by Jerry Todd, staff writer
The culture of death has two halves: Islam is a theocracy embracing imposed death or slavery for infidels – even suicide bombing each other’s prayer times. “Progressivism” completes the culture with its complete disdain for the sanctity of human life at all stages, even to the marital covenant between a man, woman and God on which human survival depends.
Islam with Sharia law and “progressivism” are incompatible with the Constitution and ultimately with any hope for a civilized society. The “progressives” are being led to a predictable outcome of bloody conflict and dragging us with them. The two 20th century socialisms – Communism and Nazism should have also taught us something about “The Night of the Long Knives” where Hitler dealt with “inconvenient” supporters just as Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood have dealt with “inconvenient” Muslim dictators. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives
Statesmen as far back as 1950 were taking … Continue Reading:The Culture of Death – Are we trimming the weeds or rooting them out?
by Jim Emerson, staff writer
This week the AP reported the United States government knows who are responsible for the murders of Americans at the U.S. Mission in Benghazi. Despite Mr. Obama’s promise to punish the terrorists he is doing nothing. Talk is cheap. The White house resident could easily order armed drones to target these thugs but he doesn’t. This is a feckless President whose inaction can be easily explained by the Limbaugh theorem. (1) If he gave the order to kill the terrorists, Obama would be seen as governing. Should anything go wrong he just might have to accept responsibility. Such a possibility is unacceptable to a spoiled man-child as his ego couldn’t handle it. But if he brings them to civilian courts his hands would be clean of any decisions.
These are terrorists. Under the Geneva conventions they have no rights and can be killed without recourse. Of course, the … Continue Reading:Feckless Leadership an art form under Obama
Some time ago, I had occasion to study a number of so-called "landmark" Supreme Court cases, and when you come right down to it, most of them are essentially crapola.
In Roe v. Wade, for example, no matter what side of the abortion debate you're on, you have to be struck by one very stupid thing: If Norma McCorvey (Roe) wanted an abortion so badly, why didn't she just go to another state to get one? It was even part of the dissent that by the time the case reached the Supremes it was moot, since the baby was already born. Normally, test cases are not moot, and normally test cases do not occur because someone volunteers to purposely create one against their own interest!
In Dalehite v. US (a case involving the worst industrial accident in US history) an entire law was invalidated on absurd grounds, mostly so that the government would not have to accept culpability. In … Continue Reading:Not So Supreme
Confusion surrounding the term "autism" is surely nothing new. The word was first used in 1911 by Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler, who presumably invoked the Greek autos, meaning "self." Bleuler was describing the behavior of many schizophrenics, whereby they withdraw into their own inner world. But, it would take the brilliant Dr. Leo Kanner, founder of child psychiatry, to identify the disease as it is understood today.
His breakthrough paper, entitled "Autistic Disturbances of Affective Contact," appeared in 1943.
A follow-up paper ("Early Infantile Autism 1943-1955") would appear in 1956, in which Kanner and his associate Leon Eisenberg elaborated on Kanner’s original concept of autism and the five features he considered to be diagnostic:
A profound lack of affective contact with other people An anxiously obsessive desire for the preservation of sameness in the child’s routines and environment A fascination for objects, which are handled with skill in fine motor movements Mutism (consistent failure to speak in situations … Continue Reading:Don’t call it autism