Conservatives4Palin Blog Scrubs Incorrect Critique Of Obama

This one definately fits in the “batshittery” category.  It seems Conservatives 4 Palin decided that parts of  President Obama’s Nobel Prize Speech were lifted directly from Sarah Palin’s book Going Rogue.  How the hell can these people really believe that the President would lift phrases from Palin’s pack of lies called a “book”?  The intelligence  quotient between the two is as wide as the Grand Canyon.  Needless to say the POTUS is on the highest end of the spectrum.

Oliver Willis:

Earlier today, Daniel Terrapin at Conservatives 4 Palin claimed that President Obama was cribbing notes from Sarah Palin

While reading President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, I was struck by how similar some of the sentiments he presented are to those in a certain best selling book I’ve recently read. In his speech, Obama stated:

I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.


That post went down the memory hole (image here), I guess because this was a sentiment Obama has expressed for some time, and the charge that Obama copied from Palin is about as laughable as it gets. One example of this sentiment from Obama is this speech from 2006:

And in a world where evil lurks and terrorists plot, let it be said that we will conduct a smart foreign policy that matches the might of our military with the power of our diplomacy. And when we do go to war, let us always be honest with the American people about why we are there and how we will win.

Barack Obama isn’t copying Sarah Palin. Barack Obama is intelligent, thoughtful, and able to make executive decisions. In almost every way President Obama is the Anti-Palin.

Tea Party Activist Wants Mandatory Christmas Carols In Public Schools

We’ve all seen this movie before.  It’s no different than my previous post about banning an atheist from public office.   Both the demand for Christmas Carols to be sung in a public school and an atheist banned from holding office because of his religious beliefs (or lack thereof) are First Amendment issues.

Huffington Post:

The Tea Party movement is supposed to be all about keeping the government out of your business. But if some California members get their way, the state will force public schoolchildren to sing Christmas carols.

It’s called the “Freedom to Present Christmas Music in Public School Classrooms or Assemblies” initiative.

Merry Hyatt, a substitute teacher and member of the Redding Tea Party Patriots, is behind the push. The Record Searchlight reports:

The initiative would require schools to provide children the opportunity to listen to or perform Christmas carols, and would subject the schools to litigation if the rule isn’t followed.Schools currently are allowed to offer Christmas music as long as it is used for academic purposes rather than devotional purposes and isn’t used to promote a particular religious belief, according to an analysis by the California Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Parents are allowed to have their students opt out of the caroling if they express that desire in advance.

“We were having Christmas without Jesus,” Hyatt complained of her previous school district.

The initiative has the support of the local Tea Party Patriots president.

“Bottom line is Christmas is about Christmas,” said Erin Ryan, president of the Redding Tea Party Patriots. “That’s why we have it. It’s not about winter solstice or Kwanzaa. It’s like, ‘Wow you guys, it’s called Christmas for a reason.’ ”

So much for limited government?

Ok, there is so much wrong with this Tea Party backed rule, on so many levels,  I don’t know where to begin. The president of the Redding Tea Party says:

“Bottom line is Christmas is about Christmas,” said Erin Ryan, president of the Redding Tea Party Patriots. “That’s why we have it. It’s not about winter solstice or Kwanzaa. It’s like, ‘Wow you guys, it’s called Christmas for a reason.’ “

I truly wonder if these people ever read ANYTHING except anti-Obama and anti-government sites.  Someone needs to tell Ms. Ryan that Christmas IS about the Winter Solstice.

Personally I am NOT an atheist, but believe strongly in First Amendment rights for everyone.  In fact there are laws against religious repression as defined by The Constitution. 

 One might ask where is the religious repression in the christmas carol issue? 

The fact that the schools were threatened with litigation if they didn’t obey the rule, is sufficient basis for repression.  The state mandating teachers to remove children who are either not religious, or are of a different faith,  to be separated from their classmates, taken to another area while the Christmas celebrations are in  progress,  is a repression of THEIR religious freedoms.

370 U.S. 421 Engle v Vitale:

The petitioners contend, among other things, that the state laws requiring or permitting use of the Regents’ prayer must be struck down as a violation of the Establishment Clause because that prayer was composed by governmental officials as a part of a governmental program to further religious beliefs. For this reason, petitioners argue, the State’s use of the Regents’ prayer in its public school system breaches the constitutional wall of separation between Church and State. We agree with that contention, since we think that the constitutional prohibition against laws respecting an establishment of religion must at least mean that, in this country, it is no part of the business of government to compose official prayers for any group of the American people to recite as a part of a religious program carried on by government.

I rest my case. 🙂

Athiest Not Eligible To Take Oath Of Office In North Carolina

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I always thought that The Constitution of The United States  supersedes any state constitution that would violate a person’s civil liberties as enumerated under The United States Constitution.

 Article VI of the U.S. Constitution says: “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

The Citizen Times:

ASHEVILLE — North Carolina’s constitution is clear: politicians who deny the existence of God are barred from holding office. 
Opponents of Cecil Bothwell are seizing on that law to argue he should not be seated as a City Council member today, even though federal courts have ruled religious tests for public office are unlawful under the U.S. Constitution.
Voters elected the writer and builder to the council last month.

“I’m not saying that Cecil Bothwell is not a good man, but if he’s an atheist, he’s not eligible to serve in public office, according to the state constitution,” said H.K. Edgerton, a former Asheville NAACP president.

Article 6, section 8 of the state constitution says: “The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”

Read more here