Body Scanners: The Naked Truth | David Rittgers | Cato Institute: Commentary

Body Scanners: The Naked Truth | David Rittgers | Cato Institute: Commentary

Body Scanners: The Naked Truth

by David Rittgers

David Rittgers is an attorney and legal policy analyst at the Cato Institute.

Added to cato.org on November 17, 2010

This article appeared in The New York Post on November 17, 2010.

PRINT PAGE

CITE THIS

Sans Serif

Serif

Share with your friends:

ShareThis

The body scanners coming to your local airport provide marginal benefits — if any — in detecting weapons and explosives hidden on travelers. They aren't worth the cost in money — let alone in civil liberties.

The Transportation Security Administration has put these machines — X-ray and radio-wave booths that look beneath clothing to perform virtual strip searches — across the nation and around the world. Industry advocates claim the technology's needed to stop terrorists with explosives hidden under their clothes like Christmas bomber Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Yet the public is justifiably skeptical. Pilots and passengers are "opting out" and taking the alternative screening method — a run through a traditional metal detector and an all-too-intimate pat-down. Cell-phone videos of encounters with TSA screeners are going viral.

If the ineffectiveness of body scanners is not enough to give the public pause, the cost ought to be.

Air travelers now face a few bad choices: Submit to the body scanner, endure an invasive manual pat-down or accept an $11,000 civil fine. This is security theater at its finest. Congress needs to revisit these protocols completely — starting with a total halt to the obscenely expensive and jarringly ineffective full-body scanner.

Despite what their proponents would have us believe, body scanners are not some magical tool to find all weapons and explosives that can be hidden on the human body. Yes, the scanners work against high-density objects such as guns and knives — but so do traditional magnetometers.

And the scanners fare poorly against low-density materials such as thin plastics, gels and liquids. Care to guess what Abdulmutallab's bomb was made of? The Government Accountability Office reported in March that it's not clear that a scanner would've detected that device.

Even if the scanners did work against low-density materials, the same group linked to the Christmas bomb, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, has already found another way to defeat the technology: hiding bombs inside the human body: A would-be AQAP assassin tried to kill a senior Saudi counterterrorism official with a bomb hidden where only a proctologist would find it.

That bomb wound up killing only its carrier. But a more enterprising terrorist could go to the plane bathroom to remove bomb components hidden in a body cavity, then place them against the aircraft hull — and the results would be far different.

Terrorists already know how to beat body scanners with low-tech (really, no-tech) techniques, but the federal government still spends billions on this gadget.

If the ineffectiveness of body scanners is not enough to give the public pause, the cost ought to be.

David Rittgers is an attorney and legal policy analyst at the Cato Institute.

More by David Rittgers

An army of executives for scanner-producing corporations — mostly former high-ranking Homeland Security officials — successfully lobbied Congress into spending $300 million in stimulus money to buy the scanners. But running them will cost another $340 million each year. Operating them means 5,000 added TSA personnel, growing the screener workforce by 10 percent. This, when the federal debt commission is saying that we must cut federal employment rolls, including some FBI agents, just to keep spending sustainable.

Why cut funding for the people who actually catch terrorists to add more pointless hassles at the airport? (Going through a body scanner also takes longer — the process is slower than magnetometers.)

Scanners clearly fail an honest cost-benefit analysis. Yet it's privacy that has the traveling public up in arms. Understandably so — the message the TSA is sending us is: "Be seen naked or get groped."

We tell our children not to talk to strangers, but now a government functionary gets to fondle away just because he has a badge?

Thanks, but no. Policymakers should rethink this move toward ineffective, expensive and unnecessarily intrusive aviation security.

"Why Only Democrats and Liberals Should Feel White Guilt" - Patriot Update

"Why Only Democrats and Liberals Should Feel White Guilt" - Patriot Update
From http://knowledgeczar.blogspot.com/

It baffles me that we're taught that Democrats are the civil rights champions. They are absolutely the opposite.

First of all, the Republican party was created to be the party against slavery because the Democrats were pro-slavery, and good people knew it was un-Christian and morally wrong. Lincoln was a Repblican, and not in "name only" as so-called scholars are teaching on campuses across the country. You'd never know it by how Republicans are portrayed now, but we were THE anti-slavery party, and we still are.

The very first Republican president freed the slaves and was hated for it. He was consequentially murdered by a Democrat.

From Maggie's Notebook, an email to her from David Lemon, and : Astonishing History of Democrat Racism at nodnc.com:

The Klu Klux Klan was created by the Democrats for the express reason of terrorizing blacks and Republicans in the South to prevent them from voting, and that every known Klansman that were members of Congress have been Democrats.

...imagine if you will, what a far different nation the United States would be had not the Republicans been around to block the Democrats’ efforts.

From WorldNetDaily:

Further, the first grand wizard of the KKK was honored at the 1868 Democratic National Convention, no Democrats voted for the 14th Amendment to grant citizenship to former slaves and, to this day, the party website ignores those decades of racism....

Three years after Appomattox, the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, granting blacks citizenship in the United States, came before the Congress: 94 percent of Republicans endorsed.

"The records of Congress reveal that not one Democrat -- either in the House nor the Senate -- voted for the 14th Amendment...Three years after the Civil War and the Democrats from the North as well as the South were still refusing to recognize any rights of citizenship for black Americans. [David Barton]

Back to the email -- the Timeline:

March 20, 1854 Opponents of Democrats’ pro-slavery policies meet in Ripon, Wisconsin to establish the Republican Party

May 30, 1854 Democrat President Franklin Pierce signs Democrats’ Kansas-Nebraska Act, expanding slavery into U.S. territories; opponents unite to form the Republican Party

June 16, 1854 Newspaper editor Horace Greeley calls on opponents of slavery to unite in the Republican Party

July 6, 1854 First state Republican Party officially organized in Jackson, Michigan, to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies

February 11, 1856 Republican Montgomery Blair argues before U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his client, the slave Dred Scott; later served in [Republican] President Lincoln’s Cabinet

February 22, 1856 First national meeting of the Republican Party, in Pittsburgh, to coordinate opposition to Democrats’ pro-slavery policies

March 27, 1856 First meeting of Republican National Committee in Washington, DC to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies

May 22, 1856 For denouncing Democrats’ pro-slavery policy, Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) is beaten nearly to death on floor of Senate by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks (D-SC), takes three years to recover

March 6, 1857 Republican Supreme Court Justice John McLean issues strenuous dissent from decision by 7 Democrats in infamous Dred Scott case that African-Americans had no rights “which any white man was bound to respect”

June 26, 1857 Abraham Lincoln declares Republican position that slavery is “cruelly wrong,” while Democrats “cultivate and excite hatred” for blacks

October 13, 1858 During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee

October 25, 1858 U.S. Senator William Seward (R-NY) describes Democratic Party as “inextricably committed to the designs of the slaveholders”; as President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of State, helped draft Emancipation Proclamation

June 4, 1860 Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) delivers his classic address, The Barbarism of Slavery

April 7, 1862 President Lincoln concludes treaty with Britain for suppression of slave trade

April 16, 1862 President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no

July 2, 1862 U.S. Rep. Justin Morrill (R-VT) wins passage of Land Grant Act, establishing colleges open to African-Americans, including such students as George Washington Carver

July 17, 1862 Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes Confiscation Act stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”

August 19, 1862 Republican newspaper editor Horace Greeley writes Prayer of Twenty Millions, calling on President Lincoln to declare emancipation

August 25, 1862 President Abraham Lincoln authorizes enlistment of African-American soldiers in U.S. Army

September 22, 1862 Republican President Abraham Lincoln issues Emancipation Proclamation

January 1, 1863 Emancipation Proclamation, implementing the Republicans’ Confiscation Act of 1862, takes effect

February 9, 1864 Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton deliver over 100,000 signatures to U.S. Senate supporting Republicans’ plans for constitutional amendment to ban slavery

June 15, 1864 Republican Congress votes equal pay for African-American troops serving in U.S. Army during Civil War

June 28, 1864 Republican majority in Congress repeals Fugitive Slave Acts

October 29, 1864 African-American abolitionist Sojourner Truth says of President Lincoln: “I never was treated by anyone with more kindness and cordiality than were shown to me by that great and good man”

January 31, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition

March 3, 1865 Republican Congress establishes Freedmen’s Bureau to provide health care, education, and technical assistance to emancipated slaves

April 8, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition

June 19, 1865 On “Juneteenth,” U.S. troops land in Galveston, TX to enforce ban on slavery that had been declared more than two years before by the Emancipation Proclamation

November 22, 1865 Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination

December 6, 1865 Republican Party’s 13th Amendment, banning slavery, is ratified

February 5, 1866 U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves

April 9, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law

April 19, 1866 Thousands assemble in Washington, DC to celebrate Republican Party’s abolition of slavery

May 10, 1866 U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no

June 8, 1866 U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no

July 16, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of Freedman's Bureau Act, which protected former slaves from “black codes” denying their rights

July 28, 1866 Republican Congress authorizes formation of the Buffalo Soldiers, two regiments of African-American cavalrymen

July 30, 1866 Democrat-controlled City of New Orleans orders police to storm racially-integrated Republican meeting; raid kills 40 and wounds more than 150

January 8, 1867 Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.

July 19, 1867 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans

March 30, 1868 Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”

May 20, 1868 Republican National Convention marks debut of African-American politicians on national stage; two – Pinckney Pinchback and James Harris – attend as delegates, and several serve as presidential electors

September 3, 1868 25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress

September 12, 1868 Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress

September 28, 1868 Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana murder nearly 300 African-Americans who tried to prevent an assault against a Republican newspaper editor

October 7, 1868 Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”

October 22, 1868 While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan

November 3, 1868 Republican Ulysses Grant defeats Democrat Horatio Seymour in presidential election; Seymour had denounced Emancipation Proclamation

December 10, 1869 Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office

February 3, 1870 After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race

May 19, 1870 African-American John Langston, law professor and future Republican Congressman from Virginia, delivers influential speech supporting President Ulysses Grant’s civil rights policies

May 31, 1870 President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights

June 22, 1870 Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South

September 6, 1870 Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell

February 28, 1871 Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters

March 22, 1871 Spartansburg Republican newspaper denounces Ku Klux Klan campaign to eradicate the Republican Party in South Carolina

April 20, 1871 Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans

October 10, 1871 Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands

October 18, 1871 After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan

November 18, 1872 Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”

January 17, 1874 Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government

September 14, 1874 Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed

March 1, 1875 Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition

September 20, 1876 Former state Attorney General Robert Ingersoll (R-IL) tells veterans: “Every man that loved slavery better than liberty was a Democrat… I am a Republican because it is the only free party that ever existed”

January 10, 1878 U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919

July 14, 1884 Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery

August 30, 1890 Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South

June 7, 1892 In a FIRST for a major U.S. political party, two women – Theresa Jenkins and Cora Carleton – attend Republican National Convention in an official capacity, as alternate delegates

February 8, 1894 Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote

December 11, 1895 African-American Republican and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Miller (R-SC) denounces new state constitution written to disenfranchise African-Americans

May 18, 1896 Republican Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting from Supreme Court’s notorious Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, declares: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens”

December 31, 1898 Republican Theodore Roosevelt becomes Governor of New York; in 1900, he outlawed racial segregation in New York public schools

May 24, 1900 Republicans vote no in referendum for constitutional convention in Virginia, designed to create a new state constitution disenfranchising African-Americans

January 15, 1901 Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans

October 16, 1901 President Theodore Roosevelt invites Booker T. Washington to dine at White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

May 29, 1902 Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%

February 12, 1909 On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP

June 18, 1912 African-American Robert Church, founder of Lincoln Leagues to register black voters in Tennessee, attends 1912 Republican National Convention as delegate; eventually serves as delegate at 8 conventions

August 1, 1916 Republican presidential candidate Charles Evans Hughes, former New York Governor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice, endorses women’s suffrage constitutional amendment; he would become Secretary of State and Chief Justice

May 21, 1919 Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no

April 18, 1920 Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus

August 18, 1920 Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures

January 26, 1922 House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster

June 2, 1924 Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans

October 3, 1924 Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention

December 8, 1924 Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis argues in favor of “separate but equal”

June 12, 1929 First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

August 17, 1937 Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation

June 24, 1940 Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it

October 20, 1942 60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries

April 3, 1944 U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system

August 8, 1945 Republicans condemn Harry Truman's surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that "[t]he use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."

February 18, 1946 Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools

July 11, 1952 Republican Party platform condemns “duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters

September 30, 1953 Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education

December 8, 1953 Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education

May 17, 1954 Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education

November 25, 1955 Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel

March 12, 1956 Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation

June 5, 1956 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law

October 19, 1956 On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America”

November 6, 1956 African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President

September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

June 23, 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights

February 4, 1959 President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats

May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats

July 27, 1960 At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform

May 2, 1963 Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights

June 1, 1963 Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama

September 29, 1963 Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School

June 9, 1964 Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate

June 10, 1964 Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirkson, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.

June 20, 1964 The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act

March 7, 1965 Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL

March 21, 1965 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace

August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose

August 6, 1965 Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

July 8, 1970 In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits

September 17, 1971 Former Ku Klux Klan member and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D-AL) retires from U.S. Supreme Court; appointed by FDR in 1937, he had defended Klansmen for racial murders

February 19, 1976 President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

September 15, 1981 President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs

June 29, 1982 President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act

August 10, 1988 President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR

November 21, 1991 President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation

August 20, 1996 Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law

April 26, 1999 Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President

January 25, 2001 U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee declares school choice to be “Educational Emancipation”

March 19, 2003 Republican U.S. Representatives of Hispanic and Portuguese descent form Congressional Hispanic Conference

May 23, 2003 U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture

February 26, 2004 Hispanic Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX) condemns racist comments by U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL); she had called Asst. Secretary of State Roger Noriega and several Hispanic Congressmen “a bunch of white men...you all look alike to me”

May I add that one of the most insidiously racist issues supported by the Democrats is abortion. Abortion was pushed as a way to decrease the black population in the US and they've succeeded at it by putting the majority of abortion clinics in black neighborhoods and teaching the people that it's a civil rights issue for them to be able to obtain abortions. Actually it's a civil rights issue that they are targeting the black population with abortions and murdering them before they're even born.

Original content is Copyrighted © by NoDNC.com . Original author(s) retain their own copyright(s). Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment.

Published on: 2006-06-01

From the Little Big Horn to the ’03 Springfield - HUMAN EVENTS

From the Little Big Horn to the ’03 Springfield - HUMAN EVENTS

This Week in American Military History:

June 23, 1903: The U.S. Army adopts the now-famous Springfield rifle (M1903) as the standard infantry weapon.

The bolt-action M1903 Springfield will be the primary American rifle carried by soldiers and Marines during America’s year (1918) in World War I. And in 1942, U.S. Marines fighting Japanese diehards on Guadalcanal are still armed with the ’03 Springfield as their primary weapon (though the semi-automatic M1 Garand had begun to replace the Springfield a few years earlier).

Coincidentally among the American combat units on “the Canal” is the fighting 5th Marine Regiment, which – 25 years earlier during the bloody battle of Belleau Wood – won for the entire Corps a reputation as some of the world’s best marksmen. And they did so of course with the ’03 Springfield.

U.S. Army Gen. John J. “Black Jack” Pershing, commanding general of the American Expeditionary Forces in World War I, will say, “The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle [meaning his ’03 Springfield].”

In his book, Guadalcanal Marine, author Kerry L. Lane will write: “The enemy on Guadalcanal would soon learn that a Marine marksman armed with a Springfield '03 rifle is a dangerous man at a great distance

On This Memorial Day There Are Two Americas

On This Memorial Day There Are Two Americas

William R. Forstchen Ph.D.
May 27, 2010



Memorial Day. Those of us old enough to remember might recall a parent or grandparent who referred to it as “Decoration Day.” We might recall as well that “Memorial Day,” was not on the last Monday of the month of May, serving as a convenient three day weekend for sales and summertime vacations, but instead was observed on May 30th, no matter what day of the week that was.

According to tradition it started shortly after the Civil War when General Logan, who was part of the forces occupying the South, observed Southern women laying spring flowers on the graves of both Confederate and Union dead, graves still fresh and barely covered with the grass that covers over memories. When he asked why they were thus decorating the graves of their former foes, a woman dressed in the black of mourning supposedly replied that the dead were now comrades in peace and she prayed that southern dead, buried far from home, might be tended by mothers, wives and daughters of the Union. Logan wrote of it, urged a national day of commemoration and thus “Decoration Day” became a tradition in nearly all states.

After World War One, the fallen of that conflict became part of the memorial services as well. After World War Two, with hundreds of thousands of new graves to tend, the tradition evolved that “Decoration Day,” would be a day of national commemoration of those who gave “the last full measure of devotion,” and that “Armistice Day,” November 11th, would become a day of honoring all veterans who served.

And thus it was until 1971 when Congress, creating three day weekends for government employees, including themselves, reordered Memorial Day to the last Monday of the month.

As a boy growing up in the 1950s I recall Memorial Day in my town as one of solemn dedication. Streets would be blocked off and a parade would weave through the community, visiting the various cemeteries. I would march with the boy scouts, my father with his American Legion post, and at each cemetery prayers would be offered, wreaths laid, followed by a volley salute and taps, which even then made my throat constrict.

We were a single America, united in memory. Yes there was already the blaring of ads on a new thing called television, about Memorial Day sales, and the exodus to the beach by some, but as a shared culture, Memorial Day was a day of memory, recollection and prayer.

We are two Americas today. Yes Presidents have “missed” visiting Arlington before this day but this time, the reasons why and what commentators have said in defense so clearly shows a national divide.

Earlier this week a notice from the White House announced that the First Family would “vacation” this weekend in Chicago. The First Lady was quoted as saying that this time the children “decided” where they would spend their mini vacation.

Vacation? So Memorial Day is a vacation weekend now, even for the First Family? Of course it was quickly pointed out that the President would visit a military cemetery near Chicago. Of course.

But that is not Arlington. Arlington is the symbolic center of our national memory for those who died in service to our country. It is as well where the Tombs of the Unknown from most of our 20th century wars are located. The ritual of the Unknown Soldier, as symbolic of all the fallen emerged after World War One, when from the torn battlefields of Europe, America and other nations recovered the unidentified remains of one soldier, to thus symbolize the millions whose final resting place, and identity is “known but to God.” To honor this one Unknown was the symbolic act of honoring all and thus it became a sacred ritual.

Arlington is, as one Civil War veteran would write, the “the vision place of souls,” and the Tombs of the Unknown, are the focal point of that memory. When a President lays a wreath before those tombs, it is a symbolic act of memory and mourning on behalf of all of us. The laying of a wreath in and of itself is also a tradition that harkens back to biblical times. For a President, it is one of the highest honors and obligations that comes with his office.

Is that too much to ask of our president? Is it too much to ask of a president to set such an example and rather than have a vacation defined by “the kids” that instead, as the First Family together they lead the nation in a day of memory, a memorial day of prayer?

We are now so clearly two Americas and this conflict about how to observe Memorial Day so clearly symbolizes a cultural divide which started in the 1960s and now seems all but unfathomable. That divide was so clearly stated this week by the leftist journalist David Corn, editor with “Nation” Magazine, when he wrote in defense of the First Family’s decision to treat this weekend at a “vacation”:

So what the hell do these conservatives want out of Obama? And does it matter if Obama throws some leaves on a tomb?

David, I will tell you what we want. We want a President who holds sacred certain beliefs and traditions that are the very core and fiber of what we see as being an “American.” In a world of such political correctness where we are constantly ordered not to offend, we are the people who on this sacred day are offended beyond any ability to express, offended by our president’s actions, offended by your soulless mocking words. . .”throws some leaves on a tomb. . .”

If that is indeed your belief, and the belief of those who are apologists for yet another insult by our president to ancient traditions, there is only one answer. We are a house divided against itself, we have become two Americas with all which that implies and such a divide, in the end, will be resolved one way or the other and come November, of this year and in 2012 we will remember.

(William R. Forstchen is a Professor of History at Montreat College, Black Mountain, NC.)


“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
June 16, 1858 @ 8:00 p.m.
Abraham Lincoln
candidate for Illinois U.S. Senator
speaking to his colleagues in the Hall of Representatives.
(http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/house.htm)

Bill Gunn for US Congress

Bill Gunn is running for US Congress in the very blue state of Massachusetts. He certainly has his work cut out for him. He is running against John Olver. John Olver is a very liberal Democrat who has been in office since ....
He has deep pockets and a loyal liberal following. But the mood has changed in Massachusetts as well as the country as a whole. The recent election of Scott Brown for US Senate to replace Ted Kennedy has signaled a sea change in how the electorate now looks at candidates.

Bill Gunn jumped into this race just 3 and a half weeks before the deadline to get signatures in, but with the help of like minded Tea Party members and some Republican Town Committee members, he has garnered over 4000 signatures. An amazing feat in the short time alloted.

ALERT! News outlet to smear gun owners, militia groups

ALERT! News outlet to smear gun owners, militia groups

A special report on militia groups and gun owners who support Second Amendment rights and the Constitutional concept of citizen militias is scheduled to be aired on a major news outlet this Thursday evening. The report has all the markings of a smear job due to the fact that its main source of information is the leftwing front group, the Southern Poverty Law Center.

In a series of ads announcing the upcoming report, News Channel 7, WSPA-TV, which serves one of the top 30 television markets in America, states that 'militia groups are growing and they are even right here in the upstate.'

At that point the ad cuts to Mark Potok, the discredited lawyer and spokesman for the Southern Poverty Law Center's 'intelligence report.'

Potok proceeds to state that 'militias are the source for much of the criminal activity in America today.'

A simple fact-check will show that Potok's statement is false. Most of the criminal activity in America today can be traced to drug trafficking, domestic violence among families, arson, and theft, particularly the growing scourge of identity theft.

With regard to violence, the militias are not even among the top sources. The average American citizen is infinitely more likely to be victimized or impacted by rape, gang violence, or road rage than the activities of a militia, most of which consist of average citizens who may be your neighbors and friends and who believe they exist to help rather than hinder the adherence to the rule of law as embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

The fact that a major television outlet in the South would actually use a discredited shill for Leftwing causes as some sort of 'expert' on conservative groups is only more evidence that the mainstream media in this country is nothing more than a mouthpiece for liberals who wish to destroy the very foundation of Constitutional law in this nation.

It is to be noted that this same news outlet, WSPA-TV, engaged in some of the most nauseating Obama-worship during the President's visit to Asheville, North Carolina this past weekend. The outlet was careful to interview only those citizens who are clearly Obama supporters, ignoring the vast majority of southerners who view the President with deep suspicion if not outright disdain.

The report, to be aired on Thursday evening's news broadcasts, which begin at 5 PM and run until 6:30 PM, merits a close examination, given that the 'expert' used to smear gun owners, militia members, and other conservatives is a major part of the segment. It will be most interesting to see if the report has some balance.

For commentary on the issues of the day, visit my friends blog at The Liberty Sphere.

The Ant and The Grasshopper « Liberal Fail

The Ant and The Grasshopper « Liberal Fail

THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER

This one is a little different… …. Two Different Versions…. ……… …. Two Different Morals

——————————————————————————–

OLD VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away..

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

——————————————————————————–

MODERN VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

CBS, NBC , PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, ‘It’s Not Easy Being Green…’

ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, “We shall overcome.” Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper’s sake.

President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper’s plight.

Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn’t maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and once peaceful, neighborhood.

The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2010.

Ah yes seems to remind of the liberal mindset.

American Thinker: I wish I were a liberal

American Thinker: I wish I were a liberal

I'd like to be a liberal because it's ever so much easier to allow others to form my opinions for me instead of researching an issue myself. That always gets me in trouble, especially when the facts I discover diverge from the latest politically correct consensus.

I'd like to be a liberal because then I'd be rewarded for all my shortcomings and nothing would ever be my fault. I'd be an important cog in the wheel of social justice, and a cherished warrior in the current fight for equality.

If I were a liberal, I would be free to have sex whenever and with whomever I want -- and be considered 'empowered' to boot. I could abort any inconvenience with nary a thought because my rights to my body trump the life I would have suctioned out of me.

I'd like to be a liberal because any guilt I would normally feel for what used to be considered deviant, irresponsible behavior may be assuaged by merely advocating the expenditure of other people's money on whatever the cause du jour is. Very cool. Especially since my stock portfolio has tanked.

I want to be a liberal because they care so much. They have a lock on all the fashionable emotions, like tolerance, diversity, equality and patriotism. And as long as my intentions were pure and I 'care', I wouldn't have to accept responsibility for any negative consequences that my actions might cause.

I'd like to be a liberal because everyone knows that conservatives are racist, homophobic, stupid and, well, beneath contempt. Conservatives are motivated by -- gasp -- profit, instead of being nice. Enough said.

It would be swell to be a liberal because I'd be able to redefine reality to my own specifications. I could turn failure into success, murder into choice, lies into 'misstatements', and theft into investment. I would automatically be considered wise, instead of opinionated. Best of all, I could make up the rules as I go along, change them in midstream and then demonize anyone who doesn't agree with me.

It's great to be a liberal because everyone knows they hold the moral high ground. They don't lie, cheat or steal. Oh, and they don't condone torture. The media says so, so it must be true.

Before I am able to join this community of man, however, there are a few ground rules:

I have to acknowledge that government is the best and only solution for any problems America has. Despite the fact that pretty much every government solution to date has been a disaster.

I must agree that America is bad and white Christian males are responsible for all that is wrong with the world. Further, I must agree that terrorists and third world dictators are either freedom fighters or misunderstood men of good would.

Oh, and I must acknowledge that dialogue is better than war. Even though decades of dialogue haven't worked, things are different, now that Obama is president. I must have faith. After all, the times, they are a changin'.

I'd, of course, be expected to not only condone, but happily embrace gay marriage and the long list of newly minted sexual behaviors, and swear to never mention the adverse health risks or the proven harm they do to traditional families.

I'd also have to quit judging people. (Except conservatives.) After all, liberals would allow me to do whatever I want, free from moral censure, and it's only fair I do the same for them.

I'd have to immediately quit smoking, in public at least. I'd be required to agree that global warming is real and man is the cause. Even though the earth has cooled in the last decade, everyone knows its still getting warmer. I'd also have to renounce Christianity in favor of Mother Earth and believe that the Constitution is a 'living instrument'.

I'd have to agree that victimhood trumps merit and that liberals know best. Always. And lastly, I'd have to support the notion that racism is still rampant, even if it is the silent 'institutional' type.

In return, I'll be accepted, popular, and invited to the best parties. I'll be eligible for the right to housing, health care, a living wage (even if I don't work) and happiness. And as long as I remain a liberal, no-one is allowed to insult me. How cool is that?

I'll finally get my columns published in my own hometown paper and would have a good chance of getting face time on MSNBC. Best of all, I'll be able to atone for my sins by merely paying Algore for a few carbon credits. Then, I would live happily ever after. Isn't that worth sacrificing such ethereal and frivolous notions like freedom, individualism and principles?

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina

Liberalism for Dummies

Liberalism for Dummies:

"Our Tax System Explained:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your
daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.

But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it
would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20, “declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I got”

“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible."

Liberty and Tyranny

"'We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others, the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men's labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name- liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names- liberty and tyranny.'

ABRAHAM LINCOLN, 1864"