Student sues "Anti-Christian" Teacher over remarks, and rightly so!

Not only do I hope this teacher has to pay through the nose, But I hope he gets fired too!

The Article: Student Sues ‘Anti-Christian’ Teacher Over Remarks in Class (via FOXNews.com)

Chad Farnan, a 16-year-old sophomore, says the teacher, James Corbett, told his students that “Jesus glasses” obscure the truth and suggested that Christians are more likely than other people to commit rape and murder.

Farnan recorded his teacher telling students in class: “What country has the highest murder rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rape rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rate of church attendance? The South!” Farnan said he took the tape recorder to class to supplement his class notes.

The reason I say this? Because for one, he’s wrong as can be. Second, had this remark had been made about Muslims or Blacks or even Jews, the outcry would have been of Biblical proportions. (If you’ll pardon the phrase)

This is the very reason, right here, that parents, in ever growing numbers, are home schooling their children. Honestly? I cannot blame them, this sort of nonsense has no place in the public school system.

Why? You ask? Because, just in case anyone has forgotten, this Nation was settled by Christians. White Puritans at that! Now go read your history books, and then argue with me.

And…. Just in case anyone has a problem with that…. Buy this book here:

Amazon.com: Christianity and the American Commonwealth

ISBN: 0915815729
ISBN-13: 9780915815722

Others on this: The Corner, Rachel Lucas, Big Brass Blog, Moonbattery, Middle Earth Journal and Patterico’s Pontifications (via Memeorandum)

Cross-Posted @ Wayward Fundamentalist Christian

Editorial: In defense of Senator Debbie Stabenow

I am not writing this to defend the actions of Senator Stabenow’s husband.  The actions of Thomas Athans were deplorable.  If I were the senator, I would be seeing a lawyer and relieving this man of his burden of marriage.

However because the story of Thomas Athans has become the catalyst of great political fodder and blogger ridicule, and outright mocking by those of opposite political ideology.  Because of this sort of nonsense, I am writing a simple defense of Senator Stabenow as a Senator of the State of Michigan.  

I am quite aware of Senator Stabenow’s political stance, However, I am also aware of her performance in the Senate.  I can personally testify to her consistency in addressing issues brought before her.  I have personally e-mailed TONS of issues, brought to my attention by the John Birch Society, to Senator Stabenow’s office.

Senator Stabenow’s office was always faithful to reply to my e-mails to her, sometimes, the replies were even personal, and not a computer generated response, even though I am sure that some of the issues brought to her attention were in direct opposition to her political stance.

Further, of all the political representatives in my local area, other than one other political official for my local area, Senator Stabenow was the ONLY political official who responded to my e-mails, sometimes Senator Stabenow would reply to me personally via United States Mail, Even though she did not have to.

Therefore, I feel that this smearing by the Republican and Conservative Bloggers is just unwarranted.  We are not dealing with a seedy politician here.  We are dealing with a very nice woman, who has a husband who is an idiot.

I think that the Blogosphere needs to take a step back and leave this woman to sort out her own affairs.  I hope that she will do the right thing in the situation regarding her husband.

More Opinions via Memeorandum

Technorati Tags:

Hillary Clinton fired from Lawyer Job

This juicy bit of info came out yesterday and I didn’t get chance to Blog about it.

This comes via the guys over at HotAir.com.

An Article by Dan Calabrese basically removes any varnish off of Hillary Clinton’s Lawyer days. Calabrese quotes Jerry Zeifman, a life long Democrat as saying the following:

Quote:

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

It is being reported that this isn’t really news, however, it is the first time that I have heard of it. So, far only Conservative Blogs are talking about it, I haven’t seen any movement by the bigger Blogs, but if this did catch fire, it could spell the end of Hillary Clinton. Because basically, she’s used her years as a lawyer to say she is ready for the White House.

Zeifman goes on to say at his website:

After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader “Tip” O’Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O’Neill’s statement that: “To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series.”

Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee’s then most recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.

I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff — where they were no longer accessible to the public.

Hillary had also made other ethical flawed procedural recommendations, arguing that the Judiciary Committee should: not hold any hearings with – or take depositions of — any live witnesses; not conduct any original investigation of Watergate, bribery, tax evasion, or any other possible impeachable offense of President Nixon; and should rely solely on documentary evidence compiled by other committees and by the Justice Departments special Watergate prosecutor.

If any of the above is true, Hillary Clinton could be in deep trouble should this story begin tread water among the main stream media.

Ed Morrissey on this:

The right to counsel is considered one of the inviolable tenets of our justice system. It doesn’t speak well of ambitious attorneys working on a highly-charged political investigation that she wanted to deny someone the right to an attorney. Small wonder Zeifman questioned her ethics.

If all she did was to propose that as a tactic, that would not make it terribly concerning — but she did much more than just spitball ideas. When informed that public evidence showed a precedent for the right to counsel, she absconded with the files to eliminate the evidence. Does that remind anyone of later incidents in the Clinton narrative, such as the billing records for the Rose Law offices and the 900+ raw FBI files on political opponents of the Clintons?

For the sake of the Democrats and for the sake of this election, I am hope that this story just dies off and goes away. I mean, the Democrats have enough trouble right now as it is.

Should be interesting indeed.

Others: protein wisdom, TBogg, Power Line, Doug Ross, Stop The ACLU, PoliGazette, Pat Dollard, North Star Writers Group, NewsBusters.org, QandO, Secular Blasphemy and Digg (via Memeorandum)

Al Gore to save the Democrat Party? I highly doubt it…..

I saw this, and almost spit my coffee on the laptop. Mostly because it sounds that absurd.

The Article: Senior Democrats mull Al Gore’s nomination (Via UK Telegraph)

Plans for Al Gore to take the Democratic presidential nomination as the saviour of a bitterly divided party are being actively discussed by senior figures and aides to the former vice-president.

The bloody civil war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has left many Democrats convinced that neither can deliver a knockout blow to the other and that both have been so damaged that they risk losing November’s election to the Republican nominee, John McCain.

Former aides to Al Gore now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate

Former Gore aides now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate acceptable to both camps at the party’s convention in Denver during the last week of August.

Two former Gore campaign officials have told The Sunday Telegraph that a scenario first mapped out by members of Mr Gore’s inner circle last May now has a sporting chance of coming true.

As exciting or scary, depending on your point of view, as this sounds. It is a known fact among us hardcore Bloggers, that the UK Telegraph is NOT really known for it’s factual reporting. It has, in the past, reported some quite outlandish headlines, that were, quite frankly, wrong.

I may not be an expert, when it comes to Politics, but it would be absolutely crazy to dump Gore into the mix, at this point in the race. There would be massive, and I do mean MASSIVE defections from the party. 

So, as nice or as horrible as this may sound. I would not begin to panic, until the New York Times or some other legit News Source in America reports it.

A rule of thumb is, if in doubt, engage your common sense filter.

Others: PoliGazette, Making conservatives …, The Moderate Voice, Hot Air, The Corner, The Democratic Daily, Political Machine, Weasel Zippers, Gateway Pundit, Dean’s World, Althouse and American Street

Saturday Political Headlines!

It’s the weekend. I am taking it off from writing Political articles. Hey, we all need a break. So….. Here’s the stuff that’s happening in the Political World…:

The Obama/Hillary Primary Saga Continues and Continues….

Meanwhile, the rest of the world is going to hell and a hand-basket.

The Economy is killing the Movie industry.

People want to know what will Fox News do, if a democrat takes the White House, I wonder, "who cares?" I’m sure they’ll have plenty to do, like smearing the President. (anyone remember Bill Clinton????!?!?!)

Obama’s Pastor makes an appearance, conservative media goes ape…..

Obama’s Pastor is also beyond the Pale, so says Philly Mayor. I was thinking Black Nationalist myself.

The Corner Says that the chickens of identity politics are coming home to roost.

How to avoid a Democrat Disater

The latest on the Basra Situation in Iraq

The Defeatist drums just continue to pound.

Students of Virginity?

The Gender wars continue, Dude…. errr Ummm.. Ma’am.

Team Hillary crosses the line……. again?