Culture Wars … from The Patriot’s Notepad

Culture Wars

by Robert Arvay

America has always had cultural struggles. Our very beginning as a nation resulted from a political dispute with Great Britain that was not merely political and economic, but also, to a large extent, cultural and philosophic. While the American Founders held certain “truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights,” the British had a very different view, which held that kings have a “divine right of rule,” and that the general public must always obey the king.

Perhaps our most monumental cultural war was over slavery, an issue that divided the nation for decades, even before the Civil War began.


With the Great Depression of the 1930s, The “New Deal” policies of President FD Roosevelt introduced a more subtle, but very insidious element into the culture war, the idea that the free market has inherent flaws that can only be corrected by major interventions by a powerful, centralized government.

The final events of the culture war to be mentioned in this commentary concern the so-called “sexual revolution” of the 1960s. These events cracked the foundations of the nation’s family values, undermining the position of marriage in our society.

There we have it. There can be no doubt that the cultural values of our nation today are a far cry from those of 1776. And the divide is only increasing. Let us be clear that this is no minor dispute over any single issue. While most Americans are united on many major ideas, such as racial justice and women’s equality, the ideas that separate us into basically two opposing camps, (often labeled as liberal and conservative), are crucial to the direction our nation will take. While we can put some of these conflicting ideas aside for a time, as we did for slavery, the issues are too vital to be put off forever. There must come a time when we choose. That time will soon be upon us.

The trigger for the latest round of the culture wars was the election of President Barak Obama. His presidency can reasonably be seen as the product of the culture wars, and just as reasonably, an acceleration of that conflict. His racial identity has been a major factor in his support, and was at first seen as evidence that the nation has healed its racial divisions. But in fact, nearly half of all those who voted for him based their decision in large part, even primarily, on his racial identity. And while many people probably opposed him for racist reasons, Obama’s economic views were clearly the case against him upon which McCain founded his campaign.

But having said all this, what role can (and indeed must) you and I play? Will it be enough to simply vote for conservatives? What will happen once those conservatives take office? Will they be able to reverse the deeply entrenched policies of FDR, LBJ and BHO?

I believe that the first step in restoring Constitutional government to the nation is to understand that the Constitution is not culture-neutral. It never has been. Our basic governing document could never have arisen in the context of any culture but that of the early Americans. The Arabia of 1776 to the present could not possibly have produced it. Nor could India, China, nor for that matter, even France or England. It is uniquely American.

Opponents of conservative cultural values often point out that the Constitution steers away from religious or philosophical questions. But that argument is disingenuous. The religious and philosophical views of the Founders are deeply embedded in all of our founding documents. There was no need for them to delve into specific details, because their overarching cultural values gave rise to the Constitution, and therefore could not become a product of it.

John Adams, one of the Founders, made this concept crystal clear when he famously said,

 

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

In other words, we could impose our Constitution on a foreign nation, and it would be wasted, unless the cultural values of the American Founders were also accepted by that nation. Likewise, if we ourselves abandon those moral values, we will lose all the benefits of our Constitution, including freedom.

 

As a nation, we have already abandoned many of the cultural and moral principles which gave rise to the Constitution, and which alone can sustain it. How can we reverse that?

We do not have a specific, enumerated Constitutional method of enforcing cultural values. Some oppressive nations do have a culture police, with the authority to enforce subjective values, such as dress codes, public displays of affection, and other rules difficult to define in legal terms.
Indeed, the danger we face is not the lack of a culture police, but quite the contrary, the emergence of precisely such a force from the political left. The term, “political correctness,” is often used to describe the enforcement of so-called liberal values by various means, including intimidation and un-Constitutional laws.

It is because of political correctness, that there is now greater freedom of speech for pornographers than for political action committees. The intent of the Founders regarding the First Amendment has been turned upside down and backward.

So what can we do?

The Tenth Amendment offers our greatest, and perhaps most neglected hope. It states, and I quote it in full,

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

But the Congress and the Courts have veered away from that critical capstone of the Bill of Rights. Enforcement of the Tenth Amendment is unlikely to come from the federal government, since the amendment strictly limits the federal government. It must come from the states, and from the people, to whom belong all powers— except for those specifically enumerated in the Constitution as being federal. It is at the state level that we as voters must elect legislators and governors who will decisively reject federal over-reach.

Remember, the states created the federal government, and not the other way around. The federal government is only an instrument of the states, not their colonial master. We certainly do need a federal government, but only for the few, specific functions mentioned explicitly in the Constitution. The “general welfare” clause does not negate those vital limitations on federal power.

You cannot force other people to live according to any set of cultural values. We must not create culture police forces. But through our laws, we can refuse to offer aid, support and financing to abortionists, homosexual activists, radical Islamists, pornographers, and others whom the Founders would clearly have denounced as destructive forces within our society.

Finally, there is this critical thing that you must do as a patriot. You must live your own personal life as one of those “moral and religious people” whom John Adams identified as being those for whom our Constitution was made. After all, “It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Tea and Sour Grapes – This is No “Party” …

by Clio

“The Republican Party is in a “deep civil war” casting a message of “moderates, keep out,” Democratic National Committee Chairman and former Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine said after the electoral upset in Delaware.

Let’s hope DNC Chairman Kaine’s statement is a wake-up call for all those hoping for GOP victories in November. It’s time for all those who wish to unseat Obama Democrats and RINO’s (Republicans In Name Only) to come together in support and unity.

 

Political Moves: O’Donnell Takes Castle

Christine O’Donnell, running for U.S. Senate, won her primary against 40-year Delaware political veteran Mike Castle on September 14, making O’Donnell the cause célèbre in political news this week. The Tea Party Express candidate’s win, considered an “upset,” provoked jeers from the political cognoscenti who pronounced O’Donnell as “unelectable.”

Many of those predicting O’Donnell’s downfall were Republican politicians and commentators, much to the delight of Democrats, locally and nationally. Instead of immediately backing the Delaware candidate, the Republicans, initially, rejected her.

 

Rep. Michael Castle, refuses to endorse O’Donnell, saying he needs time to recover from personal attacks received during the hard-fought campaign. He also blamed former Alaska governor Sarah Palin’s for providing the “attention [and] publicity” that gave O’Donnell the edge she needed to win the race. Sen. Jim DeMint, SC, also supported O’Donnell in her bid for the nomination.

 

However, Rep. Castle states that he will not endorse the Democratic nominee, New Castle County Executive Chris Coons, unlike Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava who pulled out of the primary race in November 2009 for New York’s 23rd Congressional district after Doug Hoffman, running as an Independent and endorsed by Sarah Palin, surged ahead of her in the polls.

In what seemed to be a vindictive hissy fit after quitting the race, moderate Scozzafava threw her support to Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman lost that election by four points and one can only speculate if Scozzafava’s actions cost Hoffman the election and Republicans a seat in Congress.

There is a lesson to be learned here and one hopes that the GOP powers-that-be are paying attention. While Americans decry partisan politics, there are times when one must unite, put aside differences and do what is best for Party and Country. Republicans must win in the November mid-terms because the future and fate of the country depends on Republican triumphs.

In the past few days, the Republican National Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee apparently reconsidered their earlier denunciations of O’Donnell’s candidacy and offered polite to lukewarm intentions to back her bid.

NRSC Chairman Senator John Cornyn (TX) clarified his new attitude (the day of the primaries, he told CNN he preferred Castle) toward O’Donnell: “Let there be no mistake: The National Republican Senatorial Committee – and I personally as the committee’s chairman – strongly stand by all of our Republican nominees, including Christine O’Donnell in Delaware.”

Delaware State Republican Party Chairman Tom Ross, who was highly critical of Christine O’Donnell’s candidacy, yesterday called for party unity:

“…it is time to come together and unite over our shared principles and determination to rescue our economy from the destructive policies advanced by Democrats,” Ross said in a statement.” TheHill.com

“… A Banner Of Bold Colors—No Pale Pastels”

“Four years ago we raised a banner of bold colors — no pale pastels. We proclaimed a dream of an America that would be “a shining city on a hill.” Presidential Ronald Reagan, RNC Nomination Acceptance Speech, August 23, 1984

The crux of the issue with regard to Christine O’Donnell and other Tea Party or Independent candidates is the GOP’s reluctance to embrace the movement. The Tea Party movement is made up of numerous groups: Tea Party Express, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Patriots, et al., are representative of the growing number of (primarily) conservative political activists protesting government expansion, excessive taxation, bailouts and creating a multi-trillion national debt.

 

The Tea Party movement should not be the only concern within the GOP: there is a significant trend developing vis-à-vis political affiliations. “Republican” is almost passé with many voters who now prefer terms such as conservative, Reagan conservative, Constitutionalist, “classical liberal” (translated, as “conservative”), tea partier, tea party patriot.

This new spectrum of political interests and tea partiers are not the new ‘pale pastels’; they are the bold new colors of an electorate that yearns to be united an inclusive banner. One should not diminish or ignore this trend because it could undermine the Republican’s goals for the mid-term elections.

If Republicans come out of the November 2010 elections with majorities in the House and the Senate, there is a chance that the newly elected officials can overturn or repeal some of the onerous legislation passed by the Democrats, including ObamaCare.

The nationalization of health care was forced upon a disapproving nation by Mr. Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (facing Sharron Angle in November) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (John Dennis will challenge Speaker Pelosi at the polls in California). So far, 20 states have filed challenges to ObamaCare.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson, Florida, allowed the multi-state lawsuit to proceed with the caveat that he may dismiss some, but not all, of the counts in the legal challenge that targets the new health care law on constitutional grounds.

Health care isn’t the only topic of controversy in this new administration. Since taking the Oath of Office on January 20, 2009, Mr. Obama has not taken a pause in promoting his ideologies, forging ahead, regardless of public opinion or approval, with an aggressive agenda that includes a re-direction from capitalism to socialism.

However, Mr. Obama has taken plenty of “pauses” for numerous rounds of golf and frequent vacations while showing little interest in national disasters, concerns about the economy or employment. When pushed to action on these matters, he usually lays blame for any political bad news at the feet of the previous administration.

Still, he found time to direct his Department of Justice to file a lawsuit against the State of Arizona for passing an immigration law to protect its borders. Mr. Obama also found time to include the Arizona lawsuit in a human rights violation report to the United Nations – an amazing act of hubris and disloyalty.

If I were to advise RNC Chairman Michael Steele, I would send the following, with all due expedience:

Memo to RNC Chairman Michael Steele: your party is splintering. Reach out to those who feel disenfranchised and devalued within the Grand Old Party and find a way to unite under one tent before the upcoming mid-term elections. Failure to do so is tantamount to handing over those anticipated wins in the House and Senate to the Democrats. A Republican coup d’état in November is not a certainty, in fact; it may be unlikely if there is not an aggressive campaign to embrace your conservative base and support all of our candidates with zeal and appreciation.

Historically, Republicans do not seem to be able to learn from their mistakes.

After the 2008 McCain/Palin loss to the Obama/Biden ticket, Republican leaders and even members of the McCain/Palin campaign staff criticized Governor Palin, laying the blame for the loss at her feet.

Meanwhile, the liberal press continues its collaborative “scorched earth” campaign against Palin – two years after the election.

Sarah Palin resigned as Alaska’s governor in July 2009, citing on-going attacks by political operatives, responding to frivolous (and now dismissed) lawsuits and the cost to Alaskans in time and money spent dealing with the onslaught of ethics charges. Palin also noted her wish to serve Alaska and her country:

“… I will support others who seek to serve, in or out of office, for the right reasons, and I don’t care what party they’re in or no party at all. Inside Alaska – or Outside Alaska…” said Governor Palin in her resignation speech from her home in Wasilla, Alaska.

After her resignation, pundits and critics wasted no time in predicting her disappearance from the national stage and impending political demise. They called her a “quitter” and trivialized her as a political figure.

 

Since Palin’s resignation, she published her autobiography, “Going Rogue,” a best-seller, via pre-orders, before publication. “Going Rogue” rose to the top of the best-seller lists and remained there for months.

Fox News hired Palin as a political commentator, keeping her at the forefront of the highest-rated cable news audience.

Shortly after her resignation, Sarah Palin, from a virtual podium on Facebook, began to speak out regularly on political issues, including against the health care bill. Palin has boldly confronted Mr. Obama on a wide array of issues.

Palin’s next move was to endorse conservative political candidates via SarahPAC, her political action committee. Currently, Sarah Palin’s political picks, including O’Donnell and Joe Miller who triumphed over Lisa Murkowski), won their primaries. At this point, almost 70% of Palin’s picks won their primaries – Sarah Palin is now dubbed the new “king/queen-maker.”

(Update, Friday, September 17: Ms. Murkowski announces her intention to run a “write-in” campaign for the Senate seat, which could split the vote and assure a win for the Democratic nominee Scott McAdams.)

The analysts and politicians who rejected Christine O’Donnell as “unelectable,” also predicted the end of Palin’s future in politics. We hope that some of them are now choking on their crystal balls.

Final thoughts: the Grand Old Party must put out the welcome mat for its candidates and unite with them and their voters under a singular bold banner before its arrogance and exclusionary tactics send its majestic mascot, the elephant, the way of the Woolly Mammoth – an extinct species whose skeletal remains lie buried in soil and muck.

© TBP Publishing 2010, The Bold Pursuit sm. All Rights Reserved.

STOP THE TRAIN — The Taxpayer Wants OFF!

 

by Cynthia Toney, Contributing Writer and Editor, The Bold Pursuit

 

I recently posed a question to the Republican candidate for U.S. House of Representatives in my district:  “What will you do to stop the momentum that the Democrats in Congress have enjoyed, with the help of some Republicans, in passing one piece of legislation after another?” His answer was on the right track but very short and, I felt, incomplete. So later that evening I attempted to analyze this troubling situation for myself.

There has been a seemingly unstoppable train of legislation coming out of the majority Democrat Congress for the past two years, assisted by some individuals from other parties who seem content with—or perhaps elated by—the rapid growth of our national debt and of government itself. Each time our Senators and Representatives enter into legislative session and jump onto the train, we the taxpayers must desperately cling to our wallets as we are taken on a screaming ride that tears across the landscape of our liberties.

Like any train speeding out of control, the legislation train cannot be examined thoroughly, let alone repaired, while it is still in motion. Because there are so many bills in Congress at any given time, we typically are not aware of the existence of the majority of them, in spite of the fact that they ultimately cost us dearly.

Appropriations bills are relatively simple but sometimes go virtually unnoticed by the public. We are most familiar with appropriations for defense, which is essential to our nation’s survival and which can be financed by the amount of corporate taxes alone. Unfortunately, we seldom hear about appropriations made for foreign countries, under Foreign Operations appropriations. Most taxpayers would be shocked to learn that $48 billion has been appropriated to fight AIDS and other disease in Africa, while millions in the U.S. are unemployed, losing their homes, and unable to pay their own medical bills.

More often than not, bills are mighty behemoths of legal jargon that most members of Congress do not wish to take the time to read, even though it is part of their jobs to do so. Some of us taxpayers take it upon ourselves to read those bills after a long, hard day’s work at our own jobs. In doing so, we find that such large and complicated bills commonly exhibit a feature that may appear within them for very different reasons.

As taxpayers have discovered—often too late—many bills in Congress contain unrelated or lesser pieces of legislation along with the primary legislation.  Sometimes the reason for the inclusion of a lesser but altogether worthy piece of legislation is that the sponsors of the bill hope that the added legislation might garner more support from the opposition for the rest of the bill. The opposition is usually tempted by this ploy; plus, it is almost always concerned that, by voting against too many bills from the other party, it may be accused of playing “partisan politics.” It is my belief that conservative taxpayers would like to see a little more “partisan” right now, as well as a little less “what’s in it for my district or state”. I was pleased to hear the aforementioned Republican candidate for the House say that, if elected, he will have the courage to face his constituents and explain why he cannot vote for a particular bill even though it contains a piece of legislation that would benefit them in some way.

Another reason for including an odd bit of legislation is to try to sneak it into a gigantic bill in the hope that it will go unnoticed. This would be legislation that might ordinarily raise some ire, if not from the opposition in Congress, definitely from the taxpaying public. Take for example the healthcare reform bill (with the comely name Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), which is now law. Didn’t Nancy Pelosi say that we would find out what was in the bill after it was passed? We now know that it also amends the Internal Revenue Code and expands the scope of Form 1099 to track and tax gold bullion and coin transactions. Nobody was looking for that. Taxpayers were already shaken enough by the fact that the IRS must hire tens of thousands of new agents to make sure that we purchase mandatory health insurance.

It has taken some of us longer than others to realize that almost without exception, each time a new bill passes, bureaucracy grows—sometimes in ways never anticipated—and more taxes are required to implement laws that supposedly are meant to save us money.

With each new bill, a new car is added to the legislation train; the train becomes more powerful and more difficult to stop. As a taxpayer, I would like to know that those Senators and Representatives for whom I vote in the future will stop the legislation train and allow the taxpayers to catch their collective breath.

On November 2, 2010, we must vote for those who will most likely employ the emergency brake to stop this runaway train. When it is finally stopped, we must compel those elected to review, repeal, and/or defund all programs not vital to the strength and prosperity of our nation and its citizens.



© The Bold Pursuit 2010, All Rights Reserved

Why Every American is a Victim of 9/11 …

by Clio

First, The Bold Pursuit offers our condolences to those most affected by the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001: the families, friends and associates of the victims. We also wish to pay tribute to the first responders who taught us the true meaning of heroism.

Nine years after that dreadful morning, the Cordoba Initiative, led by Chairman Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, plans to construct a $100 million, 13-story Islamic center, including a mosque. Chairman Imam Rauf is quoted as saying, “I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened [on September 11th], but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.”

There is fierce opposition to the Ground Zero mosque, the unsanctioned name of the structure based on its proximity – 500 feet – to the site of the most brutal terrorist attack on our nation and the de facto graveyard of many who perished on that day. “Ground Zero” is the location where innocents and heroes lost their lives in an act of premeditated evil.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, during his annual Ramadan Iftar dinner (Ramadan is the ninth month of the Islamic calendar. Muslims each day fast from sunrise to sunset for the purpose of inner reflection, devotion to God, and self-control. Iftar is the evening meal in which Muslims break their fast), defended the Ground Zero mosque plans:

“…If we say that a mosque or a community center should not be built near the perimeter of the World Trade Center site, we would compromise our commitment to fighting terror with freedom,” said Bloomberg.

Fighting terrorism with freedom, Mayor Bloomberg? Let’s hope that your next gig isn’t an appointment to the Pentagon.

As for another term as mayor, today’s polls indicate that Mayor Bloomberg’s Republican support sharply decreased by 19% in light of his support of the Ground Zero mosque or park 51, as he often refers to the site for the Islamic edifice.

Conversely, President George W. Bush, in his remarks to a joint session of Congress following the September 11th aerial ambush, addressed the issue of terrorists and fighting terror:

September 20, 2001

“We are not deceived by their pretenses to piety. We have seen their kind before. They are the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions – by abandoning every value except the will to power – they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism, and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way, to where it ends: in history’s unmarked grave of discarded lies. Americans are asking: How will we fight and win this war? We will direct every resource at our command — every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war — to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror network.”

Americans Object

What Mayor Bloomberg and Mr. Obama fail to acknowledge is that American’s do support our First Amendment right to freedom of religion, but that’s not the issue.

Americans object to the Cordoba House (Ground Zero Mosque) on principle: the gravesite of over 2600 souls is not just “park 51” or “private property in Lower Manhattan,” it is sacred ground. The survivors of the victims of the Al-Qaeda terrorist strikes and the citizens of New York City are not the only ones who suffered when Islamic extremists brought hate-based terrorism to our country.

In the past few decades, news reports provide ample evidence of Islamic animosity toward America: “Death to America” and “The Great Satan” are familiar slogans found on protest signs and chants. The sight of Muslim protestors burning our nation’s flag is captured in photos and film.

They said they hated us – and they meant it. They chanted “Death to America” – and they meant it.

Past Islamic terrorism primarily targeted at our military and diplomatic personnel, not civilians, thus giving us a false sense of security within our own borders. One September morning, those who proclaimed their hate and death wishes carefully crafted a plan to make good on their promise to slaughter Americans.


“Let’s Roll”

The September 11th attacks were a sucker punch to the American psyche. It was an unexpected attack on our soil, on our homeland and a personal assault on every American.

Few events in life leave indelible imprints on our minds; we remember where we were, what we were doing and other mundane details when such events occurred. In my parent’s generation, it was the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King and to my grandparents; it was that “Day of Infamy,” the attack on Pearl Harbor.

This generation will remember a late summer morning, September 11, 2001, when Islamic terrorists boarded planes, drove two of them into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, plunged another plane into the Pentagon and crashed another into a vacant field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Flight 93 departed Newark, New Jersey for San Francisco at 8:01am ET. After learning of the attacks on the World Trade Center via cellphones, passengers accurately surmised a similar fate was in store for their hijacked jet and planned a coup against the Al-Qaeda terrorists. “Let’s Roll” was their battle cry and their efforts likely caused the Boeing 757 to dive to the ground, disintegrating on impact. The last words heard from the cockpit of Flight 93, in Arabic, “Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest!”

Adding Insult to Injury: Cordoba House

The Cordoba House or Ground Zero mosque is intended to be, according to Imam Rauf, a cultural center and mosque.

Cordoba was an Iberian and Roman city, conquered by Muslims caliphs during the Middle Ages. During this period, the Caliphate of Córdoba, descended from the Umayyad dynasty, brought about territorial expansion and bolstered trade. Cordoba flourished under the Umayyads and Arabic became the state language.

The Umayyad caliphs considered themselves as “deputies of God,” the representatives of God on earth, and to have been responsible for the “definition and elaboration of God’s ordinances, or in other words the definition or elaboration of Islamic law.”

Under the Umayyads, Cordoba rose to such eminence in Mohammedanism that its mosque, known as the Ceca, was considered the Western Mecca.

The Cordoba House seeks to “to cultivate multi-cultural and multi-faith understanding across minds and borders” via the following concepts (from the website):

Thought:
    * Advising policy makers and thought leaders on urgent Muslim-West issues
    * Bringing new perspectives to familiar debates
    * Providing expert knowledge of Islamic Law and other technical subjects for use in the public square

Action:
    * Building a network of young Muslim leaders to lead the drive for change in future generations
    * Responding to Muslim-West crises
    * Advocating for human rights, including higher standards for the treatment of women

Outcomes:
    * Raising the bar of Islamic governance in Muslim-majority countries (emphasis added)
    * Changing perceptions of the other in both the Muslim World and the West
    * Fostering cooperation between governments, civil society organizations, media, academics and business leaders in the Muslim World and the West

What’s missing? Denunciation of Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, the 9/11 terrorists and their actions. Also, a message of tolerance and acceptance of other religions and divergent points of view. Cordoba House asserts “freedom of religion” for Muslims, but no one else. Freedom of religion for all beliefs goes to the very core of this country.

Furthermore, the Cordoba Initiative sponsors the Shariah Index Project. Shariah Law “evolves around the right balance between institutions of political power and authority and institutions of religious power and authority, and whether the modern nation state Muslims live in should be a secular or religious.” Muslims consider Shariah (or Sharia) Law as God’s law and dictates all aspects of Muslim life including daily routines,  including family obligations and financial dealings.

Cordoba House and Islamic Extremists

When taking all into context (Islamic extremists’ unapologetic abhorrence of America and everything it represents, numerous past terrorist attacks on American interests and the September 11th massacre of innocent Americans), one takes offense at the intention of the Cordoba Initiative to pursue building their cultural center/mosque just two blocks from the site of the 9/11 massacre.

Every American is a victim of that attack and the Cordoba Initiative, with great insensitivity, refuses to budge and build their mosque elsewhere. Why? What could be more insulting to America, to the victims and survivors of the al-Qaeda terrorist attacks than to build a shrine to the terrorist’s faith near the target of their hatred? Is this an insult or a throwing down of the proverbial gauntlet with an agenda to antagonize our country?

Below are some thoughts on September 11th and the Ground Zero mosque; please feel free to share your own:

Columnist and author, Erik Rush: “Jihadists are out to destroy the paradigm of life for all Americans, so any American who doesn’t want to live under Shariah law needs to choose a side. Radical Muslims don’t care who they kill in the name of jihad; themselves, their families, friends, countrymen. So they most assuredly don’t care about those they killed on 9/11 who might have been sympathetic to them. In general, people who are willing to summarily kill you if they perceive an obscure threat are not great friends to have.”

Sharron Angle, Republican U.S. Senate Candidate 2010, Nevada: “History is replete with examples highlighting the importance of learning from experience.

“September 11th is a hallowed day of remembrance, forever enshrined in the hearts of the American people.

“The sacrifice and resolve from the American patriots on September 11th, 2001 has left us with the lesson we will never forget. We must not forget; so that another assault on our way of life – which will be met with equal measures of patriotism and resolve – will never be repeated.”

Contributing Writer and Editor, Cynthia Toney: “If this center is for outreach, why do the Muslims not erect a small monument to the victims at the site, along with their mosque? (Not that I believe the mosque should be built at all!) The massive funding provided would certainly allow for at least that much of a tribute to them.”

Genevieve, TBP Senior Associate: “The escalating danger from the radical fringe as it infiltrates our lives makes intense scrutiny and vigilance essential to our survival. We must join together to maximize our strength and resolve to prevent another occurrence like September 11, 2001.”

© TBP Publishing 2010, The Bold Pursuit sm. All Rights Reserved.

 

Happy Labor Day!

With your participation and contributions, The Bold Pursuit will continue its quest to bring you the best of conservative opinions and observations in our ever-changing political drama. Please join us in celebration of the monumental accomplishments that are part of the American tradition of demanding and challenging occupations. We salute you, America, and aspire to a future of prosperity as we commemorate each and every Labor Day. God Bless America!  the Staff of The Bold Pursuit: Genevieve, Clio and Cynthia

Below is some food for thought to peruse as you enjoy your well-earned holiday:

 

 

“The taxpayer – that’s someone who works for the federal government but doesn’t have to take the civil service examination.” ~ Ronald Reagan

 

 

“Labor Day is a glorious holiday because your child will be going back to school the next day.  It would have been called Independence Day, but that name was already taken.” ~Bill Dodds

 

“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

 

 

“Labor was the first price, the original purchase-money that was paid for all things.  It was not by gold or by silver, but by labor, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased.”  ~Adam Smith