Nickels for the RNC

September 30, 2006

I recieved a fundraising letter with a Real Dollar Bill inside.

Here is the letter:

And here what what I sent back, with a nickel.

September 30, 2006

Mr. Ken Mehlman
Republican National Committee
310 First Street SE
P.O. Box 98206
Washington, DC 20077-7561

Dear Sir:
I received your dollar today, and I would just like you to know that this fundraising scheme doesn’t make a nickel’s worth of sense (see enclosed nickel.)

I have sent your dollar to Dwight Grotberg.

Keep the nickel.

Dustin Gawrylow

P.S. Quit supporting RINOs and abandoning solid conservative candidates like Dwight Grotberg and Matt Mechtel.


European Human Rights Court Upholds Nazi Ban on Homeschooling

September 30, 2006

I thought these were liberal and progressive people?

European Human Rights Court Upholds Nazi Ban on Homeschooling

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) does not protect European citizens against Hitler’s laws. On 11 September the Strasburg-based court ruled that the (German) State may deny parents the right to homeschool their children. The EU Court’s decision [pdf] states that the right to education “by its very nature calls for regulation by the State.”

German parents are currently being prosecuted on the basis of a Nazi bill of 1938 which banned homeschooling. The court denied a request from the Konrad family to rule that Germany’s ban on homeschooling violates their human rights to educate their own children according to their own religious beliefs. Fritz and Marianna Konrad filed the human rights complaint in November 2003 arguing that Germany’s compulsory school attendance severely endangers their children’s religious upbringing, and promotes teaching inconsistent with their Christian faith, especially the State’s mandate of sexual education (what sex education in Europe is can be seen here).

The Konrads had appealed under Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights which states, “No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”

The European Court, however, agreed with the finding of German courts that “Schools represented society, and it was in the children’s interest to become part of that society. The parents’ right to education did not go as far as to deprive their children of that experience.”

The ruling also states that “Not only the acquisition of knowledge, but also the integration into and first experience with society are important goals in primary school education. The German courts found that those objectives cannot be equally met by home education even if it allowed children to acquire the same standard of knowledge as provided for by primary school education. The [European] Court [of Human Rights] considers this presumption as not being erroneous […] The [German] Federal Constitutional Court stressed the general interest of society to avoid the emergence of parallel societies based on separate philosophical convictions and the importance of integrating minorities into society. The Court regards this as being in accordance with its own case-law on the importance of pluralism for democracy.”

The Court’s arguments resemble those which Ayaan Hirsi Ali used last year when she proposed to abolish article 23 of the Dutch Constitution, which guarantees freedom of education. She said that all children should be sent to state schools because “freedom of education hinders integration.” The former Dutch politician, who has meanwhile emigrated to the United States where she now works for the American Enterprise Institute, proposed to close down confessional schools because, apart from religious Christians, Muslim immigrants, too, had begun to establish their own confessional schools. According to Hirsi Ali the state should educate children “in order to ensure that they learn tolerance.”

The problem with entrusting the education of children to the state is, of course, that instead of parents “indoctrinating” their children with their own ideological and philosophical beliefs, they will be indoctrinated with those of the state – which is exactly why Hitler banned homeschooling in Germany in 1938.

Michael Steele Teaches Us How to Avoid Links to Republicans

September 23, 2006

By saying your a Democrat.


Baltimore Sun

No, Maryland voters, the printer did not make an error. Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele’s new campaign signs seem to identify him as a Democrat.

A “Steele Democrat,” they read.

The bright blue placards and bumper stickers made their debut yesterday in Baltimore during an event announcing a new coalition of Democrats supporting the lieutenant governor’s U.S. Senate bid. Steele, of course, is the Republican nominee for Senate and a former chairman of the state Republican Party.

The group and accompanying signs appear to be the latest Steele effort to distance himself from an unpopular White House and a Republican Party struggling to maintain its hold on Congress. The state Democratic Party chairman immediately accused him of “identity theft.”

Steele supporters said the term was akin to calling someone a “Reagan Democrat.”

Democratic Arrogance

September 23, 2006

As you read this title, remember, Roger Johnson is up for re-election versus Doug Goering whom he just barely beat in 2004.

Johnson Returns from NASDA Conference with Plans for 2007 Farm Bill as President Elect for 2007

I’m not going to waste bandwidth by quoting their talking points, but don’t they think they are jumping the gun a bit, he only beat with 50.32% of the vote in 2004.

Quite presumptive I would say.

Fargo Liberals: Don’t Execute Rodriguez

September 21, 2006

I don’t know what the readership of the High Plains Reader is, but I know it is the ‘rag’ of Fargo “progressives” and liberals.

How out of touch are they to say that Alfonso Rodriguez Jr. who has now been convicted of murdering Dru Sjodin should not be put to death.

There is no defending the action of Rodriquez. There is no rationale for what he did to Sjodin.

But the death penalty is not something that should be imposed simply because of one heinous, gruesome case. Nor should there be a groundswell to legalize capital punishment in North Dakota simply because of one highly visible case.
We need to stop ourselves short of acting out barbarically, also, as tempting as it is. Revenge is not a good enough reason.

No rationale? How out of touch are these people?

It’s not revenge, it’s called justice.

The 65th Congress: A Very Brief History

September 21, 2006

The year was 1917. Woodrow Wilson was begining his second term, the Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress, and the United States would soon enter World War One.

Congress declared war on April 6th, 1917. Just as with the Patriot Act, Congress found it required to pass legislation regarding what the American people could say about the government.

The Espionage Act made it a crime to help wartime enemies of the United States, but the Sedition Act made it a crime to utter, print, write or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the United States’ form of government.

The Espionage Act was designed to silence socialist and communist group that used their objections to the war to promote their agenda.

The Sedition Act of 1918 was an amendment to the Espionage Act of 1917 passed at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, who was concerned any widespread dissent in time of war constituted a real threat to an American victory.

The Sedition Act forbade Americans to use “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the United States government, flag, or armed forces during war.

Amazingly the Sedition Act was upheld by the US Supreme Court in Schenck v. United States.

This all was done by the Democrats of the time, could you imagine if the Republicans would propose anything like this today?

Pence on Iraq: "We’re winning"

September 21, 2006

Indianpolis Star

When we asked Rep. Mike Pence on his visit, about the first thing he said was that he asked a general and was told “We’re winning.”

Pence, who predicts “more carnage” from what he describes as a ruthless and sophisticated enemy. At the same time, he harkens back to the purple fingers and the transfers of chores from U.S. to Iraqi forces, along with America’s superior firepower, and pretty much echoes the president’s Churchill impression. He says he’s told the president personally that he’s a braver man than his critics (many of whom actually have been shot at, even wounded, in war).

Conjuring, no doubt unintentionally, the ghosts of Vietnam, Pence proclaims that the resistance in Iraq hasn’t won a single full-face engagement with American troops. The Viet Cong didn’t win the Tet offensive, either, but they eventually proved that winning battles isn’t enough for a foreign occupier. We wore down and bogged down in Vietnam; and what would we have “won,” anyway, but a perpetually propped-up puppet government?

Pence’s view: “We cannot abandon those people.”