It’s OK for 10 year old girls to marry adult men according to Islamic law. These Islamic leaders are not joking. When is Islam going to get out of the Middle Ages?

It's just fine to marry girls age 10 says Islamic religious leader

There are some Muslim voices in America opposed to radical, Islamic, shariah law. But not many …. Let’s support the moderate voices… See the following…

[AIFD Commentary] “CAIR Spreads Propaganda for Radical Saudis on Islam’s Holiest Day” by M. Zuhdi Jasser, Big Peace.com, Wed. November 17, 2010

Reply |M. Zuhdi Jasser, MD to web_list
show details Nov 17 (2 days ago)
Images are not displayed.
Display images below – Always display images from zuhdi@aifdemocracy.org

The following column by M. Zuhdi Jasser appeared online today at Big Peace.com and can be found at this link.

CAIR Spreads Propaganda for Radical Saudis on Islam’s Holiest Daystrong>Posted by Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser Nov 17th 2010 at 10:13 am in Featured Story, Islam, Islamic extremism, saudi arabia, sharia | Comments (14)

Even Breitbart.com carried yesterday’s bizarrely ‘urgent’ press release from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which praised the leading Saudi cleric, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al Sheikh, on the most significant Muslim holiday of the year- Eid al-Adha (Holiday of the Sacrifice).

No previous single press release or statement by CAIR more clearly reveals its ideological ties and service to the Saudis, and their Wahhabi ideologues – and its willingness to use word games, deception and moral equivalence to avoid revealing its true objectives.

Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al Sheikh
First, let us look at the substance of CAIR’s release:

CAIR today welcomed an anti-terror statement by Saudi Arabia’s top religious leader made in a sermon at the peak of the Hajj, the most important event on Islam’s spiritual calendar. In his midday sermon Monday to millions of pilgrims gathered on the plain of Arafah, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al Sheikh called for religious moderation and said Islam prohibits terrorism, extremism and injustice.

CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said:
It is extremely significant that such a prominent Muslim leader would offer a clear statement condemning terrorism and religious extremism during the largest Islamic gathering in the world and on the most important day on Islam’s spiritual calendar. The importance of the Grand Mufti’s statement is made even more significant given the fact that it was delivered in the same spot as the last sermon offered by the Prophet Muhammad. This statement from Islam’s spiritual capital should put to rest once and for all the false claim that Muslim leaders do not condemn terrorism.

Awad urged Muslim leaders in America and worldwide to incorporate the Grand Mufti’s statement in Eid al-Adha prayers being offered Tuesday to mark the end of Hajj.

As a devout Muslim, I
find any comparison by CAIR of the leading radical Saudi cleric, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al Sheikh, to the Prophet Muhammad to be deeply harmful to any attempt at true modern reforms. The Saudis have exploited the world’s Muslim populations with their billions in petrodollars that have given them the fuel to metastasize the cancers of their backward Wahhabi interpretations of Islam and dominate our communities. Many reformist, modern Muslims like me believe that if the Prophet was alive today, he would reject their backward, literalist interpretations for a more moral, humanitarian, modern westernized Islam. We are unable to have this debate because of the domination of the Saudi voice among Muslims in the west and globally.The mere condemnation of terrorism in this CAIR promoted sermon means nothing – because the sermon is otherwise chock full of inflammatory Muslim supremacism (Islamism) and anti-Western hatred.

CAIR’s assertion that this should “put to rest once and for all the false claim that Muslims leaders do not condemn terrorism” demonstrates, once and for all, that CAIR is part of the Saudi propaganda machine. Further, it should rather actually ‘put to rest’ any doubts that CAIR is, in fact, part of the theo-political global Islamist movement in the West and in the United States, hatched and nurtured by Saudi Arabia, the Muslim Brotherhood, and other Islamist groups from the Middle East.

Most revealingly, CAIR ignores the rest of the Grand Mufti’s sermon. The full transcript cannot yet be found online, but a number of reports discuss the other topics of this sermon. First, the Chief Sheikh did make headlines by “rejecting terrorism as a deplorable crime” but actually went on to say that “the problem is not just terrorism, but also poverty, unemployment, and diseases stemming from global crises.” True to his Islamist and Wahhabist creed, he ignores any need for Muslim reform, modernization, or separation of mosque and state. The reference to “stemming global crises” is based on the same old, tired Islamist propaganda: blame the West for all Muslims’ problems.
During this sermon, the Grand Mufti also “condemned Western occupation of foreign lands,” and went on to say:
Islam forbids the occupation of a country, and the unlawful shedding of civilian blood, and the destruction of crops and cattle…the rights of people in Third World nations is not as it is in other countries, and it is unacceptable that nations occupy these lands and rape them of their riches.
To a genuine American Muslim, this sounds more like a testimony toward radicalization and militancy, rather than any supposedly clear promotion of moderation and condemnation of terrorism, as CAIR would have us believe. Therein, lies a major indicator that the Grand Mufti is anything but moderate. CAIR not only voices no disagreement with this toxic anti-western narrative, but they use this sermon’s few lines condemning terrorism as a statement to “put to rest the claim that Muslims do not condemn terrorism.” Any wonder we are making no headway against radical Islam with these kind of vacuous Islamist condemnations of the tactic of terrorism couched in an anti-western, anti-American narrative?

On the subject of violence, his duplicity is also revealed in another statement the Grand Mufti made in the sermon:
Violence cannot be cured with violence and neither can terrorism be cured with force, but by lifting injustices levied on oppressed peoples.
This is again hardly a morally-clear condemnation of terrorism. Rather, it is a demagogic moral equivalency of barbaric acts committed by Al Qaeda, Hamas, and other radical Islamists, which this radical sheikh insinuates are understandable by the acts of America and the West.
According to Geo News, the Grand Mufti also said in his sermon:

“God sent the last and final Prophet with the complete code of conduct (Shariah), which, is in complete harmony with human nature, owing to the fact that it caters to all natural and material needs.” He also added that, “the human inner being (nafs) drives man to do evil.”
CAIR voices no disagreement on their part with the Mufti, about his interpretation of shariah here or anywhere. In fact, CAIR is now also suing the state of Oklahoma to protect their fellow Islamists’ “right” to use that same shariah, without interference from the state. To the contrary, Oklahoma voters by 70 percent voted last week to prohibit shariah law from taking precedence over state or federal law. That would seem quite prescient, in light of an organization like CAIR that, this week, uses the Grand Mufti’s sermon – which elevates the most extreme, repressive form of shariah – which dictates all aspects of life and society – as an exemplar for moderation.

For example, CAIR apparently thought that Americans are unaware of, or would not remember that less than two years ago, this “moderate” Grand Mufti expressed his grand approval of marriage of adult men to 10 year old girls. In a lecture at the mosque of Imam Mohamed bin Saud Islamic University in Riyadh, he stated:
A girl becomes ready for marriage at 10 or 12 according to Islam and stressed that Islamic law is not by any means oppressive to women…Our mothers and grandmothers got married when they were barely 12. Good upbringing makes a girl ready to perform all marital duties at that age. (Al-Arabiya)
A girl aged 10 or 12 can be married. Those who think she’s too young are wrong and they are being unfair to her.” (CNN)
This “moderate” Grand Mufti also disgracefully rebuked women for attending a conference without a veil stating, “I severely condemn this matter and warn of grave consequences,” and told Muslims at the Green Lane (U.K.) mosque that, “Muslim children should be hit if they don’t pray: ‘When he is seven, tell him to go and pray, and start hitting them when they are 10.'”
The Grand Mufti is one of the leading Wahhabi purveyors of Muslim supremacism (Islamism) around the world. Whether or not he condemns violence and the tactic of terrorism is of little consequence. Clearly, he believes in the Islamic state, and the domination of shariah law in governments where Muslims are a majority. As Alex Alexiev has noted, “the Saudi funding program is the largest worldwide propaganda campaign ever mounted-dwarfing the Soviets’ propaganda efforts at the height of the cold War.”
In fact, the Saudi’s own so-called “de-radicalization campaign” (Al-Sakeenah) has been prominently critiqued. For example Col. Jonathan Figuel writes:
It seems that the Sakeenah campaign is convenient to be presented by the Saudis as an external non-governmental independent initiative, rather than a governmental led operation. From past experience and analysis of the Saudi’s double game policy and conduct, one can assume that the Saudis on one hand use the campaign for propaganda purposes encouraging its existence for internal real threats, while on the other hand the campaign can be presented to the international political and the public opinion for political benefits without any formal or direct responsibility to the global aspects of the their radicalization influence and actions…The Saudi de radicalization campaign to “dry out the sources of terrorism thoughts” as declared by the minister of Islamic Affairs, corroborates the fact that the campaign is totally aimed to deal with domestic security threats on Islamic Wahhabi doctrine.

We must not be fooled by the “condemnation” of terrorism by the Saudi Wahhabi clerics and their tribal protectors in the Saudi royals. In reality, this further reveals the dangerous synergy and propaganda role of American Islamist groups like CAIR for Saudi Wahhabi fundamentalists like the Grand Mufti. Their ‘double game’ is manifested from their pulpits at the Grand Mosque in Mecca and from the press releases of their advocates like CAIR in the United States.
CAIR’s rush to highlight the radical Saudi cleric’s “condemnation” of terrorism was clearly based on its expectation, not without merit, that most Americans would not research how immoderate this cleric really is. A brief review of that sermon – in context, and in view of the Grand Mufti’s ‘other’ prominent radical ideas – reveals a dangerous, influential Islamist who uses Wahhabi interpretations of Islam and shariah to impose misogyny, child marriage, child abuse, Muslim supremacy, and spread hate-filled anti-American propaganda.
Shamefully, CAIR chose Islam’s holiest day of the year to spread this type of propaganda. We, modern reform-minded American Muslims and non-Muslims alike, must unite and speak with one voice against it.

Unsubscribe
http://www.aifdemocracy.orgChild-Marriage and Pedophilia in Muslim Societies: Will It Come To an End
In my previous article, I have mentioned that aged and wealthy Arabs from the Gulf countries come to India, mainly to Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, to prey on teenage girls, by paying fat cash as dowry to their parents. They generally enter into temporary marriage contracts (Mutah) and return home after a brief stay. In January, 2007, a 60 year old Arab married 3 girls, Afreen, Farheena and Sultana, at a single sitting (within ten minutes), in Hyderabad.

In another incident in May 2004, an old man called Muhammad Zafer Yaqub Hassan al-Jorani came from Sharjah to Hyderabad to undergo a cataract operation. On May 7, he married Haseena Begum, a 19 year old girl and after two days he divorced her. On May 24, he married another 16 year old girl Ruksana Begum. Haseena, ignoring even threat to her life, went to a local police station to narrate her story and within an hour police arrested Jorani. Police also arrested someone called Shamsuddin who was alleged to have played the role of a mediator and received a cash of Rs 40,000 from Jorani and handed over the money to the parents of Haseena as mehr. It is to be mentioned here that Jorani, at his Sharjah residence, had two wives and 11 children.

While commenting on these affairs, a reader wrote, “In child marriage of the other type, where young girl marries an old man, is prevalent in Muslim society in India. I am an ex-Muslim from India and such facts I have seen in my own eyes. I tried to alert police but was threatened by police themselves with dire consequences, even death, and so I kept quiet.

In various cities, where there are Muslim ghettos, this happens regularly. Muslims condemn prostitution but allow legal prostitution through temporary marriage or Mutah. Young girls of16-18-year-old are married to aged Arabs, for a stipulated period, simply for money. Mullahs make the old Arab and young girls sign nikahnama and talaknama at the same time.

Parents get money and send their daughter as a prostitute to the Arab to be raped. The Arab then divorces her after a stipulated time that may vary from a few hours to a few days. Things move fast because the next victim is waiting in the queue. Generally, beautiful girls are entered in the waiting list and many of them have to entertain their (temporary) rapist husbands every year. The month of Ramadan is busiest period of this business when many Indian girls are sent to Dubai and from Dubai to elsewhere, to be sexually assaulted by the Arabs, after Ramadan fasting.

Generally, the girls earns anywhere from Rs 15,000 to Rs 500,000, depending on the skill of the negotiator (middleman) and also on the beauty of the girl. If she happens to be a virgin, she earns a lot more, as Arabs are ready to spend fabulous money for a first time sex.

Now-a-days, there are plastic surgeons, I know, are earning lot from the pimps by turning the girls virgin again by attaching a layer of fresh skin to their private parts and thus making an artificial hymen. This happens repeatedly for many girls till she gets tired or fails to find a new (temporary) husband.

Local police, political leaders and NGOs get their share too and keep silence. I can even spell names of some people, who are involved in the racket. But my life is already under threat due to disclosing the truth about Islam. I also don’t want annoy the local police because they may just shoot me in a false encounter and get paid by the racket leaders. Such an incident happened earlier. This is, indeed, another horrible face of Islam.”

Another reader commented, “Dear old Muslims in the Middle East who are planning to marry a girl as young as 6 yrs old to be your bride, kindly let me have the honour to ask you a very simple question. Try imagining that the young 6-year-old bride whom you’re going to marry soon, is your daughter or granddaughter or great granddaughter or great-great granddaughter and that you are going to penetrate her very small vagina with your big xxxxx. Do you feel it nauseating or disgusting at the very thought of it? I believe that for those old Muslims who have some human conscience or fear of God will be kind enough to let all these young girls go.”

Another reader commented “I believe that for those old Muslims who have some human conscience or fear of God will be kind enough to let all these young girls go. As for those old Muslims who still can’t let all these young girls go because of their super strong sexual needs, may I suggest a much better option for you which could help satisfy all your sexual needs or cravings and that is, to go and buy a sex doll from any sex shop and sell all these erotic products. Don’t you think that your Allah will be pleased with my kind suggestion here which is better than destroying all those young innocent girls’ life? Thank you in advance for heeding my advice to give all these young innocent muslimahs a chance to live life to the fullest.”

In this context, it should be mentioned that, in Islam, there is no place for ethics, morality or conscience. Islamic morality is quite different and stands on two notions – Halal (permitted) and Haram (not permitted). To a sane non-Muslim individual, marrying a 6 or 8-year-old girl by an over 50 man, may appear to be highly immoral, unethical and vulgar. But to a Muslim, such an act is Halal, as Prophet Muhammad had done it. So, application of personal sense morality and ethics does not play any role. Whatever the Prophet did is Halal and every Muslim has the right to emulate the Prophet.

Another reader wrote, “These old wolfs who practice such disgusting acts by following their Prophet are wild animals. They don’t even deserve to live. These innocent young brides should be given some poison by their mothers which they can mix with some food and feed their wonderful husbands on the first night and finish them off. The Human Rights activists can defend them saying these children are minor and they do not know what they are doing. Even few years of jail sentence is much better than living with these animals. If more and more child-brides start rebelling by giving the due punishment to these animals, this cruel practice will vanish.”

Out of court settlement allows Saudi girl 8 to divorce 50 year old husband:
As mentioned in the previous article that a Saudi judge refused to terminate the marital bond between an 8-year-old girl and her 47-year-old husband. The girl’s father, according to the attorney, took US$13,000 from the man and arranged the marriage in order to settle his debts with him, who is also a close friend of his. On the other hand, the girl’s mother expressed her determination to fight the case and continue to seek daughter’s divorce.

Share

How Mama Hope started …

http://bryceyukioadolphson.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/Variables-Portfolio/G0000IKx8VE98KwA/I0000QjouJCLsE34

Share

Storytellers for Good: Mama Hope from Storytellers For Good on Vimeo.

How Mama Hope started … incredible story of love and hope.

To see Bryce Adolphson’s photographs …
http://bryceyukioadolphson.photoshelter.com/

Share

Time to “profile” radical Islamic, Muslim extremists? To be or not to be? To fly or not to fly !! Get them off our planes!

profile & keep Americans safe

If Muslims want to fly then let them fly on Muslim planes. On Muslim owned planes Muslim women can wear the clothing they want and they are safe.

If Americans want to fly U.S. Homeland Security says that Americans must accept pat downs or full body scans. No.

The problem to face is how to effectively deal with Islamic radical extremists. And, yes, there are some American born Islamic radical extremists. The problem does not lie in our stars. The problem lies in the behavior of those who want to blow themselves up and go to their form of heaven.

That problem — Islamic Muslim extremists — is what Homeland Security must deal with. And we must tell Obama and his administration — NO!

If Muslims want to fly on planes owned by the United States then they must accept that they will be “profiled”. Any connections to any radical group that supports violence — those people cannot fly. Yes, it is time to profile. If a person has the profile of a possible Islamic extremist then it’s time to take major precautions.

Today 11-17-2010 we learn that a leading terrorist will walk away from most charges connected to the killing of 3,000 Americans on 9-11
. And nine years after 9-11 there has been no convictions directly connected to the events of 9-11.

I can understand why parents will choose to drive rather than have their young children patted down
. And I can understand why pilots do not accept routine, continual radiaiton or pat downs. If the pilots wanted to kill the passengers the pat downs and body scans are not going to stop them from flying a plane into the ground.

So what is Obama and his administration doing to keep Americans safe from radical Muslim extremists? Use Google and there is Hilary Clinton implementing Obama’s Reach Out to the Muslims policy.

Last Updated: Thu, 01/21/2010 –
In an effort to pursue a better relationship with Muslim communities, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has signed special orders to allow the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties have for years banned them from the United States.

Clinton chose to exercise her exemption authority as the nation’s chief foreign affairs adviser in a quest to fulfill President Obama’s mission of creating a new and improved relationship—based on mutual interest and mutual respect—with Muslims around the world. At least that’s the official word from the State Department.

The special order, signed by Clinton this week, assures the two extremist Muslim scholars (Tariq Ramadan and Adam Habib), known to support and endorse Islamic terrorism, entry into the U.S. for the first time in years. The State Department has repeatedly denied their visa claiming they present a national security threat.

Ramadan, one of the European Muslim world’s most prominent scholars, is the better known of the two. He openly supports the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, has worked for Iran and donates money to terrorist causes. His grandfather founded the Muslim Brotherhood, an influential Islamist group that advocates terrorism against Israel and the west and is known as the parent organization of Hamas and Al Qaeda.

A few months ago a Dutch university fired Ramadan over his extremism and his work for the Islamic Republic of Iran. The move capped the beloved Muslim professor’s assessment that London subway bombers were justified in acting out against their oppressors because the “British government is helping Iraqi people to be killed.” A well-known French author who has studied Ramadan extensively says the scholar is undoubtedly an agent of radicalization.

Habib, a South African sociologist who attended college in New York, is not as high profile but never the less has spoken out against U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and the nation’s war on terrorism. In banning his entry, the State Department has claimed he “engaged in a terrorist activity.”

Now, with the stroke of Madam Secretary’s pen, both men are free to spread their radical agendas on American soil. Clinton’s decision brings to an end a dark period in American politics, according to Ramadan, who praised the Obama Administration for its willingness to reopen the United States to the rest of the world and to permit critical debate.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

Share

Aptos, CA psychologist: good tasting Spanish paella for you depends on your personal tastes? Yes!

special paella pan

Paella from Valencia, Spain requires a special paella pan …


Ever look at a recipe and immediately think how you would change it?
For this recipe I would use a low salt, organic, range chicken broth instead of water. That will increase the overall flavor. And add more saffron for flavor.

And I would use fresh vegetables. Instead of rabbit how about a handful of big shrimp put in the last 10 minutes…

What about working parents who want to make this recipe ahead of time? The could brown the meat ahead of time and set aside. Then make the broth overnight or during the day in a crock pot set on Low. Get the broth delicious by cooking it slow and long. Then add everything and cook the rice in 20-25 minutes at the end.

Below is the original recipe & how I would change it (gotten by Google: paella from Valencia)

Iingredients

1 tablespoon olive oil
1/2 (4 pound) whole chicken, cut into 6 pieces
1/2 (2 pound) rabbit, cleaned and cut into pieces
1 head garlic, cloves separated and peeled (how about 50% more garlic …)
1 tomato, finely chopped ( how about 2-3 medium tomatoes….)
1 (15.5 ounce) can butter beans
1/2 (10 ounce) package frozen green peas
1/2 (10 ounce) package frozen green beans (how about fresh COSCO green beans or asparagus?)
salt to taste
1 teaspoon mild paprika, or to taste … (make it 2 teaspoons … )
1 pinch saffron threads … (make it 2 pinches ..)
dried thyme to taste (optional) (how about fresh spices!)
dried rosemary to taste (optional)
4 cups uncooked white rice, or as needed

Directions

Heat a paella pan — where does one get one??— over medium-high heat and coat with olive oil. Add the chicken, rabbit and garlic; cook and stir until nicely browned. Move the browned meat to the sides of the pan, and add the tomato, butter beans, peas, and green beans. Season with paprika, and mix well.

Fill the paella pan almost to the top with water, measuring the water as you put it in. This is to help you to determine how much rice to add, as paella pans come in different sizes. Bring to a boil. Simmer for about 1 hour to make a nice broth.

Season with a generous amount of salt, and just enough saffron to make a nice yellow color. Season with thyme and rosemary if desired. The goal is to make a rich tasting broth that will soak into the rice to make it delicious. Stir in half as much rice as the amount of water in the pan.

Cover, reduce heat to low, and simmer until all of the liquid has been absorbed, about 20 minutes. (When I looked at traditional paella pans they said that traditional paella is cooked with NO cover…)

FOOTNOTE
The original recipe says: “Rabbit can be very hard to find so you can just use a whole chicken instead. It also may be easier to use boneless chicken but then you don’t get any fun extras, like hearts and livers. If you do use the hearts and livers don’t put them in until later as they cook very fast. They will however add a nice flavor to the rest of the dish….

So, how would you change the above recipe to make tasty paella? And what pan would you use? DrCameronJackson@gmail.com

Share

It’s time to cut 90,000 govt earmarks and save $16 billion …? Yes!

DrCameronJackson@gmail.com

How to immediately cut 16+ BILLION dollars from the federal government? The new, Republican controlled Congress passes a bill that cuts out all pork — no more “ear marks”. Time to permanently stop the exchange of favors, the wink and the nod, the backroom deals.

Many people would like to win the lottery. The winner gets 1-12 million dollars. A million dollars is a lot of money to most people. How many millions does it take to make one billion?

From my perspective saving ONE billion dollars would be terrific. Cutting out pork will save 16 billion dollars.

The double whammy to no more pork is that the 16+ BILLION not spent on pork stays home in local communities. We the People decide – not the government making decisions for us.

The growth of pork has been enormous and it’s time to stop all pork. In 1987 President Reagen vetoed a spending bill because there were 121 earmarks in the bill. Last year there were 90,000 earmarks passed by Congress.

Earmark Myths and Realities
November 10, 2010
By Sen. Tom Coburn

As Senate Republicans prepare to vote on an earmark moratorium, I would encourage my colleagues to consider four myths and four realities of the debate.

Myths of the earmark debate:

1. Eliminating earmarks does not actually save any money

This argument has serious logical inconsistencies. The fact is earmarks do spend real money. If they didn’t spend money, why defend them? Stopping an activity that spends money does result in less spending. It’s that simple. For instance, Congress spent $16.1 billion on pork in Fiscal Year 2010. If Congress does not do earmarks in 2011, we could save $16.1 billion. In no way is Congress locked into to shifting that $16.1 billion to other programs unless it wants to.

2. Earmarks represent a very tiny portion of the federal budget and eliminating them would do little to reduce the deficit

It’s true that earmarks themselves represent a tiny portion of the budget, but a small rudder can help steer a big ship, which is why I’ve long described earmarks as the gateway drug to spending addiction in Washington. No one can deny that earmarks like the Cornhusker Kickback have been used to push through extremely costly and onerous bills. Plus, senators know that as the number of earmarks has exploded so has overall spending. In the past decade, the size of government has doubled while Congress approved more than 90,000 earmarks.

Earmarks were rare until recently. In 1987, President Reagan vetoed a spending bill because it contained 121 earmarks. Eliminating earmarks will not balance the budget overnight, but it is an important step toward getting spending under control.

3. Earmarking is about whose discretion it is to make spending decisions. Do elected members of Congress decide how taxes are spent, or do unelected bureaucrats and Obama administration officials?

It’s true that this is a debate about discretion, but some in Congress are confused about discretion among whom. This is not a struggle between the executive branch and Congress but between the American people and Washington. Do the American people have the right to spend their own money and keep local decisions at the local level or does the federal government know best? Earmarks are a Washington-knows-best solution. An earmark ban would tell the American people that Congress gets it. After all, it’s their money, not ours.

An earmark moratorium would not result in Congress giving up one iota of its spending power. In any event, Republicans should be fighting over how to cut government spending, not how to divide it up.

4. The Constitution gives Congress the responsibility and authority to earmark

Nowhere does the Constitution give Congress the authority to do earmarks. The concept of earmarking appears nowhere in the enumerated powers or anywhere else in the Constitution. The so-called “constitutional” argument earmarks is from the same school of constitutional interpretation that led Elena Kagan to admit that Congress had the authority to tell the American people to eat their fruits and vegetables every day. That school, which says Congress can do whatever it wants, gave us an expansive Commerce Clause, Obamacare, and a widespread belief among members of Congress that the “power of the purse” is the power to pork.

Earmark defenders are fond of quoting Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution which says, “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” They also refer to James Madison’s power of the purse commentary in Federalist 58. Madison said the “power of the purse may, in fact, be the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people.”

Yet, earmark proponents ignore the rest of the Constitution and our founders’ clear intent to limit the power of Congress. If the founders wanted Congress to earmark funds to specific recipients, micromanage American society, and ride roughshod over state and local government they would have given Congress that authority in the enumerated powers. They clearly did not.

Our founders anticipated earmark-style power grabs from Congress and spoke against such excess for the ages. James Madison, the father of the Constitution said, “With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison, spoke directly against federally-funded local projects. “[I]t will be the source of eternal scramble among the members, who can get the most money wasted in their State; and they will always get the most who are the meanest.” Jefferson understood that earmarks and coercion would go hand in hand.

Also, if earmarks were a noble constitutional tradition, how did we thrive for 200 years without an earmark favor factory in Congress?

Finally, for those worried about ceding constitutional authority to the executive branch, I would respectfully remind them that the president has zero authority to spend money outside of the authority Congress gives him. The way to hold the executive branch accountable is to spend less and conduct more aggressive oversight. Earmarks are a convoluted way for Congress to try to regain authority they have already ceded to the executive branch through bad legislation. The fact is there is nothing an earmark can do that can’t be done more equitably and openly through a competitive grant process.

Beyond these myths, I would encourage members to consider the following realities.

1. Earmarks are a major distraction

Again, earmarks not only do nothing to hold the executive branch accountable – by out-porking the president – but take Congress’ focus away from the massive amount of waste and inefficiency within federal agencies. In typical years, the number of earmark requests outnumbers oversight hearings held by the Appropriations Committee by a factor of 1,000 to 1. Instead of processing tens of thousands of earmark requests the Senate should increase the number of oversight hearings from a few dozen to hundreds. The amount of time and attention that is devoted to the earmark chase is a scandal waiting to be exposed.

2. This debate is over among the American people and the House GOP

If any policy mandate can be derived from the election it is to spend less money. Eliminating earmarks is the first step on that path. The House GOP has accepted that mandate. The Senate GOP now has to decide whether to ignore not only the American people but their colleagues in the House. The last thing Senate Republicans should be doing is legislative gymnastics to get around the House GOP earmark ban.

3. Earmarking is bad policy

In recent years the conventional wisdom that earmarks create jobs has been turned on its head. The Obama administration’s stimulus bill itself, which is arguably a collection of earmarks approved by Congress, proves this point. Neither Obama’s stimulus nor Republican stimulus – GOP earmarks – is very effective at creating jobs.

Harvard University conducted an extensive study this year of how earmarks impact states. The researchers expected to find that earmarks drive economic growth but found the opposite.

“It was an enormous surprise, at least to us, to learn that the average firm in the chairman’s state did not benefit at all from the unanticipated increase in spending,” said Joshua Coval, one of the study’s authors. The study found that as earmarks increase capital investment and expenditures by private businesses decrease, by 15 percent specifically. In other words, federal pork crowds out private investment and slows job growth. Earmarks are an odd GOP infatuation with failed Keynesian economics that hurts local economies.

Earmarks also crowd out funding for higher-priority items. Transportation earmarks are a good example. Pork projects like the Bridge to Nowhere and bike paths divert funds from higher priority projects according to a 2007 Department of Transportation inspector general report. Thousands of bridges continue to be in disrepair across America in part because Congress has taken its eye off the ball and indulged in parochial spending.

4. Earmarking is bad politics

If the Senate GOP wants to send a signal that they don’t get it and are not listening they can reject an earmark moratorium. For Republicans, earmarks are the ultimate mixed message. We’ll never be trusted to be the party of less spending while we’re rationalizing more spending through earmarks. The long process of restoring fiscal sanity in Washington begins with saying no to pork.

– Sen. Tom Coburn represents the state of Oklahoma in the U.S. Senate.

Share

The 2010 U.S. Congress should look at how to appropriately cut entitlement programs including SSI Disability for children and youth. Some thoughts…

Children grow and change enormously. Diagnosis of children changes. How to cut social securit appropriately: all children receiving social security disability (age 3-22) should be reviewed every 3 years.Unles OK the disability stops. Simply require that schools send the psych-educational 3 year reviews to a local psycholoigst for review according to local community standards.

Share

response to Jim DeMint's WSJ article
I work in California as a licensed psychologist with children who have disabilities. Some of the children and youth I assess should never have been diagnosed as disabled. There is an entitlement mentality such that some families want a diagnosis because of the benefits that will come with the diagnosis.

Let’s hope that newly elected Tea Party representatives to Congress address how to rein in the cost of entitlement programs. One way to start could be to take a close look at the social security disability entitlements that children receive.

An appropriate way to limit entitlements is to limit the time that children with disabilities receive disability money. Many children with disabilities make amazing growth. For example, some children diagnosed with Autistic Disorder at age three will lose many of the characteristic symptoms within 3-4 years. On the other end, too many young 18 year olds who score low on IQ tests as they leave high school get diagnosed as mentally retarded and moved on to social security for life.

For children and youth age 3 – 25, a limit of 3 years on disability is probably the best way to go. Children should be eligible for a maximum of 3 years and review required to extend eligibility. The federal government could require schools to send for review all 3 year IEP psycho-educational evaluations.

As children shed their difficulties based on successful school interventions they should also shed their federal government disability entitlement.

Have the review done by an independent source, i.e., private licensed psychologists in the same geographical area where the child resides. For older youth who score low on IQ tests the federal government via private psychologists in the locale should examine the applicants. Does the young 18 year old fit in fairly well to their culture and what is expected of them? What kinds of hopes does the young person have and how can that young person become employable?

Below is an article by Jim DeMint from the Wall Street Journal 11-3-2010 addressed to the persons newly elected to Congress and the Senate.

In 2010, America elected an overwhelming number of Republican and Tea Party movement persons. In 2010 America rejected ObamaCare, the stimulus bills, the huge deficit, massive tax increases and …. President Obama’s teleprompter! Bowing to various heads of states and apologizing for America did not sit well here at home.

America wants the economy to improve, more limited government, less intrusion by government, growth of the private sector, a balanced budget, jobs that stay here and … to continue to believe that America is exceptional. It appears that many Americans reject President Obama’s domestic and foreign policies.

How can the newly elected representatives stay true to why they were elected? Jim DeMint has some excellent thoughts. The above is written by Cameron Jackson DrCameronJackson@gmail.com

November 3, 2010

By JIM DEMINT

Congratulations to all the tea party-backed candidates who overcame a determined, partisan opposition to win their elections. The next campaign begins today. Because you must now overcome determined party insiders if this nation is going to be spared from fiscal disaster.

“Many of the people who will be welcoming the new class of Senate conservatives to Washington never wanted you here in the first place. The establishment is much more likely to try to buy off your votes than to buy into your limited-government philosophy. Consider what former GOP senator-turned-lobbyist Trent Lott told the Washington Post earlier this year: “As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them.”

“Don’t let them. Co-option is coercion. Washington operates on a favor-based economy and for every earmark, committee assignment or fancy title that’s given, payback is expected in return. The chits come due when the roll call votes begin. This is how big-spending bills that everyone always decries in public always manage to pass with just enough votes.

But someone can’t be bribed if they aren’t for sale. Here is some humble advice on how to recognize and refuse such offers.

First, don’t request earmarks. If you do, you’ll vote for legislation based on what’s in it for your state, not what’s best for the country. You will lose the ability to criticize wasteful spending. And, if you dare to oppose other pork-barrel projects, the earmarkers will retaliate against you.

‘In 2005, Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) offered a measure to kill funding for the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” Before the vote, Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.), an appropriator, issued a warning on the Senate floor.

“If we start cutting funding for individual projects, your project may be next,” she said. “When Members come down to the floor to vote on this amendment, they need to know if they support stripping out this project, Senator Bond [a Republican appropriator] and I are likely to be taking a long, serious look at their projects to determine whether they should be preserved during our upcoming conference negotiations.”

The threat worked. Hardly anyone wanted to risk losing earmarks. The Senate voted 82-15 to protect funding for the Bridge to Nowhere.

Second, hire conservative staff. The old saying “personnel is policy” is true. You don’t need Beltway strategists and consultants running your office. Find people who share your values and believe in advancing the same policy reforms. Staff who are driven by conservative instincts can protect you from unwanted, outside influences when the pressure is on.

Third, beware of committees. Committee assignments can be used as bait to make senators compromise on other matters. Rookie senators are often told they must be a member of a particular committee to advance a certain piece of legislation. This may be true in the House, but a senator can legislate on any matter from the Senate floor.

Fourth, don’t seek titles. The word “Senator” before your name carries plenty of clout. All senators have the power to object to bad legislation, speak on the floor and offer amendments, regardless of how they are ranked in party hierarchy.
Election Night at Opinion Journal

Lastly, don’t let your re-election become more important than your job. You’ve campaigned long and hard for the opportunity to go to Washington and restore freedom in America. People will try to convince you to moderate conservative positions and break campaign promises, all in the name of winning the next race. Resist the temptation to do so. There are worse things than losing an election-like breaking your word to voters.

At your swearing-in ceremony, you will, as all senators do, take an oath to “support and defend the Constitution.” Most will fail to keep their oath. Doing these five things will help you maintain a focus on national priorities and be one who does.

>Congress will never fix entitlements

, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests. Time spent securing earmarks and serving personal ambitions is time that should be spent working on big-picture reforms.

When you are in Washington, remember what the voters back home want-less government and more freedom. Millions of people are out of work, the government is going bankrupt and the country is trillions in debt. Americans have watched in disgust as billions of their tax dollars have been wasted on failed jobs plans, bailouts and takeovers. It’s up to us to stop the spending spree and make sure we have a government that benefits America instead of being a burden to it.

Tea party Republicans were elected to go to Washington and save the country-not be co-opted by the club. So put on your boxing gloves. The fight begins today.

Mr. DeMint is a Republican senator from South Carolina.

Share

Am I my brother’s keeper? How does the Muslim religion answer this question if posed by a woman?

From the perspective of a Muslim women, how much freedom can she have? Does the Islamic God hate women?

Share
Am I my brother's keeper? What about Muslim women - are they constrained like in a cage or what?

So if a Muslim woman tells her husband/ family that she wants to live a life apart from the Islamic faith, can she do so? Will she be 1) be “watched over” or ” 2) be “constrained”? Below are thoughts about what it means to be “my brother’s keeper….”

The Real Meaning of ‘My Brother’s Keeper’
By Matthew Eckel

“This is such an elementary point that I fear making it will seem silly. On the other hand, so many people seem so completely in the dark about it that it is worth stating the obvious. Claiming to be “my brother’s keeper,” as President Obama is so wont to spout, is an insult to the brother!

“I suppose the confusion is perfectly understandable since most of us encounter the phrase in its English translation and not the original Hebrew, and numerous otherwise-well-meaning organizations have taken it as their motto. See here, here, and here for examples.

“After all, Webster’s Third New International Dictionary defines “to keep” as “to watch over and defend esp. from danger, harm, or loss.” But Webster’s also defines “to keep” as “to restrain from departure” and “to retain or continue to have in one’s possession or power.” So which meaning does “brother’s keeper” have in its original usage?

“The phrase comes, of course, from Genesis, chapter 4 — God’s devastating interrogation of Cain after Cain killed Abel out of rank jealousy. God asks Cain innocently, “Where is your brother, Abel? [i]” Cain replies, “I don’t know,” and asks, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Now, some of us grew up aping that catchy margarine slogan, “it’s not nice to fool Mother Nature,” so we can immediately recognize that it is probably not a great idea to try to deceive the Creator of heaven and earth, especially just after you did something He warned you not to do. God, of course, is not amused and curses Cain, who ends up lamenting, “My punishment is more than I can bear.”

But what was Cain actually saying when he uttered those words to God? The Hebrew word used here for “keeper” means more than “protector” or “defender”; it is more akin to “overseer” or “master,” as in “keeping” sheep (1 Samuel 17:20, 22); royal wardrobes (2 Kings 22:14); the king’s forest (Nehemiah 2:3, 3:29); gates (1 Chronicles 9:19); vineyards (Song of Solomon 1:6); and the temple threshold (Jeremiah 52:24) [ii]. Although these jobs are foreign to most of us, we can get the sense of them by thinking “zookeeper” or “doorkeeper.”

Now, if you think that treating your brother like a dumb animal, a clothes collection, a tree, a gate, a vine, or a doorway is charitable, then consider the context — Cain was wise-assing God! Cain wasn’t responsibly pondering, “Am I my brother’s noble defender?” He was saying, “How the hell do I know where he is? It’s not in my job description to keep track of him!” It was meant to shame God into replying, “On no, of course you aren’t. I’m so sorry I asked.” Simply put, Cain’s rhetorical sneer is not the query of a loving, responsible brother, but the bald bluster of a brutal murderer.

“Look, the pages of American Thinker are hardly the place to get into a theological debate about the meaning of obscure biblical phrases, but you need to know that when a die-hard leftist appropriates a wise-ass remark made by the archetypal murderer, he is really showing you more about himself than he would like. He’s really saying, “It’s my job (because I take it upon myself) to keep these people in line because they are unthinking, inanimate, and helpless objects which are frankly more like property than equals.” If that is what Obama really thinks of the American people, then we can only hope we escape his brotherly affections.

Back to Muslim women. How are Muslim women treated based on their religious writings? Are they in “a cage” or are they “free to go”?> How can American Christians, Jews and those interested in women’s rights assist Muslim women to be free?

DrCameronJackson@gmail.com

——————————————————————————–

[i] All bible quotes are taken from the New International Version, copyright 1973, 1978, 1984, the International Bible Society.

[ii] W. O. Klopfenstein, Keeper, Keepers, III Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, 781 (Merrill C. Tenney et al. eds., 1976).
13 Comments on “The Real Meaning of ‘My Brother’s Keeper’

Share

easy crab and asparagus Mac & cheese casserole with COSCO prepared foods

COSCO crab & asparagus cassarole

recipee from JJ Jackson
Cook ahead? Like casseroles? Like crab? Mix together Mac and cheese from COSCO with their asparagus and crab. Easy as that!

Share

Aptos, CA psychologist: The placebo effect is a healing effect based on suggestion. The effect is huge. This is mind affecting body. What we believe affects our bodies. How do atheists harness – use – the placebo effect?

How do young adults whose parents are atheists harness the placebo effect? The placebo effect accounts for about 1/3 of all healing per thousands of scientific studies. If you really believe — it will affect you.

Do atheists believe in the power of thought and how it can affect the body? What say you? What says the official site for atheists in the U.S.?

Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity, which implies that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units.

“This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.

The following definition of Atheism was given to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203, 83 S. Ct. 1560, 10 L.Ed.2d (MD, 1963), to remove reverential Bible reading and oral unison recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in the public schools:

“Your petitioners are Atheists and they define their beliefs as follows. An Atheist loves his fellow man instead of god. An Atheist believes that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth for all men together to enjoy.

An Atheist believes that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction, and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and enjoy it.

Question: What about the power of suggestion?? What is prayer but the hope and desire of help from without and within to help heal and make better ….?

An Atheist believes that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment.

“[An athiest] seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man.

“He wants an ethical way of life. He believes that we cannot rely on a god or channel action into prayer nor hope for an end of troubles in a hereafter.

He believes that we are our brother’s keepers; and are keepers of our own lives; that we are responsible persons and the job is here and the time is now.”

Share

Aptos psychologist: Courier with car might help out bike couriers when it rains?

Cameron Jackson DrCameronJackson@gmail.com

Maybe when it rains Santa Cruz County bike courier services need car backup service for reliable same day delivery?

Bike courier service is splendid when the weather is good. Winter rains have come to Santa Cruz County. It’s cold and the roads are slick.

This post contains links to local courier by bike service. Maybe when it rains these courier services could use help with couriers in cars?

Fastest way to contact PedX is call 831 426-2453. Clutch Couriers can be reached at www.clutchcouriers.com

Any courier service in Santa Cruz County that needs occassional same day delivery by car can contact the Monterey Bay Forum www.FreedomOK.net Put CAR COURIER WANTED in the subject line. Send email to: DrCameronJackson@gmail.com
More about local bike courier service below. Below is from an article by City on the Hill followed by a contact form for PedX:

“Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.”

This oft-quoted and relatively well-known saying has come to be emblematic of the United States Postal Service (USPS), yet even they can be slowed by the economic recession.

With economic hardships forcing everyone to tighten their belts, Santa Cruz citizens have turned to more cost-efficient means of delivering their mail. One such method is the employment of the bicycle courier.

Since the the turn of the 20th century, bicycle couriers have earned their reputation as being fast and reliable in larger cities such as San Francisco — able to beat lights and fly past traffic, the bicycle courier is considered by some to be the perfect solution for local rush deliveries.

Courier companies also possess a local charm, with their staff often being composed of people with intimate knowledge of the areas in which they work.

And by riding their bikes, courier companies lack the harmful greenhouse gas emissions that are inherent with any other motorized business.

Local bicycle courier companies, such as Clutch Couriers and Pedalers Express, recognize the strengths of operating in Santa Cruz.

“We’re a lot faster than motorized deliveries,” said Erin Cott, co-owner and worker of Pedalers Express. “We don’t use cars, so we don’t need oil or gasoline — I think people like that environmental factor about us.”

While the demand may perhaps be higher in larger cities, Santa Cruz’s couriers still have an important niche in the community.

Local courier companies will typically bike several hundred miles a week. Able to deliver virtually anywhere across the county — from San Lorenzo Valley to Watsonville — in a matter of hours bicycle couriers are able to get what you need, where you need it fast.

“Any Clutch Couriers rider can deliver documents up to 100 pounds in Santa Cruz County, including our daily run to Watsonville Superior Court,” said Rick Graves, owner and operator of Clutch Couriers, in an e-mail to City on a Hill Press. “We provide the same day and rush service that USPS, UPS, FedEx, and others don’t.”

Many local businesses, law offices, and other groups are already making use of these bike messengers. Clutch Couriers, boasting an impressive and diverse clientele list, is well-received by those who call upon it.

Adam Bergeron, co-owner of The Crepe Place and frequent client of Clutch Couriers, had nothing but praise for their services, describing them as “just fantastic.”

“They always do what they set about to do — you can always count on them,” Bergeron said.

However, courier companies are not exempt from the economic recession. Recently, Pedalers Express lost quite a few of their biggest clients. Clutch Couriers also saw a significant drop in its advertising and entertainment sector. With the continual development of technology coupled alongside the economic downturn, Cott finds that the contemporary bicycle courier riding harder and faster may not be enough.

“We hold meetings every week to address just that,” Cott said. “We recently took on an apprentice who can help us with marketing, so hopefully that will help.”

However while some old doors may close, courier companies are constantly alert for new business opportunities.

During the harder-hitting time in the recession, for example, Clutch Couriers experienced a notable uptick in its handling of legal documents. The U.S. Postal Service’s motion to cancel its Saturday deliveries may serve as another such opportunity.

“Most people that use the USPS only want to spend 44 cents per delivery,” Graves said. “The trick is to be there for them, with what they need, when they need it. Then business booms year-round!”

Although the work is hard, Graves and other bicycle couriers would agree it’s worth it.

As Graves put it,“Four out of five of our crew members count this as their only job, and, although we aren’t getting rich, we are making a decent living in one of the most beautiful places on earth doing what we love.”
Tags: Bicycle Couriers, Clutch Couriers, Pedalers Express, Saturday Mail Delivery, US

The following is from PedX:
PedXAboutRatesServicesClienteleShoppingContactContact
Pedaler’s Express is open Monday through Friday from 9 AM until 5 PM. We may be available outside of these hours. Please call to make arrangements. Also, please note our holiday schedule below.

Dispatch
Phone Fax Email
831.426.2453 831.466.0485 santacruz@pedalexpress.com

Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 427
Santa Cruz, CA 95061

Office Address:
The Hub for Sustainable Transportation
703 Pacific Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

Holiday Schedule
Banks and federal offices (Post Office, County Court House, etc) observe the following holidays. No mail, banking or legal deliveries will be made on these days. Our office will also be closed. 2009
Thursday, January 1 New Year’s Day
Monday, January 19 Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr.
Monday, February 16 Washington’s Birthday
Monday, May 25 Memorial Day
Friday, July 3 Independence Day
Monday, September 7 Labor Day
Monday, October 12 Columbus Day
Wednesday, November 11 Veterans Day
Thursday, November 26 Thanksgiving Day
Friday, December 25 Christmas Day

Additionally, PedX observes International Workers’ Day: Friday, May 1, 2008. We will be closed on this day.

Individual Contact Info
Please note that the quickest way to get in touch with someone is to call the dispatch number listed above. Contacting individual workers by phone or email may result in a delay of several days or more. To Contact Us Individually…
Erin erin@pedalexpress.com
Kelly kelly@pedalexpress.com
Darren darren@pedalexpress.com
Please call the dispatch number to discuss a current delivery.

Share