What’s that, consumer confidence at 3 year high? Just last week USA Today released a poll showing the majority of Americans had a negative impression of the economy. Consumer confidence measures the health of the economy by evaluating the feelings of the very consumers who bolster that economy through daily use of goods and services.

According to the Conference Board Consumer Research Center, the latest figure reflects growing optimism about the overall state of the US economy and the job market in particular. How can this be? Only last Thursday, we were told that the general perception amongst the American public was such that the economy was stagnant and a prevailing fear about the future was dominant. Some 60% of Americans said the economy was faltering and nearly just as many believed the economy was getting worse. Now we hear that consumer confidence is the highest it has been in nearly 4 years?

Obviously these two reports on the mood of the country can’t be reconciled. On many occasions we have discussed how the media uses polls to stir, rather than measure, public opinion. This can be accomplished by asking leading questions or setting up a scenario, which leads to the desired outcome, perhaps this was the strategy in USA Today’s most recent, “who hates Bush today” poll. Perhaps with the next poll results USA Today will release the questions as well.

The simple fact of the matter is polls can be manipulated. Thus a more accurate measure of the US economy should be the incontrovertible facts, which clearly demonstrate our ongoing success. With the exception of last quarter, which we suspect will be revised upwards once final counts are made, the US economy has consistently grown at a rate at or near 4%. A record number of jobs have been created, while businesses continue to expand.

Only those seeking the never-ending government handout harbor an ever-negative view of the economy. People, who have squandered opportunities or failed to act, should feel negative as time has and will continue to pass by the sedentary or inert, as well it should be.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8FFOBF00.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-01-26-bush-sotu-cover_x.htm
http://www.thephalanx.com/2006/01/majority-america-on-wrong-track.html

In a radical departure from their earlier stance, both Russia and China have joined with the EU and the United States in calling for UN action regarding Iran and its wayward nuclear program. For some time the Russians and the Chinese have opposed involving the United Nations in the stalemate, opting instead to call for another try at diplomacy.

The fact of the matter is diplomacy has been tried for 2 years now with no meaningful results. In the meantime, Iran has inched ever closer to the development of a nuclear arsenal, with which it can arm insurgents and radical Islamic terrorists around the world. With the Russians and the Chinese on board, however, it is now hoped that Iran will see the futility of further smokescreens. This hope, however, is premature. Iran has played both ends against the middle before and knows full well that Europe is anxious to avoid a conflict, China wants no disruption in oil flow to fuel its economic engine and Russia is salivating from profits scored by feeding Iran’s nuclear ambitions in the first place.

With this knowledge Iran should have no difficulty in stringing the Security Council along until it has fully developed a nuclear arsenal, just like North Korea, then the mullahs of Tehran will be able to call the shots. Even if decisive UN action is taken, which is highly unlikely, it is tantamount to nothing. Never before in the history of the world have sanctions succeeded in bringing a tyrant to terms. The only thing sanctions will do is strengthen the resolve of Iran’s tyrannical regime.

Indeed, with UN action, the Iranians will have scored a great victory in the world of radical Islam as they stand up to the West in the face of overwhelming circumstances. What the Iranians understand is force and a real threat of force, perhaps only one country, Israel, realizes that, but tiny Israel may have met its match when it comes to taking action and if they move to act as they most likely will, the world will surely be engulfed in terror the likes of which we have never before experienced.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran31jan31,0,7973829.story?coll=la-home-headlines&track=morenews

Thomas Murphy, a UPS delivery driver in the city of Chicago was beaten nearly to death by a gang of malcontents from a nearby school. Perhaps most troubling is the fact that this gang of youths, numbering 15 to 20 teens, were not high schoolers but, middle school students, meaning their maximum age would be around 13 years old.

Murphy reported being forced to stop when a teen stepped in front of his delivery vehicle; he was then beaten over the head and repeatedly kicked by several delinquents. There is no word as to what was the motivation for the attack. Perhaps these youth were angry because they are destined to work minimum wage and feel embittered towards people who work hard for a living. Perhaps it was nothing more than a game and perhaps they were simply malcontents with no redeeming characteristics whatsoever, a likely scenario.

As we have said time and time again. Where are the parents? Perhaps they were busy bludgeoning a FedEx driver across town? They certainly weren’t at home instilling values and respect or even an appreciation for hard work. This incident highlights the growing problem of adolescent crime and a bankrupt culture that coddles youth and foments criminal behavior. These young criminals should be hunted down and punished, serving as a lesson to other young criminals in the making.
http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_030190225.html

Apparently the only thing separating the learned from the ignorant is the variable X. In Los Angeles, like most communities around the country, students are required to pass Algebra in order to advance scholastically and subsequently receive a high school diploma. For most students around the country, such a requirement has no lasting impact as Algebra is no more complicated than playing with blocks in kindergarten. Not so in the LA Unified school district. Algebra is such a difficult subject for some LA students that many students fail the course countless times, only to drop out of high school after persistent failure.

Since 2003, LA Schools have required students to pass both Algebra and Geometry, in order to ensure that graduates received a meaningful education. Since implementing this strategy, the school system has witnessed a significant increase in the number of dropouts. The problem is so significant that over 40% of high school freshman fail Algebra. These figures highlight the failure of some of this country’s public schools. Small wonder, the US lags behind the rest of the industrialized world in terms of math and science. The simple fact of the matter is this failure is not only a failure for students and schools, but the parents as well.

What exactly is going on with the schools in California? Last year we discussed the fact that many 12th graders were failing the required graduation exams, which tested a student’s language ability on an 8th grade level. So what exactly are students in LA learning, not math, not language arts, not science? By 2016, students in LA will be required to take Algebra II as well, which spells certain doom for many LA County students.

What does it mean for this country when nearly half of high school students in one of the largest school districts in the country can’t pass a course that many students take in middle school? With the significant failure rate, it should come as no surprise that some parents are calling for a relaxation of LA’s graduation requirements, which will only exacerbate the problem. Unfortunately, failure is endemic in LA, and of those that did pass a course like Algebra, nearly 1/3 received Ds, which is BELOW AVERAGE.

The state of schools in LA is not unique; around the country there are similar stories. Schools certainly shoulder some of the blame, by some accounts many teachers lack the credentials to even teach subjects like Algebra. At California State University-Northridge, a mid-level college which churns out many LA elementary teachers, over 1/3rd earned Ds or Fs in their first college-level math course. With such marginal experience it comes as no surprise that students leave their formative grades without a solid base upon which to build.

Schools alone are not to blame, however. As teacher Shane Sauby recounted many students ignore homework, refuse to study and regularly cut class. As a result many of these students repeat the same class over and over, sometimes with the same teacher, and subsequently drop out all together. Where are the parents? Parents that refuse to take an interest in their child’s education are no doubt failures themselves who continue that tradition by modeling exactly the wrong values and work ethic. Students lack any appreciation for knowledge or education and thus come to school, unprepared, uninterested and unconcerned about their futures (or lack thereof). Many students profiled in a LA Times story skipped more classes than they attended, yet we are supposed to be surprised that students are failures.

In addition to parents some “experts” have called for a dumbing down of educational standards, arguing that subjects like Algebra may not be right for all high school students. This is certainly true, after all, someone will have to serve fast food or pick up garbage in the future

Below is a sample question from the LA school standards, followed by a brief layout used to solve the problem.

A 120-foot-long rope is cut into 3 pieces. The first piece of rope is twice as long as the second piece of rope. The third piece of rope is three times as long as the second piece of rope. What is the length of the longest piece of rope?

A) 20 feet
B) 40 feet
C) 60 feet
D) 80 feet

Show your work:
3t + 2t + t = 120
6t = 120
t = 20
Largest piece: 60

If you cannot figure out with relative ease that the answer is C, please stop reading and proceed to the nearest Sylvan learning center and refrain from reproducing.
http://www.latimes.com/news/education/la-me-dropout30jan30,0,3211437.story

If there is one thing we at the Phalanx can’t abide, its revisionist history. People who look upon the Japanese as innocent victims in WWII or holocaust deniers are nothing more than ignorant buffoons attempting to advance a sinister agenda. One of the earliest revisionist movements began in the late 19th century, as southern Civil War veterans, still smarting over their devastating defeat at the hands of the North, sought to recast their role in history.

No longer was the War Between the States one fought to ensure the continued bondage of black slaves, now the war was a noble cause to preserve southern heritage and the southern way of life. Suffice it to say that way of life was built upon the immoral, illogical, anti-free market and socialistic institution of slavery. Southern heritage (i.e., White Racist) organizations have tirelessly argued that the Civil War, and the secession movement that precipitated it, had nothing to do with slavery.

Most recently that endless campaign to legitimize state sanctioned racism continues again. This time the battle line has been drawn at a local public school in Blunt County Tennessee. Students at a local high school sought to “express themselves” by wearing t-shirts with the confederate battle emblem to school. Once they were noticed by the administration, school officials asked the students to change clothes or leave the premises, the enlightened young leaders of tomorrow, chose the later, after all what red neck would chose education over expressing a fondest for their racist heritage? Soon their parents got into the act, turning this expression of ignorance into a free speech rally. The parents have threatened to sue the school system, which is the typical American response in a situation such as this. The students, for their part argue that the entire situation was blown out of proportion and their intentions have been misconstrued. "The confederate flag was just a battle flag…,” noted Derek Barr a student at William Blount High School. “It had nothing to do with slavery. And I think a lot of people are getting the wrong picture on this, thinking we're being racist, but we're not."

To be fair, Barr and his fellow students are right on one account, if a person chooses to wear a flag depicting the confederate battle flag, they are very much within their rights. Our constitution protects the rights of individuals to express views, which may be contrary to the accepted views of society or which may be deemed offensive. By the same token these brain dead parents, who probably never lifted a finger in support of their child’s education until this fight over the flag, should be honest with themselves and the public at large. This fight is not about a proud southern heritage, this fight is not about freedom of speech, this fight is about the expressed desire of some local racists to thumb their noses at others by highlighting their personal bigotry and hatred.

The confederate flag and the defunct confederate nation it represents is very much a symbol of racism and hate.

The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically.

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition.

Alexander Stephens
Vice President, Confederate States of America, March 21, 1861 (http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=76)

There can be no doubt that Stephens spoke correctly of his nation’s founding principles. The Confederate Constitution makes a point to vigorously defend the perpetual condition of slavery in the south. While rednecks like those in Blount County Tennessee argue that secession and the confederacy had nothing to do with slavery, learned individuals need look no further than the actual secession ordinances and subsequent proclamations issued by the seceding states declaring slavery as the principle justification for the dissolution of the Union. These facts are well-documented points of history.

The Confederacy is a symbol of hate and thus so to is its flag. Why else would unquestioned bigots like the KKK use the flag as their symbol, because it symbolizes heritage? No, because of the fear and hate it stands for. If these flag proponents, are so concerned about “southern heritage,” why is that they choose only to recognize that period in southern history from 1861-1865, why not honor the heroes of the American Revolution or World War II? Or why not recognize some of the work of many great southerners like Crawford Long, Juliet Gordon Low, Martin Luther King, Margaret Mitchell, Sam Houston, etc… What is it about this particular period in history that makes it so unique? We all know what that unique characteristic is and so to do the racist bigots who protest under the guise of free speech.
http://www.volunteertv.com/Global/story.asp?S=4424448
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/ordinance_secession.html
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_south_carolina.html
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_mississippi.html
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_georgia.html
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_texas.html
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/isham_harris.html

In practicing the art of propaganda, one of the first acts is to convince your intended audience of an alternative reality. Propaganda is designed to distract, re-shape opinion and to deceive. This is a strategy employed with expert skill be the left in this country, and abroad. Perhaps one of the greatest feats of Mussolini-esque distraction perpetrated by the left has been their success in convincing the vast majority of us that Saddam Hussein never possessed weapons of mass destruction.

The facts have been all but ignored as the left as sought to portray Bush as a warmonger who went into Iraq for no justifiable reason. The fact of the matter is Iraq most certainly did possess weapons of mass destruction. This has again been confirmed by a top Iraqi general, Georges Sada, in a recent book entitled, “Saddam’s Secret. Sada a Christian, like former Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, was a Saddam loyalist nonetheless and a top ranking Iraqi Air Force general. Sada claims, Hussein transferred is WMDs to Syria as it became apparent that a US invasion was imminent. Sada claims some materials were flown to Syria, while others were transported via truck convoy.

Naturally, the left has dismissed Sada’s claims as the stuff of fantasy and the media has all but ignored his book and his claims. The president, just as he has done with the economy and the progress of the war has allowed the left to control the debate. He has allowed the fiction of Iraq’s WMDs to devour the truth. The fact remains that Iraq DID possess these weapons, a reality previously acknowledged by the left, before and after Bush took office.

Even the left acknowledges that Saddam Hussein possessed such weapons at the conclusion of the Iraq war in 1991, in the years that followed, Saddam Hussein never produced one single shred of proof that these weapons were ever destroyed, a fact that is not refuted by any party. Indeed, Saddam refused to cooperate with weapons inspectors from the moment the guns fell silent, until the day he was toppled. In 1998, President Clinton and Tony Blair authorized massive bombing of strategic sites across Iraq. Why? Because Iraq was complying with UN resolutions to scrap its WMD program? Certainly not. As recently as 2003, Saddam was still turning away weapons inspectors. Why? Because he was in full compliance?

The facts simply do not add up. If Iraq no longer possessed such weapons then were is the evidence of their destruction. If weapons systems have been moved, which they most likely were, then it would stand to reason that there would be no trace of their existence, but if such weapons were indeed destroyed a plethora of evidence would readily present itself. The reality of Saddam Hussein’s complicity in WMD production and possession is well known to the left. Every prominent Democrat from Bill and Hillary Clinton, to John Kerry and Ted Kennedy have acknowledged as much during the Clinton and Bush presidencies, yet now we are supposed to forget that such statements were ever made and operate under the assumption that the last 12 years never took place.

The fact that so many people accept this as gospel is a testament to the skill of the left in their ability to wield propaganda that would make even Dr. Goebbles cringe. Are the American people stupid, or just easily manipulated? Clearly it is one or the other when facts can be so easily dismissed. When contrary statements can be easily ignored. Mussolini would certainly be proud.
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&issue=20060126
http://www.thephalanx.com/2005/12/hidden-truth-iraq-did-possess-wmds.html

The media and leftist politicians have tried ceaselessly to portray the US and its economy in the most negative light possible. Consistently, leftist politicians, contrary to factual evidence, have berated the US economy as faltering with devastating job losses and stagnate growth. The leftist media, for their part, have continuously published slanted polls to drive the message home. The ultimate goal is to convince the American people that America is on the wrong track and who’s to blame for that? Obviously the president and his allies in the Congress.

The left wants desperately to return to power, even at the expense of truth and reality. This is the same strategy employed by the left in addressing the issue of Iraq. Leftists have ignored the reality of Iraq’s WMDs and have even forgotten their own statements on the matter as they stake out a position contrary to the president. The press ignores the hypocritical nature of these positions, as it would be contrary to their leftist agenda to report such conflicts. Again, USA Today has released yet another poll highlighting the mood of the American people. According to the USA Today poll, 60% of respondents rated the economy as “fair” to “poor.” Such a result boggles the mind and lends credence to one of three possible explanations. The respondents have been thoroughly brainwashed by leftist negativism, the respondents are categorically stupid and have no hope of understanding even the most basic economic concepts or the poll was conducted in a welfare office. Barring those scenarios, there simply is no way on Earth a logical human being could view the American economy as fair or poor without a serious mental defect.

Even the leftist politicians in Congress know the truth, though to admit such would be contrary to their political interests. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been created each month while GDP has grown consistently at over 4%. Indeed, the US economy has far eclipsed every other industrialized economy in the world from Japan, to Germany to Great Britain. Economic growth during the past three years rivals the economic boom of the late 1990s, yet the media and the left portray the economy as languishing in recession. Such a position is inconsistent with facts, yet the administration does nothing to advance that reality, ceding the argument to the left and allowing them to set the debate in the country.

The fact of the matter is, the US economy is performing exceedingly well. Should Americans be concerned because backward companies like GM and Ford continue to falter? Yes, but their ongoing troubles are not indicative of the overall health of the US economy, their difficulties are the results of poor management, high labor costs and a failure to understand their own markets, it does not reflect a general decline in the US economy or even the auto industry, if so, how does one account for the fact that companies like Honda, Toyota and even Chrysler increased their domestic auto sales? The simple reality is, the state of the Union is good, very good indeed, to think otherwise is a reflection of one’s own ignorance, rather than an acknowledgement of reality.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-01-26-bush-sotu-cover_x.htm
http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/gdpchg.xls

It seems the Russians have revived a deal, proposed last year, to enrich uranium in Russia, to supply Iran’s nuclear energy needs. In the past Iran has balked at such a proposal, but now, as opposition to a nuclear Iran intensifies, the nation seems more willing to entertain the notion. The Chinese, who also hold considerable influence on the UN Security Council, have also voiced their support for the proposal, anything to avoid a disruption of oil supplies from Iran. Under this proposal Iran could continue to pursue the development of nuclear power to supply its “energy needs” and the crucial step of enrichment (a major stepping stone toward weapons development) would take place in Russian territory, presumably this step will forestall fears that Iran is enriching uranium to develop nuclear weapons.

On the face of it, the European Union, which has been the chief negotiating power with Iran, has voiced their skepticism over the deal, and rightly so. There is a strongly held belief by US and EU officials that this latest act is nothing more than a delaying tactic on the part of Iran, and perhaps even the Russians as well, who benefit mightily from their many dealings with the Islamic state.

As we have noted on numerous occasions, the Iranian nuclear issue is one of many contradictions and suspicions. Why would a nation with 10% of the world’s known oil reserves need to develop a new source of energy? Why, if their research was for peaceful purposes was it hidden from the world, only to be exposed by Iranian defectors to the west? Why invest billions in nuclear research when it is a lack of capital investment, not cheap electricity that has contributed to Iran’s continued economic stagnation? The Iranians are lying and that lie will be revealed sooner or latter.

The Iranians have warmed to the Russian proposal because their research is incomplete, by agreeing to the Russian terms it is hoped that international pressure will be reduced. The Iranians, correctly postulate that the EU is anxious for an opportunity to back down from their bellicose posturing, just as Prime Minister Chamberlain was anxious to back down at the Munich Conference. The Iranians have no intention of abiding by the Russian proposal; it is simply a smoke screen. The Iranians will continue to process uranium in secret, only to reveal years from now, just as North Korea did, that they have nuclear weapons. When that day comes, as it surely will, the world situation will be altered dramatically. For the first time in history an expansionistic, radical Islamic state will possess the means to destroy the world in the name of Islam. At that point we will have no one to blame but our selves.
http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=262452

Since the 1990s, the Chinese economy has consistently grown at a rate exceeding 9% each year. Most recently, the Chinese economy eclipsed the UK to become the 4th largest economy in the world. The Germany’s economy continuing to falter, its only a matter of time before China surpasses Germany as well, leaving only Japan and the US. Though technically a communist nation, China has thoroughly embraced the concept of the market economy.

Once a supplier of cheap goods and products requiring minimal skill to produce, China is now maneuvering to become a high tech Mecca unto itself, rather than simply a manufacturing center for companies based in the US, Japan and Taiwan. Sadly, China’s economic success can now serve as a model for the west. China is lifting millions out of poverty every year, and that is being accomplished, not through grandiose social welfare projects, which serve only to entrench poverty. China is lifting millions into the middle class by creating a fertile climate for business to prosper. With over 1.2 billion people, China offers vast market potential for western companies seeking to expand. To attract these businesses, the Chinese have offered incentives to encourage foreign direct investment (FDI). This strategy has paid off handsomely.

China’s economic success has had ripple effects around the world, as supplies of petroleum have become scarcer and construction materials have become more expensive. As China has expanded, so too has domestic Chinese industry. Chinese manufacturers like Haier, Lenovo, Geely and Chery are expanding their base at home and know looking to compete in the global market, with major consequence for US, European and Japanese industries.

The Chinese, its seems, have forgotten about democracy and the promise of representative government, as average Chinese flock to the cities in search of a new middle class lifestyle, or have they? By the Chinese government’s own account, there were over 87,000 incidents of local unrest in the past year. China is hemorrhaging as its society undergoes significant growing pains. Market freedoms will inevitably lead to greater social and political freedoms, just as market integration has rendered the threat of conflict with China all the more unlikely. The key to this continued evolution in China is engagement, unlike our flawed policy vis-à-vis Cuba.
http://today.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=ousiv&storyID=2006-01-25T081641Z_01_PEK232222_RTRIDST_0_BUSINESSPRO-ECONOMY-CHINA-DC.XML
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10779158/

It is not uncommon for people, institutions and even nation-states to harbor deep seeded hatred and resentment for the successful, likely attributable to their own personal failures as individuals. For some time now the EU, has been ruthlessly going after Microsoft Corporation on a host of charges stemming from the argument that Microsoft is “abusing its monopoly” in the area of personal computing. The supposition is laughable. Microsoft is NOT a monopoly. A fundamental tenet of economics holds that a monopoly characterizes a market environment in which there is only one source for a good or service, and thus no market competition for the supply of that good or service. This supposition does not apply to the desktop computer market, nor has it ever, since Microsoft entered that arena in the mid-1970s and with the first production of Windows in 1985, Microsoft has always been one of many players in a crowded field. For years users had a plethora of OS choices.

Early computer users had a choice of Unix, CP/M, later OS/2 and of course operating systems by Commodore and Amiga, not to mention the Mac OS. Today those choices continue with Linux, Solaris and the venerable Mac. While it is true that many players in this field have long since retreated, their retreat is can be attributed to their own failures, as Microsoft developed solutions favored by the market. Microsoft should not be punished simply because other companies failed adapt and lost their competitive edge.

To the European Union, such facts are irrelevant, in their mind, Microsoft as the world’s largest software maker, by far, is inherently wrong and must therefore provide a level playing field for its competitors by releasing trade secrets, which will allow those competitors to gain an upper hand. Initially Microsoft sought to fight the move, but under significant threats from European regulators to impose daily fines on the software giant, Microsoft has relented to pressure and will release the source code to its popular Windows operating system. This capitulation is a defeat for the concept of free enterprise and even strikes at the foundation of intellectual property rights.

No company, no matter how liked or reviled, should be compelled to reveal trade secrets in order to boost the position of a competitor. This would no more make sense if the case were Toyota who developed a new fuel injection system that boosted automobile efficiency 100%. Certainly the development of such technology would give Toyota a competitive advantage should the government therefore force Toyota to make this technology open to the public? Of course not, any more than the government should force Grandma to give up her cherished cookie recipe. This is nonsense of the highest caliber.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8FBS0D80.htm?campaign_id=apn_tech_down&chan=tc

To hear a story of a 16-year-old child demanding $100 for beer, one should immediately conjure up images of someone on a direct path toward a maximum-security prison in the not too distant future. Its bad enough that a 16-year-old would be drinking in the first place, but who are we kidding, quite a few teens imbibe on a regular basis, but $100 worth of beer? That’s more like submersion.

As it turns out the story of 16-year-old Kurt Cass is more than a story about underage drinking. Kurt Cass did more than demand $100 for beer; he put a razor blade to the throat of his own grandmother and demanded money, after she refused to finance his binge. After returning home from his beer run, young Kurt found that poor grandma had locked the doors, unfortunately she should have called the police.

Kurt was so enraged by the fact that the door was locked that he kicked the door down and proceeded to bludgeon his grandmother with fists, a 2x4 and a piece of PVC pipe. Fortunately help arrived to end Cass’s rampage. According to police Cass has been charged with aggravated assault, aggravated battery, attempted robbery, and kidnapping. For some reason he was not charged with attempted murder. If someone holds a razor to a person’s neck, they aren’t threatening that person with assault, they are threatening death, to say nothing of beating a grandmother with a 2x4.

This hellion should be prosecuted with the utmost rigor of the law, never again to see the light of day. Cass’s trip to prison is now assured, where he will meet a rare form of animal, just anxious for a new plaything. A fitting end for a portrait of a piece of trash.
http://www.tampabays10.com/weird/weird_article.aspx?storyid=24334

Prior to his election defeat earlier this week, Canada’s Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, attempted to blame the US for increased crime in the US, after all Canada is a bastion for civility, where crime is unheard-of and people never resort to violence as a means of solving disputes, or so we have been lead to believe. As it turns out Canada is no stranger to crime, in fact it seems Canada’s rate of violent crime is twice that of the United States.

While an American must admit without any degree of hesitation that crime in America is appalling and more needs to be done, it would be foolish to argue that crime in America is impacting crime in Canada. In fact, since the 1970s, the FBI has noted a significant decline in violent crime nationwide, during that same period crime in Canada has risen constantly. Paul Martin, however, attributed crime in Canada to lax gun laws and a “culture of violence” in the United States. What the Canadian leader has ignored is the country’s growing gang problem in several large cities including Toronto and Vancouver as well as a seeming aversion to tackle crime and impose harsh penalties for perpetrators.

In fact, according to columnist David Frum, in 2003 (the most recent year for which statistics are available), the violent crime rate in the United States was 475 per 100,000 people compared with 963 in Canada, with similar results for sexual crimes. According to Frum, Canada’s crime has increased as it has adopted more restrictive gun ownership policies, leaving guns in the hands of criminals while removing them from law-abiding citizens.

It’s debatable whether or not gun ownership comes into play one-way or the other. The fact of the matter is in both the US and Canada, culture plays a major role in the prevalence of crime. In many developed and developing countries, some with restrictive gun polices and some without, crime rates are far lower than in the US or Canada. As is usually the case with matters such as this there is no simple answer, but there are simply wrong answers, paramount among them would be blaming America for Canada’s failures.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/24/150547.shtml?s=ic
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

With the Iraqi election results now official, Shiite and Sunni political parties are headed to the negotiating table. Both sides are seeking to forge a coalition government. No party won an outright majority in the Iraqi parliamentary elections, but the Shiites did win a plurality. Because neither the Kurds, the Shiites nor Sunnis won a majority, a coalition government is necessary.

Even before the election results were official, Sunnis protested the results as being fraudulent. Preliminary results had indicated that Sunni aligned parties only won between 19 and 20% of the vote. To the Sunnis, the main backers of Saddam Hussein and the subsequent insurgency, such results were clearly fraudulent because they did not receive an overwhelming majority. The fact of the matter is, however, Sunnis only make up 1/5th of Iraq’s population and thus the results were clearly not fraudulent, as election observers could further attest.

The massive protests, however, were calculated, signaling to Shia and Kurd that if the Sunnis did not receive a significant role in a future Iraqi government there would be ongoing hostilities with the Sunnis. The Shia apparently got the message, as they have bent over backwards to include the Sunnis in power sharing talks, when the Kurds and Shia alone could have forged a coalition to govern Iraq. One of the most volatile points of contention, aside from the murderous rampage of the insurgents is the matter of Iraq’s next Prime Minister. Presumably the Shia may agree to a Sunni leader if the Sunni will agree to stop killing any and everyone who crosses an Iraqi street.

The prospects for Iraqi democracy aren’t promising. The fact that the Sunnis were able to win concessions simply by protesting an obviously legitimate vote, does not foment great trust in representative government, but rather enshrines the mob mentality that the Sunnis have embraced wholeheartedly.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-01-25-iraq_x.htm

Rightist in America are falling all over themselves with joy, after 12 years of Liberal Party rule in Canada, the Conservatives are again in power, though at the helm of a minority government, thus requiring a junior party, such as the Bloc Quebecois or the New Democrats. The Conservatives have gone through a period of significant hemorrhaging over the past decade. The Conservatives briefly split into two factions, the Alliance (previously the Reform Party) and the original Progressive-Conservative Party, only recently reunited to form a solid front against an increasing corrupt Liberal government, first under Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and then Paul Martin. Not only have the Liberals labored under a lingering cloud of corruption, but to distract voters from their ongoing failures they have sewn the seeds of anti-Americanism, not unlike their European counterparts, in a pitiful attempt to maintain their hold on power.

For years this strategy worked, during the last election the Liberals rode a tide of anti-American jealousy all the way to another election victory. More recently, the outgoing liberal government of Paul Martin even attempted to blame a rise in gang violence on the US, perhaps this foolish step was too much even for the brainwashed Canadian electorate to take. In yesterday’s election the Canadian electorate, finally dislodged the distraction prone liberal failures. The new Prime Minister designate, Stephen Harper, is cut from a different cloth than outgoing Paul Martin, he is a 46-year-old economist with plans to boost the economy and improve relations with the US.

Dare we say it, but Mr. Harper will most assuredly fail. The Canadian public has been brainwashed for 12 years and as long as Bush is in power, Mr. Harper will be under intense pressure to distance himself from the US, he may even be tempted to blame America from time to time for Canada’s failures. Once a population has become dependent on increasingly leftist policies, like Canada, it becomes extremely difficult to wean them off, witness the fact that today’s’ GOP is just as much the party of big government as the Democrats ever were. We must also realize that while the Conservatives have gained the upper hand in the Canadian parliament, they did not when a majority, only a plurality, which will require a collation partner, probably the New Democrats, the Bloc Quebecois will not join a government so opposed to Quebec succession as the Conservatives.

Nationally, the Conservatives only won 36% of the vote, meaning nearly 2/3 of Canadians do not embrace the conservative agenda of lower taxes and a tough stance on crime. What this means is Canada’s ruling coalition will have a weak platform from which to govern. We give Canada’s new government 2 years before they again fall from power, the lure of socialism has become too great for some Canadians and they will soon maneuver to bring back the liberals, with or without their corruption.
http://www.canada.com/national/features/decisioncanada/index.html

Imagine if the Nuremberg war crimes trials had been conducted in the same manner as the trial of Saddam Hussein, it is very conceivable that high-ranking Nazis like Herman Goring would have gone free. The trial of Saddam Hussein is a joke in every sense of the word. The session today was again cancelled coming only days after the lead judge in the case was replaced.

On the few occasions when the trial does take place, it is nothing more than a grand standing opportunity for Saddam and his henchmen. There is no order in this court; there is no semblance of justice and thus no hope for a fair trial and a meaningful outcome. Such a mockery of justice would never be allowed to happen in even the most kangarooiest of kangaroo courts. This trial was designed, not only to punish Saddam and his architects of death and destruction but also close the door on this dark chapter of Iraqi history, signaling to the Iraqi people that a new era had begun.

Rather than closing a chapter, this trial has long since denigrated into a circus, with Saddam Hussein as the master of ceremonies. With the results being less than favorable to say the absolute least. The people of Iraq, if they haven’t already, will soon develop a contempt at the mere hint of the term “rule of law.” Gone are the days when Iraqis could hope for meaningful reform and closure. This trial has taught the Iraqis that Saddam Hussein still carries power and influence, even while in shackles, perhaps even lending credence to the Islamic insurgency.

Both the Iraqi government officials and the US are to blame for this travesty. By giving Hussein a forum, he is able to position himself as a martyr, Hussein is able to coerce and manipulate his audience. In no criminal trial anywhere in the world would the accused be allowed to carry on as Hussein has. At this point the authorities might as well let Saddam go and give him his standard villa in the South of France, which is traditional fare for ousted dictators.
http://www.forbes.com/business/manufacturing/feeds/ap/2006/01/24/ap2471289.html

According to Welsh busybody, Cliff Arnall, a health psychologist at the University of Cardiff, today is the worse day of the year. By Dr. Arnall’s calculations during the month of January people are brought down by the weather and the fact that they have accumulated massive debts during the holidays. He also argues that by this point people are beginning to break their New Year’s resolutions and thus feel like failures. Such factors come to a head by January 23rd and thus today has been deemed the worse day of the year.

In a sense Arnall is right, those irresponsible wretches racking up huge bills that they can’t afford, should feel bad, those people who break their resolutions are failures. Does that make today any worse? No! These people are universal failures regardless of the day.
According to Arnall this is a time when people have little to look forward to. How about breathing, how about family and about faith, how about 2nd chances, which each and every day represents? Those that have nothing to look forward to, it can be safe to say, have probably made nothing of their lives and thus January 23rd is probably no different than July 23rd or October 23rd.

Arnall has devised an intricate formula, presumably designed to ensure his tenure at the University of Cardiff.

W+ (D-d) x TQ
———————————
M x NA

The variables involved in this ridiculously meaningless equation are the breaking resolutions or (Q)uiting a bad habit, lack of (M)otivation and (NA), the need to take action, whatever that means.

The University of Cardiff must be truly proud of this braggart for devising perhaps one of the most meaningless pieces of scientific drivel as yet created by man. Anyone who allows their mood to be dictated by factors such as the weather isn’t much of a person in the first place. Life is what you make of it. Perhaps Dr. Arnall’s formula holds some validity when evaluating the lives of certifiable failures, but those who make responsible decisions in life and strive to achieve should have no problem dealing with today or any day, short of a real personal tragedy, which consists of more than a credit card bill or a rainy day.
http://news.scotsman.com/features.cfm?id=108812006

A number of our readers disagreed with our position on Terry Schiavo during the height of that controversy last year, but in our disagreement there is one subject upon which we can all agree. Every adult should have a living will, every adult should clearly outline their wishes in the event that they are incapacitated and appoint and executor to ensure that those wishes are carried out. In the case of Terry Schiavo, no such action was taken, leading to a bitter and ongoing struggle between Terry’s “husband” and her parents.

Terry’s husband, Michael Schiavo married his long time lover this weekend. Schiavo had long claimed that his wife was in a persistent vegetative state, with no hope of recovery, a position later supported by an autopsy. Her parents, however, argued that there remained the possibility that she could survive with continuous advances in medical technology, something that was equally possible. The reality is Michael Schiavo should never have been regarded by the state as an appropriate spokesman for Terry’s wishes. Why? After all, he was her husband? Yes he was her husband, but how many wives would won’t an adulterous husband who was living with another woman, by whom he had two kids, to speak on their behalf?

Terry Schiavo’s condition is irrelevant to the fact that her husband’s life after the incapacitation of Terry rendered his impartiality questionable at best, which calls in to question his true motivations. Michael Schiavo, who had once committed himself to maintaining Terry’s life, even pursuing radical treatments to further that objective, changed his position after winning a medical malpractice suit, which included funds to maintain Terry’s life. After that suit, Schiavo soon began a relationship with another woman, only then did he “remember” his wife never wanted to be kept alive artificially, how convenient.

Critics, mostly on the left and fellow libertarians have argued that the government should never have become involved in such a matter. Under normal circumstances this would be an accurate assessment, but in the case of Terry Schiavo such a position is flawed. As stated, Michael Schiavo had a conflict of interest. No one would question the involvement of the state when a child were neglected or abused, in such cases the court would appoint an impartial third part to represent the interest of the child, Terry Schiavo deserved the same. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-01-22-schiavo-remarries_x.htm

In a recent NBA game in Chicago, Antonio Davis of the New York Knicks, stormed into the stands, when, by his account, his wife was threatened by a fan. For his antics, Davis was suspended for 5 games. Meanwhile the fan that supposedly threatened Kendra Davis has charged that it was he who was threatened by Ms. Davis and he further refutes claims that he was drunk.

Now the fan, Michael Axelrod, is planning to sue Davis and his wife for “slander and battery” for the ripe sum of $1million. According to Axelrod a verbal altercation between he and Ms. Davis ensued after she grew enraged at Axelrod’s booing during the game. Later Antonio Davis rushed into the stand, before being taken back to the court by a referee. “Fans nearby began yelling at the woman to sit down and she went into the row of seats to confront another fan…I started trying to wave more security down, then I turned around and Antonio Davis was standing right there," Axelrod said. Anyone notice anything peculiar about Mr. Axelrod’s account of the incident? Exactly when did the battery take place? Or for that matter, the slander?

Are we to believe that a verbal argument at a basketball game rises to the level of defamation of character? And doesn’t battery require actual contact? By Axelrod’s own account the confrontation was verbal, perhaps if one flails their arms in the air such an act constitutes battery and slander. Once again another baseless suit motivated solely by opportunistic reasons. This fan is no more entitled to $1 million dollars than the readers of this article. In fact he’s not even entitled to a free ticket, at the most he should receive a small box of popcorn for his troubles and perhaps a the help wanted ads so he may find gainful employment rather than resorting to litigious extortion.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/2006-01-19-fan-davis_x.htm

Earlier this week, New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin noted that his city would again be a chocolate city, so all you of the vanilla or caramel persuasion, it would be advised to head north. After much fallout, however, mayor Nagin apologized, not once but twice, saying all were welcome in New Orleans.

Mayor Nagin’s concern for the racial makeup of New Orleans, which by most accounts wasn’t much of a city in the first place, is purely political. Nagin is concerned about his reelection prospect. Before Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans was over 60% black. Today that figure has changed significantly, Nagin, is desperate for as many of the city’s poor and minorities to return as quickly as possible, thereby boosting his reelection prospects. This represents the simplest strategy to achieve his political ends. More complicated, however, would be to call for a re-birth of New Orleans, a city radically different from its past, a city of economic and social revival. This strategy would be far more challenging for Nagin, which is why he has opted for the former.

Rather that concerning himself with the racial makeup of the Big Easy, Nagin should be concerned with the work ethic of those who return. By every account, New Orleans had one of the largest collections of drags on society anywhere in the developed world. New Orleans, while being a tourist Mecca, was also one of the nation’s poorest cities. This was largely attributed to the culture and work ethic of its inhabitants. Their race is (and should be) of no consequence. History shows that deadbeats come in all shapes and colors. Minimum wage, minimum skilled, minimum motivation is not the path toward New Orleans’ resurrection.

Indeed, Nagin and other state officials should be calling for hard workers, the educated and the productive to come to New Orleans. Aside from the Central Business District and various tourists sectors of the city, New Orleans mirrored a third world encampment rather than a modern American city. If New Orleans is to be reborn then the deadbeats and the unproductive dead weight that was Pre-Katrina should never return. Perhaps then New Orleans can be a city to marvel and a city of prosperity, rather than a city of degradation, sloth, corruption and incompetence.
http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/MSN/world/national/2006/01/18/neworleans-mayor060118.html

In a move that comes as no surprise, Syria, an unofficial member of the axis of evil, has wholeheartedly endorsed Iran’s efforts to develop “peaceful” nuclear technology. Syrian President (and dictator) Bashar Assad, still licking his wounds after being chased from Lebanon is looking to Iran to bolster its own position in the Middle East. Syria, like Iran is also facing the threat of UN sanctions for its complicity in the assasination of former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafic Hariri. Assad is a long time supporter of Iran and Iran’s new fire eating president recently paid a visit to his fellow terror state.

Syria, like Iran contends that as a sovereign state it is Iran’s right to pursue the development of nuclear technology, something that is allowed under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Technically, Assad is correct and some outside observers would question the calls of the US and the EU to halt Iran’s nuclear program. If it were any other country, with a few exceptions, Assad’s argument would be legitimate. But in the case of Iran the issue is not as benign as the mullahs of Tehran would have us believe. Iran is an avowed an admitted sponsor of terror. Iran’s aggressive actions and desire to destroy Israel are widely acknowledged. Iran simply cannot be trusted with nuclear power.

Unlike conventional weapons, thereby we could wait for Iran to act before retaliating; nuclear weapons are far more devastating with far greater long-term consequences. America and the world cannot afford to wait idly by as Iran emerges as a nuclear power. Indeed, Iran is far more dangerous than North Korea, who by most accounts is quite content to oppress and starve its own people. North Korea, unlike Iran, does not represent an entity bent on world conquest; Iran does and has said as much, noting that Islam is destined to rule the world.

Given such realities, a hard line must be maintained vis-à-vis Iran. America, cannot act alone, on this matter, not only because it would impose a logistical nightmare for the US but also because if America acts alone it will serve only to bolster Iran’s position in the world, America, however, cannot rely solely on the Europeans to take the lead on this matter. Europe’s poor negotiating stance and its flirtation with appeasement served only to embolden Iran as much as Russian technology served to equip Iran.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=84540e4b-0f89-4cb8-935b-aa236d8fdabb&k=22990

What is going on in France these days? Recently the French government has been uncharacteristically bellicose with regard to the Iranian crisis. Calling an end to diplomatic negotiations with Iran and calling for tough action to confront the Iranian threat (though the tough action they propose is still rather timid), now the French are threatening to use nuclear weapons? Earlier today, the French government made it clear in no uncertain terms that France stood ready to respond to any terrorist attack with the use of nuclear weapons.

What has happened in France is the realization that years of appeasement and turn style immigration has left the French state extremely vulnerable. That vulnerability was made evident with the devastating riots that occurred last fall, largely at the hands of Islamic immigrants. Now witness the danger that is Iran. The country is developing ICBMs capable of targeting Europe, they have announced their desire to “wipe Israel off the map” and now they are moving ahead with a clandestine Nuclear weapons program. These events surely have the French welfare state in utter panic. France clearly realizes that if Iran becomes a nuclear power, its only a question of time before Islamic radicals around the world begin threatening the use of nuclear weapons.

Jacques Chirac, who took it upon himself to make this dire pledge, noted that “Against a regional power, our choice would not be between inaction or annihilation.” In the present state of geopolitics, however, annihilation is a very real danger for all of us, if terrorists gain access to nuclear weapons. For this very reason Iran’s flirtation with nuclear power is extremely disconcerting. Perhaps France has awoken from its slumber. In reality, however, it will take more than UN sanctions to change the minds of the mullahs in Tehran, there must be a genuine belief that Iran itself is in danger and even then there is no certainty that these radicals will pursue a rational course of action, lest we forget their credo: submit, convert or die.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/e805e2d4-88e6-11da-94a6-0000779e2340.html

As if the constant maneuvering by the GOP to impose religious standards weren’t enough, now the Democrats are stepping into the picture. State Democratic leaders in the Georgia General Assembly have proposed legislation, which would authorize the creation of elective courses that would teach the bible in a historical context.

The Democratic sponsors of the bill contend that there is an educational need for these courses, as it will enable students to better understand Shakespeare or the foundations of our democratic government. Is this for real? This is nothing more than a poorly veiled attempt to reintroduce religious education in schools, not unlike the ongoing strategy of the creationists?

Above all, the Democrats argue that this course is not about teaching faith in schools, and they are right, its about pandering to religious conservatives who can’t get it through their heads that public schools are not the place for religious instruction. The Democrats should be commended for taking a page from the GOP playbook, however. James Carville would surely be proud.

Any course that teaches the bible in a public school environment is a state endorsement of religion, no matter how its supporters may define it. If parents are so interested in imparting a Christ centered education for their children why not enroll their children in a private Christian school rather than calling upon the state to assume that responsibility? That’s what responsible parents do.

In this case the left is simply pandering for the votes of traditionally Republican voters in an increasingly Republican state. If successful, look for more such strategies throughout Red States across this country.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/stories/0119legbible.html

Some of us believe that debate and political discussion is healthy in a representative form of government. In Venezuela, however, there is one subject that is beyond debate or discussion and that subject is the country’s leader, Hugo Chavez. Apparently to criticize the Mussolini of Latin America is to destabilize the country, or so Chavez would have us believe. That certainly sounds like “democracy” to me.

During Mass in the city of Barquisimeto, Cardinal Rosario Castillo, rightly criticized the Venezuelan president for eroding democratic freedom in the country. Castillo warned that Venezuela had “lost its democratic path” and was headed toward dictatorship. Naturally, the Cardinal was correct and nowhere is that more evident than in Chavez’s response. "This is part of a provocation, part of a conspiracy, there is nothing innocent about this. It is a plot to destabilize the country," Chavez noted during his weekly television and radio show. This is the archetypical rote response given by Chavez and his cronies when he is criticized. Chavez attempts to sidestep the issue, by putting his critics on the defensive accusing them of imagined conspiracies and efforts to remove him from power.

In reality Chavez is succeeding only in solidifying his hold on power, while his empty promises go unfullfilled. Recently a conference of bishops in the country, challenged Chavez’s assertion that his “revolution” was benefiting the poor, something we at the Phalanx have said all along. Indeed, under Chavez, the poor have faired even worse, but Chavez’s master skill in the art of distraction has shielded this reality from public view, the fact that Chavez practically controls the media certainly aides that cause.
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/01/15/chavez.church.reut/

China is the largest country in the world. It’s economy has surpassed France as the fifth largest and before long, China will eclipse even the United States. China is spending billions on science and technology and because of the vastness of its market; foreign investors have flocked to do business in the country, lifting millions of Chinese out of poverty every month. The Chinese government is selling advanced weapons systems to rogue nations and dictators in every corner of the globe.

Now the Chinese are seeking to expand their influence on a global scale. China’s government has sought to promote trade and finance deals around the world from Africa to Latin America and throughout the Asia Pacific region. As a result of China’s efforts, the authoritarian behemoth is seen as benign, while the US is seen as a global threat. Why?

Chinese leaders have no interest in encouraging democracy or spreading freedom around the world. Indeed, it would be counterproductive for the Chinese to advance the concept of representative government as it would threaten the stranglehold China’s leaders have. They are interested solely in financial prosperity. So far this strategy has proven successful and through a combination of political ruthlessness and economic liberalization the communist government continues to distract the Chinese people from the fact that they lack even basic freedoms of speech, religion, press, etc…While China continues to invest in business, industry and infrastructure throughout the developing world, its influence continues to grow, in some cases at the expense of the United States.

The US, however, isn’t the only country to take notice. India, another rapidly expanding nation, has looked on China with envious eyes as China secures one trade deal after another. Through expanded trade, nations like China gain access to a wealth of resources to fuel its ever-expanding economy, which threaten America’s dependence on same resources. Its time America takes notice, before another set of tyrants, this time in Beijing begin dictating terms to the US.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4619956.stm

With growing concern over Iran’s nuclear program, there is an increasing fear that a showdown between Iran and the west could lead to a significant energy crisis. Iran has even hinted at using its vast oil wealth to retaliate against the west if sanctions are imposed.

Now Guy Caruso, head of the U.S. Energy Information Administration, has warned of skyrocketing petroleum prices. According to Caruso, the world cannot afford to loose access to Iran’s petroleum reserves. The mullahs of Tehran are keenly aware of this fact and for this reason they have a clear advantage in on again, off again negotiations with the EU3.

The Iranians are negotiating from a vantage point of strength and they are aided by the fact that two of their largest benefactors, China and Russia, are adamantly opposed to sanctions or any serious threats to Iran. Once again we see the err of our ways as the US and the west in general, have failed to plan for the future.

The US lacks a reliable alternative to petroleum and as a result, every tin pan dictator with more than a few barrels of crude to their credit can dictate to us the new world order or shift the global balance of power. Witness Hugo Chavez in Latin America. Until we embrace alternatives and provide incentives for businesses to innovate in this sector, the US will continue to find itself in such a position.
Link to Reuters article

Don’t let anyone tell you that the GOP is not in the hip pocket of wealthy developers. Last year the GOP proposed legislation in the Georgia legislature that would have given developers carte blanche to seize land through eminent domain, not for the purpose of public works projects such as bridges, roads and schools, but for private development projects. After much outcry across the state, the GOP tabled the idea. Then came the controversy Supreme Court ruling last summer, which gave local communities the authority to seize land under the auspices of eminent domain and turn it over to private developers.

According to the Supreme Court, boosting tax revenue could be considered a “public use” insofar as it relates to the subject of eminent domain. After that decision was handed down, local communities and states around the country pledged to enact legislation to circumvent the ruling, thus protecting the property rights of citizens across the country. Not everyone, it seems, got the memo. GOP legislators have sponsored a bill that bears a resemblance to the same bill they tried to push through last year. Once again the provision was buried in the bill, but its intent is crystal clear. The fact that the GOP would try to push through this blatant anti-American piece of legislation highlights their questionable loyalties.

Property rights are one of the fundamental hallmarks of our American society. Even in communist China the government is taking steps to secure the property rights of citizens, while our own government is underhandedly trying to steal that property. Once the fit hit the shan, the GOP went out of their way to assure the public that language in the bill authorizing land condemnation was a mistake. The only mistake, however, was in giving the GOP control of both houses of the state legislature. If these corrupt politicians can’t recognize that their paramount duty is to protect the rights of citizens and uphold the constitution then it is time that they be shown the door. Corporations and developers do not elect representatives to government, citizens, however, do and hopefully those citizens will take the appropriate steps next fall to correct this oversight.
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/0105edeminent.html
http://www.11alive.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=74703

The Martin Luther King holiday is a time for reflection on the struggles of our civil rights era past, but sadly it is also a time for race baiting politicians to score political points and this year is no exception. New York Senator, Hillary Clinton used the backdrop of the King holiday to attack the Bush administration as one of the worst in history. The senator also likened the US House of Representatives to a “plantation” which squelches opposing views. “We have a culture of corruption, we have cronyism, we have incompetence,” Clinton noted in a speech to a mostly black audience in New York. The one truth about politicians is the fact that without exception, most are hypocrites at heart. The fact that any person with the name Clinton can stand up in public and decry corruption is laughable. Furthermore, for a Democrat to complain that dissent is not tolerated is equally hilarious. No Political Party in history has done more to undermine political debate and discussion, castigating their opponents as evil and deriding those with differences of opinion. Even members of their own party, who don’t tow the party line, are left out in the political wilderness.

Clinton went on to laud Democrats for most, if not all, of the progress made in this country regarding civil rights. In a sense Clinton is correct, Civil Rights era legislation would not be possible with out the leadership of key Democrats, but such legislation would not be law today without the efforts of the GOP, who voted in overwhelming numbers in favor of both the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Act, something Democrats cannot claim, in fact only 63% of Democrats in the House voted in support of the Civil Rights act, compared with roughly 80% of Republicans.

Since the 1960s, however, no party has done more to undermine people long oppressed by Jim Crow and segregationist policies. The Left has promoted one program after another that serve only to foment a culture of dependency. They have discouraged entrepreneurship, limited choice and opportunity for education and discouraged hard work and resourcefulness through mindless welfare projects, which promote idleness. Indeed, it is the modern Democratic Party that has wholeheartedly embraced the plantation concept. Not only have they dismissed those whose views contrast with their own, but they have fully embraced a paternalistic mentality, not unlike the planters of yore.

Generations ago, slave owners maintained that the slave system was beneficial, that slave owners were in a better position to care for the slaves than the slaves could themselves and thus in a better position to make decisions on behalf of the slaves. This too is the paternalistic covertly racist attitude of the Democrats, who contend that the state, and by extension the left, is best suited to make decisions on our behalf as they “know best.” Sadly, many prominent Black politicians embrace this Democratic position. Are they brainwashed? Perhaps, some however, like the house slaves of that bygone era seek only to reside in the big house and eat the master’s scraps; in return they must surrender their independent thoughts.

Not only are Democratic policies insulting and detrimental to minorities and the poor, but when is the last time you saw a minority in a leadership position within the Democratic Party? One need only ask Party Chairman, Howard Dean how many Blacks he has on staff. No he’s too busy courting those voters with “Confederate Flags” remember? And what of Mr. Elitist himself, John Kerry? Even Bill Clinton did less to promote minorities through the ranks than the current President Bush, yet we are to believe that minority rights are of paramount concern to Democrats. And yet the Dems argue that it is the left that is intolerant, just ask Michael Steele of Maryland which party is more open to dissent. Michael Steele, who is black, is the GOP candidate for US Senate and has become a frequent target by Dems even have even resorted to racially tinged attacks, why? Because they are just so tolerant.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/17/nyregion/17speech.html

Last week we brought you the story of Jessica Bradley, an Atlanta teen who was asked to leave Covenant Christian Academy after the school administration learned of an inappropriate sexual relationship. Last week we noted that Jessica had been expelled, in reality, it seems young Jessica was simply asked to withdraw. Not that there is much difference.

In response to the school’s actions Jessica’s father filed a $1million suit against the school for invasion of privacy and breach of contract. Jessica’s father argued the child was asked to leave because of a same-sex kiss at a slumber party, the school, however, contends it was more than a kiss, arguing that Jessica admitted to a sexual relationship with a fellow student, who was also asked to leave the school. In the Bradley’s suit, the family argued that the student guidelines are vague and unenforceable. This argument is certainly debatably. According to the handbook, “any behavior, on campus or away which indicates that a student has disregard for the spirit of the school standards, would be sufficient reason to ask for him/her to withdraw from Covenant Christian Academy.”

While it is unclear what denomination Covenant Christian belongs to, there is no Christian denomination that condones of sexual activity for a 14 year old girl. The Bradley’s claim of vagueness is ludicrous. The Bradley’s have since moved to Pennsylvania, where their quest for a sexually provocative Christian school is likely to go unfulfilled. We at the Phalanx will keep our loyal readers updated on the progress of this most frivolous of lawsuits.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/gwinnett/stories/0117metexpel.html

In a move that should come as no surprise, the tyrannical regimes of Russia and China have made it known that they oppose taking a hard-line regarding Iran and its nuclear program. Russian President Putin is opposed to the use of sanctions as a means of coercing Iran and even opposed to taking the matter before the UN Security Council. While we at the Phalanx have been arguing for some time that neither sanctions nor the UN can or will do anything to restrain Iran, Russia’s Putin is motivated by other factors, namely money. Let us not forget that Russia is primarily to blame for this crisis in the first place. They have sold Iran nuclear technology as well as advanced weapons systems. Russia and China are favorite suppliers of tyrannical, despotic, authoritarian regimes around the world.

If sanctions were imposed on Iran, it would interfere with Russia and China’s ability to sell weapons and technology to the mullahs of Tehran. For this reason, Russia has called for a measured approach. Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov even went so far as to argue that sanctions had done nothing to retrain the actions of Saddam Hussein and would therefore have no affect on Iran, something we have been arguing for sometime now. Though Russia at the start of the Iraq war was fully in favor of the sanctions regime. So have the Russians been convicted by an overwhelming desire to help the poor of Iran? Not likely, considering the way they treat their own people.

Recently, China argued that referring Iran to the Security Council would only make matters worse, now both Russia and China argue for alternatives. With the Sino-Russian coalition adamantly opposed to UN action, one would assume they would propose alternatives, especially in light of the fact that they are the cause of this crisis. One, however, would be wrong, rather than offering alternatives to break the impasse with Iran both the tyrants of Beijing and the tyrants of Moscow have simply argued for patience. What exactly does that mean? Should the world wait patiently while Iran develops nuclear weapons only to supply them to every terrorist from here to Timbuktu?

In reality both Russia and China have a vested interest in protecting Iran, just as they did with Iraq. The European Union on the other hand stands to loose either way, Iran is a major European oil supplier, but they would also be the prime targets of a nuclear Iran. The Europeans also lack the fortitude for a showdown with the Iranians, leaving only the US. America, however, is in no position to move on Iran. The left who once championed action against Iraq, would turn on Bush, just as they did with Iraq, even though they now call for a swift response to Iran. Indeed, the leftist propaganda machine in this country would act quickly to destroy any chance of acting resolutely with regard to Iran. If by some remote chance, however, the US or Europe does take action, we can rest assured that terrorism around the world will increase 100 fold. Making Iraq seem like a picnic, lest we forget who is the architect of modern terrorism in the world.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/17/iran.nuclear/index.html