1) Minorities Should Express Shame, Not Only Pride... Minorities/Culture
2) Democrat Pay Raises for Lawmakers Anger Watchdog Groups... Democrats/Politic/Economy
3) If Caroline’s Last Name Was Palin... Media Bias/Liberals/Politics
4) China Defends Censorship Rights, Blocks NY Times Online.... Communism/Politics
5) Blackwater radio logs: Guards took incoming fire... Iraq/Blackwater/Judicial
6) California Democrats devise plan to hike taxes... Democrats/High Taxes/High Spending
7) Student Says School Persecuted Him for Being Conservative... Education/Liberal Bias
8) Joe the Plumber Angered: 'I'm Just a Private Citizen'... Politic/Democrat Abuse of Power
9) Swedish city hit by youth (see Muslims) riots... Europe/Islam/Media Bias


1) Minorities Should Express Shame, Not Only Pride... Minorities/Culture
http://townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2008/12/16/minorities_should_express_shame,_not_only_pride

December 16, 2008
Gay Pride. Jewish Pride. Black pride. Hispanic Pride. Multiculturalism. Ethnic pride. Minority rights vs. tyranny of the majority.

For a generation, America has been awash in the celebration of minorities and minorities celebration of themselves. Just recall Black is Beautiful or I am a woman, I am invincible. At the same time, the majority group in America -- white Christians -- has been allowed to celebrate very little. Rather, they have constantly been reminded of what they should be ashamed of -- their racism, sexism, homophobia, patriarchy, and xenophobia -- real and alleged.

But what about minority shame?
Why does one almost never hear expressions of group shame from members of any American group other than white Christians (specifically, white Christian male heterosexuals)? Are the only evildoers in America white male heterosexual Christians? Is there something inherently wrong about members of minorities expressing anything but group pride? Are there no minority sins worthy of shame? The latter is in fact the argument advanced by many intellectuals concerning black racism, for example. For a generation, college students have been taught that it is impossible for blacks to be racist because only the racial group in power, i.e. whites, can express racism. Of course, that is nonsense. A black can be a racist just as a white can be one. A minority race might not have the power to implement racist national policies but that hardly means that no minority group, or any individual, can be a racist. All this came to mind recently when, by coincidence, I read two things about the minority group of which I am a member -- Jews. I just completed reading Anthony Beevors The Fall of Berlin 1945, in which the author writes that in the midst of the massive rape of German women (millions of girls and women of all ages) by Red Army troops, Jewish officers in the Red Army were known to be the one group that protected German girls and women. In Beevors words, Red Army officers who were Jewish went out of their way to protect German women and girls. I fully admit to a sense of Jewish pride when I read that. The next day I read a news report that because of the objections of one kindergartners mother, a public school in North Carolina had banned the singing of Rudolf the Red Nosed Reindeer because the song contained the word Christmas. I blame the school officials first and foremost for this craven and foolish decision. But when the news report noted that the woman was Jewish, my heart sank. Just as I had read the Beevor report and felt a surge of Jewish pride, I read the North Carolina story and felt a surge of Jewish shame. It was a surge of Jewish shame that years ago led to one of the largest demonstrations of Israeli Jews in Israels history. They were demonstrating against the massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Chatilla refugee camps in Lebanon. The killings were committed by Lebanese Christian militias, but they took place while Israel occupied that area of Lebanon.

It would seem, then, that group shame is a good thing. There are at least three reasons:

A. It is maturing. Only children think only well of themselves. A group that only expresses pride is essentially a group of children.

B. If one expresses group pride, one is morally obligated to express group shame. Obviously, this does not apply to any person who does not identify with, let alone take pride in being a member of, a group.

C. If only the majority group is expected to express shame, then only the majority group is expected to be governed by rules of morality. It is, ironically, the highest moral compliment to Americas white Christians that they are the only American group of whom expressions of shame are expected. It means more is morally expected of them than of anyone else.

The relative absence of expressions of shame in the Muslim world over the atrocities committed in Islams name is an example of the above. The labeling of blacks who express shame over disproportionate rates of violent crime and out-of-wedlock births in the black community as Uncle Toms is another. The absence of any expression of shame in the gay community over the current blacklisting -- and attempts to economically destroy -- anyone who donated to the California proposition defining marriage as between a man and a woman is another example. When Sen. Joseph McCarthy blacklisted people in Hollywood for real or alleged support for the Communist Party, he was finally shut up with the words, Have you no shame, sir? Expressing group shame when morally necessary is not airing dirty linen or giving solace to ones ideological enemies. It is, rather, one of the highest expressions of moral development. And it is therefore universally applicable. Being a minority doesnt exempt its members from moral responsibility. It will be a great day for America and the world when minorities begin to express shame as well as pride. In fact, there is real pride in expressing shame. Minorities should give it a try.

Me: I have always said that every group has reasons to be proud and to be ashamed. While we may disagree at which is the case and which isn't it remains true. But, it seems with this multiculturalism mixed with White Guilt results in only a few groups expressing both the pride and shame. One of those groups is the white christian male. But the minorities also have a similar case in which they have reasons for shame but is it seldom or never explored or felt.


2) Democrat Pay Raises for Lawmakers Anger Watchdog Groups... Democrats/Politic/Ecomony
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/20/pay-raises-lawmakers-angers-watchdog-groups/

December 20, 2008
Pay Raises for Lawmakers Anger Watchdog Groups
Each lawmaker is due for a $4,700 cost-of-living wage hike starting in January, which will amount to a total cost of $2.5 million for taxpayers. As Americans across the country grapple with one of the worst financial crises since the Great Depression, members of Congress quietly are getting a pay raise. Each lawmaker's annual salary is due for a $4,700 cost-of-living increase starting in January, which will amount to a cost to taxpayers of $2.5 million in 2009, infuriating watchdog groups.

"Members of Congress don't deserve one additional dime of taxpayer money in 2009," said Tom Schatz, president of the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste. "While thousands of Americans are facing layoffs and downsizing, Congress should be mortified to accept a raise," he said in a written statement. Members of Congress make an average of $169,300 a year, with Congressional leaders making slightly more. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Cailf., makes $217,400, while the majority and minority leaders in the House and Senate each make $188,100. The raise will increase the average salary to about $174,000, up 2.8 percent.

Democrat Pelosi's and Senate Majority Leader Democrat Harry Reid's offices did not respond to FOXNews.com's requests for comment. Pay raises for public officials, whether at the federal, state or local level, usually spark outrage among taxpayer advocates. But the deepening financial crisis has led even a few lawmakers to object. Earlier this year, Rep. Harry Mitchell, a first-term Democrat from Arizona, introduced legislation that would have stopped the automatic pay adjustments from kicking in for members next year. But the bill, which drew 34 cosponsors, died in committee.

Two other members of Congress, Rep. Dan Burton, Republican-Ind, and Rep. Gresham Barrett, Republican-SC, also tried to block the wages but didn't get very far. Burton plans to return his pay increase to the Treasury Department. "As we face the most challenging economic crisis in our history, and with many Americans and Hoosiers enduring personal financial hardships, I am opposed to any pay increase for members of Congress in 2009," he said in a written statement. He said he'll try again next year.

Lawmakers have received automatic raises since 1989. As part of an ethics bill, Congress gave up its ability to accept pay for speeches and made annual cost-of-living pay increases automatic unless lawmakers voted otherwise. Republican Lawmakers have rejected pay raises six times since then, most recently last year, when Democrats, newly elected to the majority, had vowed to block an increase in their paychecks until Congress raised the minimum wage. For the past eight years, Rep. Jim Matheson, Democrat-Utah, has been trying to end the automatic salary hike for House members, arguing that spending priorities in a time of war and economic crisis do not include pay raises for lawmakers. Matheson wants to put the automatic pay raises to a vote. "At a time when people are losing their jobs, their homes and their retirement, I think the least we could do is openly debate whether we should take the pay increase this year or do some belt-tightening," he said in a written statement. As he has done for the past eight years, Matheson plans to donate his pay raise to charity, his spokeswoman said. The Senior Citizens League asserted the pay raise would rank each lawmaker in the top six percent of American households.

"As lawmakers make a big show of forcing auto executives to accept just $1 a year in salary, they are quietly raiding the vault for their own personal gain," the group's chairman, Daniel O'Connell, said in a written statement. "This money would be much better spent helping the millions of seniors who are living below the poverty line and struggling to keep their heat on this winter." The group estimates that a senior receiving average benefits will get a $63 monthly increase to just $1,153 per month next year, increasing their annual total to $13,836. The pay raises come as the economic recession deepens. The economy lost 533,000 jobs in November, bringing the unemployment rate to 6.7 percent.

Me: SO Palin is offered a pay raise declines it, the Democrats put a automatic pay raise HIDDEN in another bill and then ok's it while the economy is in recession and they are demanding the private market to control how many they earn. Hypocracy much? It does explain why they hated Palin.


3) If Caroline’s Last Name Was Palin... Media Bias/Liberals/Politics
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/12/19/tantaros_caroline_kennedy/

December 19th, 2008
Republican Political Commentator

What has she done in her career? Does she have the experience to govern? Isn’t she just a name and a pretty face in expensive clothes? All questions asked by Democrats (I’m being nice) regarding Sarah Palin as McCain’s pick for Vice President. But Caroline Kennedy –similarly an intriguing, attractive outsider decked in designer duds and a thin resume — isn’t put under the same kind of scrutiny.

"Apparently, qualifications don’t matter to the left as long as you don’t hunt moose."

The left is just plain giddy with excitement over a return to Camelot and the New York press corps, the most selectively tough in the business, is following suit. One this is certain: if Kennedy’s last name were Palin she wouldn’t be anointed. Hillary has been telling her supporters to stop trashing Kennedy, but not because she wants to do Caroline any favors. Caroline and her Uncle Judas Iscariot Kennedy turned on the former first lady in her hour of need, arguably a turning point in the Democratic primary. The last thing Hillary wants is a discussion and comparison to her lack of experience when she ran for the Senate in the Empire State almost a decade ago.

"I’m curious if she’ll sit down with some prominent Big Apple media fixtures like Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric and subject herself to their murder boards."

Obama is certainly pushing for his ally, no doubt. It could only benefit him to have a high-profile advocate on the Hill and Kennedy will certainly be more malleable than Clinton. And what about this concept of change? The Kennedy family is an institution. They’ve been around for decades and have been consistently plagued by scandal and drama. Hardly what I’d call a new viewpoint. As Kennedy travels around the state of New York, not saying much and refusing to answer questions about her lack of experience, I’m curious if she’ll sit down with some prominent Big Apple media fixtures like ABC’s Charlie Gibson and CBS’s Katie Couric and subject herself to their murder boards. As a resident New Yorker I would like to hear Couric ask Kennedy about her feelings on the Peace Bridge in Western New York or Indian gaming in the Catskills. I suspect there would be some stuttering and stammering in her responses but she’d hardly be called a fool as Palin was. We always knew the Democrats had a double standard. They nominated the most inexperienced candidate in nearly a century to run for president, while they sought to destroy the Republican nominee for vice president because she wasn’t elitist or experienced enough. What they need to learn is that stature is not a substitute for substance, even in New York. But apparently, qualifications don’t matter to the left as long as you don’t hunt moose.

Me: Think about it the media said time and again "how little experience Palin had" and they ask "how can she want to be Vice President" and so on. Here they pick a house wife with no political experience and because of being related to someone they love the Democrats SO love her and the democrat don't think she isn't ready and think she has experience because of her relatives. This is the very model of liberal bias... Palin runs a State Government, Ran a City Government, Ran and Company, and Raised a family and she is called "uninformed" and "unexperienced", YET this Kennedy comes along who never had a elected position, ran NOTHING, and had nannies take care of her children and she is loved and thought of as a great choice.


4) China Defends Censorship Rights, Blocks NY Times Online.... Communism/Politics
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470638,00.html

December 20, 2008
China has blocked access to the New York Times Web site, the newspaper said Saturday, days after the central government defended its right to censor online content it deems illegal. Computer users who logged on in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou received a message that the site was not available when they tried to connect on Friday morning, the paper said. Some users were cut of as early as Thursday evening, it said. The Web site remained inaccessible from Beijing Saturday. It was not clear if the move was meant to block specific content on the newspaper's Web site or if it was a return to stricter censorship of the Internet in general. Beijing loosened some media and Internet controls during the 2008 Summer Olympics — gestures that were meant to show the international community that the games had brought greater freedom to the Chinese people. A spokesman for the Foreign Ministry said they do not deal with Web sites. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, which regulates the Internet, could not be reached for comment.

Earlier this week, Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao defended China's right to censor Web sites that have material deemed illegal by the government, saying that other countries regulate Internet usage too. During the August games, China allowed access to long-barred Web sites such as the British Broadcasting Corp. and Human Rights Watch after an outcry from foreign reporters who complained that Beijing was failing to live up to its pledges of greater media freedom. The New York Times said Beijing had blocked the Chinese-language Web site of the BBC, and Web sites of Voice of America, Asiaweek, and Ming Pao, a Hong Kong newspaper, earlier in the week. But apart from Ming Pao the sites were all accessible Friday, it said. Ming Pao's online site was still inaccessible Saturday in Beijing. China has the most online users in the world with more than 250 million, but it has also put in place a sophisticated system to police Web sites for sensitive material and routinely blocks sites that support Tibetan independence or the region's spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. A spokeswoman for The Times, Catherine J. Mathis, told the paper that there did not appear to be a technical issue. Users in Japan, Hong Kong, and the U.S. were also not experiencing difficulties, the paper said.

Me: You know I remember just how much the Times gushed about China during the Olympics and if you think this is going to change the light touch the Times gives China guess again. Sometimes I wish we would ban the Times which fequently prints lies or so vastly bias news as to be nearly useless news.


5) Blackwater radio logs: Guards took incoming fire... Iraq/Blackwater/Judicial
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081218/ap_on_go_ot/blackwater_prosecution

Dec 18, 2008


WASHINGTON – Radio logs from a deadly 2007 shooting in Baghdad cast doubt on U.S. government claims that Blackwater Worldwide security guards were unprovoked when they killed 14 Iraqi civilians. The transcripts of Blackwater radio reports, obtained by The Associated Press, describe a hectic eight minutes in which the guards repeatedly reported incoming gunfire from insurgents and Iraqi police. Five guards face manslaughter and weapons charges for their roles in the shootings. A sixth has pleaded guilty. Prosecutors said the men unleashed a gruesome attack on unarmed Iraqis, including women, children and people trying to escape. But the radio logs from the Sept. 16, 2007 shooting suggest otherwise. Copies of the logs were turned over to prosecutors by Blackwater.

Because Blackwater guards were authorized to fire in self-defense, any evidence their convoy was attacked will make it harder for the Justice Department to prove they acted unlawfully. The logs, which document radio traffic heard by the company's dispatch center inside the U.S.-controlled Green Zone, show that the Blackwater convoy known as Raven 23 reported taking small arms fire_or SAF_ from insurgents within one minute of shutting down traffic in Baghdad's Nisoor Square.

"Mult insuirg SAF @ R23," the log states at 12:12 p.m.

One minute later, the Raven 23 convoy reported taking fire from Iraqi police: "R23 rpts IPs shooting @ R23."

It's unclear why Iraqi police would fire on the Blackwater convoy. Prosecutors could argue the police fired because they believed Blackwater was attacking civilians. It's also common for insurgents to dress as Iraqi police or military officials. Raven 23 was told to leave the square and return to the Green Zone at 12:14, according to the logs. But one minute later, the convoy reported that one of its heavily armored vehicles was disabled. Guards jumped out of another truck and set up a tow rig, still under fire, according to the logs.

"R23 in trfc still under sporadic SAF," the log shows at 12:20 p.m., as the convoy made its way back to the Green Zone.

"Unless these guys are lying to their command watch in real time, making up stuff, that's real-time reporting that they were taking small arms fire," said defense attorney Thomas Connolly, who represents Nick Slatten, a former Army sergeant and indicted Blackwater guard. Connolly provided the logs to the AP because he said prosecutors knew there was evidence of a firefight, yet unfairly described it as a massacre.

"The Justice Department began their presentation to the American people with a lie," Connolly said.

Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd declined to discuss the contents of the logs. "We cannot comment on evidence related to a pending case, but we are fully prepared to address in court arguments made by the defense concerning the documents you reference," he said.

Blackwater, based in Moyock, N.C., confirmed the authenticity of the logs but declined further comment. The logs add a new uncertainty to an already murky case. Iraqi witnesses say Blackwater fired the only shots. And some Raven 23 members, including at least one who set up the tow rig, told authorities they saw no gunfire, according to people close to the case who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. Others in the convoy told authorities they did see enemy gunfire. And Blackwater turned over to prosecutors pictures of vehicles pocked with bullet holes, which the company says proves the guards were shot at. The photos were not time-stamped, however, and the trucks were repainted and repaired by the time FBI agents began investigating.

The Iraqi government has labeled the guards "criminals" and is closely watching the Blackwater case. The shooting strained diplomacy between Washington and Baghdad and fueled anti-American insurgency in Iraq. U.S. prosecutors were aggressive in their charges against the guards. They used an anti-machine gun law to attach 30-year mandatory prison sentences to the charges. And though they can't say for sure exactly which guards shot which victims, all five guards are charged with 14 counts of manslaughter. A sixth Blackwater guard struck a deal with prosecutors, turned on his former colleagues, and pleaded guilty to killing one Iraqi and wounding another. "Those who engaged in unprovoked and illegal attacks on civilians, whether during times of conflict or times of peace, will be held accountable," national security prosecutor Patrick Rowan told reporters when announcing the indictments.

Mark Hulkower, an attorney representing Army veteran and former Blackwater guard Paul Slough, said the logs undermine that claim. "It's absolutely bizarre that the Department of Justice thinks it can call balls and strikes for every shot fired in a firefight," Hulkower said. "I think a jury would be reluctant to do that." In all, 17 Iraqis were killed in the assault. Rowan said evidence in the case could only prove the guards shot 14, although he left open the possibility of future charges. Blackwater Worldwide and its corporate officers were not charged.

Me: So the "evil" guards that attacked the poor "innocent" Iraqis had bullet holes in their vehicles and a radio log of being shot at. Would you have known this if you had been listening to the media? From what I heard I would have thought it was a slam dunk case in which these criminals should be executed or lock away for life. Now I am not saying they are innocent but this is yet another example of the case being resolved in the media which their anti war bias.


6) California Democrats devise plan to hike taxes... Democrats/High Taxes/High Spending
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-budget18-2008dec18,0,1785472.story

December 18, 2008

California Democrats devise plan to hike taxes By structuring them as fees, they would skirt GOP opponents and raise $9.3 billion. A court fight looms. Reporting from Sacramento -- California's Democratic leaders were planning a vote today on a brazen proposal to raise gas, sales and income taxes through a series of legal maneuvers that would bypass the Legislature's minority Republicans. The Democratic gambit, announced Wednesday, would raise $9.3 billion to ease the state's fiscal crisis by increasing sales taxes by three-fourths of a cent and gas taxes by 13 cents a gallon, starting in February. The plan would add a surcharge of 2.5% to everyone's 2009 state income tax bill. It would also require businesses to withhold taxes on payments above $600 made to independent contractors, as they are now required to do with salaried employees. In addition, the Democrats said they would cut $7.3 billion from schools, healthcare and other programs. Their package would total $18 billion and nearly halve the state's budget shortfall, projected to reach $41.8 billion in the next 18 months. Both the Assembly and Senate planned to vote on the package today. Late Wednesday, Democratic lawmakers were negotiating with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger over items he wanted included in the proposal before he would support it.

Inside the Capitol, the strategy is considered revolutionary, because it would sideline the GOP. Though Republicans are a minority in both houses of the Legislature, they have repeatedly blocked tax increases and thwarted budgets they did not like, because California is one of only three states mandating a two-thirds vote for both budgets and tax increases. Achieving that threshold requires some Republican votes. "I still believe in bipartisanship," Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) said at a Capitol news conference. "But there is an even greater responsibility than practicing bipartisanship, and that is to govern. And that is what we intend to do here today."

Republican legislators and antitax groups promised legal challenges to derail the Democrats' plan. "Raising taxes on people and playing funny math and calling it fees is not governing," said Assembly GOP leader Michael Villines of Clovis. "That's trickery, is what that is." The plan hinges on a legal distinction made by judges that a tax is imposed broadly and used for general government purposes, while a fee is charged to users of a specific benefit provided by government, such as a road. The proposal would employ an arcane loophole in state law that lets legislators pass a tax bill with a simple majority vote -- if the bill does not raise more revenue. The Democrats intend to do two things: eliminate some existing fees, including those on gasoline, and substitute tax increases that would include a 9.9% levy on oil extraction and the income tax surcharge. Under the proposal, the Democrats would then reimpose the gas fees at higher levels; fees can be raised with simple majority votes. The gas money would go to roads and transportation. The net effect would be billions of dollars in new revenue for the state. Similar proposals have been considered in past budget crises but never acted on out of concern that they would unravel in court. The Democrats said Wednesday the plan had passed muster with the nonpartisan Legislative Counsel's office, which provides legal advice to lawmakers. But the only opinion from that office that Democrats released was from 2003. Democrats said this plan was the only way they could see of breaking the current budget impasse, which has stretched on for more than a month since Schwarzenegger called lawmakers back into session. "Sen. Steinberg and I are committed to getting this job done with or without our Republican colleagues," said Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles).

Matt David, a spokesman for Schwarzenegger, said the Republican governor would not sign the measure unless it included cuts to the state's workforce, which public employee unions are resisting. David said Schwarzenegger also is insisting that lawmakers include measures for mortgage relief and provisions allowing private contractors to perform more state construction and even take over some government facilities, such as roads. "If it doesn't have these components, then the vote . . . is nothing more than a drill," David said in an interview.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., said the Democrats' bid violates tenets of Proposition 13, the 1978 initiative that capped property taxes and required that all other tax increases be approved by two-thirds of the Legislature. "If they proceed with this proposal to raise taxes with a simple majority vote, they will be sued and they will lose," Coupal said. "So we're very confident this is more of a ploy than anything else." Legal experts said no one can know how the courts would rule. Judges might be reluctant to take an action that could send the state spiraling into insolvency. On the other hand, the experts said, judges -- particularly those afraid of recall campaigns -- might be afraid of a populist uprising akin to the revolt that led to Proposition 13.

"It is absolutely a shell game," said Kirk Stark, a professor at UCLA School of Law. But "in the 30 years since Prop. 13 was enacted, the courts have been accommodating of legislative ingenuity." Or, said another UCLA law professor, Jonathan Zasloff: "The court may just say, 'We are not dealing with this; it is not our job' " to run the state's finances. "It will be a galvanizing issue that tests the independence of the judiciary."

If the plan were to survive legal tests, the state would still face a debilitating budget gap and a cash crisis so severe that California's top three financial officials -- the state treasurer, the controller and Schwarzenegger's finance director -- voted Wednesday to freeze financing on road, levee, school and housing projects. State fiscal experts said lawmakers would have to erase the entire budget gap before they would resume issuing the bonds that finance such projects, which number more than 2,000. They said state bonds are not selling while financial speculation grows that California may become insolvent. "In a market where investors are looking for quality, we do not feel they are going to want to buy the bonds of the state of California" until the state's finances are righted, said Paul Rosenstiel, a deputy treasurer. "We don't hear from the investment bankers at all these days."

Me: So the Democrat are still trying the idea of High Taxes will increase the State revenue. They have control that State for like ever and accordingly that State has one of the highest tax rates in the country YET they have a budget short fall of 41 BILLION. So what is their solution is to increase the taxes and spend even more money. At some point this is going to fall apart.


7) Student Says School Persecuted Him for Being Conservative... Education/Liberal Bias
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,467626,00.html

December 16, 2008
A former student at the Rhode Island College School of Social Work is suing the school and several of his professors for discrimination, saying he was persecuted by the school's "liberal political machine" for being a conservative.

William Felkner, 45, says the New England college and six professors wouldn't approve his final project on welfare reform because he was on the "wrong" side of political issues and countered the school's "progressive" liberal agenda. Felkner said his problems with his professors began in his first semester, in the fall of 2004, when he objected in an e-mail to one of his professors that the school was showing and promoting Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" on campus. He said he objected because no opposing point of view was presented. He said Professor James Ryczek wrote to him on Oct. 15, 2004, saying he was proud of his bias and questioning Felkner's ability to "fit with the profession." "I think the biases and predilections I hold toward how I see the world and how it should be are why I am a social worker. In the words of a colleague, I revel in my biases," he wrote. Felkner's complaint, filed two years ago, alleges that Ryczek discriminated against him for his conservative viewpoint and gave him bad grades because of it in several classes. It also alleges discrimination by other professors and administrators. Felkner said he received failing grades in Ryczek's class for holding viewpoints opposed to the progressive direction of the class. Felkner says he was also discriminated against by Professor Roberta Pearlmutter, who he says refused to allow him to participate in a group project lobbying for a conservative issue because the assignment was to lobby for a liberal issue. He alleges that Perlmutter spent a 50-minute class "assailing" his views and allowed students to openly ridicule his conservative positions, and that she reduced his grade because he was not "progressive."

The Rhode Island College School of Social Work did not respond to a request for comment. Felkner, a self-proclaimed free-market conservative, told FOXNews.com that during his final year, he wanted to do a project on "work first" welfare, which requires that recipients get jobs before they can get benefits. He said the school advocated an "education first" system, in which recipients get job training and don't have to work for benefits. "Basically it was a system that resulted in 2 percent of [Rhode Island's] recipients being on welfare for over 10 years. It was just not working," Felkner said. While at the college he had an internship with the governor's office on public policy to work on welfare reform.

The social work organizing and policy degree program requires a student to complete a project that works for "progressive social change." He was scheduled to complete his project in January, but he said the defendants' actions kept him from finishing and graduating. "There were two years worth of discrimination really, there's no better way to put it, because I had different views than the school does," Felkner said. "It's kind of insane to think that someone studying how to help the poor can't research welfare reform." Felkner also alleges in his complaint that the school's treatment of him restricted his ability to express his opinions and that his bad grades damaged his professional reputation and would make it difficult for him to get a job as a social worker.

Kim Strom-Gottfried, professor of social work at U.N.C. Chapel Hill, said that faculty members should not impose their politics on students. "My bottom line is I think clearly as faculty we have to appraise our students based on required competencies and demonstrations of that, whether critical thinking or whatever, but there shouldn't be a belief litmus test for joining the profession or for an assignment," Strom-Gottfried said. "The questions I have in cases such as his — why would someone choose to affiliate with a profession that's so at odds with his beliefs and his value-base? That's always a question for me," she said.

Bruce Thyer, professor of social work and former dean at the College of Social Work at Florida State University, has written about discrimination against conservatives and against evangelical Christians in social work. He said discrimination hurts the profession. "I have seen students actively discouraged from perusing social work because of their politically conservative views. I've also seen it happen with students who have held strong religious views," he said. "I think that the profession is a great and noble discipline and there are occasional episodes like this that cast a black eye, and it's really unnecessary." Thyer said liberal and conservative social workers have the same goal — to help people — and that the school overstepped its bounds in Felkner's case. "I think it's an overzealous faculty wishing to impose their own political views upon those of their students, and that's unfortunate because there are many areas in which liberal and conservative thinkers within the discipline of social work have so much to agree upon," he said. "Nobody's advocating, certainly not Bill Felkner, that people not be helped."

The college filed a motion for summary judgment this summer, but it was recently denied by the court. Felkner said the school is now seeking a settlement. He said he would still like to receive his masters in social work, and he is still working on government policy on social welfare programs in Rhode Island through the Ocean State Policy Research Institute, which he founded after leaving the school. "You can say what you want about the war on poverty and how it's going, but I think that it hasn't gone well and I think there are better alternatives, and I think it was a shame I wasn't even allowed to research and pursue those interests," Felkner said. "It's indoctrination."

Me: This does not surprise me. Liberals have ZERO tolerance and promote ZERO support for diversity when it comes to what ideas they will allow and what they will not. They have taken over much of the education system and use it to indoctrinate new to be liberals. This goal isn't about education it is about liberalism and in there eyes education is education only if it is liberal in focus and idea. This is what makes it so rough for Conservatives to get the education needed to then get the jobs in education to make the changes so desperately needed as of late.


8) Joe the Plumber Angered: 'I'm Just a Private Citizen'... Politic/Democrat Abuse of Power
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/joe_the_plumber/2008/11/05/148122.html?s=al&promo_code=7073-1

November 5, 2008
Joe Wurzelbacher — better known as Joe the plumber — tells Newsmax that he was “angered” by the background checks Ohio officials ran on him after he was mentioned by John McCain at a presidential debate. Asked by Newsmax’s Ashley Martella for his thoughts on the Barak Obama election victory, Joe said on Wednesday:

“I’m disappointed, but the American people have spoken. They’ve gotten what they wanted. Now it’s time to make sure that he goes to work for us. He’s got a lot of work to do.” He said the multiple background checks by officials in Ohio “angered me. I’m just a private citizen … That scares me just for the simple fact that other people might hesitate on questioning our elected officials and that worries me greatly for America. “I’m not real happy about that at all.”

Asked if he felt the Democratic Party was behind the checks, he responded: “I’m not going to say they’re completely behind it. Maybe people who were connected to them. “They wanted to find out something so they could try to discredit me. But to sit there and say that Barack Obama was directly responsible for such a thing — no, I’m not going to say something like that.” Joe declared that for the Republicans to “get back into the game” following their election defeat, “they’ve got to remember that they’re conservatives. “As soon as people say the Republican Party, all they think about is big business and corporations and guys that make $30 million a year. That’s not the case. I’ve voted Republican a lot in my lifetime because of conservative core values that built America. That’s what I think they need to get back to.”

Asked if he still plans to buy a plumbing business, as he originally stated, or to run for elected office, Joe said he could “better serve my fellow man by working with a new watchdog group I’m coming up with,” called Secure Our Dream.com, “that essentially will hold politicians accountable and make them remember that they actually got into this business to serve their fellow man, and not themselves.”

Me: He has every reason to be angry and the media has basically hidden this story of the Democrat abuse of power to undermine a man who dared question their man god Obama.


9) Swedish city hit by youth (see Muslims) riots... Europe/Islam/Media Bias
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7791553.stm

19 December 2008


Dozens of youths have rioted in the southern Swedish city of Malmo for a second consecutive night, setting cars on fire and clashing with police.

"We've had a very difficult evening," a police spokeswoman told the AFP news agency late on Thursday. "There have been fires burning since this afternoon... extensive damage to public property, and... stone-throwing and bomb threats against police." She said the trouble was linked to the closure of an Islamic centre. The owner of the building, in an immigrant neighbourhood, had decided not to renew the centre's lease. The centre, which included a mosque, had to move out. But some youths squatted in the premises, until they were evicted by police earlier this week. Once police left the premises, the youths returned, setting fires in the area. They then clashed with police.

"The origin of the riots is the occupation of the building. But that's not really the reason now, now other troublemakers have just joined in, taking advantage of the situation," police spokeswoman Ewa-Gun Westford told AFP.

Me: Wow I am impressed... they mentioned the Islamic Centre. (mocking tone intended)