Higher Education or Brainwashing?

According to the University of Delaware, I'm a racist. If you're white, so are you. Don't bother trying to argue otherwise, you're a racist. We're so racist that we invented racism, and no one but us can be racist.

All dorm students are required to attend the brainwashing sessions, and "treatment" is available for those wishing to be further brainwashed, so that they may hate the white race as much as the multiculturalists do.

Apparently Sistah Souljah rides again.

-------------------------------------
University to students: 'All whites are racist'
Mandatory program 'treats' politically incorrect attitudes
Posted: October 30, 2007
9:35 p.m. Eastern
By Bob Unruh
©2007 WorldNetDaily.com

A mandatory University of Delaware program requires residence hall students to acknowledge that "all whites are racist" and offers them "treatment" for any incorrect attitudes regarding class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality they might hold upon entering the school, according to a civil rights group.

"Somehow, the University of Delaware seems terrifyingly unaware that a state-sponsored institution of higher education in the United States does not have the legal right to engage in a program of systematic thought reform. The First Amendment protects the right to freedom of conscience – the right to keep our innermost thoughts free from governmental intrusion. It also protects the right to be free from compelled speech," said a letter from Samantha Harris, director of legal and public advocacy for The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education to university President Patrick Harker.

The organization cited excerpts from the university's Office of Residence Life Diversity Education Training documents, including the statement:

"A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. 'The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination….'"

The education program also notes that "reverse racism" is "a term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege." And "a non-racist" is called "a non-term," because, the program explains, "The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift the responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called 'blaming the victim')."

The "education" regarding racism is just one of the subjects that students are required to adopt as part of their University of Delaware experience, too, FIRE noted.

The "shocking program of ideological reeducation," which the school itself defines as a "treatment" for students' incorrect attitudes and beliefs, is nothing less than "Orwellian," FIRE said.

The school requires its approximately 7,000 residence hall students "to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy and environmentalism."

"FIRE is calling for the total dismantling of the program, which is a flagrant violation of students' rights to freedom of conscience and freedom from compelled speech," the organization said.

On a foundation blog, a student noted that one residence assistant told students, "Not to scare anyone or anything, but these are MANDATORY!!" And the training program for those who indoctrinate students includes the order: "A researcher must document that the treatment/intervention was faithfully applied (ex: specific lesson plans were delivered to every student, etc.)."

Further, the school requires "a systemic change" as a result of the program, FIRE noted. As one RA told students: "Like it or not, you all are the future Leaders, and the world is Diverse, so learning to Embrace and Appreciate that diversity is ESSENTIAL."

"The University of Delaware's residence life education program is a grave intrusion into students' private beliefs," FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. "The university has decided that it is not enough to expose its students to the values it considers important; instead, it must coerce its students into accepting those values as their own. At a public university like Delaware, this is both unconscionable and unconstitutional."

According to university materials, RAs are instructed to ask students during one-on-one sessions questions such as: "When did you discover your sexual identity?" "When were you first made aware of your race?" and "Who taught you a lesson in regard to some sort of diversity awarness? What was the lesson?"

"Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RA's 'worst' one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having 'diversity shoved down her throat,'" FIRE said.

This particular student responded to the question, "When did you discover your sexual identity?" with the terse: "That is none of your damn business," FIRE said.

Requirements for students include: "Students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society," "Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression," and "Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality," FIRE said.

The foundation said students even are "pressured or even required" to make social statements that meet with the school's approval.

"The fact that the university views its students as patients in need of treatment for some sort of moral sickness betrays a total lack of respect not only for students' basic rights, but for students themselves," Lukianoff said. "The University of Delaware has both a legal and a moral obligation to immediately dismantle this program, and FIRE will not rest until it has."

A spokesman for the school, contacted by WND, said he was not ready to make a statement about the situation right away.

But the foundation's letter to Harker noted, "we have never encountered a more systematic assault upon the individual liberty, dignity, privacy, and autonomy of university students than this program," which "requires students to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues."

"Such utter contempt for the autonomy and free agency of others is the hallmark of totalitarianism and has no place in any free society, let alone at a public university in the state of Delaware," the letter said.

Especially alarming, Harris told WND, is that the school defines learning specifically as "attitudinal or behavioral changes," not acquiring any sort of knowledge and ability.

Such thinking "represents a distorted idea of 'education' that one would more easily associate with a Soviet prison camp than with an American institution of higher education," FIRE said. "As another example, after an investigation showed that males demonstrated 'a higher degree of resistance to educational efforts,' the Rodney complex chose to hire 'strong male RAs.' Each such RA 'combats male residents' concepts of traditional male identity,' in order to 'ensure the delivery of the curriculum at the same level as in the female floors.' This language is disturbingly reminiscent of a pivotal scene from George Orwell's '1984,' in which the protagonist's captors tell him that 'The Party is not interested in the overt act: the thought is all we care about. We do not merely destroy our enemies, we change them.'"

No small danger, FIRE noted, is being presented to the university through such apparent constitutional violations. "Simply put, the residence life education program is a legal minefield," the group said.

One student reacted to the indoctrination with rebellion. On the FIRE blog, he wrote:

"Take the issue of homosexuality, and the rights that should or should not be associated with it. As a Christian, I believe that the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, and is a sin against God. As such, I cannot accept it as a legitimate lifestyle. While I accept homosexuals as people, I do not accept their choice as right, and subsequently I do not think that homosexual couples should be given marital rights. I accept that others do not hold the same views as me. But it is wrong that under the Residence Life curriculum and school mandated curriculum that I should made to feel guilty for my views. … It is not the school's right to try to convince me to embrace the values that Residence Life has chosen. Essentially, if I do not change my views, I will be labeled by my RA as not embracing diversity, and not accepting of certain groups, and thus my RA will try all the harder to change me. This is not the school's job, or right."

Source: WorldNetDaily.com

Jena Myths Exploded

The Jena 6 boat is sinking fast. The flood of facts is swamping the ship of lies, and it's heading to the bottom to join Tawana Brawley and the Duke Rape Case in the Davey Jones Locker of false accusations, racial fraud, and outright lies against Whites.

The truth makes a powerful torpedo.
____________________________________

Christian Science Monitor

October 24, 2007 edition

Media myths about the Jena 6
A local journalist tells the story you haven't heard.
By Craig Franklin

Jena, La.
By now, almost everyone in America has heard of Jena, La., because they've all heard the story of the "Jena 6." White students hanging nooses barely punished, a schoolyard fight, excessive punishment for the six black attackers, racist local officials, public outrage and protests – the outside media made sure everyone knew the basics.

There's just one problem: The media got most of the basics wrong. In fact, I have never before witnessed such a disgrace in professional journalism. Myths replaced facts, and journalists abdicated their solemn duty to investigate every claim because they were seduced by a powerfully appealing but false narrative of racial injustice.

I should know. I live in Jena. My wife has taught at Jena High School for many years. And most important, I am probably the only reporter who has covered these events from the very beginning.

The reason the Jena cases have been propelled into the world spotlight is two-fold: First, because local officials did not speak publicly early on about the true events of the past year, the media simply formed their stories based on one-side's statements – the Jena 6. Second, the media were downright lazy in their efforts to find the truth. Often, they simply reported what they'd read on blogs, which expressed only one side of the issue.

The real story of Jena and the Jena 6 is quite different from what the national media presented.

It's time to set the record straight.

Myth 1: The Whites-Only Tree. There has never been a "whites-only" tree at Jena High School. Students of all races sat underneath this tree. When a student asked during an assembly at the start of school last year if anyone could sit under the tree, it evoked laughter from everyone present – blacks and whites. As reported by students in the assembly, the question was asked to make a joke and to drag out the assembly and avoid class.

Myth 2: Nooses a Signal to Black Students. An investigation by school officials, police, and an FBI agent revealed the true motivation behind the placing of two nooses in the tree the day after the assembly. According to the expulsion committee, the crudely constructed nooses were not aimed at black students. Instead, they were understood to be a prank by three white students aimed at their fellow white friends, members of the school rodeo team. (The students apparently got the idea from watching episodes of "Lonesome Dove.") The committee further concluded that the three young teens had no knowledge that nooses symbolize the terrible legacy of the lynchings of countless blacks in American history. When informed of this history by school officials, they became visibly remorseful because they had many black friends. Another myth concerns their punishment, which was not a three-day suspension, but rather nine days at an alternative facility followed by two weeks of in-school suspension, Saturday detentions, attendance at Discipline Court, and evaluation by licensed mental-health professionals. The students who hung the nooses have not publicly come forward to give their version of events.

Myth 3: Nooses Were a Hate Crime. Although many believe the three white students should have been prosecuted for a hate crime for hanging the nooses, the incident did not meet the legal criteria for a federal hate crime. It also did not meet the standard for Louisiana's hate-crime statute, and though widely condemned by all officials, there was no crime to charge the youths with.

Myth 4: DA's Threat to Black Students. When District Attorney Reed Walters spoke to Jena High students at an assembly in September, he did not tell black students that he could make their life miserable with "the stroke of a pen." Instead, according to Walters, "two or three girls, white girls, were chit-chatting on their cellphones or playing with their cellphones right in the middle of my dissertation. I got a little irritated at them and said, 'Pay attention to me. I am right now having to deal with an aggravated rape case where I've got to decide whether the death penalty applies or not.' I said, 'Look, I can be your best friend or your worst enemy. With the stroke of a pen I can make your life miserable so I want you to call me before you do something stupid.'"

Mr. Walters had been called to the assembly by police, who had been at the school earlier that day dealing with some students who were causing disturbances. Teachers and students have confirmed Walters's version of events.

Myth 5: The Fair Barn Party Incident. On Dec. 1, 2006, a private party – not an all-white party as reported – was held at the local community center called the Fair Barn. Robert Bailey Jr., soon to be one of the Jena 6, came to the party with others seeking admittance.

When they were denied entrance by the renter of the facility, a white male named Justin Sloan (not a Jena High student) at the party attacked Bailey and hit him in the face with his fist. This is reported in witness statements to police, including the victim, Robert Bailey, Jr.

Months later, Bailey contended he was hit in the head with a beer bottle and required stitches.

No medical records show this ever occurred. Mr. Sloan was prosecuted for simple battery, which according to Louisiana law, is the proper charge for hitting someone with a fist.

Myth 6: The "Gotta-Go" Grocery Incident. On Dec. 2, 2006, Bailey and two other black Jena High students were involved in an altercation at this local convenience store, stemming from the incident that occurred the night before. The three were accused by police of jumping a white man as he entered the store and stealing a shotgun from him. The two parties gave conflicting statements to police. However, two unrelated eye witnesses of the event gave statements that corresponded with that of the white male.

Myth 7: The Schoolyard Fight. The event on Dec. 4, 2006 was consistently labeled a "schoolyard fight." But witnesses described something much more horrific. Several black students, including those now known as the Jena 6, barricaded an exit to the school's gym as they lay in wait for Justin Barker to exit. (It remains unclear why Mr. Barker was specifically targeted.)

When Barker tried to leave through another exit, court testimony indicates, he was hit from behind by Mychal Bell. Multiple witnesses confirmed that Barker was immediately knocked unconscious and lay on the floor defenseless as several other black students joined together to kick and stomp him, with most of the blows striking his head. Police speculate that the motivation for the attack was related to the racially charged fights that had occurred during the previous weekend.

Myth 8: The Attack Is Linked to the Nooses. Nowhere in any of the evidence, including statements by witnesses and defendants, is there any reference to the noose incident that occurred three months prior. This was confirmed by the United States attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, Donald Washington, on numerous occasions.

Myth 9: Mychal Bell's All-White Jury. While it is true that Mychal Bell was convicted as an adult by an all-white jury in June (a conviction that was later overturned with his case sent to juvenile court), the jury selection process was completely legal and withstood an investigation by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. Court officials insist that several black residents were summoned for jury duty, but did not appear.

Myth 10: Jena 6 as Model Youth. While some members were simply caught up in the moment, others had criminal records. Bell had at least four prior violent-crime arrests before the December attack, and was on probation during most of this year.

Myth 11: Jena Is One of the Most Racist Towns in America. Actually, Jena is a wonderful place to live for both whites and blacks. The media's distortion and outright lies concerning the case have given this rural Louisiana town a label it doesn't deserve.

Myth 12: Two Levels of Justice. Outside protesters were convinced that the prosecution of the Jena 6 was proof of a racially biased system of justice. But the US Justice Department's investigation found no evidence to support such a claim. In fact, the percentage of blacks and whites prosecuted matches the parish's population statistics.

These are just 12 of many myths that are portrayed as fact in the media concerning the Jena cases. (A more thorough review of all events can be found at http://www.thejenatimes.net/ – click on Chronological Order of Events.)

As with the Duke Lacrosse case, the truth about Jena will eventually be known. But the town of Jena isn't expecting any apologies from the media. They will probably never admit their error and have already moved on to the next "big" story. Meanwhile in Jena, residents are getting back to their regular routines, where friends are friends regardless of race. Just as it has been all along.

Craig Franklin is assistant editor of The Jena Times.

Dream Act Goes Down in Flames

Falling short of the 60 votes needed to force cloture, the disatrous "Dream Act" thankfully went down to defeat. When are the Neocons in the White House and the Progressives in Congress going to get it through their heads that WE THE PEOPLE aren't going to stand for them giving special perks and privileges to aliens who are not in this Country legally?

Anyone who is not here legally needs to get out of the United States, and those who are trying to force the American people to swallow their shamnesty plans need to either be impeached or tried for treason.

Readers, be vigilant. Those wishing to sell our sovereignty and security for a burrito aren't going to give up- this bill (or some form of it) will rear it's ugly head again and again and again.

Gutless Republicans voting for Cloture:
Brownback (thank God this idiot dropped out of the Presidential race)
Coleman
Collins
Craig (Guess he wasn't in the bathroom when the vote was taken)
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchinson (not surprised a neocon from Bush's home state voted for Cloture)
Martinez (don't blame me, I didn't vote for this idiot)
Snowe

Hat's Off to the following Democrats for siding with the American people:
Baucus
Byrd
Conrad
Dorgan
Landrieu
McCaskille
Tester

And of course the gutless Presidential wannabe from Arizona- John MCain- did not vote, nor did Tequila Ted Kennedy.

And of course, now all the pro-illegal Senators are on TV whining about how mean-spirited we are. But I say, score another one for the good guys.

I'm sure there's great sadness in the campaigns of the GOP's pro-shamnesty Presidential candidates- McCain, Giuliani, and Huckabee. Ain't that a shame.

Bye Bye Brownback

Shamnesty Sam Brownback has dropped out of the race for the GOP nomination. As I posted on Wednesday (Brownback's Last Gasp), the final nail in his coffin was proposing the US "apologize" for slavery and segregation... I guess he was trying to garner the endorsement of Jackson, Sharpton, and Calypso Louie Farrakhan... I guess it didn't work.

Try to Kill A White Kid...

and get on TV!

That's right, Black Entertainment Television (BET) rewarded two of the infamous Jena 6 for the beatdown they administered to a white teenager by bringing them onstage at the BET Hip Hop Awards last night. How did the audience respond? With a standing ovation, of course!

This would never happen on White Entertainment Television... oh wait, there is no White Entertainment Television. That would be racist to have a network aimed at one particular ethnicity- of couse, that only applies to White folks.
___________________________

Two of 'Jena Six' defendants present BET award
By Abbey Brown
abrown@thetowntalk.com
(318) 487-6387

Two of the teens enmeshed in the nationally known "Jena Six" case helped present the most anticipated award during Black Entertainment Television's Hip Hop Awards show broadcast Thursday night.

Carwin Jones and Bryant Purvis were introduced by Katt Williams, a comedian and the awards show's host, as two of the students involved in a case of "systematic racism."

"By no means are we condoning a six-on-one beat-down," Williams said during his introduction of the teens, one of whom is still facing attempted murder charges in connection with the attack on white student Justin Barker. "... But the injustice perpetrated on these young men is straight criminal."

As Jones and Purvis walked onto the stage at the Atlanta Civic Center, where the awards show was filmed on Saturday, they were greeted by a standing ovation.
"They don't look so tough, do they?" Williams joked as the teens stepped up to the podium.

Both Jones and Purvis thanked a number of people, including family, friends, the "Hip-Hop Nation" and the thousands who came to their small hometown to rally behind their case.

Purvis said the Sept. 20 rally proved "our generation can unite and rally around a cause."

The teens assisted Williams in presenting the Video of the Year honor to Kanye West for "Stronger." Purvis handed the award to West, who in turn shook hands with both teens.

The rest of the article can be read at TheTownTalk.com.

Catholic Professor Says Archbishop was Right

A Jesuit Professor defended the actions of Archbishop Niederauer by stating that he behaved properly in serving the Eucharist to two transvestites dressed as nuns. In other words, I was right- it was no accident. So to all of you who sent me nasty emails, and you all and O'Reilly can spin things any way you want, but that won't change the facts. The pro-gay Archbishop knew exactly what he was doing.

I've italicized the pertinent portions below, but posted the entire article because it shows that many in the Catholic laity have drank the poison of the post-Vatican II Catholic Church. Apparently, they don't know their Archbishop very well, do they?
________________________________
From this morning's San Francisco Chronicle:

Archbishop apologizes for giving Communion to gays dressed as nuns
Julian Guthrie, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 17, 2007

(10-16) 21:58 PDT San Francisco -- It was a typical Sunday Mass until two men in heavy makeup and nuns' habits received Holy Communion from San Francisco's top Catholic official.

On Oct. 7, Archbishop George Niederauer delivered the Eucharist to members of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence - an activist group whose motto is "go forth and sin some more" - prompting cries of outrage from conservatives across the country and Catholics in San Francisco.

In response to a request for comment, Niederauer released a letter of apology addressed to "Catholics of the Archdiocese of San Francisco and to Catholics at large" in which he said he did not realize his mistake until after the Mass at Most Holy Redeemer Church in the Castro district.

"At Communion time, toward the end of the line, two strangely dressed persons came to receive Communion," Niederauer wrote. "As I recall, one of them wore a large flowered hat or garland."

Niederauer said that although he was familiar with the group because its actions had been condemned by his predecessors, he had never encountered any of the group's members until that Sunday.

"These two people have long made a practice of mocking the Catholic Church in general and religious women in particular. Someone who dresses in a mock religious habit to attend Mass does so to make a point (that) was intended as a provocative gesture," he said in the letter, which will be published in this Friday's issue of Catholic San Francisco, a diocesan newspaper.

The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, founded in San Francisco in 1979, are known for their white face paint, outrageous costumes, theatrics and support of the gay community. They adopt names such as Sister Chastity Boner and Sister Constance Craving of the Holey Desire and have mottos such as, "It is not wise to say no to free drinks, cheap jewelry, discount cosmetics or pretty boys."

Sister Barbi Mitzvah, who serves as "Board Chairnun" and "Sexytary," said Tuesday that the group is "not offering a comment.

"These people are always after us," Sister Mitzvah said, referring to conservative pundits and Catholic leaders.

The group did not identify the two members who took the wafers. One of the men, however, sent an e-mail to the church after the Mass and gave the name "Sister Delta Goodhand."

Conservative Fox news commentator Bill O'Reilly, who has disparaged "San Francisco values," called the latest flap another example of how the city is run by "far-left secular progressives who despise the military, traditional values and religion."

On his Friday news show, O'Reilly called San Francisco "a disgrace on every level."

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom dismissed O'Reilly's comments.

"This debate really is about San Francisco values. The Bill O'Reillys of the world are threatened by San Francisco because we value diversity, universal health care and civil rights for all. They will exploit any controversy to attack our values."

Some local Catholics, however, said they were hurt by what they said was a mockery of their most holy ritual.

"It's been all the news in Catholic circles," said Bill May, chairman of the San Francisco-based Catholics for the Common Good. "Catholics are hurt, frustrated and a bit angry because nobody is standing up and saying this is not right. This is a desecration of the Eucharist. They were there to make a statement and embarrass the archbishop and, in doing so, they desecrated what is most sacred and dear to every Catholic in the world."

Holy Communion is a centuries-old tradition in which the celebrant receives from a priest the consecrated bread and wine representing the "Body of Christ" and the "Blood of Christ." It is to be taken reverentially, as it is considered the source of Christian life.

"The general sacramental principle is that you don't deny the sacrament to someone who requests it," said the Rev. Jim Bretzke, professor of moral theology at University of San Francisco, a Jesuit Catholic university. "The second principle is that you cannot give communion to someone who has been excommunicated."

He said such people are designated "manifest public sinners" in canon law.

"This is someone who violates in a serious way one of the Ten Commandments or one of the important laws of the Church," he said. "While I can see Bill O'Reilly and others might be offended, the sisters do not meet the criteria the church has for denying Communion. Over-accessorizing and poor taste in makeup is not an excommunicable offense."

Bretzke added, "Even if these people were bizarrely dressed, the archbishop was following clear pastoral and canonical principles in giving them Communion. The default is, you give Holy Communion to one who presents himself."

Matt Dorsey, who works in the city attorney's office and is a parishioner at Most Holy Redeemer, attended the Oct. 7 Mass. He said the service was held on the day of the Castro Street Fair, so many parishioners were casually dressed.

"The Sisters have done a lot of great work for social justice," Dorsey said. "I think it's deeply offensive to see this incident politicized this way. It's not about religion. It's about the culture war."

On a lighter note, he said he couldn't help but notice the Sisters as soon as they entered the sanctuary.

"I was there in jeans and T-shirt," he said. "I have to give the Sisters credit for taking far more time getting ready than I did."

Dorsey said he was impressed by an e-mail sent to the general mailbox of Most Holy Redeemer after the Mass.

Sister Delta Goodhand, one of the two who received communion from Niederauer, wrote: "Just a quick note to recognize the wonderful mass yesterday at your Church. Your entire congregation was so welcoming and it was great to be able to participate. You are a wonderfully inclusive Church."

O'Reilly Defends San Fran Archbishop

Before proceeding, let me tell you all that I am not a Catholic, and please forgive the length of this post, but the spin job provided by Bill "no spin zone" O'Reilly in defending a pro-gay bishop requires this lengthy rebuttal.

That disclosure being out of the way, Bill O'Reilly's defense of Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco is one of the most ridiculous spin jobs I have ever come across. The apparently blind Archbishop served the Eucharist to two outlandishly attired transvestites, and Pope Bill granted him absolution, placing all the blame for the communion fiasco on the crossdressers.

I'm going to insert O'Reilly's "Talking Points" memo from Friday, October 12th, here- in it's entirety, so that I can't be accused of taking anything out of context. More of my diatribe will continue afterwards.
__________________________________
From Fox News:

Another Unbelievable Outrage in San Francisco
Monday , October 15, 2007

By Bill O'Reilly

Another outrage in San Francisco and this one is very hard to believe. As you may know, San Francisco is run by far left secular-progressives who despise the military, traditional values and religion. Not everybody in San Francisco feels that way, but certainly the power structure does. Time and again, we have brought you stories of outrageous behavior on the part of militant people living in that city.

Now, things have reached critical mass, no pun intended. Last Sunday, at the Catholic Church of the Most Holy Redeemer, Archbishop George Niederauer was celebrating mass. As part of that ritual, holy communion is given to Catholics by the celebrants. Two gay militants in bizarre dress took communion from the archbishop in an attempt to mock the mass and the man. — The people who did this are members of a militant homosexual group that runs around San Francisco dressed as nuns.

All city officials are aware of the group because in the past they have publicly demeaned Christianity. The Mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, has refused to comment.

The District Attorney, Kamala Harris, says she is waiting for a complaint to be filed.

The Catholic Church says it will do its own investigation and doesn't want the police involved at this point. The archbishop has apologized, saying he's embarrassed and sorry he gave communion to people committing sacrilege.

But it really is not the archbishop's fault. — He is an elderly man who was taken by surprise. The fault here lies with the leadership of San Francisco. Mayor Newsom has consistently avoided criticizing behavior that is harmful. He hides under his desk and attacks messengers like me:

VOICE OF GAVIN NEWSOM (D), MAYOR, SAN FRANCISCO: Guys like Bill O'Reilly attack this city and use it as a way to attack Nancy Pelosi and "San Francisco values", it makes me sick to my stomach. How dare you attack this city because of a few exceptions, not the rule, in terms of where our elected officials are with relationship to the military.

Now that comment came after I criticized Newsom for refusing to allow the Marines to film a commercial on city streets. By the way, the comment had nothing to do with Nancy Pelosi.

Again, we've invited Mayor Newsom on the program, we've asked for a statement about the Catholic situation but the mayor is consistent. He condones terrible behavior by refusing to confront it.

Incredibly, the San Francisco media has blacked out the story, refused to report it; with the exception of KNEW Radio. If a mosque had been attacked like this, if a synagogue had been defiled, this would have been page one not only in the San Francisco Chronicle but in every liberal newspaper in the country. Instead, there is no reporting on a violation of a church service by those militants.

"Talking Points" believes all Americans should take a very hard look at what is happening in San Francisco. Certainly the 65 million American Catholics should be deeply offended by the city's behavior.

Enough is enough. Desecrating a Catholic Mass or any other religious service is unacceptable in the United States of America.

And that's "The Memo."
_____________________________________
Ok, back to me again. There you have O'Reilly's insane defense- it's all the fault of the gays and secular progressives in San Francisco... the poor Archbishop was hoodwinked- Bill flat-out states it was "not the Archbishop's fault."

What the Archbishop did was no accident, and O'Reilly should certainly have done his homework before opening his mouth to defend him. For proof I offer the following article which clearly demonstrates Niederauer tolerance and acceptance of gays- even gays in the clergy.

O'Reilly, if you're going to masquerade as a "culture warrior," you better realize that the Catholic leadership in San Francisco is every bit as "socially progressive" as Newsom and the other political leaders.

___________________________________
From The San Francisco Chronicle, December 16, 2005:

A NEW ARCHBISHOP FOR S.F.: VIEWS
Tolerant statements toward gays
Homosexuals can minister as priests, Niederauer says
Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, December 16, 2005

San Francisco's incoming Catholic archbishop, George Niederauer, has spoken boldly in support of gay priests and has praised gay parishioners, leaders of gay Catholic organizations said Thursday.

Many in the church hierarchy have blamed the international clergy sex abuse scandal on gay priests, and the Vatican's recent instruction on gays in the priesthood stated new rules on gay clergy were "made more urgent by the current situation."

Niederauer disputed those ideas in an interview with his diocesan newspaper in Utah.

"Some who are seriously mistaken have named sexual orientation as the cause of the recent scandal regarding the sexual abuse of minors by priests," Niederauer said in the interview with the Intermountain Catholic News, which was published Monday.

His reference to "sexual orientation" stands in contrast to the Vatican instruction's description of "persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies."

Niederauer said gay men committed to Christ and the church can effectively minister as priests, and he said sexual orientation was "a structure of human personality." In contrast, the Vatican instruction states that men "who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called 'gay culture' " are unfit for priesthood.

"I don't think there are any ifs, ands or buts that the Vatican is trying to blame the sex abuse crisis on gay priests, and this man says that is 'seriously mistaken,' " said Sam Sinnett, national president of DignityUSA, an organization in Washington, D.C., of gay and lesbian Catholics.

"Very few bishops have come out and said clearly that this is not about sexual orientation," Sinnett said. He added that, if the statements reflected the bishop's thinking, his appointment in San Francisco would be "more than a small step forward for gay and lesbian Catholics."

As archbishop, Niederauer will have a central role in determining who is ordained in San Francisco, Marin and San Mateo, the counties included in the San Francisco diocese.

In 10 years as bishop of the Diocese of Salt Lake City, Niederauer rarely had to address gay and lesbian issues in the church. DignityUSA, which has chapters in 24 states, isn't active in Utah.

In 2004, however, Niederauer publicly opposed a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage that appeared on the Utah state ballot, even though he opposed same-sex marriage.

Many Protestant leaders and the powerful Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints supported the ban. But Niederauer said he was troubled that the amendment banned any union beside marriage. He also saw the ban as unnecessary because same-sex marriages already were prohibited by Utah law.

Niederauer also helped form the "Coalition of Concerned Religious Leaders," a group of Utah clergy who urged tolerance for gays and lesbians after the state legislature in 1996 banned gay student clubs when students at one school expressed interest in starting such a club.

Before he was assigned to Utah, Niederauer spent his career in Southern California, including a stint at a parish in West Hollywood, which has a large gay population. In a 2003 interview with the (Salt Lake City) Deseret News about his work in West Hollywood, he was enthusiastic.

"I don't have to take a back seat to anyone in the church in my admiration for the people I met," Niederauer said. He added, "They were as wonderful and gifted and generous and compassionate as any you meet."

Francis DeBernardo, who leads New Ways Ministry, a national advocacy group for gay and lesbian Catholics, and met with Niederauer in Salt Lake City, said the bishop was genuinely interested in reaching out to the gay and lesbian community.

"With his pastoral experience in an overwhelmingly gay Catholic parish in West Hollywood, and his political experience dealing with extremism from anti-gay forces in Utah, I think that Bishop Niederauer is one of the best candidates to lead the heavily gay-populated Catholic community of San Francisco," DeBernardo said.

Niederauer's predecessor, Archbishop William Levada, received mixed reviews from gay and lesbian Catholics. Levada spoke several times at the Most Holy Redeemer Church, a largely gay parish in San Francisco's Castro neighborhood, and appointed gays and lesbians to important positions in the diocese.

But on Levada's watch, the diocese stopped its ministry specifically for gay and lesbian Catholics and left that work to local parishes, said the Rev. Jim Schexnayder, who founded the Berkeley-based National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries. Schexnayder said he hoped Niederauer would revive that ministry.

"There's a great need obviously in San Francisco, with so many gay and lesbian Catholics who would greatly benefit from a public pastoral outreach," Schexnayder said.
__________________________
There you have it. The gay community in SF was thrilled when Niederauer was appointed to replace Levada, and now you know why.

So much for the "no spin" zone, eh, Bill? Guess the spin started with you- but the spin stops here.

Mind Control in California

For the last couple years, GOP-types have been talking about amending the Constitution to allow Schwarzenegger to run for President. After reading the following article, if you're a Republican and would even consider voting for this guy to be President, you're dumber than a fence post.

This is political correctness gone to seed. Like the article says, if you're a parent in California, the State doesn't care what your values are. If this was happening anywhere else in the world, it would be called brainwashing (or at least forced indoctrination). Progressives are trying to convince you that the State is God, and knows far better what's good for your kids than you do.

_____________________________________________________________

From WorldNetDaily.com:

'Mom' and 'Dad' banished by California
Schwarzenegger signs law banning anything perceived as negative to 'gays'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 13, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.

"We are shocked and appalled that the governor has blatantly attacked traditional family values in California," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.

"With this decision, Gov. Schwarzenegger has told parents that their values are irrelevant. Many parents will have no choice but to pull their children out of the public schools that have now become sexualized indoctrination centers."

"Arnold Schwarzenegger has delivered young children into the hands of those who will introduce them to alternative sexual lifestyles," said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, which worked to defeat the plans. "This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms.

"Shame on Schwarzenegger and the Democrat politicians for ensuring that every California school becomes a homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination center," he said.

Analysts have warned that schools across the nation will be impacted by the decision, since textbook publishers must cater to their largest purchaser, which often is California, and they will be unlikely to go to the expense of having a separate edition for other states.

The bills signed by Schwarzenegger include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices.

There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.

"SB 777 will result in reverse discrimination against students with religious and traditional family values," said Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Institute. "These students have lost their voice as the direct result of Gov. Schwarzenegger's unbelievable decision. The terms 'mom and dad' or 'husband and wife' could promote discrimination against homosexuals if a same-sex couple is not also featured.

"Parents want the assurance that when their children go to school they will learn the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic – not social indoctrination regarding alternative sexual lifestyles. Now that SB777 is law, schools will in fact become indoctrination centers for sexual experimentation," she said.

Also signed was AB394, which targets parents and teachers for such indoctrination through "anti-harassment" training, CCF said.

Schwarzenegger had vetoed almost identical provisions a year ago, saying existing state law already provided for penalties for discrimination.

"We had hoped that the governor would once again veto this outrageous legislation but he obviously decided to side with the out-of-touch extremists that control the legislature. This law does not reflect the true values of the average Californian," said England. "True leadership means standing up for what is true and right."

Thomasson said SB777 prohibits any "instruction" or school-sponsored "activity" that "promotes a discriminatory bias" against "gender" – the bill's definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes – as well as "sexual orientation."

"Because no textbook or instruction in California public schools currently disparages transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality, the practical effect of SB777 will be to require positive portrayals of these sexual lifestyles at every government-operated school," CCF noted.

Offenders will face the wrath of the state Department of Education, up to and including lawsuits.

CCF noted that now on a banned list will be any text, reference or teaching aid that portrays marriage as only between a man and woman, materials that say people are born male or female (and not in between), sources that fail to include a variety of transsexual, bisexual and homosexual historical figures, and sex education materials that fail to offer the option of sex changes.

Further, homecoming kings now can be either male or female – as can homecoming queens, and students, whether male or female, must be allowed to use the restroom and locker room corresponding to the sex with which they choose to identify.

AB394 promotes the same issues through state-funded publications, postings, curricula and handouts to students, parents and teachers.

It also creates the circumstances where a parent who says marriage is only for a man and a woman in the presence of a lesbian teacher could be convicted of "harassment," and a student who believes people are born either male or female could be reported as a "harasser" by a male teacher who wears women's clothes, CCF said.

Thomasson said Schwarzenegger also signed AB14, which prohibits state funding for any program that does not support a range of alternative sexual practices, including state-funded social services run by churches.

Affected will be day cares, preschool or after-school programs, food and housing programs, senior services, anti-gang efforts, jobs programs and others.

Thomasson said it also forces every hospital in California – even private, religious hospitals – to adopt policies in support of transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality and opens up nonprofit organizations to lawsuits if they exclude members that engage in homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual conduct.

"It's the height of intolerance to punish individuals, organizations, businesses, and churches that have moral standards on sexual conduct and sexual lifestyles," said Thomasson, in response to the signing of AB14. "This is another insensitive law that violates people's moral boundaries."

The vitriol over the issue rose to new levels in its latest campaign.

As WND reported, a board member for the homosexual advocacy group Equality California verbally attacked and threatened CRI for its opposition to the bill earlier.

The board member sent an e-mail and video to CRI threatening the group would be buried if it continued efforts opposing the homosexual advocacy.

"The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance," said England. "Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools."

She also cited an informational document published by the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center that already is lobbying for special treatment in the school system.

"If you want to use a restroom that matches your gender identity … you should be allowed to do so," it advises. "Whenever students are divided up into boys and girls, you should be allowed to join the group or participate in the program that matches your gender identity as much as possible."

Further, the groups advise, "If you change your name to one that better matches your gender identity, a school needs to use that name to refer to you." The advocacy group also warns schools against bringing parents into any such discussion with students.

WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators, including leaders in California, have taken it upon themselves to promote a homosexual lifestyle to children under their charge.

WND reported California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, under whose supervision hundreds of thousands of children are being educated, has used his state position and taxpayer-funded stationery to praise a "gay" pride event used in the past to expose children to sexually explicit activities.

That drew vehement objections from several educators, including Priscilla Schreiber, the president of the Grossmont Unified High School District governing board.

"I am outraged that a person in this high-ranking elected position would advocate an event where diversity is not just being celebrated but where pornography and indecent exposure is being perpetrated on the young and innocent children of our communities," she said.

Resegregating the Public Schools- An Idea Whose Time Has Come?

I was amazed to read the following in the ultra-left St. Pete Times, and you might be amazed that the editorial was written by a black man.
_______________________

School integration is not the answer
By BILL MAXWELL
Published October 11, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several years ago, I ran into then-Pinellas School superintendent Howard Hinesley at the concession stand during a local high school football game. We had a moment of small talk but soon got around to the potential "resegregation impact" of the district's ambitious school choice plan.

As we walked back to our seats, I asked the superintendent to tell me what he saw in the bleachers. He quickly saw what I was getting at: The overwhelming majority of the hundreds of students in the stands, along with their parents, were segregated along racial and ethnic lines.

Whites sat together in groups, and blacks sat together in groups. It was a virtual Balkans in the bleachers.

My point to the superintendent was that he and his teachers and administrators could not do what society at large does not do: force people, in their natural state, to associate with people with whom they prefer not to associate.

In other words, people in those bleachers had naturally chosen to be with others with whom they had a lot in common - with whom they felt most comfortable. The self-segregation that Hinesley and I witnessed was the most natural thing people do. Yet, we mandate that our public schools re-engineer the very self-segregation we practice in our daily lives away from our schoolhouses.

Look around. Our housing is mostly segregated along racial lines. Eleven o'clock, in church, on Sunday morning remains the most segregated hour of the week. Black kids hang out primarily with other black kids at our malls. White kids hang out with white kids. Interracial marriages still raise eyebrows. And, yes, even in our public schools, you almost always will see white and black kids sitting at separate tables in the lunchrooms.

Still, we have placed the unfair burden of societal change on our public schools. I understand the inclination. In theory, we view the classroom - the academy - as a place of enlightenment.

It is where intelligent and ethical scholars teach and demonstrate the core principles, such as justice and equality, that make our democracy special in the world. It is the place where civility is praised as a virtue and is not mocked as a character flaw. It is a place where future scholars, practitioners and public servants are born.

For these and other admirable reasons, we invest untold amounts of tangible and intangible resources into efforts to prevent our public schools from resegregating. We continue to implement magnet programs, choice plans, majority-minority transfer schemes and other well-intentioned strategies to stop "white flight" and black saturation.

As a democracy, we instinctively, albeit uncomfortably, believe in racial integration in our schools. And for a long time, many of us believed that busing was the way to integrate and that integration was the panacea for a just, peaceful and educated America.

Now, four decades later, we should acknowledge that when court orders requiring desegregation are lifted and we are left to our own devices, we naturally resegregate.

In Pinellas, many blacks, especially NAACP members, reject the proposed student assignment plan that permits students to attend neighborhood schools. A real fear is that whites naturally will attend schools nearest to their homes, and blacks will do the same, making some schools majority white and others majority black.

Black opponents of the new plan believe that majority black schools will lose out on resources across the board, including teacher and staff quality. Their fear may be well-founded. I suspect, however, that a fundamental, more troublesome fear is at work: Too many blacks believe that for their children to learn effectively, they must be in class with white children. To them, racial integration is the only way for their children to learn, never realizing that they are indicting themselves as failed, nonessential players in their children's intellectual lives. In other words, integration has become the surrogate parent for some.

White liberals who see integration as a moral obligation argue that school integration gives white children the opportunity to be in the presence of black children, a relationship that gives the races a chance to learn about each other. The end result, such whites believe, should be that black children will become smart, and white children will become smart and U.S. society will become better for everyone.

Perhaps they are right. I do not know. What I do know is this: School integration has not benefited black children as positively as it has children of other races and ethnicities. When we speak of the achievement gap, we are referring to black children. Integration is not closing the gap and will not close the gap without exceptional effort on the part of blacks.

A school is as good as the students who attend, as good as the parents who send their children to school, as effective as the teachers who teach the children, as efficient as the principal who runs the place. A mostly black or all-black school can be as good as its white counterpart. That said, parents should have the right to send their children to a majority black or a majority white school for the best education.

As the product of an all-black, Jim Crow era school in a small town, I am convinced, however, that racial integration is not necessary for a high-quality public school education. If the school district would sign an agreement guaranteeing equal resources in majority black schools, black parents should have no reason to demand integration.

Evidence tells me that integration, which we have had for nearly a half century, has not rescued most black children from the behaviors and culture that trap them in the cycle of failure. We need to try something different.

Tancredo Tears into Border Mayors

I'm supporting Ron Paul, but there's a lot I like about Tom Tancredo. He's been out front on the illegal immigration issue, and I respect him for that.

It is a sad commentary on the American electorate that, given all the anger and frustration showed by the American people in stopping the McCain/Kennedy shamnesty bill, the most pro-border security and anti-illegal immigration voices in the entire Presidential field- Paul, Tancredo, and Hunter- have lousy poll numbers. It's pathetic that so many voters rely on the mainstream media, pundits, Hollywood, PACs, and other nefarious entities tell them who to vote for- they are mind-numbed sheep being led to slaughter by elitist wolves.
__________________________________________________________

Presidential candidate blasts “rogue” border mayors
Ryan Holeywell
October 11, 2007 - 9:38AM

McALLEN — Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo labeled some border mayors as “rogue” for refusing to cooperate with the federal government’s efforts to construct the proposed border fence in some parts of Texas.

Tancredo, a congressman from Colorado, also suggested in a news release earlier this week that the fence could be built north of U.S. border cities that don’t go along with it.

Tancredo’s comments came after The Associated Press reported earlier this month that some U.S. border leaders had denied some access to federal workers doing preliminary work on the fence.

“I’m glad he said it, because all it means is he wrote his own obituary,” McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez said. “Nobody like him can possibly be elected to a leadership position in this country.”

Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada said Tancredo’s comments were “not constructive” and added those who vehemently support the fence — such as Tancredo — are “being driven by fear or racism.”

“He has no clue how we live, how (the fence) will affect us and how close it is,” Ahumada said.

Tancredo, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, was polling at 1 percent in an NBC/Wall Street Journal conducted in late September. His campaign has raised $4,825 from two donors in the Rio Grande Valley, according to the Federal Election Committee.

Lately, he’s gained attention for his vocal support of the fence, as well as his vehement position on the need to reduce both legal and illegal immigration.

Tancredo told The Monitor his suggestion of building the wall north of some cities was “just for effect,” but he is serious about his support for the fence itself.

While Rio Grande Valley residents and elected officials alike may oppose the fence, Tancredo said, it “is a national security issue and we all have to pay the price and make some sacrifice.”

While Ahumada said he supports a so-called virtual fence created by dredging and expanding the Rio Grande, Tancredo said a physical barrier is the best option to stop “the invasion that is occurring,” referring to the influx of undocumented immigrants to the country.

He also said the fence sends a symbolic message to Mexico.

“It says clearly, ‘Here’s where one country ends and another one begins,’” Tancredo said. “Short of sending someone an atlas, this is the next best thing.”

Cortez said a fence could impede the billions of dollars of trade that comes through the country’s borders. But Tancredo said a fence would not affect legitimate business.

Ahumada said he invites Tancredo to visit the border and see for himself how it would affect the community. Tancredo said he’s visited the border many times and was in Texas last year, but he hopes to visit the state soon.

From: The Monitor

A Scintilla of Hope for Higher Education

The following, from The Daily at the University of Washington, gives me some hope that all is not completely lost in our system of higher education- there are still at least some students who havent't drank the koolaid of the Left.
_______________________________________________________________

Mexican claims to U.S. soil historically unfounded
October 8, 2007
By James Foxcurran

College campuses most often use the negative terms “imperialism” and “colonialism” to describe European and American history. Meanwhile, in 21st century North America, our southern neighbor is being granted moral legitimacy for the same behavior.

Mexican immigrants are now present in the Southwestern United States with a population percentage they have never enjoyed at any other time in history.

While defendants are saying it’s just the natural process of the Mexicans moving back onto land that really belongs to them and that the Hollywood demonstrations should be a source of conventional wisdom, history is being overlooked.

Mexico had barely colonized most of the Southwestern United States when it became U.S. territory in 1848. Spain, then Mexico, merely held imperial sway over Indian territories.

In 1835, Texas had about 3,500 Spanish-speaking residents, compared with almost 30,000 Anglo-American settlers, according to Ray Allen Billington, in his book The Far Western Frontier: 1830-1860.

In California, there were about 4,000 to 7,000 Spanish-speaking residents in the 1840s. The vast majority of the population was still Indian. Scattered missions, pueblos and presidios represented most of the Mexican presence in the area, which is why it was so easy for the United States to seize the area during the Mexican-American war, according to “History of French America” by Gilles Harvard and Cecile Vidal.

Meanwhile, in 1803, at the time of the Louisiana Purchase, there were 40,000 to 50,000 French-speaking residents west of the Mississippi River between Missouri and Washington state.

This number tripled to quadrupled by 1850. However, there is no modern political constituency for this group, therefore the story is apparently not worth telling.

The only state that has always had a majority Spanish-speaking population is New Mexico, with 44,000 Spanish-speaking residents in 1830. Since the Spanish were the first to explore the Southwest, their geographic terms are on the map every place they stopped to relieve themselves.

These vestiges are often used to justify the massive Mexican colonization currently unfolding, in spite of the fact that it is actually the first wave of Mexican colonization, not the second.

History is often revised to reflect the current situation rather than the facts. This is exactly what is happening with the American Southwest and the inflation of Mexican claims to the land there.

This historical revisionism clearly has a political motivation to justify and legitimize the influx of illegal Mexican immigrants and to discredit efforts to respect our border and immigration laws.

As former Rep. J.D. (R-Ariz.) Hayworth said in the film Border Wars, “The Left sees cheap votes, and the Right sees cheap labor, so you have the perfect storm.”

While one certainly can’t stereotype all persons of Mexican immigrants, there is a distinction between Mexican-American families who have citizenship and roots in the United States, and an illegal alien of a foreign nation who is violating and evading federal laws.

While illegal immigration is unacceptable, it is important to have sympathy for the migrants.

The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, working with the border patrol is serving a heroic function that is saving Mexican and American lives in large quantities. I don’t see any Leftists sweating in the Arizona desert, saving illegal Mexican migrants from dying of dehydration and starvation.

The only people that have decisively responded to this human rights tragedy are the groups that Leftists despise and routinely slander.

Mexicans are gaining considerable political power and forcing politicians of both parties to shy away from defending the border and enforcing immigration laws.

A Zogby’s poll found that 58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement, “The territory of the United States’ Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.”

This was on display last year with the massive marches of Mexican citizens waving Mexican flags in American cities. If this isn’t blatant colonization, with ulterior imperialist motives, I don’t know what is.

[Reach contributing writer James Foxcurran at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.]

Now What Do You Think Could Be Their Reasoning?

Seems that officials at Columbia University are being less than cooperative with law enforcement officers looking into the hanging of a noose on a black professor's door. One would think this bastion of left-wing lunacy would want to help law enforcement find the perpetrators, since they consider this a "hate crime," and one would also think Jesse and Al would be putting all kinds of pressure on them to turn the tapes over so the white racists could be arrested.

Or perhaps (and I'm of course only speculating here) that's the whole point- maybe the perpetrators aren't white after all. I posted a story on here a few days ago about a black man burning a cross in his own yard and blaming it on whites to stir up the racial pot... perhaps the same thing happened here. Again, I'm just speculating, but maybe this is a "false flag" opeartion, employed by agitators to enrage minority students at Columbia. If this were the case, then it would make perfect sense for the Columbia adminstation to not turn over the security tapes- if it showed a black person hanging the noose, then the whole thing would be shown to be as big a fraud as the uproar in Jena, and their leftist anti-white agenda would once again be exposed.

But of course I'm only speculating. The liberal elite have far too much integrity to pull a scam like this, right?

You can read the story here.

The Political Cesspool Hits Back

I received the following via email from The Political Cesspool this morning. It's their response to the hatchet-job done on them by Morris Dees and his sheep from the Southern Poverty Law Center. Hat's off to the Cesspool for standing up to Dees and exposing the darkness of the $PLC to the light of truth.
__________________________________________

Montgomery Skunks in Alabama; A Den of Charlatans Remains
(From the Files of Winston Smith / October 2007)

The $outhern Poverty Law Center ($PLC) just can’t get enough of The Political Cesspool, and especially of our main man, James Edwards. The latest edition of that rancid organization’s main publication, the hilariously titled Intelligence Report, did another feature-length hit piece on James. And the report says far more about Morri$ Dee$ and Mark “The Pocket” Potok than it says about James. The piece also says much about the $PLC’s deluded supporters, as they seem to be content with seeing the same old tired buzz-words and worn-out demagogue phrases that the $PLC has deployed against us since March of 2006, when they did us the great service of adding our radio show to their laughable “Hate Watch List.” Back then, $PLC she-reptile Heidi Beirich coronated The Political Cesspool “[t]he radio nexus of the hate movement,” a phrase the $PLC used again this year, saying, “[The Political Cesspool] has become the primary radio nexus of hate in America.” In their so-called coverage of our work over the past couple of years, $PLC writers have treated their supporters to a dazzling display of descriptive desolation by falling back on canned phrases like “raging anti-Semite” twice, ““Who’s Who” of the radical right” at least four times (twice in the same issue of Intelligence Report), five references to Holocaust™ denial, six references to White supremacism, six references to David Duke, ten references to the Ku Klux Klan and Klansmen, eleven references to neo-Nazis, and several other examples of intellectual infertility. It also gives us a valuable clue as to the $PLC’s financial machinations. Follow me on this: Everything the $PLC says, writes, and does is for one purpose only – to get donations and line their own pockets. The $PLC would never mention James Edwards and The Political Cesspool if it didn’t result in an extra dollar in Morri$’s or Mark’s bank accounts. But the fact that James is featured prominently in $PLC publications for Winter, Summer, and Fall of 2007 means that he’s pure money for the $PLC, which in turn means that James and The Political Cesspool have long and bright futures. With all the money Morri$ and Mark apparently make off James, the last thing they would want is for him to go away and The Cesspool to go off the air. Heck, they’d probably hire a security company to make certain nothing happened to James.

Among charitable organizations, the $PLC is well known and widely known as the dregs, carrying the shameful stature of being among the worst of the worst. Throughout the 1990’s and into this century, newspapers, magazines, other charitable organizations, and charity watchdog groups investigating the $PLC have registered assessments like:

“Rather than being legitimate crusaders against alleged right-wing “hate” groups, SPLC and Dees have been shameless exploiters of the misfortunes of people they do almost nothing to help. . .”

“a wealthy civil rights organization essentially controlled by one man: Morris Dees,”

“Morris Dees doesn’t need your financial support” because “the SPLC is already the wealthiest ‘civil rights’ group in America,”

“. . .the SPLC is little more than a direct mail outfit that has raised heaps of money hyping hate crimes—real and imagined—while doing virtually nothing for the victims.”

“the center [has] one of the worst ratings of any group [monitored by the American Institute of Philanthropy], estimating that the SPLC could operate for 4.6 years without making another tax-exempt nickel from its investments or raising another tax-deductible cent from well-meaning ‘people like you’.”

“What is the Southern Poverty Law Center doing…? Mostly making money…In 1999 it spent $2.4 million on litigation and $5.7 million on fundraising, meanwhile taking in more than $44 million–$27 million from fundraising, the rest from investments…On the subject of ‘hate groups’ …No one has been more assiduous in inflating the profile of such groups than the center’s millionaire huckster, Morris Dees, who in 1999 began a begging letter, ‘Dear Friend, The danger presented by the Klan is greater now than at any time in the past ten years.”…With…a salary close to $300,000 putting him among the top 2 percent of Americans. . .”

“[Dees] is a fraud who has milked a lot of very wonderful well-intentioned people. If it’s got headlines, Morris is there. . .”

Secretive as Swiss bankers, the $PLC bristles at the notion of accountability to donors. Recently, the $PLC refused to participate in the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance’s evaluation, a non-partisan process that would have given donors, present and potential, a good idea of how Morri$ and Mark use the money sent them. The Alliance reads the $PLC’s refusal as “a lack of commitment to transparency.” (Look for the Better Business Bureau to be placed on the “Hate Watch List”.) But then, one need only look at the $PLC’s lavish and imposing multi-multi-million dollar donor-financed castle-fortress in Montgomery to get an idea of how welcome the $PLC might welcome donor inquiries.

Very few windows, lots of reinforced concrete, reinforced steel garage doors, one narrow walkway leading to just one entrance. . .it doesn’t sound very inviting, does it? And the good people of Montgomery hate it, because it brutally reflects the sun and blinds them. Good neighbors the SPLC, eh?

(By the way, if you want to know how we at The Political Cesspool use the donations with which you good folks entrust us, I’ll tell you right now: every cent we receive goes directly to projects and to mission statement fulfillment. Not one penny goes for salary, overhead, facilities, or perks. No one on The Political Cesspool staff has an expense account; none of us receive so much as a penny for what we do here. Unlike Morri$ Dee$ and Mark “The Pocket” Potock, we easily retain our honor and dignity, because we’re never at the pay window. And yet, even with a quarterly budget that probably wouldn’t be enough to pay for Morri$’s and Mark’s monthly dinner bills, we still command attention sufficient for the $PLC to devote a considerable amount time and ink to us.)

With its well-established reputation for chicanery, hucksterism, and nefarity, one can’t help but marvel at the $PLC’s hypocrisy in assuming the moral authority to judge anyone. And lest anyone think the $PLC’s depravity is merely organizational and can’t be helped, I invite you to read the divorce decree against Morri$ Dee$. Then you decide if the $PLC’s venality is most likely an extension of his own abominable and congenital perversions. All of this explains why you never hear or read of any politician praising the $PLC. This also explains why the $PLC never hosts meetings, conventions, or conferences – no one who cared for their reputation would accept an invitation to participate in an $PLC event, because they would never want to be associated with Morri$ Dee$ and Mark “The Pocket” Potok. No governor, mayor, senator, representative (with the possible exception of Barney Frank), or any elected official with aspirations to higher office would want to be seen walking through the door of an $PLC-sponsored event, nor would they want the existence of pictures or video tape of themselves standing next to Morri$ and Mark to be the albatross around their neck or the scarlet “$PLC” on their chest. Even today’s bought-and-sold amoral politicians have some standards.

So, for us at the Political Cesspool, being the subject of any criticism by the $PLC is like being sprayed by a skunk. The stench comes from them, and we can easily wash it off and be rid of it that day. But tomorrow, the $PLC will still be skunks, stinking, reeking, and repulsive, able to keep company only with other skunks.

Winston Smith is a staff member of The Political Cesspool Radio Program. He can be e-mailed here: winstonsmith_99@yahoo.com

Not to Beat a Dead Horse, but...

I sincerely hope the message will finally get through- Bush and the Neocons are not the friends of conservative Christians.

How much more is it going to take? One GOP Senator cavorting with female prostitutes, another looking to get his jollies in bathroom airports, and a President who who's a Universalist masquerading as a Methodist. Neocons use religion as a tool to get elected. For both neocons and progressives, it is a civil religion, which is why, when pushed, they never take a stand for truth- they are, in fact, theological liberals in the guise of "evangelicals." They are wolves in sheep's clothing.

The GOP takes "values" voters as much for granted (if not more than) as Democrats do the votes of minorities. There are alternatives- that's why I switched to the Constitution Party.
________________________________________

Bush: All religions pray to 'same God'
'That's what I believe. I believe Islam is a great religion that preaches peace'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 7, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

President George Bush has repeated his belief all religions, "whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God" – an assertion that caused outrage among evangelical leaders when he said it in November 2003.

Bush made the statement Friday in an interview with Al Arabiya reporter Elie Nakouzi.

Al Arabiya is Al Jazeerah's top competitor in the Mideast.

As the president and Nakouzi walked from the Oval Office to the Map Room in the White House residence, Nazouki asked, "But I want to tell you – and I hope this doesn't bother you at all – that in the Islamic world they think that President Bush is an enemy of Islam – that he wants to destroy their religion, what they believe in. Is that in any way true, Mr. President?"

"No, it's not," said Bush. "I've heard that, and it just shows [sic] to show a couple of things: One, that the radicals have done a good job of propagandizing. In other words, they've spread the word that this really isn't peaceful people versus radical people or terrorists, this is really about the America not liking Islam.

"Well, first of all, I believe in an Almighty God, and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. That's what I believe. I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace. And I believe people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives aren't religious people, whether they be a Christian who does that – we had a person blow up our – blow up a federal building in Oklahoma City who professed to be a Christian, but that's not a Christian act to kill innocent people.

"And I just simply don't subscribe to the idea that murdering innocent men, women and children – particularly Muslim men, women and children in the Middle East – is an act of somebody who is a religious person.

Friday's statement echoes one made by Bush in November 2003 during a joint press conference with then-Prime Minister Tony Blair. A reporter noted Bush had frequently expressed the view that freedom is a gift from "the Almighty," but questioned whether Bush believes "Muslims worship the same Almighty" as the president and other Christians do.

"I do say that freedom is the Almighty's gift to every person. I also condition it by saying freedom is not America's gift to the world," Bush replied. "It's much greater than that, of course. And I believe we worship the same god," reported the London Telegraph.

Read the rest of the article at WorldNetDaily.com.

Commit an Adult Crime...

Do adult time. When I was growing up, there was no crime problem in Manatee County. Nowdays, it's not safe to go to the beach on a holiday because that's become a favorite time and place for gangs to shoot it out, regardless of who gets hurt in the process.

I don't care if the brat thug in the following story is only 14 years old- she's a member of a Mexican gang, she was in felony possession of a weapon, and she assaulted a police officer. She committed adult crimes, and now she's facing adult prison time.

Black and Mexican gangs are starting to take over the County. There's gang graffiti all over the place, and earlier this year some gang thugs gunned down a 9-year old little boy. Forget coddling these little criminals- stick their butts in jail where they belong.

Our liberal paper doesn't say whether she's here legally or not. That detail seems to escape their notice when reporting the rise in Mexican gang violence.
_________________________________________

From The Bradenton Herald:

Unfair treatment of young suspect alleged
By MAURA POSSLEY
mpossley@bradenton.com


MANATEE --A 14-year-old girl who authorities claim is a gang member has been charged as an adult for alleged battery of a Bradenton police officer in July.

Magis "Maggie" Ruiz faces charges of battery of a law enforcement officer and attempting to deprive an officer of means of protection/communication.

During a hearing Wednesday, Ruiz, who wept softly, was slapped with a third charge - possession of a weapon during commission of a felony - ensuring she would be tried as an adult.

Prosecutors and police say Ruiz bit an officer's arm and went for the officer's gun during her arrest on a warrant the afternoon of July 11.

Once handcuffed and in the officer's vehicle, police allege Ruiz said she wished she had gotten the gun to kill the officer and claimed membership in the SUR-13 street gang.

But the teen's public defender, Jennifer Fury, is crying foul on the state attorney for leveling such charges on a person her age.

The state's claim that Ruiz boasted of her gang membership, Fury said, was at minimum an association with friends and a way of surviving an uphill battle she has faced her whole life.

Ruiz had been in the custody of Florida Department of Juvenile Justice since the age of 11, Fury said.

She has been abandoned by her mother, who in their last contact told the teen she had washed her hands of her, Fury said Ruiz has told her.

"I don't know how much involvement in gang activity she has," her attorney said. "She has not been out on the street."

Ed Brodsky, assistant state attorney, declined to comment Wednesday, saying judicial ethics rules prevent him from talking about a pending case.

He said the state attorney's office reviews juvenile cases separately, and a juvenile has to commit a serious enough offense to be tried as an adult.

"The facts of each particular case will speak for themselves," Brodsky said.

Fury on Wednesday went on to describe conditions Ruiz has been placed in at the Manatee County jail, which she says are inappropriate given Ruiz's age.

Ruiz lives in a small medical unit, her attorney said, with no sunlight and two other inmates, including Ashley Rios, a 16-year-old reputed member of SUR-13 who is facing charges of principal to murder in the May shooting death of 9-year-old Stacy Williams III.

Jail spokesman Randy Warren said juveniles are held separately from the jail's adult population.

They are housed in the safest environments possible and given access to the exercise yard, he said.

Jail officials ensure inmates in the units get along, are not co-defendants and are not known enemies, Warren said.

"We are limited in the areas we can put her in," he said. "In jail, you don't always get your own room."

Fury contends Ruiz is being unjustly targeted as a criminal. Holding her behind bars is not the solution, she said.

"I told her, 'No matter what happens, I'm not leaving you,' " Fury said. "Even if I fail, I'll go down swinging, because she needs to know there are adults out there who care. That's this girl's problem - everybody has failed her."

Veteran Enforces Federal Flag Law

4 USC Section 7(c) states:

"No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag of the United States of America, except during church services conducted by naval chaplains at sea, when the church pennant may be flown above the flag during church services for the personnel of the Navy. No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof:"

Please note the fact that the establishment mentioned in the story below was in violation of Federal law. It's not like it's some obscure clause, either- I learned this when I was still in elementary school, and that was about 35 years ago.

My hat's off to this patriot for taking action.
______________________________________
From WorldNetDaily:

THE RED, WHITE AND BLUE
Vet cuts down Mexican flag flying above U.S. banner
Took action after hearing of illegal display by Hispanic bar owner in Reno
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 3, 2007
2:44 p.m. Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Mexican flag flies above U.S. banner at Reno business in footage from local KRNV-TV
After hearing a Reno bar was flying a Mexican flag above a U.S. flag, an angered U.S. Army veteran took matters into his own hands, drove to the site and cut down the banners in front of a stunned group of Hispanic patrons.

Reno television station KRNV, which was there to document Jim Broussard's act of defiance, noted the U.S. code prohibits raising the flag of any other nations above Old Glory.

Broussard pulled up in his truck to the Cantina El Jaripeo near downtown Reno yesterday, cut the rope that anchored the flags and pulled them down from a makeshift flagpole.

He left the Mexican flag on the ground and, with the U.S. flag in hand, turned to the KRNV cameraman:

"I'm Jim Broussard," he said, "and I took this flag down in honor of my country with … a knife from the United States Army. I'm a veteran, I'm not going to see this done to my country. If they want to fight us, then they need to be men, and they need to come and fight us. But I want somebody to fight me for this flag. They're not going to get it back."

The KRNV footage shows a Hispanic man, possibly the bar owner, picking up the Mexican flag after Broussard briskly walks past him down the street to his truck.

Later, Broussard, told nationally syndicated talk-radio host Mike Gallagher he took action after hearing on a local talk station that the flags had been flying all day.

"I was immediately infuriated and felt a duty to do something about it," Broussard said. "I feel there's a lot of this turning-our-heads-on-things in concern with the Hispanic community and the things they do. They seem impervious to our laws in a lot of situations."

Broussard, pointing out the bar was committing a federal offense, said local authorities weren't sure what to do about it.

He affirmed Gallagher's comment that many Americans are afraid to speak out on the problem of illegal immigration and lack of assimilation because they are afraid of being called bigots.

Broussard said he had no idea a TV camera would be there until he arrived on the scene.

About a dozen Hispanic men came pouring out of the building when he showed up, according to Broussard.

The men said, Broussard recounted, "What do you think you're doing?"

"I said, well, watch me."

Broussard said he talked to local police after the incident, and they have not taken any action. But Hispanic leaders, he said, "are trying to coerce the bar owner to file charges against me."

The veteran affirmed to Gallagher there are many Hispanics who are equally upset about illegal immigration and the resistance to assimilation.

"We have many cultures who've come here, and they've learned our language, and they respect our culture, because they know America is a great country, and they simply want to be a part of it," he said.

KRNV said it sent a cameraman to the scene after a viewer called to say "a business near downtown Reno was flying a Mexican flag above an American flag ... which is, in fact, illegal."

The Jena 6 Thugs- The Saga Continues

If you do a news search on Yahoo, Google, or just about any other search engine, you'll find story after story of protests supporting the alleged attempted-murderers are breaking out all over the Country. They descended on the Justice Department, walked out of high school and college classes, wrote songs, and invoked the spirit of the 60s to anyone who would listen.

As much as I know all of this is a crock, the last thing I want to do is put a stop to it. I want them to keep protesting, keep marching, keep walking out of class, and by all means, please keep talking.

Why do I say that? Simple, really. The truth about what really happened in Jena is starting to come out- even black journalists are blowing the whistle (read my previous posting of an article by Jason Whitlock of the Kansas City Star). The truth is out there and available- we'll see how long Jackson, Sharpton, and the protesters refuse to accept it. We'll see how long Jackson, Sharpton, and their ignorant sheep followers keep up the unrest in spite of the truth. Their true colors are showing, so to speak- they aren't interested in the truth, only in those things which will get them on TV and line their pockets.

SPLC Launches Yet Another Attack on "The Political Cesspool"

Once again, Morris Dees and his cult of political correctness (aka the Southern Poverty Law Center) are launching an assault against freedom of speech. The SPLC has again slandered The Political Cesspool in a lengthy "expose," calling it a "shamelessly white nationalist talk show." The SPLC can't win arguments on merit, so they resort to name calling and false accusations against anyone who doesn't fall in line with their warped view of "tolerance." If you say anything against blacks (of for whites), you're a white supremacist and a racist; if you say anything against gays, you're a homophobe; say anything bad against any group (other than whites) and you're intolerant.

For more information on Dees and his cult following, read "The Church of Morris Dees" on American Patrol Report website.

Here's the revolting report from SPLC, which I received via email from The Political Cesspool...
____________________________________________________________________
Friends:

Today, the radically leftist Southern Poverty Law Center issued (another) attack on our award-winning radio program. This three-page "expose" is the SPLC's most detailed assault to date. As with any SPLC hit-piece it is littered with inaccuracies, but I felt as though the listeners of this program would appreciate being made aware of what it said. I encourage you to read it for yourself and then reply to this e-mail with your comments. Now, more than ever, we need the fans of our groundbreaking show to stand with me and the rest of the staff. At the conclusion of the article you can click on a link that will enable you to help us fight back!

On To Victory,

James Edwards
Founding Host, The Political Cesspool Radio Program
www.thepoliticalcesspool.org

Memphis Sewage
In Tennessee, a Racist Radio Host Thrives
by David Holthouse

When the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) held its annual national conference June 1 and 2 at a Holiday Inn in Greenville, S.C., James Edwards was the golden boy of the hate group's proceedings.
Tennessee radio host James Edwards has worked assiduously to provide neo-Nazis, Klan associates and Holocaust deniers with a path to mainstream respectability.
Edwards, 27, is the host of "The Political Cesspool," a shamelessly white nationalist radio talk show that's broadcast for two hours every weeknight from a studio near Memphis, Tenn., where Edwards grew up and still lives.

"The Political Cesspool" in the past two years has become the primary radio nexus of hate in America. Its sponsors include the CCC and the Institute for Historical Review, a leading Holocaust denial organization. Its guest roster for 2007 reads like a "Who's Who" of the radical racist right. CCC leader Gordon Lee Baum, Holocaust denier Mark Weber, Canadian white supremacist Paul Fromm, American Renaissance editor Jared Taylor, neo-Nazi activist April Gaede, anti-Semitic professor Kevin MacDonald, Stormfront webmaster Jaime Kelso and League of the South president Michael Hill have all been favorably interviewed on the "Political Cesspool" this year, along with former Klan leader and neo-Nazi David Duke, the show's most frequent celebrity racist guest, who has logged three appearances.

"I have known Dr. Duke for a number of years and have found him to be a Christian man above reproach," Edwards says on the "Cesspool" website. "Time and again, he has gone out of his way to help me, asking for nothing in return."

Edwards is quite a bit younger than the majority of CCC members who attended the South Carolina conference. Many of those members' involvement in the white supremacist movement dates back to the White Citizens Councils that were formed to oppose school desegregation and the civil rights movement and were later reincarnated as the CCC. Edwards sat with his wife at a table near the back of the conference hall, engaging in conversation with a nearly constant stream of admirers who looked twice his age or more. They slapped his back and shook his hand and congratulated him not only on the success of "Political Cesspool" — which is tailored for a southern, neo-Confederate, white nationalist audience — but also his recent triumphs in smoothly injecting white nationalist ideology into national mainstream media discussions of race relations and crime in America.

Edwards arrived at the hate group conference just three days after his third primetime appearance on CNN in the previous two months. "Crime and violence follow African-Americans wherever they go," he said in his April 4 CNN debut, a panel debate on "self-segregation" hosted by Paula Zahn. "And if you think that is racist, then spend some time on the mean streets of south Memphis."

Zahn, who initially identified Edwards to CNN viewers as merely a "radio talk show host" from Memphis, invited him back on May 21 for a "Paula Zahn Now" episode titled "The Changing Face of America."

"Why not celebrate the diversity?" Zahn asked him in one exchange.

"My primary interest is to protect and safeguard my family," Edwards replied. "Whites are in for the fight of their lives. America is becoming balkanized. We are being robbed of having a future in the very nation our ancestors carved from the wilderness."

David Duke, who calls Edwards his "favorite radio patriot," gave the "Cesspool" host's CNN appearances a glowing online review: "He delivered a powerful performance, stuck to his guns and didn't back down as he articulated an unapologetically conservative viewpoint regarding race relations."


'Heathen Savages'
Edwards began garnering similar accolades from his elders on the radical right last year as the "Cesspool" gained a larger and larger audience. (Although the show is broadcast only regionally on the airwaves, anyone can listen to it on the Internet.) "James is a bundle of energy and dedication who is deeply concerned about the genocide against European-Americans," white nationalist Bob Whitaker stated online after appearing on the show. "He is also wiser than many of the older members of our movement. … He sticks with legitimate complaints that gentiles have and our fear of the genocide of immigration and intermarriage that respectable conservatives all advocate. The Political Cesspool is one of the first major steps toward making our perfectly legitimate and generally felt concerns — the ones that are presently denounced as heresy, racism and hate — the mainstream."
The "Cesspool" host is a rising star of the white nationalist movement because he's articulate, charming and equally at ease in a television studio, behind a radio microphone and standing in front of a crowd. He was a specially invited guest speaker at the CCC conference. His topic: "Creating Your Own Media." CCC National Field Coordinator Bill Lord told a "Martin Luther Coon" joke in his introduction of Edwards. Lord and other longtime CCC members casually dropped racial epithets at the conference, but Edwards carefully avoided using such crudely derogatory language, as he always does when speaking in public, on the airwaves or to the media. Edwards allies himself with hate group leaders who call black people "niggers," but he doesn't drop the N-bomb himself. Instead he speaks in the more or less polished code of a suit-and-tie racist, calling blacks "heathen savages," "subhumans," and "black animals," exclusively in the context of discussing violent black-on-white crime.

His audience of about 150 at the CCC conference included Jared Taylor, whose magazine specializes in race "studies," and Don Black, the former Alabama grand dragon of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and founder of Stormfront, the largest racist forum on the Internet.

Edwards began by quoting Mississippi civil rights activist Fanny Lou Hamer, telling the crowd that he is "sick and tired of being sick and tired" when it comes to reverse discrimination against white people. He described "Political Cesspool" as "unabashedly pro-white" and detailed the show's early success in rallying Memphis whites to "defend" the gravesite of Confederate cavalry general Nathan Bedford Forrest, the first national leader of the original KKK. The gravesite was the subject of a protest in August 2005 led by the Rev. Al Sharpton, at which about 200 whites squared off against a few dozen black Sharpton supporters.

"Sharpton denigrated the general's gravesite with that kind of rabble there," Edwards said. He then boasted of the lavish all-expenses-paid treatment afforded him by CNN, including, he said, fine hotels and limousine rides. Edwards finished by announcing that "as a result of listener demand, support from station ownership and a surge of interest from the recent CNN exposure," beginning the following week "Political Cesspool" would expand from one hour per weeknight to two.

He received a standing ovation.


Biased and Controlled
The radio station that carries "Political Cesspool" — WLRM-AM — is a Christian station (WLRM stands for "We Love Radio Ministries," according to its website). Most of its programming consists of standard nationally syndicated conservative Christian "news and views" content that is often homophobic but generally non-racist, including a two-hour weekday show by the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, a well-known anti-gay minister who is African-American.
WLRM is not audited by Arbitron, the radio industry's equivalent of the Nielsen Ratings system, so there's no reliable estimate of the number of "Political Cesspool" listeners. Advertising on the show is cheap: $100 a week for a regular plug. Edwards describes "Cesspool" as primarily "listener-supported," and the show's website claims it has received nearly $15,000 in donations this year.



The WLRM station manager did not return three phone calls seeking comment for this story. Edwards politely refused to comment as well. "I appreciate your request for an interview as much as I do the SPLC's continued interest in our conservative radio program," he wrote in response to an E-mail from the Intelligence Report. "I must, however, respectfully decline your offer."

Proper manners were instilled in Edwards early in life both at home, he writes on his website, and when he attended Briarcrest Christian School, an expensive private school in Memphis — tuition is now $10,000 a year — where "conservative Christian values and morals are taught and practiced in every aspect of school life," according to the Briarcrest mission statement.


Paul Fromm, a well-known Canadian white supremacist, has appeared on "The Political Cesspool" this year.
When Edwards reached the ninth grade he transferred into a "Christian nationalist" home schooling program. "It was that decision that ultimately led me down the road of political activism," Edwards says on his site. "I could no longer be aware of the problems that are plaguing this Republic without trying to be part of the solution."

He began reading the works of white nationalist politician and commentator Pat Buchanan, who appeared on "Cesspool" last year. "Buchanan was one of the first commentators that I noticed who really seemed to be speaking my language," Edwards told the Mid-South Patriot, a monthly Memphis newspaper, in a February interview. "I felt as though he was articulating a message that resonated within me."

When Buchanan ran for president in 2000, Edwards worked on his campaign. "Politics was in my blood at that point and there was no turning back," he said. Edwards ran for the Tennessee House of Representatives in 2002 on a pro-life, pro-school vouchers platform. His campaign website featured endorsements from his pastor and the fathers of several children on a bowling team that Edwards coached. He lost. But during his campaign, Edwards befriended fellow Memphis-area conservative activist Austin Farley.

The two of them together launched "The Political Cesspool" in October 2004. Farley left the show in 2006 to run for the Tennessee House in District 97, the same district Edwards had targeted four years earlier. Farley also lost.

The "Cesspool" founders won a remarkable token of mainstream political acceptance in 2005, when Memphis City Councilman E.C. Jones, who has been interviewed on "Political Cesspool" several times, presented Edwards and Farley with a certificate "in appreciation of outstanding contributions to the community," and named them honorary city councilmen.


League of the South leader Michael Hill has been on "The Political Cesspool" this year.
When Jones came under fire from the Memphis media for honoring the "Cesspool," he told the The [Memphis] Commercial Appeal, "It pisses me off when people want to make a big damn deal out of nothing. … Just because they have a different political view, am I supposed to exclude those people?"

When the Mid-South Patriot asked Edwards in February about the accusations that he's a racist he replied: "The horrible defamations we must endure are little compared to the physical battles of blood and bone that so many of our ancestors had to endure so that we could be here now." He also said that David Duke, his favorite "Cesspool" guest, is unfairly maligned. "Most of his detractors come to their conclusions about him based upon what they hear parroted from a biased and controlled global media."


Idolizing Duke
The Feb. 20 "Political Cesspool" broadcast featured a phone interview with David Duke, speaking from the Ukraine. Edwards made it abundantly clear during their conversation that he, like Duke, believes Jews control the media, among many other things. "We have a very small minority that has incredible power in the American media, the American government, in academia, and in the economy," Edwards told the infamous author of Jewish Supremacism. "I find it amazing that no movement has been too big or too small that these people have not had their hands in. … You look at all the destructive movements of the 20th century. We're talking about women's rights, the civil rights movement, and today the newly protected minority status for homosexuals."
Duke said in response: "Well, the way they have been able to do that, James, and everybody listening, is through organization. They have an agenda. They make a united front. When I was a university student at LSU [Louisiana State University] on campus, the very leftist, liberal anti-Vietnam war movement was absolutely led by radical Jews." Duke failed to mention another aspect of his LSU years: In 1970, while still a student, he was photographed dressed in neo-Nazi regalia, including a swastika armband, to protest the appearance of left-wing Jewish attorney William Kunstler at nearby Tulane University. That photograph, along with hundreds of others of Duke in his Ku Klux Klan robes, have haunted Duke over the decades and hampered his attempts to win mainstream political office.


Radio host James Edwards has been compared to former Klan leader David Duke, who has run for numerous political offices. But unlike Duke, who was photographed as a young man with neo-Nazi and white supremacist symbols, Edwards has avoided the most compromising situations and language.
Edwards idolizes Duke. At the CCC conference, he repeatedly quoted "Dr. Duke" in conversation. But as much as he admires Duke, Edwards has also clearly learned from his mentor's early mistakes. He does not appear at any hate group events where he knows swastikas and other white supremacist symbols will be photographed or filmed.

A frequent topic on "Political Cesspool" all of this year has been the gruesome murders of a young white couple in Knoxville who were allegedly carjacked, raped and murdered by four black men. "Hate crime laws were made for one reason and one reason only — to protect these black animals," Edwards said during his May 28 "Cesspool" broadcast. "If these two souls [the victims] had been more aware of the racial realities of our time, perhaps they would still be alive today."

Two days before that broadcast, neo-Nazi leader Alex Linder organized a protest against "black crime" in Knoxville. Edwards was nowhere to be seen. When he appeared on CNN May 29, the network rolled footage of the protest showing demonstrators wearing swastika T-shirts and displaying other white supremacist symbols. CNN host Kiran Chetry asked Edwards, "Why has this [murder] case become a rallying cry among the white supremacists?"

Edwards disingenuously dodged the question: "Well, I can't necessarily speak for people that I don't have any association with. But I will promise you this: Had the roles been reversed, and had the victims been black and the murderers white, this would have been the biggest news story in America."

The next day on his blog, Edwards posted this message to his fans: "With regards to those who showed up in Knoxville (who were labeled 'Klansmen' and 'Nazis' etc.), conservative activists often get maligned with nefarious descriptions because they dare stand up and speak out. I don't know the hearts and minds of those who attended the Knoxville rally because I wasn't there. However, with regards to their demonstration, they were doing the right thing by bringing attention to the despicable double standard this case has received. God bless them for that."

It's not exactly a stretch to "label" a man wearing a swastika T-shirt and shouting "Heil Hitler" a Nazi. Edwards knows that, but he's a master of carefully parsing his language so that he walks the razor's edge between conservative commentary and outright neo-Nazi rhetoric. This balancing act allows him to continue building his core audience of white nationalists without doing irrevocable damage to his mainstream political aspirations As this article went to press, Edwards was scheduled to deliver the keynote address at a Sept. 15 meeting of the Missouri chapter of the League of the South, a racist, neo-secessionist organization based in Alabama. He also had recently announced that he was in negotiations with a Michigan-based media company to start broadcasting "Political Cesspool" nationwide.

His stated mission is "[f]ighting to advance a nationalist agenda based upon the Christian world view" and turning back the clock in America to the pre-civil rights era, "back when America had a strong moral compass," as he put it during his May 17 show. "You had cultural and racial integrity in those days. …What's been taken away from us, we can take back."

Edwards works hard to maintain a professional appearance and demeanor. He wears suits, not Klan robes. But he's doing more than anyone else in the white nationalist movement at this point to promote the views of neo-Nazis, Klan sympathizers, Holocaust deniers, academic racists and anti-Semites. Helped along by cable news television and the occasional sympathetic elected official, he's beginning to look a lot like the next David Duke — and he'd almost certainly consider that a compliment.

Emily Brown and Janet Smith contributed to this report.

Intelligence Report
Fall 2007

Direct Link: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=817