by Father John Corapi

I have fond memories of the 4th of July going back to when I was probably only four or five years old. We remember the parades, the picnics or barbecues, and the happy gathering of families. During the American Revolution, the legal separation of the American colonies from Great Britain actually took place on July 2, 1776, when the Second Continental Congress voted to approve the resolution of independence previously put forth by Richard Henry Lee of Virginia. After debate and revision Congress approved the Declaration of Independence on July 4th.

Of note is the letter John Adams, one of only two Founding Fathers who went on to become president, wrote to his wife Abigail:

"…This day ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of the continent to the other, from this time forward forever more." (Adams Family Papers: An Electronic Archive. Massachusetts Historical Society)

Like so many of the Founding Fathers, Adams recognized that the day of deliverance came from the providential hand of almighty God. I am not sure about large numbers of duplicitous politicians and other so-called public servants today, whether elected or appointed.

Freedom is a great thing, and we do well to celebrate it on the 4th of July. That being said, it’s something rooted in truth, and apart from the truth there can be no authentic freedom.

"If you continue in my word [truth] you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." (John 8:31-32)

An individual, a country, or a world that does not remain rooted in objective truth cannot ultimately live in freedom.  Some highlights of this reality:

1731: Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude [true happiness].

1733:  The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes…

One of the most common errors of all time is to confuse freedom and license. Today, frequently under the specious pretext freedom, mankind acts in a manner that is really license. We are not morally free to do whatever we choose to do.  Only when rooted in truth and acting in objective truth can we hope to be free.  No one has the moral right to do evil.  No one has the moral right to choose to take an innocent life or to engage in actions that are out of accord with right reason or any objective standards of morality we have ever known.

The inevitable consequence of abusing freedom is losing freedom. Soon, if we do not alter our present course, the United States will no longer be the home of the brave and the land of the free. Loss of personal freedoms, one at a time, is already well underway.  One day we shall awake from our moral slumber and find that we have become slaves.

We must live in truth and act in truth if we are to remain free. Abuse it and I assure you we shall lose it! Wake up America! God is not a disinterested spectator.  Let’s thank God for our freedom, but let’s not sit by idly while the forces of darkness divorce freedom from truth. For, as Jesus says, “The man who sins is the slave of sin.” (John 8:34)

I’ll leave you with the motto of the United States Army Special Forces on this 4th of July: 
De oppresso liber! (To free the oppressed)

Indeed, Jesus came to set the captives free. Let’s do our part for our country and our world that we might all remain free in the glorious freedom of the children of God.

WASHINGTON, June 29 /Christian Newswire/ -- The United States Supreme Court reversed Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in the now-famous New Haven firefighters case. Although Judge Sotomayor and two of her colleagues did not even think the case worthy of a published opinion, the Supreme Court said the case presented "two provisions of Title VII to be interpreted and reconciled, with few, if any, precedents in the courts of appeals discussing the issue."

Concerned Women for America (CWA) President Wendy Wright said, "This decision sends a disturbing message that Sonia Sotomayor, as a judge, sanctioned discrimination against people because of the color of their skin. This validates concerns that Judge Sotomayor's judicial philosophy reflects her personal bias, as expressed in speeches and the controversial groups to which she has belonged, that people should be discriminated against based on their ethnicity or sex. No one in a burning building cares if their fire chief is a minority. A firefighter's qualifications can determine if innocent people will live or die. Yet Judge Sotomayor denied qualified firefighters a promotion in order to advance her ethnic politics. Judge Sotomayor's decision in the Ricci case proves that questions about her fitness to serve at the Supreme Court are legitimate. Her decisions suggest such an enormous bias in her philosophy that we could not fault anyone in her courtroom for questioning her impartiality."

"In choosing a Supreme Court nominee, President Obama said 'I will seek someone who understands that justice ... is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives, whether they can make a living, and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes, and welcome in their own nation. I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with peoples hopes and struggles as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes.' Judge Sotomayor's unjust decision in the Ricci case shows that she does not fit that description. She denied firefighters the well-deserved promotions and, by doing so, was willing to make people unsafe in their homes."

Mario Diaz, Esq., CWA's Policy Director for Legal Issues, said the Ricci case "exposes not only bias, but arrogance on the part of a judge at the brink of getting a lifetime appointment to the highest court of the land. How she thought this case did not even deserve a published opinion is beyond comprehension. It seems ethnicity and gender not only 'play a role' in her judgment as she has said, but they actually control her judgment to the point where she can no longer look at the facts of a case impartially. Looking at her record, it seems her passion for minorities is such that she would need to recuse herself from any case involving a minority party in litigation.

"Unless she renounces her own statements and has some strong explanation for her actions in cases like Ricci at her hearings, I don't see how any Senator, or even the President himself, can feel confident about her fitness to serve at the Supreme Court."

by David Almasi

The U.S. Senate resolution apologizing for slavery and segregation will be used as a lobbying tool to acquire reparations payments, say members of the black leadership network Project 21. The group urges the Senate to "move on," saying the apology will do little to heal perceived racial gaps.

On June 18, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution apologizing for slavery and segregation in the United States. While the resolution was written with the intention that it could not be used to support claims for monetary reparations, reparations activists Randall Robinson told the Washington Post the legislation constitutes a "confession" that will aid the process of acquiring reparations.  Harvard professor Charles Ogletree said the resolution should not be a substitute for reparations, saying "That battle will be prolonged."

Project 21 members voicing skepticism about the politics behind the resolution and the need for it include:

Jerry Brooks (Auburn, WA): "I'll accept the Senate's apology, but let's move on already. This apology is something that might have been more appropriate long ago, and now it's likely going to be misused by those with a political axe to grind. In particular and despite its intention to the contrary, it is already being used to promote reparations. Not only is this an idea without merit, but an extremely foolish one to be clinging to while our nation is trying to recover from its current economic distress."

Brooks continued, "I also take offense to the ignorant partisan attacks involved in this debate. In trying to infer Republicans are responsible for slavery is downright silly considering that the party came about as part of the movement to abolish slavery."

Jimmie L. Hollis (Millville, NJ): "As an American of African ancestry, I think this apology is ridiculous and useless. It is just another 'feel good' action. If we are to start apologizing for every injustice and wrong done in the past, we will spend the next few decades just apologizing. Let's move on."

Bob Parks (Athol, MA): "Why the need to do this now? Are we attempting to keep the First Lady proud of her country?"

Parks added, "The problem is that, when you apologize, it's important that the recipient knows the reason for the apology and who is giving it.  It wasn't the entire Senate whose former party slogan was 'the White Man's Party' or fostered the Ku Klux Klan or resisted black civil rights efforts until it was realized just how the black voting bloc could be used for political advantage. But why the entire Senate is apologizing for evil past doings, once supported by the Democrat Party, is a mystery to me."

Rep. Alan Grayson asks the Federal Reserve Inspector General about the trillions of dollars lent or spent by the Federal Reserve and where it went, and the trillions of off balance sheet obligations. Inspector General Elizabeth Coleman responds that the IG does not know and is not tracking where this money is.  

Federal Reserve Office of the Inspector General:  http://www.federalreserve.gov/oig..
 
Related:  U.S. Taxpayers Risk $9.7 Trillion on Bailout Programs

Indiana Challenges Constitutionality of TARP Money for Auto Bailout..

 by JT Keller

by David Almasi

Washington DC - As the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments today in the voting rights case Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder, the Project 21 black leadership network is joining with other organizations to ask that this outdated portion of the Voting Rights Act be found unconstitutional.

"The racist boogeyman of the past is just that -- a thing of the past," said Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie. "I think most people realize this, but the civil rights special interest lobby has been strong enough to keep this boogeyman alive to the legal detriment of our post-racial society. As we try to move forward, our children will continue to bear the burden of long-rectified mistakes."

At issue in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder is whether the federal government still has a compelling reason to oversee and approve election practices in certain areas. When the Voting Right Act was renewed in 2006, Congress did not amend Section 5 of the Act -- which mandates this "preclearance" standard -- despite the concerns of voting rights scholars. The local Texas voting district officials challenging the Act say the standard exceeds Congressional authority under the Reconstruction-era 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Project 21 has joined a amici curiae ("friend of the Court") brief on the case with the Pacific Legal Foundation and the Center for Equal Opportunity.

In the brief, it is argued:

Changes in the social and political landscape cast doubt on, not only Section 5's relevance, but its constitutionality. These changes show that the justification for Section 5's remedial measures no longer exist. For instance, when the [Voting Rights] Act was enacted in 1965 there were few, if any, black elected officials in the South. But now black elected politicians make up an appreciable percentage of many state governments of the Deep South. Forty years ago the drafters of the Act understood that widespread and persistent intentional discrimination in voting occurred predominantly in the jurisdictions targeted, and typically entailed the willful misuse of tests and devices which Section 5 was specifically designed to remedy.  But modern allegations of discrimination in voting may arise equally in both covered and noncovered jurisdictions, and involve a completely different array of problems which Section 5 is ill-suited to resolve.

For instance, the brief points out:

Today, the greatest majority of cases brought under the Act involve vote dilution claims which are not concentrated in any one part of the country and are addressed through Section 2 of the Act nationwide. Since 1990, the same number of Section 2 violations have occurred in Pennsylvania (a noncovered jurisdiction) as in South Carolina (a covered jurisdiction). Even more Section 2 violations occurred in New York.... The old style and systemic, race-based discrimination that made the Act necessary in 1965 exists only sporadically, if at all, while new allegations of minority voting problems stem from issues motivated by partisan politics rather than racial prejudice [such as long lines and ballot design].

A decision by the justices in the case of Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder is expected by the end of June. A copy of the brief Project 21 has joined can be obtained at http://tw5.us/UJ .

Project 21's Massie added: "The Voting Rights Act was first enacted during a time when skin color was considered enough to disqualify a man from full participation. Today, that same Act would bar people from full participation due to where they live -- regardless of their race. Where's the fairness in that?"

by Mass Resistance

The stunning anti-family actions and political appointments of Barack Obama since taking office, some of which we've chronicled here, are unprecedented in America, maybe even in the world.  But this even shocked us.

Obama appoints Kevin Jennings to Dept. of Education post

Kevin Jennings is the founder of the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN), an aggressive national homosexual organization targeting children in the public schools.  In high schools and middle schools across the country GLSEN runs "gay straight alliance" clubs and promotes the Day of Silence, among myriad other destructive homosexual and transgender activities.

Now we've learned that the Obama administration has appointed Kevin Jennings to be Assistant Deputy Secretary, Office of Safe & Drug Free Schools in the US Department of Education!

          Dept of Education press release announcing appointment.

And the reaction in conservative press:

          WorldNetDaily: 'Gay' activist to oversee public classroom 'safety'

          Americans for Truth: AFTA calls for withdrawal of nomination

In Massachusetts, where Jennings founded GLSEN, GLSEN is a major member of the Mass. Commission on GLBT Youth.  GLSEN also holds yearly conferences for children and teachers on the latest techniques for pushing homosexual behavior on kids as young as Kindergarten age.  Click HERE for this year's GLSEN Conference.

In 2005, GLSEN distributed the horrific Little Black Book of homosexual pornography to kids at Brookline High School..

But Kevin Jennings and GLSEN are probably best known for the horrific "Fistgate" incident in 2000, where children as young as 12 were taught homosexual sex acts by state employees.  The incident attracted national attention, but GLSEN defended the conference and activities.

          CLICK HERE for report on the infamous "Fistgate" incident

We will be posting more on Jennings and GLSEN very soon, including the actual recordings from the "Fistgate" incident which made national news.

Obama declares June to be "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month."

This is so offensive and bizarre that we don't even know how to comment on it.

The very thought of a US President doing something like has been up until now incomprehensible.  You'll have to look at it for yourself . . .

CLICK HERE for Obama's proclamation

by AV Web

Eminent domain has been invoked to secure some 500 acres of in Somerset Country, Pa., from seven owners, for a memorial to United Airlines Flight 93, a Boeing 757 that crashed there September 11, 2001, after passengers heeded the call "Let's roll" and attempted to retake the flight from its hijackers. The memorial for the 40 passengers and crew will encompass 1,400 acres, and the Department of Justice has a paperwork deadline at the end of the month. Flight 93 Federal Advisory Commission members, Somerset County Commissioner Pamela Tokar-Ickes and Stonycreek Township Supervisor Gregory Walker, have stepped down in protest of the land grab. Replacements are being sought from a pool of area residents. The National Park Service, which will own the land and could have negotiated for its purchase, was defended by the U.S. Department of Interior. Associate director Steve Whitesell told a local news station "we're at the deadline. We need to start proceeding with construction" to make an opening date of September 11, 2011. Vocal property owners are stating that they were willing to make a less forceful transfer of ownership, but were never engaged in negotiations for the land.

Among those who will lose property is a man whose father had purchased land there during the great depression and a pastor who owns a cottage there where he planned to retire. Landowner Randall Musser told the Associated Press he served on the committee that helped establish the memorial's boundaries and said that back in 2002 landowners were promised that eminent domain wouldn't be used. A spokesman for the park service said of the latest plans, "It's just fitting and right that we get this done in time for the 10th anniversary." Eminent domain eliminates the potential for title challenges, liens and other claims that could delay the project.

Related: http://www.wjactv.com/news/19490778/detail.html

by David Almasi

Washington, D.C. - Congressman James Clyburn (D-SC), the third-ranking member of the congressional leadership, has engaged in unnecessary and harmful race-baiting in his criticism of governors wary of accepting money from the so-called "stimulus" package, say members of the African-American leadership group Project 21.

"Trepidation about accepting a federal handout is rational, not racist," said Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie. "For Congressman Clyburn to claim that refusing stimulus money would hurt blacks is the last gasp of a desperate politician revealed to have been making a career out of the loathsome practice of pushing set-asides, pork projects and increased government intrusion."

In remarks to reporters on February 19, Congressman Clyburn called opposition to the stimulus package "a slap in the face of African-Americans." In particular, he was referring to opposition by southern governors such as Rick Perry of Texas, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Mark Sanford of Clyburn's home state of South Carolina.

These governors - all Republicans - are concerned about federal mandates that may be attached to the acceptance of stimulus money.  In a letter to President Barack Obama, Governor Perry wrote:  "I remain opposed to using these funds to expand existing government programs, burdening the state with ongoing expenditures long after the funding has dried up." Perry and several other critical governors are grudgingly accepting stimulus-related money.

Project 21 member Kevin Martin said: "Liberals such as Congressman Clyburn have always employed tactics such as the race card to shame critics into accepting their heavy-handed demands. This stimulus package is unpopular pork, and the American people are angry.  To use race as a means of cramming it down these governors' throats is reprehensible, and people should take notice as to how far these people are willing to go to get their way."

Massie added: "The 10th Amendment to our Constitution protects the rights of states from federal encroachment. These governors are concerned about the tremendous debt and regulatory strings this spending package will saddle their constituents with in the future. But Congressman Clyburn is essentially saying that being fiscally responsible and protecting the integrity of the Constitution is racist and antagonistic to blacks. It is an affront to reasonable minds."

 by Jeffrey Kuhner

The disastrous path on which America is currently embarked was tried in another country. A fact not well known is that Argentina, prior to World War II, was an economic powerhouse. Beginning in the 1880s and continuing through the 1920s and 1930s, it was regarded as one of the most prosperous and advanced nations in the world. Then Juan Peron and his wife Eva took control in the 1940s until a coup in 1955 ousted them from power.