Byam Elementary School apparently has a gift shop they arrange every year during the holiday season. But in the interest of political correctness, religion must of course be promptly removed — we wouldn’t want to anger the atheists, after all — and Christmas is the holiday that’s most in the crosshairs.

After meeting with members of the Byam Elementary School PTO, two mothers asking to put the holidays back into the school’s annual holiday gift shop say Byam isn’t budging.

Kathryn McMillan and Kathleen Cullen, who both have children at Byam, asked school officials to allow all holiday items at the gift shop following a ban on Santa, candy canes, stockings, and all Christmas, Hanukkah and other “religious items.”

But a meeting with some PTO parents on Thursday night grew heated as emotions got in the way.

Red and green tissue paper to wrap presents was also crossed off the list because it looked too “Christmasy,” McMillan said.

“One of the parents said, ‘If we allow Santa, what do we say if a child brings in a swastika? Do we allow that too?’ ” McMillan said. “All I could think of was, are you kidding? You’re comparing a Christmas ornament to a swastika? It seems as if reason is lost somewhere and I just hope we can find it again.”

Superintendent Donald Yeoman told The Sun on Tuesday that the rules for the gift shop are under the authority of Byam Principal Jane Gilmore. Ultimately, said Yeoman, the policy for the gift shop was set so no child would feel left out.

“It’s operated under those same rules for a number of years with success and without complaint,” Yeoman said.

Until now.

Gilmore did not return a reporter’s phone call yesterday.

McMillan and Cullen have asked that if the children can’t celebrate their traditions – whatever they may be – at the holiday gift shop, then maybe the school should move the gift shop to another time of year.

Not all Chelmsford schools have adopted the same policy as Byam. The South Row Elementary School, and the former Westlands Elementary that closed last year, had no restrictions on gift-giving.

“It makes sense that the school probably makes the most money by holding the gift shop over the holidays,” McMillan added. “So all we’re asking is that if you’re letting kids buy gifts for the holidays, let them donate stuff that celebrates those traditions and use it as a teachable moment so these kids can learn.”

McMillan and Cullen will appear before the School Committee on Tuesday, Nov. 24.

It seems like these parents are the only ones who possess any reason whatsoever. But, as always, there is the one parent who gets OFFENDED!! for their children’s sake, and must ban Christmas, Santa, Christianity, and anything that might even resemble it. But going so far as to link Santa Claus to Nazi swastikas is taking it further than I think I’ve seen before. I mean, really, let’s see… we have Santa Claus, a saint who has grown into a myth, a man who believes in kindness and giving. And then there’s Nazis, who were responsible for the torture, starvation, slavery, and murders of over six million people. How does one’s mind link Santa Claus and Nazis? When someone mentions Christmas or Santa, how screwed up do you have to be to automatically think that letting a kid celebrate that in school means that you’re opening the door to celebrating Nazis? I mean, that’s one hell of a leap there. On top of that, the rules seem more than a little outrageous. You can’t even have red or green wrapping paper because it just might remind someone of Christmas? Good Lord, this takes worshipping at the altar of political correctness to a whole new level.

And for what it’s worth, I think the suggestion of McMillan and Cullen seem perfectly sound to me. If they won’t let children celebrate their respective holidays at the gift shop — Christmas, Hanukkah — then why not just move the gift shop to a different time of year and avoid the whole issue? Instead, the school has seemingly gone out of their way to deliberately snub religion. It’s simple, though. The school wants to capitalize on the holiday season without having to actually deal with those pesky holidays, and they know that having the gift shop in the middle of, say, September just wouldn’t be as profitable. I don’t begrudge them wanting to make money, but it seems hypocritical to want to make money off of the holiday season — and also by taking advantage of the festive, giving holiday spirit of parents — while being completely unwilling to include the holidays they’re capitalizing on.

And while surely if enough parents complain enough, the school will change the rules, it’s disturbing enough that this would even happen. This was a country built on faith-based principles, after all — and now, we have more and more schools trying to keep faith out of the public eye in any way, shape, or form.

Jane Gilmore, the religion hating principal of Byam Elementary School.

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary, or follow her on Twitter!

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The EPA has told two longtime agency veterans and outspoken critics of the administration’s cap-and-trade plan to remove any references to the agency in their critiques and to get approval for any future “outside writing projects.” That includes removing their critical video from You Tube.

Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel, a married couple and EPA lawyers in San Francisco, have been railing against cap-and-trade proposals for a while. Most recently, they had a sharply-worded op-ed in the Washington Post that said current legislation would be ineffective and even counterproductive.

The couple stressed that the views they expressed were their own — not the agency’s. But they also stressed that their years of experience with the EPA, and specifically working on other cap-and-trade programs, informed their views.

Compliments of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, the video our ecofascist rulers have tried to suppress can be seen here.

On a tip from Varla. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

BEIJING – President Barack Obama prodded China about Internet censorship and free speech, but the message was not widely heard in China where his words were blocked online and shown on only one regional television channel.

Irony? Serendipity? Coincidence? Or just plain pwned?

“I’m a big supporter of non-censorship,” Obama said. “I recognize that different countries have different traditions. I can tell you that in the United States, the fact that we have free Internet — or unrestricted Internet access — is a source of strength, and I think should be encouraged.”

Hmm, we’ll see how that non-censoring thing will work out as Democrats put together plans to take down Conservative talk radio. Oh, and then there was that little spat with Fox News, initiated by the White House.

Obama may have been hoping to set a personal example for China’s leaders when he said he believes that free discussion, including criticism that may be annoying to him, makes him “a better leader because it forces me to hear opinions that I don’t want to hear.”

Spat. Fox News. Fight with Limbaugh. Fight with Hannity. Joe the Plumber. Kevin Miller. Barbara West. Hiring Cass Sunstein, a man who is all about censoring the Internet.

Look, I applaud Obama’s cajones in answering the question in that manner as he stands on Chinese soil. Kudos to him, in all seriousness. But, considering his own opinions and actions here in the US, he really does not have the moral authority to lecture the Chinese.

Just for reference, Pirate’s Cove is banned in China, along with my test site. Not sure about Stop The ACLU or Right Wing News, since the site designed to tell you if your site is blocked has been taken down. Unsurprisingly, The Huffington Post is now unblocked in China, though, the Huff Post’s opinions are farther left then the Chinese governments. But, they have blocked I Can Has Cheeseburger! That’s just mean. See here and here for lists of some who have been blocked.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

We read:

“A swastika along Highway 36 flown on private property in Junction City is just one example of hate speech in Lane County, according to County Commissioner Pete Sorenson. He says flags like this are legal on private property, but he still doesn’t want to see them. “This kind of hate speech is just not welcome in our community,” he says.

In light of this recent swastika flag, county commissioners met late last month and voted on the “Proclamation Against Hate Speech.” Basically, commissioners are using their free speech to condemn this type of speech. They can condemn it but not change it. “As most people know, the swastika is a symbol of hatred,” says Sorenson. “We feel while we cannot regulate that kind of speech under the federal and Oregon constitution, we feel we certainly can condemn it. And that’s exactly what we did.”

Source

It’s difficult to know who is the dimmest here. The flag illustrated is NOT a symbol of hate. It is an Indian good luck symbol. You see them all over the place in India. In the Indian “swastik”, the arms normally point to the left. In the Nazi Hakenkreuz, they point to the right. The Nazis did NOT refer to their symbol as a “swastika”. It was the English who created that confusion. The German term translates as “Hooked Cross”.

But the learned commissioner was not the only dummy. The guy who put the flag up apparently was comparing Obama to Hitler — which is legitimate political speech, though something of an exaggeration. After all, Bush=Hitler was repeated ad nauseam from 2000 to 2008.

Posted by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. To keep up with attacks on free speech see TONGUE-TIED. Also, don’t forget your daily roundup of pro-environment but anti-Greenie news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH . Email me here

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

In a case that raises questions about online journalism and privacy rights, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day.

The grand jury subpoena also required the Philadelphia-based Indymedia.us Web site “not to disclose the existence of this request” unless authorized by the Justice Department, a gag order that presents an unusual quandary for any news organization.

Kristina Clair, a 34-year old Linux administrator living in Philadelphia who provides free server space for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked to receive the Justice Department’s subpoena. (The Independent Media Center is a left-of-center amalgamation of journalists and advocates that — according to their principles of unity and mission statement — work toward “promoting social and economic justice” and “social change.”)

The subpoena (PDF) from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded “all IP traffic to and from www.indymedia.us” on June 25, 2008. It instructed Clair to “include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information,” including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers’ Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.

Clair turned to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which dug into whether Big Government is supposed to be able to behave like this.

Under long-standing Justice Department guidelines, subpoenas to members of the news media are supposed to receive special treatment. One portion of the guidelines, for instance, says that “no subpoena may be issued to any member of the news media” without “the express authorization of the attorney general” — that would be current attorney general Eric Holder — and subpoenas should be “directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter.”

Still unclear is what criminal investigation U.S. Attorney Morrison was pursuing. Last Friday, a spokeswoman initially promised a response, but Morrison sent e-mail on Monday evening saying: “We have no comment.” The Justice Department in Washington, D.C. also declined to respond.

Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, replied to the Justice Department on behalf of his client in a February 2009 letter (PDF) outlining what he described as a series of problems with the subpoena, including that it was not personally served, that a judge-issued court order would be required for the full logs, and that Indymedia did not store logs in the first place.

Morrison replied in a one-sentence letter saying the subpoena had been withdrawn. Around the same time, according to the EFF, the group had a series of discussions with assistant U.S. attorneys in Morrison’s office who threatened Clair with possible prosecution for obstruction of justice if she disclosed the existence of the already-withdrawn subpoena…

For more info on this alarming example of applied Obamunist Transparency:

Bankston has written a longer description of the exchange of letters with the Justice Department, which he hopes will raise awareness of how others should respond to similar legal demands for Web logs, customer records, and compulsory silence. “Our fear is that this kind of bogus gag order is much more common than one would hope, considering they’re legally baseless,” Bankston says. “We’re telling this story in hopes that more providers will press back and go public when the government demands their silence.”

Hopefully liberals who believe in at least some of the fundamental principles of liberty that make America America, will awaken soon to the nature of what they have wrought by allowing the Moonbat Messiah and his gang of sleazy neo-Marxists into the White House.

On a tip from nancz. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

With increasing threats, lawsuits and exposure over what constitutes a ‘legal Christmas season’ in this country, it is astounding albeit wonderful, that the current White House administration, President and Congress have not decided to remove the word Christmas or Christ from the upcoming tree lighting ceremony in Washington D.C.

Current reports on the NPS.gov webpage have the traditional ceremony of the National Christmas Tree Lighting happening on December 3rd this year at the Elipse, south of the White House grounds in Washington D.C. Each year the National Park Service and National Park Foundation sponsor the tree lighting ceremony that helps kick off a four week Christmas celebration in the U.S. Capital.

Kudos to Barry for keeping it as such, but, you know there would be apoplexy were he to rename it the National Holiday Tree.

In early October, school children in Arizona were asked to make decorations for the National Christmas Tree. Those who made ornaments referring to Christ or Christmas were told they had to redo their artwork in order to leave out Christ. After the Alliance Defense Fund became involved, sending a letter to the NPS stating that banning such ornaments was unconstitutional, the NPS agreed and changed their mind on the religious ornament ban. Children have constructed thousands of ornaments this year, thankfully now without fear of rejection due to their religious depictions on them. The ornaments will be placed on the nearly 65 foot tree that will grace the grounds near the White House starting December 3rd.

As many conservative and tradition-loving Christians look forward to various tree lighting ceremonies during the upcoming Christmas season, some still hold their breath waiting to see which extremist anti-Christian organization will throw a fit over someone else celebrating their own religion and sharing those celebrations with the rest of the majority in the United States.

It has almost become a game, waiting to see who will do what. The writer, Karen McCracken (cool name!), then offers up even more examples, then offers some advice

While it is absolutely important to stand up for our rights to worship and celebrate as we see fit – no matter our religion – the meaning of Christmas is not removed when the word Christmas is removed from the name of an event. (Such as what has been done to the Hollywood Christmas Parade this year; recently renamed The Hollywood Santa Parade.) The God who is my Heavenly Father is not taken away when a Christmas Parade is taken away from the community nor will Christ disappear merely because His name is removed from a worldly event.

She is correct that the season is not about those things, and shouldn’t be about those things. Jesus is in our heart. The season is about His message. Unfortunately, there are those that attempt to turn the entire thing into something secular that should only be practiced in the privacy of our own homes, rather than acknowledging the reason for the season.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The ruling by the court in Strasbourg, which Italy said it would appeal, said crucifixes on school walls — a common sight that is part of every Italian’s life — could disturb children who were not Christians.

That is, Muslim colonists might not like that Italy has been a Christian country since Constantine converted to Christianity in the 4th century.

Even some commies are aghast:

Paola Binetti, a Catholic in the opposition Democratic Party, the successor of what was once the West’s largest communist party, said: “In Italy, the crucifix is a specific sign of our tradition.”

Education Minister Mariastella Gelmini concurs:

The history of Italy is marked by symbols and if we erase symbols we erase part of ourselves.

This of course is exactly why progressive Eurocrats want crucifixes banned. The objective is not just to suppress Christianity, which is hardly even defended anymore; it is to eradicate Western civilization. That’s why no effective measures are taken to save Europe from the ongoing Muslim demographic conquest — and why amnesty will soon open the door to massive Third World colonization of the USA.

On a tip from mega. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The climate-change bill that has been moving slowly through the Senate will face a stark political reality when it emerges for committee debate on Tuesday: With Democrats deeply divided on the issue, unless some Republican lawmakers risk the backlash for signing on to the legislation, there is almost no hope for passage.

Most Republicans will vote no, if they know what is good for their political careers, much less their constituents. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) could face some very stiff competition come 2014 for his support of this craptacular legislation for this fake issue.

So Democratic leaders, with the support of the Obama administration, are trying to sway at least half a dozen Republicans by offering amendments to speed along their top priority: building nuclear power plants.

In other words, bribes that are things we should be doing already. Bribes that will be forgotten by Democrats minutes after the passage of a cap and tax bill. Bribes that could actually be over-written with legislation after cap and tax is passed.

“There is nowhere near 60 votes for a nuclear power bill on its own. There’s not 60 votes for a cap-and-trade bill as it’s currently constructed,” Graham said in an interview. He said combining the two measures is “the only way you’ll get to 60 votes.”

Democrats have been whining about “clean energy” for years. France uses a majority of nuclear energy. Why can’t we? Nuclear energy would seem a slam dunk. But, this whole charade is not about “going green,” but about control of countries, economies, and private citizens. Because the science is not “settled.” If anything, more and more information comes out as scientists feel emboldened to actually go against the Approved Doctrine. Two researchers at MIT have cast doubts on the UN IPCC climate modeling. A team of scientists have sent a letter saying that consensus is fake.

But, just remember: if we don’t “do something,” puppies will drown and bunnies will die. And all you skeptics are child murderers. Which is why governments, such as the Australian one, try to gag publications. It’s for your own good, especially when they lie about the overall costs. And if you are a big climate polluter, you should be treated like a murderer.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

A few days ago, Hans Bader writing for Stop the ACLU reported on the hate crimes legislation Bill. This article is intended to be a further discussion of what is behind the language in the Bill. The question is, is double jeopardy a factor in this new legislative language?

The answer is kinda-sorta. It’s really more about The Dual Sovereignty Doctrine negating the double jeopardy clause in the 5th Amendment.

The government now does have the right to try hate crime suspects after they have been tried by the state, and even if already tried and found guilty by the state. This position is confirmed by a letter from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to members of the U.S. Senate. Read it at NationaReviewOnLine. So how does it happen a person can be tried twice for the same crime?

Here is a portion that I believe gives the DOJ the opportunity to retry a hate crime: (The text of the Bill is here).

(b) (1) IN GENERAL – No prosecution of any offense described in the subsection may be undertaken by the United States, except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, or his designee, that- (C) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence; or (D) a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice.

(b) (2) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the authority of Federal officers, or a Federal grand jury, to investigate possible violations of this section.

This gives the DOJ the right to try any case on behalf of a victim they feel has not received justice, while also eliminating “the badges…and relics of slavery and involuntary servitude.”

A quick reading of the Bill might lead you to think it will simply “support” state’s with money, but it goes much deeper than the $5 million to be given to states in each of the years 2010 and 2011. If a state can “certify” the need for government assistance to “investigate or prosecute the hate crime,” then that state will get that assistance. But read about the”sham and cover” exception a few paragraphs below. We have to ask why this administration believes this legislation is necessary.

The Dual Sovereignty Doctrine expects those administering under the Doctrine to “limit” their actions. This from TheFreeLibrary:

The court did not, however, fully eliminate the double jeopardy prohibition from this context. The dual sovereignty doctrine continues to be limited by what is referred to as the “sham” exception, which was described by the Bartkus Court.

The sham exception provides that a prosecution by one sovereign cannot be used as a “sham and a cover” for another sovereign’s re-prosecution of the same defendant.

This doctrine would operate to prevent, on double jeopardy grounds, a prosecution brought by one sovereign with the encouragement and support of another sovereign that has already failed in its attempt to prosecute the same defendant.

The doctrine is founded on the rationale that the two sovereigns are acting as one. Unfortunately, this exception has been construed so narrowly as to make it difficult to be utilized successfully.

Apparently, this DOJ and Barack Obama believe that justice is not done often enough, and courts do not punish, often enough, those who commit hate crimes. So the question remains: is it possible for any violent crime to be classified as a “hate crime” when it is perpetrated against a Jewish or a white person?

[Emphasis by Lobo]

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Kansas City Chiefs running back Larry Johnson issued his second apology in 12 months Tuesday and was told to stay away from the team while the NFL and the Chiefs complete their investigation into his use of a gay slur.

As Johnson was releasing his apology, a national gay rights advocacy organization called on the league and the team to take disciplinary action against the two-time Pro Bowl selection.

#2

ESPN broadcaster Bob Griese has been suspended for one week for a remark he made about NASCAR driver Juan Pablo Montoya.

Network spokesman Josh Krulewitz said Griese would not be working a college football game this week. Krulewitz said ESPN has spoken to Griese and “he understands the comment was inappropriate.”

During ESPN’s coverage of the Minnesota-Ohio State game on Saturday, a graphic was shown listing the top five drivers in NASCAR’s points race. Fellow analyst Chris Spielman asked: Where was Montoya?

Griese replied, “Out having a taco.”

#3

Pauline Howe, 67, a committed Christian, was questioned by two police officers after she wrote a letter to Norwich City Council about its decision to allow the march.

She wrote: “It is shameful that this small, but vociferous lobby should be allowed such a display unwarranted by the minimal number of homosexuals.”

#4

Florida Democrat Rep. Alan Grayson issued a written apology Tuesday evening for a comment for a month-old comment that has stirred controversy on Capitol Hill in recent days.

During a September radio interview, Grayson called Linda Robertson, an aide to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke who has also worked as a lobbyist, a “K Street whore.”

Hmm, that’s weird, the last one has no consequences, despite being a supposed elected public official. Imagine had he been a Republican. Good thing he didn’t use a gay or racial slur, he might have been in big trouble.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post