Friday, October 29, 2010
Society • Political Zingers For Election Day-VOTE CAREFULLY!
Is Christine O’Donnell REALLY dumb as Dems trumpet? Did Meg Whitman knowingly hire and keep an illegal on her payroll? And of special interest to residents of the California Bay Area, in particular, Contra Costa County—what are the newspapers hiding?
During a political debate with Christine O’Donnell running for the Delaware Congressional Seat, the question came up from her opponent regarding the Separation of Church and State. Ms. O’Donnell said that the idea of Separation of Church and State was not in the constitution, which prompted cackles, werewolf howls and clucking from the mainly democrat attendance. The Dem newspapers crowed that Ms. O’Donnell was a dumbbell who did not know her history or the constitution. WRONG!
Ms. O’Donnell is absolutely right. The First Amendment erroneously referred to, addresses the states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free excercise thereof.” This protects all from having the government establish and mandate which church is THE church. It goes on to declare that the government could not prohibit the free excercise thereof (of freely carrying out your religious practices). PERIOD.
It was to this phrase that Thomas Jefferson referred to the Danbury Baptist Convention and acknowledged that this created a wall of separation between Church & State, meaning that the government cannot dictate HOW or WHERE you worship. One is free to practice his religion in America without government interference. That is the very intent of those words.
The word ‘intent’ is an important legal word. Intent, or lack of intent is crucial to a murder trial. And so must it be regarding the guidlines set forth by our founding fathers. This blog would like to see one of the public service law firms open a case about the proper intepretation of this clause that has been totally perverted by the Socialist Democrats who will use any excuse possible to try and outlaw Christianity.
Meg Whitman, running for governor of California against Jerry Brown was accused by the Dems of hiring an illegal immigrant to work in her home and that she kept her even though she knew full well her employee was illegal. WHOA! HOLD ON THERE! Ms. Whitman hired the employee from a reputable employment agency, who has the duty to check all references and status. They did not. When Ms. Whitman was notified by ICE that her employee was illegal, she immediately fired her….the moment she learned about it. Gloria Allred, the hustling attorney who will do anything to serve the left has been working with the illegal and coaching her what to say and how to say it in order to harm Ms. Whitman.
The California Bay Area is known to be anti-Christian, anti-God, anti-religion. It’s a free-for-all-out-of-control society out here that wants to do what it wants with no restrictions, and, depending how the election goes, might even be able to legally puff some joints while they’re doing it.
However, the East County which is on the outskirts of the Bay Area may offer some hope. Here we have Parsons running for City Council along with a Pope!
Martha Parsons is running for the Antioch City Council while in Oakley, Randy Pope is vying for a seat. Things just might get better out here.
The race for Contra Costa County District Attorney has special interest for this writer. The letter below was published by the Brentwood Press, Rick Lemyre-editor and was also submitted to The Contra Costa Times as an Op-Ed Opinion Piece. Despite several contacts with that paper, they have not published my endorsement, possibly due to their involvement in the bogus case listed below. If the piece is not published by this Sunday, then this issue will be expounded upon.
Here is what was submitted:
Think Carefully About Voting For Dan O’Malley!
We do not want another district attorney who is interested only in convictions. We’ve already had that. We need one who is interested in justice, period. A former D.A. took pride in convictions and while running for re-election, did not have the backing of law enforcement. To gain their support he opened a bogus case against me, falsely accusing me of being an enemy of police officers and publishing the home address of a sheriff. I knew nothing about this action until I read about it in the Times. Determined to convict me in order to gain police endorsement, that D.A. made sure that I could not speak at the ‘trial’ nor could i challenge any “evidence,” which I could have definitely proved false. A staff prosecutor, Dan O’Malley conducted the case for his boss and was to carry out his instructions. As the proceedings unfolded, I knew in my heart that Mr. O’Malley knew full well that I was being railroaded. He was visibly disturbed over what he was required to do. I have since become acquainted with Mr. O’Malley and know beyond doubt that he would be a fair District Attorney who would prosecute the bad guys, but never someone innocent. My vote is for Dan O’Malley as District Attorney. Voters,think very carefully about this as you may unexpectedly wind up in court yourself and would want someone in charge who seeks justice not just convictions.
Rev. Austin Miles