The Right Lane update 4.18.13

The pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free markets and individual liberty

"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington

To subscribe, see note below

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

U.S. ‘deporting Saudi person of interest’

What? How does this happen? This is not good. We can’t seem to deport anyone, yet a person of interest gets a pass?
Check it out:

An expert on terrorism says the Saudi national who was the original “person of interest” in connection with Monday’s Boston Marathon bombing is going to be deported from the U.S. next week.

The foreign student from Revere, Mass., is identified as 20-year-old Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi. “I just learned from my own sources that he is now going to be deported on national security grounds next Tuesday, which is very unusual,” Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism told Sean Hannity of Fox News Wednesday night.

The Reuters news agency reported President Barack Obama met with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal on Wednesday, noting “the meeting was not on Obama’s public schedule.”

After that meeting was mentioned, Emerson told Hannity, “That’s very interesting because this is the way things are done with Saudi Arabia. You don’t arrest their citizens. You deport them, because they don’t want them to be embarrassed and that’s the way we appease them.”

~~~~~~

WH Won’t Comment on Gosnell, Maintains Obama’s Support for Abortion By Fred Lucas

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney declined to comment on the trial of the Philadelphia abortionist charged with the murder of one woman and seven born babies, but stressed, “the president’s position on choice is very clear.” President Barack Obama, while serving in the Illinois state senate in 2003, opposed a born alive infant protection bill that would assure that a baby born after a botched abortion would be cared for.  Asked about this, Carney would not comment on whether the White House could support legislation to protect babies that are born alive from being terminated. The trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 72, began last month in Philadelphia and is expected to last until at least the end of April. Fox News reporter Ed Henry asked, “Is the president following this at all? Is the White House having any kind of reaction to that kind of situation that is alleged?” Carney responded, “The president is aware of this. The president does not and cannot take a position on an ongoing trial. So I won’t as well. Certainly the things that you hear and read about this case are unsettling. But I can’t comment further on an ongoing legal proceeding.” Henry followed, “The president as a state senator in 2003 voted against a bill that would provide medical care as I understand to babies who would be born after a botched abortion like this. The president at the time said he couldn’t support it as a state senator because he felt like any doctor in that situation would take care of a child. When you hear this kind of evidence, it suggests there is at least one doctor who apparently did not. I understand that you can’t deal with the deliberation of the case. But is there some legislative solution or at least a conversation that needs to happen in Washington because on guns you were just saying, we need common sense reform. We need to save lives. In this case do we need to be saving lives as well?”   Gosnell is charged with murder in the third degree for the death of a woman in November 2009 when she was overdosed with anesthetics. He is also facing seven murder charges for the deaths of infants who were killed after being born alive during the sixth, seventh and eighth month of pregnancy. The state has also charged Gosnell with infanticide, conspiracy, abortion at 24 or more weeks, abuse of a corpse, theft, and corruption of minors, solicitation and other related offenses, according to the District Attorney’s office in Philadelphia. Obama opposed the Illinois state born-alive bills in 2001, 2002 and 2003. The 2003 bill was assigned to the Illinois Senate Health and Human Services committee that Obama chaired.

In 2002 Congress passed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act 98-0, before Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate.

~~~~~~

Common Core Quietly Nationalizing Education by Tad Cronn

All across the United States, schools are falling in line with a federally backed “progressive” curriculum that critics fear will only produce generations of know-nothings and ensure America’s education system continues to fail its students.  The Common Core curriculum, which has been adopted by 46 states, according to the Washington Post, is long on teaching Progressive values and short on teaching accepted facts. The standards are expected to be implemented by 2014, although some schools have already begun using them. While in its curriculum descriptions Common Core sounds like it includes all the educational necessities, experts who’ve examined the actual lessons say that the program “teaches to the test” rather than pushing students to achieve individually, and its lessons rely heavily upon liberal interpretations of history, current events and other topics. The Common Core plan also has produced some recent outrages when lessons became public knowledge, such as the class which was assigned to pretend their teacher was a Nazi SS commandant and write a persuasive paper on why Jews are evil. President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan both lied publicly about the Common Core curriculum being developed by the states and adopted voluntarily when in fact adoption of the curriculum was tied to granting of federal “Race to the Top” dollars. Even though the Department of Education is prohibited by law from prescribing curriculum, it has used the $4.3 billion in grants as a carrot and implied in its 2009 Blueprint for Education Reform that the curriculum in the future will be a requirement for states that want Title 1 funding for poor schools. Former Texas State Commissioner of Education Robert Scott has said he was urged to adopt the Common Core program before the standards had even been written. “Lead architect” David Coleman is at the center of the controversy. While he’s not the only Dr. Frankenstein responsible for this monster, Coleman is certainly the man in charge and representative of the attitude that went into Common Core. Coleman is a Rhodes Scholar progressive with a reputation for peppering his presentations about Common Core with curse words. Or as the Atlantic calls him, “an utterly romantic believer in the power of the traditional liberal arts.” Many teachers are skeptical about his qualifications. California 2007 State Teacher of the Year Alan Lawrence Sitomer wrote on his blog, “(Coleman) has zero K–12 teaching experience. Should we really be learning how to cook from a person who’s never been in the kitchen?”  They may have no choice. Not only has Coleman’s plan been adopted by almost every state, seemingly under cover of night, but he is taking over as head of the College Board, so his standards may soon become the standards of state colleges and universities, as well.  “I’m scared of rewarding bull***t,” Coleman said while discussing current educational curricula at a Delaware education conference in October. “I don’t think it’s costless at all.”

Although Coleman sells the program as encouraging students to think about literature, science and other subjects, the baseline philosophy of Common Core, according to critics, isn’t to create students with a solid understanding of what might be considered “core knowledge,” but to create students who are designed and ready to be community activists. You can guess which causes they are intended to be activists for. Critics say the curriculum is obsessed with race, gender, class and sexuality as the primary shapers of history, culture and politics. Any way you slice it, Common Core represents nationalization of education. While local governments still retain control over things like reading lists, the program comes with its own series of tests, and Coleman has a goal to rewrite the SAT to match Common Core standards. Once the program is established in any location, minor points like who is in charge can change. Adding to the mix contributors like the Gates Foundation and GE does little to discourage thoughts along conspiracy lines, particularly when Coleman starts going on about students competing in the global economy. High-sounding intentions aside, the ultimate result of Common Core seems likely to be liberal indoctrination and the creation of an easily manipulated, reactionary populace. That may very well be exactly as intended.

~~~~~~

Rethinking Carbon-14 Dating: What Does It Really Tell Us about the Age of the Earth? by Jake Hebert, Ph.D.

Evolutionists have long used the carbon-14, or radiocarbon, dating technique as a “hammer” to bludgeon Bible-believing Christians. A straightforward reading of the Bible describes a 6,000-year-old universe, and because some carbon-14 (¹⁴C) age estimates are multiple tens of thousands of years, many think that the radiocarbon method has soundly refuted the Bible’s historical accuracy. However, these excessively long ages are easily explained within the biblical worldview, and ¹⁴C actually presents a serious problem for believers in an old earth. ¹⁴C has been detected in organic specimens (coal, wood, seashells, etc., containing carbon from formerly living organisms) that are supposedly hundreds of millions of years old—but no detectable ¹⁴C should be present in specimens that are even a little more than 100,000 years old! Nearly anyone can verify this for themselves using basic multiplication and division.

Radiocarbon Basics

Carbon comes in three “varieties” or isotopes: ¹²C, ¹³C, and ¹⁴C. Any carbon atom has six protons within its nucleus, but the different isotopes have different numbers of neutrons. In today’s world, only about one in a trillion carbon atoms is a ¹⁴C atom. Cosmic rays (mainly high-energy protons) trigger a process in the atmosphere that changes atmospheric nitrogen into ¹⁴C. However, unlike the other two carbon isotopes,¹⁴C is unstable and eventually decays back into nitrogen. The decay rate can be measured for a large number of these ¹⁴C atoms. Since this decay process slows as the number of ¹⁴C atoms decreases, it may be expressed best in terms of a half-life, which is the amount of time for half of any given sample of ¹⁴C to decay back into nitrogen. Thus, after one half-life, 50 percent of the original ¹⁴C atoms will remain. After two half-lives, 25 percent of the original ¹⁴C will remain, and so on. Today’s measured half-life of ¹⁴C is 5,730 years….

~~~~~~

Clowns to the Left of Me Alert: Leftist Hopes it’s a White Devil That Bombed Boston

As we now move into the official Political Aftermath period of the Boston bombing — the period that will determine the long-term legislative fallout of the atrocity — the dynamics of privilege will undoubtedly influence the nation’s collective reaction to the attacks. That’s because privilege tends to determine: 1) which groups are — and are not — collectively denigrated or targeted for the unlawful actions of individuals; and 2) how big and politically game-changing the overall reaction ends up being. This has been most obvious in the context of recent mass shootings. In those awful episodes, a religious or ethnic minority group lacking such privilege would likely be collectively slandered and/or targeted with surveillance or profiling (or worse) if some of its individuals comprised most of the mass shooters. However, white male privilege means white men are not collectively denigrated/targeted for those shootings — even though most come at the hands of white dudes. Likewise, in the context of terrorist attacks, such privilege means white non-Islamic terrorists are typically portrayed not as representative of whole groups or ideologies, but as “lone wolf” threats to be dealt with as isolated law enforcement matters. Meanwhile, non-white or developing-world terrorism suspects are often reflexively portrayed as representative of larger conspiracies, ideologies and religions that must be dealt with as systemic threats — the kind potentially requiring everything from law enforcement action to military operations to civil liberties legislation to foreign policy shifts.

~~~~~~

Obama Calls 2nd Amendment Groups Liars

President Obama angrily blamed the defeat Wednesday of his centerpiece gun-control proposal on lies spread by the National Rifle Association, calling it “a pretty shameful day for Washington.”

“The gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill,” Mr. Obama said in the White House rose garden about 90 minutes after the vote. “It came down to politics.” As he spoke, Mr. Obama was surrounded by family members of victims of the Newtown, Conn., school shooting. Also with him was former Rep. Gabby Giffords of Arizona, wounded in an assassination attempt. Senators voted 54-46 late Wednesday to expand background checks of gun purchases, six votes shy of the 60 needed for passage of the amendment. The vote was a huge blow to the president’s efforts since the Newtown, Conn., school massacre last December to enact a broad package of new gun laws. Mr. Obama and his team had considered background checks the most likely gun restriction to be approved by Congress, with polls showing as much as 90 percent of the public in favor of the measure immediately after the Newtown shootings.

~~~~~~

Obama Irate as Senate Votes Down Background Checks

An angry President Barack Obama denounced Senate Republicans on Wednesday for failing to pass stricter background checks on gun purchases, calling it a “pretty shameful day” for Washington.
Earlier, Senate Republicans, backed by rural-state Democrats, blocked legislation to tighten restrictions on the sale of firearms.  In recent weeks, the families of some of the victims of the December shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School pressed lawmakers with stories of personal loss, as Second Amendment advocates countered that none of the proposed changes would have stopped the grisly tragedy.
Attempts to ban assault-style rifles and high-capacity ammunition magazines also faced certain defeat in a series of showdown votes. The background check measure commanded a majority of senators, 54-46, but that was well short of the 60 votes needed to advance. A total of 41 Republicans and five Democrats pulled together to scuttle the plan.

The president alluded to polls that peaked at 90 percent of Americans supporting expanded background checks for convicted criminals and the severely mentally ill. He said “90 percent” of Democrats supported the bill, but “90 percent” of Republicans opposed it.  “There were no coherent arguments as to why we wouldn’t do this,” Obama said. “It came down to politics.”

Here stands a President that repeatedly lies about legislation he is pushing, will not come clean on Benghazi and disregarding the howls of discontent over Obamacare.  He is spoiled, disconnected and cannot believe the Senate acted in the best interest of the country while being deeply saddened by the Newtown slaughter of young lives.  He is not deep enough to engage both thoughts!

~~~~~~

Boston Bombing and Why Our Government Can’t Protect Us By Michelle Zook

Right now, we are our own worst enemies. In the face of senseless violence in Boston, we find ourselves once again facing the questions: Why would someone do this? What unspeakable evil possesses them to cause them to behave this way? Hating our policies and our country is one thing; plenty of people do that, grouse about American interference, burn a flag, and get over it. But what kind of hate does it take for someone to conceive of a plot like this and wantonly act on it?

There are no good answers to these questions. There will be conspiracy theories, there will be regrets, and there will be panic. It is the panic we must fear the most. When Americans panic, we turn to our government, and we demand that they protect us, we demand to know why they didn’t stop bad things from happening, and we demand to know what they will do in the future to keep us safe. The government will inevitably make promises it cannot keep. We will trade liberties for false securities, and the government will never give us those liberties back. There will be people who will warn us of this, but then, on the other side, will be those mouthing platitudes like, “Well, if it saves one life…” or “But it’s for the children,” and then, “But the government is supposed to protect us, and they need to be able to do this to protect us.” No. Stop it, right now. While the government didn’t plant those bombs, make no mistake.

What happened in Boston on Monday was an act of our government’s own making. It is a consequence of our incoherent energy policy — both foreign and domestic — and our failing, schizophrenic “peace in our time” appeasement mentality.  This is not just Obama’s fault, either, although a lack of anatomy isn’t helping his cause. Don’t forget that 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens, and undoubtedly the perpetrator(s) of this attack will also have Middle Eastern ties. What was the Bush administration’s reaction to this? We “distanced” ourselves from them, but their military still trains with ours, we still send foreign aid, and they still want us to deal with Iran so they don’t have to do it.

Instead of opening up ANWR for drilling and approving the Keystone XL Pipeline, our government is busy incentivizing wind power and electric cars that no one wants, keeping us dependent on foreign oil and driving our foreign policy. Instead of telling the Saudis and their cronies where to get off, we’re busy bowing to them, holding their hands, and exchanging kisses. While we’re buying their oil, they’re fostering terrorism on American soil.

Clearly, it’s time to play hardball with our Arab enemies, but our president throws like my three-year old daughter (actually, she may throw better, and she doesn’t rock mom jeans). This is one of those times I wish our president could muster a backbone and a little Texas swagger, because I’d be more than happy to loan him both.  If I was president, the Zook Doctrine would be in full effect — which in basic summation, says we’ll leave you alone if you leave us alone, but if you violate that and harm Americans, the whole might and force of America will rain down on you, and no, we won’t put it all back together for you when we’re done. In short, I’d be on the phone with King What’s-His-Name saying, “Geez, those are some nice holy cities you got there. Be a shame if something happened to ‘em.” We ought to tell the Saudis we’re immediately revoking every visa to their citizens at this point, we’re pulling our troops from the region, and we’re cutting all aid and funding off until we get real, meaningful apologies (and monetary compensation) for 9/11 and Boston. If they don’t like this, any future diplomacy can be conducted with B-2s, and we’ll roll the dice as to whether they’re loaded with conventional or nuclear weapons.

Unfortunately, I am not your president, I can’t loan our president what he needs, and there is that whole pesky energy policy. In the meantime, he will be more than happy to seize your civil liberties in exchange for false security. How many terrorists has the TSA stopped? And yet there is no sign of our Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights being restored in airports. But we can’t expect it to stop anytime soon, because once the government seizes a power, it never relinquishes it voluntarily, and no one seems to really care too much that our government is — and has been for over ten years — overstepping its bounds. Indeed, we can only look forward to the TSA expanding, and the DHS will use Boston as an excuse to ask for more power (because the DHS did such a GREAT job at protecting Americans in Boston, huh?). Your government cannot protect you. As we’ve seen the last several years, it can barely function, and can’t even do the jobs outlined for it in the Constitution. Do not let them take more power, because they will squander it and abuse it, and we will not be any safer for it. What happened in Boston was senseless and awful, but it is not an excuse to give up liberties Americans have fought and died for. Please do not let their deaths be in vain. If anything, use Boston to demand a change in our foreign policy and our energy policy — and hold your family a little more tightly tonight.

~~~~~~

"Happily for mankind, liberty is not, in this respect, confined to any single point of time, but lies within extremes, which afford sufficient latitude for all the variations which may be required by the various situations and circumstances of civil society." --James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 53, 1788
† † † † † † † † † † †