America, Faith, and The Moral Compass

I was reading a post on Another Black Conservative where Cliff made the observation that our society's moral compass is in disrepair on his post about the latest photos released by TMZ on Anthony Weiner's obsession with taking pictures of his private parts. My comment to him was that it is more than just in disrepair, the compass is on all out life support. Cliff was really talking about how we get the government we deserve. What does it say when Weiner's district wants him to stay in office?



I truly believe that America's turn to the type of permissiveness that allows this to happen can be traced back to the court case that forever changed the way we view religion in our country. While it doesn't have the name recognition that a Brown V. Board of Ed has, the change in our country has been substantial. McCollum v. Board of Ed was a landmark decision in this country. Many people don't realize that the words separation of church and state don't exist in our constitution. I remember years back I stupidly took a job with a progressive DM agency thinking I could just put my head down and do my job. I went for the paycheck instead of my principles. It didn't go well to say the least. I was a fish out of water. I am sure that the majority of people there backed Obama over Hillary years ago in the primary, and I would feel safe in saying that they don't feel Obama has gone far enough. Don't get me wrong, most of them were very nice people who I happened to disagree with. Bush was in office at the time and the Bush bashing was done on a regular basis. I was talking to a young guy about something. I can't recall what the conversation was actually about but I had mentioned to him that it doesn't exist in the constitution. He didn't believe me. I told him if he could find it I would give him $1,000. I also told him to do some research on Judge Hugo Black, the former KKK member. Yes, that is right we had a KKK member on the highest court of the land at one time in this country. McCollum was a case brought by an atheist mom who didn't like that her local school system had VOLUNTARY religious classes. The premise of her case was that her son was subject to ridicule due to the fact that he didn't attend these classes. The classes were put on by a council that included Jews, Protestants, and Roman Catholics. This was designed specifically to give children a choice in religious education. This was not done to exclude anyone nor was it forced on anyone. It well-known how the KKK felt about Catholics and Jews.


The battle to remove God from our lives has been an ongoing struggle in this country for about a century, but this case in particular made major changes. This case opened the door for the ACLU to sue at the drop of the hat over high school graduations, Christmas celebrations done in the squares of small towns and big cities across this nation. They rarely miss an opportunity to do so. The founders of this country were very clear about what they wanted for the country. No federally mandated religion was to be allowed, but they wanted a society that could openly worship. The founders believed that in order for a society to survive it must have a moral compass.


Morality of course is in the eye of beholder. But by relegated religion to almost a back room status we have opened our society up to changing social norms and we have acquiesced what it is that we find acceptable in our society. Look at the things that the far left can accomplish by pushing religion to the back burner. Abortion on demand, because human life is no longer kept at the forefront. We are also seeing a push for assisted suicide. You can face heavy fines for damaging bird eggs in this country, but you can kill an unborn human being at will. The left never has to answer for this hypocrisy because the unborn is no longer characterized as life. It is just a bunch of cells. If it feels good, do it. If you want to have sex with five different partners in one week, go ahead. There shouldn't be any differences between men and women, when the differences are long, varied, and obvious. The stay at home traditional mom is vilified and the men who support the traditional mom are called Neanderthals, even by people on the right.


What organizations like the ACLU have done is diminish our society, not improve it. They have given us a society that allows a congressman to take naked pictures of his private parts and have no price to pay. The polls in Weiner's district show that they are OK with what he did and don't feel he needs to step aside. What kind of twisted logic does it take to write off his behavior as a personal failing and say that his personal judgement in no way gets in the way of his professional judgement to make decisions that effects the lives of everyday Americans? If Anthony Weiner worked in the private sector and his job found out he was texting pictures of himself wearing next to nothing while working out in the company gym he would be fired, yet we have people in this country who think that he should still be allowed to continue in the legislative body of our federal government. This is a loss of a moral compass. This is a loss of faith in our society and our God. The fact that the congressman worships God in a different fashion than I do, is irrelevant to me. What is relevant to me is that people like him are constantly pushing for more and more laws in this country that take away my rights to worship freely and openly, yet gives government a larger say in my life and how I live it. The same government that says it is OK for him to keep his position.


I say no thank you to the liberalism view that it is OK for the government/public school systems to decide how I feed my child, because I may not pick the foods that are "healthy" or to decide for me how often I can use my air conditioner to save the planet against man-made global warming when the science for this is still unclear and recent events have left many questioning if this is not just some money-making hoax. A government that hires people who specialize in using marketing tools to get the public to do what it wants and the main stream media covering the story like it is a good thing instead of the scary thing that it really is. Yet doesn't feel that what Anthony Weiner did rises to the level of bringing dishonor to the House of Representatives than we as a society no longer have a moral compass. When a sitting member of congress who was writing tax laws for the rest of us slubs is cheating on his taxes and is allowed to stay in congress we have lost our moral compass. When the people in the district of Charlie Rangel re-elected him knowing he was a cheat saying "they all do it" we have lost our moral compass. When we allow people to work on Capitol Hill that owe back taxes we have lost our moral compass. When the U.S. Senate confirms a man who is a tax cheat to head Treasury, we have lost our moral compass. By turning our back to faith and to God, we have created a society that is losing its moral compass.


What liberals need to realize is that practicing faith out in the open will only enrich our society. By having acts of faith in our town squares will help bring our moral compass back to life. It is nothing to fear, as you will not be forced to participate. But you will wreak the benefits of a society that cherishes values that don't allow people like Anthony Weiner and Charlie Rangel to continue to serve at the highest levels of government when anyone in the private sector would pay a high price for the behavior. We would all benefit from expecting our government officials to act in a moral and ethical way.

Quote of the Day - Charlie Rangel Edition - Part 3

"I know one thing: He wasn’t going out with prostitutes, he wasn’t going out with little boys, he wasn’t going into men’s rooms with broad stances. All of those things I understand...I even don’t understand that type of stuff to be honest with you. But he apologizes for it. So I, like everyone else, have to assume it’s not proper conduct. But I don’t know what he did, who he offended."

Charlie Rangel on Anthony Weiner

Yes, apparently he only knows one thing if he can't figure out that sending an unsolicited photo of your naked penis to someone would be considered offensive to many people. 

Jack ass.

It truly is a club in congress, they think they can do whatever they want and get away with it.  Sadly, the American people for the most part let them.

The Charlie Two Step

This is classic.  He is guilty of "sloppiness".   Amazing.

Quote of the Day - Pete King Edition

Why yes, this is the equivalent of life in prison.



“I don’t believe the findings warrant the censure. Censure is a very extreme penalty. If expulsion is [like] the death penalty, censure is life in prison.”

Congressman Pete King on Charlie Rangel's Censure

Censure is like life in prison.  It took a total about two minutes of standing in the well while Nancy Pelosi read a very short statement and it recommended that he pay his back taxes. 


Recommended that he pay his back taxes?  Wouldn't I be in jail if I hadn't paid mine?  I am pretty sure that Wesley Snipes would say yes. 

I don't know King's voting record very well and he seems to be quite tough on terrorism, but at least on this issue he is jackass.  It truly is a club, regardless of party.

Go West - Allen West on the CBC and Lewis' Racebased Defense of Ethically Challenged Charlie Rangel

Pulling out the race card to some how justify Charlie Rangel's corruption is low.  So is Lewis saying because he was at Selma in the 60's he now has a get out _________ card for the rest of his life?  Where exactly is the line drawn?  One of the things that Rangel did that was horrible was using four rent control apartments for his own use.  Four families did not get those apartments.  Aren't they part of  the reason that they went to Selma?  The majority of the people who live in Charlie Rangel's district are minorities. 

So Mr. Lewis, what exactly can't Rangel do? 

Guilty - Rangel Found Guilty on 11 Charges of Ethics Violations

Say it ain't so.  A person who has been serving in congress for forty years has problems understanding the rules of congress.  Rangel was just soundly re-elected even though the people in his district were well aware of the charges that were pending. 

One of the charges that I found so egregious is the four rent controlled apartments.  Harlem is an area that has a pretty substantial population that lives near or below the poverty line, yet he takes four affordable apartments away from them to use in violation of law.  This goes directly to his character and how he really views the people he was sent to Washington to represent.  There are families in Harlem who are not getting those rent control apartments because he is using them.  He makes a good income, I am sure that there are people who are in more need of the rent controlled apartment than he is.  This is a man who owns a brownstone in Manhattan and rental property in the Caribbean.  Somehow it seems to me that he could afford to live without rent controls.  Especially since one of those apartments was used as campaign headquarters; a violation of his lease. 

Then we can move on to his tax issues.  It is pretty hard to believe that the man who was the chairman of the committee that writes tax law doesn't understand the law.  You collect rent from property you own, you have to report it as income on your year end taxes.  That really isn't all that complicated; actually it is pretty simple. 

These findings came a day after Rangel walked out of the hearing saying he no longer had legal representation.  Rangel and his law team had some sort of falling out last month and he has yet to replace them.  The ethics committee refused to extend this hearing any longer yesterday.  The investigations into these charges have been continuing for more than a year.  More than enough time for him to set up a legal defense fund.  The law firm has released statement saying that they tried to work with Rangel within the congressional guidelines and were unable to.  I guess the question I have is why not take out a mortgage on your brownstone in Manhattan or your rental property on the beach?  That is what us commoners would have to do. 

Rangel released the following statement after the findings:

"How can anyone have confidence in the decision of the Ethics Subcommittee when I was deprived of due process rights, right to counsel and was not even in the room?"

No one forced Charlie out of the room.  He choose to get up and walk out.  Something that I have this feeling that I wouldn't be able to do if I were called in front of congress.  The committe chair explained that Rangel has been given information on how to raise money for a legal defense on numerious occassions.  He continued with his statement with:

"I can only hope that the full Committee will treat me more fairly, and take into account my entire 40 years of service to the Congress before making any decisions on sanctions."

So, I guess they are supposed to look at him being a life-long legislator as a good thing?  The thing that I find the most odd is why he wanted the hearing to be put off.  He has a much better chance of not being expelled from the House from this sitting congress than the next one.  Expulsion takes a two thirds majority, a level that they will not be able to reach with the current make up. 
Even CREW isn't buying Rangel's excuses:

"All of Mr. Rangel's theatrics aside, the facts were clear: Mr. Rangel violated numerous House rules and federal laws.  Whether these violations were deliberate or inadvertent, the American people deserve to be represented by members of Congress who adhere to the highest ethical standards. Mr. Rangel should resign."

Charlie Rangel's Long and Disjointed Statement on His Ethics Violations Charges

This is very long, but you will find it stunning.  Some highlights:

His district doesn't care what he does, they will re-elect him anyway.

He goes after the bluedogs that he at one time went and campaigned for.

He honestly doesn't understand why people are questioning his ethics, he claims that the landlord knew that he was using a rent controlled apartment for an election office.  He further claims that the landlord was having problems finding people to rent the apartment.  I wonder if all the people in Harlem would agree with that? 

Murder and Victimhood in Manchester, CT

Omar Thornton walked into his workplace a few days ago and killed eight people and then himself.  Before turning the gun on himself he made a call to 9-1-1 and calmly explained his actions:

"They're treating me bad over here. And treat all other black employees bad over here, too," Thornton explained in a measured tone. "So I took it to my own hands and handled the problem. I wish I could have got more of the people."

He says he was victim of racial discrimination.  He and his union official were there to attend a meeting with his employer to be fired.  The company had video of him stealing beer to re-sell it. 

The beer distributor that he worked for says that they have no record of any racial discrimination claims made by him.  Having grown up in CT, I can tell you without hesitation it is very difficult to legally fire someone in that state.  The laws are all on the side of the employee, even without you being in an union.  The fact that his meeting also included his union official would make it even harder to fire him.  So, for it to reach this point, you can bet dollars to doughnuts that they had the goods to make a legal firing.  Another arrest has been made of an accomplice of the theft.  Another employee is also being investigated. 

What is one of the more disturbing parts of the aftermath of this story is the fact that his family is still hanging onto the race angel in this story.  They are trying to turn him into some sort of martyr for the cause of racism.  It would seem they have no concept of the fact that not only are innocent people dead, the families of the dead no longer have their loved ones. 

I have said many times before that racism still exists in our country, but the reality is the majority of people in this country want to get past it.  The current environment it has become increasingly difficult to do so.  Racism charges are all over the news.

Maxine Waters first line of defense is to cry racism.  Charlie Rangle is not far behind.  Waters has been the list of most corrupt politicians on and off for many years now.  Her husband sat on the board of a bank that received bailout funds after her using her power and influence to get a meeting for a bank that otherwise would not qualify.  She personally profited from this transaction.  That has nothing to do with the color of her skin, but the content of her lack of character.  Rangel uses much needed rent controlled living space for himself and his local offices.  A violation of his lease, and a slap in the face to the poor people that he represents.  He can't be doing all that badly if he makes 175K a year, has brownstone in Manhattan, and a condo in the Caribbean.  Again, this is not about his skin color it is about him using his power and influence in ways that he shouldn't be while the rest of us get screwed. 

There are real dangers to flaunting the race card.  Didn't President Clinton recently say that creating an atmosphere that allows individuals to think acting out in a violent way is an inevitable outcome to all the negative messaging that is being thrown out in the media.  I realize he was talking about "tea baggers", but isn't it the same thing? 

Thornton most obviously had problems.  Rational people don't bring shotguns to a work meeting.  The media of course isn't making this connection.  Shocker!  But this needs to be brought up.  His family almost sounds like they are justifying his behavior. 

For the sake of argument, lets suppose his boss was a racist.  Is a shotgun the way to solve that problem?  There are laws in place to handle these type of situations.  Without having much information on the company's workplace environment (No complaints recorded as far back as 2001) a final conclusion cannot be made.  But what we do know is that he viewed himself as a victim. 

That is what playing the race does, it turns you into a victim.  The constant messages that we are hearing about race of late only intensifies that.  Tea party people dislike Obama's skin color, it has nothing to do with fiscal conservatives being against the tax and spend policies that this administration is pursuing.  A typical view of Obama and black people being the victims, that people like Sharpton and the raaacism complex keep putting out there. 

These messages are also coming from high levels within our government, and they need to stop.  AG Holder said we are nation of cowards when it comes to race relations.  Well, Mr. Attorney General put your money where your mouth is and come out against the false charges of racism that are being bandied about.  These are very serious charges that have real legal consequences.  They are also charges that continue the narrative that people of color are victims; when what they are is Americans. 

The charges have been levied so often since Obama has taken office that they virtually lost all meaning.  That is except for those 8 families of the dead. 

For those that have come over from that filthy racist site, please just go away.  You are not welcome here.  I don't like false claims of racism, but what I hate even more is real racism.  

Obama Says Rangel Should End Career with Dignity

"I think Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served-- his constituents very well. But these-- allegations are very troubling,"
"And he'll-- he's somebody who's at the end of his career. Eighty years old. I'm sure that-- what he wants is to be able to-- end his career with dignity. And my hope is that-- it happens. "

President Obama to Harry Smith on The Early Show

The President and Nanny Pelosi keep talking about how they are not worried about the dems losing control of the house in November.  Hmm, the above statement seems like that is not the case.  No one can believe that Obama would be saying this had the ethics committee not come out with charges yesterday.  Rangel's seat could easily be lost if the trial gets ugly and is drawn out as the elections draw closer.  One would think that the people of Harlem are not going to be happy about the fact that Rangel is not only using a rent controlled apartment for his headquarters for re-election, but actually has 4 apartments in that building.  Those are homes that are needed by the people who live in that district, a rent controlled apartment in one of New York's poorest community is a valuable thing to a low income family. 

Also, how does a man who only makes $175,000 per year have a brownstone in Manhattan, and a vacation home in the Carribean?  Oh, I guess those rent controlled apartments did serve a purpose.