The Bible, Christianity, and Reason vs. Political-Correctness about Homosexuality

 While the media continues to brow-beat Americans into bowing to the "equal rights" agenda of the LGBT lobby, many are still speaking and preaching the truth that is now considered politically-incorrect as new legislation is advanced.  Here below is a plain speaking Sunday Sermon worth hearing against the politicizing of homosexuality, and even "same-sex marriage" (an oxymoron) now, into forced acceptance (by about 2 percent of the population upon everyone else!), and a thorough review of what the Bible plainly teaches as Christian doctrine on the subject.   The preacher goes through the Bible thoroughly demonstrating the opposition of God, who does not "make" homosexuals as either a gender, or condone their perverse and unnatural behavior (any more than He does the incestuous, pedophiles, zoophiles [beastiality, as is now reported], adulterers, etc), but to the contrary has historically abhorred, abominated, outlawed, banished, and punished it in no uncertain terms as a social disease and a provoking crime against heaven which he threatens to judge.  (Here is the One who 'judges', for all those who condemn all judging, with righteous judgment, and legally delegates that same judgment to governments to enforce; as the named Kings of Israel did for a "light of the nations", and as until recent history was still outlawed in American states). 

It should be also noteworthy by historical accounts that no great empires (Canaanite, Hittite, Babylonian, Greek, Roman--and remember Pompeii) or civilizations have ever continued when gross moral corruption, among which was sodomy and homosexuality, was permitted to flourish; and wherever homosexuality was prevalent, so was pedophilia and abuse of young children also a common feature (e.g. Greece under Alexander the Great).  If "gay rights" is given full legal status, pedophilia and statutory rape will soon be legalized as "sexual orientation" as well, and even beastiality is no longer a crime.  Yet "equal rights" for gross aberrant behavior that spreads real disease is to be accepted by force of the LBGT lobby on all, if everyone lies down for them.  The preacher calls to attention the original name of AIDS, and we know just how that was spread to everyone else.  The truth is, we are in the midst of a Moral Pandemic, which has societal and health consequences, which the government is aiding and abetting, under pressure of a special behavioral interest group (not a nationality, race or gender "identity") which behavior was formerly illegal!

It begins with an examination of the sin--i.e. "going after strange flesh"--of the people of Sodom, which was "made an example of" (see Jewish archeology study; and from which the behavior has historically been named for, i.e. Sodomy, for the 'men of Sodom' lewd behavior), which is sometimes debated.  Sodom destroyed now lies under or near the Dead Sea (a Salt Sea) which the Jewish historian Josephus called Lake Asphaltites (asphalt, note the "tar pits" in which the Kings of Sodom fell into in Genesis earlier, until Abraham saved them along with Lot).  Let the Bibliophobes and Christophobes mock, but this is what the Bible teaches plainly which liberal churches, like the apostate Evangelical Luthern Church, Presbyterians Church (USA), and some others who speak different (contrary to their founders Luther, Knox, and Wesley, who would scold them) and are willfully blind to.  Intellectual honesty demands this conclusion from the Scriptures, and so this is the view of conservative Christians in West Virginia without a doubt, even those who nominally grew up in church, across all political party lines.

Note too in this message, that Sodomites are enslaved to passion, and cannot be appealed to by reason, i.e. they must have what they want, and oppose all who resist, have no moderation or conscience but are brazen in their lust, and therefore are violent, and rebel against governments like brute beasts, as exemplified both toward governor Lot and the "visitors" in the dramatic account.  They have pursued coercing their "rights" from government with the same violence today, including their speech used to abuse and deride others as "hateful" and "bigots", with their own hateful speeches, as if they have no malice toward Christians or others who oppose them.  It is all so familiar in the account, even as they now are turning their heat on President Obama (even though he is more liberal than Lot), to coerce him to endorse Sodomite Marriage (see next link below).

(Must enable Sermon Audio javascripts to see and activate the media player below).


So are Christians supposed to let their 'religious freedom' and 'freedom of expression', which the Constitution protects, be countered by new social opinions or even strange new government laws, as in New York Friday, which legalized "same-sex marriage", to couples who cannot engage in the marital activity of procreation and family?  To the contrary, Christian and Bible beliefs about homosexuality cannot be outlawed or silenced by tyrannical persecution by government, media, or anyone else.  Unfortunately, this is what is happening when unnatural marriage or homosexuality generally is given legal protection or authorization--religious freedom is lost in regards to individual liberty of action in terms of association, property rights, and even speech and press.  WHEN HOMOSEXUAL "RIGHTS" OR "MARRIAGE" IS LEGALIZED CHRISTIAN LIBERTY AND RIGHTS IS OPENLY PERSECUTED, CENSORED OR CONDEMNED BY GOVERNMENT, AND THE NEW MORALITY IS ENFORCED OVER THEM.  And this is by the people that always said "you cannot legislate morality", except their counter-Christian morality!  It is not only Christians that oppose homosexuality either.  It is the radical politicalization of this subject that has drown out all rationality and the abusive legal consequences of the "gay rights" agenda.

In truth, however, freedom of speech and press remains wide open for all opposed to homosexuality, and the legalizing of it and "marriage", to engage against it freely, with full protection of the highest law as Supreme Court decisions have recently made clear.  Christians will have to go to court to appeal to the Constitution to defend their liberty to act upon their own beliefs, which are also rational and just (as even nature exemplifies), and the normative historical precedent, since heterosexual marriage has been the exclusive practice and law in all of human history, since the dawn of civilization.

If West Virginia legislators even think about debating what was done in New York, they had better think about what it will cost them politically to even entertain such a wicked bill on the House or Senate floor.  And they can look at how well the LGBT lobby's point man, Senator Kessler, did in his attempt in the gubernatorial primary as an example.

FANATICISM: Sports, Not Religion, Is the Real "Opiate of the People"

Professional sports, which includes College Sports--which is definitely for money and profit in the "Higher Education" world--in truth is a waste of valuable time.  Do people consider that sports coaches of universities are the most highly paid positions in State government?  (Note in the link that West Virginia pays more for sports than others in the Big East, even as a much poorer state!)  Is that not a dangerous fanaticism?  Should that not offend and disturb us as "taxpayers"?  Where is a "tea party" against that abuse of government spending within "higher education"?  Are sports coaches the instruments of justice or legislative representation, or executive authority?  Is it not shameful that they outstrip Governors and Justices in taxpayer renumeration--and without the consent of many outside the institution of "higher learning"?  And those who spend their emotions on sports teams and watch every game proudly call themselves "fanatics".    Now this only proves that it is politically correct and acceptable to be a sports fanatic, while at the same time, if anyone cares "too much" about political issues of government, or religious issues in particular, others hurl the epitaph "fanatic" as a term of derision, from which sports "fans" are immune, despite their candid admission. 

The media in particular is guilty of this irrational value process and for feeding the sports frenzy,  for profit, because sports news "sells newspapers" and boost radio and TV ratings.  That is why Hoppy Kercheval on state-wide talk radio will actually spend more time discussing any changes at WVU, even in the midst of important legislative or serious matters which most of the public is largely, and willingly ignorant of.  Such is the mark of not an intellectual society, but a hedonistic one. (Illegal drug use is in fact the same hedonism principle in its purest form of pleasure vs pain and mental escapism, and modern opiates such as Meth, are another clue this is true of society).  The truth is, if everyone were serious minded and lived in reality, instead of in virtual reality (movies, mass entertainment, fiction or "reality shows" on TV, etc), things could be for the better in government, social and intellectual thinking, and religious morality and rational sober living.

The following video, in an entertaining manner, shows how there is a social consensus which is irrational that permits one kind of fanaticism to drown out really the only important matters in life, where everyone's real problems exist.  Sports is indeed the Opiate pain-killer and distraction, then, which religion has been branded for irrationally.

Moralityphobia--Get Over It

This anti-social and political disease is a virtual pandemic that infects all discourse within the arenas of government and public debate. Governors, state legislators, teachers, and media (including talk show radio hosts that claim to be "conservative") either promote or are complying in a slavish manner to new Humanist commandments that frame the New Public Mores of "democratic society" (by definition a humanist society without regard to God), which persecutes, scolds and attempts to censor those who do not bow to their rules of Progressive Political Correctness. It is as if there were these new higher laws, graven on modern virtual tablets, written by the finger of Democratic Man:

I. "Thou shalt have no other gods but Tolerance".
II. "Thou shalt not obey old laws, but thou shalt obey the written new rules of Political Correctness (which at present hold legislator's captive by fear and intimidation)
III. "Thou shalt not judge by old standards (only because they are old), such as Virtue, especially from historically respected books, like the Bible."
IV. "Thou shalt not take the name of Tolerance in vain (for Tolerance is intolerant of that, and demands to be worshiped, by some more than others), and make no mention of sins in the old fashion, whether public or private, or such as blasphemes Tolerance".
V. "Thou shalt make no mention of the Bible or its moral teachings, or Jesus (except for Progressive legislation for Tolerance)".

When discussion about homosexuality occurs (since the revolutionary firebrands require it) those who oppose the abhorrent, unnatural, and perverse behavior (and those who practice, promote or legalize it), and are on the side of moral society and what used to be called "public virtue," are branded, slandered, and villified as if they have done evil. A new public "shaming" is put upon them instead, and government bows in fear and even repeals its own laws. (Note the other party's blind hypocrisy about "not judging others"). Thus public debate about Morality is either censured or censored....at least the Old Morality is, but only to be replaced by the New.

Well, this dated article addresses this subject and rings true, and the rope of its bell needs to be pulled again. To the general public: "Hear ye, hear ye...

Get over your Moralityphobia

Americans need to get over their "moralityphobia."

mo·ral·i·ty·pho·bi·a (n.)

• 1. A persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong, despite the awareness and reassurance that the distinction is not dangerous.
• 2. A squeamishness or [anti-social] discomfort that compels one to avoid any discussion of what is right and wrong.
• 3. A strong dislike [hatred!] or aversion to a [former] system of ideas of right and wrong conduct.

Gov. Joe Manchin's Record as He Bids for Byrd's Senate Seat

When Manchin campaigned for governor 6 years ago he promised to improve the state climate for business in West Virginia. CNBC's state scoreboard says it all.

Since President Obama is focused on the economy, what does Manchin bring to the table? Only his "Open for Business" results .

Manchin cut taxes, good. But it was a food tax, which most states don't have. So he gets a C.

He managed the budget well, good, but only by bringing in casino table games to increase state revenues on top of lottery schemes. This increases revenues by defrauding others, their duped consent notwithstanding (what gambling is, and why its a crime until legalized, for the "house always wins"). And this trick was done by circumventing and violating the Constitution of West Virginia, as the WVU Law Professor interview proves (and the state supreme court refused to hear in appeal!) Only 4 of 55 counties got to vote.

clipped from politics.usnews.com West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin: Senate Run 'Highly Likely' clipped from www.cbsnews.com clipped from politics.usnews.com BOSTON — West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin said Friday that he'll make a decision next week on whether to run for the late Robert C. Byrd's Senate seat. "It's highly likely I will," he told The Associated Press at the National Governors Association meeting. clipped from www.pbase.com clipped from www.huntingtonnews.net EDITORIAL: What Exactly Has Manchin Accomplished to Merit U.S. Senate Seat? Six years later, Manchin has accomplished nothing like that helpful effort for West Virginia's business climate. clipped from www.cnbc.com #46 West Virginia Category Score 2010 Rank 2009 Rank Cost of Doing Business 283 15 10 Workforce 126 44 48 Quality of Life 117 40 39 Economy 134 24 11 Transportation & Infrastructure 82 38 39 Technology & Innovation 27 48 49 Education 71 34 35 Business Friendliness 4 50 50 Access to Capital 12 40 36 Cost of Living 17 17 15 OVERALL 873 46 46

West Virginia Senate Bill Reasserts State's Rights vs. Federal Encroachments

From West Virginia Watchdog, great coverage on this excellent legislation linked below.

It is very important to note on this subject that the West Virginia Constitution has these leading articles, already very powerful (wisely embedded by Confederate-leaning legislators to prevent the tyranny of Federal Reconstruction and further Federal Despotism after the Civil War) which every Mountaineer should memorize and ought to be taught in school, that still draw a Constitutional line in the sand for the Federal government:

1-2.  Internal government and police.

     The government of the United States is a government of enumerated powers, and all powers not delegated to it, nor inhibited to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people thereof.  Among the powers so reserved to the states is the exclusive regulation of their own internal government and police; and it is the high and solemn duty of the several departments of government, created by this constitution, to guard and protect the people of this state from all [i.e. Federal] encroachments upon the rights so reserved. 

 1-3.  Continuity of constitutional operation.

     The provisions of the constitution of the United States, and of this state, are operative alike in a period of war as in time of peace, and any departure therefrom, or violation thereof, under the plea of necessity, or any other plea, is subversive of good government, and tends to anarchy and despotism.

The legislature and Governors thus far have ignored these provisions when establishing the federal REAL ID (national ID driver's licenses) and by not resisting the tyrannical and unpatriotic USA PATRIOT ACT (made illegal, however, by Huntington, West Virginia, on these very grounds) under the "plea of necessity" after the 9/11 "catalyzing event" and the cry of "terrorism".  The Constitution is to be upheld by the State government, per the Supreme Law of West Virginia, against all federal claims of "necessity", to protect West Virginians from federal usurpations of power.  The Governor and legislators and Supreme Court Judges all swear to "uphold" the State and Federal Constitutions upon taking office, while they clearly have not.

It was former Supreme Court Justice John Marshall who wrote:

A legislative act, contrary to the Constitution, is not law".

While this proposed Resolution would have been even more powerful during the post-9/11 Bush administrations (when republicans went stark blind to the Constitution--when a Tea Party was needed!) in expanding the usurping federal Security and Surveillance State, it is appropriate (although a bit partisan and bias) to invoke it now as the Obama Nanny State (i.e. Health Care, Economic and Environmental Reform) is erected, including an economic and environmental agenda that threatens to undermine West Virginia in particular.  Before Democrats cry "partisan bill" too loud, however, they should recall that even Senator Byrd warned that the Obama administration could be on a federal "power grab" of its own.  It must be added that our Congressional representatives in Washington on this have failed us (and violated their oaths), for they voted for the above legislation and fell for the "plea of necessity" (although Sen. Byrd recanted and voted against extending the USA PATRIOT ACT after seeing the light of the Constitution on it later).  Partisanship needs to drop to the floor and the Constitution should be reinstated as the non-partisan Supreme Law that it is on this matter.

The West Virginia Constitution requires and demands the Governor and State government defend West Virginia's sovereignty (resolution or not) but it should be applied impartially against all federal legislation that usurps State's rights.  Any governor or legislator that disagrees with the State Constitution or 10th Amendment on this principle of State Sovereignty vs. Federal Encroachments has lied upon taking their "oath" and is unfit for political office, period.  And it is the duty of the public to hold them all to it!

 "Mountaineers are always free" only if the state government obeys the State (and Federal) Constitutions impartially.

State Senate to Consider W.Va. Sovereignty Resolution

By Steven Allen Adams on February 8, 2010


A resolution that would declare West Virginia’s sovereignty under the U.S. Constitution was introduced yesterday in the State Senate and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 20 would reassert that state’s sovereignty under the U.S. Constitution’s 1oth Amendment. From the resolution:

…Be it resolved by the Legislature of West Virginia: That the State of West Virginia reasserts sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and, be it
Further Resolved, That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and, be it
Further Resolved, That the Clerks of both houses forward a copy of this resolution to President Barack Obama and all members of West Virginia’s Congressional Delegation.

The 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The resolution is the brainchild of State Sen. Donna Boley, R-Pleasants, and is co-sponsored by the following State Senators: Clark Barnes, R-Randolph; Mike Hall, R-Putnam; Frank Deem, R-Wood; Don Caruth, R-Mercer; Dave Sypolt, R-Preston; Karen Facemyer, R-Jackson; Jesse Guills, R-Greenbrier; and Robert Plymale, D-Wayne.
“What we’ve seen going on in Washington D.C. is a lot of the federal government reaching out and taking power away from the states or mandating to the states things they should not be mandating to the states,” explained Boley in a conversation with West Virginia Watchdog.

REAL ID: Chertoff Threatens Governor (Montana), Governor Threatens Chertoff

Read this exchange! Gov. Schweitzer (D-Montana), a governor who truly fights for his citizen's constitutional freedoms, works with Gov. Manchin on the board of the Govenor's Association. Manchin has been complying while Schweitzer resisting REAL ID, as have the majority of republicans and democrats in the West Virginia legislature (see REAL ID tags). Manchin and the DMV have acted behind the scenes to stall and block any anti-REAL ID legislation. "Mountaineers are always free", if it is more than just the state Motto, is at stake.

Tell the Govenor and your legislators what you think, and take action below (DownsizeDC.org) to send your Congressmen an email on this too.

D o w n s i z e r - D i s p a t c h

---

Quote of the Day:

"Do you want our government to have the ability to track where you went, how you went, how you got there and when you got home? It would be naïve for someone to think this information will not be abused in the future. Virtually every decade these kinds of files have been used to violate people's privacy."
-- Brian Schweitzer, Governor of Montana

Subject: Chertoff threatens governor, governor threatens Chertoff

We knew that the state of Montana was resisting the REAL ID Act, but we just learned some of the details of that resistance. The story is so good we had to share it, in case you hadn't heard . . .

Brian Schweitzer, the governor of Montana, wrote a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. The letter informed Chertoff that Montana would not be complying with the REAL ID Act. Our quote of the day supplies one of the reasons for Governor Schweitzer's rebellion. In response to the letter . . .

Secretary Chertoff called Governor Schweitzer and threatened him. Chertoff told Schweitzer that Montana residents would be banned from airplanes, or subjected to severe, time-consuming inspections at airports.

The Governor countered with his own threat, "How about we both go on 60 Minutes a few days after the DHS starts patting down Montana driver's license-holders who are trying to get on the planes and both of us can tell our side of the story."

Chertoff didn't like that suggestion. He said, "I see the problem. We need to get this fixed."

So far, the "fix" involves granting Montana and all other rebellious states an extension of the deadline for complying with the REAL ID Act. But the real fix is to repeal REAL ID.

Have you protested to your elected representatives that the Secretary of Homeland Security has been threatening the citizens of states that don't comply with REAL ID? If not, please do so. You can mention the Chertoff-Schweitzer exchange in your personal comments. Ask Congress to repeal the REAL ID Act. You can send your message here.

If you've sent a REAL ID Act message recently, consider sending another "I am not afraid" message. We have a lot of new people who probably aren't familiar with our "I am not afraid" campaign. You can check it out here.

Please also consider making a donation to further our work. You can do so here.

Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC army.

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

D o w n s i z e r - D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation

America Becoming Land of Surveillance, West Virginia Too

Charleston surveillance camera

traffic cameras in West Virginia have multiplied

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

--the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

All this increase in surveillance cameras, including in West Virginia, despite a lack of evidence that it is effective, or even evidence (mentioned in article below) that proves it is ineffective from UK studies. (See our previous "surveillance" tagged articles). But the security merchandisers (see WVDOT contractors here) are making a fortune and state and local governments are impulsively spending faster than a woman with a credit card. The source article states this:

P. Freeman said the domestic market for such systems last year had doubled over five years, to $9.2 billion, and estimated that it would more than double again by 2010, to more than $21 billion.

So you as a taxpayer are paying for your loss of liberty (4th amendment rights), while they profit, which is insult to injury. It is worth wondering how many government officials own stock in security companies (either individual stocks or mutual funds), which would be a conflict of interest (perhaps even insider trading) in that lawmakers and officials (including those heading state DMVs and DOTs) also profit through authorizing this spending.

clipped from www.msnbc.msn.com Smile! More and more, you’re on camera Public surveillance video mushrooms despite lack of evidence it works After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, local governments across the country set aside concerns over privacy and installed surveillance cameras in public streets and plazas. Now — even after a damning report by the head of London’s extensive surveillance network and with little evidence that the systems work — police in many cities are trying to add thousands more cameras to their networks. “‘Cameras Everywhere’ continues to be the best description of the trend in the video surveillance market,” security market analysts J.P. Freeman Co. said in a report in 2006 that estimated that a quarter of major U.S. cities were investing in the technology. Officials in many cities are eager to take advantage of money from state and federal security agencies to install the cameras on street corners and intersections

West Virginia, Rogue State Formed Unlawfully

"It is said that the admission of West Virginia is secession, and tolerated only because it is our secession. "

-- Pres. Abraham Lincoln

I hold that there is, legally and constitutionally no such state in existence as the state of West Virginia and consequently no senators from such a state. My object is simply to raise a question to be put upon the record, and to have my name as a Senator recorded against the recognition of West Virginia as a state of the United States. I do not believe that the Old Dominion, like a polypus, can be separated into different segments, and each segment become a living constitutional organism in this node. The present state of West Virginia as it has been organized, and as it is seeking representation on the floor of the Senate, is a flagrant violation of the Constitution.

-- Senator Davis, Kentucky

It was West Virginia Day June 20th. The state was formed illegally by a minority insurrection 145 years ago. Beautiful state, but with an unlawfully formed government. This is lifted from West Virginia's own archives. History records the controversy.

"there is no evidence that the majority of people within the counties which were to compose the new state had ever given its assent to its formation."

Fruits of the Civil War, Old Dominion Virginia was ripped in half. Virginia has never officially recognized the rogue state of West Virginia in law. Lincoln himself called it merely expeditious , not legal.

Lincoln and Congress had no more authority to permit the state anymore than Bush could authorize West Pennsylvania or Northern California.

During the Civil War those who supported the Yankee Union position were called "anti-Virginians". State's rights was greatly trampled which the Constitution itself in the 10th amendment makes plain in order to restrain federal power--a power of an absolute and irresponsible majority (i.e. democracy). It's been rougher ever since in restraining the federal usurpation!

clipped from www.wvculture.org Statehood for West Virginia: An Illegal Act? The admission of West Virginia in the midst of a war was an unusual event in the history of our nation. The circumstances of its admission leaves doubt as to whether the granting of statehood to West Virginia had a basis in law. Shortly thereafter, on May 23, 1861, the Secession Ordinance was ratified overwhelmingly by the people of Virginia. Only 20,373 Virginians voted to stay with the Union, while 125,950 cast votes to join the Confederacy.7 The question arises. Was this new government a sincere effort on the part of loyal Virginians, or was it a subterfuge to enable separatists to set up an entirely new state separate from the parent state? Even after West Virginia was admitted to the Union, Senator Davis of Kentucky objected to seating its Senators in the upper house. President Lincoln had doubts about the legality of admitting West Virginia to the Union. admission of West Virginia is secession, and tolerated only because it is our secession

Arizona Joins the Revolt, Outlaws REAL ID

Next! Liberty is a threatening thing to Homeland Security. If it was really about making drivers licenses secure then the Feds would not care. But it is really about federal power and their matrix of surveillance that they want to construct that is at stake.

West Virginia needs to defend its own and the federal Constitution (4th and 10th amendments), and outlaw and nullify REAL ID in the next legislative session, irregardless of Governor Manchin and the DMV's irresponsible and unjust support of REAL ID, to defend our liberties that began on July 4, 1776.

clipped from www.azcentral.com Napolitano: Real ID a no-go in Arizona Arizona will join roughly a dozen states that have vowed not to participate in federal plans for a uniform standard on state-issued driver's licenses and identification cards. On Tuesday, Gov. Janet Napolitano signed a measure, House Bill 2677, barring Arizona's compliance with the Real ID program. In so doing, she called it an unfunded federal mandate that would stick states such as Arizona with a multibillion-dollar bill for the cost to develop and implement the series of new fraud-proof identification cards. HB 2677 is a rare recent example of broad, bipartisan agreement at the state Capitol, with the Democratic governor and GOP-led Legislature finding common ground in their opposition to Real ID. Some of that opposition is grounded in concerns about privacy and government advancement toward a national identification card. For Napolitano, the biggest issue is related to Real ID's costs for the states.

West Virginia Conducts Improbable, Expensive Terror Excercise, Evacuation of D.C. Scenario

"Thomas says it’s costly to run emergency exercises like this and researchers like him hope to find ways to practice less expensively."

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling"; Homeland Security plays 'Chicken Little' again, at the cost of West Virginia taxpayers. The probability of this happening is microscopic! See our previous article, "OVERBLOWN", to put all this into more rational perspective.

According to the paranoid propaganda (similar to "mushroom clouds" from Saddam Hussein) we are to believe that "it is not if, but when" the nation's capitol WILL BE attacked, and a mass evacuation forced--because they say so! All of this to see if "radios and communication" work properly? Is this apocalyptic scenario (like catastrophic tides due to global warming) really that probable, or is this more of a psychological operation and way to get West Virginia government to comply with the "war on terrorism" program of Homeland Security? (Gov. Manchin previously conducted a "Flu Pandemic Summit" also in Charleston, another "not if, but when" scenario, and also supports REAL ID while the people and legislators largely oppose it).

Actually, even if a rehearsal were justified, there is a greater probability many would flee to Maryland or southern Virginia, since the interstates more immediately cross those areas, rather than the narrow portion of the West Virginia panhandle, and I-270 is the quickest northern route which would entirely by-pass the portion of I-81 this was conducted at. So even the emphasis on West Virginia does not make sense, which looking at the map shows.

View Larger Map

Meanwhile taxpayers should be told just how much this cost and how much came from the state budget.

Dirty bomb exercise tests West Virginia's emergency services

By Cecelia Mason

Listen Now (3:30)

Homeland Security spokesman discusses exercise

June 18, 2008

The scenario: A dirty bomb falls somewhere in the Washington D.C. area. Thousands of people evacuate to West Virginia. The state Homeland Security Department staged a major exercise yesterday to test whether West Virginia can handle such a scenario.

In Berkeley County, the local Homeland Security and Emergency Services Department set up a decontamination station on a strip of land between the county’s hospital and Interstate 81.

Shortly after 11 a.m. a West Virginia Emergency Response Team semi truck and trailer pulled up. Members from local fire and emergency services departments worked with members of the National Guard to empty the truck and erect tents where evacuees were decontaminated.

State Military Affairs and Public Safety Deputy Director Christy Morris was on hand to observe.

...Thomas says it’s costly to run emergency exercises like this and researchers like him hope to find ways to practice less expensively.

Alaska Becomes 9th State to Outlaw REAL ID

Tyrannical federal legislation has sparked another Civil War against federal despotism, and the states are seceding from REAL ID continually, essentially using the doctrine of Nullification based upon the 10th amendment of the Constitution.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Any state that respects the Constitution and freedom for its citizens will do the same. Tell Governor Manchin and the legislators to make West Virgina the 10th State to ban REAL ID and follow the supreme law they swear to uphold!

clipped from www.aclu.org Alaska Becomes 9th State to Reject Real ID Governor Palin allowed the bill to become law, effective August of this year. Real ID is a federal mandate imposing a national ID card on all Americans through their state drivers' licenses. The Real ID Act of 2005 mandates that all states have compliant identification cards consistent with federal regulations, as well as requiring that all Americans' private information be held in a giant federal database – the cost and security of which is unknown. The states' response to the passage of Real ID has been steady. To date, 19 states have passed either resolutions or statutes against the program, including nine that have opted out completely. "Alaska has joined a growing nationwide movement against Real ID As the Department of Homeland Security continues its practice of kicking the can down the road, states are continuing to stand up for their residents' privacy and reject Real ID. Officials of both parties came together to pass legislation

FED UP With REAL ID: Cato Interviews SC Gov. Mark Sanford--"REAL ID Rebels"

Great interview with the Governor of South Carolina (R) who is resisting REAL ID, that Governor Joe Manchin, State legislators, and the entire public should listen to.

He frames the controversy as between State and Federal government power, and Liberty vs. Security, consistent with the Constitution, which all swear to defend and protect:

Listen to it on the Cato Institute Daily Podcast here

VOTE: May 13th Primary Elections--Educate Yourself, Vote Your Conscience, Reject "Group Think"

Here are the links from the Secretary of State's Office to online SAMPLE BALLOTS by county for all registered parties and voters.

clipped from www.wvsos.com West Virginia Primary and General Election Ballots Find your county's candidate list or sample ballot for the West Virginia Primary and General Elections here. The lists and sample ballots are posted for viewing using the Acrobat Reader. For information about how to download and use the free reader, see Acrobat Reader Help. If your county information is not yet available, you may request a sample from your county clerk. Go directly to the county and ballot links below.

USE THE SAMPLE BALLOTS TO DECIDE BEFORE YOU GO.

Since every candidate must swear to defend and protect the Constitution of West Virginia and of the United States, think about who WILL defend the Bill of Rights the most, that ensures our freedoms, that we are losing!

We can think of a few who would be better than their rivals:

--Ron Paul (R) for President, still in race, will increase delegates for voice in national convention; strict Constitutionalist, most conservative member of Congress on taxes and gun rights, limited government, personal liberty. [McCain is a RINO neoconservative (not conservative), deceives on war hero status, does not uphold the Constitution, blindly loyal to Israel, McCain-Feingold on illegal immigration, Keating Five member, megalomaniac on war policy, CFR member (world government), wants National ID, etc.]

--Edward Burgess for Delegate (R) St. Albans--strict Constitutionalist, activist

--Bob Bastress for Supreme Court (D)--only expert on the West Virginia Constitution. This is important since many issues of the state could involve controversies on the State and Federal Constitutions; i.e. mandatory drug testing, REAL ID, surveillance cameras, PATRIOT ACT powers, mandatory vaccination laws, home schooling, free speech issues, a rogue Legislature and Governor that trample the Constitution(s) through laws and executive power (e.g. tables games, privacy rights, private property rights, law enforcement powers, etc.)

--Dan Greear for Attorney General (R)--Law education, seems intellectually honest rather than partisan as top prosecutor.

--Corey Polumbo for Senate (D)--lawyer, intellectually honest, open, admitted table games were likely not Constitutional (but voted at the end for it anyway, glaring inconsistency; better be his last)

--ABSOLUTELY NO on Shelly Moore Capito (R) for US House of Reps--did not defend and uphold the Constitution on REAL ID, USA PATRIOT ACT, Military Commissions Act, domestic surveillance, unjustifiable Iraq and Afghan wars (for neocon regime change, not threats to US), gross overspending of tax dollars, Abramoff (convicted) recipient, Scooter Libby (convicted) supporter, partisan instead of Constitutional, lack of oversight in Page incident, little evidence of weighing constituents views contrary to party loyalty, liberal on social issues (abortion, government health care), not strict enough on 2nd amendment rights.

--ABSOLUTELY NO ON ANY INCUMBENT WHO VOTED FOR LEGISLATIVE PAY RAISE.

--VOTE AGAINST MANCHIN FOR GOVERNOR, who does not uphold the Constitution on REAL ID (4th and 10th amendments), free speech (signed unconstitutional ethics legislation in first month; threatened, intimidated Blankenship who ran ads against him, settled out of court), violated State Constitution on table games, 4th amendment privacy rights (favors mandatory drug testing; traffic surveillance cameras across state began in late 2007), heavy taxation (WV ranked 4th in total taxes as fraction of population income, with high food stamp population, highest State gas tax, corrupt anti-constitutional casino game tax scheme; credits himself on food tax, but resisted it, forced it to be gradual only; state is rich in revenue while people are comparatively poor), is partisan instead of law and issue oriented, political ambitions over good of West Virginians, arrogant (self made inaugural parade) and extravagant (Christmas parties at state expense, Gov. Mansion remodel, new gold dome) relying on political "noble family" status while feigning "buddy", flag waver instead of Constitutional defender, uses State money for subtle personal travel (bowl games, plane trips, extensive foreign travel), cronyism for political appointees (frankly, alot of Italians in key positions of power--see Knights of Columbus; wife and brother in state positions), Knights of Columbus member (loyalty to ideology of secret society that pushes militant Roman Catholic world view toward empire; not loyal to Constitution; persecutory toward Protestant Christians and others--see oath), and WVU-Heather Bresch Affair demonstrates favoritism, political protectionism and real family values of "privileged" status.

[These opinions are only those of the West Virginia Holler editor. Not paid for by any candidate or candidate's committees.]

Bob Bastress: by Far the Best Qualified for Supreme Court of West Virginia

clipped from wvgazette.com Bastress, Ketchum tops in Supreme Court survey Supreme Court hopefuls Bob Bastress and Menis Ketchum fared best among West Virginia lawyers quizzed about the 2008 judicial candidates. Chief Justice "Elliott'' Spike Maynard received the lowest overall score, and also elicited more responses than any other candidate in the survey. More than 1,620 lawyers, about 35 percent of the West Virginia Bar's membership, rated candidates for Supreme Court and circuit judge in the Bar's latest survey. Bastress, a West Virginia University law professor, and Ketchum, a Huntington lawyer, each rated "good'' for their overall qualifications for office. The survey asked lawyers to rank the candidates from "outstanding'' to "poor'' in such categories as legal ability, diligence, decisiveness and courtesy to others.

With this story last week the Charleston Gazette presented some of the strongest evidence to narrow the field for West Virginia Supreme Court Justice, which demonstrates by peer judgment who is most qualified in the race, measured by some very important standards.

And with this podcast below from West Virginia Public Broadcasting, in an investigative article by reporter Scott Finn, Ketchum's claims and record are brought into the light, showing his own claims to be more of the "mumbo jumbo" he claims to run against:

Ketchum’s claim not supported by evidence - [Podcast link] 4/23
By Scott Finn

A survey of lawyers by the WV State Bar rated the candidates for WV Supreme Court. Coming out on top were WVU law professor Bob Bastress and Huntington lawyer Menis Ketchum. Incumbent “Spike” Maynard ranked last, doing especially poorly on the question about “integrity, moral courage and impartiality.” The other candidates have escaped media scrutiny, but recently, Ketchum has made claims about his court experience that don’t seem to be true. (5:23) Transcript

This leaves Bob Bastress, whose key expertise and credentials are below, standing head and shoulders above the rest, and who is the most unbias, non-political candidate whose expertise in the West Virginia Constitution--which through the Supreme Court keeps in check the powers of legislature and Governor--would restore objective and scholarly impartiality into a Supreme Court held now in the sway of political maneuvering.

Bob Bastress, a candidate for the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, is best known as Professor of Law. He has been a faculty member at West Virginia University College of Law since 1978. Professor Bastress is an authority on Constitutional Law, focusing special attention on the First Amendment and the West Virginia Constitution. Courses he has taught include Constitutional Law, Labor and Employment law, Local Government Law, and Legal Skills. Bob Bastress presently serves as the John W. Fisher, II Professor of Law.

Professor Bastress has written the only book published to date that focuses on the West Virginia Constitution, a nationally prominent textbook on counseling and negotiating, textbooks for his courses on West Virginia Constitutional Law and on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and numerous other professional publications.

(website) BOB BASTRESS for Supreme Court Justice

REAL ID: Idaho Rejects, Missouri House Opposes, SC Governor Publicly Renounces--While Manchin Holds West Virginians Hostage

More wise States (but not including West Virginia, being held captive by Manchin and the head of DMV) are moving against REAL ID despite the phony "extensions" (measures to coerce compliance) from the Dept. of Homeland Tyranny. Most people, however, are still too ignorant about the issue of what really goes on at DMV (becoming federalized Gestapo outposts) when they are "processed" for their innocent looking drivers license. For when that occurs an entire biometric and data-mining system is then established on them (yes, "free citizens" pre-booked like arrested criminals), including the process of linking of their ID to foreign governments (i.e. Canada and Mexico. Yes, when you cross the border Canadian customs can pull your entire personal record, including occupation, up on their screen, courtesy of the federalized DMV). Meanwhile, the security merchandisers (like Viisage, contracted with West Virginia DMV, apart from legislative or judicial oversight with new privacy invasions) are making a killing, using your tax dollars, at the expense of your personal liberties! Manchin government is more than willing to have the latest hi-tech, privacy-killing, tyrannical ID system to tag, track, and monitor you, and of course have you pay for it under the guise of "public safety". It is more than just West Virginia's official slogan of "Mountaineers are always free" that has been set aside. It is the very constitution and laws defending that which are being abandoned which prevent an intrusive, liberty-killing, over-powerful government that claims the people are its property and tags them like sheep.

People need to read so here is some help. Do not miss Washington Times commentary ("REAL ID Side Effects) below from Gov. Mark Sanford (R - South Carolina), who writes this, which is similar to the position in previous SB248 (the bi-partisan West Virginia senate bill against REAL ID) which got buried by the Governor's minions:

Our greatest homeland security is liberty, and the Founding Fathers believed our greatest threat to liberty was a central government grown too powerful. Accordingly, they set up checks on federal power by vesting authority at the individual and state levels.

REAL ID disrupts this delicate balance of power in two ways. First, it turns the Founders' logic on its head by forcing states to act as agents for the federal government in creating a national ID card for federal purposes. Needing a REAL ID to board a plane or enter a federal building would also change the balance of power in something as seemingly insignificant as a visit to a member of Congress.

Too bad Gov. Manchin is not like this (as he worked to block passage of the anti-REAL ID bill in the House), despite that he swore to "defend and uphold the Constitution" (both State and Federal) upon entry to office! Manchin is either grossly ignorant or willingly defiant of the Constitution, bowing to the federal plea of "necessity". Democrat and republican voters alike should mark his constitutional violation well, which has occurred frequently behind warm smiles.

Along with the articles about Idaho now joining the growing list of anti-REAL ID states, and Missouri on the brink (as well as California), do not miss the blog article from Reasonable Citizen ("Making States Submit to Federal Authority"), who makes a strong case against REAL ID, including this good observation:

"The 9/11 Commission could have said: 'The States must set standards for drivers licenses and other forms of identification.' But, no, they decided that only the Federal government could set standards and then force the States to comply.... Why is the Federal government forcing this upon people? Because they know that nobody wants a Federal ID system. Nobody.... By forcing the States to do something at a local level, the Federal government can create a Federal ID system without taking any of the heat."

Idaho Joins the Ranks of the Anti-Real ID States
ACLU (press release) - New York,NY,USA
"Governor Otter heeded the will of the people this week when he rejected the invasive and problematic Real ID Act," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the

Missouri House passes bill to prohibit Real ID
Kansas City Star - MO,USA
The Missouri House approved a bill sponsored by Guest, a King City Republican, prohibiting the state from complying with the federal Real ID Act. The act, ...