Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Playmate Turns a New Leaf

It takes different folks different amounts of time to grow up, but former Baywatch star Donna D'errico believes she finally has.  She has gone from the 1995 Playboy playmate to a very religious mother who never misses Mass, shares her deep convictions with her children and says she would never vote for Barack Obama.

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Back to School Time Is Cause for Extra Security

It is that time of year when children across America return to school.  For many parents it is a welcome relief.  In a day and age when most families find two incomes essential to keeping the mortgage paid and basic family requirements fulfilled, this time of year means that working parents need not worry about the whereabouts of their children.  They will once again find the local school to be a useful tool to not only educate, but also to guard over the children's safety. But how safe is it?

I am, as many know, an advocate of home schooling.  I think it is an obvious choice for families who want to avoid the pitfalls of the government school system as it exists today.  However, I also realize that many parents, for various reasons, will choose not home school their children.  Therefore, it is crucial that parents work to circumvent the tremendous pressures that will be upon their children. 

Primarily, the pressures I speak of are the guilt issues that are placed upon children of white heritage.  Assemblies will be held, purported accurate studies related, and textbooks read, which all attest to the guilt that children of European descent should have.

The environment is in shambles because of the huge carbon footprint of the western nations.  Children are starving somewhere in the world due to the imperialistic legacy of the western nations. And success has been denied to others because of white privilege.  This is what children will learn and I believe it is harmful to both white children and children of other racial backgrounds. 

This type of teaching will harm the self-esteem of white students and create an aura of suspicion and resentment in other children.  Nobody wins when this social experiment is plied in the schools.

Also, aside from the racial issue, students are now facing the dilemma of remaining true to the traditional beliefs of their parents and most cultures or succumbing to the new sexual politics of gender identity and the promoted proliferation of homosexuality, lesbianism, and transgender identity.  This is harmful to all cultures and ethnicities and yet it is the prevalent thinking by the leading academics of today. 

What are parents to do?

My advice is not new and many have given it.  I only want to repeat it, because it is crucial to the vitality and and fruitfulness of our society and our western Christian civilization. 

Parents must stay in tune to the life of their children.  Often by the time children have reached the teen years it is too late to impart your values to them.  They have taken upon themselves the values of their peers and their teachers.  This is okay if you have monitored both of these parties who will no doubt have an influence upon your children that sadly far out weighs your influence.  Unless, that is, you always counter with solid teaching of your own, positive example, and happy home life.

Parents really need to start in the pre-school years with positive reinforcement of family values and continued acceleration of discussion regarding the negative propaganda they will be receiving in school.  It is no easy task, but one that is absolutely essential.  Parents cannot let down their guard.  A happy and well adjusted society doesn't just happen.  It happens through the thoughtful and careful guidance of millions of parents who take their role seriously.

Jesus Christ told his disciples not to be deceived.  Yet, many Christians believe that somehow they are better than the disciples.  If even they could be deceived by an unChristian world system, then why should Christian parents today feel they are off the hook.  This is exactly what has happened however, and we see the depravity all around us as a result.

Guard the heart and mind of your children just as you would their physical bodies.  We warn about not texting and driving or drinking and driving.  We caution to wear seat belts, and to be kind and considerate as part of our Christian witness to win others to heavenly security.  Guarding our god given genetic legacy from the on going global genocide is no less important.  You are your children's best security for a world in which they are a minority population and through the manipulation of others are facing a hostile social and political environment. 

Use your time wisely.

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

PRO-LIFE Groups Targeted by Obama Administration

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 17, 2012, ( – The federal government appears to be making a concerted effort to to gain intelligence on the pro-life movement, according to some of the movement’s most prominent leaders.

Jill Stanek has revealed that on July 13, FBI agents Conrad Rodriguez and William Sivley paid a visit to her son-in-law, Andy Moore, reportedly pressuring him to expose the inner workings of the right-to-life movement and making veiled threats to separate him from his wife and family through imprisonment or deportation.

Troy Newman is concerned that government surveillance, which his organization experienced under the Clinton administration, is ramping up again under Obama.The feds questioned Moore after the Southwest Women’s Surgery Center, a Dallas abortion clinic, complained that Moore used a bullhorn on one occasion during a peaceful protest. Upon learning this violated a local noise ordinance, Moore stopped using the bullhorn.

The abortion mill also claimed Moore was “too aggressive” and had trespassed on its property – something Moore denies and which he says the clinic made no attempt to prove.

Stanek wrote that the agents – who said their department also investigates hate crimes such as those committed by white supremacists – asked “inappropriate questions clearly aimed at intimidating Andy, while also launching into a fishing expedition about me.” Agents reportedly asked her son-in-law whether Stanek had inspired his activism, whether she trained him, and if he got his ideas from her.

They also asked, “What affiliations do you have including church groups?”

Stanek said the agents were most interested in getting him to name other pro-lifers who he believes are overly “abrasive or aggressive.”

Moore, who hails from New Zealand and is not a U.S. citizen, could be deported if successfully prosecuted. FBI agents reportedly told him, “You wouldn’t want to be apart from your wife and newborn.”

Stanek questioned why the FBI was involved in the first place, since, “the charges rose to the level of nada to begin with, certainly not above local law enforcement’s pay grade.”

Others in the pro-life movement have received similar visits and probing questions.

The Obama administration is essentially engaging in a witch hunt,” wrote Life Legal Defense Foundation Senior Staff Counsel Allison Aranda. “From the moment the new administration took office, the DOJ has been targeting peaceful pro-life sidewalk counselors.”

In February U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp dismissed a federal lawsuit against Mary Susan Pine for violating the FACE Act, ruling, “The Court is at a loss as to why the Government chose to prosecute this particular case in the first place…The Court can only wonder whether this action was the product of a concerted effort between the Government” and the local abortion clinic.

“It’s not everyday that a federal judge accuses the Justice Department of a full-blown conspiracy,” Pine’s counsel, Harry Mihet, told

A spate of federal studies have painted pro-life, pro-family leaders as potential “domestic terrorism” threats.

The most recent, “Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970 to 2008” written by Gary LaFree and Bianca Bersani, concluded that organizations dedicated to a single issue – such as “anti-abortion groups” – posed the most enduring threat to American safety and well-being.

An April 2009 DHS report on “Rightwing [sic.] Extremism” identified “groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration” and opposition to same-sex “marriage” as “the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States.” The DHS later pulled the report.

Yet DHS and FBI agents subsequently attended a terrorism training seminar on alleged pro-life terrorism, hosted by Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation, and the Feminist Majority Foundation. After equating free speech with violence, organizers distributed a resource guide listing three pages of purportedly extremist websites such as Priests for Life, the American Center for Law and Justice, and the Christian Broadcasting Network.

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Help! I'm nine months pregnant and can't fit in the tank

It apparently isn't just fodder for crazy Focker movies anymore. The U.S. military thinks their male soldiers need to wear fake boobies and pregnant bellies to have more empathy for pregnant female soldiers.  No, I'm not kidding!

Elaine Donnelly, president of the Military Readiness Committee exposed this latest Department of Defense move back in February.  It still hasn't made much noise.  Elaine Donnelly also served as a member of the Defense Committee on Women under two presidents and is an outspoken advocate against homosexuals in the military, so she knows what she's talking about.

This is just one more step toward requiring women to register for selective service when they turn eighteen, just like our boys must do. I have been speaking out against this and the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) since I was twelve years old.  I know that women have always played a supportive role in military affairs, but unless it is a last resort of defense (because mammas have a right to defend their children too) women do not belong in combat positions, not because they aren't brave or courageous (remember Boudica?) but rather because men are to guard the national boundaries so that women can guard the home front.

Sadly it isn't just a bunch of crazy women who promote this type of stuff, but there are way too many men who are more than happy to let women in harms way.  Sure there may be some guy out there who says that if that's the way they want it, then thats' what they get.  This is not a very manly way to think.  God intended men to protect women and children whether they know the danger they are in or not.  Many women have had to step forward due to male abdication of their role and due to Jewish propaganda that casts dishonor upon Christian women and their ability.  A Talmudic prayer says, "Thank God I am not born a Goy, a slave, or a woman."  Women want to be appreciated for their mental capacities, which unfortunately have been downplayed due to Jewish influence in society throughout the ages.  Many women feel they have to prove themselves.  This is a sad mindset for a woman to be in. 

The repercussions are enormous.  We have gone from a time in which it was improper ettiquette for a soldier to push a baby stroller (unfortunately it was considered unmanly) to men in uniform being required to wear fake pregnant bellies.  Too many of both sexes are on a self-serving mission.  Our population has moved toward an extreme of hedonistic worship of the individual.  The bedrock of the nation is not the individual.  It is the family.  What is good for the family?  That is the question we should be asking. 

Read the Article and watch the video at the end

On February 9 the Department of Defense announced incremental steps to implement a report advocating doctrinaire "diversity" in the military.  Central to this campaign, which briefers described as "just the beginning, not the end," are plans to order female soldiers into direct ground combat units such as Army and Marine infantry and Special Operations Forces.  These fighting battalions, which attack the enemy with deliberate offensive action, face conditions and physical demands that go far beyond the experience of being "in harm's way.

Days later, in an article titled Soldiers Don Fake Belly, Breasts to Better Understand Pregnant Troops' Exercise Concerns, Stars & Stripes posted a video of a male non-commissioned officer who was forced to wear fake breasts and a big belly simulating a female soldier's pregnancy. The hapless NCO, based at Camp Zuma in Japan, is one of several male PT instructor trainees who must take turns wearing the "empathy bellies" for at least an hour. The Army's Pregnancy Postpartum Physical Training (PPPT) Exercise is part of a worldwide effort to teach enlisted personnel how to be fitness instructors for pregnant soldiers and new mothers.

At first glance, the video appears to be an early April Fool's joke. It could also be an amateur show produced by someone seeking attention on Jon Stewart's Daily Show. Alas, the video is for real. The same Army leaders who think women can engage the enemy in hand-to-hand direct ground combat also think it is necessary to teach pregnant women to stay away from "snowboarding, bungee jumping, or horse riding."

Army doctors and nurses should counsel pregnant women about the value and risks of moderate exercise while on duty. But it is an abuse of authority, bordering on harassment, to force men to appear before their colleagues dressed like expectant mothers. There is no need to humiliate men just because some pregnant soldiers do not have enough common sense to follow doctors' orders for personal health and safety during pre-natal months.

Historically, trainees have been expected to conform to the demands of Army training, not the other way around. The larger question is, why is the Army preparing for so many pregnant women, and how does this improve our military? The Pentagon is doing the wrong things for the wrong reasons, elevating "diversity" above all other considerations.
The Military Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC), largely composed of civilian and military equal opportunity experts, has recommended policy changes that would treat the military like just another "equal opportunity" employer. To advance "diversity metrics'" for female personnel, the MLDC recommends policies that weaken or eliminate women's exemptions from assignments in "tip of the spear" Army and Marine infantry battalions and Special Operations Forces.

Americans are proud of women in the military, and there have been some changes in their roles since 9/11 that deserve recognition. For example, female engagement teams (FET)s and cultural support troops interact with civilian women and children in war zones in ways that are difficult for male personnel. It is dangerous duty "in harm's way," but still not the same as direct ground combat attacks against enemy forces under fire. These land combat missions, with physical demands beyond the capability of almost all women, have not changed.

If a soldier is wounded in battle−what we saw many times in Baghdad in 2003 or Fallujah in November 2004−a collocated support soldier may be the only person in a position to evacuate the wounded soldier on his own back. In this environment, women do not have an equal opportunity to survive, or to help fellow soldiers survive.

Lives should not be put at needless risk just to satisfy "diversity metrics" to advance the career ambitions of a few. Since we keep hearing about the need for a female Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey should pick a female officer and give her his seat. That would make more sense that feminizing Army training, especially since the Pentagon has admitted that military women are promoted at rates equal to or faster than men.

The male pregnancy training video brought to mind one of the most memorable moments in a March 1993 two-hour Firing Line debate with team captain William F. Buckley, Marine Vietnam hero Col. John Ripley, author David Horowitz, and me. Opposite us were feminist Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder, ACLU attorney Ira Glasser, Air Force veteran Heather Wilson, and retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Wilma Vaught.

Previously Gen. Vaught had stated that even pregnant women, depending on the month, should be allowed to serve in combat. In his joust with Gen. Vaught, Col. Ripley asked, “Would you please tell us, what month is it okay for pregnant women to fight, to be in combat?”

After some hesitation, Vaught stood by her statement, insisting that “There are women who are capable of doing many things up to a very late period in their pregnancy.” At that point, Ripley brought down the house with “Well, that’s wonderful. I’m sure the personnel people will be happy to know they are getting two for one.”

Col. Ripley's joke, unfortunately, is becoming all-too real. The pregnancy-padded NCO in the video, who was following orders, should not be blamed for looking ridiculous. The Army's top brass, who have no excuse, don't seem to know how foolish they look.

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Say it isn't so!

I loved being in the Girl Scouts growing up. I still have a box full of achievement badges. I have two grown daughters and we skipped that phase and they knew why. The Girl Scouts have gone crazy. It really is sad, because Juliette Low, the groups founder, was a devout Christian. Yes, I know lots of sweet little girls in the scouts and I can't resist buying a box of cookies - or two - when they ask so nicely. I'm not saying every Scout leader is a man hating lesbian feminist, but the organization is moving in that direction and they are trying to take our girls with them. Watch this great little video below. It is an eye opener.

Friday, February 10, 2012

Ex-Komen VP Karen Handel Slams Planned Parenthood, It Fires Back


Following her departure from the Komen for the Cure breast cancer charity in the wake of the massive attacks waged on it by Planned Parenthood following news that it would cut its funding, Karen Handel slammed the abortion business.

As LifeNews reported Tuesday, Handel, a top Komen official who was said to be instrumental in putting in place the changes in Komen policy that essentially resulted in cutting funding for Planned Parenthood, resigned her position.

Komen initially decided in December to revise its grant-making process to funds grants to agencies that provide direct health services for women — which would eliminate Planned Parenthood since it does not do mammograms. After Planned Parenthood, Democratic members of Congress and the media pounced on Komen for its decision, Komen clarified that Planned Parenthood would still be allowed to submit grant requests but they may or may not be funded.

“I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it,” Handel said in her letter. “I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen’s future and the women we serve.”

Handel followed up that letter with various interviews, including an appearance on Fox News, where she told the news station that Planned Parenthood viciously attacked the breast cancer group.

“What was unleashed over this past week was a vicious attack against a great organization,” Handel said, noting that Komen founder Susan Brinker came under personal attacks as well. “I would think all of us should be saddened that an outside organization should put this kind of pressure on another organization.”

“The last time I checked, private non-profit organizations have a right and a responsibility to be able to set the highest standards and criteria on their own without interference, let alone the level of vicious attacks and coercion that has occurred by Planned Parenthood. It’s simply outrageous,” Handel added.

She told Fox News that political pressure from her as a former Georgia Secretary of State and Senate candidate had “absolutely” nothing to do with Komen’s decision, saying, “For Komen, for myself the mission was always foremost on our mind.”

“The only group here that has made this issue political has been Planned Parenthood,” she explained. “I clearly acknowledge that I was involved in the process, but to say I had the sole authority is simply absurd.”

Handel also said the impending Congressional investigation of Planned Parenthood for fraud, misuse of taxpayer dollars and breaking abortion laws was part of the reason for Komen’s decision along with the desire to end pass-thru grants and provide direct grants to organizations that, unlike Planned Parenthood, provide women mammograms.

“I think the Congressional investigation, along with the various state investigations, were a factor in the decision,” she said. “But make no mistake about it, it was a bigger picture than that. There was the granting criteria, as well as the controversies that were surrounding Planned Parenthood.”

Some observers say the December Komen decision came about in part because Komen hired pro-life former Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel as its new Vice-President for Policy. While media reports have differed about the level of influence she had on the Komen decision to change its grant policies, the liberal Huffington Post alleges in a weekend story that that was the case:

Handel told Fox News the focus on her made it so she should resign.

“I was too much of a focal point,” she said. “I really felt I had a responsibility to just step aside so they could refocus on their mission. I wanted to do the right thing on my own terms, and that’s what I tried to do.”

Later on Tuesday, Planned Parenthood vice president told pro-abortion activists at a fundraiser that the debate was good for the abortion business as it built up its grassroots support.

“We heard from tens of thousands of people,” Cecile Richards said. “It was a fabulous opportunity to frankly educate a lot of people in America about the preventive care we do.”

“What we saw last week,” Richards said, “was Americans are just tired of people playing politics with women’s health care. … By reversing this decision, I think (Komen) has gone a long way to reassuring folks that they don’t want to get between women and their health care.”

“The good news is it means we’ll be able to provide a lot more health care to women,” she said, saying Planned Parenthood raised about $3 million off of the public battle

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Open letter to Sen. Mitch McConnell

From a Concerned Wife and Mother Regarding
the No Gun Registration Amendment and Gun Registration

Dear Senator McConnell,

I am a mother and grandmother. I home educated my children and am active in the Tea Party, my local Republican Party, and the Home Schooling Alliance of Arkansas. My husband is a small business owner. Within my family are law enforcement officers, teachers, attorneys, and ministers. We are a conservative and traditional value based family with members in throughout the United States as well as your home state of Kentucky. This weekend I spoke before a traditionalist organization in D.C. in regard to the incremental legal decline of the Christian family in this nation and the rise of socialism.

We are all deeply saddened that it now appears you will not back the NO-GUN REGISTRATION Amendment sponsored by Rand Paul. You have spoken out in defense of a tougher stance toward illegal immigration. You have spoken out in defense of limited government. And you have spoken out against many of the insane entitlement programs that are draining our economy. But how will you vote in this most important issue that our civilization pivots on?

Surely, Mr. McConnell, you are aware that allowing any federal agency the authority to track and demand the 4473 form of legal gun owning citizens is a slippery slope toward the eventual abandonment of our Constitutionally protected God given right to keep and bear arms.

Taking away our right to privacy from the intrusive eyes of political engineers who desire to dismantle traditional America – in the name of “security” will be disastrous in the years ahead for all freedom loving men and women everywhere.

I urge you to support this important amendment to the extension of the Patriot Act.

I trust you will side with the Constitution and the legal opinions of our founding fathers.

Rachel Pendergraft