Rekjalhew

December 31, 2005

Watch Night Service. Church is the place to ring in the New Year!

by @ 10:19 am. Filed under The Truth Shall Set you Free!

If you are not familiar with what Watch Night Service is, you need to read all about it here.


Today, attendance at these events, often called Watch Night services, rivals that of clubs, restaurants and other hot spots chosen to celebrate the coming new year. Last year, for example, 12,000 people came out for Mount Zion Baptist Church’s year-end devotional service at Nashville’s Municipal Auditorium, said senior pastor Bishop Joseph Warren Walker III. The church has three locations and more than 16,000 members. Its Watch Night service outgrew the church’s largest sanctuary, which seats 5,700.

“People joke that Mount Zion shuts down the clubs,” Walker said.

“This community goes to church on New Year’s Eve,” said the Rev. Enoch Fuzz of Corinthian Baptist Church in north Nashville. “They are not where they need a designated driver. People go to church because they want to be better. They go to Watch Night service because they are looking for hope, a blessing. They choose the blessing over a party.”

This is something that should become a regular moment of celebration and praise for all Americans. We all should celebrate and praise the Lord for allowing us to see another year. We all should celebrate, that the evils of slavery are in America’s past and we are spreading freedom in America’s present and future.

Let Freedom Ring! Give Praise and Glory to God!

2,000 Katrina evacuee sex offenders unaccounted for.

by @ 12:05 am. Filed under Nuts on Parade

These are the kinds of things that happen when it is “illegal” for a receiving state to screen evacuees that they accept!

Authorities urge states to find 2,000 evacuee sex offenders


The Administration for Children and Families estimated that about 30 states are affected. In November, agency officials matched the names of sex offender registries in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama with the names of evacuees who applied for disaster assistance.

The agency came up with more than 2,000 matches. The find led Horn to work with the Federal Emergency Management Agency on a system that would allow state law enforcement agencies to find registered sex offenders who are receiving disaster assistance.

And here is an example of how the search has been going in one state that is actively working to find them.


Federal authorities told Texas of 304 known sex offenders who had relocated to the state, of which they know of 14 who have registered and provided contact information to law enforcement, said Jerry Strickland, spokesman for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.

Also, an additional inquiry that Texas authorities conducted with the National Crime Information Center found 188 people wanted in connection with other crimes, said Grant Collins, who also works in the federal Administration for Children and Families.

So only about 4%-5% of offenders that went to Texas registered. Not to mention the near 200 people wanted for other crimes.

It is not known if all states are putting forth much effort to find these offenders and other wanted individuals.

Hat tip to Drudge.


Related post:
Criminal Katrina evacuees take their crime to other cities!

December 30, 2005

Ted Hayes’ Homeless Shelter. Increased Rent Because of Ted’s Popularity.

by @ 1:39 am. Filed under Questionable Items

Conservative Republican Homeless Activist Ted Hayes runs a homeless shelter in Los Angeles, California. He has been running it for over 12 years at the same location on property owned by a retired lawyer. His rent was $2,500 a month and was just raised to $18,330. An over 700% increase from one month’s price to the next!

Given the high increase, Mr. Hayes inquired as to why the price went up so high so quickly. He says that he had just attended a Republican event that he was invited to, that was covered by the local press. He says the property owner read the news report and informed him that the increase was due to Mr. Hayes being a Republican. Mr. Hayes says the property owner claimed to be a Democrat, that did not wish to help any longer via cheap rent. So Mr. Hayes has to find a new location for his homeless shelter or shut it down.

This says a lot about Liberals’ (at least one Liberal’s) desire to help the poor. I doubt the property owner is planning to use that area for another homeless shelter run by someone he feels he might agree with on a political level. It’s clear the property owner was helping Mr. Hayes in order to build his own self esteem and not because of any concern for the homeless. The property owner wanted himself to feel good. So he could say to himself that he was doing something nice. Pat himself on the back and boost his own ego. Once he found the situation involved someone that he does not agree with it was time to give Mr. Hayes the boot, because the property owner’s ego and image might otherwise get hurt.

Mr. Hayes was on FoxNews last night and has written this Wall Street Journal commentary, titled “Prejudice”. (Subscription required to view the article.) He feels that this action was taken because he is a “Black Republican”. He has equated his situation with the race based attacks against Black Republicans like Michael Steele and others.

People like Liberal Alan Colmes mentioned that Ted Hayes was known to be a Republican for some time. Mr. Hayes mentions in his commentary, the property owner in this matter noticed this when reading an article. (Mr. Hayes also mentioned on FoxNews that one of his associates also heard similar statements about party affiliation from the property owner. The property owner denies any such conversations took place, but has not mention he will sue for slander.) So maybe the property owner knew earlier and maybe he did not. Either way, here is my take. If the owner knew Ted Hayes was a Republican, he became angry because Mr. Hayes was gaining much more popularity. I personally did not know of him until recently and things like his proposal regarding the Tookie Williams execution caused many people to learn about him, that never knew him before. So if the property owner knew, he obviously became angry that Mr. Hayes was becoming more popular. It probably would make a Liberal Lawyer feel pretty embarrassed if his friends asked him “you are helping out that Republican guy that was in the newspaper?”… Of course in that question they might play on race, but that’s another matter I want to mention. Mr. Hayes feels that his race had a role in this. That because he is a Black Republican he is being persecuted by a Liberal Democrat, that wants Blacks to be Democrats. I must disagree. Mr. Hayes has not provided any statements from the property owner that mention race at all. So any statements about his race being a factor are pure speculation. People like Michael Steele, Condi Rice and others have faced attacks that specifically played on race and old racial games. Mr. Hayes has not shown any such attack. There have been plenty of non-Blacks that were treated dis-favorable by Liberals, once the Liberal with some power discovered they were in the presence of an outspoken Conservative. I think the best recent example is Swift Boat Vet Steve Gardner, who lost his job, probably as a result of standing up to John Kerry.

Just the same it is sad that a homeless shelter may have been given the boot by a property owner simply because of party affiliation. But the property owner has the right to do it. Mr. Hayes does not dispute that right and he has no intentions of taking any legal action. He simply wanted to let his story be known.

Mr. Haye’s commentary also mentions that because of feared attacks many Blacks are closet Republicans. While I have no problem letting everyone I meet know about my Conservative views, I do know of some Blacks that told me things like “I’m voting for Bush, but I told *** I’m voting for Kerry” during the last Presidential election. They feared the backlash they would face if they said that they are not a Liberal. And some folks who might be attacked by powerful Unions and such have good reason to be discreet and exercise their right to a “private” vote. While it would be nice for people to be able to all be open about their political views, there is no protection from discrimination based on political views and there should not be any such protection. It is simply a weight that we each must carry and decide for ourselves if we wish to keep our politics private from our associates or speak freely. With the understanding that some might respond unfavorably.

I pray that Mr. Hayes is able to find another location for his shelter.

December 29, 2005

My trips to the barbershop go a little like this too

by @ 12:07 pm. Filed under The Truth Shall Set you Free!

Larry Elder has explained what many Black Conservatives experience every week or 2. On their visit to the barbershop!

And I enjoy every single visit. Because somebody has to tell it like it is.

Good people with guns is a good thing

by @ 10:36 am. Filed under The Truth Shall Set you Free!

John Lott has a post today, where he list a number of instances where private citizens (and one off duty police officer at his home) used their guns to defend themselves from people with bad intentions.

Do you think someone would ever try to rob a store if they knew everybody in the store had a gun?

As I’ve mentioned before, gun ownership is part of my recommended crime solution for people living in high crime areas. Don’t let the thugs be the ones with all the guns taking over your community. If you feel the police in your area have failed you, laws to take guns from “everyone” will fail you too. Because then only the thugs will have guns. When more good people in high crime areas own guns, crime suddenly goes down!


Some Christians feel that members of the faith should be pacifists, but they neglect the fact that Jesus asked his own disciples to arm themselves!

Luke 22:35-38 (New King James Version)

35) And He said to them, “When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?” So they said, “Nothing.”

36) Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.

37) For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.’ For the things concerning Me have an end.”

38) So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”

He was not asking them to prepare in that instance for “spiritual warfare”. Nope, he was asking them to arm themselves with the weapons of that time. He knew it was getting close to the time where he would be arrested, because of course God’s son would know such things in advance. So he wanted to ensure that his arrest took place as it should. Without any attempts to actually kill him before the crucifixion and without the disciples being killed before they themselves should die.

So when a sword was used inappropriately, Jesus informed them to put the swords away and it was OK for him to be arrested.

Luke 22:47-53 (New King James Version)

47) And while He was still speaking, behold, a multitude; and he who was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them and drew near to Jesus to kiss Him.

48) But Jesus said to him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?”

49) When those around Him saw what was going to happen, they said to Him, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?”

50) And one of them struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his right ear.

51) But Jesus answered and said, “Permit even this.” And He touched his ear and healed him.

52) Then Jesus said to the chief priests, captains of the temple, and the elders who had come to Him, “Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs?

53) When I was with you daily in the temple, you did not try to seize Me. But this is your hour, and the power of darkness.”

Jesus knew his disciples having swords would temper any additional aggression beyond his own arrest.

Given Christ himself requested that his own disciples arm themselves, it is foolish to claim that Christians should never own a gun. To the contrary, Christians should own a weapon for their own personal defense. To be taken by authorities for the sake of the Gospel is one thing, but to die at the hands of a greedy thug is another and not the way to go!

Nick Cannon’s “Can I Live”. What a great track!

by @ 8:57 am. Filed under The Truth Shall Set you Free!

Since I did not catch this when it first came out, I’ve got to give my 2 cents now. Because I think most people like me were not aware of this and the way it shook up things in the music world some months back.

First check out Nick Cannon’s web site. Where he is still promoting the track “Can I Live”. Watch the video of the track there.

Basically this is a fantastic pro-life message. Apparently this song came out about 6 months ago or so and was praised by some Pro-Life blogs then. Of course this caused a stir in the mostly Liberal entertainment business and Liberal blogs were in disbelief that a fairly well known Hip Hop/R&B artist would actually show his mother appreciation for not aborting him killing him in the womb. As a result of the Liberal backlash and efforts by pro-lifers to embrace the effort, Nick took a bit of an “on the fence” stance. He mentioned afterwards that the issue of abortion (baby killing) is a personal decision and he was just speaking for his own situation. He did not want to be labeled as a pro-lifer. Regardless I say well done Nick. I can’t say I’m a fan of every one of his efforts. Like when he worked with “accused” child molester R. Kelly on this piece of trash. But it seems he got one right and I pray he does more similar efforts like “Can I Live”. You usually know you’re making a song that is “good” when you can put your own mother in the video!

On his other web site, he’s selling “Can I Live” T-Shirts. His video is full of kids wearing them. I think the message is clear that Nick is Pro-Life, but fears what it could do to his career. I feel his “Can I Live” efforts should be supported.

If you don’t know who Nick Cannon is, do you remember the movie Drumline? He’s the guy who was the star of that movie.

December 28, 2005

Thomas Sowell: In the Right Direction, interview notes

by @ 11:59 am. Filed under Business, Education, The Truth Shall Set you Free!, Unions Destroying America

Thomas SowellFred Barnes was able to get Conservative Thinker Thomas Sowell to do a one on one interview on FoxNews recently. Like Mr. Barnes and other Conservatives, I really enjoy Mr. Sowell’s work. So I’ve made notes from the interview. In my notes I attempt to cover the major topics covered during the interview and Mr. Sowell’s general view on them. There was so much covered that it would be difficult to capture every word. Mr. Sowell brings up so many facts, figures and perfect analogies on the fly that it’s hard to keep up if you’re actually trying to document everything. So I’m hoping I’ve just captured the general points and my notes are in no way a fully detailed report of every single thing covered. But I’ve captured enough that I feel satisfied with sharing my notes here on the blog.
(more…)

December 27, 2005

Bush had to bypass judicial wrangling to protect the homeland

by @ 1:36 pm. Filed under Judiciary, Terrorism and War, The Truth Shall Set you Free!

The facts show the FISA Court that Liberals claim is so easy to get permission from has not been that way with requests from the Bush Administration.

Secret court modified wiretap requests

Government records show that the administration was encountering unprecedented second-guessing by the secret federal surveillance court when President Bush decided to bypass the panel and order surveillance of U.S.-based terror suspects without the court’s approval.

A review of Justice Department reports to Congress shows that the 26-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court modified more wiretap requests from the Bush administration than from the four previous presidential administrations combined.

The 11-judge court that authorizes FISA wiretaps has approved at least 18,740 applications for electronic surveillance or physical searches from five presidential administrations since 1979.

But since 2001, the judges have modified 179 of the 5,645 requests for court-ordered surveillance by the Bush administration. A total of 173 of those court-ordered “substantive modifications” took place in 2003 and 2004 — the most recent years for which public records are available.

The judges also rejected or deferred at least six requests for warrants during those two years — the first outright rejection in the court’s history.

While the Justice Department was trying to gain valuable intelligence information, the FISA court was playing games of delay, modify and deny! Bush did the right thing to by-pass them.

Hat tip to Drudge.


Related post:
Presidents are required to use executive power to protect American lives

The Sudan situation. Bill Bennett praises the efforts of Senators Obama and Brownback

by @ 9:35 am. Filed under Terrorism and War

While listening to Bill Bennett’s radio show this morning he mentioned a Washington Post Op-ed by Liberal Democratic Senator Barack Obama and Conservative Republican Senator Sam Brownback.

The entire Op-Ed should be read, but here is an excerpt.

Policy Adrift on Darfur

For two years the Bush administration has made commendable efforts to improve the lives of people in Darfur. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick has become personally invested in the crisis, recently completing his fourth trip to the region in the past seven months. The United States has spent almost $1 billion aiding refugees and displaced persons who might otherwise have died of disease or starvation. And the U.S. military has helped airlift and fund African Union troops stationed in the Darfur region of Sudan.

Yet, despite American engagement, Darfur’s humanitarian, security and political conditions are deteriorating. If the United States does not change its approach to Darfur, an already grim situation is likely to spiral out of control.

The piece offers details of how things are going adrift and suggest solutions. The most critical suggested solution will be:


More important, Washington must immediately spearhead efforts to create a larger multinational force.

The bottom line is this, if the USA does not start sending troops and initiate a full scale military effort things will fall apart. Despite the rest of the world’s lip service, they will watch as the people die. If the so-called “great Satan” of the world does not make a greater move to save lives things will only get worse. Mr. Bennett raised this point about the need for US troops. Take note, today Bill Bennett said something about helping Blacks who are in the most urgent of need. I wonder how many news shows will cover it?

I’ve written about the issues in the Sudan in this piece and pointed out how President Bush has mentioned it in this other piece.

I know for many Conservatives this proposed use of US Troops might not be acceptable. But consider that the Sudan was a haven for Bin Laden and China is now making strong overtures to the Sudanese government. The Op-Ed even mentions:


the administration must use diplomacy to override Chinese and Sudanese opposition to such a force and persuade outside troops to join it.

If noting is done about this situation, the area’s resources will become the tools of America’s enemies. Given the current government there that is already the case and getting worse. This is why China is working to do so much new trade with the government of Sudan. The Sudan has mass killings, a history of supporting terrorists and now is getting cozy with China. So I have no choice but to support the USA taking a stronger stand. We can either start stepping up efforts now or suffer the consequences of inaction.

Because if no more is done, the resulting death toll will look bad, but the support given to our enemies will make matters even worse for the USA and our allies.


update (12/27/2005 9:56AM ET):
The Political Pit Bull also sees this op-ed as a positive act, while blog Narcissistic views on News/Politics has a different perspective on the motivations behind this op-ed being written.

December 26, 2005

Jesus does not celebrate Kwanzaa

by @ 2:32 pm. Filed under The Truth Shall Set you Free!

One day after celebrating the birth of Christ it is sad that some people run to embrace a racially segregated “holiday”, daily straight into the New Year.

I must say, when growing up my mother and I looked into this “holiday” a bit and after attending a Kwanzaa celebration it was the last time we had much to do with it. My father never cared for it at all. After that I felt it was a good thing for some years. Just because it involved Blacks trying to help themselves. Then after learning more about the “holiday”, it’s true roots, it’s founder, my own faith, and history I realized it is a bad thing.
(more…)

Independent Conservative - Copyright 2007 - Copyright Notice

[powered by WordPress.]

27 queries. 0.414 seconds