Archive for July, 2007
Wednesday, July 11th, 2007
You’ll have to excuse my lack of blogging the last two days. I’ve been distracted by my latest endeavour: re-building my personal website which will so on be combined with the blog in some fashion, stay tuned for that and more details in the coming days. Topics I’ll be blogging on soon include:
What type of immigrant, legal or illegal, should we really be most concerned about?
Senator David Vitter: We must hold him to the same standard we have held others in the past.
So look for those and more very soon on the blog. If you want to check out the revamped website it’s pretty much done. It can be found at: www.AndyBarnett.com
Let me know what you think, and don’t be afraid to call into the radio show at 320-251-1990, weekday mornings 6 to 9!
Listen live online.
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Monday, July 9th, 2007
You know I think when it comes down to it, the far left seems to be concerned with two things. Power and sex. If anything gets in their way to have government power or in their way to have uninhibited recreational sex they sure get irritated. They don’t seem to care about anything else, including human lives (IE; murdered babies or our troops) if they interfere with their two primary goals. Did I mention they could care less about right and wrong? Did I mention they could care less about the lives of kids growing up in America? Read on…
Students Sex Ed Documentary Conceived of Curiosity
Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 5:21:30 PM
Jeff Fecke (Minnesota Monitor)
Jim Winkle says he didn’t set out to make a documentary.
“It started small, with me just interviewing a few legislators. But I wanted to find out more, and that’s how I ended up traveling out to Washington and talking to people from the Heritage Foundation,” he said in an interview with Minnesota Monitor, in which he spoke about his documentary, “Sex Ed and the State.”
Winkle, a graduate student in the University of Minnesota’s School of Public Health, produced the film as both a master’s thesis and an attempt to figure out why states continue to shy away from enacting comprehensive sex education policies.
“I thought it was a paradox,” he said. Winkle added that sex education standards continue to lag, “even though sex ed has good evidence behind it — it’s been shown to increase condom use and delay the onset of sexual activity — and it also gets pretty high approval in polls.”
He says bills are offered every year in the Minnesota legislature codifying sex ed, and that he hopes his film will help him and others “find out where it fails in the legislative process.”
Winkle filmed during the 2006 session, when Republicans controlled the House. He said that sex education was “not anything most of them had on their mind,” but said that didn’t mean there were no strong opinions.
Winkle cited Sen. David Hann, R-Eden Prairie, as a chief opponent of the measure. “He thought if we were to teach sex ed, it should be what’s good and what’s bad, that abstinence is good, and having sex before marriage is bad.”
He also noted that Sen. Sandy Pappas, DFL-St. Paul, who sponsored the bill, was a strong advocate for the measure. “She has kids, and she thinks they deserve to be told the truth.”
Winkle said he thought the lack of sex ed could be behind recently rising abortion numbers in the state.
“I think it is a factor,” he said. “France, England and the rest of Europe has an abortion rate about a quarter of America’s, and they have comprehensive sex ed starting in fifth grade.” He also said poverty plays a role in the rising rates.
He also noted that Sen. Sandy Pappas, DFL-St. Paul, who sponsored the bill, was a strong advocate for the measure. “She has kids, and she thinks they deserve to be told the truth.” - The truth is that abstinence is effective 100% of the time in preventing pregnancies and STD’s. The truth is that abstinence is the best thing to do and many would argue it’s what we’re designed to do. The truth is that kids need to learn self control, discipline, and good behavior. This includes controlling their sexuality. The whole idea that kids should just do what they want is an irresponsible notion promoted by irresponsible adults.
“France, England and the rest of Europe has an abortion rate about a quarter of America’s, and they have comprehensive sex ed starting in fifth grade.” - Why don’t we look at the divorce rate in France, England, and the rest of Europe? How about we look at the marriage rate to begin with! What about the rate at which kids grow up in single parent homes? Let’s also look at how women are treated and objectified in Europe. Do I need to go on?
To say that teaching kids how to have recreational sex is going to decrease pregnancies and abortions is insanity! You don’t teach someone how to control their car when speeding and expect highway accident rates to go down do you?
Abstinence is a lofty goal, but it’s the principle behind it that we should not be afraid to teach. (Did I say principles? Whoops, I forgot that’s unacceptable and definitely not pluralistic!)
Finally, since when do government schools get to teach kids to be irresponsible? You don’t see our schools teaching kids how to steal and not get caught. Parents should be the ones teaching their kids about sexuality, not schools. It’s incredibly hypocritical for the same crowd that wants no reference to Christianity in our schools (because they don’t want to “indoctrinate” or “brainwash” kids) to turn around and push this sexual agenda on them. Teach kids to read and write, leave the social issues to parents!
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
Sunday, July 8th, 2007
You never know what will happen around the radio station, last week I was visited by a surprise guest! It was state Senator Tarryl Clark. I asked her if she’d be joining us on Hot Talk anytime in the near future. Here’s what she had to say:
Senator Clark made it clear to me that she does not do certain types of radio shows, like Hot Talk. She said she is not comfortable doing opinion based entertainment talk shows. She went on to say that she didn’t like the questions I asked her because they were too opinionated. She said I asked the kind of questions her critics from the right ask. Heaven forbid I ask a politician how they feel about issues and debate those issues with them. Isn’t debate an essential function of politics? I would think she’d welcome the opportunity to silence critics and speak her mind. Apparently not.
I respect Senator Clark for coming to me and telling me how she feels. She’s not comfortable being asked tough questions. I guess I can relate. I don’t like to be put in uncomfortable positions either, but that’s why I try to do my homework I guess. Anyhow, it’s certainly her right to avoid debate. It’s a decision she has made and the public will have to decide what they think of her decision to avoid these questions while she is in public office.
At the end of our conversation there was some talk about a possible re-appearance on Hot Talk, but she said it would have to be with certain ground rules in place. I’ll have to try to think up ways to not be entertaining or ask tough questions. That might be a tough task. Maybe I’ll try listening to some NPR, without falling asleep, to get some ideas!
Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments »
Saturday, July 7th, 2007
That’s it, I’m not going to let the “Go Green” Kool-Aid drinkers ruin my love of the outdoors. I am standing up and putting a stop to it right now. I enjoy the mountains, the trees, the lakes, the stars, the wildlife, etc. I enjoy untamed wilderness and fresh clean air. I also think everyone should do their best to treat their environment in a friendly manner. Littering is irresponsible. Is recycling a good thing? Sure I guess, but I’m not going to be militant about it.
See, I have a tendency to react exactly the opposite of the Environmentalist Wackos. Well, I’m fessing up. That’s probably not always a good thing. Will I stop it completely? No way it’s too much fun to do satire on the subject to point out how loony some people are. I will tell you though, that after spending almost a week in the north woods of Minnesota I do truly appreciate the natural beauty of God’s creation. I think everyone should learn how to clean up after themselves and should look into making personal choices to help do their part to keep nature clean.
So often, conservatives like myself who make fun of the tree hugging goof balls, get painted as people who want to tear through the forests with a chainsaw. We get stereotyped like we’re ready to dump chemicals in the woods, and we’re ready to kill off all endangered species. That’s just not right. In fact it’s wrong. We can appreciate the earth and all its beauty without condemning any and all human actions like some do.
I think one problem I have with environmentalists is this. They see humans as just another part of the animal kingdom just like any other species, yet, they hold humans to a higher standard than any other species. When was the last time they asked a deer or an ant to be more environmentally friendly? I know that sounds silly, but seriously there is some hypocrisy there isn’t there? Clearly humans are not just another species in the animal kingdom. Clearly we do have a responsibility to do more because we are different. We are intelligent, we do have a moral conscience. (In fact to be perfectly honest, I believe that this fact leads to proof in a Creator.)
So where do the crazies cross the line? They cross the line when they condemn all of humanity for using the resources available in the earth. There is nothing wrong with consuming plant life. There is nothing wrong with consuming other animal life. There is nothing wrong with using oil found within the earth. There is nothing wrong with consuming water. There is nothing wrong with using the land to survive and to thrive. Every other species on earth does so! Unfortunately there are those environmentalists who see humans as bad. I think they’d be happier if humans just died off. Maybe, if we’re lucky, the extreme environmentalists will just go ahead and die off and spare the rest of us from the insanity!
I’m proud to say that I love spending time outdoors. I enjoy the sounds of the wild at night. The call of the loon, or the coyote, or the bullfrog. I enjoy the clean water and fresh air filled with the scent of pine trees. I enjoy these things, I do my best not to destroy these things, and yet I’m not going to look at mankind as this great evil threat to the environment for merely existing.
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »
Monday, July 2nd, 2007
I have often tried to weigh where the line should be drawn when it comes to matters of citizens rights and where the government should step in to protect certain rights or where it should butt out altogether. Here’s another attempt at such an effort.
If you’re not aware of the situation involving Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis and their fight to have the right to enforce strict Muslim law on whoever they want, then you must be living in a cave. Don’t worry, I’m here to show you the light and help guide you toward some wisdom and understanding. Here’s the issue: The cab drivers have refused service to commuters who carry alcohol or have a seeing eye dog because both are violations of strict Sharia Muslim law. This story refuses to die and so now the saga continues.
(Cue Star Wars Music)
A short short time ago, outside of an airport that serves the Twin Cities metropolitan area, the rights of Muslims were under attack. At least that is what they’d have you believe.
(Stop Music)
No this is not an epic tale of good against evil. This is not the Galactic Empire (the Metropolitan Airports Commission) crushing the freedoms of the Rebellion (Somali Muslims.) Although there are those who would love to make you think like that. There’s an agenda out there to turn this into another case of “intolerance” and a case of “failing to accept diversity in our culture.”
(As I’ve pointed out many times previously, the radical followers of Islam are the ones who are intolerant, and it shows by their insisting that they have the right to enforce their strict religious edicts on all people. Furthermore those who stand by their side, the so called “tolerance” crowd, also display intolerance.)
This battle has now taken a new turn and it’s not being fought with light sabers. The court of law is the weapon of choice now, as reported by the left leaning blog, The Minnesota Monitor.
Minnesota Monitor
Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 6:26:20 PM
By Abdi Aynte
Citing an infringement to their freedom of religious rights, about 10 airport cabdrivers filed a lawsuit against the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), which ruled in May that cabbies can’t avoid alcohol-toting passengers on the grounds of religion.
The complaint was filed last week in a Hennepin County District Court. The lawsuit is a dramatic escalation to the rocky relationship between airport taxi drivers, who are predominantly Muslim, and the MAC. The Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport was ground zero for cabdrivers refusing to ferry passengers wielding booze. They say it’s against their religion to transport alcohol. But the MAC, which owns and operates the airport, grew impatient as the number of refusals increased.
On May, the MAC unanimously approved to increase the penalty on cabbies who shun passengers with alcoholic beverages. For the MAC, it was becoming a customer service issue. But Jeffrey Hassan, the cabbies’ attorney, said that the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion for all citizens.
The simple truth is this case should be thrown out almost immediately. If it’s not, then we have a severe problem on our hands. We risk setting precedent to allow workers to to whatever they want on the job, taking the rights of the employer away completely.
To quote the movie Office Space, “This isn’t Riyadh!” This is America. You have a right to practice religious beliefs however you see fit. That means if you think it’s against God’s will to transport people carrying alcohol, you don’t have to do it! Get a new job!
You wouldn’t find a Catholic Priest working in a brothel would you? You probably wouldn’t find a strict Southern Baptist serving hard liquor would you? Followers of both of those two religions (the two biggest in the United States) don’t seem to have this problem and you know why? They understand that you have to make the decision where you think it’s right for you to work. They understand that they can’t force everyone in America to abide by all their teachings as a matter of law.
The church does not run this country. Freedom does rule. Does that mean the church doesn’t influence the laws and choices of our land? No, of course it does! I think we’ve erred greatly when we start to deny the history of faith in our country and it’s role in our laws and traditions. I also think we err when we want to restrict it from our culture altogether. There is a fine line and it’s easy to fall to either side but the founders of our country understood that.
Infringement of rights is an issue in this case! Muslims infringing on the rights of all others who choose not to follow the strict edicts of Sharia law!
Maybe I should file a counter suit? Nah, that wouldn’t be very Christian of me.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
