Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Did You Know That Diane Sawyer Worked in the Nixon White House?

Originally published on Jan. 22, 2007 by James Broadwater at http://jamesbroadwater.townhall.com.

We’ve probably all heard about Dan Rather and his “Memogate,”
and you may know of Katie Couric’s anti-Christian bent as
evidenced in her infamous statement against Dr. James Dobson,
saying that he advocated for the murder of homosexuals and
instigated the murder of Matthew Shepherd in Wyoming, and
as also evidenced in the “interview” (or “Liberal Inquisition”)
that she did with Kenneth Starr in which she berated the Bible
and intimated that anyone who believes that any of it is true must be crazy.

But did you know that Diane Sawyer was a trusted White House
employee of the late former President Richard M. Nixon – a
Republican, and that she stabbed him in the back in an interview after
he had left office?

At some point, Ron Ziegler, White House press secretary, hired
Diane Sawyer to serve in the administration of President Richard
M. Nixon. She ended up holding several positions within that
administration, and worked there through his resignation in 1974.
She was part of the Richard Nixon-Gerald Ford transition team
from 1974 to 1975. She also assisted former President
Nixon in the writing of his memoirs in 1974 and 1975. As you
will see from a later interview she did with the former President,
Sawyer had been a trusted employee of Nixon’s, but she would
betray that trust, just as it seems to me as all liberals eventually do,
and hurt him only to advance her own career and the liberal agenda.

Nixon was in the process of putting Watergate behind him, had
entered back into public life, and was again making a positive
contribution to society, as you will see below, and that must
have taken tremendous courage, given the fact that every liberal
in America was against him, and also given the fact that
he had given them the opportunity they had long been eagerly
awaiting: the opportunity to discredit a Republican administration.
It must have felt like a tremendous coup for them.

Well, here are the facts of the matter. According to Robert Sam
Anson in his 1984 book, Exile: The Unquiet Oblivion of Richard
M. Nixon (New York: Simon and Schuster), pp. 261-265:

(Note: In the transcript, Nixon uses God’s Name flippantly on
two occasions, not as profanity, but disrespectfully, so be warned
if you respect the Lord. I have put it here as “thank _____, with the
word “God” going in the blank, not out of superstition, but out of the
respect for God that He deserves.)

… Richard Nixon … had come out of the desert. He was
back in the arena again.

Like a force suddenly let loose, Nixon was a blur of activity the
next several months.

In January, he put the finishing touches on his manuscript
and submitted it to his publisher.

In February, he flew to Jamaica for two weeks of
vacationing and conferences with the newly elected
conservative prime minister, Edward Seaga.

In March, he traveled again to Morocco for talks with
King Hassan.

In April, he granted a long interview to Time on his
current thoughts on the state of the presidency.

In May, he delivered a foreign policy address to a
Republican fundraiser in Orange County, California.

And there was more ahead. In the next year, he would
deliver seven major speeches, appear on eleven network
interview shows, attend seven GOP fundraisers, travel
to nine foreign countries (meeting the heads of state of
each), confer with the editorial boards of several major
publications, and, if he got around to it, perhaps grant
interviews to the 150 reporters with standing requests.
Such was his prominence that even hated Harvard
was asking him to come.

Confident was not the word for Richard Nixon’s mood.
He was ebullient, and, with the reception he had been getting
of late, there was cause for it. When he addressed the
party faithful in Orange County, denouncing proponents
of the nuclear freeze and warning that the next year was
going to be “tough politically,” he was introduced as
“truly one of our great Presidents” and a band played
“Hail to the Chief.” Afterward, the Republican
autograph-hunters, many of whom had paid $1000 a piece
to shake his hand, stood in queues thirty-deep. In
Morocco, where the king hosted one banquet in his
honor and the U.S. ambassador another, 75,000 people
gathered outside his Marrakech hotel on the chance
they might get a glimpse of him. When Nixon rewarded
them by wading into the crowd to shake hands and hold
up babies, a chant went up in Arabic, “You should
still be President.” Nixon responded by flinging out his
arms in his V-for-Victory campaign salute, and shouting
into the din, “Hasta luego!”

The only bit of unpleasantness in all of this came from
an unexpected source. In late May, as Nixon was setting
his plans for a three-week trip to Eastern Europe, Diane
Sawyer called, asking for an interview. Since leaving
San Clemente, Sawyer had become a television star for
CBS, first as the network’s State Department correspondent,
and later as co-host of the CBS Morning News. Throughout,
her relations with Nixon had remained friendly, and Nixon
agreed to the interview request. He coupled his
acceptance with an invitation to dinner.

At first, the session went well. Nixon was in a relaxed,
almost playful mood, gently poking fun at himself
(“My media critics consider that—that I’m rather the
one who probably was behind the barn door when the
brains were handed out.”), advising Teddy Kennedy to
lose twenty pounds and “get some new ideas” (“I’m sure
he will; he’s a very practical man.”) and terming former
Vice President Walter Mondale (“Mondale, blah!) “just
a warmed-over Carter.” As for Reagan, Nixon had nothing
but praise.

“Now,” Nixon said, “if—if—if you ask whether he’s smart
in terms of IQ, in terms of whether or not he would be
accepted as a full professor at Harvard, the
probabl—the answer is, probably not and thank _____ we
don’t have a full professor at Harvard as President.”

His tone sharpened when Sawyer asked him about the
press. “Now let’s talk about the ladies in the press for a
moment,” Nixon replied. “We have to realize that men
reporters can be tough, but women reporters think they have
to be tougher; they’ve got to prove something. . . . A
delightful fellow, Manolo Sanchez, who worked for us
when we were in the White House years—walking by the
press quarters, he used to refer—he’d look in there, and
he says, ‘There you have the vultures and the witches.’ Now
[by] the vultures he referred to the men, [by] the witches
he referred to the women.” Nixon shrugged. “My views
are a bit old-fashioned, I must admit. . . . But . . . like the
little ditty from the song, ‘Why can’t a woman be like a
man?’ . . . I want women to be like women. I want men to be
like men.”

“Maybe . . . the press has a visceral reaction against me,”
he went on. “Maybe it was my manner, I don’t know.
But it was there, and, as far as I am concerned, it’s now
live and let live.” He smiled at Sawyer. “They
usually have underestimated me. And—but I’ve done
reasonably well, except for some unfortunate events which
we won’t go into at the moment.”

But it was precisely those events Sawyer did want to go into.
Noting that the tenth anniversary of the Watergate
break-in was approaching, she asked what it now meant to him.

“It happened a long time ago,” Nixon answered, eyes
narrowing. “I’ve said everything I—I can on the subject. I
have nothing to add, and I’m looking to the future rather than
the past. . . . I’ve always said this: ‘Remember Lot’s wife.
Never look back.’”

Sawyer continued to press. “But a lot of people say, and these
are common people, ordinary people, people in the street,
say that you never just said, ‘I covered up and I’m sorry.’”

“Well, that—is, of course, not true,” Nixon replied with
apparent agitation. “As a matter of fact, if you—if you go back
and look at the Frost broadcast, and if you read my memoirs,
I’ve covered all that in great, great detail. And I’ve said it
all, and I’m not going to say anything more in the future.”

Sawyer was not so easily put off. “Do you think about it when
you’re just sitting alone, when some—when it’s—you’re not working?”

“Never,” Nixon snapped. “No. If I were thinking about it,
I wouldn’t be able to—do I—what is some of the constructive
work I’ve been doing on my new book, and also preparing for
the travels I’m going to be doing. You see, I
understand—I—I—I—understand the obsession with this
subject. It’s understandable. But people who are obsessed
with it don’t understand me. I went through it, I know what went
wrong, I know that I have a responsibility, I’m not trying
to excuse myself. But I’m not going to spend my time just
looking back and wringing my hands about something I can’t
do anything about.”

The exchange grew increasingly hostile.

SAWYER: You don’t even sit sometimes and think to
yourself, once again, as everyone thinks you must, “Why didn’t
I burn those tapes?”

NIXON: I’ve covered that also, of course, in my — in my
memoirs, and I must say that if — I must get — I must get a oh,
a half a dozen letters a week even now. “Why didn’t you
burn those tapes?” And the answer is, of course, I should. It
should have been done. But the main part is, they should never
have been started.

SAWYER: You did say to David Frost, you said that
you made horrendous mistakes, ones not worthy of a President,
ones that did not meet the standard of excellence that you dreamed
of as a young boy. What was the worst one, the thing that
you’re most sorry about?

NIXON: Oh—oh—oh, the worst one—the—the—I’ve—covered
this in great detail, and I’m not going to go into it any further.

SAWYER: There’s no one thing that you had in mind when
you were saying that?

NIXON: Well, the—the—well—well, the—if—if—well, it—I
th—I’ve—I’ve covered it already, but its- -it perhaps is—on
reflection, the thing that was the greatest mistake was in
failing to concentrate on it the moment I got word on it.

SAWYER: What’s it like to be Richard Nixon, and go out and walk
into a room? Do you — what do you sense when you walk into a
room? Do you ever think, these people are looking at me because
I resigned, or that—you—

NIXON: No, I never look back. I never did look back. And
people are very friendly. You—you have to realize that people
who reach the highest levels in public life don’t become
obsessed with themselves, and thinking, “Oh, my ______, what are
people going to be thinking of me,” and all that sort of thing. If they do,
they’re never going to be great leaders.

SAWYER: You also said to David Frost, you said, “I let down my
friends, I let down the country, I let down an opportunity I had for
projects that would have built a lasting peace; and I let the
American people down, and I have to carry that burden with me the
rest of my life.” Does that burden get heavier or lighter?

NIXON: Now that says it all, right there, and, as far as I am
concerned, having said it then, I’m not going to say it again now.

SAWYER: Could I get some phrases again? John Mitchell.

NIXON: Well, I think I’ve covered enough now, so
we’ll—I—I think we’ll—

SAWYER: How about John Dean?

NIXON: No comment.

SAWYER: You won’t even say whether the burden, year by year,
gets heavier or lighter?

NIXON: No (pauses) I’ve—I’ve already pointed out that I’m not
looking back.

The camera switched off. Nixon smiled tightly at Sawyer and
rubbed his hands together, as he did when he was nervous.
“Well,” he said, “you got it?”

When Sawyer returned to her office, a message was awaiting her.
The dinner was canceled.

--END OF QUOTATION.--

That 1970s interview should serve as an example of the blatant disregard,
the outright hatred, that all liberals, Diane Sawyer included, have for
their fellow human beings who hold a point of view which goes
against their liberal, socialist, communist, anti-God agenda, especially
if that person has even a small amount of influence. And Nixon had been
a President, so of course they hated him. The more influence that one has
for the good, the more that person is hated by the liberals. Their attacks
are merciless and calculated, sometimes years in advance. We must
fight them, but we had better know with whom we are dealing.
According to Anson, Sawyer had acted “as interrogator” to help prepare
Nixon for the March 23, 1977 television interview with David Frost.
She had been trusted by President Nixon. But she betrayed that trust.
Maybe the following is at least a little telling. Back on August 9, 1974,
President Richard M. Nixon had appeared on television to announce
that he was resigning the presidency. Diane Sawyer was, at the time,
working as an assistant in the press office of Ron Ziegler, White House
press secretary. According to Anson on page 14 of his book, “As she
looked closely at the television screen from on board Air Force One,
she noticed that there were tears in his [Nixon’s] eyes.” There was no mention
of tears in her eyes. Pretty strange for someone who had worked for the
first American President in history to resign his office - unless she had
never agreed with his philosophy in the first place. After all, in what
may be another little-known fact, she was at one time considered a
strong suspect for being “Deep Throat” during the Watergate scandal.
She was one of six people to request and receive a public denial from
Bob Woodward. But she wouldn’t have been considered a strong suspect
unless she had been on the inside of the Nixon administration and unless
she had also been a person who disagreed with at least some of Nixon’s policies.

Nixon wasn’t without sin. But then, none of us are. God has made that plain to us.
There are many verses in the Bible which point to this fact, but one that is
well-known and that points it up very plainly is Romans 3:23, which says,
“…all have sinned, and fall short of God’s glorious standard.” The good news is
that God has made a way out. He sent His only begotten Son, Jesus, to pay the
penalty for us on the cross. Everyone who repents of their sins and believes
on Him receives forgiveness and eternal life. You can pray to God right now
and accept Jesus Christ as Lord. You don’t have to be in a church to do it,
although God commands you to join a good, Bible believing church once
you have done it. You need the fellowship of other Christians.

Jesus, who is God, says in Matthew 7:5 (and this is also recorded in Luke 6:42),
“You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see
clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” We have developed at least
a couple of sayings from that verse. “Clean up your own backyard before
you go to telling me to clean mine up.” And, “Isn‘t that the pot calling the
kettle black?” So, since Diane Sawyer took the liberty to attempt to
make President Nixon feel like he should keep that burden on his back for
the rest of his life here on earth (and she was probably, in my opinion,
hoping that it would only get heavier for the rest of his life), then I
believe that Diane Sawyer’s life deserves being looked at as well.
What has she actually done in life? I think the record shows that she won a
beauty contest when she was about 18, thereby getting a scholarship to college,
chose to attend an all-women’s college (pretty strange choice for a liberal),
and went into “journalism,” a profession in which you really need to be more
of an actor or actress than an actual journalist, since the main qualification is
the ability to read cue cards and look into the camera that has the light on
rather than the one that is momentarily turned off.

Now, those who run the liberal media would like for the rest of us to think that
they and all the people who work for them are wholesome, squeaky-clean,
completely trustworthy, and entirely above reproach. But such is usually not
the case. And ABC television “journalist” Diane Sawyer is one poignant
illustration of this.

ABC News currently promotes Sawyer as follows: “Among U.S. broadcasters,
she is among the most popular according to recent surveys.”

A few facts on Diane Sawyer: Full name: Lila Diane Sawyer. Age: 61.
Birth date: December 22, 1945. Works for ABC News and is co-anchor of
ABC’s Good Morning America. Profession: Television journalist. I may have a
bit of a problem with that. Maybe it should read, “Misleading television
commentator who attempts to pass off as fact the opinions of every anti-American,
anti-God individual and organization on earth, and does so in such a way that she
tries to convince and influence the American people to believe that those
opinions are American, and that they are worthy of adopting as one’s own.”

Diane Sawyer was born in Glasgow, Kentucky. Soon after her birth, she
moved to Louisville, Kentucky with her parents. She won the “America’s
Junior Miss for 1963” scholarship pageant, a beauty pageant, as a representative
from the State of Kentucky, which must have provided her with a scholarship
to attend college. She received a B.A. degree in English from Wellesley
College in Massachusetts in 1967 and completed a semester of law school
before deciding on a career in broadcasting. Now, as I’ve already said,
Wellesley is a college for women only. She must have chosen Wellesley.
I can’t imagine the “America’s Junior Miss” pageant people saying, “Now,
we’re giving you a college scholarship, but you can only use it to go to
Wellesley.” Or, if they did say that, then Sawyer could have turned them down
on “principle,” saying that an all-women’s college was just as unacceptable
in her eyes as an all-men’s college. Or maybe she wasn’t a liberal yet, given the
fact that she later went to work in a Republican administration. At any rate,
Diane Sawyer had no problem attending Wellesley for four years, but I’m
guessing that she does have a problem today with even the thought of
allowing the existence of any college that is for men only, being given over,
as she is, to the ideologies of the feminist movement and the women’s
liberation movement. The motto of her alma mater is “Non Ministrari sed
Ministrare” - “Not to be ministered unto, but to minister.” That motto is
taken from the words of Jesus in Matthew 20:28 and Mark 10:45, which say,
in part, “…the Son of Man (Jesus referring to Himself) did not come to be served,
but to serve, …” That’s another irony, given the fact of Sawyer’s obvious
anti-Christian sentiments.

After college, Sawyer went back to Louisville, Kentucky in 1967 and began her
career in broadcasting at a local television station, WLKY, where she was a
local TV news reporter until 1970.

At some point, Ron Ziegler, White House press secretary, hired Diane Sawyer
to serve in the administration of President Richard M. Nixon. She ended up
holding several positions within the Nixon administration. She worked
in his administration through his resignation in 1974. She was part of the
Richard Nixon-Gerald Ford transition team from 1974 to 1975. She also
assisted former President Nixon in the writing of his memoirs in 1974 and 1975.

Eerily, I have not been able to find any information on what Diane Sawyer was
doing between 1975 and 1978, the time between her leaving political life and
her going to work for the mass media.

She became a political correspondent for CBS in 1978, working
as CBS News’ State Department Correspondent. She was a floor
correspondent for the 1980 Democratic Convention. She became a
co-anchor of the CBS Morning News in 1981. She was a floor
correspondent for the 1984 Republican and Democratic National
Conventions. She became a correspondent for 60 Minutes in 1984,
and was the first woman to co-anchor that show. She stayed there for
five years. She got married to director Mike Nichols on April 29,
1988, making her 42 years old when she married him. She was podium
correspondent for the 1988 Democratic and Republican National
Conventions. She moved to ABC in February 1989 to co-anchor
Primetime Live with Sam Donaldson. In addition to her Primetime
assignment, Sawyer was named co-anchor, with Charles Gibson, of
Good Morning America in January 1999. Sawyer and Robbie Gordon
received the 2004 George Polk Award for Television Reporting given
annually by Long Island University to honor contributions to journalistic
integrity and investigative reporting.

According to ABC News’ own website, “Sawyer reported live from
Ground Zero during the week of Sept. 11 and interviewed over
60 widows who gave birth after the World Trade Center disaster.
She recently returned to Afghanistan to reunite the women profiled in
her landmark 1996 report from behind the burqua, as one of the first
Western journalists to expose the plight of women under Taliban rule.
She also presented a groundbreaking two-hour special on gay adoption
and the foster care system, featuring Rosie O'Donnell's personal story as a
gay parent.

“Her interviews include President George W. Bush in his first
national interview; Saddam Hussein, the first Western television
interview granted by the Iraqi president for nearly a decade;
President Fidel Castro; Robert MacNamara's public apology on Vietnam;
… Ellen DeGeneres, who announced her homosexuality; ousted Panamanian
leader Manuel Noriega's first interview from prison; Michael Jackson
and his then-wife Lisa Marie Presley's only interview; Michael J.
Fox's interview about Parkinson's disease and the decision to leave
his show; and former first lady Nancy Reagan on President Reagan's
battle with Alzheimer's disease and their 50-year marriage. She also
had the first interview at home with the Clintons after the 1992
presidential election.

“Other important investigations include … uncovering the questionable
business practices of three major televangelists … Sawyer's revealing
hidden-camera investigation of racial discrimination, which
documented the different experiences of blacks and whites in America,
also won the Grand Prize in the prestigious Robert F. Kennedy
Journalism Awards.

“Sawyer's overseas reporting includes her coverage of the attempted
coup in Moscow, when she made her way into the office of Boris
Yeltsin at the moment the attempted Soviet coup was at its crisis.
During the Gulf War, she traveled to Egypt to interview President
Hosni Mubarak and to Amman, Jordan, where she interviewed King
Hussein and his American-born wife, Queen Noor. She is one of the few
Western journalists ever to report from North Korea on the famine and
the government's attempt to keep it secret.”

Now, let’s take a look at some of those “accomplishments.”

ABC News says, “Sawyer reported live from Ground Zero during the week
of Sept. 11 and interviewed over 60 widows who gave birth after the
World Trade Center disaster.” Knowing the “reporting” style of Diane
Sawyer and the rest of the liberal media, I’m sure that it was all
designed to encourage anti-American sentiment, as in “the attacks
were all our fault,” and, “Let’s figure out what we did wrong to make
them so mad and not do it again.” The liberals are still the Blame
America First crowd, and most probably, they always will be. Why
can’t we have a pro-God, pro-America media? We do have a right to it.
We have a basic right to the pursuit of happiness, and how can we
pursue happiness when the media is constantly trying to make us feel
bad about ourselves?

ABC News says, “She recently returned to Afghanistan to reunite the
women profiled in her landmark 1996 report from behind the burqua, as
one of the first Western journalists to expose the plight of women
under Taliban rule.” Does Diane Sawyer support exporting the feminist
movement and the women’s liberation movement to Afghanistan? Does she
want for Afghan women to go to the same colleges as Afghan men? Or
does she advocate for them to go to all-women’s colleges, as she did?
If it’s good enough for Diane, it should be good enough for all women
everywhere, right?

ABC News says, “She also presented a groundbreaking two-hour special
on gay adoption and the foster care system, featuring Rosie
O'Donnell's personal story as a gay parent.” The last thing that we
need in this country, or anywhere, for that matter, is for people
involved in homosexuality to raise children! That story is only
groundbreaking if your goal is to push homosexuality on all the rest
of us. In addition, I remember before Rosie O’Donnell made it public
that she was involved in homosexuality, she ridiculed the Rev. Dr.
Jerry Falwell for saying that if the character Tinky Winky on the
children’s television show TeleTubbies was supposed to be “gay,”
then it was wrong. (Tinky Winky was supposedly a male, but he carried
a purse.) Well, we soon found out why Rosie O’Donnell supported a
cross-dressing character.

To continue, “Her interviews include President George W. Bush in his
first national interview;...” I’m sure she didn’t try to make him
look good. “…Saddam Hussein, the first Western television interview
granted by the Iraqi president for nearly a decade;…” I’m sure she
enjoyed interviewing him - someone with whom she probably felt a
natural kinship. I wonder whether she cried when he was hanged. I’d
rather be ruled by Richard M. Nixon than Saddam Hussein any day. “…
President Fidel Castro;…” Bet she enjoyed that one, too. “…Robert
MacNamara's public apology on Vietnam;…” Bet she loved that one. “…
Ellen DeGeneres, who announced her homosexuality;…” Diane must be
especially proud of that one. The announcement of her homosexuality.
It was probably described at the time by ABC News as
being “groundbreaking.” A precursor to the Rosie O’Donnell raising a
child story. The plot thickens, or sickens, or both. “…Michael
Jackson and his then-wife Lisa Marie Presley's only interview;…” No
comment needed on that one. “Michael J. Fox's interview about
Parkinson's disease and the decision to leave his show; and former
first lady Nancy Reagan on President Reagan's battle with Alzheimer's
disease and their 50-year marriage.” Both obviously designed to
elicit support for stem research that murders an embryonic human
being - research that hasn’t produced a single cure, while research
on adult stem cells - research that doesn’t murder anybody, has
produced dozens of cures. And on January 9, 2007, I heard on the
radio that stem cells from amniotic fluid can grow new tissue and has
the very real potential of producing incredible cures! Why do
liberals support programs and policies that end up producing death?
Well, the Bible tells us that sin is pleasurable for a time, but the
end thereof is death. So, as they pursue sin, it leads, naturally, to
death. “She also had the first interview at home with the Clintons
after the 1992 presidential election.” How sweet. Someone who
believes the same way she does.

“Other important investigations include … uncovering the questionable
business practices of three major televangelists …” Why not
investigate the questionable business practices of three major
homosexuals, or three major news networks? Oh, yes. Because that
wouldn’t fit into the anti-American template of discrediting
Christians and Christianity, promoting homosexuality, and protecting
the media’s ability to continue trying to destroy this great nation
called America. “…Sawyer's revealing hidden-camera investigation of
racial discrimination, which documented the different experiences of
blacks and whites in America, also won the Grand Prize in the
prestigious Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Awards.” Racial
discrimination is bad. But I could tell her some places in
Mississippi in 2007 where she could hide her camera and find Blacks
racially discriminating against Whites, Asians, and Hispanics, and
even other Blacks who don’t fit into the liberal media’s definition
of “Black culture.” But I bet ABC News wouldn’t be interested in
doing that story. They’d only be interested in discrediting the
people who’d like to bring it out into the open and implement a
solution. And speaking of Robert F. Kennedy, then-California Governor
Ronald Reagan destroyed Kennedy, who was a Senator at the time, in a
televised debate on May 15, 1967. I haven’t yet been able to find it
anywhere on the Internet to view it, not even on YouTube, and CBS has
the rights to it. As important as it is, I think that it should be in
the public domain, but I also believe that there are certain people
who don’t want for anyone to see it because it clearly shows the
superiority of conservative beliefs to liberal ones, and it shows how
the debating skill of Ronald Reagan was vastly superior to that of
Bobby Kennedy.

But the beat goes on. “Sawyer's overseas reporting includes her
coverage of the attempted coup in Moscow, when she made her way into
the office of Boris Yeltsin at the moment the attempted Soviet coup
was at its crisis.” How did she manage to get into the office right
at that moment? “During the Gulf War, she traveled to Egypt to
interview President Hosni Mubarak and to Amman, Jordan, where she
interviewed King Hussein and his American-born wife, Queen Noor.” Why
not interview American service members, and tell their true stories?
Is it so bad to be pro-American when you’re supposed to be an
American? “She is one of the few Western journalists ever to report
from North Korea on the famine and the government's attempt to keep
it secret.” Which government? Ours or theirs? To the liberal, it
doesn’t always matter. Anything to discredit a government. Just
today, January 10, 2007, I heard on the radio of a first-hand account
of a man in North Korea who was murdered just for having in his
possession two copies of the Bible and for holding a Bible study in
his own home with his own family. He was murdered immediately upon
being discovered by his communist government. Diane would probably
say in intimate conversations with her friends that he deserved it.
But in reality, the United States government should decide that we
can no longer bow to the liberals. We should send money, supplies,
and weapons to the citizens of North Korea who want to fight against
their evil government that oppresses those who believe in the Truth
and want to do what’s right, and we should send a few of the Army’s
Special Forces units in to train them so that they can win. That’s a
very American thing to do.

And what awards the liberals give to each other to create the
illusion of credibility! This from ABC: “In addition to her Dupont
Awards, Robert F. Kennedy awards, and numerous Emmys, her many honors
include the grand prize of the premier Investigative Reporters and
Editors Association, two George Foster Peabody Awards for public
service, an IRTS Lifetime Achievement Award, Broadcast Magazine Hall
of Fame and the USC Distinguished Achievement in Journalism Award. In
1997, she was inducted into the Television Academy of Fame.”

In 2004, Diane Sawyer and Robbie Gordon of ABC News PrimeTime Live
received the George Polk Award for Television Reporting that is given
out annually by Long Island University. The Polk Award was named for
George W. Polk (1913-1948), a CBS correspondent who was killed or
murdered in Greece during the Greek civil war. According to Elias
Vlanton, author of the book, Who Killed George Polk? The Press Covers
Up a Death in the Family, Polk had relentlessly criticized players on
both sides of the Greek civil war. Amazingly, at least in my opinion,
Sawyer, a recipient of the Polk Award, only covers stories in a way
that favors the liberal point of view.

Now, let’s take a look at how much she has been paid for the “work”
that she’s done.

According to a New York Times story by Peter J. Boyer dated December
22, 1986, Diane Sawyer was at the time (her contract with CBS about
to expire the next week) in negotiations with all three major
television networks - ABC, NBC, and CBS, who were competing intensely
for her services. All three were reportedly vying for her with
assorted packages involving more money, more air time, and the
potential of an anchor role. In another story, in the same newspaper -
story written by the same reporter, eight days later, it was
reported that Sawyer had agreed to stay with CBS under a new, five-
year contract that would raise her salary from about $840,000 a year
to about $1.2 million a year, according to sources close to the
contract negotiations. It was also reported, interestingly, that
Sawyer had been in Louisville with her family on the previous day and
was “not talking to the press,” according to a CBS spokesman, Ann
Morfogen. A television personality not talking to the press? It seems
that the media people give to themselves privileges that they don’t
think the rest of us have.

On February 20, 1989, the New York Times, in a story by Jeremy
Gerard, reported that Diane Sawyer was leaving CBS for a five-year
contract with ABC, which means that she didn’t finish out her five-
year contract with CBS. Diane Sawyer would “reportedly earn $7.5
million under her new five-year contract with ABC, which hired her
away from CBS with the offer of an anchor's chair.”

I guess it takes an awful lot of money to try to assuage a guilty
conscience.

There were, at one time, rumors that Sawyer would host World News
Tonight. However, on May 23, 2006, it was announced that Charles
Gibson, Sawyer’s co-anchor at Good Morning America, would assume the
anchor chair for World News Tonight, and on June 28, 2006, Gibson
left Good Morning America to begin work in that position. She was not
only passed over for the top anchor job at ABC News when they hired
Charles Gibson; she was also passed over for another top anchor job -
the one at CBS News, who hired Katie Couric.

According to one source, it is rumored that Sawyer will leave GMA
when her contract ends in 2007, where she has been popular with
viewers. (Source’s words, not mine.) However, according to that same
source, controversy and negative response from viewers had been
generated by Sawyer’s undercover investigative news reports about
child abuse, and the specific instances in which Sawyer and the
investigative team failed to report the documented abuse to child
welfare authorities.

Could her being passed over for two top anchor jobs be in part
because of her failure to report child abuse to the authorities,
which could come back to cause problems for a network in the future?
Or could it be that liberals just don’t always take care of their own?

I’d say that today, every news anchor is more an actor or actress and
an advocate for the liberal ideology than they are a reporter. Their
most important assets are some acting ability, the ability to read
cue cards convincingly, and agreement with the liberal viewpoint. But
the ancient Greek word for actor is the word from which we get our
word “hypocrite,” meaning someone who pretends to be something he is
not. That’s what the liberals are today. Except they’re not just
entertaining us, although by “entertain” I mean “to get someone’s
attention and hold it for a long time,” and that is wasting our time
and keeping us from the important work of spending time with our
families and reclaiming our country before it’s taken away from us.
No, they’re not entertaining us because they like us and want to
bring us pleasure. They’re keeping our attention, and they’re keeping
us distracted until they’ve taken away everything and left us with
nothing except what they say we can have - that is, if they let us
live.

That’s something to think about, and it’s something to pray about.
And then, once you’ve done some thinking and praying, it’s something
to also take action on. You can take action by seeking out good
candidates, helping them with their campaigns, and voting for them,
or by becoming a candidate yourself. It’s time to compel your
neighbors to action, too. Make them realize the shape we’re in, and
let’s all pitch in together to save this great nation of ours before
it’s too late.

The Mandatory HPV Vaccine in Texas

Originally published on this website on Feb. 6, 2007.

This past Friday, February 2, 2007, the Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, issued an executive order requiring all girls, upon entering the sixth grade - or, at about age 11 - to be immunized against HPV, or the human papilloma virus. Governor Perry and I are both Republicans, but he is not the first member of my own political party with whom I have found myself in vehement disagreement.

While HPV does cause cervical cancer, HPV is transmitted through sexual contact. A better course of action for Texas to take, rather than mandating more immunizations for the children of their state, is to work for abstinence until marriage, and fidelity within marriage, with it being understood that marriage is for as long as both the man and his wife shall live, preparing couples for marriage, and discontinuing the easy divorce which shatters families, many times plunges the women and children of divorce into poverty, and harms children most of all, psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually. Forcing these immunizations on girls, not yet even women, and even against their will, is sending them the message, "Yes, we do believe the very worst in you, that you are going to be promiscuous, we do believe that you will commit fornication - having sex without being married (for you who have never heard that word, maybe because it hasn't been used, even in church, for far too long), and we are going to forcibly immunize you so that at least, maybe, you won't get one certain disease among many that you may likely get if you engage in this behavior." This executive order goes against the Biblical commands to teach our children to walk in the ways of the Lord, to promote personal and corporate holiness in our people, to believe the best that you can possibly believe about people, and to love one's neighbor as oneself. After all, would you want an unwanted and unnecessary immunization forced on you?

And why was an executive order necessary. Well, it wasn't. The issue was already before the Texas legislature. Of course, the pharmaceutical company that makes the vaccine, Merck and Co., has made donations to various Texas lawmakers and to a group called Women in Government, an organization that has lobbied heavily in several states for mandatory HPV vaccinations. Well, Texas has just become the first to mandate these unnecessary vaccines, which are also intrusions into the private lives and personal freedoms of every little girl and every family with children in their state. And in my opinion, this push for these mandatory vaccines is not to protect the public health, as it is clearly better to push for abstinence until marriage and fidelity within marriage. This push is clearly for profit, and the Holy Word of God has already told us that when someone loves money, they will do anything to get it. I believe that includes "Pier Sixing" our children's health in order to get the money that pays for whatever manifold sins that they are already involved in, or want to be involved in, which take so much money to pay for.

But there is another factor involved in the push to speed things up. A rival company, GlaxoSmithKline, is close to releasing a similar drug, which would create competition for Merck. Merck simply wants to corner the market and make their money before the other guy can cut into their profits.

It is not money, but the love of money, that is a root of all kinds of evil, and the love of money in this sorry case in Texas is clearly a root of the evil order just handed down by that state's chief executive. This is just another example of why we, the people of this country, should prefer only Christians who act and vote like Christians to rule over us. I'm just glad that I don't have a daughter who hasn't yet made it past the sixth grade in Texas. If I did, I'd be looking for a job in some other state, where, hopefully, the best possible things are believed about my children and about the rest of my family, and not the worst.

Byram Incorporation and Bad Politics

Originally published on Dec. 11, 2006 at http://www.onlinebyram.com.

In the December 2006 edition of The Byram Banner, the Byram "Interim Board of Aldermen" wrote within a long column concerning our bid for incorporation, "All of the interim aldermen are not in the incorporation area." The poor English used in this statement leaves one to wonder whether some of the "aldermen" are in and some are out, or whether all of them are outside of the incorporation area. If they all end up outside of the incorporation area, then I would say that's good news, and I would only hope that our "interim mayor" ends up outside the incorporation area, too.

But this is not the most disturbing part of their article, by far. The most disturbing part is the part in which the person writing for the "aldermen" writes about how Byram will have numerous churches with large acreages as if that's a bad thing because churches are exempt from paying taxes. I was warned as a student at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary's Northern Orange County Campus back in the 1990s that there might be, in the future, some people who love money so much and are so devoid of understanding of what's really important that they would actually seek to abuse the government's right of eminent domain to take away church property and lands and give them to businesses because the businesses would bring in more revenues to the city's tax base. That would be, of course, ignoring the value of Christianity to a city. I think that each of these "aldermen" calls himself a Christian, and the "mayor" probably would as well; yet they have a problem with churches having large acreages where businesses could be built and make more money. They've got their priorities backwards. Don't just listen to what people say; listen to what they really say, and look at what they do. One of the "aldermen" has already said on a blog that she didn't believe that morality had any part in the decision-making process of government officials. Well, excuse me, but every official action that a government official takes is either moral or immoral.

Now, the people of Byram aren't dumb. We are self-sufficient (meaning that we depend on God, and we also don't want to become dependent on the government; we want to do as much as we possibly can, with the help of God, for ourselves), and we can and will make Byram into a great place to live, given the opportunity. But opportunities don't just come by themselves. We've got to have good leaders who will be willing to make it happen. We need to elect a city government who will work for the good of all the citizens of the City of Byram, not just themselves and their friends, and we need to elect people who already understand what's truly important, not people who we have to try to teach or people who we have to beg to do what's right.

It seems to me that everything about the Byram incorporation is being manipulated, and the manipulators aren't talking -- or at least they're not telling us anything that they don't want for us to know. But "by their fruits you shall know them," and judging by their actions, they're up to no good.

If and when Byram ever gets to hold legitimate, free elections, and I mean free from manipulation, then we will have our chance to elect people who have the best interest of the people at heart. On the other hand, we can also elect people who only care about themselves. All of the candidates will say that they care about the people of Byram, but you had better take care to really get to know them and their views before you go to the ballot box. Otherwise, we the people could be taking what has the potential of being a golden opportunity and throwing it down the drain. On the other hand, we have, at the same time, a chance to make Byram a really wonderful place. The choice is up to us. Our children will either benefit from or be harmed by the choices that we make. God will also call us to account for what we do. There really is much at stake. As one of our Founders said so long ago, take care that you do not trifle with your vote, and give your children and grandchildren reason to curse you.

May God bless you.

Wearing Pajamas to School? What's Next?

Originally published on Dec. 2, 2006 at http://www.onlinebyram.com.

Whose stupid idea was this? I was at a friend's house last night, and noticed on their bulletin board a note sent home from the teacher of one of their children who is in the first grade, instructing that on Thursday, December 14, 2006, their child is to wear "pajamas or a nightgown" to school. They claim that this will "enhance their study as they watch the movie Polar Express." This is at Gary Road Elementary School here in Byram, where I live!

Yes, the Hinds County School District, the same bunch of people who have changed our Christmas Holidays to "Winter Break," is at it again! What's next? Junior high and high schools having Lingerie Days? Do we want for our little girls to grow up to be like Britney Spears, or do we care whether they follow God? And don't we want for our sons to grow up to be godly men?

I'm totally disgusted at this point. Sounds like more of what Rush Limbaugh calls "No Child's Behind Left Alone." This is one reason why we home school our son. Maybe next they'll want to use our taxpayer dollars to put the Playboy Channel in all of our public schools, and hand the remote to the biggest troublemaker in the class. Our State Constitution still states that the Bible will never be taken out of the schools of our state. It's time we give a copy, not only to every student, but to every teacher and administrator, because they obviously desperately need to read and learn to obey it.

The Democrats Pulled It Off - With Some Help

Originally published at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Nov. 8, 2006.

A hundred or so years ago, there were Republican newspapers, and there were Democrat newspapers. I think that was a good thing, since we human beings are imperfect and there is no truly unbiased reporting.

Then, at some point, the Democrats played a dirty trick on all of us. They used the post-World War I desire for world peace (by their own contrived definition meaning "the absense of conflict") to supposedly create a totally fair, completely unbiased, and unquestionably honest mass media empire. Note that word, "unquestionably."

Christian and conservative media were minimized. Only the ones with the liberal slant were deemed, by them, to be trustworthy. They vilified anyone and everyone who disagreed with their already-failed philosophy, while they treated their favorite people and organizations as if they were above reproach and as if we weren't allowed to even question their truthfulness.

Well, folks, they're still doing the same thing today. They never have gone away. There's still a mass market for what they pass off as news, although that market has been shrinking in recent years. But you've got to hand it to them. The liberals engaged in an all-out blitz this year, and it worked. With help from the mass media arm of the Democratic Party, they lied about Republicans, they copied Republicans (at least they did in Arizona), they lied to us about who they really are, they pretended to be conservative, and they held onto the knowledge of Republican scandals until October when they knew it could hurt Republican chances of winning, while at the same time minimizing Democrat scandals. And I'll say it again, even though they were wrong, their strategy worked.

Our human nature is such that we are still susceptible to sin even if we've given our lives to the Lord Jesus Christ and are trying to do good. We must be on our guard constantly, or else we'll fall into the snare of the enemy, and the outcome will be anything but good. And the poor souls who have never given their lives to the Lord are, oftentimes, like people in a lifeboat without any oars and in the middle of a storm, tossed about to and fro. We have the capacity to do tremendous good or horrendous evil, and in the election in which we just voted yesterday, I don't think that the majority of the people understood what the sorry results of the way they voted could turn out to be.

Then again, I think that the main reason why our side lost is because Republicans, when they had control of the White House and both houses of Congress, failed to do what they should have done. They didn't lead -- or at least not in the right direction. They shouldn't have waited until they thought it politically expedient to start working on stopping illegal immigration, but they did. President Bush shouldn't have appointed homosexuals to high-level government positions, but he has. None of them should have let the liberal mass media get away with outright lying about there not being weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but they have. I could go on and on, but I won't.

What we've got to do right now, and I mean right now, is get ready for the elections that are in the near future. If I may use my home state of Mississippi as an example, we have statewide elections next year, and we'll be voting on every office from Governor to Justice Court Judge, and we had better start getting ready now.

Whoever we elect to the legislature next year will redraw the district lines after the next U.S. census, which will be in 2010, and those lines will include the boundary lines for our four U.S. Congressional Districts. Whoever we elect as Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and as our state legislators will either help protect us from the abuse of eminent domain or they'll let our homes and lands be taken by greedy developers and greedy municipal governments to be made into strip malls or whatever else they want to do with them.

Well, I could go on and on, and so could you, I'm sure. But please let me leave you with one closing thought. We should take every election seriously. We should vote, but we should prepare to vote long before Election Day rolls around again. You need to know that the qualifying deadline will be around March 1st. After that, we'll know who's running for what, and we'll have somewhere between three and five months to get to know them before the Primaries roll around. And we'd better get to know them, because so much of what affects our lives and the lives of our children, our extended families, and our neighbors depends on it. Pick whoever you believe are the best candidates. Give $10 or $20 to the campaign of your favorite one. And ask the Lord right now, "Are You calling me to run for something?" In some cases, the qualifications are much less than you might think.

Courts Don't Have the Right to Tell Legislatures What Laws to Make

Originally published at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Nov. 1, 2006.

The New Jersey Supreme Court, just a few days ago, ordered their state's legislature to redefine marriage. And correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Massachusetts do the same thing not too long ago?

In this country, we have three branches of government, and the judicial branch is supposed to be the least powerful. The judiciary does not have the right to tell the legislative branch what laws to make. It's about time we rein in the "imperial" judiciary - again. When I say again, I mean that we've done it in the past.

In our history as a nation of people under God, we have impeached judges for things such as being drunk in public. Our forebears were right in their actions back then. And we need to realize that the usurpation of one branch of our government over another is far more serious even than public drunkeness. Passing new laws and amending the Constitution in attempts to control our out-of-control judges is definitely not the way we should go. The Founders of this great country provided in the Constitution itself the way in which we should go. Impeachment. There is no reason why our U.S. Representatives, who we elected, shouldn't impeach many of the judges currently in our federal courts, and there is also no reason why our U.S. Senators shouldn't convict them and remove them from office. And the same holds true for our state officials.

I suspect that many or most of them are being blackmailed, bribed, or threatened - or rewarded for their inaction and pretense. Well, we knew they weren't without sin when we elected them. If some of them would just confess and forsake their sins and turn to doing what's right, they just might find that the American people would forgive them.

Bennie Thompson

Originally published at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Oct. 21, 2006.

Two nights ago, U.S. Rep Bennie Thompson, the Democrat "representing" us here in Byram and in 25 percent of the State of Mississippi, made an appearance on WAPT-TV 16 in Jackson in order to tell us some of the things that are important to him, and to give us some reasons why he thinks we ought to reelect him - again.

He told us in very plain language that he is a cut-and-run Democrat - that if his party gets control of the U.S. House of Representatives, that he is in favor of pulling all of our troops out of Iraq, which would result in the destablization of that nation and make it a haven for terrorists and a base from which they could - and most certainly would - attack us and other Western nations over and over again.

He told us very plainly that he would become the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. That's something that I don't particularly like to have to think about, but I do have to think about it. Not only would we have a liberal, cut-and-run Democrat in charge of Homeland Security in the U.S. House, but we would have Nancy Pelosi, who some like to call "San Fran Nan," ruling over the entire House of Representatives as Speaker of the House, and we would most likely have John Murtha, another cut-and-run Democrat, as second in command in the House. If you want to see examples of failed leadership in the style of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and John Kerry, then Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, and our own Bennie Thompson fit the bill.

In that Thursday night interview, Bennie Thompson excused his exit from the Agriculture Committee by saying that agriculture isn't the number one industry in Congressional District Two anymore anyway. It's gambling, according to him, and he said it as if it's a good thing. This very statement alone shows that he doesn't understand - or doesn't care - that gambling in Mississippi is nothing but government sponsored theft, if you ask me. A lot of people have to lose in order for just one person to win. It hurts the poor more than anyone else, since they make up the majority of the people who gamble, and ours is still one of the poorest congressional districts in the nation after 13 years of having Bennie Thompson as our "representative."

Representative Thompson's voting record in Congress over the past 13 years shows that he supports abortion, homosexuality, and gun control, that he wants to raise your taxes, and that he is against the brave men and women who serve in our military to protect you and me and our families. How the majority of the people who live in our district can call themselves Christians and yet reelect him is something that I just don't understand - nor do I want to understand it.

Our "Republican" candidate who is running against him, Yvonne Brown, Mayor of the tiny Delta town of Tchula, doesn't appear to be much better. She has said that her family and the Espy family have been friends for a long time. The Espy family is a family of liberal Democrats. Mike Espy held the Second District of Mississippi seat in Congress at one time, until he was appointed by Bill Clinton as Secretary of Agriculture, where he ended up resigning in disgrace over a scandal. His nephew, Chuck Espy, serves in Jackson as a state representative, and proved earlier this year that he couldn't defeat Thompson in the Democratic Primary Election. Since the Brown family is such close friends with the Espy family, I wonder just how "Republican" or how conservative Mayor Brown is.

When I contacted her asking what her views were, she simply said that they were probably pretty similar to mine. Well, I'm sorry, but that's just not specific enough for me. When she tells of her perceived accomplishments as Mayor of Tchula, she talks about how much money she has been able to get from the federal government to "improve" Tchula - over $5 million, but no mention of actually improving the town's economy so that they don't need government assistance, and not a word about where she stands on abortion, homosexuality, gun control, taxes and spending, the War Against Islamo-Facists, and many other issues that affect us all.

I most definitely will NOT be voting for Rep. Thompson, and I see no reason to vote for Mayor Brown, but there IS one thing that we can do to improve our congressional district in the not-too-distant future. Next year, in 2007, we can elect state representatives and state senators who will draw our boundary lines after the next census, which will be in 2010, so that they don't unfairly favor keeping Bennie Thompson in office. Now, 2007 is only 2-1/2 short months away, and the deadlines for candidates to qualify is very early in March. Time is short, and now is the time to start praying about for whom to vote, and maybe about whether you should be a candidate yourself. Don't stop with praying for a candidates, though. Find good ones, even if they don't live in your district, give money to their campaigns as you're able - even if it's only $10, and put one of their signs in your front yard. If we'll all do our part to help, it'll go a long way.

Byram Incorporation, Part III

Published originally at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Oct. 14, 2006.

Those poor people who live in the areas where they had hoped to become a part of the new City of Byram but are now looking at the very real possibility of being annexed by Jackson -- very much against their will -- are angry, and rightfully so.

At one Thursday evening meeting of the "Byram Interim Board of Aldermen," at which the "Byram Interim Mayor" Nick Tremonte, and WAPT-TV 16, were also present -- a meeting which I sometimes like to call "The Big Fight" -- Mr. Tremonte promised those residents that he WOULD NOT sell them out to Jackson, but now, apparently, he, and others, have done just that.

It's just another reason why these pretenders to governmental power who call themselves our interim government must not be trusted as far as we can throw them, which isn't very far at all. And when we get to elect our REAL city leaders, and they run for those offices, which I think they will, we should throw them out of their pretend offices and never afford them the opportunity to do us any further harm.

Byram Incorporation, Part II

Originally published on Oct. 12, 2006 at http://www.onlinebyram.com.

We in Byram may be on our way to becoming an incorporated city, but the attorneys for all involved must agree on boundary lines before the judge will release his opinion. There is a weekly meeting tonight of our "interim government" at Trinity Wesleyan Church on Siwell Road, and I look for a lot of people to be in attendance, possibly to include a news crew from WAPT-TV Channel 16, since they've covered some of the more important meetings in the past. It will be a meeting worth attending.

Byram Incorporation

Originally published at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Oct. 11, 2006.

We've heard for the past two days that Byram is going to be a city again. That's great news for those of us who will be living within the Byram city limits; bad news for those who live within that four square miles that will be annexed by Jackson. Look for news on municipal elections, watch to see who runs for office, and whatever you do, please educate yourself on the candidates. It is crucial that we start off with a city government that will honor God. Values voters, please make sure that you're registered to vote, donate to the campaigns of worthy candidates, and please get out and vote!

Noise, Part II

Originally published on Oct. 11, 2006 at http://www.onlinebyram.com.

A local television station reported last night that Jackson has passed a noise ordinance. It's about time, although it's not necessary, since we already had a state law against disturbing the peace. Now, if they'll only enforce it, then the entire City of Jackson will be so much better off. People will be able to relax more and enjoy peace and quiet in their own homes and yards, which they pay for.

Byram: Initiating Low Taxes and Controlling Spending

Originally published at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Oct. 3, 2006.

If Byram incorporates, we will necessarily have to initiate a city tax. But, how high or how low will that tax be? It will all depend on whom we elect to our city government, and it should be people who will publicly commit to initiating low taxes and keeping them low, controlling spending, fiscal responsibility and accountability, and limited government.

Crime and Law Enforcement

Originally published by James Broadwater at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Oct. 2, 2006.

There is a direct correlation between crime and whether all the laws are enforced.

In the last three years, Mazzio's Pizza, MacAllister's Deli, and Portabella's have been robbed. Entire neighborhoods have been burglarized. At The Reserve of Byram Apartments, four vehicles have been stolen (in one night), and one apartment has been broken into. An off-duty police officer working as a security guard at what was then Winn-Dixie (now Vowell's Marketplace) was assaulted by a thug with a baseball bat. Etc. You get the picture.

Our Hinds County Sheriff's Office tries to locate and arrest these people, but you rarely ever see them stopping people for speeding, tailgating, cutting people off in traffic, wreckless driving, or running stop signs or red lights, and you NEVER see them arresting people for breaking the state law against disturbing the peace.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was right when he implemented a policy of enforcing all the laws, not just some of them. He found that when the officers under his command arrested people for misdemeanors, they often found that those same people were wanted for more serious crimes. That's one thing from New York City that I wouldn't mind importing to Mississippi.

Honoring God in School

Originally published by James Broadwater at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Sept. 29, 2006.

I was very offended when I found out that our Hinds County schools refer to the December/January vacation as a "Winter Break" rather than Christmas Vacation. What's next? The abolition of Easter?

The school board already says that the Easter Break can be used as make-up days if the kids have to miss due to bad weather or some other such event.

What would happen to us and to our children should all vestiges of Christianity were taken away? We need only to look at the former Soviet Union to find the answer.

Noise

Originally published by James Broadwater at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Sept. 29, 2006

Many of my fellow Christians seem to believe that the measure of their obedience to God is how much they're willing to tolerate. Well, they're wrong. Remember the Intolerable Acts? Our Founders believed that there were certain things that we weren't to tolerate, and they staked their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor on it.

Have you ever noticed that the word "nice" is not to be found anywhere in the Bible? We're commanded to be kind, etc. But "nice" means that you're willing to do anything to try to get people to like you, and that you're also willing to do anything to avoid their criticism and condemnation.

I think that too many of us have been far too "nice" for far too long, and I want for you to think about what it's gotten us.

President Bush tried to "reach across the aisle" to Democrats right after he became President, and in doing so, he let Ted Kennedy write an education bill. Now, would you want a person like Ted Kennedy having anything at all to do with your child? Not if you love your child. No wonder our schools are in the shape they're in.

What does all this have to do with noise? Well, I said that we've been far too nice for far too long. Really, we're called to expose evil to the light, to speak the truth in love, and to do justice. Such is the case with all this unnecessary noise that surrounds us every day. People are now playing, at very high decibel levels, "music" that's not fit for anything except for use in trying to extract information from suspected terrorists. Much of this "music" promotes, in explicit detail, such things as illicit sex, murder, rape, and even the murder of law enforcement officers. And the music itself is obviously designed to annoy most of the population.

But what do we do about it? Most people choose to ignore it and appease the offending parties. Well, let me ask you something. What did appeasing Hitler get the Allied powers before and during World War II?

I have a "neighbor" who plays this loud music. He doesn't care whether his neighbors like the music, he doesn't care whether it keeps us from concentrating on something important that might benefit someone other than ourselves, and he doesn't care whether he's keeping us awake at night, making it impossible to get our needed sleep so that we can do our jobs properly the next day. I guess he feels that he doesn't have to care. You see, he's on "public assistance," which, in his case, means that our elected government is stealing money out of our paychecks before we even get them, and giving a part of it to him for sitting on his front porch or in his car and doing nothing but making life miserable for his neighbors, who have acted in good faith toward him.

And what happens when we call the Hinds County Sheriff's Office? We are told that there is no noise ordinance in Hinds County, and that these people are allowed to play their excuse for music as loudly as they want, whenever they want, for as long as they want. Well, there is a state law against disturbing the peace. I contacted Justice Court Judge Bill Skinner, who also used to be a Jackson police officer, and whose father was murdered by a thug while serving as a police officer. Judge Skinner told me that the sheriff's office can arrest the offending parties IF THEY'RE WILLING TO DO SO. And therein lies the problem. I guess they're also concerned with being nice? The question is, do we need a nice guy to be our sheriff, whose main goal seems to be to prove that he can get reelected, or do we need a real man, whose main job is to ENFORCE THE LAW?

We should all remember that Sheriff Malcolm McMillan is up for reelection in 2007, and cast our vote based on who will enforce the law, not on who will promote tolerance.

Judge Singletary

Originally published by James Broadwater at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Sept. 29, 2006.

Recently, the Clarion Ledger reported that Judge Singletary was arrested for allegedly ringing his neighbor's doorbell repeatedly because of their barking dogs, going inside when the door was opened, using profanity, and threatening the person inside. But are the charges true? I know what it's like to have one neighbor who causes trouble, and believe me, the fact that you're right doesn't always mean that the law is always on your side in Hinds County.

The judge has also been accused of holding a machete to the throat of an elected official, and it is being said that he brandishes a machete in the courtroom. Now, that last charge should be easy enough to prove, if it is true. Judge Singletary, by law, is not allowed to discuss the case, so for now, we're only hearing one side of the story.

Could it be that Judge Singletary has been set up in order to derail Byram's incorporation bid, or for some other reason? It's possible. Frank Melton, Mayor of Jackson, has been mayor for only a little over a year, and he has already been formally accused of breaking the law and arrested. In this case, as in the Judge Singletary case, for now, we're only able to hear one side of the story. But we do know that Mayor Melton has been trying to clean up crime in Jackson, and considering the people who have come out against him -- District Attorney Faye Peterson and Attorney General Jim Hood -- the whole thing is suspect, if you ask me. Let's remember that both Peterson and Hood are up for reelection next year. And Hinds County Sheriff Malcolm McMillan, who arrested Mayor Melton, is also up for reelection in 2007, so we should carefully scrutinize every move that these three make over the next 14 months, as well as consider their past actions, since some people tend to start behaving near election time.

Justice Court Judges

Originally posted by James Broadwater at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Sept. 19, 2006.

In Hinds County, we have five justice court judges. Sources say the only decent one is Judge Bill Skinner. I have experience with Judge Clyde Chapman, and I can tell you that he doesn't even have enough respect for us, the citizens, to begin court on time. And no, I do not feel that I received justice when I went before him in what should have been an open-and-shut case. On the other hand, I have found Judge Bill Skinner to be a good and decent man.

In Hinds County, when one files a lawsuit in justice court, he may not get the judge for whom he voted -- the one who is supposed to represent him. The stated reason is that the judges are trying to prevent judge shopping. Well, a liberal doesn't have to judge shop. He already has an 80 percent chance of getting what he wants. But those of us who voted for Judge Skinner are being deprived of our day in court. When we file a lawsuit, we face an 80 percent chance of not getting the judge who we chose in a fair election. And the same is true if someone files a lawsuit against us. When we go to court, we should get the judge for whom we voted.

If the conservatives in this country were only as bold as the liberals, America would be a much better place.

Byram's "Interim" "Government"

Originally posted by James Broadwater at http://www.onlinebyram.com on Sept. 18, 2006.

Byram's "interim government" is neither interim nor is it a government.

The Mississippi Code of 1972, As Amended, says that a mayor and councilmen (or, in this case, aldermen) are to be qualified electors of the city (Mississippi Code, 21-8-21). But since Byram is not a city, then how can it have a city government? The members of the so-called government say that they were elected, but where is there a record of any election, and where is the record of the results of that election? They certainly cannot be found on the official Hinds County website, nor do they appear on the Mississippi Secretary of State's official website, both places where official election results for Hinds County are posted and made available for public viewing. Why didn't Byram's "government" have to run for re-election in 2005, as is required by law? I'm sure that many REAL elected officials would love the chance to avoid elections and just keep their offices. And has Nick Tremonte been sworn in by the Governor of Mississippi, as is required by law of every REAL mayor? Well, I can only say, I can find no record of that, either.

The answer can only be that they are an illegitimate government. And isn't it against the law to pose as an elected official?

You can tell that I'm angry about this imposition of a non-elected, self-appointed, pretend government on all of us. We should also ask ourselves, "Why would they want to call themselves a government when what they actually are is a committee of people who want to re-incorporate Byram?" Each one claims to NOT want to be elected to real office if Byram incorporates. But is that really true? It looks to me like they are positioning themselves to have an advantage should Byram be granted incorporation by Judge Singletary, and should Jackson drop its bid to annex us. I'm not surprised by the behavior of any one of them, except for State Senator Richard White, who should know better.

And what about them calling themselves "interim"? Doesn't the word "interim" mean "in between," as in when a church has an interim pastor, or as when Iraq had an interim government between the regime of Saddam Hussein and the new, elected government? Byram hasn't been an incorporated town since the 1930s. Are we to believe that these people have been serving since then, waiting for Byram to incorporate again?

No, things are going on here that just aren't right. And judging by the way they've treated us at some of their weekly meetings, like the one held in the Trinity Wesleyan Church parking lot not long ago, I say that we should never trust a single one of them with our God-given vote.

Speaking of those weekly meetings, I've attended several of them, and I've been disappointed, and occasionally appalled, by what I've seen. The meetings only last about 20 minutes on average, and the only business that they conduct is related to raising money for the incorporation effort, which only underscores my point that they're not a legitimate government, and that they have no real authority to do anything. At one meeting I attended, "Interim Councilwoman" Amy Douglas showed up late and actually admitted to giving the "interim government's" checkbook to a total stranger to deliver to the meeting ahead of her when she had a flat tire. Good thing he turned out to be an honest person. But it sure doesn't say much in the way of our pretend government's officials taking their responsibilities seriously.

You may want to contact them and ask them exactly some point-blank questions. Some sample questions include: "Why are you calling yourselves elected officials?" "Where are the official election results posted to prove that you were ever actually elected?" And, "Don't you actually want to be elected if and when Byram incorporates?" Their telephone numbers, as published in The Byram Banner, are as follows:

Nick Tremonte, Interim Mayor: 601-371-2578. Interim Aldermen: Kent Alday: 601-372-0279. Amy Douglas: 601-372-3176. Danny Ford: 601-373-9896. Theresa Marble: 601-209-5026. Richard White: 601-373-2827.