A Time to be Thankful - A Time for Concern

Published in the November 26, 2010 edition of the Lynchburg Ledger 

By Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC

On April 30, 1789, George Washington took the oath of office and became the first President of the United States.  Six months later, President Washington proclaimed the nation’s first national Day of Thanksgiving.

His proclamation said in part:  “Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor…”   The proclamation continued, “…that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions…” the proclamation ended, “Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3^rd of October, A.D. 1789.”  Thus began the official observance of Thanksgiving.

The Pilgrims, who are credited for holding the first Thanksgiving, although the colony at Jamestown was actually first, briefly experimented with socialism.  They established a collective farm and everyone was to benefit regardless of effort expended.  Although they were deeply religious, they were also human.  Having nearly starved after the first year, they quickly abandoned the collective farm and allocated plots to individual families who could plant what they wished. 

After adopting the capitalistic system, they never went hungry again.  Although socialism fails every time it is tried, still today we see Obama and the Democrats embracing socialism as Europe is casting off its shackles.

The freedom of religion we enjoy today, although increasingly under attack from the liberal left, has not always been an entitlement. There was much religious persecution in colonial America.

Roger Williams came to Puritan Salem, Massachusetts in 1631.  As a Baptist, he shared the same basic Christian doctrine with the Puritans, but differed on practices, particularly baptism.  The Puritans tried and condemned Williams, and he fled in the winter of 1635-36, eventually founding the colony of Rhode Island.

Just as Roger Williams was leaving, Robert Wheaton, also a Baptist, was arriving.  He refused to take the Puritan oath, and being judged a “pestilential fellow,” was expelled from Salem in 1638.  He later founded the town of Swansea in Massachusetts.  (I have yet to determine if I am related.)

But as bad as it was in Salem, Virginia was worse.  The Anglican Church was the official tax-supported state religion, and controlled all religious activity. 

The first recorded imprisonment of Baptist preachers in Virginia, charged with preaching the gospel without a license, was on June 4, 1768 in Fredericksburg.  In the years that followed, Baptist preachers were threatened, arrested and some beaten.  From Chantilly to Tappahannock and from Berryville to Culpeper, Baptist preachers were routinely persecuted. 

However, in Fredericksburg on October 16, 1777, Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, Edmund Pendleton, George Wythe, and Thomas Ludwell Lee, deliberating for hours, produced the first draft of the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, which became the foundation of our religious freedom today.  It is also one of the founding documents Virginia students are to study in depth and is incorporated into the Constitution of Virginia.

The founders never intended to prohibit the federal government from promoting and supporting religious beliefs. Congress hired chaplains for itself and the military and appropriated funds to print Bibles. Washington said, “Of all the dispositions and habits that lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

But today many atheists, agnostics, and other pagans who are in rebellion against God’s authority, simply ignore history.

The founders realized for them to have religious freedom, all must have religious freedom, Christian and non-Christian alike.  Jews, Muslims, Hindu’s, Buddhists and Sikhs all enjoy equal protection.

Unfortunately, this mutual respect is not reciprocated in Muslim nations where there is open hostility to Christianity.  Just try to bring a Bible into Saudi Arabia and see what happens.

Christianity is not only under attack in Muslim counties, but also right here at home.

On some American college campuses, Christian groups and ministries are threatened by the “politically correct” virtue of tolerance.  When homosexuals are denied leadership positions in Christian organizations, the organizations are branded as intolerant and come under attack.

Many of our public schools continue to show open hostility to Christianity.  This is evident around this time of year when our nation celebrates two federal holidays of Christian origin, Thanksgiving and Christmas. 

So during this Thanksgiving, we should be thankful for the blessings and freedom we still have and reflect on our nation’s future.  The recent election demonstrated the people are not ready to embrace the liberal agenda.  However, much of the damage has already been done.

The nuclear family, the foundation of our nation, is under attack.  In a recent survey, 40 percent stated marriage is becoming obsolete.  In the black community, we see up to 70 percent of children born out of wedlock, a direct result of the liberals “war on poverty:” from the 1960’s.  Poverty has won.

The homosexual agenda continues its assault on our national morality by demanding same-sex marriage.  Whenever the people have an opportunity to voice their opinion, the homosexual agenda fails.  It is the unelected judges in our courts forcing the homosexual agenda down out throats.

The question we need to ask ourselves this Thanksgiving is will we once again put ourselves under subjection to God’s authority and reap the blessings; or will we follow the advice of the self-proclaimed experts and remain in rebellion to God’s authority and reap the consequences?

Lame Duck or Dead Duck

By Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC

Published in the Lynchburg Ledger on November 19, 2010

The Congress has reconvened for what is called a Lame Duck session.  There are at least 63 Democrat seats in the House of Representatives (three from Virginia) that changed to Republican as well as 6 Senate seats.  The question is whether they will listen to the voters or use this session to push through as much of their liberal agenda as they can.

Being Democrats, I suspect they will make a push to pass more of their liberal agenda. 

The only thing that may save us from the liberal onslaught is that many Democrat Senators are up for election in 2012.  They may have heard the voters where the defeated Senators did not.

There were three special elections in the Senate to fill unexpired terms.  These Senators can be seated immediately but only two will- both Democrats. The lone Republican winner (in Illinois filling the remainder of Barack Obama’s Senate term) will not be seated immediately because Democrat election officials on Illinois are refusing to certify the election results in a timely manner.

There are two issues to be brought up that I am most interested in.  One I want them to pass, and one I want them to defeat.

I think one of the issues made clear in the historic vote this year is that the economy needs to be stimulated.  Any stimulus bill where government keeps spending will do nothing but grow the deficit, which will further depress the economy.

In a recession, the last thing you want to do is increase taxes and allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire at the end of the year will do exactly that.  The Democrats love to engage in class warfare, and the Bush tax cuts are a prime example.  They seem perfectly willing to extend them for the “middle class,” but oppose any extension for the “wealthy.” 

It is the so-called wealthy who are the job creators in our free enterprise system.  I have never gotten a job from a poor person.

Obama and the Democrats hate those who have worked hard and earned substantial sums of money.  They seem to think the rich got that way by stealing from the poor. 

When I was a teenager, I was glad that there were rich people, because they would hire and pay me.  Back before the days of golf carts, teenagers like me used to caddy at golf courses.  I caddied at an exclusive country club and made good money.  You had to be rich to belong to this club, and I didn’t resent them one bit.

Congress needs to make the Bush tax cuts, all of them, permanent.  Right now, employers and business people have no idea what their taxes are going to be and are essentially sitting on their hands.  If Congress makes the tax cuts permanent and Obama signs it, I believe it would be the biggest shot in the arm for the economy we could provide.

The issue I don’t want congress to pass is a bill repealing “don’t ask-don’t tell” for the military.  This law, enacted in 1993, bars open homosexuality in the armed services. Although Clinton watered down the actual law, the law has functioned fairly well. About 14,000 men and women have been separated from the armed services under that law over the past 17 years. That's less than 1 percent of total military separations, most of which were for other reasons such as pregnancy, substance abuse, being overweight, etc.

Homosexual activists, including the Log Cabin Republicans and their media allies, are turning up the heat on the lame duck Congress to overturn the law before a more conservative Congress is seated in January.

 

Gen. James Amos was just appointed Marine Corps Commandant by President Obama, replacing Gen. James T. Conway, considered the military's most outspoken advocate for keeping the ban.  Gen. Amos has not wavered from Gen. Conway's stance. He said during a trip to California that with troops fighting two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan now was not the time to change policy.  Gen. Amos said, "There is nothing more intimate than young men and young women — and when you talk of infantry, we're talking our young men — laying out, sleeping alongside of one another and sharing death, fear and loss of brothers,  I don't know what the effect of that will be on cohesion. I mean, that's what we're looking at. It's unit cohesion, it's combat effectiveness."

His remarks seemed to stun Adm. Michael Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs who supports repeal.  Mullen appears to be more interested in political correctness than an efficient military.

In Iowa, where they elect their judges, three of the seven Iowa Supreme Court Justices who overturned the state's referendum to define marriage as being between one man and one woman, were up for a retention vote. All three were kicked off the bench by the voters.  Better than 54 percent of voters rejected all three judges.  Any time the people have a chance to vote, they reject the homosexual agenda.

Harry Reid, who unfortunately was not defeated although I contributed to Sharron Angle’s campaign, will be returning next year.  However, this year, he has not promised to bring the issue up for a vote.  Those in the Senate up for re-election in 2012 need to be mindful of the Iowa vote.

5th District Congressman Tom Perriello has one last chance to do us dirty in Congress.  It might be prudent to flood his office with calls telling him to extend all the Bush tax cuts and oppose the repeal of “don’t ask-don’t tell.”

Political Obituary of Rick Boyer

Published in the Lynchburg Ledger on November 12, 2010

By Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC

The day after the election, President Barack Obama held a news conference admitting the Democrats took a "shellacking" on Election Day.  They did indeed, losing at least 63 House seats, three of which were here in Virginia.

Also taking a "shellacking” was Republican Rick Boyer, who ran for the Clerk of Court in Campbell County.  Boyer’s "shellacking" was even greater than the Democrat’s when you consider all the facts.

By way of an introduction, a vacancy occurred in the Clerk’s office when the former Clerk retired.  Sheila Bosiger was appointed Interim Clerk by the Court, being the Chief Assistant Deputy.  Seeking to retain her position, she entered the political process. 

With the ink on his Liberty University Law School diploma barely dry, Rick Boyer entered the race in search of a paycheck and political power.  He managed to secure the Republican Party nomination for Clerk after his hand-picked party chairman violated the party bylaws in calling a special meeting.  Boyer then flooded the ensuing nominating meeting with people from his church.

This set up a classic David and Goliath confrontation between politically savvy Boyer and political neophyte Bosiger.

Boyer has been involved in politics since he was a teenager and is a political veteran, having won the Sunburst District Supervisor election in 2003.  He had many political contacts, many political IOU’s to call in, knew how to run a campaign, had access to funding and had the backing of the local Republican Party. 

He was “shellacked” by a candidate who up to two months ago had never engaged politics except to vote.  Sheila Bosiger had no political experience and no idea how to run a campaign. 

A number of prominent Republicans broke with the party to support Bosiger, putting their own political futures at risk.  They did so for two very important reasons. 

First, they knew Sheila Bosiger was the only person qualified for the job of Clerk.  Boyer’s law degree was irrelevant as of the 120 Clerks of the Court in Virginia, only two have law degrees.

Second and most important, they knew Rick Boyer and his insatiable quest for political power.  They knew he would use the Clerk’s office as a political power base.  This was confirmed for me on Election Day when I overheard a boisterous Boyer supporter bragging that after the election they would “put a padlock on Rustburg,” meaning they were planning a political takeover of the county in next year’s election.

Sheila Bosiger received an accelerated course in grassroots politics and hit the campaign trail.  She was an excellent campaigner.  She loved getting out into the community and meeting the voters.  Although her job as Interim Clerk came first, she got out to knock on doors and attend events as time permitted. 

Boyer was free to campaign unrestricted by the constraints of employment.  He sought endorsements from within Campbell County, but not one single current or former elected official would support him, especially those who served with him on the Board.  They all knew him to be unqualified.  All Boyer’s political endorsements came from outside the county.

Bosiger was endorsed by 19 current and former county elected officials.

On Election Day, I was one of the many Bosiger poll workers and had an opportunity to talk to the voters.  The comments I got fell into three categories.  Some asked if Sheila was the one who was the current Clerk.  They saw no reason to change.

Some asked about the unethical political tactics used to get Boyer the Republican nomination.

The sentiments of most were best expressed by a local pastor who said, “We have to make sure this dufus is not elected to anything.”

When the votes were tallied, it was clear that David had once again slain Goliath. In spite of a last minute sign and media blitz by Boyer, Sheila Bosiger defeated him in a landslide with a vote count of 10,064 (55.31%) to 6,075 (33.39%).  The key to the win was that more than half of the Republican Robert Hurt voters broke and did not vote the party line for Boyer.  This is significant because the Republican poll workers were not supporting Robert Hurt , only Boyer.

Bosiger won 17 out of 18 precincts showing strong county-wide support.  Boyer won only one with barely over 50 percent of the vote.  In his worst precinct Boyer pulled only 13 percent of the vote, indicating no county-wide support.  The county produced the highest percentage vote for Hurt in the 5^th District but Boyer received just 308 more votes than looser Democrat Perriello.

With a blowout of this magnitude, it is clear that the county has resoundingly rejected Rick Boyer.  The many political enemies he has made over the years came back to haunt him.  With this humiliating defeat, the voters of Campbell County have declared Rick Boyer politically dead.  

Not only is he politically dead, but he is also politically toxic.  Any candidate whose name is mentioned in the same sentence with Boyer will be contaminated.

The Campbell County Republican Party is on life support.  With such a tremendous effort expended against a political novice and to be humiliated to this extent, their credibility as a political party has been destroyed.  After suffering a humiliating defeat of this magnitude, it is customary for the leadership to resign.   .

I had warned party officials, such as 5th District Chairman Bill Stanley and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli that Boyer would destroy the local party.  They did not believe me then, perhaps they will now.  If the Campbell County Republican Party is to recover, it must distance itself from Rick Boyer, abandon its corrupt practices, adhere to its own bylaws and reorganize under new leadership.

Bill Wheaton lives in Concord, Virginia.  Recent columns are available at billwheaton.blogspot.com.  His email address is bwheaton@moreinformation.net.

Rick Boyer – Unqualified for Clerk

 Published on the Lynchburg ledger on October 15, 2010

Commentary

By Bill Wheaton

Press media Group, LLC

When Robert Hurt won the Republican primary in June, a prominent Campbell County Republican called Rick Boyer asking him to support Hurt.  Boyer and his politically active family supported Feda Morton, who received only 73 votes in the county.  Although Morton sent out an email on election eve urging her supporters to support Robert Hurt, Rick Boyer, who would have us believe he is “Mr. Republican,” refused.

Boyer changed his mind only after he decided to run for Clerk of the Court in Campbell County and seek the Republican nomination.  Boyer wouldn’t have the Republican nomination at all if it wasn’t for the local party trashing its own bylaws to hold an illegal meeting.  Email messages between Boyer and the party chairman Will Kirk prior to the nominating meeting concerning the rules smacked of collusion.

Kirk has accused supporters of Sheila Bosiger, the Interim Clerk of the Court, of packing the nominating meeting with Democrats.  This is a smear tactic usually used by the liberals.  The fact is, the person who packed the meeting was Rick Boyer bringing in people from his church, many of whom had no idea why they were there.

But now that Boyer is running for Clerk of the Court as a Republican, a position he is unqualified for, he expects all the Republicans to support him.  Most of the county elected Republicans who have to work with the Clerk are not.  They know he is unqualified and has the wrong temperament to be an elected official, which he demonstrated when he was a supervisor. 

I covered the board of supervisor meetings for the last three years of Boyer’s term and observed first hand just how ineffective he was.  He had the arrogance to try to lecture his six colleagues on the board, who combined had in excess of 100 years of public service experience.

The board members were much too professional and polite to publicly criticize Boyer and the senior member, Hugh Rosser (a Democrat) attempted to mentor him with no success.

It was obvious to me that Boyer did not run to be a public servant, but to gain political power.  He paid little attention to the needs and concerns of his constituents.   He used his position as supervisor to attack fellow Republican Senator Steve Newman publicly, which drew the ire of numerous religious leaders including the late Jerry Falwell. 

Dr. Falwell always had unique ways of addressing problems so in an attempt to educate Boyer, he gave him a scholarship to Liberty Law School. 

It would appear that after the three year law school education, Boyer has gained in knowledge, but not in wisdom.  My personal experience is that he cannot disagree without being disagreeable.  He simply does not have the temperament to be a public servant.  His life goal is political power not public service.

While in law school, Boyer worked in the family drywall finishing business and did an addition to the house of a friend of mine.  He asked Rick what he intended to do after law school and his reply was to go into politics.  His ambition for political power is certainly no secret. 

On issues, you would be hard pressed to find any difference between Rick Boyer and I, we are both strong conservatives.  Our differences lie in the way we implement our conservative beliefs.

For example, he objected to my support for Jim Gilmore over Bob Marshall for Senate in 2008.  Instead of entering into a dialogue, Boyer chose confrontation.

This confrontational attitude must run in the Boyer DNA.  I have been writing a column for over a dozen years and without a doubt, the nastiest email I have ever received was from Rick Boyer’s brother Tim who is the Vice Chairman of the Campbell County Republicans,  Even an email from a self-described “bi-sexual feminist psychotherapist” I received was more civil than Boyer’s.

Comments like “Bill, you are so filled with hate and vengefulness that you insist on making an utter, blithering idiotic fool of yourself” and “I would suggest saving yourself further embarrassment by retreating back north of the Mason-Dixon line where your intelligence may have a fighting chance of hitting the geographical average,” don’t lend themselves to establishing meaningful dialogue.

Besides not having the temperament, Boyer does not have the knowledge for the position he seeks.  In a recent visit to a businessman, he stated he intended to make the “land book” more available to the public.  Only problem there is that the Clerk has no authority to do so.  The Commissioner of the Revenue is responsible for the land book.

The clerk is responsible for the land records, and if Boyer doesn’t know the difference, he certainly is not prepared for the job.  Boyer is telling people about all the changes he plans to make sounding almost like Barack Obama did in the 2008 campaign.  We have seen what Obama change has meant.

This would be nothing more than a political stepping stone for Boyer, and he would turn the Clerk’s office into his base for future political action.  Most seekers of this office do so to serve the public until retirement.

The old saying, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” applies to this race.  Everyone who uses the Clerk’s office is pleased with its operation under Interim Clerk Sheila Bosiger.  Some candidates have tried to find fault, to no avail.

Rick Boyer would be an unmitigated disaster, and Sheila Bosiger is the only logical choice for Clerk on November 2^nd .

Chicago-Style Politics

Published in the Lynchburg Ledger on August 20, 2010

by Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC

As I begin writing this column, the jury in the Rod Blagojevich political corruption trial appears to be deadlocked. When the defense rested quickly without calling Blagojevich to testify, I thought to myself, “They have bought the jury.” Actually, they have to only buy only one juror.

Barack Obama came out of the same political environment, and we have seen Chicago-style politics on a national scale. The appointment of Czars needing no Senate confirmation, the trashing of the Constitution with the takeover of General Motors and Chrysler and the high living at taxpayers' expense during a recession are just some examples.

Obama and the people he surrounds himself with hate the Constitution because it restricts their political agenda, so they simply ignore it and do what they want.

Up until last week, I thought Chicago-style politics was limited to Chicago and Washington D.C. Little did I realize that the same disregard for the rules was being played out right here in rural Central Virginia. It was not among the Democrats as one might think, but among the Republicans in Campbell County.

Earlier this year, the Campbell County Republican Party elected a new chairman, Will Kirk. He seemed like a nice enough fellow, and the only criticism I heard was he was acquainted with the politically ambitious Boyer family. I voted for him because I felt we needed “change” in the Republican Party. Well, we got change, just like the nation got change with Obama, but in both cases, it was not the change we were looking for.

Also earlier this year, Deborah Hughes, Clerk of the Campbell County Circuit Court retired, and the Court appointed Assistant Chief Deputy Sheila Bosiger to serve as Interim Clerk until the November election.

The Clerk of the Court is an elected position, but the least political of all the Constitutional offices. The Clerk is on an eight-year cycle where all others are on a four-year cycle.

With 25 years experience in the Circuit Court Clerk's office and 10 years as Assistant Chief Deputy, Sheila Bosiger decided to seek election to the job she is filling on an interim basis. Since all the Campbell County Constitutional officers are Republicans, she sought the nomination of the Campbell County Republican Party.

However, opposition in the person of Rick Boyer appeared on the scene. Boyer, who just graduated from Liberty University Law School and is awaiting the results of the Bar exam, has decided he wants to run for the seat. There is virtually nothing Rick Boyer learned in law school that would equip him to serve as Clerk of the Court. In fact, Boyer has admitted Sheila Bosiger is more qualified than he is for the job. If he should be elected, Sheila Bosiger would have to train him to run and manage the office she is currently running and managing.

Since the Clerk of the Court is prohibited from giving legal advice, Boyer' law degree would become worthless to him.

Sheila has the respect of all the Campbell County elected officials plus the local attorneys. At least three of the county elected officials personally contacted Rick Boyer and counseled him not to seek this position, but the politically ambitious Boyer turned a deaf ear to the advice.

With the filing deadline fast approaching, Republican Chairman Will Kirk hastily called for a meeting in the Unit Committee for the purpose of calling a Mass Meeting to pick a nominee, as prescribed in the Bylaws of the Campbell County Republican Party. However, Kirk chose to ignore major portions of the Bylaws to expedite his and Rick Boyer's agenda.

Article V, Section A, Part 4 of the Bylaws states, “All Unit Committee meetings shall be held in a building appropriate for public use and shall be open to the public.”

Instead of holding the meeting in a public building being open to the public, Kirk held the meeting by telephone conference call and closed it to the public; therefore, this was an illegal meeting and any decision made by the meeting should be null and void.

On the day prior to the illegal conference call meeting, I had emailed Kirk advising him of the Bylaw restrictions. I wrote, “By my reading of the Bylaws of the CCRC as adopted 1/8/2004, you cannot hold a unit meeting by phone as you are planning to do Wednesday.” I was giving Kirk the benefit of the doubt that he was working from ignorance.

I later learned that this was a planned strategy between Kirk and the Boyers' to secure the nomination for Rick Boyer. Email messages between rick Boyer and Will Kirk regarding the rules for the Mass Meeting are proof enough of that.

Boyer managed to bring 134 people, many from his church. Some actually had no idea why they were there, except that Boyer asked them to come. .

Sheila Bosiger, who is not a political person, learned about the Mass Meeting only a week before the meeting was scheduled. She managed to turn out 100 supporters, which was 34 votes short, and Boyer won the nomination.

Bill Stanley, the Chairman of the 5^th District Republican Committee was at the meeting and served as parliamentarian. I advised him of the violations of the Bylaws and he informed me that if I made any objection, I would be ruled out-of-order. Later he did advise that there is a way to appeal, which I am in the process of doing.

Sheila Bosiger will be on the ballot as an Independent.

It is indeed a sad day when we see Chicago/Obama-style politics right here in our own back yard.

Rights, Responsibilities and Islam

Published in the Lynchburg Ledger on September 3, 2010 

By Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC

For every right, there is a corresponding responsibility.

The Apostle Paul explains this very well in 1 Corinthians 8 when he answers the question posed to him about eating food sacrificed to idols.  He explains that the Corinthian Christians had a perfect right to eat the food as idols are nothing, but they had a responsibility not to if their action would cause others to “stumble.”

I think we all can think of instances where we chose to subordinate a right for a higher purpose.  The principle of being willing to sacrifice for the benefit of others is a Christian principle.  Jesus said, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

In America, we have a right to build churches, synagogues, mosques and temples.  But when Muslims announced they intended to build a mosque just blocks from “Ground Zero,” where the Twin Towers once stood until Muslims brought them down by flying an airliner into each one, the outrage among families of the 9-11 victims was understandable.  This is a slap in the face and a kick in the teeth to them.  Many others, including myself feel it is unconscionable for them to even contemplate such a brazen act.  But once you understand Islam, you realize they don’t care.

The principles of Islam are in stark contrast to those of Christianity.  Where Christianity is a religion of  repentance and forgiveness, Islam is a religion of revenge and “holy war.”

Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who led New Yorkers through the terrorist attack and its aftermath, joined the growing number opposing the mosque.  He said on NBC “Today,” "If you are a healer, you do not go forward with this project.  If you are a warrior, you do."  Giuliani was referring to the controversial Imam of the mosque, Feisal Abdul Rauf.

Feisal Abdul Rauf has been involved in a series of conferences to push Sharia law throughout the world and some speculate that the planned 15 “ground zero mosque” would be dedicated to this purpose.  Sharia law is the instrument by which Islamic activists seeks to control the Muslim world and then the entire world.  Sharia law needs to be opposed for its imposition of theocracy over democracy, its human rights abuses, its systemic discrimination, its denial of human dignity and individual autonomy, its enslavement of women and for the cruelty and barbarity of its prescribed punishments.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomburg supports the building of the “Ground Zero mosque” as do many on the political left, such as President Barack Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and 5^th District Congressman Tom Perriello.  They see it as strictly a religious freedom issue, which it is not.  No one is questioning the right to do so, just the wisdom.

A recent Washington Times editorial says, “Mosque apologists have planted their flags on the First Amendment, claiming that the Constitution's guarantee of freedom of worship is absolute. But no constitutional rights can escape balancing tests, and in this case, the issue is not the freedom of Muslims to worship as they choose but the propriety of constructing a gigantic mosque so close to the greatest scene of Allah-inspired mass murder ever perpetrated in the country.”

If everyone is so concerned about the freedom to worship, then why all the opposition to rebuilding the only church destroyed in the 9-11 attack?   The St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church was destroyed in 2001 by the falling World Trade Center South Tower.   Talks between the church and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey stalled last year and church leaders say they've been trying to resume them ever since.  The land on which the church stood is being used as part of the reconstruction site.

Instead of being concerned about who is funding this 10-story  “Ground Zero mosque” which is to include a swimming pool, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is concerned with who may be funding tho opposition to the mosque.  She said in an interview, ““There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque is being funded,”  If that doesn’t frighten you, you are probably a Pelosi/Obama/Perriello socialist.

The left-wing media has weighed in on the issue.  The Associated Press issued an advisory to its writers and staff saying, "We should continue to avoid the phrase ‘ground zero mosque' or ‘mosque at ground zero' on all platforms."

Islam is a very real threat to us all.  It is not a religion of peace, but a religion of war and violence.  Two weeks ago, a medical mission team in Afghanistan was brutally lined up and murdered by Muslims.  One of those killed was the son of two people with a connection to the church I attend.  A Taliban spokesman claimed the killings telling the Associated Press that the group was "spying for the Americans" and "preaching Christianity." 

Instead of coddling Muslims, there are voices speaking out and telling the truth about Islam.  Brigitte Gabriel, who grew up Christian in Lebanon and suffered under Muslim persecution, is one such person.  In a speech delivered at the Intelligence Summit in Washington  D.C., she said, “I was ten years old when my home exploded around me, burying me under the rubble and leaving me to drink my blood to survive, as the perpetrators shouted, 'Allah Akbar!' My only crime was that I was a Christian living in a Christian town. At 10 years old, I learned the meaning of the word 'infidel.”

To learn more about the threat we face from Islam, visit http://americancongressfortruth.com/.

Islam is a religion and a culture that will demand its rights and ignore its responsibilities in their quest to spreads Islam by force and sheer numbers throughout the world.

Bill Wheaton lives in Concord, VA.  His email address is bwheaton@moreinformation.net.

Global Warming Hoax Collapsing

Published in the Lynchburg Ledger on September 10, 2010

by Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC 

A Gallup poll in March of 2009 showed that an increasing number of Americans believe that the seriousness of man-caused global warming is being exaggerated.  Beginning in 2006, the percentage of those who believe in the seriousness of global warming dropped from 66 percent to 57 percent while those who believe it is exaggerated rose from 30 percent to 41 percent.

This skepticism spans even political party lines.  Among Republicans, the number went from 51 to 66 percent.  Among Independents, the number went from 29 to 44 percent.  Even among Democrats, the number went from 15 to 22 percent, although they continue to be the most gullible when it comes to the massive hoax of man-caused global warming.

Since 2006, a number of events have occurred, and increased information has become available which has caused many to question the hype and cult-like promotion of man-made global warming.

The sun is the primary driving force of our world-wide climate.  Even a slight change in the solar output of the sun has profound effects on our global climate.

The sun’s output is not constant but varies in a somewhat predictable way.  There are solar cycles within solar cycles within solar cycles.  Solar cycles of 11, 22, 87, 210 and 1,500 years have been detected in ice sheets, ice melting, floods, droughts, lake and deep-sea sediment, cave deposits, boreholes, tree rings, pollen, peat and in floating organisms.

We recently learned that the “global warming scientists” responsible for much of the hype have totally ignored the effect of the sun and rewritten history to conform to their pre-determined conclusions.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was formed over 20 years ago to build a scientific case for humans being the source of global warming.  However IPCC was hijacked by politicians, bureaucrats and a handful of activist scientists to promote their human-caused global warming agenda.

We have been told that the IPCC represents a consensus of 2,500 experts in the field. Yet when we look closely, we find that the IPCC process, and especially the Summary for Policymakers, is in the hands of a small group, no more than two or three dozen.

Author Michael Crichton commented, "If it's science, it's not consensus. And if it's consensus, it's not science."

What this small group in the IPCC has done is engage in a massive effort of history revisionism.  Periods such as the Dark Ages (535 – 900 AD), the Medieval Warming (900 -1280 AD) and the Little Ice Age (1280 – 1850 AD) were totally ignored.

The Dark Ages was a terrible time to live.  A sudden cooling of the earth occurred, resulting in famine, war and political upheaval.  Weakened humans succumbed to the plague killing millions.

The human condition improved abruptly when the Medieval Warming occurred.  In Europe, the climate was warm; rainfall increased resulting in a high agricultural output.  The excess of food led to a 50 percent increase in population.  Tree ring studies suggest North America also enjoyed warmer weather.

The Little Ice Age was not really an ice age, just rapid global cooling which led to famine, depopulation, war and disease.  The most bitterly cold periods corresponded to periods of diminished energy from the sun, such as the Sporer Minimum (1450 – 1540), the Maunder Minimum (1645 – 1715) and the Dalton Minimum (1795-1825).

The entire basis for the IPCC position is what is called the Hockey Stick Graph, also called MBH98 after the three authors Mann, Bradley and Hughes and from the year it was compiled 1998.   It shows that the temperature just varied a few tenth of a degree before 1900. This graph was published in the very prominent scientific magazine Nature and made quite a sensation. It was also prominently displayed in several places in the 2001 IPCC report. 

It has now been removed from the 2007 IPCC report for policymakers as it has been discredited and has become too much of an embarrassment for the IPCC to include.

From 1999 to 2005, Michael Mann taught at the University of Virginia (UVA), in the Department of Environmental Sciences.  Earlier this year, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli requested that UVA release Mann’s emails related to his work on the MBH98 paper as a possible violation of the Fraud Against Taxpayers Act (FATA).

In November of 2009, a massive email dump which came to be known as “Climategate,” occurred.  The emails exposed just how data had been manipulated and how the peer reviews process for scientific papers had been perverted by the global warming crowd.

Predictably, the global warming advocates have circled their wagons while we “global warming deniers” continue to shed the light of truth on a massive hoax.

A number of credible authors have written books on the subject in the past year or two.  Two I have added to my library are:  “Climate Confusion” by Roy W. Spencer (who is Rush Limbaugh’s official global warming expert) and “Heaven and Earth, Global Warming – the Missing Science” by Ian Plimer.  Both are excellent resources.

This hoax is costing literally hundreds of billions of dollars at a time when the Western world is ravaged by recession.  If Barack Obama, Harry Reed, Nancy Pelosi and Tom Perriello get their way, it will cost billions more and likely send us from a recession to a full-blown depression.  The House has passes Cap and Trade, a bill based on the global warming hoax, with the help of Tom Perriello’s vote but is stalled in the Senate.  Senators Warner and Webb are being pressured to oppose it. 

The fear is that after the election, a lame duck Senate will do an in-your-face to the American people and pass it.

Voters Need to Stay Mad

Published in the Lynchburg Ledger on September 24, 2010

by Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC

It takes a lot to get the American people mad.  In the past 100 years or so, there have only been a handful of events that raised the ire of the American people.

On February 15, 1898, the USS Maine was sunk in Havana harbor which ushered in the Spanish American War (1898) and gave rise to the saying, “Remember the Maine, to Hell with Spain.”  It was a sneak attack.

There was the sneak attack of Pearl Harbor by a Japanese sneak attack on December 7, 1941 that immersed us in World War II and mobilized America.

Then there was the Islamic terrorist attack on America on September 11, 2001 that changed the way of American life forever.  Another sneak attack.

Lastly, there was the election of Barack Obama as President, another sneak attack.  Had he run as the socialist that he is, I doubt he would have been elected.  He has mobilized more Americans than 9-11.  Currently, 45.3 percent approve of Obama and 49.8 percent disapprove.

In January of 2009, the Generic Congressional Ballot favored Democrats over Republicans by a whopping 48 to 34 percent. 

In just four short months, that margin shrank to 41 to 38 percent as we began to see Barack Obama for what he really is and congress for what it is.  By September of 2009, just 9 months into the Obama presidency, the generic ballot tied at 42-42 percent.

For the next 10 months, it stayed nearly tied with Democrats leading occasionally.  But in July of this year, the American people seemed to have an epiphany.  It appears that some of the American people began to wake up and realize exactly what the Democrats were doing to our nation.

By mid July, the Generic Congressional Ballot swung to the Republicans for the first time and the margin has increased steadily as Election Day draws near.  Today, it stands at 46 to 41 in favor of the Republicans.

However, there is now a third political influence to consider, and that is the Tea Party effect.  Philosophically, Tea Party folks are more aligned with Republican thought than with the Democrats.  We have seen many Tea Party-backed candidates running for Republican nominations.  I don’t know of a single one seeking a Democrat nomination.

In fact, many Democrats have moved politically right to the Tea Party movement.  CNN reported on April 2, 2010, “Some Americans who say they have been sympathetic to Democratic causes in the past -- some even voted for Democratic candidates -- are angry with President Obama and his party. They say they are now supporting the Tea Party -- a movement that champions less government, lower taxes and the defeat of Democrats even though it's not formally aligned with the Republican Party.”

Voters are not only mad at Obama and the Democrats, but also with the Republicans.

I vividly remember the campaign of 1994 when the voters were very concerned about Bill Clinton and the Democrat majority in Congress.  They had tried and failed to pass “HillaryCare,” but that was enough to get the voter’s attention.  Thanks to a brilliant strategy by Newt Gingrich called the “Contract with America,” Republicans took control of the House and Senate, prompting ABC World News Tonight anchor Peter Jennings (a Canadian citizen) to claim “The voters had a temper tantrum last week.”

It didn’t take long for the Republicans to become more and more like Democrats until the voters had another temper tantrum and kicked them out in 2006 and 2008.

The rise of the Tea Party movement occurred because the normal place for the concerned citizens to go, the Republican Party, ignored their concerns and ran them off.

Recent primary election results show that the influence of the Tea Party is being felt in Republican politics.  Instead of embracing the change, the Republican establishment is pushing back against it.

In Florida, Governor Charlie Crist felt the heat early in the campaign for Senate and dropped out, opting to run as an independent.

In Nevada, Republican Sharon Angle won the Republican nomination for Senate to face Harry Reid with the endorsement of the Tea Party Express.  I also contributed to her campaign.

In Alaska, Joe Miller, with the backing of Sarah Palin and the Tea Party upset incumbent Senator Lisa Murkowski, who has decided not to accept the will of the voters and has announced she is mounting a write-in campaign.  It is this type of arrogance that has repelled Tea Party folks from the Republicans.

In Delaware, another Tea Party-backed candidate Christine O’Donnell easily defeated the Republican establishment candidate Congressman Mike Castle, who often voted with Obama and the Democrats.  After his defeat, Castle called Obama and Rahm Emanuel but has yet to call Christine O’Donnell.  I also contributed to the O’Donnell campaign.

The Republican Party has a unique opportunity to pull off a big victory, but will the old establishment Republicans squander that chance?

Locally, it appears that the Tea Party people are aligning behind Robert Hurt.  Tom Perriello is running outrageously false TV ads against Hurt as a move of desperation.  Polls had shown him down until he started his lying negative campaign ads.  They are now in a statistical tie.

I would rather see Hurt in a tie or even lagging in the polls as that tends to make the volunteers work harder. 

The electorate needs to stay just as mad as they are from now until November 2nd and take out their frustrations at the ballot box.

Don’t Believe the Perriello Lies

Published October 22, 2010 in the Lynchburg Ledger

Don’t Believe the Perriello Lies

 by Bill Wheaton

Press Media Group, LLC

With the election only days away, we need to separate the lies from the truth when it comes to the economy.

If Tom Perriello was at all proud of what he has accomplished in Washington, you would expect him to campaign on all the things he did.  Rather he is engaging in revisionist history and attacking Robert Hurt, trying to place Hurt to his left.

Our economy is in the tank for one reason and one reason only – the collapse of the housing market.  In a recent book by noted economist and columnist Thomas Sowell, The Housing Boom and Bust, the author explains what led up to today’s economic woes.

The roots go back to 1977 during the Democrat Carter administration when Democrat majority Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act.  The so-called problem they were addressing was that it was difficult to get financing in the inner city, and the Democrats attributed it to racial discrimination.  

The fact was that real estate values in those areas were declining and many applying for finance didn’t qualify.

Like many government programs this one started small, but did not stay that way.

When Democrat Clinton was President in the mid-90s, the Democrats worked hard to repeal the Glass Spiegel Act, legislation passed in the 1930s that regulated banks and security houses keeping their functions separate.  The repeal of Glatt Spiegel removed the regulations that have snowballed into the avalanche we have now - all these problems with the banks, which started with Fannie and Freddie.

It was the Democrats who began to put pressure on Fannie and Freddie to lower the bar for home loan requirements.  They initiated such products as “low doc” and “no doc” loans which, allowed people who would otherwise not qualify for a loan to apply and be qualified.

Under pressure by liberal Democrats, these requirements were continuously lowered to the point that a number of unqualified borrowers received loans.

As far back as 2004, there were indications that trouble in the mortgage market was on the horizon.  Republicans sponsored bills to reform the home loan system, and it was the Democrats who opposed them.

When you follow the money, you know why.  Fannie and Freddie donated heavily to Democrats.  Sen., Chris Dodd (D-CT) received the most and Barack Obama received the second largest amount in donations even though he had been in the Senate only two years. Former Fannie Mae chairman Jim Johnson was one of three advisors tapped by Obama to vet vice presidential candidates.

The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (S. 190) would have established the Federal Housing Finance Agency as an independent agency. The legislation would give the new agency broad power to issue regulations and guidelines, strong authority to better define and enforce charter acts and flexible authority to set capital requirements over Fannie and Freddie and the Federal Home Loan banks.

The Republican-backed measure would require Fannie and Freddie to sell portfolio assets unrelated to their mortgage securities businesses. A Democratic alternative would have permitted the regulator to reduce their portfolio without requiring such cuts.

John McCain went to the Senate floor and said, “For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs.

“I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”

The American people were assured by Democrats such as Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and Chris Dodd that all was well at Freddie and Fannie.

In the fall of 2008, the bottom fell out of the housing market, and the Democrats blamed everyone but themselves.  They blamed Wall Street, mortgage lenders, insurance companies, banks and, of course, George W. Bush.

In 2010, we have the opportunity to begin to reverse what the Democrats have launched.  5^th Congressman Tom Perriello marches lock-step with the liberal Democrats.  He voted for the stimulus which has done nothing except increase the debt; Cap and Trade, which if enacted would cripple the economy; and, of course, ObamaCare, which cuts $500 billion from Medicare, eliminates Medicare Advantage, and increases the taxes on anyone who get employer-provided health care.

Perriello has perhaps two to three times the funding Robert Hurt does and he will be on an advertising blitz during the closing days.  Don’t be deceived by his lies and half-truths.  Remember, our economy tanked because of Democrat policies. Turn America back to the people and vote Robert Hurt for Congress on November 2^nd.