Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen allegedly jumped for joy when the second plane hit the World Trade Center on 9/11, according to Mateen’s former high school classmates.
Mateen, a U.S. citizen of Afghan descent, gunned down 49 people inside of a popular gay Orlando nightclub early Sunday morning.
Robert Zirkle, Mateen’s classmate who rode the bus to school with him daily, told the Washington Post Mateen “was making plane noises on the bus, acting like he was running into a building.” Zirkle added that prior to 9/11 he and Mateen were friendly but “After 9/11 happened, he started changing and acting different.”
Mateen was sent to the dean’s office for “saying some really rude stuff,” including “That’s what America deserves,” according to another former classmate. The former classmates remember Mateen being escorted out of Florida school when other children took offense to his comments.
In a separate instance after 9/11, Mateen falsely proclaimed that Osama Bin Laden was his uncle. Two classmates told the Washington Post that Mateen’s behavior after 9/11 was significantly altered and bizarre. They speculated Mateen was either suspended or expelled from school for his constant fights and strange behavior.
Mateens behavior and statements after 9/11 may be key to understanding how he began sympathizing with radical Islamic terrorism and the Islamic State.
FBI Director James Comey told reporters Monday that Mateen had previously sympathized with Iranian-backed Shiite terrorist group Hezbollah. Comey also said there were “strong indications of radicalization,” with “potential inspiration by foreign terrorist organizations.”
Comey further confirmed reports Mateen attended the same mosque as the first American-born suicide bomber in Syria and was under investigation for nearly 10 months before the investigation was closed. Mateen’s father claimed in the late hours after the attack, the massacre “had nothing to do with religion.”
Mateen called 911 three times during the course of the attack, according to the FBI, to declare his allegiance to ISIS and praise the Tsarnaev brothers, who were responsible for the 2013 Boston marathon bombings. (For more from the author of “Orlando Terrorist Cheered on 9/11, Classmates Say” please click HERE)
A federal judge has issued a permanent injunction against enforcing Alabama’s law banning same-sex “marriage,” despite the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision upholding that law.
In March 2015, shortly before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision, which ruled that same-sex “marriage” is a Constitutional right, the state Supreme Court had ordered probate judges to stop issuing same-sex marriage licenses, saying the state law remained in effect.
In January of this year, Chief Justice Roy Moore reaffirmed that 2015 state Supreme Court decision. In an Administrative Order he reminded the state’s judges that the ban on same-sex “marriage” remained in effect, and advised them not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples . . .
However, U.S. District Judge Callie V. Granade ruled last week that state officials are bound by the United States Supreme Court’s decision.
Judge Granade’s injunction is permanent, preventing judges and any official “who would seek to enforce the marriage laws of Alabama that prohibit or fail to recognize same-sex marriage” from doing so. (Read more from “Judge Says Alabama Must Perform Gay ‘Marriages'” HERE)
A Georgia judge who rejected the name change proposed by a transgendered woman who identifies as a man is facing a challenge to his decision.
Columbia County Superior Court Judge J. David Roper had ruled that Rebeccah Elizabeth Feldhaus could not change her name to Rowan Elijah.
“The question presented is whether a female has the salutatory right to change her name to a traditionally and obviously male name,” the judge wrote in March. “The court concludes that she does not have such right.”
“I don’t know anybody named Elijah who’s female,” Roper said, according to a hearing transcript. “I’m not going to do that. I’ve never heard of that. And I know who Elijah was, one of the greatest men that ever lived.”
This week, Roper’s decision came under fire as attorneys for Feldhaus filed papers with the Georgia Court of Appeals to overturn Roper’s ruling.
Feldhaus said in a statement that he felt insulted and objectified to be told he can’t use the name that his family, friends and even co-workers already use.
“It can be a scary situation when I show up for work or the first day of class and my legal name does not match my public presentation and my gender identity,” said Feldhaus, who attended Augusta University. “I just want to change my name so that it reflects who I am.”
Roper had said he did not approve of changing male to female names.
“I will allow a gender-neutral name change that will benefit the general public because I don’t want them to have to go through the embarrassing issue of trying to figure out what to do with you when you present, in your appearance today, with a female name, particularly if you had on a uniform and you were dressed like a man,” Roper told Feldhaus, who is in the Army Reserve. (For more from the author of “Transgender Appeals Judge’s Ruling Denying Her Bid to Use Male Name” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Respect_and_Equality_for_All_Trans_People_4764133272_2-1.jpg22432990Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-12 21:38:442016-06-12 21:38:44Transgender Appeals Judge’s Ruling Denying Her Bid to Use Male Name
Americans should use their “God-given responsibility” and vote this November, the Rev. Billy Graham said in a call to action published on the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association website.
In a Q-and-A format, Graham responds to a questioner who voiced a common thought heard across the nation as elections approach.
“I’m sick of politicians and political campaigns, and I’ve decided I’m not going to vote this year. It wouldn’t do any good anyway, because just one vote won’t make any difference. Why bother?” asked the questioner.
Graham met the question head-on.
“Let me ask you a question: What would happen to our nation if everyone decided not to vote? You know the answer — before long we’d lose our freedoms and be ruled by a power-hungry dictatorship,” said Graham.
“No system of government is perfect, including ours. But all it will take to make it collapse is an indifferent citizenry,” he wrote.
“But I also urge you to vote for another reason: I believe it is a God-given responsibility,” he wrote.
Graham noted that even amid the governmental and political shortcomings of the Roman Empire, Jesus preached that everyone had a responsibility to be good citizens.
“He said, ‘Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s’ (Matthew 22:21). The same principle is true for us today: We should do everything we can to encourage and support good government — including voting,” Graham wrote. “Understand the issues…know where the candidates stand on them…ask God to guide you — and then vote.”
Graham said a Christian’s responsibility does not end there.
“Beyond that, however, pray for our nation and its leaders — not just the President, but all who’ve been entrusted with public office. It’s the most important thing you can do,” he wrote. (For more from the author of “Billy Graham Reminds Americans of Their ‘God-Given Responsibility'” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-131.jpg7201280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-12 21:31:322016-06-12 21:31:32Billy Graham Reminds Americans of Their ‘God-Given Responsibility’
Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad is encouraging citizens of his state to spend more time reading the Bible by calling for a Bible-reading marathon. And now a couple of organizations are threatening to sue over what they believe is a violation of the separation between church and state.
Branstad, a Republican, signed a proclamation encouraging Iowans to read the Bible on a daily basis “each year until the Lord comes” and to participate in a 99 county Bible reading marathon from June 30 to July 3.
The Bible reading marathon is set to take place with Bible scripture read out loud in front of the courthouses in all of Iowa’s 99 counties. Several Christian-based groups, including the Iowa Prayer Caucus, are organizing the events. Some of the events will include prayers every 15 minutes, The Des Moines Register reported.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the Freedom From Religion Foundation have criticized the proclamation and are considering suing, The Des Moines Register reported.
“The Governor’s proclamation is frankly outrageous and embarrassing, and inconsistent with our core American and Iowan principles of inclusion and respect of all its people of all faiths, as well as those who are not religious,” ACLU of Iowa Legal Director Rita Bettis said in a statement to The Daily Signal.
Freedom From Religion Foundation Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor told The Daily Signal that her organization, an atheist and agnostic nonprofit based in Madison, Wisconsin, is asking Branstad to rescind the proclamation.
“It’s totally beyond the purview of a governor or any public official to request that people read the Bible, much less that they engage in a Bible marathon or that they read any ‘holy book,’” Gaylor told The Daily Signal. She added: “Government is supposed to be neutral towards religion. It’s not supposed to play favorites.”
Gaylor says the proclamation is “unconstitutional” and “egregious” and that her organization is “hoping to sue.”
“We have a godless, secular Constitution,” Gaylor said. “There’s no Bible in it.”
The Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter to Branstad on Wednesday saying that the proclamation sends a message that “Iowa prefers and endorses the Christian faith over other religions and over nonreligion,” of which the organization says violates the separation of church and state.
Branstad says he was “shocked” to have groups threaten to sue him over the Bible reading proclamation.
“Virtually every president since Abraham Lincoln has signed proclamations encouraging prayers and Bible reading right on through including President Obama,” Branstad told WHO Radio. He added: “Other governors, of both parties, have done this.”
Branstad told WHO Radio that First Liberty Institute, a legal organization that exclusively defends Americans’ religious freedom, “has offered to defend us” if sued. Branstad said:
I feel very confident based on the information they [First Liberty Institute] provided me that we will be successful if they’re stupid enough to file the lawsuit. It may be just a threat or an effort for them to raise money from left-wing groups, but I just think this is absurd to threaten a public official for doing something good to encourage people to read the Bible or to pray.
“The governor has every right to issue this proclamation,” Hiram Sasser, deputy chief counsel for First Liberty Institute, said in an emailed statement to The Daily Signal. “These types of proclamations have been issued by governors and presidents since the days of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. Whenever courts are asked to address these proclamations, the courts have routinely thrown the cases out because, since no one is injured by them, no one has standing to sue over them. So Gov. Branstad’s proclamation is beyond judicial question.”
The executive director of The Family Leader Ambassador Network, Greg Baker, wrote that Branstad’s proclamation is “clearly constitutional.” The Family Leader, the umbrella organization for The Family Leader Ambassador Network, is based in Urbandale, Iowa, and is on a mission “inspiring Christ-like leadership in the home, the church, and the government.”
“In fact, Gov. Branstad’s proclamation echoes Benjamin Franklin’s suggestion at the very Constitutional Convention itself that an appeal to God needed to be made for His intervention and that each day of the Convention must begin in prayer,” Baker wrote. “Or when President Abraham Lincoln in his Second Inaugural address boldly proclaimed that God was judging America for its sins and in order for the Civil War to end, America need to repent.”
Branstad told WHO Radio that Iowa Prayer Caucus State Director Ginny Caligiuri had approached him about doing this particular proclamation.
Caligiuri defended the marathon in an email to The Daily Signal:
The separation of church and state was to protect the church from the state, not the state from the church. It was to protect our nation from coming under the rule of one particular denomination, such as happened in Great Britain, not to keep men and women of faith out of the government.
“We are reading the Word of God on the grounds of our courthouses,” she added, “because we as a nation have turned from our biblical foundations and our nation is in big trouble.” (For more from the author of “After Iowa Governor Calls for Bible-Reading Marathon, Groups Threaten to Sue” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-129.jpg16002560Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-10 22:16:582016-06-10 23:18:01After Iowa Governor Calls for Bible-Reading Marathon, Groups Threaten to Sue
Hillary Clinton’s very first campaign event since becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee will be a speech for Planned Parenthood, America’s number one abortion provider.
Planned Parenthood has endorsed Clinton for president saying she would “always defend” taxpayer funding for the organization, according to a press release by the Susan B. Anthony List. The abortion organization receives over $500 million in federal funding every year and accounts for one-third of all abortions in the U.S.
In response to the news, the Susan B. Anthony List called Clinton’s visit “revealing”:
“It’s revealing that Hillary Clinton’s first major stop as the Democratic presumptive nominee would be to Planned Parenthood, the leader of the deep-pocketed abortion industry. Clinton has put abortion at the center of her campaign and has said the ‘unborn person has no constitutional rights.’
“What Clinton does not realize is that on the issue of life, the majority of Americans – including majorities of young people and women – stand with us, not her. Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion and support a compassionate limit on abortion after five months. She has staked out her turf far outside the mainstream. We welcome this opportunity to engage and expose her, confident the American people will reject her abortion ideology at the ballot box.”
It’s actually quite fitting that Clinton, who is currently under “criminal investigation” for her use of a private email server, will be speaking in support of Planned Parenthood, an organization recently under investigation for their alleged illegal sale of baby body parts.
In contrast to Clinton’s attendance at a pro-abortion Planned Parenthood conference, conservatives are defending religious liberty at a Faith and Freedom Coalition event. The event, Road to Majority 2016, will run through Saturday, June 11th. (For more from the author of “Hillary’s First Stop as Nominee – a Planned Parenthood Abortion Conference” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-128.jpg7201280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-10 21:53:492016-06-10 23:21:04Hillary’s First Stop as Nominee – a Planned Parenthood Abortion Conference
A 40-year-old funding fight that touches questions of the proper separation of government powers has reached fever pitch in the state of Kansas. The state Supreme Court has threatened to shut down public schools should the state legislature fail to appropriate an additional $38 million in funds by the court mandated deadline of June 30.
The court ruled in May that the state’s $4 billion block grant appropriation of school funding was “inequitable and unconstitutional,” giving the legislature its deadline to rework the school financing. The court issued its proclamation at 4:55pm on the Friday before Memorial Day weekend, the last weekend before the legislature adjourned for 2016.
The block grant program was adopted as a temporary replacement of a decades old program of school finance that was causing automatic spending increases Kansas Republicans deemed wasteful. In scrapping the old program for a block grant program, the court decided Governor Brownback and the Kansas legislature had violated the state constitution.
Governor Brownback has proclaimed a special session of the legislature to begin June 23 — two weeks from now, to resolve the finance issue. In a statement released by the Governor’s office, Brownback said it was “distressing that the Kansas Supreme Court has put the schools and legislature of Kansas in this position over less than 1 percent of school funding.”
The Legal Problem
The Supreme Court found that Governor Brownback’s block grant funding program violated the Kansas state constitution because it did not provide “equitable and adequate” funding for Kansas schools.
Article 6, Section 6 of the Kansas constitution requires that “The legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state.” Historically, the courts in Kansas have defined the word “suitable” to mean “equitable and adequate.”
The Wichita Eagle, reporting on the court’s May decision, explained how the court decided Governor Brownback’s block grant program didn’t meet the “equitability requirement” of the Kansas constitution.
“The reason was that it contained a “hold harmless” provision that guaranteed the bill wouldn’t reduce local option budget funding for any school district, although the vast majority wouldn’t get any more. The local option budget, or LOB, is money that voters can elect to tax themselves to provide extra funding for their own schools.
Inequity creeps in because property-rich districts can easily raise large sums of money with relatively small increases in their tax rate. Not so for the poor districts, where it takes a large jump in property tax rates to generate comparable income for the schools.”
“It is unfortunate that the Kansas Supreme Court has put at risk the education of Kansas students and livelihood of teachers across the state by threatening to close schools on June 30,” Kansas Governor Sam Brownback said in a statement. “The court is engaging in political brinksmanship with this ruling, and the cost will be borne by our students.”
The Funding Fight
Governor Brownback’s administration has been characterized by fiscal restraint. The growth of government spending in Kansas was reduced to 1.7%, which is less than half of the growth rate under Brownback’s predecessor, Democrat Kathleen Sebelius. Executive agency employees were reduced 25% and Brownback slashed cabinet level spending across the board.
And Brownback’s administration accomplished this while signing into law the largest tax cut in the state’s history.
Yet education has remained a top priority of Brownback’s administration and education funding has remained at record levels despite cuts to spending elsewhere.
In his 2015 State of the State address, Governor Brownback issued a call to reform the school finance process. “For decades now, Kansas has struggled under a school finance formula which is designed not to be understood,” the Governor said. “A formula designed to lock in automatic, massive increases in spending unrelated to actual student populations or improved student achievement.”
Governor Brownback’s office provided Conservative Review with a copy of the archaic and complex formula used to determine school finance appropriations in the state of Kansas, for much of the past 20 years.
In his State of the State, Brownback called for a “timeout in the school finance wars,” a repeal of the old formula, and he proposed a simple program of block-grant funding for two years as a temporary solution to the state’s education finance woes. Brownback’s plan froze school funding at FY 2013-2014 levels until the legislature could develop a new scheme to replace that archaic and confounding mess of a budget formula.
The Republican controlled legislature passed the block grant scheme, and state Democrats assailed them for doing so, accusing the Brownback administration of slashing funds for education. But that’s not accurate.
Kansas is actually investing a record $4 billion in K-12 education. The state spends the 3rd most on education of any state in the country as a percent of the state budget: 50%. Kansas spends about $1000 more per pupil than the national average of state education spending. Increases in education funding have outpaced both inflation and enrollment growth.
The additional $38 million the state Supreme Court is ordering is less than 1% of the funds already appropriated to Kansas schools.
The specific fund in question, Local Operating Budget Equalization, goes to property tax relief, which does not affect the ability of schools to fund their classroom operations. It is this particular fund that the Supreme Court says is creating the “inequitably” that violates Kansas’ state constitution.
A Separation of Powers Issue
At the heart of the matter is a simple question. What does “suitable funding” mean? And which branch of government gets to answer that question?
Responding to a request for comment, Eileen Hawley, a spokeswoman for the governor, said “other courts have faced a similar question. The Texas Supreme Court correctly recognized that the Constitution guarantees the power of the purse to the Legislature, stating ‘accordingly, we decline to usurp legislative authority by issuing reform diktats from on high, supplanting lawmakers’ policy wisdom with our own.”
Supporters of Governor Brownback’s block grant scheme argue it is the legislative branch, the branch invested with the power of the purse, that should decide what funding is “suitable” when it appropriates funds.
Governor Brownback has indicated he is open to the legislature granting the court’s request for an additional $38 million in funds, though he views the excess government spending as unnecessary. Yet his administration seems to wish to keep in mind the constitutional separation of powers, telling Conservative Review that the governor would “welcome any alternatives that the legislature may propose.”
Hawley added, however, that it is “unlikely that the Court will uphold any action without an increase in funding.” (For more from the author of “Power Play? Kansas Supreme Court Threatens to Shut down Schools” please click HERE)
There was no liberal outrage when news broke that Hillary Clinton wore a $12,000 Giorgio Armani spring tweed jacket during her New York Primary victory speech in April. Clinton even dared to stress inequality in her speech – was not her own conscience screaming?
You may recall during the 2012 presidential election the liberal media’s obsession with casting Mitt Romney as a rich, out of touch patrician, indifferent towards the little guy.
When Mitt’s wife, Ann Romney, wore a designer blouse costing $990 to a campaign event they could not contain themselves.
A stunning example of such was an article for the Washington Post by Suzi Parker titled “Ann Romney’s $990 T-shirt is indicative of a tone-deaf campaign.”
“Does Ann Romney wear her $990 designer shirt while driving one of her two Cadillacs?” Parker began her rant.
“Ann’s pricey shirt will not help her husband change those perceptions, no matter how many Laundromat photo ops are on the campaign’s daily itinerary. Romney’s wardrobe choice could haunt the campaign indefinitely. If it were a solid color, the designer tee might have been forgotten after awhile. But the yellow bird print is unique enough to become emblematic of wealth that most Americans could only wish to have.”
Later Parker said that the Romneys should not be ashamed of their wealth, but suggested, “maybe it’s time to buy something off the rack at a lower-end store.”
Similar critiques of Hillary Clinton are impermissible, however. Rachel Lubitz, writing an op-ed for Time Magazine even labeled it “sexist” to call out Clinton for wearing the Armani jacket while lecturing on inequality.
That’s just high fashion hypocrisy. (For more from the author of “Where’s the Media Outrage Over Hillary’s $12K Armani Jacket?” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/8411555275_c87d2e818a_b.jpg9191024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-10 02:24:302016-06-10 02:24:30Where’s the Media Outrage Over Hillary’s $12K Armani Jacket?
You say someone violated a newly defined “gun-free zone” to shoot innocents at UCLA?
Impossible! Preposterous! Outrageous!
Economist-slash-statisticians Tim Groseclose and John Lott, Jr. explain (more patiently than I could) for the mentally defective and the Left, but I repeat myself.
The fatal shooting at UCLA wasn’t supposed to happen. Late last year, California passed a ban on people being able to carry a permitted concealed handgun on college campuses. California instituted the ban despite the previous rule being in effect for over 100 years without a single example of any problem.
Both of the authors here have taught at UCLA, and we don’t take these arguments lightly… The shooting last week at the campus engineering building took place only about 400 yards from the UCLA police station. But despite police being so important in stopping crime, this case again illustrated a simple fact: Police virtually always arrive on a crime scene after the crime occurs.
…Since at least 1950, all but three public mass shootings in America have taken place where general citizens are [unconstitutionally] banned from carrying guns. In Europe, there have been no exceptions. Every mass public shooting has occurred in places where general citizens are not allowed to have guns. And Europe is no stranger to mass shootings, with a fatality rate virtually the same as that in the U.S…
…Those advocating gun-free zones argue that permit holders will accidentally shoot bystanders. Or that arriving police will shoot anyone with a gun, including the permit holders. At colleges, fears are raised that students will get drunk and misuse guns.
Out of the dozens of cases where concealed-carry holders have stopped shootings in malls, churches, schools, universities and busy downtowns, no permit holder has ever shot a bystander. Nor in these cases have the police ever accidentally shot a permit holder.
Gun-free zones are a magnet for murderers. Even the most ardent gun control advocate would never put “Gun-Free Zone” signs on their home. Let’s finally stop putting them elsewhere.
(For more from the author of “UCLA PROVES ONCE AGAIN: Gun-Free Zones Are Magnets for Murderers” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/5536326089_2215970aa2_b.jpg7681024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-10 02:00:512016-06-10 02:00:51UCLA PROVES ONCE AGAIN: Gun-Free Zones Are Magnets for Murderers
A few short miles outside of Washington, D.C., a public school community appears divided over a policy that allows transgender students to use the bathrooms, locker rooms, and other sex-specific facilities in accordance with their gender identity.
Supporters view it as a positive step in the name of equality, while opponents view it as an infringement on the privacy and safety rights of the rest of the students.
In some ways, this community, Fairfax County, Virginia, has been ground zero for the transgender issue. Last spring, a year before the Obama administration issued guidance mandating that transgender students be granted access to facilities that match their gender identity, the Fairfax County School Board passed its own transgender non-discrimination policy.
This has made Fairfax County a test case, in some ways, of what’s to come with the Obama administration’s new transgender policy.
To find out how the community is dealing with the issue, The Daily Signal attended a Fairfax County School Board meeting, where we spoke with people on both sides of the debate. Watch the video to hear their response. (For more from the author of “School District Grapples With the Transgender Debate” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/school-417612_960_720.jpg718960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-09 01:35:432016-06-09 01:35:43School District Grapples With the Transgender Debate
