The American Worldview

Chronicle
Vol.1. No. 1

Dr. Frederick Meekins

January 2012

Leftist Factions Co-opt Rather Than Abolish Holidays

For about the past two decades, those to
the left side of the sociopolitical spectrum
have made such a fuss over their hostility
towards traditional American holidays
and celebrations that the arising
disputations have themselves become an
anticipated aspect of the close of each
year. It was claimed such festivities
promote values so vile that these
sentiments must be expunged from the
civic calendar and the very names seldom
mentioned for fear of irrevocably
harming those not participating for
whatever the reason.
Though not always cognizant of the epic
spiritual and philosophical struggle
taking place all around them, Americans
can be a remarkably stubborn and
independent lot. As such, a number
sympathetic to the process of
communalization have realized that they
might be more successful in
accomplishing their goals through a
subdued gradualism rather than through
sudden revolutionary upheaval.
The first of the remembrances of the
waning year subverted by manipulative
social engineers is Thanksgiving. This
holiday is despised for a number of
common liberal reasons.
For starters, it is argued that
Thanksgiving is racist because of the
hostilities that eventually erupted
between Americans of European origins
and the American Indians. However,

such criticism fails to recognize that, at

the time of the first Thanksgiving Feast,
these distinct groups were at accord with
one another over the blessings shared
amidst hardships and struggle.
Frankly, if you have a problem over the
concept of Thanksgiving, you have a
serious attitude problem. No one is
saying that at points that the Indians
weren't screwed over. Yet it must be
remembered that some of them gave as
good as they got in terms of inflicting
violence upon innocent Whites not
responsible for crafting or implementing
policy.
So if you can't take a few moments to
express gratitude for what you do have in
this country as a result of the values set in
motion there at the beginning even if they
weren't adhered to in full at every step
along the way, you are yourself
harboring a degree of animosity
bordering on racism.
The next and probably deeper reason as
to why Thanksgiving is really despised
despite all the lofty platitudes regarding
honoring indigenous cultures and the like
is that the day expresses gratitude
towards God. In this era of postmodern
enlightenment, such homage is to be
directed more towards terrestrial sources,
the COMMUNITY being foremost
among them.
Usually when given the opportunity in a

public forum such as the popular press to

provide words of encouragement and
understanding, those holding positions as
professional clergy worthy of their hirer
tend to draw focus to what God has done
for us, how we have fallen short of the
glory of God, and how He still loves us
anyway with restoration available for
those placing themselves under His
mercy. Interestingly, pastors of Emergent
Church inclinations would rather go
along with the flow rather than prevent
the nation's downward slide into tyranny
and desolation.
Writing in the November 2011 edition of
the Hyattsville Life & Times, pastor of
the town's First Baptist Church Todd
Thomason asserts that the thing he is
grateful for this Thanksgiving season is
not so much his God, his freedom, or
even his family but rather
COMMUNITY. In other words, this
pastor does not value people as
individuals but rather as part of the
overall group.
In his analysis, Thomason in particular
reflected upon a power outage following
Hurricane Irene. Commenting on what
took place, the pastor observes, "But I
was hardly the only person offering
assistance. It was a wonderful display of
community at its best."
If this represents the kind of spiritual
insight available at this particular
congregation, no wonder the discerning
get the impression it is becoming
increasingly ensnared in the clutches of
communalism.
Thomason continues, "Then the lights
came back on and we all went back...to
our narrower, more familiar life patterns
that...keep us apart."
What this misguided cleric fails to realize
is that, by its definition, community does
not include everyone and by its nature is

necessarily exclusive. That is not

necessarily a bad thing.
In a paragraph following this
lamentation, Pastor Thomason lists a
number of things that he views as
obstacles to social harmony. These
include categories such as economic
status, political affiliation, religion,
ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Why
aren't these valid categories around which
to in part derive one's social identity?
G.K. Chesterton is credited with saying
that one should not take a fence down
until you know why it was put up.
Sometimes the best way to maintain
amicable relations is to limit one's
interactions with those whose values are
diametrically opposed to one's own.
Rev. Thomason, on the other hand,
advocates such a compulsory and
contrived degree of togetherness that one
ought to willingly surrender those
convictions of the heart one holds most
dear. For usually in those kinds of
situations where the parties involved hold
to conflicting perspectives, it is the party
holding to the higher standard that is
forced to adopt the more lax principle.
For example, in terms of religion, if this
is not to be one of the categories by
which we determine those from the
within from those from the without, it is
usually the ones that believe that faith
alone in Jesus Christ without reliance
upon good works is the only means of
eternal salvation and not those that
believe all paths are equally valid so long
as our good works outweigh our evil
deeds that are forced to compromise in
the name of ecumenical unity. Likewise
in regards to sexual orientation, when we
supposedly come together setting aside
our differences, in the postmodern
context that does not mean the
promiscuous elevate their behavior by
henceforward living lives of repentant

abstinence, covenantal monogamy, or at

least keep their mouths shut regarding
what kinky proclivities they might be
into. Rather, it ends up that those
espousing a traditional morality are the
ones not only shamed into silence but
forced to smile and applaud in
affirmation under threat of punitive
denunciation.
Until recently, the disputes regarding
Thanksgiving have for the most part been
of a more subdued or subtle nature.
Some of the really great battles of the
culture war have instead broken out over
Christmas.
The key to winning any conflict is
controlling how that conflict is expressed
in terms of language and
conceptualization. Those that despise
Christmas and the Christ that the
celebration was originally intended to
honor have gone to considerable lengths
to minimize the mention of the day's very
name.
Occasionally this is accomplished under
threat of some kind of punishment on the
part of the state. More often, this is
achieved by attempting to shame these
words out of common usage by crafting
elaborate reasons as to why the values
given lip service by petty despots such
diversity, inclusion, and hyperpluralism
are to be extolled at the expense of those
preferred by the average person.
For example, the Hyattsville Reporter
insert of the November 2011 edition of
the Hyattsville Life & Times lists a
number of events to be held by the
municipality throughout the month of
December such as the "Annual Holiday
Tree Lighting", breakfast with Santa, and
a memorial toy drive. At no point in the
announcement is the reader informed as
to why these events are being held this
time of year rather than in the middle of
the summer as Christmas is never

mentioned.
In the past, it was claimed in connection
with this very issue that the phraseology
"holiday" has to be utilized since not
everyone celebrates Christmas. If so,
then why is the word invoked in the
column immediately to the left?
The heading reads none other than "We're
Dreaming Of A Green Christmas".
However, what follows does not so much
detail what certain individuals plan to do
themselves but rather what they hope to
guilt trip everybody else into.
For example, in regards to gifts, it is
literally insinuated "You shouldn't have."
Instead of traditional gifts, the
responsible consumer rather gives
donations to charities or purchases
locally made items. In other words,
things nobody really wants.
As in the case of the blurb about
domestic artificial and locally grown
trees, the reason behind locally produced
gift items has nothing to do with
bolstering the U.S. economy. Rather, it is
about reducing the distance for ecological
reasons the miles goods and supplies are
transported. But unless an artist or
craftsman forges, smelts, or mixes their
own supplies, does it really matter if the
assorted petrochemicals are assembled
down the street or across the country
since they will still have to travel the
exact same distance?
In "The Lion, The Witch & The
Wardrobe", the tyranny imposed by the
White Witch upon Narnia is categorized
as it being always winter but never
Christmas. It seems now the next stage
of villainy has developed where the
White Witches of our own time and
realm instead wish to use the trappings of
this celebration as a tactic in the attempt
to implement their assorted agendas.
By Frederick B. Meekins

Quips & Observations

Regarding this "giving back to the COMMUNITY" drivel. The average person
does that everyday they go to work, pay their taxes, occasionally slip
something into the collection plate at church, and doesn't rampage in the streets
like these Occupy Wall Street & Air Jordan mobs.
Muslims slaughtered Christians celebrating Christmas at a church in Nigeria.
Does Ron Paul still think these fanatics pose no global security threat? Since
he snickered on late night TV about Michelle Bachmann not liking Muslims,
perhaps the Texas Congressman thinks attacks on churches are a laughing
matter.
Regarding Prince Philip's emergency coronary artery surgery. Was he put onto
the same waiting list as the other subjects in the British health care system? Its
doubtful anyone else that age over there would have even been allowed the
surgery.
For as many years that transpire between each Mission Impossible movie, Tom
Cruise will likely be strolling around in a wheelchair at an assisted living
facility by the time the next one is released.
Should Shop With A Cop programs where "underprivileged" youngsters go
Christmas shopping with a law enforcement officer be for 16 year olds whose
parents make nearly $40,000? This is a bigger joke than Angel Tree for the
jailbirds' kids.
The same crowd regularly ranting about women wearing pants is now in an
uproar that women's boxing is now being planned for the Olympics. But It's
not like Feminists are grabbing women off the street and forcing them to fight
one another. So why is it more appropriate for a man to knock the teeth and
snot out of another man but not for a woman to do it to another woman?
Were the North Korean mobs flagellating themselves over the death of Kim
Jung Il mourning the loss of their leader or over concern what would befall
them if the Communists their accuse them of failing to put on a convincing
performance for the cameras?

New Yorker Cartoon Exposes Bias & Not Historical

Realities
It has been observed that often a
picture is worth a thousand words.
By this, it is meant that often a witty
image can more quickly convey an
idea than a written exposition.
Another truism nearly as classic insists
that the only thing we learn from history
is that we don't learn anything from
history.
A prime example of these working in
tandem could be found on the cover of a
late 2011 edition of the New Yorker
Magazine. Depicted violating the U.S.
southern border were migrants adorned
not in sombreros but rather in what
would be considered traditional
Thanksgiving pilgrim garb.
Such doodling, though admittedly
humorous, displays a number of
questionable assumptions.
For starters, the cartoon assumes that the
illegal aliens of today are the equivalent
of the Pilgrim settlers.
In addressing this issue, emphasis must
be placed upon ILLEGAL.
The migrants coming here today are
doing so in violation of the agreed upon
governing authorities of the territorial
United States.
The English Separatists voyaging here
aboard the Mayflower committed no such
transgression. In fact, the pioneers
making that trek were so eager to see law
and order established that among their
first acts was to promulgate the
Mayflower Compact. They are not to
blame if the Indians did not have an as
developed sense of property as we have

in our own Western tradition or that there

was not as much of a need to enforce
borders back then as there is today.
The naive will likely respond but, if our
Founders were all immigrants, who are
we to forbid entrance to those that come
here after us?
If that is the case, should those making
such a case (especially if they are White)
be forced to not only provide shelter to
any minority squatter that crawls in
through an open window but also cook
daily meals and provide laundered sheets
for the uninvited house guests? If not,
how is amnesty and assorted social
welfare benefits going to those that have
not earned them any different?
Those fawning all over the border
violators of today will gush incessantly
how moral and family oriented these
blatant criminals are just like the Pilgrim
settlers coming here to start a new life.
Even the likes of alleged conservatives
such as Dr. Dobson of Focus on the
Family have at times been duped by this
as evidenced by the time he got atop his
Colorado high horse and proceeded to
castigate Pat Buchanan regarding the
syndicated columnist's classic "The
Death Of The West".
However, just how moral are these new
arrivals when one of their foremost
weekend activities is bawdy drunkenness
that often results in public urination? It's
doubtful many Pilgrims blared music
until 3 AM given the solemnity and
austerity for which the rigorous
Protestants of that era were renowned.
Often leftists like to harp on the decline
that befell the American Indians once the

historical paths of these people groups

intersected with those of the Europeans.
Then let's draw on some lessons from
that episode as to why the United States
of today must curtail the numbers
crossing over the nation's frontiers.
If the migrants of today are to be
construed through the prism that they are
the equivalent of the Pilgrim
"foreparnets" (no need to set off radical
feminists among fanatic grammarians), it
must be pointed out that their famed
work ethic wasn't the only thing the early
Puritans brought with them. They also
brought a number of diseases against
which the population already residing
here had little immunity.
Sadly, little can be done to prevent the
suffering and death from the epidemics
that swept across the New World
centuries ago. But with the germ theory
of disease that has developed since that
time, shouldn't we honor those passing in

that tragedy by clamping down on our

own borders by only granting admittance
to those from beyond our borders that
adhere to the most rigorous of health
standards?
Don't think this is a valid concern? Then
why are not only diseases once thought
conquered or at least under control such
as tuberculosis but even bedbugs as well
making a resurgence?
Nation-states exist primarily for the
benefit of those already living within the
boundaries of a particular delineated
territory that have a proper legal basis for
being there. Once a culture loses its
wherewithal to defend this particular
principle, it won't be long until it is swept
into the dung heap of history.
by Frederick Meekins

Zany Might Not Be So Bad Afterall

Romney insists in regards to Gingrich
that "zany is not what we need in a
President".

By that, one must assume Romney

considers as "zany" that is unwilling
to at least consider approaches to issues

with his own patters of speech, "just

peachy".
And just think, he could have likely
gotten by with it if it weren't for those
pesky kids.

outside of the box and observing where

our time fits with the overall flow of
history.

Thought I would toss that in if candidates

are going to start sounding like they are
doing voiceovers for Scooby-do episodes
from the mid 70's.

To Romney, it seems how things are

going now are, to use vocabulary fitting

by Frederick Meekins

Christmas Billboards Point In The Culture War's Direction

Christmas is the time of year when
the thoughts of most Americans grow
to be at their most devout. It is
increasingly the time of year that the
avowed despisers of the Almighty are
at their most disrespectful.
Before now, the most culturally
embarrassing thing to come out of the
wastelands of the Garden State was
likely Snooki and her Jersey Shore
compatriots. However, it now seems
even their debauched escapades have
been surpassed in terms of
deliberately thumbing ones nose at
God.
For decades, one municipality there
has draped across a main street a
banner reading that horrible bit of
wordplay Keep Christ In Christmas.
As has become customary, leftist
subversives have stepped forward
insisting that the banner be taken
down to placate one or two
discombobulated by the message.
Those holding to this position contend
that the feelings of a handful must be
upheld at all costs for the sake of
social cohesion. So if it cannot be
urged to keep Christ in Christmas, are
these diversitymongers going to be
consistent and call for the decoupling
of Black from History Month?
That commemoration is even more
divisive and controversial, but most
Whites are too afraid to speak up as to
what they really think of it.
In what could be categorized as a
battle of the banners, to express their
disdain regarding public displays of

belief, a gaggle of atheists have

hoisted an ensign emblazoned with
the following: At this season of the
winter solstice, there are no gods, no
devils, no angels, no heaven or hell.
There is only the natural world.
Religion is but a myth and a
superstition that hardens hearts and
enslaves minds.
Perhaps the greatest gift such deluded
infidels could be given this Christmas
season would be for someone to point
out that their countersign is itself
fraught with a number of faith-based
assumptions as ultimately improvable
as anything held by the most ardent
adherents of traditional religious
belief.
For example, can the atheist really
irrefutably prove that only the natural
world exists? If one wanted to get
really snotty about it, couldnt one
make the argument that, since mans
knowledge is finite, God is floating a
mere two inches out of range of the
most powerful telescopes ever
designed?
The banner hoisted by the unbelievers
attempts to strike an eminently
scientific pose. However, its
conclusion has nothing whatsoever to
do with experimental objectivity.
Furthermore, aren't we often chided in
response to the most ludicrous
postulations to keep an open mind?
So why is the existence of God an
invalid assumption?
The banner concludes, Religion

hardens hearts and enslaves minds.

But if nothing exists beyond
physicality and materiality, on what
grounds are hard hearts and enslaved
minds such a negative thing?
With power and brute force being the
only true values since they promote
survival and existential optimization
of those that wield them, why are hard
hearts and enslaved minds less than
optimal states of being? You see, in a
materialistic context, one cannot even
use the word bad.
During Christmas each year, St.
Matthew's-In-The-City Church in
Aukland, New Zealand sponsors a
billboard that the congregation
considers provocative. This year, the
church went with a billboard
depicting the Virgin Mary holding a
home pregnancy test with an
expression of shock and dismay upon
her face.
This work does attempt to take the
viewer beyond the quaint romanticism
of the Christmas story as popularly
presented to better appreciate how the
lives of those involved were
profoundly impacted and altered. Yet
this depiction is still wrong on a
number of levels.

of befuddlement on her face ignores

the facts and implications of the
Biblical account. A surprised look
would indicate a couple of things.
A pregnancy test suggests that the
angel did not make the announcement
to Mary as chronicled in Luke
Chapter 1. According to the artistic
depiction in question, she would not
have suspected she was with child
until whatever it is that prompts a
woman to suspect she might be and
seeks confirmation through the
highlighted pharmaceutical apparatus.
If the angel did appear as detailed, the
taking of a home pregnancy test
would indicate that Mary did not
believe the angel. And though there
were no doubt times that her heart
grew heavy as did that of her child in
the Garden of Gethsemane, there is no
indication from Holy Writ that she
ever doubted the veracity of the
message sent to her and the move of
God upon her. In Luke 1:38, Mary
says, "I am the Lord's servant. May it
be to me as you have said (NIV)."

There is one thing the observant

notices right out of the gate. That is
just how long would you live if you
drew the portrait of the founder of a
particular world religion with a
proclivity for loud explosions holding
a home pregnancy test?

Many dismiss billboards as nothing

but blights upon the landscape. But if
one takes a closer look, one discovers
how a number of these oversized
signs can highlight the ideas
clamoring for prominence in public
perception and a remind Christians
why they must always be ready to
give an answer in response to the
confusion and despair that has
gripped mankind in various forms
throughout history.

Secondly, depicting Mary with a look

by Frederick Meekins

Quips & Observations

Often, it is insisted that one must use the phraseology "Happy Holidays" in
order to avoid excluding New Year's Day. However, don't the advertisements
exclaiming "Now that the Holidays are over" prove that such linguistic
manipulation is just at attempt to avoid saying Christmas?
Profilers insist that the LA arsonist is likely a White male of low intelligence.
If so certain can it be bluntly stated in establishmentarian media that terrorists
are likely overly degreed Muslims or that most looters tend to be minorities
receiving public assistance handouts?
The new California booster seat law has little to do with child safety but more
about a financially destitute state scraping the bottom of the barrel for an
additional source of revenue.
It is amazing how Christians that would revoke your church membership for
attending the movies or reading a Harry Potter or Twilight novel are
enthusiastic about voting for hard narcotics legalizer Ron Paul.
If Andrea Mitchell thinks there are "too many White Evangelicals" in Iowa,
perhaps she should be told there are "too many Jews" in the upper reaches of
the banking industry.
Truth be told, most honest, upstanding Black folks would probably prefer to
live in an area that was "too White & Evangelical" as well.
If Iowa is "too White and Evangelical" to be considered a legitimate measure of
political opinion, then shouldn't the same be said of congressional districts
gerrymandered to placate agitated racialist minorities?
When you can tell me your parents wore garments made of livestock feed sacks
and carried their lunches to school in a used cardboard cracker box and if your
grandfather as a child had to tie his uncles used socks around his young legs so
he could have something even on his feet, maybe then I'll care to listen to you
accusing me of being wasteful in regards to grocery bags.
Until you tell me how many times per week you eat ramen noodles for dinner,
your support for a bag tax to my ears is virtually indistinguishable from typical
liberal smugness.
Same ones for the bag tax will also come out in favor of increased petroleum
based taxes since you don't really need to go anywhere and certainly don't need

to be comfortably cozy in your home during the winter.

Don't lecture me regarding the conveyance I utilize in transporting nutritional
provisions. I shop in stores you wouldn't enter without wearing a hazmat suit
in neighborhoods you wouldn't enter into without a police escort even though
you are the one to ballyhoo your highly vaunted appreciation for diversity.
Those that are so politically correct that they have to make a public
proclamation that they use cloth bags rather than simply use them must be so
rich that they use deliberately purchased bags to line their garbage pales.
Usually, these are folks whose lives are so devoid of significance that they can't
help but tell everyone else what to do.
An effusively pious associate is aghast that Gingrich is seeking "revenge" over
verbal distortions propagated by Romney regarding the former Speaker of the
House. It is the associate's contention that such an attitude is not Biblical or
Christlike. Yet, most positions held by Ron Paul is accepted nearly as Holy
Writ. So I ask is advocating the legalization of hardcore narcotics Biblical and
Christlike?
Aren't you giving back to the COMMUNITY each time you pay your own bills
since you are taking the pressure off assorted charitable organizations or
government agencies to do so?
If a PSA is instructing us to intervene whenever we see someone doing
something that could start a forest fire, is there going to be an accompanying
clarification allowing us to fill their backsides full of buckshot when the
offender turns around and threatens our lives?
If one is going to couch one's opposition to Bachman & Gingrich from the
standpoint of feigned sophistication by going on how their experience has only
been in the House of Representatives rather than as a Senator or Governor and
thus are unqualified to be President, shouldn't you be consist and come out
against Ron Paul as well?
If the murderer of the park ranger had been a professor of naturalistic evolution
or postmodern literary criticism, would the media continually beat that aspect
of the scumbags background into our heads?
Anti-military propagandists have latched onto the fact that the murderer of a
park ranger in Washington State was an Iraqi war veteran. Mark my words.
Some human filth will eventually be saying she got exactly what she deserved
as a government employee.

DC Grants Rats More Rights Than Unborn Children

A law has been enacted by the DC
city council not only requiring that
must most forms of rodentine vermin
be captured for rerelease, but that they
must also be relocated as family units.

According to one DC health official

from Pakistan, the rat problem at
Occupy movement shantytowns
exceed those in Third World refuge
camps.

These creatures are not a pod of

whales, a herd of elephants, or a troop
of gorillas.

Some will snap that the law applies

only to pest control officials.
But for how long?

Given that they will even eat their

young and produce another liter a few
months or weeks later, I doubt they
form deep meaningful bonds with
their offspring.
The same fanatics that don't want rats
harmed by human hands are the same
ones that decimate feral cat colonies
that would otherwise keep these pests
in check.
It's not like rats are on the verge of
going extinct in the nation's Capitol
(and given the nature of the city it's
doubtful that they ever will).

Often as in regards to other expansive

laws, eventually this dictatorial
regulation will be expanded to
homeowners trying to handle these
vermin themselves.
And speaking of plagues and such, it
wouldn't surprise me if such laws
were being enacted as a way to allow
some kind of new strain of the plague
to develop with the hopes of
systematically eliminating vast swaths
of the human population.
by Frederick Meekins

Quips & Observations

A news report claimed Michael Vick's jersey is among the most popular. Unless
you are buying it for your dog to urinate on, what person in their right mind
would want one?
WorldNetDaily revealed that there are over 30 terrorist training facilities in the
United States. Still don't think Jihadists are a threat, Dr. Paul?
To those lacking perceptual awareness beyond the obvious or to ratiocinate
beyond what their betters allow, a five cent bag tax doesn't sound like much.
However, to those of us that eat at home and don't stuff our gullets with
restaurant swill, that will amount to hundreds of dollars per year. Oh well, just
take it out of what you would put into your church collection plate. If we are

told in the NT that government is a ministry of God, than any of the taxes going
into the state coffers are a part of your tithe. It is not your fault if the state takes
up the entire 10%.

Christmas Irritants Pervasive

Use to be during the Christmas season
in modern America, if the individual
wanted a little buzz during the
holidays, they would slip a bit of
something into their eggnog. Now, all
you have to do to feel that surge of
agitated surliness is to turn on the
news or read about those turning
themselves into the hind quarters of
the species the Holy Family rode into
Bethlehem in order to pay the
assessed tax (an existential financial
matter it seems fewer and fewer could
possibly relate to).
If you think it is only secularists
making an overall nuisance of
themselves, you are in for a bigger
disappointment than finding a lump of
coal in your stocking Christmas
morning.
For better or worse, the Internet is
widespread enough that most are
aware that there is nothing in the
Bible compelling believers to
participate in the celebration of the
birth of Christ even though His
miraculous arrival is documented in
the pages of Scripture and that many
of the trappings such as decorations
and related customs now imbedded
with meanings symbolizing the
spiritually profound account have (to
invoke a word of sectarian irony) less
than kosher origins.
However, for the most part, Christians
on either side of the divide have
established a kind of amicable truce

where for the most part about the

worst that they do to their
counterparts is to look down their
noses at one another and snicker how
peculiar or inconsistent the ones on
the side of the debate opposite their
own happen to be.
That has changed in one Michigan
town. There, an anonymous
equivalent of Dana Carveys Church
Lady character from Saturday Night
Live sent a letter to those daring to
adorn their abodes with Christmas
lights.
Usually, those going to such lengths
as to put the criticism of such
decorations into writing make a point
of accusing either the decorations or
the individual putting them up of
being too religious. This time, the
victims of such in your face
busybodyism have been accused of
not being religious enough.
The note insists that the homeowners
ought to reevaluate their beliefs. This
is because decorative lights, mistletoe,
and yule logs can be traced back to
pagan origins.
While nothing should be done about
the doofus posting the letter since the
First Amendment is pretty much a get
out of jail free card for unbridled
stupidity, it makes you wonder just
how much authority over what goes
on in homes or on our property should
be granted to those insistent upon a

hardline implementation of Americas

Puritan heritage.
Most years, it seems many of the
Christmas time outrages such as the
one detailed above occur on the local
level such as a school child having
their constitutional religious liberties
trampled upon in the attempt to forge
Christmas-free school zones or as
result of the directors of homeowners
associations overly eager to enforce
Soviet-style architectural conformity.
However, it now seems the partisans
of the White Witch of Narnia are
attempting to assert themselves at the
center stage of U.S. national
government.
Irrespective of the overall decline in
respect for the body brought about by
the often unconscionable behavior on
the part of the institution, Congress is
often looked upon as the greatest
deliberative body in the world in that
its members are suppose to be able to
speak their consciences freely to their
fellow members, their particular
constituencies, and the nation as a
whole.
However, it now seems that an
authority within the legislative branch
may be attempting to curtail
expression that, to most Americans
not having jumped off the cliff into
one variety of fanaticism or the other,
would be about one of the least
partisan things one could say as such
sentiments are usually enunciated
freely irrespective of the party
affiliation of those to whom the
greeting was intended. One of the
perks extended to members of
Congress is the so-called franking
privilege where taxpayers pick up the

tab for the postal correspondence

between legislators and their
respective constituencies.
In exchange for this benefit, the
outgoing communications are
required to adhere to certain criteria
regarding content. For example, these
items arent suppose to be of a
campaign nature.
It seems now though that, at least in
regards to the House of
Representatives, wishing someone a
Merry Christmas via these official
dispatches has been deemed the
equivalent of saying, Vote for me
because the other guy kicks puppies.
Proponents of the prohibition insist
epistolary interference is necessary as
today one never knows who might be
offended by the platitude.
Ill tell you what ought to offend
people. Its that these clowns dont
only get to send mail at someone
elses expense but that theyll get to
enjoy lavish retirements while the last
words from your dieing lips will
likely be Hello. Welcome to
Walmart because Social Security
will be nothing but a memory.
This snide disrespect towards the
religion and customs of the vast
majority of the American people on
the part of parts of the Legislative
Branch extends beyond the House
mailroom. It has even come to
infiltrate the symbols this branch of
government has adopted to
commemorate this particular holiday.
In so doing, it has attempted to
manipulate the meaning of the
occasion in the minds of the American
people.

On the Capitol grounds, each year a

stately tree is erected. As with
countless other trees the world over,
this one is adorned with a variety of
ornaments.
By tradition, the ornaments are
donated by the residents of the state
from where that years particular tree
originated. The 2011 tree came from
California. So hence the theme
California Shines.
CNSNews correspondent Terrence
Jeffery observed that, while the
decoration is a Christmas tree, other
than a reference to Psalm 19
symbolizing that the Word of God is
more precious than gold, not a single
ornament on the visible part of the
tree references Christmas as the
celebration of Christs birth. There is
also an ornament declaring how much
the creator of that particular bulb
loves President Obama, the figure
many concluded worthy of adoration
as a new Christ figure for no other
reason than that he emerged from his
mother's womb of racially mixed
pigmentation but who came up
disappointingly short perhaps even
more so than many other aspiring
pseudo-messiahs.
When informed of this incongruity,
officials from the U.S. Forest Service
and the Architect of the Capitol both
sheepishly feigned an unawareness as
to the nature of the tree's adornment
and insisted that there is no stipulated
prohibition regarding decoration
content. However, that does not mean
that hullabaloo surrounding the tree
will remain objective and neutral.

To get students particularly to

contribute ornaments to the tree
effort, a special curriculum was
developed. Yet if you assumed the
lesson plan was about how these trees
came to be replete with Christian
metaphor and symbolism, you are
sadly mistaken.
Instead, the Christmas tree has
become merely an additional prop in
the unending effort to indoctrinate
students with environmentalism.
According to Jefferies, the website
sponsoring the decoration contest
intones, "We ask that all ornaments
for the Capitol Christmas Tree be
made of natural or recycled
materials...There is No Away with
your students when they create an
ornament for the Tree. Ask students
where they think that trash goes when
they throw it away. Work with them
until they understand that trash
eventually ends up in a landfill. Show
students the image of a landfill."
Can't the students of today simply be
allowed to do something for fun
without being politically browbeaten?
Why ought they be made to feel
guilty for simply living and enjoying
their lives when greater examples of
waste occur at the levels fostering
environmentalism not so much as a
way to steward finite resources but
rather as a way to control those of us
deemed to be the lesser breeds of
man.
If we are to lead lives of constant
ecological vigilance as epitomized by
the constant admonitions to buy
locally grown produce, carpool to
work, and these guidelines insinuating

the environment will collapse if

ornaments aren't crafted from
recycled material, isn't one of the
most profound examples of
unnecessary excess the annual felling
of a tree and the shipping of it to
Washington, DC for no other reason
than to titillate Congresss sense of
Yuletide vanity?
Between 1964 and 1968, the tree
decorated was one planted
permanently on the Capitol grounds.
So in this era where environmental
concerns are suppose to triumph over
other concerns such as convenience
and enjoyment, shouldnt our socalled leaders set the example by
planting a permanent tree rather than
harvesting one at the close of each
year?
The U.S. government is divided into
three branches: the executive, the
legislative, and the judicial. Each of
these have played their own role as a
social irritant in the disputes
regarding Christmas.
The courts have eroded the JudeoChristian foundations of the legal
system through rulings such as those
removing Nativities and Menorahs
from public land and decisions
curtailing religious expression in the
public school system.
In this exposition, it has already been
examined the role played by the
legislature in fomenting Christmas
discord. Readers should not expect
the executive branch to go unscathed.
Regarding the other examples
examined thus far, each has been
about those attempting to undermine

the celebration of Christmas.

However, it seems the Executive
Branch may have gone overboard in
commemorating Christmas 2011.
During his ascent to power as well as
throughout the duration of his reign,
Barack Obama has consistently called
for shared sacrifice on the part of all
Americans in the hopes of getting the
nation through challenging economic
times. One would think such a plea
for austerity would result in the White
House erecting only one or two trees
not all that different than those
enjoyed by Americans in most of our
homes. And the cost for such a
decoration ought to come out of the
Obamas personal pockets given that
they are multimillionaires several
times over and it is doubtful they have
been burdened with picking up the tab
for their own Washington utility bills
while we let them bunk in the
servants quarters.
However, White House decorators
didn't exactly take the spirit of the
Charlie Brown Christmas special to
heart with that program's classic
message that even the scrawniest tree
possesses its own form of inner
beauty. Not only were thirty-plus
Christmas trees jammed under the
White House roof but also a
gingerbread house weighing nearly
500 pounds. I am sure it wasn't
wasted and was distributed for
consumption once it was no longer
needed for ornamental purposes.
When this incongruity of calling upon
the rest of us to give a little more up
for the good of the COMMUNITY
while she herself wallows and frolics
amongst extravagant opulence was

pointed out, Michelle Obama feigned

what a burden it really was dwelling
in the light of such splendor. The
First Lady assured the trees are really
there to uplift the spirits of the
struggling in America, especially the
unemployed and the families of U.S.
military personnel.
But try showing up unannounced
(even if you belong to one of these
two unassailable classes invoked to
nullify and evade nearly every form
of known criticism) insisting you are
there to see YOUR trees and see how
far you get. The only holiday
greenery you'd get to see after that
would be the mold on the bread in the
prison cafeteria.
The First Family spent the lion's share
of their Christmas vacation in Hawaii.
So few Americans get to see the
White House (as well as numerous
other sites around Washington, DC)
thanks in part to the security
procedures put into place as a result
of the Jihadist Third Worlders Obama
so admires in the darkest depths of his
heart.

other than for a sprig or two of

evergreen in the windows or on the
pillars for the tourists to take pictures
of from the sidewalk. But I doubt the
common American is even allowed to
do that anymore given that glorified
rentacops so inebriated on their trivial
amount of power that they don't
enforce properly enacted laws but
rather ones pulled from their rear
holsters.
Even though fewer and fewer
Christians or conservatives want to
admit to the existence of the culture
wars anymore either out of the
weariness that inevitably results from
nearly constant struggle or for fear of
losing any status they might have
gained as a result of silent
compromise, these disputes for the
most part have become a permanent
feature of American society. And
until the triumphant return of the King
so humbly born in that simple
manger, these disputes surrounding
the day celebrating His birth will no
doubt ring out as among that
conflicts most contentious.
by Frederick Meekins

There is really little reason for the

White House to be decorated at all