Asian Conservatives - Latest Comments

Re: Simple Steps to Start Writing for AsianConservatives

Abigail Aaron — Wed, 16 May 2012 11:08:01 -0000

I find this information very usefull for making future decesions.It will be very helpful benefits for us and now I am well aware of its every aspecIts like you read my mind! You seem to know so much about this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you could do with some pics to drive the message home a bit, but other than that, this is great blog. A great read. Ill definitely be back.
Merchant Cash Advance

Re: NC State Senator Brunstetter’s Wife Accused/Denies Making Racially Charged Comments

David — Tue, 08 May 2012 10:57:53 -0000

Speaking of NC….in April, WHOLE FOODS opened a new store in Greensboro (next to the Apple store, naturally) and then proceeded to chop down 60 year old trees along Friendly Ave ---WTF!. Really?

They say they are “green” I guess they were talking about green-backs only. Though I must admit, my experience with Whole Foods is biased. The last time I was in D.C. we stayed in Alexandria (VA)…I was very annoyed that the dreadlock patchouli-wearing shop assistant was more interested in trying to up-sell me than simply help me find a few items we actually needed. My friends were in from Beijing and there was NO, and I mean ZERO mainstream product to choose from…everything was some fringe-version of reality. Hell, I just wanted to find some foods that my guests would not have a GI reaction to…there was not even cornflakes that looked normal. Whole Foods is a scam!

http://www.news-record.com/con...

Re: NC State Senator Brunstetter’s Wife Accused/Denies Making Racially Charged Comments

David — Tue, 08 May 2012 10:31:04 -0000

The YES MAGAZINE reference to Brunstetter's wife's racist comments is a blog, only. (Is this as credible as 'real' journalism?)
http://yesweeklyblog.blogspot....

-David
NC

Re: NC State Senator Brunstetter’s Wife Accused/Denies Making Racially Charged Comments

David — Tue, 08 May 2012 10:21:19 -0000

I just voted for the amendment this morning, then found the online references (YES Magazine) regarding Senator Brunstetter’s wife’s comments. Jodie Brunstetter’s comments are racist and I have no idea why the State AG was not pressed to suspend the Amendment from the ballot. Peter Brunstetter, a San Francisco native comes to NC and THIS is his real mentality? Outrageous! Neither side left nor right has said a word about this in the mainstream media. Marriage as defined as exclusively between a man and woman, sure; of course. What about common law marriage? That has been part of America and particularly in the rural South since the beginning. We in this office are beginning to feel manipulated by half-truths from both the left and the right. Brunstetter and his wife need to answer for these racist statements. Is this how elected officials spend their time and our money? Pathetic

-David
NC

Re: NC State Senator Brunstetter’s Wife Accused/Denies Making Racially Charged Comments

David — Tue, 08 May 2012 10:16:29 -0000

I just voted for the amendment this morning, then found the online references (YES Magazine) regarding Senator Brunstetter’s wife’s comments. Jodie Brunstetter’s comments are racist and I have no idea why the State AG was not pressed to suspend the Amendment from the ballot. Peter Brunstetter, a San Francisco comes to NC and THIS is his real mentality? Outrageous! Neither side, left nor right, have said a word about this in the mainstream media. Marriage as defined as exclusively between a man and woman, sure. Of course. What about common law marriage? That has been part of America and particularly in the rural South since the beginning. We in this office are beginning to feel manipulated by half-truths from both the left and the right. Brunstetter’s needs to answer for his wife’s racist statements.
- David
NC

Re: 9 Month Infant Forcibly Aborted by Obama Approved China One Child Policy Central Planning Authorities

Dk2852 — Fri, 04 May 2012 04:27:12 -0000

This has nothing to do with Obama you dumbass, quit blaming him for something going on in China. He met with Hu Jintao last year and one of the issues Obama specifically brought up was his concern over human right's violations in china, such as forced abortions.

You are deliberately twisting facts on this page to give a bad image to Obama, that is biased and unethical and you should seriously think before posting misinformation like this.

Re: NC State Senator Brunstetter’s Wife Accused/Denies Making Racially Charged Comments

GumbyDammit! — Thu, 03 May 2012 15:35:41 -0000

Par for the Republican course.

Re: God, Miley Cyrus, Albert Einstein, and Lawrence Krauss

Wolffang21 — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:21:16 -0000

Where did exploding stars come from? You obviously are lacking intermediate knowledge of the cosmos.

Re: Al-Qaeda Flag Seen Displayed/Flying in Libya

guest — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:37:47 -0000

Baghdad? do you mean benghazi? Under neath the flag it says 'the flag of Iraq, the Salafist state'

Re: Obamanomics: Half of New College Graduates Jobless or Underemployed

Ernald Macaraeg — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 23:15:07 -0000

I took out $250K in loans, so I can learn to change the world. Now, I demand the gov't to pay it off! Please.

Re: Photos Show GSA Official Jeff Neely Enjoying Wine, Soaking Spa Tub at Swanky Las Vegas Hotel

Lavaux — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 01:32:45 -0000

Are you really paying your fair share of taxes? Mr. Neely doesn't think so. If you were, he'd be drinking Moët & Chandon instead of the house rosé, and there'd be $1,500 per hour call girl in the spa tub with him.

Re: Photos Show GSA Official Jeff Neely Enjoying Wine, Soaking Spa Tub at Swanky Las Vegas Hotel

Disgusted — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 20:51:59 -0000

A picture is worth a thousand words, Mr. Neely. You don't have to say a thing.

Re: 9 Month Infant Forcibly Aborted by Obama Approved China One Child Policy Central Planning Authorities

Paweledman — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:40:26 -0000

ABORTION HAS TO BE FORBIDDEN!!!! OBAMA WAKE UP!!!

Re: Barack Obama: Radical-In-Chief

Wfleischer — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:35:30 -0000

We help Asian with there surety Bonding needs www.bfbond.com
over 60 years working close with minority Asian conservative contractors and business, helping them to succeed.

Re: Obama Misquotes, Misunderstands Bible

Christinamancinci — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:03:43 -0000

No obviously not.

Re: Day 20 Egyptian Hostage Crisis American NGO’s Held Captive Country in Chaos

zzzzz — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 09:58:49 -0000

good for you

Re: Andrew Breitbart (1969–2012) Rest in Peace

wuxiandis — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 03:59:26 -0000

So sad.

Re: Day 19 Egyptian Hostage Crisis: Americans Held Captive Awaiting Trial

LM — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:29:32 -0000

Makes me wonder why this isn't being updated daily in every newspaper and television news show. It's human interest in the face of an implacable crazy foreign government, right?

Re: Day 20 Egyptian Hostage Crisis American NGO’s Held Captive Country in Chaos

rickinva54 — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 06:07:54 -0000

I have set up a facebook page on the Egyptian Detainee Crisis. https://www.facebook.com/pages...

Re: Chinese Communist Dictator in Waiting Xi Jinping Goes to Washington

Ernald Macaraeg — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:32:25 -0000

Much of the media has highlighted the trip of this Communist princelings, but what about the recent Congressional testimony given by the wives of Gao Zhisheng and Guo Quan? Most people won't know them cause we're too busy "honoring" our Creditors with lavish attention. Who else is going to fund Obamacare mandates?

Re: Pro-Boxer Floyd Mayweather Uses Twitter to Make Anti-Asian Rant About NBA Star Jeremy Lin

Ernald Macaraeg — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:22:29 -0000

Even Spike Lee told Mayweather to "RECOGNIZE." Now, that's something coming from Lee, as noted by HotAir. Good on Lin staying above the fray.

Re: Canadian Prime Minister Courts China Regime After Obama’s Keystone XL Pipeline Rejection

Ernald Macaraeg — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:06:58 -0000

This is just a pattern that the Obama Admin has created. Who would have thought, in the case of the Near East, the Saudis would be looking to the Chinese to develop their nuclear power. The US is failing in both the prevention of an arms race, and the implementation of a common sense energy policy. Both intertwined.

Re: Obama: Economy Moving in the Right Direction–Wait, Not So Fast

Lee Adams — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 14:18:31 -0000

That's why I refer to the Democrat party in this country as deceitful, greedy and power hungry... at the expense of ALL of the American people.

Re: MSM Ignores Obama’s Latest Decree

dougindeap — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:30:22 -0000

1. Separation of church and state is a bedrock principle of our Constitution much like the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. In the Constitution, the founders did not simply say in so many words that there should be separation of powers and checks and balances; rather, they actually separated the powers of government among three branches and established checks and balances. Similarly, they did not merely say there should be separation of church and state; rather, they actually separated them by (1) establishing a secular government on the power of "We the people" (not a deity), (2) saying nothing to connect that government to god(s) or religion, (3) saying nothing to give that government power over matters of god(s) or religion, and (4), indeed, saying nothing substantive about god(s) or religion at all except in a provision precluding any religious test for public office. Given the norms of the day, the founders' avoidance of any expression in the Constitution suggesting that the government is somehow based on any religious belief was quite a remarkable and plainly intentional choice. They later buttressed this separation of government and religion with the First Amendment, which constrains the government from undertaking to establish religion or prohibit individuals from freely exercising their religions. The basic principle, thus, rests on much more than just the First Amendment.

That the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the text of the Constitution assumes much importance, it seems, to some who may have once labored under the misimpression it was there and, upon learning they were mistaken, reckon they’ve discovered a smoking gun solving a Constitutional mystery. To those familiar with the Constitution, the absence of the metaphor commonly used to name one of its principles is no more consequential than the absence of other phrases (e.g., Bill of Rights, separation of powers, checks and balances, fair trial, religious liberty) used to describe other undoubted Constitutional principles.

To the extent that some nonetheless would like confirmation--in those very words--of the founders' intent to separate government and religion, Madison and Jefferson supplied it. Some try to pass off the Supreme Court’s decision in Everson v. Board of Education as simply a misreading of Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists–as if that were the only basis of the Court’s decision. Instructive as that letter is, it played but a small part in the Court’s decision. Perhaps even more than Jefferson, James Madison influenced the Court’s view. Madison, who had a central role in drafting the Constitution and the First Amendment, confirmed that he understood them to “[s]trongly guard[] . . . the separation between Religion and Government.” Madison, Detached Memoranda (~1820). He made plain, too, that they guarded against more than just laws creating state sponsored churches or imposing a state religion. Mindful that even as new principles are proclaimed, old habits die hard and citizens and politicians could tend to entangle government and religion (e.g., “the appointment of chaplains to the two houses of Congress” and “for the army and navy” and “[r]eligious proclamations by the Executive recommending thanksgivings and fasts”), he considered the question whether these actions were “consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom” and responded: “In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the United States forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion.”

2. Questions about the government requiring or prohibiting something that conflicts with someone’s faith are entirely real, but not new. The courts have occasionally confronted such issues and have generally ruled that the government cannot enact laws specifically aimed at a particular religion (which would be regarded a constraint on religious liberty contrary to the First Amendment), but can enact laws generally applicable to everyone or at least broad classes of people (e.g., laws concerning traffic, pollution, taxes, contracts, fraud, negligence, crimes, discrimination, employment, and on and on) and can require everyone, including those who may object on religious grounds, to abide by them. Were it otherwise and people could opt out of this or that law with the excuse that their religion requires or allows it, the government and the rule of law could hardly operate. Thus, the government can forbid discrimination against specified people and apply that law even to those who say their religion allows or requires them to discriminate. In rare (one hopes) circumstances, such a generally-applicable law could put an individual in an ethical Catch-22 if it requires one to take actions one considers immoral. For just this reason, when such binds can be anticipated, provisions may be added to laws affording some relief to conscientious objectors.

Here, it may be questioned whether there is real need for such an exemption, since no one is being "forced," as some commentators rage, to act contrary to his or her belief. Employers generally are not required by law to offer health-related benefits to their employees, although the practice of providing such benefits is common. IF an employer chooses to offer health benefits, though, federal anti-discrimination laws and health plan enforcement regulations act to protect an employee’s rights under those health plans. So, depending on whether an exemption to the law is allowed, either employers or employees are put to a choice. If religious employers are exempted from current discrimination and health benefit laws so they can offer health benefits omitting some medications and services, employees can choose whether to accept such benefits or seek employment elsewhere. If current discrimination and health benefit laws are enforced, religious employers can choose to offer health plans complying with those laws or not offer any health plans at all. To the extent that employers already have an option under the current laws consistent with their religious views, they have less need for an exemption from those laws.

Re: Islamic Fascist Iran Sentences Christian Minister to Death for his Faith

Paul637 — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 01:23:51 -0000

Islam is the tool of mid-east dictators to reach power. The only reason that Islam was created, was so that Satan might have a foothold here on earth.