I judge the two preeminent interviews that Rob has completed as of late, to be the ones with Michael Del Rosso and Jim Patterson. In both, the guests made it more than copiously clear, that in the face of America’s current narcissism, where we seem totally captivated with either money, (the economy), or sex, (the contraception debate), that during all of this, is the seemingly abject failure by most all of our elected representatives, to adequately address foreign policy. Or rather, the failure of the politicians to permit the military to do its job, and to hold sacrosanct, the concept that the one position that both sides of the political aisle will not attempt to intervene in, is in the regards to the prosecution of a conflict. “The unforgiving minute,” is a phrase from Kipling that referred to certain times in war when the collective will of a people or an army can without warning collapse – critical moments that must be capitalized on. Thanks to the feckless pantywaist policies of politicians, our enemies in the Middle East are capitalizing on that axiom making the United States continue to repeat the one grave mistake it can no longer afford. It must have an established code of conflict that is easy to understand and leaves little room for error, while maintaining great room for flexibility. It must allow our servicemen to do what they were trained to do, and not turn them into construction workers whose uniforms just happen to be desert camo and bullet proof vests. It must let them keep weapons in their hands, not handing out ice cream and watercolor paints. There is room for that no doubt, but for another party, another time, one that follows after the men who’ve completed the call of front line duties. However, this approach to armed conflict seems to run deep in our history, regrettably.

America was still getting itself together when WWI broke out. Then, as now, there were those that falsely believed that if America just acted helpless, and simply kept a small standing army and navy, with little in the way of munitions, we would somehow receive a pass from the rest of the world. We were a little late to the party, taking three years and nine months for congress to take action, and only after seven of our ships were sunk by German submarines. Playing catch up, we were sending 10,000 G.I’s abroad everyday, and saved the day. Regardless of the warning of members of the military to the contrary, America was prepared to hammer its swords into plow shears, and once again rely upon the false notion that the “war to end all wars” had actually been fought. The military had to beg and plead to keep itself as strong as it was, when the eyes of the pacifists were once again awakened on the sleepy Sunday morning of December 7, 1941. Certainly there has been enough written and discussed, that it need not be reiterated here. However, the one thing that should be recognized is how “politics” began creeping into the manner in which we prosecuted that war. To some degree it was orchestrated out so that all of the allies were allowed to share in moments of glory. Much to the chagrin of men like Patton, who had to stop his advance into Germany, so that his fuel could be diverted to Montgomery, in order to allow him to catch up. Eisenhower angered a lot of our military leaders by failing to let the military do its job, and get it over with. Many have speculated that WWII in Europe could have ended many months earlier, had we heeded the advice of the professionals. We spent a lot of time and money fighting the cold war with the Russians, after again, failing to heed the advice of our military leaders, who warned of the dangers of not taking Prague, or Berlin, before the Russian’s could get there. History has written the correct but unheeded prophecies of those men.

The Korean War, or police action as well as Vietnam equally show the vain waste of human life, when the military is wrongly bridled with feckless policies of opinion poll driven politicians. This criticism is not pointed at any one political party. It matters not to me whether you are a democrat, republican, independent, etc. If you, who represents WE THE PEOPLE, are willing to send our soldiers into hostile territory, then it is incumbent to know what it is you want done beforehand. Having listened to the two interviews, it seems abundantly clear, that senators and congressmen should be required to attend a through briefing by the joint chiefs, so that they quickly and completely comprehend the threats from abroad, that WE THE PEOPLE, expect to be protected from. After which, it seems cogent for a code of conflict to be formulated given those threat assessments and understandings.

What then should be those understandings? First and foremost, everyone in a suit and tie should know what General Leonard Wood stated concerning the purpose of an army. “The purpose of an army is to fight!” The second point is to realize that of paramount importance is to make the number one goal of our actions, to be the defeat or destruction of our enemies. All other actions, no matter how well intentioned or noble they may be, are secondary, and must never conflict with the first goal. Thirdly, the goal must not require infinite resources, human nor financial, and twenty-year time lines to accomplish. Fourthly, our code of conflict can not nor should not be designed with the notion of political correctness in mind. It can not be drafted in order to make ivory tower elites or media personalities happy. It has to be predicated upon the notion of winning conflicts in the fastest manner possible, at the greatest cost to the enemy, and the least cost to us. It is understanding that all the hardware that has been developed, has been for that to transpire effectively and efficiently.

Our civilian leaders seem not to understand the nature of our enemy. Our “war on terror” is a misnomer. There has never been a war against a method, which was effectively fought and won. We are no more in a war against terror than our servicemen were in a war on “ Zero’s,” or “ U-Boats” or “Panzer tanks.” If we are to be gravely straightforward with ourselves, we would recognize that we are at war with Islamic fascists, more often than not from the Middle East, who have played on the frustrations of customarily regularly male, jobless young people, whose autocratic governments are unable to provide the conditions for decent employment and family life. A tiny group of Islamists appeals to the anxiety of the disaffected through a reflective and intransigent turn to a fabled Caliphate, in which religious purity trumps the material advantages of a decadent West and protects Islamic youth from the contamination of far-off technology and insidious ideas. Millions within the Islamic world daily scrutinize the West’s struggle against Islamic fascism. Somewhere within the recesses of their being, they perhaps would prefer, understandably so, and with some idealism, to live under Western-style freedom and democratic auspices. Their inability to let go I believe, is partly due to nationalistic, and religious reasons that has created an ethnic solidarity in this war, which ultimately seems to produce far greater resentment against a powerful America, even though it is America’s power that can bring the very freedom that the Arabs for decades, have declared they wished for. Correct code of conflict would not be bothered by such inconsistency. Rather it would make sure that it had not only overwhelmed the terrorists and their cohorts, but had done so in such destructive fashion that none in the Middle East might find such a repugnant cause at all romantic, bringing as it did utter ruin as the wage of the wrath of the United States. Therein has been the problem in allowing the empty suits to overrule the professional soldier. We always seem to stop short of fully achieving our objective. Politicians should formulate their plans first. Work out the details, and agree on what they want the end scenario to look like. Once they have done that, give it to the Joint-Chiefs, and then get the heck out of the way. But instead, suits with no skin in the game will flap in the breeze of public opinion, allowing the winds of conflict to blow in unnecessary chaos.

No doubt, given the recent turn of events in Afghanistan, an august body of men will gather together to formulate a new and revised code of conflict. One group will have experience, wisdom garnered from blood stained service, and braid upon their sleeves. The others will be in three-piece suits, checking their face book accounts, current public opinion polls, and scheduling meetings with their lobbyists. Mean while, our enemies are quietly gathering together, licking their collective chops, awaiting our “unforgiving minute.” That minute may come only when the spoiled and lazy elitists and the subculture of dualists they have spawned that keeps government ever growing, all suddenly find they have no power to their various entertainment devices, and see the headline news declaring that a couple of million people have just been vaporized. I pray not, but it is possible.

With a father who was a veteran of WWII and Korea, I grew up in American Legion Halls and VFW Posts, both here and in North Carolina. I’ve heard war stories that will never be made into motion pictures by Tom Hanks or Stephen Speilberg. The one fact I can count on, is that noble young citizens will always be asked, and will be ready to risk their lives for our country. They should not be expected to die for a code of conflict crafted in ignorance and forged in political correctness.

Subsequent to Drudge running the news, Schilling’s account of government-school deity-redaction also was featured on Glenn Beck’s The Blaze and Todd Starnes’ Fox News & Commentary, among many other major media outlets.

Web traffic from DrudgeReport.com to SchillingShow.com was so intense that it crashed the incoming server and alternate hosting arrangements were sought.

The Schilling Show extends gratitude to the Drudge Report for picking up the story and to Norm Leahy and BearingDrift.com who reposted it, accepting the incoming link from Drudge.

For an upcoming 4^th and 5^th grade performance at Albemarle County’s Broadus Wood Elementary School in central Virginia, music teacher, Jean Flaherty, has altered a key line from the 1985 Michael Jackson / Lionel Richie composition, “We Are The World.” In an effort to avoid offending non-believers, Flaherty overtly removed lyrical reference to “God.”

The second half of the first verse, as composed by Jackson and Richie, reads:

We can’t go on pretending day by day
That someone, somewhere will soon make a change
We are all a part of God’s great big family
And the truth, you know,Love is all we need
[emphasis added]

Flaherty’s edited version changed the third line:

We are all a part of one great big family
[emphasis added]

Seeking to further shelter her students from Biblical assault, Flaherty made an additional exchange. In a semblant reference to Matthew 4:3, wherein the devil asks Jesus to prove his divinity by turning stone to bread (Jesus did not succumb), the original lyric for verse three, says:

Send them your heart so they’ll know that someone cares
And their lives will be stronger and free
As God has shown us by turning stones to bread
So we all must lend a helping hand
[emphasis added]

Unable or unwilling to subtly alter this (somewhat convoluted) Biblical reference, Ms. Flaherty substituted a god-less verse re-written for We Are The World 25 For Haiti:

Send them your heart so they’ll know that someone cares
So their cries for help will not be in vain
We can’t let them suffer; no we cannot turn away
Right now, they need a helping hand
[emphasis added]

While instructor Flaherty reportedly has told concerned, inquiring parents that their kids are allowed to sing “God” in the modified verse if they so choose, the official lyric sheet does not reflect such an option. And, due to social/peer pressures extant in modern-day government schools, few children are likely to deviate from the rehearsed and distributed lyric in order to vocalize “God” over the suggested “one.”

Lost in the shuffle to shutter references to the Creator are the kids who actually believe that they are children of God, and for whom such blatant redaction, is itself, highly offensive.

There are many god-free alternatives that Ms. Flaherty could have chosen to emphasize the commonality of man, but in selecting a song that was too “offensive” to sing publicly without substantive modification, Flaherty has proven herself utterly tone-deaf to the sensibilities and presentiments of America’s vocal religious remnant.

Listen to We Are The World(ly), as envisioned by Jean Flaherty:

Full, revised lyrics as posted on Ms. Flaherty’s Music Class “homework” page:

There comes a time
When we heed a certain call
When the world must come together as one
There are people dying
And it’s time to lend a hand to life
The greatest gift of all

We can’t go on
Pretending day by day
That someone, somehow will soon make a change
We are all a part of
one great big family
And the truth, you know love is all we need

We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me

Send them your heart
So they’ll know that someone cares
So their cries for help
Will not be in vain

We can’t let them suffer
No we cannot turn away
Right now, they need a helping hand

We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me

When you’re down and out
There seems no hope at all
But if you just believe
There’s no way we can fall
Well, let us realize
That a change can only come
When we, stand together as one

We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me

(repeat)

We all need somebody that we can lean on
When you wake up look around and see that your dreams gone
When the earth quakes we’ll help you make it through the storm
When the floor breaks a magic carpet to stand on
We are the World united by love so strong
When the radio isn’t on you can hear the songs
A guided light on the dark road you’re walking on
A sign post to find the dreams you thought was gone
Someone to help you move the obstacles you stumbled on
Someone to help you rebuild after the rubble’s gone
We are the World connected by a common bond
Love- the whole planet sing it along

We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me

Norris, a pro-abortion Democrat, joined about 25 protesters at an April 12 rally on University Grounds to call for an end to feline intubation. This procedure allows medical residents to practice putting tubes down cats’ throats in anticipation of later using the technique to save lives of human babies.

According to a report in the April 13, 2012 Daily Progress, “Norris the Red” called the feline testing process “cruel and unnecessary.”

The Progress story clarifies that no cats have died as a result of the process. Dr. Sandy Feldman, attending veterinarian to subject cats compared the procedure’s aftermath to a “sore throat.”

Sadly, Norris’s concern for “cruel and unnecessary” procedures performed on cats does not extend to human babies, thousands of whom have been (and continue to be) aborted at the University of Virginia Medical Center—just steps away from the UVa “save the cats” rally.

Whether pleading for the comfort of cats or declaring the rights of trees, godless Charlottesville leftists, inspired by morally confused “leaders” like Dave Norris and David Toscano, continue to miss the forest for the trees. And while Charlottesville cats may now be more comfortable in life, Charlottesville babies continue to suffer unspeakable, torturous deaths (warning extremely graphic photo) in the name of “choice.”

Frederick, apparently not satisfied with TJPDC’s million-dollar, taxpayer-funded assault on private property rights (under the guise of regional “planning”), now is dispensing advice on how to squelch the speech of climate change “deniers.”

In a February 4 New York Times article about Tea Party activism and United Nations’ Agenda 21, “counterorganizer” Frederick openly presents her contra-constitutional game plan envisioned to mute citizen “critics” of the globalist green agenda:

Summer Frederick, the project manager for the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission in Charlottesville, Va., which withdrew its dues to Iclei and its support from a national mayors’ agreement on climate change late last year after a campaign by protesters, now conducts seminars on how to deal with Agenda 21 critics. (Among her tips: remove the podium and microphones, which can make it “very easy for a critic to hijack a meeting.”) [emphasis added]

While such a diabolical scheme could be effective if implemented covertly, Frederick’s hubris in brazenly discussing methods of disabling community dialogue at public meetings displays either abject arrogance or abject stupidity—or perhaps both.

As stated on its web site, the TJPDC has a noble purpose:

The mission of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission is to serve our local governments by providing regional vision, collaborative leadership and professional service to develop effective solutions.

Yet the TJPDC’s promised mission of “service” is perverted beyond reclamation when a $52,000 per year government employee (Summer Frederick), supervised by a $110,000 per year government employee (Stephen Williams), flagrantly works to promote an anti-American personal agenda while proposing the undermining of foundational American rights—all in the name of “planning.”

Mr. Williams, maybe it’s time to remove Ms. Frederick’s microphone, podium, and employment contract.

We had a night to remember at the abortuary on Commonwealth Drive…just around the corner from the Pregnancy Centers of Central Virginia.

Normally one or two pro lifers show up with their signs and their prayers. Today the parking lot was already half filled by the time the first pro lifer arrived. It’s easy to get discouraged and today looked like it was going to be another long night… but that is not what God had planned. Today was going to be different because the silent cries of the unborn were not only heard by God, but there was a response by his faithful servants.

Their names are not as important as their mission, but maybe you know them? Chaney, Avery, Martha, Christina, Steve, Katarina, and Lauren all gave up their evening to serve God on a very special night. A night that would reveal the weakness of men and the strength of God.

It started when Martha walked up the abortion clinic driveway which is shared by an accountant’s office next door and stood on the edge of the accountant’s grass. She invited the others to join her and quickly they formed what appeared to my eyes to be a pro life line of defense. The previous week the accountant had given Martha permission to stand on his land to reach out to mothers and fathers considering abortion. The clinic staff were furious and had been complaining about the presence of persistent pro lifers who refused to walk away or give ground.

And today was no different. The clinic staff came out and Martha told them they had permission to be there, but the permission wasn’t simply from the accountant.  Pro lifers had answered the call long before that accountant knew of their existence. Their permission was of a spiritual nature — they had permission from God who calls us to serve in Him a fallen world on the sidewalk and driveway of an abortion clinic that to the untrained eye looks like an ordinary house.

The staff didn’t take matters into their own hands just yet… instead they decided to call the police.

And soon four police cruisers were on site, but those courageous pro lifers didn’t surrender. Instead they all knelt and began to pray. It was beautiful to see courage in the face of conflict. The headlights of one of the police cars was shining on them as passersby in cars craned their necks to see what was going on in the abortuary parking lot, but those police headlights did not shine nearly as brightly as the light of God’s spirit in that parking lot.

That spiritual light burned so bright that not even the abortionist could ignore it. And we’re not talking about just any abortionist.

The abortuary is owned by Dr. William Fitzhugh who has been performing abortions across the state of Virginia for decades and has been a leading advocate for partial birth abortion, even going so far as to be a named plaintiff in a federal lawsuit to keep partial birth abortion legal.  Last year his clinics stole the lives of 3,733 innocent Virginians … 415 were babies from the Charlottesville community.

The clinic staff were hoping the police would solve their problem and remove these pro lifers from the premises.

The police called the accountant to confirm that he had given the pro lifers permission to stand on his property — not only did they have permission to stand on the grass but according to the police the dividing line was the middle of the driveway! The pro lifers could now stand even closer than they had imagined. As time wore on post abortive mothers and fathers began to walk toward their cars with pro lifers praying and holding signs closer than they had ever been in the history of the spiritual battle for life in Charlottesville. They were so close they could see the pain and the shame in the eyes of the mothers and fathers.

Those moms and dads were told that God loved them and could heal them. They were told about ministries that were waiting for them such as Rachel’s Vineyard.

This would have been a miraculous night if nothing else happened, but God was just getting warmed up. The doctor who had ignored too many pro lifers to count was suddenly acutely aware of their presence outside of his clinic. He walked out of the abortuary in scrubs and stood on the back porch of the house where thousands upon thousands of innocent lives have been stolen and looked at the pro lifers who could be seen from the back porch for the first time in his career aborting babies in Charlottesville.

And then Dr. Fitzhugh heard the same words he’d been hearing for weeks, “It’s not too late to change!”

But unlike all of those other days when he dismissed the pro lifers and went about his grisly work, today he responded to those words and walked toward them. “I’m sorry, I didn’t catch that?”

“It’s not too late too change!”

He shook his head and walked closer still, “I didn’t catch that?”

“It’s not too late to change!”

Closer and closer… and the words were repeated over and over until he was face-to-face with the pro lifers who were still standing there late into the night.

“You shouldn’t be bullying people out here!” Dr. Fitzhugh said with as much courage as he could muster, but he wasn’t dealing with his office staff or lukewarm Christians. He was standing nose-to-nose with servants of God who were sent to rescue the unborn, their parents, and him.

He was shown the picture of a baby in the womb and reminded that his job is to dismember babies who are defenseless against him and that is the definition of a bully. “I’m not a bully! I’m here to help women.” He retorted.

Dr. Fitzhugh, like so many other misguided physicians, has deluded himself into believing that abortion is good for women. Even when it was pointed out that a woman had left his clinic five minutes ago who was obviously in great pain and suffering he didn’t break from the script. A few moments later he was presented with another more powerful example when he was asked about a young Muslim man who was in his clinic last week begging and pleading with his girlfriend to spare their baby. That young man had come out three times to talk to the pro lifers who did their best to encourage him and told him to go in back in and rescue his child and tell his girlfriend that God loved her and that he loved her too.

We never shared that story because it was so painful.

When that young man drove into the clinic parking lot the look in his eyes are forever etched in my memory. I don’t know if words can adequately capture it, but I imagine it’s how I would look if I were lost at sea and drifting on an old piece of wood after giving up any hope of rescue — and then opening my eyes and seeing the distant outline of land. Hope… that is what I saw in his eyes.

He didn’t even bother to go into the clinic — he went straight to the pro lifers who were standing on the sidewalk and in tears he asked if they thought he was going to hell. He stated that he knew his girlfriend was going to hell, but he wasn’t sure if he would go there since he had tried everything to save his baby. He took all of the pro lifers literature and listened to their suggestions and went into clinic three times to save his baby.

And three times he came out unsuccessful and frustrated. I remember the sound of the abortuary door slamming shut after his third attempt and the look of disgust on his face as he sat on the steps and pondered the impending death of his baby. I was also feeling frustrated that nothing was working. Earlier in the day a pro lifer said with 100% confidence, “We don’t have to worry… God has this one under control. I don’t know why… but he does… it’s going to work out.”

I wanted to believe it, but after the third time I was running out of words. To be honest, I was running out of hope.  I thought about risking getting arrested and going into the abortuary myself and talking to his girlfriend directly. Maybe if I could look into her eyes she would know that her baby would be cared for even if it was a complete stranger. I asked God for a special intervention… even though I knew that God loves all of his children equally and is no respecter of persons.

I wanted to tell the world about the miracle of a young man who had friends he had never met waiting for him at the abortuary. I wanted to see the smile on his face and her face… but that’s not what happened. He went in a fourth time and we waited, and waited, but he never came out again. Finally we went home disappointed that we didn’t get to see a miracle that night, but we knew there would be other nights — even if we would never be able to erase the memory of a young man desperately trying to save his baby with the help of pro lifers who were praying and advocating with every gift God had given them.

I walked away that night convinced that somehow we had failed that Muslim boy. The last words I heard him say was that he wanted her to suffer for what she was about to do to their child.

And now we were staring at the doctor who stole that child’s life and played a role in destroying the relationship of a mother and father. I wanted to hear his justification for hurting a man who was powerless to save his child, but I wasn’t prepared for his answer.

“I know exactly who you’re talking about… she didn’t have an abortion that night. She changed her mind.”

Dr. Fitzhugh had no idea what he had just told us. Long after we had given up and gone home to begin the grieving process and question our inability to win the victory — God was still there fighting. And God was victorious.

This abortion story captures the weakness of men. Even when we’re told God has it under control we still manage to see the all ways that it cannot happen. How it’s just not possible. But God is faithful to the very last possible moment even after every human effort up to that point has failed.

The spiritual battle surrounding abortion is just another shining example of how God is triumphant.

“But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.” – Matt. 19:26

In a desperate attempt to justify his abominable pro-abortion, pro-Planned-Parenthood voting record, Houck invoked Thomas Jefferson as one who would support a woman’s right to “make her own decisions,” as reported by the Daily Progress:

“As we stand here in front of Mr. Jefferson’s Rotunda, one of the principles that Jefferson always espoused was individual liberties and individual freedom,” Houck said. “Well guess what, my opponent made it very clear in a debate last night that he stands squarely opposite of what I believe and what Mr. Jefferson believes: that a woman has the personal freedom to make her own decisions.” [emphasis added]

Principled men of Jefferson’s day never would have supported abortion on demand as Houck does. They recognized that children were a gift from God—not a “punishment” and not to be bodily sacrificed at the altar of personal convenience.

But Houck also got it wrong in attributing to Jefferson a favorable outlook on women’s “personal freedom.” In fact, Jefferson pictured a woman’s place as in the home caring for her children. He also opposed American women taking an active role in politics as he’d observed French women doing in their homeland. A letter to George Washington made clear Jefferson’s position on women in politics:

The manners of the nation allow them to visit, alone, all persons in office, to solicit the affairs of the husband, family, or friends, and their solicitations bid defiance to laws and regulation . . . [Few Americans] can possibly understand the desperate state which things are reduced in this country from the omnipotence of an influence which, fortunately for the happiness of the sex itself, does not endeavor to extend itself in our country beyond the domestic line.

Professor Edd’s historical ignorance does not end with Jefferson, however. In an October 4 Daily Progress story, Houck implies that the Bible can be interpreted to support abortion. He further states that morality and God’s word is not absolute, but rather, relative:

“I think [pro-life theology] is one interpretation of what the holy scriptures say. I think it is an abomination to pull the Bible and to use churches in the way that my opponent is doing in this campaign. It’s way over the top. The holy scriptures are something that each person finds their own way of understanding and believing in…” [emphasis added]

So much for Edd’s historical grasp—such wildly inaccurate statements indicate an extreme level of desperation in Houck’s flailing re-election campaign as well as his dangerous ignorance of Jeffersonian history and Biblically based Christianity.

Edd Houck: Desperate. Ignorant.

Desperately ignorant.

Mr. and Mrs. Smith, of Rose Hill Drive, were threatened by Zoning Administrator, Read Brodhead, with “legal proceedings” and fines of up to $5,000 if they did not remove the disputed sign from their property. The story was first reported by The Schilling Show Blog and later picked up by Newsplex. In addition, the Rutherford Institute, a nationally renowned civil liberties organization, was preparing a First-Amendment-based legal defense of the Smith’s right to free expression.

The city, unable to justify selective enforcement of its own sign ordinance, relented by placing an unstamped letter of retraction (text copied below) in the Smith’s mailbox after normal mail-delivery hours.

Congratulations to Mr. and Mrs. Smith for standing up against unjust government persecution, and shame on Zoning Administrator Brodhead and his department for their abuse of regulatory power.

October 4, 2011

Mr. and Mrs. Smith
Charlottesville VA

Re: Rose Hill Drive

Dear Mr. & Mrs. Smith

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that I have reversed my decision on the legality of the sign that is in excess of one (1) square foot, located on your property. After further reviewing the sign ordinance, it is my belief that the code section referred to is erroneous and thus inapplicable to your sign. You may keep your sign and still be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.

I apologize for any inconvenience that my earlier letter may have caused you.

Sincerely,

 

Read Brodhead
Zoning Administrator

On September 23, Mr. and Mrs. Smith, of Rose Hill Drive, were issued a Notice of Violation / Order of Correction by Zoning Administrator, Read Brodhead. The transgression? Erecting a sign in their yard, which reads: “Worship your faith, not your politics.”

Brodhead cites, in his notice, Zoning Ordinance Section 34-1047(1): “signs within residential zones shall not be greater than one (1) square foot.” The letter continues by threatening the Smiths with “legal proceedings” and “civil penalties” of up to $5,000 if they do not take “corrective action” (i.e. remove the sign).

Unreferenced by the Zoning Administrator is Section 34-1027(11), which allows “political signs” to be displayed in all districts without obtaining a permit.

Currently and recently, scores of Charlottesville neighborhood homes have donned signs bearing political and quasi-political messages including:

• End this War
• Save McIntire Park
• Support our Troops
• Wage Peace
• Attack Iraq, NO!
• Build the Parkway

Each of these exceeded code limitations for size, and most were up for months—if not years—without citation from government zoning administrators.

In past weeks, City employees have made multiple surveillance visits to the Smith residence in order to monitor the state of this infraction. But during this course, Brodhead, et al somehow managed to overlook a badly decomposed, city-owned curb and storm drain on the same Rose Hill property (photos below). These important infrastructure deficiencies previously have been brought to the city’s attention, but to date, there has been no remedial action taken or maintenance scheduled.

Read Brodhead and his City Hall co-conspirators unnecessarily have created a conundrum in deciding that this particular sign doesn’t qualify for Charlottesville’s vague “political sign” exemption. While the sign police may end up reversing course in this instance, someday soon, the city may be facing “legal proceedings” of its own.

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

__________________________

Of all the things that Americans could be doing to commemorate the September 11, 2001 radical-Islamic-inspired attacks on the citizens of United States, what might come to mind:

• Petitioning God for the healing and restoration of America (2 Chronicles 7:14)
• Teaching your children about the evil perpetrated on this day
• Remembering the blessings God bestowed upon America throughout her history
• Watching video of the 9/11 attacks in order to strengthen your resolve in the fight for liberty
• Visiting a church or synagogue for quiet reflection
• Face painting

Face painting? Yes, face painting.

For the third consecutive year, the City of Charlottesville, led by City Manager, Gary O’Connell and Mayor David Norris, are using City tax payer dollars to provide face painting for your kids, and to propagate a dangerous myth: September 11 is a time for frivolity and a day to celebrate “peace.”

Charlottesville’s ongoing participation in the “September Concert” events demonstrates utmost disrespect toward the direct and indirect victims of the 9/11/01 attacks, as well as toward all freedom-loving Americans.

Instead of this day being about remembering the victims of September 11th, it’s now about “the party,” as described in the City’s “September Concert 2009″ press release:

On Friday, September 11, 2009, across America and around the world, the skies will come alive with music as The September Concert Foundation organizes its eighth annual global day of music for peace. On that day professional and amateur musicians will perform classical music, jazz, rock & roll — all kinds of music in all kinds of venues — from parks and squares, schools, libraries, and senior centers.

The City of Charlottesville is proud to announce that they will be joining this global effort along with Monticello Media and Unity Church to promote peace and understanding on the 8th anniversary of September 11th with a concert to be held at Central Place on the Downtown Mall.

The concert will take place on Friday, September 11th from 4:00pm – 7:00pm and will feature the talents of The John Wyant Band, Laurence Elder and the Music Resource Center. Plus special performances by the Wordsmith Poets and the AHS Vocal Jazz Choir. There will also be free face-painting for the kids and participation by local dignitaries.

This is the third year that the City of Charlottesville has participated in this international event to form the largest free concert offered across the world.

The public is encouraged to join members of City Council and the rest of the community for the free concert of diverse music to promote peace through mutual respect, understanding and cooperation… one individual, one community at a time.

Seating will be available and the event will be held rain or shine.

For Charlottesville Communications Director, Ric Barrick, and his City Hall cohorts to reference this day as a day when “the skies will come alive with music,” is nothing short of vulgar.

Do they not comprehend that the skies were filled with death on that 2^nd date of American historical infamy? That the weapons of attack were fuel-laden, airborne American jetliners—filled with innocent men, women and children—purposefully directed into buildings filled with additional innocent men, women and children?

For the city’s press release to promulgate the idea that this concert will “promote peace through mutual respect, understanding and cooperation,” implies that the United States deserved the September 11^th attacks, because we did not mutually respect the attackers’ origins and their faith—that if we would just try to “understand” and “cooperate” with those who attacked us, we all could live side-by-side in “peace.”

The appropriate “understanding” for this day and beyond is that almost 3,000 innocent people were murdered in cold-blood on American soil in the name of radical Islam.

The appropriate “cooperation” for this day and beyond is not a superficial, externally-oriented global “pageant,” but rather, an internal resolve on the part of all those who love America and the freedoms for which it stands. As a nation, we all must be courageous enough to recognize and call out evil when we see it and to cooperate internally in fomenting its destruction.

Don’t be fooled by cheap advertising ploys, cute sound bites and “feel good” gimmicks. Don’t drink the peacenik Kool-Aid. Don’t trivialize the slaughter of your fellow citizens through attendance at events such as the city’s concert for “global peace.”

September 11 is not about peace, music, balloons, face painting, ice cream, or the like. Whether we are able to face it or not, September 11th is about murder, mayhem, destruction, chaos and evil. And all of us were the intended victims.

The downtown mall has weathered its share of controversy—pedophiles congregating at the children’s museum, violent teen-mob assaults, and reportedly random mayhem (reluctantly) have been covered by local media—yet the area remains “vibrant” and continues to attract core, teen and young adult constituencies.

What is the real image problem of the city’s “urban park,” a problem conveniently overlooked despite ongoing patent offense? Charlottesville’s Community Chalkboard: A Monument to the First Amendment.

A joint project of the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression and the City of Charlottesville, the controversial slate slab, touted as an homage to free speech, instead has become an unmolested harbor for vile invective, personal threats, base profanity, and ugly racial epithets. The wall’s unfortunate proximity to the Virginia Discovery Museum compounds the city’s quandary.

While such problems were foreseen by project critics, objections fell on deaf ears. Star struck city councilors who coveted a nationally recognized “monument” for their downtown pedestrian experiment, enthusiastically embraced the concept, simultaneously dismissing detractors’ fears. Years later, the critics have been vindicated, but there are no winners here.

Most recently, Charlottesville City Manager Maurice Jones faced harsh criticism for ordering city work crews to remove “lewd” images from the monument. Instead of public scorn being heaped on those who profane the public square, the city’s self-designated gatekeeper himself has been profaned by guardians of “free expression.”

Has Charlottesville City Government ceded its vaunted downtown mall to purveyors of free speech pornography? Is the Charlottesville downtown mall now appropriate only for NC-17 audiences? Can a family safely walk young children past the Community Chalkboard without facing embarrassing questions or risking loss of innocence?

How will we deal, if at all, with Charlottesville’s dirty downtown mall?

See the photo essay of graphic pictures taken at or near Charlottesville’s Free Speech Monument on the downtown mall (photos courtesy of Kevin Cox). Warning: contains adult content; no children, please.

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

But things can always be worse, and now they are. Introducing the internationalist City Councilor, Satyendra Huja!

Perhaps in attempt to out America-hate fellow travelers at Charlottesville’s August 20 Democrat Firehouse Primary, the self-described “Urban Turban”—a candidate for reelection to Charlottesville’s City Council—featured a disturbing display on his literature table: the United States and United Nations flags entwined in a quotidian vase of semi-fresh flowers.

Huja, known for his promotion of international relationships between Charlottesville and her “Sister Cities,” apparently was successful with his one-world, one-people campaign theme. His pandering, flippant dismissal of American sovereignty played well with assembled Democrats, rendering him the second highest vote getter among seven leftist contenders.

While most of his council cohorts have expressed admiration for the United Nations either verbally or in vote, none has so brazenly embraced the subversive, anti-American organization.

A sworn oath to uphold the United States Constitution (which Huja took) is not compatible with personal or professional veneration of the United Nations. Divided allegiance, especially among elected officials, is a treacherous position to maintain.

Click to see Satyendra Huja’s “international” table display:

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

Photo courtesy of Steven Latimer

The United Nations Pledge of Allegiance (with apologies to Francis Bellamy)

I pledge allegiance to the flag

Of the hallowed United Nations

And to the one-world Government

For which it stands

One organization, under Mother Gaia

With bondage and servitude for all

(© 2011 The Schilling Show)