I apologize for the lurid title, but this is a lurid story.

Every divorced father, every non-custodial parent, and every decent, fair, compassionate person should both tremble and be outraged by the recent feckless court decision of activist Illinois judge, John R. Kennedy.

The now-lesbian ex-wife of Mr. Taro Iwata took him to court in Urbana, Illinois in a successful attempt to take their two young children, with whom Mr. Iwata is very close, to Eugene, Oregon to live with her and her lesbian partner.

Eugene, Oregon–a stone’s throw from the lesbian mecca of Portland, Oregon–is 1,800 miles away from Champaign, IL where both Mr. Iwata and his children currently live.

His ex-wife Karen Kelsky is a tenured associate professor of East Asian Languages and Culture and Anthropology at the University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign) who has decided that her self-serving and disordered desire to live with a lesbian lover across the country trumps her husband’s natural and legitimate desire to be deeply and regularly involved in his children’s lives and trumps her children’s needs, desires, and rights to be deeply and regularly involved with their father.

And apparently Champaign County Judge Kennedy agrees, for he has decided that Kelsky may uproot her children, take them far away from their devoted father, and settle them permanently in a household defined by deviance.

According to attorney Jason Craddock who represents Mr. Iwata, the Court found the following:

that the children’s best interests will be served by allowing the move because 1) the mother will be a “stay at home mom” (ah, yes, the quintessential picture of traditional domesticity: a fatherless home led by two lesbians) while her lover works (even though their standard of living here in Illinois is higher than their standard of living will be in Oregon); 2) the judge views the lesbian relationship as equivalent to a heterosexual marriage (even though neither the state of Illinois nor the state of Oregon views them as equivalent); 3) the judge found that the mother being with her lover will be a direct benefit that will enhance the children’s quality of life; and 4) the judge found that the presence in Oregon of the extended family of the lesbian lover was a factor warranting removal of the children in that neither the mother’s nor the father’s extended family lives close to Illinois or Oregon.

So now interactions with the extended family of a homosexual partner constitute a greater benefit to children than regular, frequent interactions with a loving, committed–and heterosexual–biological parent? That is a radical, subversive, insidious, pernicious, and stupefying idea. Toto, I have a feeling we’re not in Kansas any more.

The Court went even further in its efforts to undermine the fundamental human right of both children and fathers to be intimately involved in one another’s lives: Kennedy decreased the remaining inadequate summer and holiday visitation times.

Attorney Craddock explains that,

Even from a “coldly” legal standpoint, this decision is subversive. It flies squarely in the face of decades of removal jurisprudence in Illinois, as Illinois courts historically and consistently give great weight to the relationship enjoyed between children and their non-custodial parents, and typically allow removal only where the visitation time would either remain the same or increase after the move. Also, Illinois courts have never allowed removal where a custodial parent desired to move to a place in order to move in with a paramour or when such a move would lower the family’s standard of living. Courts have without exception allowed removal only where the new spouse or fiancee of the custodial parent lived away from Illinois and where the standard of living would be increased.

This decision clearly constitutes an activist decision, with Judge Kennedy going boldly where the Illinois legislature expressly declined to go before: the Illinois “civil unions” bill presented in the House of Representatives was soundly rejected this past year. Our elected legislature apparently recognizes a legal distinction between heterosexual married couples and same-sex couples. Judge Kennedy has taken it upon himself to confer legal status where it decidedly does not exist.

This tragic, unconscionable, deliberate rupture in an essential relationship serves the unholy desire of Kelsky who writes this about herself on the U. of IL faculty bio page:

My current work is on the lesbian community and the politics of transgenderism in Japan. I am at work on a book project entitled “The Personal is Personal: Reading the Lesbian in Contemporary Japan,” which is a cultural studies-based exploration of the major lesbian popular texts of the last twenty years, including autobiographies, zines, and pornography. I focus on the major sites of contestation around lesbian identity and subjectivity in this work, particularly around issues of butch-femme and sexual autonomy, coming out, privacy and visibility, and the question of sexual diversity. I have just finished a manuscript entitled “[Not] a Lesbian Feminist: Kakefuda Hiroko and the [Im]Possibility of the Lesbian Subject in 1990s Japan.”

Judge Kennedy’s findings reveal his likely underlying assumptions: he likely holds the unproven, highly arguable, a-historical theory that homosexuality is ontologically equivalent to race and morally equivalent to heterosexuality, whereas in reality homosexuality is both ontologically and morally equivalent to polyamory or consensual incest.

He also likely holds the unproven, arguable, a-historical, erroneous theory that “gender” is irrelevant to both marriage and parenting.

Perhaps most troubling of all is that he has arrogantly decided that subordinating the relationship of father and children to the profoundly disordered relationship of mother and homosexual partner serves the best interests of the children.

It’s a wonder that Kennedy can sleep at night.

Mr. Iwata intends to appeal this execrable decision. Please pray for his victory.

In a way, the following story is not breaking news. There have been reports in the media regarding problems with the Obama administration’s plan designed to assist homeowners. The “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” was implemented to give relief to those who have mortgages. The program was created to provide encouragement to individuals who found themselves in danger of losing their homes due to the economic crisis resulting from the falling housing market and the rash of foreclosures–which finds at least one out of every five mortgage holders in default or in foreclosure across America.

The current economic crisis–which plunged the nation into the deepest recession since the Great Depression of the 1930’s–was created because of reckless lending practices. Government-subsidized institutions, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, were helping to provide mortgages to many who could not afford them. Indeed, members of Congress, including U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts) and U.S. Sen.Christopher Dodd (D-Connecticut) led the way in their support of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which between them guarantees one in every two home loans in the United States. There have been allegations that both Frank and Dodd profited from kickbacks related to their promotion of Fannie and Freddie. But, to date, a Democratic-dominated Congress has been reluctant to pursue these allegations.

According to TimesOnline, in an article dated July 18, 2008, between July of 2007 and July of 2008, these two programs alone lost $11 billion due to foreclosures–which were guaranteed by American taxpayers.

“Fannie Mae was established in 1938 as part of Franklin Roosevelt‘s New Deal. As the US limped out of the Great Depression, the company was set up to kickstart the mortgage market and allow Americans to own their own homes. Fannie Mae’s role was to buy up mortgages and sell them on to investors, providing stability and liquidity for home loan firms. As a result, the secondary mortgage market was created. Within the secondary market, companies like Fannie Mae are able to borrow money from foreign and domestic investors at low interest rates because of the financial support that they receive from the US Government. Fannie Mae makes a profit from the difference between the interest rates homeowners pay and foreign lenders charge. Until 1968, Fannie Mae had a monopoly over the secondary mortgage market. But due to fiscal pressures created by the Vietnam War, President Lyndon B Johnson privatised the lender in order to remove it from the accounts. It then became know as a Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE). The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, known as Freddie Mac, also a GSE, was set up in 1970 to provide competition to Fannie Mae.”

An estimated loss of $5 trillion guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac created the economic crisis in which America now finds itself; a cascade effect occurred due to dropping home values and the subsequent foreclosures which took place when the housing market went bust. This, combined with skyrocketing unemployment rates–which have now reached double digits–has helped compound the number of Americans who currently find themselves on the brink of default or in actual foreclosure.

President Obama’s “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” (more commonly referred to as the stimulus package) passed by Congress earlier this year, led to the formation of the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan.” The latter program encouraged lenders to renegotiate interest rates with mortgage holders who found themselves in financial distress. Some suggest that the one in five American homeowners who find themselves on the edge of foreclosure have no one to blame but themselves. However, due to irresponsible and questionable lending practices, many financial institutions failed to adequately verify whether potential homebuyers could actually afford the American dream–owning one’s own home.

The Illinois Family Institute has learned that hundreds or perhaps thousands of Illinois homeowners have again become the victims of government inefficiency. The above numbers do not properly put this crisis in perspective; the failures of the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” must be related at a personal level.

The Illinois Family Institute has become aware of the fact that lending institutions were not properly advised as to who was eligible for the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan.” Here is an example of how the Obama administration’s plan to bring financial relief has led to a situation in which those who were paying their mortgages on time have now created a huge increase in foreclosures–which is expected to impact the housing market literally within months.

It is estimated four major home lenders control 56% of the housing market. Citibank is one of these institutions. The Illinois Family Institute has discovered, in a number of cases, verbal agreements were made with those holding mortgages which decreased their interest rates substantially. “In June, Citibank told me my monthly mortgage payment would be reduced by $426 effective immediately,” said a homeowner who preferred anonymity.

“I had never missed a payment and I had never been late on a mortgage payment. For the next three months, I sent in my monthly mortgage payment, which reflected the verbal agreement I made with Citibank. After a three month period, I began receiving documents which gave the appearance I was in the process of negotiating for the reduction in my mortgage payments–when I was led to believe back in June, I was meeting my responsibilities regarding the re-financing of my mortgage I had agreed to with Citibank. After a two month period of a back and forth documentation inquiries I was receiving from Citibank, I was then informed I did not qualify for the ‘Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan.’ Beginning in December, I started to receive notices from Citibank’s collection department which stated I was in arrears on my mortgage payments. To my amazement, Citibank was now demanding the $426 decrease for each month I sent in a payment after the June verbal agreement. Citibank told me I owed $426 for each of the six months I thought I was under the ‘Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan’ program.”

Essentially, Citibank was now telling these homeowners they owed Citibank in excess of over $2,500…even though they had never missed a payment and fully complied with the verbal agreement they made with Citibank under the assumption they qualified for the program.

To pour salt on a financial wound, which was of no making of their own, Citibank sent three notices to this family in December.

“We have one notice dated December 8th that states our loan is more than 30 days late,” said the homeowner, “but we did not receive this notice until December 15th. There is an 800 number on the letter, but no one ever answers the number provided. The next notice we received was dated December 4th and it said our account had been placed with collections. This notice included another toll-free number that no one answers either.”

What made this situation even more ridiculous is the fact the family received another letter from Citibank–which was also dated December 8th–thanking them for their “interest” in the mortgage modification. The communication from their lender also stated they were reviewing this family’s “case.”

Soon the collections agency began making daily phone calls to the family demanding payment in full. The homeowners were also notified their dwelling had been re-appraised and its value had decreased from $170,000 to $100,000. This is a practice known as the Computerized Valuation Method (CVM). A highly respected appraiser and expert in the field of home financing told IFI that CVM is a tool lenders use to determine the value of a home without an appraiser making an actual visit to the premises. This practice is possibly circumventing Illinois law which requires an appraiser to be licensed.

“This company is walking a thin line regarding the law in this case and they are certainly doing no service to the consumer,” said the licensed Illinois appraiser regarding this matter. “It is a proprietary program which some lenders use to determine the value of a home without any human ever visiting the property. Different companies call their CVM’s various names, including AVM (Automated Valuation Method), but they are essentially using the same method. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has asked homeowners to report these companies whether or not the homeowner agrees with the assessment which usually favors the lender.”

The Illinois Family Institute has learned this scenario has taken place many times over in Illinois and, according to reports, the “‘Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” has been inadequately administrated since its inception when it was signed into law by President Obama in February. Obviously, in the case above, Citibank was not aware of exactly who qualified for agreements, which has now put homeowners who were not in danger of losing their homes to default or foreclosure at risk. In the case above, Citibank went as far as to claim the homeowners themselves should have known whether or not they qualified to participate in the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan.”

In a story published by the Heritage Foundation shortly after Obama signed the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” into law, the group pointed out 12 problems they saw with this initiative. Amazingly, the article pointed to the possibility that homeowners who were not in default or in foreclosure might be lured into such problems through participation in it.

The Heritage Foundation writes:

“Two of the bill’s three key components are designed to provide subsidies and benefits primarily to homeowners who are still current in their payments… The first provision will assist those who may not be able to take advantage of attractive refinancing opportunities at lower interest rates because the value of their home has declined beyond the loan-to-value ratio permitted by rules governing mortgage investments made by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The second such provision of the plan would provide taxpayer and investor subsidies to mortgage borrowers who have taken on more debt than they could safely manage including, in some cases, credit card and automobile debt. The third component of the plan encourages the enactment of legislation allowing bankruptcy judges to alter the terms of certain mortgage loans, a practice that to date has been prohibited by federal law.”

Some say, and rightfully so, that individuals entered into mortgage agreements which they could not afford, and, therefore, they must suffer the consequences. However, in these economically depressed times, it is apparent there were those who were promised something the government could not provide or poor administration could not properly monitor. In such cases, homeowners–through no fault of their own–now find themselves in dire straits. There is an old adage which states: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. But the primary role of government is to protect American citizens, not to put them in jeopardy. It is clear the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” has thrown gasoline on a fire which was already burning out of control.

NOTE: Though flawed, the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” is free. The public must be aware of scams related to unscrupulous entities claiming to be part of this government program who charge for their services. Buyer beware!

Leah Ward Sears, former Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court wrote an opinion piece for CNN recently entitled “Stay Married if You Want Kids.”

Justice Sears notes the number of cases that came before her as a judge that were related to family breakdown. She witnessed on a daily basis the tremendous toll on society caused by indifference to marriage and rising out-of-wedlock births. Her recommendations for addressing this problem include stopping the “glorification” of single parenthood, respecting the role of men as husbands and fathers, revisiting state no-fault divorce laws, and offering children a reality check regarding the demands of raising a child.

Click HERE to read the full article.

Leah Ward Sears, former Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court wrote an opinion piece for CNN recently entitled “Stay Married if You Want Kids.”

Justice Sears notes the number of cases that came before her as a judge that were related to family breakdown. She witnessed on a daily basis the tremendous toll on society caused by indifference to marriage and rising out-of-wedlock births. Her recommendations for addressing this problem include stopping the “glorification” of single parenthood, respecting the role of men as husbands and fathers, revisiting state no-fault divorce laws, and offering children a reality check regarding the demands of raising a child.

Click HERE to read the full article. 

Cook County Judge Daniel Riley Issues a Temporary Restraining Order Against Illinois’ Parental Noticication Law

How radical is the ACLU? Well they and their allies at Planned Parenthood are frantic to stop any parent from being notified that their minor daughter is considering an abortion. (This law does not require consent.)

ACLU attorneys filed suit on behalf of abortionists claiming that parents knowing about their minor daughter’s crisis pregnancy, and therefore the availability of parental counsel would place “vulnerable teens” in a position where they suffer the possibility of irreparable harm. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, Cook County Judge Daniel Riley agreed with the radical ACLU.

Lost on Judge Riley is the fact that the vulnerability of teenage girls is dramatically increased by third party predators who have a vested interest in the wholesale slaughter of innocent pre-born life — and — who desperately need to keep those with physical and emotional ties, ie., parents away from their child. After all, who has her best interest in mind. As President Barack Obama emphatically pointed out, a daughter in a crisis pregnancy “shouldn’t be punished with a baby” for goodness sake.

Despite being fully vetted by federal courts, Judge Riley concluded that the ACLU had raised a “fair question” about whether the Parental Notice Act violated the Illinois Constitution. He thus ordered that the law be blocked from enforcement until such time as a full evidentiary hearing can be held.

Our good friends at the pro-life law firm Thomas More Society are reviewing their options in the wake of the decision and will be back in Court on November 19 to argue in favor of the law. This case is far from over, at least for the present. Tragically, however, Illinois teens in crisis pregnancies will continue to not be required to talk to a parent about the choices of giving their child life or death.

On September 12, 2009 something phenomenal happened in Washington, DC. Hundreds of thousands of taxpayers marched up to the White House to let their government know they have had enough. It was a rare spectacle indeed; Americans off the sidelines and in the game.

As you might guess the mainstream media has all but ignored them, and the radical left has taken their usual posture of denial and belittling.

By all first hand accounts, the crowd was civil, respectful, and orderly. Not a small aside when you consider crowd estimates range from 350,000 to 1.5 million. Whatever the actual count, the plaza could not hold the crowd, and the march had to start early just to make room for everyone coming in. Still, there were no stories of pushing or obscenities. One account contrasted this march to the inauguration, which was comparable in size, yet left their mark in trash.

If you can see clearly, you will notice that there are no visible high profile leaders in this movement; they are not coming to hear someone speak. They want to be heard, they want the powers-that-be to shut-up and listen.

Most came to Washington by privately chartered buses. Groups were organized by friends and neighbors. They are people who lead busy lives, they have jobs, and they are stable, respected figures in their communities. But what should worry congress more than anything: these are voters who no one will have to send a bus to get come next election.

They carried signs that read, “If you’re not outraged you’re not paying taxes,” “Congress pack your bags, you’re going home in 2010,” and then there was my personal favorite, “An angry mom is worse than an angry mob.”

People are angry alright. They are angry that their voices have been dismissed and they, the taxpayers who are funding the exploits of this administration are being characterized as Nazis and mobs.

Brian Ross of Huffington Post writes, “They are John McCain‘s people. His contribution to American politics. Yes, the white angst and anger that both the dyed-in-the-wool and the closet racists share was always there.”

Always the race card– not the fact that people are not happy with the fundamental change that’s occurring. No, its that he’s black. And anyone who disagrees with him is a racist.

Here’s the truth. Obama was elected because Americans were happy to elect our first black president. He was elected largely because he was black, not because of his policies (because no one really knew what they were, other than hope and change). Now that his policies are clear, his color is of no consequence. Crying race is nothing more than a shield to deflect any real criticism, a time honored tactic.

Ross goes on to say, “These are indeed Joe Wilson’s people – Ignorant 99% white Americanists who somehow feel that they are losing “their country.” They are easily manipulated. The GOP machine politicos who are organizing them want us to see a country in outrage against our black liberal socialist president.”

The GOP couldn’t muster up this kind of passion and protest if they wanted to. The GOP is on notice as well.

In true liberal hateful fashion Ross concludes, “What I see is pathetic: A rag-tag band of political puppets performing for unseen neo-con masters who pull their angst-strings, manipulated political Punch-and-Judys, dancing for the cameras with their placards and their angry white faces, screaming out childish cries like “Liar liar pants on fire” at yesterday’s “rally.”

Speaking of performing political puppets, all David Axelrod could say of the taxpayers concerns was, “They’re wrong.”

What the liberal elite simply can’t understand is that the folks who took off work to attend the tea parties, who drove for miles to attend a town hall meeting, along with those who came to DC in buses, are not beholden to anyone. They are simply tax paying voters. They are not activists; they are your grandparents and the guy who owns the hardware store, and they are off the bench.

According to CBS News, Dr. Diane Harper, one of the lead researchers for the HPV vaccine Gardasil, says young girls and their parents should receive more complete warnings about the vaccine’s risks and long-term effectiveness. Dr. Harper expressed concern that the CDC’s recommendation that girls receive the vaccine at age 11 would “put them at harm from side effects, small but real, for no benefit. The benefit to public health is nothing, there is no reduction in cervical cancers, they are just postponed.” There is no data indicating Gardasil is effective for more than five years.

Dr. Harper also expressed concern that patients are not being informed that the risks and side effects of Gardasil could occur “more often than cervical cancer itself.”

Dr. Scott Ratner, a physician, spoke to CBS News last year after one of his teenage daughters became seriously ill after her first dose. Dr. Ratner said she’d have been better off getting cervical cancer (often completely curable if detected early enough through tests such as a PAP smear). “My daughter went from a varsity lacrosse player at Choate to a chronically ill, steroid-dependent patient with autoimmune myofasciitis.” Other physicians continue to express concern that the rate of serious adverse events, including death, associated with Gardasil is at least as high as the number of deaths each year from cervical cancer.

Two years ago, the Illinois General Assembly was considering legislation to require Gardasil vaccination for all sixth-grade girls. With effectiveness beyond five years being unknown, those girls would have been potentially at risk while still in high school. IFI worked hard to lobby against this bill (HB 115 and SB 10), convincing enough legislators to drop the vaccine mandate in favor of a plan to provide information to parents about the vaccine, and leave the decision to vaccinate where it should be — in the hands of parents and their family doctors.

Other Senior Groups See Vast Increase in Membership

Founded in 1958, the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) has been the primary organization representing individuals over the age of 50. According to AARP, the group has a membership of 40 million and is listed as a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. The AARP includes a Public Policy Institute which promotes legislation related to those over 50 years of age.

AARP’s Mission Statement reads the group’s goal is “to enhance the quality of life for all as we age, leading positive social change and delivering value to members through information, advocacy and service.”

The AARP has come under criticism in the past for what many believe has been the endorsement of a liberal political agenda. More recently, the organization has suffered a public relations fiasco due to AARP’s seeming support of President Barack Obama‘s plan to reform America ‘s health care system.

An AARP spokesman admitted more than 60,000 individuals have canceled their membership since July 1st of 2009. However, AARP’s loss is good news for others.

A conservative alternative to AARP is the 60 Plus Association, a “nonpartisan seniors advocacy group with a free enterprise, less government, less taxes approach to seniors issues.” The group’s goals include ending the federal estate tax and saving Social Security for the young.

In recent weeks, seniors have turned out en masse at Town Hall meetings across the nation, voicing their opposition to what many believe would be a government take-over of America ‘s health care system. Medicare has been targeted for over $500 billion in cuts and this has united seniors in a way not seen since the 1930’s when World War I veterans sought promised compensation for benefits related to their military service.

Senior citizens are concerned that their Medicare benefits will be cut drastically as a result of the proposed health care reform legislation yet to be considered by Congress. Many experts predict those in their golden years will eventually face the rationing of medical services in order for the government to save revenue. Nearly 25% of Medicare’s budget is allocated on patients during the last year of life. According to the Obama administration, there are currently 47 million Americans who do not have any form of health care coverage, though this figure is widely contested. Most experts agree the coverage of nearly 50 million uninsured would come on the backs of the elderly.

When the health care reform debate first began, the AARP was out in front in its support of what most admit would eventually evolve into a government-run health care system. The thought of bureaucrats making life and death decisions for a significant segment of the population has put the AARP on the defensive in recent weeks.

During a recent Town Hall meeting in New Hampshire, Barack Obama added more fuel to the fire concerning the controversy surrounding AARP. Obama told those gathered his plan for health care reform was officially endorsed by the organization. The next day an AARP spokesman quickly denied the group had given its blessings to Obamacare, but the bleeding has not stopped regarding the exodus from the organization. Other groups representing seniors have also benefited from the flap over health care reform and how it would affect the elderly.

Founded in 2005, the Atlanta-based American Seniors Association (ASA) is also seeing a substantial increase in its rolls due to the exodus from AARP. ASA has offered a two year membership (for the price of one year) to those who turn in a torn in half AARP card. ASA was founded by Jerry Barton, a retired businessman and long time advocate of conservative causes.

It is evident what apparently appeared to be a windfall for the AARP has turned into something the organization wishes would now go away. But some believe the AARP’s monopoly over information and services provided to seniors was never a good thing, and the growing membership in groups which approach issues affecting seniors from an alternative political view is needed.

With each new generation of parents there comes a new generation of parenting books written by “experts” and “professionals” who purport to hold the key to successful parenting.

I can handle the onslaught of books and philosophies, but, personally, I bristle at the commercials with a young actor or actress extolling their parental virtue, “Talk to your child…he will listen,” reading their profound advice from a cue card. Whoever hired these people must consider the average parent to have the intelligence of a sack of hammers.

First of all, Hollywood is not exactly known for producing stable adults, let alone well-adjusted children. It’s as if they’re selling something, using their name and familiar face to persuade us to be good parents. If we are that shallow, our children need more help than a 60-second public service announcement can produce.

Notice you never see some plump, white-haired woman on a commercial saying with a smile, “I have raised eight children. Two are politicians, but the rest are happy, well-adjusted, successful adults. Here’s my advice…” Not even Dr. Phil can do that.

No, instead we get our advice from the stars. Lisa Whelchel, (she played Blair on “Facts of Life” years ago) authored a book entitled “Creative Correction: Extraordinary Ideas for Everyday Discipline.”

Parents don’t need creative correction; they need effective parenting skills and time to use them.

Unfortunately, due to the actions of a few, parents today live under a shadow of suspicion. Corporal punishment has been deemed child abuse by social workers and the nosy lady at the grocery store. No doubt, this is the conclusion of some “professional” who has only raised lab rats.

The problem with “professionals” who make these assessments is that they rarely have the opportunity to observe healthy, normal families. They tend to see only the families with problems and the extreme cases.

Then they draw conclusions and try to apply their theories to the rest of society, disregarding the methods of previous generations. Parents have used time-honored methods of discipline– not to harm their children, but to teach them and protect them from their own destructive childishness.

Raising children under the current politically correct system is like trying to raise chickens to live inside the house. When you strip parents of their respect and authority, you tie their hands behind their backs and leave them with only creative manipulation and bribery to coerce compliance.

A few years ago, I read about a desperate couple in Florida who went on strike to get their teenagers to help around the house. They pitched a tent, set up a lawn chair and TV, took the phone out to the driveway, and posted signs-“Parents on Strike.” Depriving teenagers of parental supervision–some plan.

I would be willing to bet this family lost that battle years ago when the children were still young enough to really care what their parents thought.

Reasoning with a young child who has not yet developed reasoning abilities can quickly digress into manipulation. Children, who learn manipulation (rather than respect) at an early age, become formidable foes as teenagers.

One “creative discipline” Ms. Whelchel advocates is placing hot sauce on a child’s tongue. My problem with this tactic is that it inflicts pain and possible injury for a minor offense.

Mouthy children or children who are trying on new words for size should be taught otherwise, but consequences coupled with an explanation on a child’s level works without danger of injury or the potential for abuse.

I prefer Grandma’s tradition. Give the small offender a chance to spit out any “dirty” words into the sink while explaining, “Those words are dirty, yuck. Get them out of your mouth.”

Then encouragement–“Spit! Keep spitting! Are they all out? Are you sure?” Always follow with a promise of help in the future.

“Okay, if I find anymore dirty words in there I will wash them out with soap for you.” A slightly soapy washcloth can quickly wipe out a budding new vocabulary.

Childishness is bound in the heart of a child, but it takes a diligent parent’s correction to drive it far from them.

Have you noticed that the liberal left keeps someone in their cross hairs at all times? They are like the bully on the playground who always has to make a spectacle out of the kid least likely to fight back. Their tactics are the same; isolate, belittle, degrade.

Take David Letterman for example, once a funny young man, now an obviously bitter old man trying to keep his ratings up with political jokes, by vilification of the President of the United States. With republicans out of office, thats no longer in vogue. So he looks around the playground and targets the new girl–Sarah Palin (and her daughter). The Letterman assault is a perfect example of how liberals attack and destroy– with a smile.

At long last, after public outrage, last week Letterman issued his apology–and it is accepted. May I point out that it took two tries? The first round, Palin didnt buy it–and rightfully so. It was a sorry excuse for an apology. By deflecting criticism in saying that his joke was not about her 14 year-old daughter, but rather about her 18 year-old daughter shows he is completely oblivious to the fact that her daughters, at any age, should never be target of crude sexual jokes.

Tina Brown, of The Daily Beast wrote a piece titled, What Hillary Can Teach Sarah Palin. Ms. Brown joins Letterman as a classroom example of how those in liberal media/entertainment expose their belief system–and impose it.

Brown wrote of her observance of Melanne Verveer being sworn in by Hillary Clinton as ambassador-at-large for global women’s issues. She writes, “Standing in the grand Benjamin Franklin Rooms amidst a sea of some 400 animated guests, most of them unostentatious women of stature and purpose, I felt someone should pluck the combustible Alaskan away from whatever rancid talk show she was headed for and make her watch a vignette of what real female power looks like.”

Aside from the slight by implicating that Palin has been on a round of talk shows (and this is a bad thing)– which she hasn’t– the “make her watch a vignette of what real female power looks like” comment is an astounding display of arrogance.

First of all, Sarah Palin is the Governor of Alaska. She was chosen as a presidential running mate in the Republican Party. I don’t know of Hillary rising on her own to anything other than Senator of New York. Even there, Ms. Clinton rode into politics on her husband’s coattails– the very definition of what feminists detest. There is a difference between powerful women and power hungry women.

Brown goes on to write, “The scene was a great snapshot of two battle-tested empty nesters, both handsome blown-out blondes in their early 60s, both wearing consummately safe alpha-female pantsuits, (Hillary in self-possessed powder blue, her new ambassador in respectful grey.)”

Self-possessed powered blue and respectful grey. Rare colors obviously found only in alpha-female pantsuits. Apparently, not available where Sarah Palin rented her wardrobe for the campaign trail–now returned.

Brown continues, “Does anyone believe that Palin really, truly thought Letterman’s sexual joke was about her 14-year-old daughter, Willow, not her 18-year-old, Bristol…?”

Why would anyone think any differently? He didn’t name her, but it was said about the daughter that was with her at the ball game– thus, Willow.

She continues, “Letterman’s joke may not have been his finest hour, but at least he swiftly apologized. Meanwhile, the nation’s hockey mom scores another goal for intellectual dishonesty.”
The truth is he did not swiftly apologize. It took two tries, and a public pounding. Notice, that when a conservative is offended at crude jokes it’s intellectual dishonesty?

She winds up her column with this advice to Mrs. Palin, “Take a leaf out of Hillary’s book, Sarah. Study up and shut up. If you were a real power woman, we wouldn’t be hearing from you right now, so soon after your vice presidential flameout. You’d be too busy preparing yourself for the day when you have something to say worth hearing.”

My advice to Tina Brown; turn off the old ‘I am woman hear me roar’ record, it’s worn out.

What both Brown and Clinton can learn from Sarah Palin is that real female power doesn’t have to look nor act like a man. It does not destroy life, it creates and protects it.

An interesting conversation has been ongoing in my house over the last few days. It began early last week, when I was informed of a statement made by my youngest daughter. She had expounded on her political views. With all the confidence and experience that accompanies eleven year old wisdom, she announced, “Me and Megan don’t think girls should be president!”

As a child of the sixties, I was absolutely positive this could not be MY daughter’s own philosophy. This had to be the work of peer pressure-plain and simple. This was obviously her girlfriend’s point of view; my daughter must have thought Megan– being a couple years older– was pretty smart and confident, and, therefore, right.

Besides, it’s not really cool to argue politics at that age. After all, there are really important things to talk about when you can still wear skates all day. It’s all about being “in” and “accepted” or at least that’s how I consoled myself when faced with my apparent failure as a mother and role model.

My comfort was short lived. I soon discovered that the majority of my daughters thought along the same lines as the 11 year old- that a woman should not be president.

Where did I go wrong? Had I not taught them to be confident, intelligent women? Had I not told them they could accomplish their dreams? Was this one of those weird mind-twisting episodes of “The Twilight Zone,” with me trapped in the seventies-while my own daughters had become Archie Bunker clones?

I realized it couldn’t be the seventies because the all the men in my house agreed a woman could make a good president.

A couple of the girls claimed that women would be too emotional, or not be able to react decisively in time of war.

I attempted to explain to my girls that some of the greatest world leaders have been women, like Golda Meir. (Note another disgrace; not one of them knew who she was.) I had to explain that Golda Meir had been a Minister of Labor, Ambassador to Moscow, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Secretary-General of Mapai, and that was all before she became the Prime Minister of Israel. Not to mention while serving as Prime Minister, she saw war and the slaughter of her country’s Olympic athletes, and acted decisively.

What about Margaret Thatcher? A woman admired by Ronald Reagan. Time described her as a “champion of free minds and markets” because “she helped topple the welfare state and make the world safer for capitalism.”

British historian, Paul Johnson, wrote of Margaret Thatcher, “Thatcher had supported in the face of sometimes spectacular opposition: free markets and free minds. The world enters the 21st century and the 3rd millennium a wiser place, owing in no small part to the daughter of a small shopkeeper, who proved that nothing is more effective than willpower allied to a few clear, simple and workable ideas.”

Somewhere along the way, I have failed to expose my daughters to great women of courage and influence.

The fact that we have a woman and a black man as presidential candidates is proof that this generation is does not suffer under the delusions of past generations who believed in the inferiority of race or gender.

If given the opportunity, I will do my part, vote, and actively campaign so we will have a woman elected to guide this country.

Neither gender nor race should be an issue; we are past that. Great women can be great leaders– history has already proven this. She alone has the experience to step into the presidency. She alone has run the country as a trusted advisor to the president for two consecutive terms. She has not been just a white house hostess, entertaining the wives of foreign leaders with tea parties. She has set policies, met with heads-of-state, and worked tirelessly with little fan fare as a mover and a shaker with power, dignity, and grace.

That’s why, given the chance, I want nothing more than to see Condoleezza Rice as the next vice president and role model for my daughters.

IFI has been warning you about the relatively new phenomenon of “sexting” and the fact that some local teenagers have been arrested on child pornography charges. While criminal charges are very serious business, one family’s tragedy has resulted in a campaign to bring awareness and pass tougher laws.

An 18-year-old high school senior sent a nude cell phone picture to her boyfriend that was meant for his eyes only, but ended up being viewed by hundreds of teenagers across several neighboring school districts. The student was devastated as she was bombarded with taunts and harsh names through social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook and in person. Last July, Jessie Logan hanged herself in her bedroom, leaving her parents childless.

“My only baby that I will never be able to touch again,” Cynthia Logan told the Cincinnati Enquirer in tears. “I will never have grandchildren. I will never be able to hand down my heirlooms. I’m just devastated by these parents that allow their children to do and say anything they want.

Cynthia and her husband Albert are now attempting to launch a national campaign seeking tougher laws to address “sexting,” the act of taking and sending nude or semi-nude photos using cell phones.

The couple also wants teenagers to know about the harassment, humiliation and bullying that can occur when the photos are forwarded beyond their intended targets. One in five teen girls say they have electronically sent or posted nude or semi-nude images of themselves online or over cell phones.

“Schools need to understand our kids are targeting each other and how technology is being used as a weapon,” said Parry Aftab, one of the leading authorities on Internet safety and cyberbullying working with the Logans. “None of them (the schools) know what to do. Many of them … think it’s not their problem.”

Scripture tells us to be careful how we live (Eph. 5:3-7). Furthermore, we are to avoid sexual immorality, including pre-marital sex, and to learn to control our own bodies (1 Thess. 4:3-6).

I thought they were adorable. Each one of our (then) eight children were dressed in matching outfits. The year was 1992, and the bright neon colors of the 1980s were still in full swing.

We were on our way to a parade. Not just to watch, but to participate. It was a gigantic world wide celebration; cities all over the world were hosting these parades called “March for Jesus.”

I made each one of the girls an adorable short ruffled jumper. They had a black background with bright red, green, and yellow neon print of popcorn, hotdogs, and cotton candy. Each wore a different color of tee-shirt underneath, with matching anklet socks and ribbons streaming from their pigtails. My oldest daughter got into the spirit and made a matching hat and scarf for her dog out of our left over scraps of material. The boys, their father and I, all wore matching red tee-shirts; I imagine we were quite a sight.

We arrived at the parade and were ready to take our place in line when my son noticed a stand just outside the entrance that was selling event tee-shirts — white tee-shirts. To my young son, this posed a problem; we stood out. Here was our family dressed in bright colors in a sea of white.  I, on the other hand, remained undaunted (and too cheap to buy ten new tee-shirts). Little did he know there was a method to my madness.

Nevertheless, my motives for dressing the children alike were the least of his concerns. Being a self-conscious adolescent, the only thing on his mind was the fact that we were breaking a cardinal rule-we stood out in a crowd.

“Mom, everyone is looking at us!” the boy said in dismay.

“Don’t be silly.” I said as I smiled at the nice family who stopped to pet our dog.

“Mom, I’m not kidding. If one more person stops to say how “cute” we are… I’m out of here.”

Then, it happened. A sweet older couple stopped to coo at the baby, and used the dreaded c-word again in my son’s presence-the boy walked ten feet behind us the rest of the day.

Although red shirts still bring back memories, my children are now naturally doing the same thing when taking their families into a crowded place.

By dressing them in bright colors I could spot one at a distance should one stray. Also, as an added benefit and (more crucial today) we looked alike. Most everyone passing by noticed that we all belonged together by the way we were dressed. My hope was that would make us a less likely target for anyone looking to steal a child. Plus, if we lost one, anyone who had passed us earlier would recognize the crying child and know what the group looked like that she (or he) belonged to; a priceless insurance policy. Not to mention, I had five girls in a row; it was just plain fun to dress them up.

It seems that there are more and more headlines with little girls’ names followed by the word “missing.” That is truly a parent’s worst nightmare.

While every parent would certainly prevent an abduction if they could, we need to at least look at some of the circumstances that would make an abduction easy.

First, a child’s bedroom mustn’t be seen from the street. If it is, and can’t be helped, it needs to have heavy curtains so that no one can see from outside that it is a child’s room.

Before buying or renting a house, go to www.familywatchdog.us to see if sex offenders would be living near you.

Cell phones now have GPS, and many have a “chaperone” feature that can be set to alert you if your child leaves the area you designate.

Children are not always happy about our protective measures. We embarrass them with our fussing at times, but that shouldn’t matter or detour us. We live in a time where missing children posters line the entrance of stores; the very least we can do to protect our children from the wolves that seek to devour them is not allow them to be easy prey.

We have a toddler in the house. It has been twelve years since I have had to keep up with such a ball of energy bouncing around the house looking for something to get into.

Nothing in the house is safe or seemingly out of reach. All plants have been Googled for toxicity, waste paper baskets have magically transformed into treasure chests, and the bathroom door now bursts open the moment I sit down.

I should have known it would be this way. Every couple of years, since the late seventies to the mid-nineties, we would have a marauding toddler running around the house. It wouldn’t take long before our little bundles of sweet smiles would soon be off and running, testing our grit. I should have known better than to invite a new one in, but we have always had a full house, and I missed it.

One of my toddlers loved to sing. I use the word “sing” only because that’s what she thought she was doing. Anyone else hearing her would not use that word to describe the sounds coming from this beautiful little girl.

This particular toddler found a way to use her love for “singing” to whittle away the time spent on a potty. Unfortunately, she also discovered the wonderful acoustics that public bathrooms have to offer.

Most mothers will agree the real test of potty training ability (yours) is shopping in a large store where the bathroom is a panic driven five minute sprint away. After one such power walk from the east to the west side of the department store, we got to the bathroom. I helped her up, and she shooed me out.

While standing guard outside the door, I heard her begin to “sing.” At first it was fairly quiet, then, she burst into full opera mode. I stuck my head in to give her the hush sign, but her indignation at my intrusion was quickly followed by a door slam.

People started walking by slowly, with furrowed brows, and glances of concern. After the longest ten minutes in shopping history, two store clerks and a manager came up to me with grave expressions on their faces.

“Can I help you?” the manager asked, with a tone of solemn condolence.

“No, thank you. We’re just waiting.” I said, with a smile.

“Is she hurt? Is she okay?” one clerk asked.

“She’s ‘singing,'” I sheepishly explained.

That phase lasted almost two years.

In many ways I was glad those days were behind me. Sleeping through the night is such a wonderful thing. So why would I miss the mess of a toddler?

I don’t. But my mother’s heart needed the companionship that only adoring baby eyes can bring. Since my birthing days are long gone, I adopted the perfect child for a menopausal woman- a four month old puppy.

She is now six months old and my children complain she has more toys than they did growing up; which is probably true. However, I quickly point out that she is happy with plastic, and she doesn’t want an iPod.

In many ways Penelope, our newest member of the family, is like a spoiled, only child. And I love it-she makes me smile when I don’t want to.

Raising a family can’t be replaced by anything on earth, and grandchildren are a delight. Still, as we edge toward that empty nest, this fur ball has brought our home the kind of laughter only toddlers can bring, even if she has four legs.

Even though I still can’t trust her upstairs alone, the bathroom must be monitored at all times, and she has an appetite for baseball hats, she is my perfect child. Birthed, nursed, and weaned by another, yet I hold her undying affection.

Her big brown eyes will never say good-bye as she heads off to college. She will never embarrass me in a public bathroom, ask to drive my car, or beg for a cell phone. She won’t use my makeup or borrow my clothes. She will never flash a bright diamond ring while telling me the date she plans to leave our home and change her name. And if she comes up pregnant- I will sell her children.

Frankly, I have heard enough doom and gloom about the economy. I realize it’s bad, but seriously, it has been worse. I haven’t seen one gas line yet, we are not rationing tires, and the price of milk has really gone down.

When things get out of control, there are natural forces that correct it. It may not be comfortable enough for our liking, but there are always opportunities even in the most dire circumstances, and, in fact, it seems the best opportunities come out of dire circumstances.

I don’t mean to sound crass or unfeeling. I’m going to miss stores like Circuit City and Linens ‘N Things. Everyday, it seems, holds news of another store closing or more people being laid off.

But this can be a time for new hope. No, not the kind manufactured by a politician– that’s a marketing ploy. I mean real hope. The stuff dreams are made of.  Most of us don’t really change anything until we have to. So, now we have to.

Since our families can’t manufacture money nor can we look at bank accounts dripping in red ink and honestly think we can turn it into black ink by taking the family on a spending spree to Disney world. We have real choices to make; we can either join the circus of gloom the media and our esteemed leaders are perpetuating, or we can tighten our belt and get creative.

About fifteen years ago, my husband and I made a hard choice. It came just a few years after I closed my own business to be a stay-at-home mom and care for our growing family. Together, we decided he too needed a career change. He left a number one position after 13 years in a well-paying factory job and went into police work.

Entry level police work in a small town means several part time jobs. The truth is, even full time pay for police work in a rural farming area falls well below the poverty level. For years he worked one full-time job and two (or sometimes, three) part-time jobs in police departments all around Douglas County just to make ends meet. Without a doubt, we would have qualified for every government program offered. But the government should always be the last resort, as it is seldom the best answer to family problems.

One way we survived those years was to develop a meal planning system that saved us hundreds of dollars every month.

First, we cut out most convenient foods like cold cereal. For the price of a box of cereal (depending on where you shop) you can buy a dozen eggs, a pound of bacon, and a pound of sausage. You may be surprised to know that oatmeal and other hot cereals are also cheaper alternatives to Lucky Charms.

Next, I figured out that the most cost effective way to plan meals was also a major time saver; grouping meals.

Take spaghetti for example– a basic family staple. Rather than buying a pre-made jar, look up an old family recipe. Or search online, the Internet is rich with recipes.

Once your sauce is made, you now have the basis for Lasagna, Manicotti, and several other meals. These usually freeze well, and, frankly, it takes just a little more time to throw them together and stick them in the freezer. Think of your own favorite recipes that share a major common ingredient like seasoned taco meat, for example, and apply the same principles. There is no waste because everything is used, and the second meal time preparation is cut by more than half.

There is a new twist to menu planning online at www.e-mealz.com. These folks have taken all the excuses out of menu planning. For about $1.50 a week, they give you a new menu plan based on the menu you want; you can choose by store, diet and family size. Each week there is a new menu plan that uses primarily products from the sale items from the store you chose complete with grocery list, and (the always appreciated) new recipes.

Innovation and hard work will see families through these turbulent economic times. Individual families will get creative and share their ideas. And, while it’s painful to watch now, a forest of new business will begin to sprout up among the ashes, like new growth after the devastating fire.