Thursday, April 30, 2009

Hope. Change. Yugo! "Fiat" money and Yugo Design Studio to Save Chrysler?

It looks like the Obama administration will print $8 Billion Barack Bucks and use Fiat to save Chrysler. Remember Yugo?
Guess who designed the car? The "Yugo" was an old Fiat 128 when it first rolled off the assembly line that produced the now extinct Yugo. The defunct factory is now owned by Fiat. Fiat and Fiat money. A marriage made in Washington, or Serbia. Engineering good enough for Zastava Koral should be good enough for the buying public. Hope, Change, Yugo.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Matt Smith Saves Snail Darter!

Or, that might as well have been the headline. I contend the category of "abused by the FLDS" is a small set. Yes, members of the FLDS abuse people, and I'm sure, as an organization, they've made their share (ok, maybe LESS than their share) of mistakes that constitute abuse.
Let's face it, if you make a mistake involving another person, there is some level of abuse.
The Kingman Daily Miner - KINGMAN - "Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard awarded Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith Wednesday with the Distinguished Service Award for Leadership.

Smith earned the award for his work with victims of abuse from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints."
This is really a "slow news day" smear. Since this whole nasty business started, I've never seen such a short list of "fresh" stories on the FLDS. One of my search routines is to only search the last 24 hours, and if I could, I'd search a shorter time frame, like the last 12 or the last 4 hours. It brings the new stuff to the top quickly.

It's a smear because in the dearth of news, the Arizona AG plunks out an "award" for Matt Smith, who is fighting a losing battle against Warren Jeffs and his attorneys before Judge Steven Conn. It is designed purely to put the phrase "Victims of Abuse from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints." Believe me, no one will remember that Matt Smith got that award, but in another instance of Jury Pool Poisoning, the word is read, and heard. That word being that the FLDS abuses. Thus the sound bite, the spin is FLDS=Abuse even though there are probably less real instances of abuse in the FLDS community, than in the population at large, by a significant margin.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Genocidal Politics

It works every time. Hat Tip to the Elusive Wapiti for reminding me.
Robert A. Heinlein:
"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."
Always revisionist, the historian writes the outcome in self serving fashion, because as the Pirates Axiom reminds us:
"Dead men tell no tales."
As Government aggressively acquires more power, the solutions become more the open pit, and the bag of lime. Your government is not going to warn you. They won't even teach you that the above things are true. When your times comes, you will just be forgotten, and buried.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

.50 Caliber FLDS Dreams

I know it's slow. I've seen a few droughts when it comes to "New Things To Blog About" regarding the FLDS. This takes the cake though. First there is the brainless purely sensational accusation that the FLDS are killing babies. What is the most obvious proof that they are not? Arizona, Utah and Texas would have been all over the issue from day one, and would have exhumed every tiny body in the "Baby Cemetery" referred to by "Boots" at her tedious, shrill and vacuous blog. It probably doubled it's "hit" total when I pointed to it. Believe me, I have my regrets. So here is my next regrettable link.
I won't even discuss the muck raking shill that alerted me to the post, but here it is. From FLDS Texas, rumored by some to be the blog of Natalie Malonis.* This information is gleaned from a recent issue of Eldorado Success, discussing Brooks Long’s deposition:
" '(Brooks) Long further acknowledged finding a cache of firearms, including .50 caliber rifles and a night vision scope.'

I have seen statements made many, many times that there were no weapons found at the Ranch and that the FLDS are known to be peaceful and would never resort to any kind of violence. The description of this find as a 'cache' is a little troubling. I’d like to know more about just how many were in that cache and who they were registered to. And what’s the need for a night vision scope? Is this hunting equipment?"
First of all, the term "cache" simply refers to a place something is stored together with something else, usually secret. Frankly, this is what firearms safety whiners always tell us we should do with our firearms. Store them secretly and securely under lock and key.

Next, the term is has been spun in the media to mean something large, despite the fact that it's origins are more for something small. Terrorists for instance stash caches of weapons for later nefarious and destructive purposes. What Brooks Long, et al discovered was a legal gun safe with legal weaponry in it. The "night scope" was probably an expensive low light telescopic site. You don't play with .50 cal weaponry with low resolution optics, it makes no sense. Whatever you have your .50 for, it's to "reach out and touch" something. Something a long way away. The owner was probably a shooting enthusiast. It brings up the related question of whether or not we would find a similar rifle in the possession of any of the Texas Rangers as a privately owed gun? Care to lay any bets?

Then there is this rather sensational omission. The real reason we haven't heard anything about the "arms cache" that Brooks discusses. Right after the discussion of the "firearms cache."
"None of the firearms were illegal, however, so none of them were taken into evidence."
Well, there you have it. Had the owner been arrested, or had this (these) weapons(s) been anywhere close to alleged evidence, also confiscated, they would have been laid out and photographed and paraded around like trophies. Read this way we know of a certainty, they were given back to their owner because they were legal, properly stored, rightfully owned (this is the United States) and their owner couldn't be tied even remotely to any crime.

*Those in the know, or who should be in a position to know the blogs author, refer to the author as male.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

"Rip 'n Read" Chief Executive, The President as Ted Baxter

With his recent teleprompter foul ups, I can only think of one character.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, April 27, 2009

Interesting Claim that the FLDS are killing Babies

Weird too, considering their doctrines. I have nothing to go by so, go by and drop her a comment. Or two...
From the "Executive Director at Americans Against Abuses of Polygamy" who calls herself "Boots." I'm tempted to make a joke about the "Executive Director Formerly Known as Boots," but can't quite work one out yet.
"I received an answer a couple of days ago to the challenge I have issued, for anyone to show me another city in the United States, of the same size, which has the same child death rate as Colorady City, Arizona, home of the FLDS.

Here is the resonse to the challenge:

I accept your challenge in regards to explaining the number of children ran over by cars in Colorado City.According to the NTSA the per-capita child pedestrian fatality rate is 1.6 per 100,000. Using their formula the rate for Colorado City is 1.79 per 100,000. Colorado City has a marginally higher rate than the rest of the country.This minute increase can easily be attributed to there being more children in that population than in other areas. For instance you used Lake Havasu so I'll use that population as well. Colorado City has 3.28 times more children age 15 and under than Lake Havasu. With over 300% more children there are going to be more incidences of any nature involving children.I look forward to your reply.

Here is my reply:

Are you telling me that Colorado City, Arizona has more children in it than the entire state of Connecticut? Just to be fair I compared Colorado City to an entire state, which had the same number of deaths, in the same time period."
I truly do not know where to start with this one. Maybe she's not getting responses because no one gives a flying rip. So I thought I'd help her out.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Chrysler in Carbonite?

I have a theory, about the news you may have heard that Chrysler may be going Chapter 11 bankrupt. It is said the Obama administration is "preparing a bankruptcy" for them.

It's a simple theory, and I may be wrong, but between the Bush Administration and the Obama administration, there has been talk of this since last fall. No one wants to try out bankruptcy on GM, they are the emperor's prize, so to speak.

They're willing to try it out on Chrysler though, so we (I work for a Dodge dealership) will be run through bankruptcy first, to see how it works. If we survive, then the public and the investment world will have confidence that GM will survive if it is done with them, as well.

I'll let you know, I expect to be frozen in Obama's "carbonite" by the end of the week.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Go on, Guess. Who reads this blog?

I don't have sophisticated tools (can't afford them) so I rely on tools that are free, like Alexa. So, who reads this blog? 50 year old men wanting to find spare wives?
Though it is an inexact science, since some provide inaccurate information or some don't provide any at all, people who browse the web tell tales about themselves, and those that know how to manipulate date properly, can extrapolate to an approximation of who is cruising a site.

What are the Modern Pharisee's readers like?

They are young adult women, heavily overrepresented in the 18-34 age group. I should get more dates right?

Oh, maybe THIS will explain why not. They are browsing mostly from home, and have kids. This is again, a heavy overrepresntation. It seems some fella has already found them.

They don't have much in the way of a college education.

Trying to make a lot of assumptions about this audience is foolish, but I know from my days in radio, that if I was attracting that sort of demographic, I'd have a job for life.

What the Modern Pharisees readers are not. They are not kids, they are not old, they are not men. What are they? Mothers with children, at home.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, April 24, 2009

Rozita Goes Over The Edge...(WARNING: EXPLICIT LANGUAGE)

Crazy? I don't think so? Evil? Dang close. Don't go further than "more" if you are sensitive to bad language. Remember, I'm ONLY QUOTING.

From Rozita Swinton's blog, "What Princess Says Goes."
"If I was a rude and disrespectful woman I would tell the fuckers taking advantage of her and others in my life where to stick it. I hate people who take advantage of others kindness. I hate greedy people who think they deserve it all. I hate people who try to intimidate others to get what they want. I hate bullies. I hate people who abuse there power in a position. I hate people who judge you when they don't know you. I hate people who try and sabotage your success. I hate people who will go out of there way to lie on you to get you fired. I hate people who lie to try to get ahead and oh yeah let's not forget the ass kissers you work or have worked with. I have worked with a lot of those in my short careers and boy are there lips big.

If you are a pushover reading this get some balls please not only does it affect you, but it also affects others around you who care and love you.

To those big headed bullies, assholes, ass kissers, greedy and arrogent pigs, blood sucking jerks, and incompetent people who have no life except when their gossiping. I know deep down you are miserable and knowing that makes me smile :) You are the ones who have to live with yourself and go to sleep at night knowing how you treat people each day. P.S. You suck!!!!!!!"
I do not have absolute proof that this is Rozita's blog, but if it's not, it's someone who knows her, probably very well and this someone wants us to THINK she is Rozita. So for my purposes, it is Rozita. She allows it and she encourages it, at the very least.

For those keeping track, that's 9 "I HATE's" which is rage folks, deep seated rage, barely controlled. There are two references to kissing behind, a rectum reference and an F-bomb (in a pear tree?) Christmas came so soon this year.

If you realize that "suck" in this context is not a mild word, but a fellatio reference, then pile another one on the no hold's barred venting she just threw out at the world. I keep emphasizing that if this woman is not dealt with, she will do what she did last year, and the year before and the year before, again and again. She keeps upping the stakes too. One day someone will get killed. It almost happened last year.

Armed with a phone, this woman is more dangerous than a roadside bomb.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

I'm 105,061st. Flirting with a milestone again...

Yeah, yeah, looks like bragging or narcissism but there's a point.
For those of you that follow this blog, primarily because of it's stances on religious freedom, the YFZ invasion and it's pro polygyny stance, it's a good thing that more people read this blog.

According to the commonly available "Alexa" rank, provided by "Amazon," the Modern Pharisee is averaging a worldwide rank in the top 400,000 this last week (398,663rd). I'm almost in the top 100,000 in the United States for the first time. That will be a first.

That's important. The more attention I attract, the better airing our mutual causes get in the public eye. The better the chance for legalized polygamy. Remember that if legalized polygamy had been the law of the land two years ago, no one would have cared about Yearning for Zion and their prophet would doubtless be a free man. As it is, we have mindless government destroying hundreds of lives and law being used to justify vendettas.

As long as I breath people, unless plain reason or scripture convinces me otherwise.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Nicole Gagne to remain "critical" for at least two weeks.

Please continue in prayer for Nicole Gagne. She is recovering, but severe injuries such as hers, can quickly take control of her health.
The Times-Argus - "Nicole Gagne, 37, (a Montpelier High School graduate) who went on to attend the Parsons School of Design and has become an internationally acclaimed jeweler, is in critical condition and expected to be in the intensive care unit for another couple of weeks, according to her father Peter Gagne of Barre.

'She's pretty well banged up,' he said on Wednesday. 'She's fighting fevers and infections right now.' "
Here is an inventory of the traumas Nicole survived.
"Gagne was brought to a local hospital, where they determined she had a broken jaw, cheekbone, hip, pelvis, ribs – one of which punctured a lung — and several other serious injuries."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Pharisee's job down the drain?

The Obama Administration is "preparing a bankruptcy" for Chrysler.
And I work for a Chrysler dealership.
FoxNews - "The New York Times, citing sources familiar with the process, reports that an agreement was reached with the United Automobile Workers union to protect pension and retiree health care benefits in the planned Chapter 11 filing, which could come next week.

FOX News wasn't immediately able to confirm the Times report, though talk of bankruptcy at the company is hardly new.

Chrysler, one of the Big Three U.S. automakers, has been hit hard by the economic downturn and has continued to struggle despite billions in federal aid and talk of an alliance with the Italian automaker Fiat."
Of course, Obama is protecting pension and retiree benefits for Union Workers, which quite frankly, are at the heart of the problem. It remains to be seen if Obama is simply bailing out the retirement plan, or buying it out. It looks as if April will continue to be a bad month. The good news is that it's a Chapter 11, providing the story is true. The bad news is bankruptcy is never good. It's just better than the remaining alternatives.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Living in the Past, and finding nuggets there.

I said the following on January 11th in a comment on one of my posts in which I interacted with a poster who sometimes seems as if he or she knows (or is) Rozita:
"David Doran knows that in fact the details of the compound are only possessed by those who have been there. This means that he, being one of the few that are not FLDS that set foot into YFZ, fed the information to someone. This means he knows that intimate details of the layout of YFZ are known to others, and he knows who they are, they could include Rozita Swinton, or someone who passed that information to her."
That was the third of several "possibilities" that I gave for how David Doran was so sure that Rozita, when calling the ranch, was using "Genuine Eldorado Facts" known only secretly to YFZ members, and of course him.

And of course whoever he told.

Which of course, he had to know.

Which meant he lied.

We now know that Rozita was coached by Newbridge Operator Jessica Carroll.
The Salt Lake Tribune - "(Jessica Carroll) did an Internet search for the words 'Barlow' and 'FLDS' and found a story about Barlow's conviction in Arizona on charges related to an underage marriage. She then asked the caller if that was her husband and the caller said yes, adding he had gone 'away for a while' but was 'expected back.' "
Ranger Long has standing orders to call if there is a call from the Ranch? David Doran, Ranger Long, Jessica Carroll? Theory three?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Rozita is a Dope(r)?

420. Rozita Swinton declares herself a pothead. No really, I'm not kidding.
At her blog she pots in "honor of 4/20." Also from Wikipedia:
"A large celebration is held every year on the University of Colorado's Boulder campus, with attendance reaching more than 10,000 in 2008. University police have tried various methods to prevent the gathering, including photographing students participating in the event, but the crowd has grown every year."
A dope smoking LDS Lesbian runaway phony phone caller? How weird will this story get before it's over?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

74 Page "Motion to Dismiss" filed for Warren in Arizona

This will take a long time to digest, I thought you might want to read it as well. Some, if not all of this motion may be cross filed in Texas.
Follow the Link. The address (url) of the motion says it is "to dismiss" but it seems to be a motion to supress, nearly identical to the one in Texas.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

What if YFZ had never happened?

It falls repeatedly on deaf ears, but I'll try it again. If the men of YFZ who are under indictment had been monogamists, they wouldn't be charged right now.
"Pedophilia is ILLEGAL you shout," to which I repeatedly reply "Yes it is!" And then go on to point out to the screaming opponent with their hands over their ears that they don't know what pedophilia is.

The simple fact of the matter is that Willie Jessop was right. A three year old can get married in Texas. In his testimony before the Texas Legislative committee, Willie also asked the question if any of the Representatives before him knew what the youngest age was for a person getting married in Texas. None of them knew. So Willie answered for them. His answer was a bit of a construction, but the point was simple. A three year old can form the words in his or her mouth that amount to a request to be married. They can possibly write them down and mail them to the court. The judge needs no more of a request than that, to rule in favor of a request to be married. That's a fact. Thus a 13 year old can marry in Texas. What she or he cannot do, is marry someone who already is married. Sex with a person who has been married is not pedophilia.

So we arrive at another point I continue to make. An older man or woman may enter into a monogamy with a minor. It is legal to do so. The resulting expected sexual relationship is then not pedophilia. A monogamist can therefore do, what a polygynist may not. They may marry a young person for the purposes of having relations with them. Because polygamy is illegal, a polygynist may not do so. Since they already have a wife, they are barred from such a legal relationship with the object of their affections. Oddly though, you can have an affair with a 13 year old, thus encouraging immorality, if that 13 year old is or has been married. Texas does, to this day, marry 14 year old girls legally. Once that is accomplished, she is no longer an object of a pedophile crime.

So, back to the original point. What if YFZ had never happened? It would never have happened if polygamy was legal and if the members of YFZ had taken the legal step of certifying their marriage to the satisfaction of Texas. Because polygamy is illegal though, they are under arrest for a felony. Texas was loathe to prosecute them for their polygamy alone, but happy to do so when there were younger brides involved. So the point is, make it legal and I'm no longer COMPLAINING that it should be legal, I'm doing something about it. Vermont Polygamy is now real. I'm a registered lobbyist with the state of Vermont. I filed the paperwork. They cashed my check. I'm on their website.

This will be expensive, but not nearly as expensive as having your familes broken up and your husbands dragged into court. It will not be as trying as having all your stuff broken into by SWAT teams with guns and axes. I daresay I can get the job done for a lot less than the $15,000,000 to $20,000,000 that Texas alone on it's side of the YFZ fiasco has spent trying to "get" those dirty rotten dozen dudes.

If this had happened 2 years ago. No YFZ. Or at least we could tell the folks at YFZ it's their own fault for not insulating themselves against attack. If Merrianne Jessop were legally wed to Warren Jeffs she wouldn't be state custody now. If polygamy was legal in 2007, Allen Steed probably isn't charged with rape, and Warren isn't successfully convicted as an accomplice.

If you want to come out of the closet and challenge your churches to accept you. Work with me, make it legal. If you don't want to be carted off in a squad car and have your life destroyed, work with me, make it legal. Vermont needs to have one word removed from it's current marriage law for polygamy to be legal. Let's get the job done, either by court challenged or legislative act. Come here, get married, go back to where you came from, free from the worry of attack.

Email me if you want to send a check, Hit the Pay Pal button if you want to donate electronically. I am deadly serious. We can do this. I'm the guy. Get off the fence. Stop whining. Let's do something. I am an official lobbyist in the state of Vermont. To my knowledge there is no one else in a position to get this done faster than I am and we are, right here, right now.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

And now, personal ethics on display. Remind you of something?

With the newest filing posted at the Mohave County website regarding the Warren Jeffs case, I have some observations.
It would appear, to my untrained eye, that this is roughly what happened earlier in the year when various attorneys "agreed" not to release certain documents about Warren Jeffs. Instead, they were released anyway to quite a furor and the press now happily refers to pictures of Warren Jeffs kissing Merrianne Jessop, pictures of Warren on a Motorcylce and to copies of "The Prophet's" dictations. From the "filing" or "acknowledgement" of the attorneys' pleading.
"The court acknowledges the filing in these cases of a Notice of Filing of Agreed Protocol for Attorneys' Eyes Only Review of Law Enforcement Recordings which is signed by all 3 attorneys involved in these cases. It does not appear that the Court is being asked to take any action regarding that pleading and it will not do so unless specifically requested."
So when all those documents escaped, that if my memory serves me, FLDS leaning attorneys wanted sealed, there was no court "order" just as there is no court "order" in this case. Everyone is on their "good behavior."

It seems that Matt Smith thinks Michael Piccarreta and Richard Wright know what good behavior is, and will abide by it. No one expects in view of Matt Smith's "pleading" that it will be he that releases the content of those recordings or those actual recordings. Again, relying on memory, which I will attempt to refresh throughout the day, and with the help of you, the good reader, there was not that same confidence in Natalie Malonis, et al, on the State or Attorney ad litem side of the equation. A feeble attempt was made to bolt the door after the horse was gone when such things began to appear on blogs and in the press. I would not be surprised at all to find that blogs like "FLDS Texas" and it's two predecessors actually turned out to be the blog of supposed advocate for Teresa Jeffs, Natalie Malonis. If true, that would mean that she is using the privilege she had back in the day, even now, to disseminate information that everyone "agreed" was "eyes only."

It then seems very likely to me, that Piccarreta could blow the lid off what was in those recordings or distribute them any time he wanted. If he cannot, very simply it seems that the Court in the person of Barbara Walther passively concurred with the leak of depositions, photos and journals in Texas. If Conn comes down like the wrath of an angry God on Piccarreta because he does something similar, it would show that prejudice on Walther's part, even more. In other words, I wonder what strength this "pleading" (as Conn terms it) actually has.

In other words, if you want something private in a proceeding, get it sealed or it's not going to be. If Piccarreta and Wright wish to burn their capital with Judge Conn, they can. The cost will be Judge Conn will not trust them before his court in the future as other Judges might not either. The problem for that interesting little experiment? I don't think Piccarreta or Wright will leak. We'll never get to compare Texas and Arizona. But it would be, "interesting."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, April 20, 2009

Weighing in on lightweights who weigh in on the "Motion to Suppress"

I wasn't going to dignify (or was it vilify?) the latest from a certain blogger, but that's ok, someone else did I like, did. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Why all those traffic stops and heavy Sheriff's presence in Colorado City?

They're just trolling for a teen with a bump.
The Mohave Daily News - "Sheriff Tom Sheahan promised that his sheriff's deputies will remain in the area to enforce the laws throughout the county. The sheriff also said there was a pattern of misconduct when six Colorado City police officers were decertified as law enforcement officers in recent years.

At the March meeting, Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith said his office will continue to look into allegations of sexual conduct with underage girls in Colorado City by members of the polygamist church."
What does this really mean? To borrow from Sean Hannity's "Liberal Translation" shtick, this really means "We don't know of a crime, we haven't found a crime, but we'll keep looking until we can charge someone with a crime."

Are they patrolling drug ridden neighborhoods with the same zeal?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Insight into why Polygyny scares the church MORE than Gay "Marriage"

It doesn't seem to make sense, does it?
Polygyny is a marriage practice of historical record in the Old Testament. Even if you think it shouldn't be practiced today, is polygyny worse Gay-Lesbian-Trans Gender couplings? Read why our brothers and sisters in Christ think so.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Personal Prayer Request List

If you would be so kind as to remember in Prayer, the following:

One of my sons is afoul of the law, as he often is. He resides in Butte MT and I have not heard from him for a while.

Continued effective prayer of the Saints for Nicole Gagne. She continues to recover but inside information points to some complications that may have resulted from her horrific injuries. Time will tell. Doctors have spoken early on of a "complete" recovery but people generally don't get crushed without some life long after effects. May Nicole's be the ability to forecast weather.

There is a meeting tonight. On the agenda will be my less than traditional beliefs. I won't say anything more about it other than your prayer for the men involved will be that there hearts and minds be open to God's will.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, April 18, 2009

So it's not Susan Boyle's first? "Cry me a River" was. Listen here.

It has been revealed that Susan Boyle was featured on a very obscure charity CD before her talent show appearance.

The article is here. She's VERY GOOD. Compare her to Julie London.

To Barbra Streisand.

To Diana Krall.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Susan Boyle Revisited

If you haven't heard the "Susan Boyle" performance on "Britain's Got Talent," it's time to listen. But first it's time to listen to others try, and then hear her succeed. Not just any others, acclaimed professionals. If you have heard her, it's time to do it again.

I have never heard nor been interested in attending a performance of "Les Miz" as Patti LuPone calls it. I suggest this order of listening to the various performances. First Elaine Paige, who Susan most wishes to be like. I cannot see why personally, but taste is taste and aside from her success, I would not be attracted to the song except for Susan performing it. Elaine would not have made me like the song. To her credit Susan does what I call "own" the song, and make it hers, and does not imitate (in my mind at least), Ms. Paige.

Next, listen to Ruthie Hensall. This by far and away is the best of the three performances IMHO that are presented as Susan's competitors.

Then listen to the owner of the song as it were, Patti LuPone. Her jaded assessment after many performances is instructive, and she attacks that cynicism in her own way. She engages in funny and creditable self effacement. No amount of understanding her own exhaustion and arrogance surrounding her stardom can equal a nearly 48 a year Scottish spinster fearlessly singing her heart out.

Listen to Susan and try NOT to cry. She is not sad. The performance is not tragic. You will in fact be hard pressed not to blubber. I failed. That was difficult to cover up at work, with the office door open, particularly when most have heard Susan's stunning work.

In the audience, Simon's expressions are the most fun to watch. His face goes to instantly wide eyed wonderment. He is clearly enjoying the performance, the rug having been pulled out from under all his negative expectations. It is as if he could see, for the first time, having been blind.

To do all this, you will have to go to a site that is run by someone I do not count as a friend, but in this case, I mostly agree with. Go here.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Gag order (agreement) placed on (agreed to by) Warren's attorneys

(UPDATED) I see nothing to be concerned about though I would dearly love to have a wiretap in Michael Piccarreta's office.

Matt Smith has moved filed an agreement that all audio and video recordings obtained and reviewed by Warren's defense are to be kept secret. I've gotten the impression all along that Michael doesn't try this case in the press.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Red Herring - "Pedophilia is not a religion"

Allegedly said by Representative Drew Darby of Texas.
I have this to observe. I know of NO RELIGION, particularly those of Judeo Christian origin, that define pedophilia. This has always been a matter of law. The thorny problem this presents for people who rabidly shake the finger and foam at the mouth over the horrible crime of pedophilia, is that it is just that, a crime.

Without the strength of law behind it, it would be no crime at all, and my religion (which is not FLDS or LDS or any of it's offshoots) does not forbid it. I'm sure a lot of you will begin to spit and speak at the audacity of this and drown your keyboards in saliva while you attempt to bang out an impassioned response, but it's nonetheless true.

The insulation from the acts we term "pedophilia" are the right of parents, and our concerns for children and the sanctity of marriage. Even society says no pedophilia occurs inside marriage, and as Willie Jessop so correctly pointed out, and as the Motion to Suppress correctly points out, marriage can occur down to three years of age. Even in Texas.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Update on Nicole Gagne, Good News.

The Queens Gazette - "Jewelry designer, and tenant in the building Nicole Gagne, (37), remains in critical condition in the Trauma Unit at Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan, where she was taken after an external staircase at the 5 Pointz building collapsed on April 10, trapping her under some 20 feet of bricks and debris.

Gagne, a graduate of Parsons School of Design, left her art studio at the building at 45-11 Davis St. at about 6 p.m. and was heading to the street when a 20-foot section of the staircase gave way on the third floor of the local landmark building, fire officials said."
Further on in the story though, there is a prognosis.
"Bellevue Hospital officials said that Gagne underwent surgery on Friday night and is expected to make a full recovery."
This of course, does not obviate the need for continued prayer, but we are grateful to God for his care so far. More from the NY Daily News:
"To help pay for her medical expenses, Cohen and other artists are organizing a fund-raiser, which they are hoping to hold within the next two months at nearby P.S. 1 Contemporary Art Center.

Write to for information on how to help Gagne."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

It is now CONFIRMED, call to CSPD about Rozita made DURING THE RAID.

Not after, as the lying affidavit in Colorado would have us believe, and as your Modern Pharisee has pounded constantly on the keyboard about, to anyone (read almost no one) that would listen since last year. During the raid. Reading directly from the motion.
"During the course of the search of these premises, a call was made to law enforcement Colorado Springs, Colorado, the area code of the caller's telephone. The first officer contacted recognized the telephone number as that of Rozita Swinton, a 33-year-old African American, single, childless woman, who had been previously convicted and was awaiting trial on charges of false reporting of child abuse in that jurisdiction and was under investigation in jurisdictioins from Washington State to Florida."
I had this story back in January as a result of my own investigative reporting. Texas knew about Rozita DURING the raid. Now we want to know, was it BEFORE as well?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Googling up a Crime to fit the order? I'm sorry Flora, I guess you didn't coach Rozita

This should be HUGE, but will it be? Dale Evans Barlow challenges the evidence on behalf of those under indictment in Texas.
The Salt Lake Tribune - "The motion says the caller refused to give shelter workers who spoke with her a last name, address or location in Eldorado, or contact telephone number and her cell phone number was blocked. She also refused to give her alleged husband's first name.

One shelter worker who took her calls did an Internet search for the words 'Barlow' and 'FLDS' and found a story about Barlow's conviction in Arizona on charges related to an underage marriage. She then asked the caller if that was her husband and the caller said yes, adding he had gone 'away for a while' but was 'expected back.'

However, in a sworn affidavit used for the first search warrant, Texas Ranger Brooks Long said Barlow was at the ranch, the motion says. Brooks also failed to disclose he had confirmed with an Arizona deputy sheriff that Barlow needed permission to leave Arizona as a condition of his probation."
Now this is the Rozita I know, and I humbly submit that after having interacted with her in the stilted dysfunctional way that we have, I know her better than anyone in the media. I can believe Rozita stumbled around providing inadequate information because she didn't known enough to do anything other than say "FLDS," or "YFZ" or "Eldorado." But that's OK, because Newbridge filled in the blanks for her. So there we have it, the witness was coached.

There's also an alarm bell ringing in the back of my head that says Newbridge had received special instructions about what to do if a call from YFZ came in. Check out this out:
Sore Toes and a Bleeding Heart - "They had their instructions: Upon first notice of a call from the YFZ Ranch, call Sheriff Doran's office.

And from Sheriff Doran's office, the other agencies were notified, and the plan was taken off the shelf and rolled into action.

Did they put an emergency trace on the NewBridge phone lines, and wait for more calls?

Did Sheriff Doran or Ranger Long hang around the NewBridge Shelter and coach the next conversations?"
They didn't have to, they had coached the workers, and they coached Rozita.

Furthermore, another thing your Modern Pharisee pointed out exactly a year ago, was that it was easy to check up on an emergency room visit fitting the description of "Sarah." Ranger Long calls, but there was no such visit to the emergency room.
"(Ranger Brooks) Long also 'failed to even make a single telephone call to corroborate or verify this caller's information' and, despite checking, was unable to verify her claim of recent treatment at the Schleicher County Medical Center, the motion says."
This screams bad faith.
"After being told no 'Sarah Barlow' existed, officers asked to interview all females between the ages of seven and 17 and were granted access to the ranch. That showed their intent not to 'seek evidence of a special crime' but to 'check evidence of any crime against the children present,' the motion states.

After three days of searching, there was still no sign of 'Sarah Barlow,' the motion states.

'It is clear that the authorities used a hoax phone call as an excuse for staging a massively intrusive raid upon a disfavored religious group,' it says."
NOW, we are getting somewhere.
"The sect's motion alleges law officers various misrepresentations or fact omissions in requesting search warrants used to enter the ranch and specific buildings, such as a temple, after receiving reports of alleged abuse. It also contends the search violated the mens' constitutional rights, the Texas' Religious Freedom Act and the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act."
This is going to send me back to do serious research on what happened a year ago. Updates to follow. There is a similar story in the Deseret News. Brooke Adams also blogs on this at the Plural Life. The question is, NOW will the press get on the conspiracy/set up/bad warrant aspect of the story?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

No one reports Drew Darby's threat.

During the hearing yesterday, Rep. Drew Darby (San Angelo) "got tired" of hearing Willie Jessop characterize the San Angelo Colosseum as a "Hay Barn/Stable." Willie apologized and stated that he really meant Fort Concho. Be that as it may, Drew Darby's threat, that elicited Willie's apology was that he and Willie would "Come to Blows" if Willie kept saying that.
Ok, it's all a little jostling by a couple of big country boys, right? Not really. I had a couple of email exchanges by email with one of those few people who is fair enough to act as a lens to both sides of the issue and ended up saying this:
"But (Drew) did mean something by it. It was a dominance gesture, and a successful one. He said 'I can threaten you with violence allegorically and get away with it.' If Willie had said the same thing in the same tone, he would have been arrested. It's like one dog walking up and peeing on the other dog. All Willie can do is lie down and whimper, because if he doesn't, they'll literally tear him apart."
And the effect indeed was immediate, because Willie went right to an apology. Again, going back to the dog illustration, I'm sure you've seen one growl and the other roll over and expose themselves in a gesture of submission and this in fact is precisely what happened.

I'm not impugning Willie's manliness or courage by observing this. I am pointing out that this was a form of public abuse that Willie had little choice but to accept if he wanted to remain a free man. Drew Darby knows this, he's both a lawyer, and a politician. In the WHOLE WORLD of media with access to the event, only your Modern Pharisee reported on this aspect of the hearings. I know of no other video or story reflecting this shameless exercise of pure power.

This should make you think about EVERY aspect of packaged news that you hear or read. It's not what your reporter tells you, it's just as much what they won't tell you.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Spend Then Tax, Tea Party Day USA (find yours here)

I don't know if any other wag has pointed this out yet, but it's no longer "Tax and Spend," it's "Spend, then Tax." It's like being taken to dinner, only to find that you've been stuck with the bill and your date has skipped out the bathroom window. Want to find out where your Tea Party is? Read on.
Cynical Vox doesn't think it will make a difference, but has the map up anyway for you to find your Tea Party.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Merrianne Jessop to continue role as sacrificial lamb

Apparently, everyone, the public included is willing to pretend the raid warrant was always for catching child molesters.
How quickly the mission statement changes, or is revealed to be what it always was. As part of the legal window dressing though, Texas needs to keep alive the idea that someone was being abused at YFZ. That's going to be Merrianne Jessop.
The Deseret News - "Family and Protective Services Commissioner Anne Heilingenstein said during a legislative hearing on Tuesday that Child Protective Services would seek permanent custody of the girl because efforts to reunite her with her parents have failed."
Remember, this is all coded CPS "Newspeak" that has words being used that sound as if an effort was made to get Merrianne back home, when in reality, the effort was to extort someone into testifying and to emotionally abuse the Jessops and Jeffs, both child and adult alike until someone "cooperates." If no one cooperates then Merrianne will never be returned.

She wouldn't be returned anyway since doubtless the things Texas wishes the Jessops to admit to would make Texas the monster, if they returned Merrianne. This is the classic kidnapping drama where you pay the ransom, or the child is killed (in this case kept). The problem is, the child will be kept if the Jessops cooperate, and even if they don't. This is where hoax caller Rozita Swinton comes into the story again.

Remember, the legal impact of releasing the last child, who had to be taken back in the first place, will be that Texas will have no pretext for the raid. As long as they pretend they can't "investigate" Ms. Swinton and as long keep Merrianne, there was an abuse, and there was a report of that abuse. No matter how ridiculous the rationalizations may get, Texas will hold onto both. The investigation of Rozita and the custody of Merrianne.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Has anyone read their Rudyard Kipling?

Jenny Hoff comes to see what Grits did, and what I saw too. The problem with the raid? CPS says "we didn't have enough power."

If you want a translation of what Anne Heilingenstein says in this report, it is "Had we been able to do the impossible, there would have been no damage." What Anne wishes could have been done was the imaginary painless surgical removal of the children she thinks were abused. It would have been OK that way. Yeah Anne, If I had wings. If I had a million dollars. If I were the Queen of England.

It is with good reason that some say "If" is the biggest word in the English Language.

KXAN predictably shows Willie Jessop's most uncomfortable moment, but not the blow up of threatening to "come to blows" issued by a member of the panel.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wacky Natalie Malonis is testifying right now.

Follow the link provided below in the Willie Jessop story.
She doesn't see how anything could have been done differently. How could she say that evidence was clear, when it has been acknowledged by the Judge testifying two witnesses before her that Willie was right? Texas can allow a girl to marry as young as three.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

UPDATED Willie is testifying. Physically THREATENED by Texas representative.

It is getting ugly, one representative (Hildebran, I think) Drew Darby suggested they would "Come to blows." Willie has made the interesting assertion that he has doubtless researched, that the youngest age allowable for marriage with judicial consent in Texas is THREE. The next witness, Judge Scott McCowan confirmed this is so. That seemed to shut things down, as no one on the panel knew that. The chairman is apparently declaring that he doesn't believe that Willie doesn't know certain facts, but they're asking him for hearsay. They have decided to swear Willie in. Willie is being confronted with the well known pictures of Warren Jeffs with Merrianne Jessop. Here's the link.
Texas. Stream 7. Willie was asked if he knows of underage marriage and he said he doesn't live there.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Texas is the Nascent Dictatorship, learning to walk.

Grits for Breakfast has an excellent post. We are on the verge of utter chattel slavery that I don't think even Scott sees. The solution to the abuses of CPS, as proposed by Harvey Hildebran, is simply to make the abuses of CPS, not abuses. I told you, you must be a friend of the FLDS in this matter, because to oppose them establishes a precedent that you cannot live with as parents.
"The bill also eliminates a requirement that CPS - when seizing children without a court order - make 'reasonable efforts ... with respect to preventing or eliminating the need to remove a child from the child's home or to make it possible to return a child to the child's home.' Under Hildebran's proposed language, 'the court may find that based on the circumstances no reasonable efforts would prevent or eliminate the need to remove a child and that the department satisfied the requirements ... even though the department made no efforts to prevent or eliminate the need to remove a child.' That essentially guts the requirement that CPS make a good faith effort to keep families together."
This is a stunning display of legislative arrogance and budding totalitarianism. If they can take your child, and keep your child on a rumor, they own you. Outright. You are no more than slaves.

It's not right for me to analyze the entire article. I will stop at this quote and the above observation. Go read the rest.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, April 13, 2009

Micromanagement? President Obama "Twice" authorized the "Use of Force."

This has bothered me since I first heard it.
KDKA/AP - "The Defense Department twice asked Obama for permission to use military force to rescue Capt. Richard Phillips from a lifeboat off the Somali coast. Obama first gave permission around 8 p.m. Friday, and upgraded it at 9:20 a.m. Saturday. Officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations said the second order was to encompass more military personnel and equipment that arrived in the Indian Ocean to engage the pirates."
This bothers me immensely. It shows indecision. To me at least, you pick your people and go with them. The idea that a Navy Seal needs me green light each and every time to do what I could NEVER do is ridiculous. It also shows a Carteresque micromanaging bind at the top of our decision making process.

I have never served. Obama has never served. Swift and effective retaliation for piracy is of paramount importance. You have to trust the people that know what they are doing when you have no experience of your own to rely on. Those that have served doubtless do this already and review performance afterwards, not manage performance during a crisis. I fear the damage is already done. Obama hesitated, furthermore the story that he hesitated is out there. Though this incident ended well, Obama as a result, will be tested again and American lives put in danger, or taken, as a result.

Consider that all you have to do to overwhelm a micromanaging "involved" leader, is start several fires on several fronts. This is the character that Obama has revealed to a world full of enemies.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Prayer Request

Nicole Gagne was nearly crushed to death over the weekend in a stairwell she had used time after time in the ordinary course of daily events in her life, she is recovering from the resulting injuries in NYC.
The New York Daily News - "Gagne rents a studio in the Davis St. building, which is festooned with legal graffiti and populated by artisans. Originally from Montpelier, Vt., she moved to the city in 1990 to attend the famed school, according to the Web site of her company, Leoworks. Her work is sold in expensive boutiques, but she has also donated profits from her sales to benefit women in India and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Witnesses said the stairs gave way without warning."
Your prayers are requested. Sources say Ms. Gagne's heart stopped more than once in the course of her resuscitation, rescue and emergency surgery.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, April 12, 2009

Childress and Schmidt talk, reveal they are "True Believers."

Well, it wasn't exactly rocket science though many doctrinaire members of the rabid opposition took issue with my analysis back in October. They will be gratified to know I got something wrong. Childress was no friend of the FLDS, he was a True Believer.
The Modern Pharisee October 25th, 2008 - "I am speculating here but it is sound speculation for someone as far on the outside as I am. If this is truly the case, I again repeat that Charles Childress may turn out to be, in the final analysis, a great hero for the FLDS, having stood up to Texas who seems intent on prosecuting a much larger number of cases.

You can imagine a meeting that goes like this:

'You're dismissing nearly ALL the cases Charles, WHAT'S UP?!?!'

'You have maybe three cases.'

'That's unacceptable!'

'You have maybe three cases, this is what you hired me to do.'

'You find MORE!'

'I can't.'

(Phone Rings, Governor Perry is calling on his cell phone)

'Pack your kit and git Chuck.' "
In this speculated phone call, I got the rolls wrong but the general idea right. Childress did want to pursue custody cases, right up to severing parental rights, but Texas did not.
The San Angelo Standard-Times - (Patrick) Crimmins said, (Charles Childress and Jeff Schmidt's) position was not supported by the CPS caseworkers involved with the families.

'It is true that after being assigned to assist in these cases, Mr. Childress and Mr. Schmidt urged that the pleadings in several cases be amended to include a request for termination of parental rights," he said. "This recommendation was not supported by the conservatorship workers assigned to work with the children and families in these cases in the field, nor was it supported by their supervisors.' "
My error was in painting anyone outside of Childress and Schmidt as caring about the children. This does not make them pro FLDS or even their actions as pro FLDS nor would it make me agree with their actions as actually protective of the children, but they do believe in what they are doing and they were trying to find cases where children could be "saved" and they had gotten to the point where they thought they had.
"As the state's investigation continued, both men said they saw evidence to warrant filing motions seeking termination of parental rights on a number of cases - at least 10 and perhaps more, the attorneys said.

Instead, they said, they were overruled by leaders of the Department of Family and Protective Services, which runs the agency."
So the conversation is actually more like this.
"Charles, how are you coming on dismissing those cases? I thought you'd be done by now."

"I've got ten I want to go forward with."

"I don't think you understand Charles, we lost that battle but we have guys under indictment, and this was never really a child custody case, it was a fishing expedition masquerading as 400 child custody cases."

"I can't lend my name to that." (actually said by Childress)

"Get rid of all of those cases Charles, except for this one and that one."

"I can't."

(Phone Rings, Governor Perry is calling on his cell phone)

"Pack your kit and git Chuck."
That is more or less the gist of it. It was never about backing the FLDS having their kids on either side of the argument, it was about moving on and it never having been about the children in the first place. The Childress position is that CPS should really define Child Abuse as it was defined for justifying the taking of the children in the first place, the state's position is "that was all for show, we have what we want, we have our indictments, the children would have been a bonus, forget it. That's pretty much backed up by the following:
"Ultimately...the situation became untenable as pressure increased from Austin to shut down cases, even ones with significant concerns."
So pressure came from the state Capitol to get rid of the cases. I'm sorry, but with this looks too much like Austin never cared about the children. Even Childress in his twisted way cared more about the kids than the state did, they were always just an excuse. Over two days I wrote the following about the Childress situation including the above speculation that maybe Childress had turned in favor of the FLDS. First there was "Childress Resigns. CPS in Turmoil." That was absolutely accurate.
"After three months the attorney hired specifically to handle FLDS cases has abruptly resigned. Such resignations don't occur unless something major has happened behind the scenes. I've pointed out before that when high profile figures in a department or case resign, it's done with the awareness of how it will look to the world at large.

Clearly the damage of a Childress resignation was outweighed by the damage that Childress would stay, so he resigned. Since the appearance of a Childress resignation is a sign of the total turmoil in Texas and their "persecution" of the FLDS, the resignation signals extreme internal distress at CPS.

What else could possibly be the meaning of a three month employee resigning in the biggest child custody case in US History? By concluding there is no one to pursue, Childress has said there was no case. At all."
Accurate, completely up to the last sentence. It should have read "By the STATE concluding there were no cases to pursue, they have said there is no case, at all." The same day I made another observation.
"The key here is that whoever is ultimately pulling the strings in the whole CPS/FLDS/YFZ fiasco, it has been determined from the top that the handling of the custody cases is a disaster. Since this is politics, the disaster part is determined by how it makes those at the top look. Charles Childress had NOTHING to do with the raid taking place, but still falls on the sword. Preceding him was Gary Banks, who WAS lead counsel at the time of the raid."
I finished with the following on October 25th:
"(A) rule of politics is that you don't make your constituency (your co workers in a bureaucracy) LOOK bad. This LOOKS bad, so it IS BAD. You don't DO it unless something profound happens because it looks that way and everyone will think it is for some earth shattering reason. Planned resignations take place with the outgoing head giving plenty of time and citing 'good reasons' and praising their peers. Tom Brady doesn't quit the Patriots during the introduction of the starting line up in the Super Bowl. It's DESTRUCTIVE. It's not what a career 'team player' does. Bureaucrats are CONSUMATE team players. They don't survive unless they are."
Now we know how true that was. It was an earthquake, just like I said it was.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, April 11, 2009

Friday, April 10, 2009

Vermont Political Action on Polygyny? $60.00. Winning the battle? Priceless.

The goal is to hit the ground running. The "Pay Pal" button is on the right. To that end I visited with the Vermont Secretary of State's office on 26 Terrace Street in Montpelier.

The likelihood of drafting a bill, introducing it into Vermont's legislature and gaining passage prior to the end of the current legislative session is very low. It's probably better than me winning the lottery, provided I buy a lotto ticket, but not much better.

The best way to gain legal status right now for polygyny in Vermont is to strike, through court action, the word "two" from the current marriage law of Vermont, as altered through SB-115. For that I need a test case, and I need donations. Pure and simple.

As a lobbyist in the state of Vermont, I can solicit money to any amount, and must report such donations at the time when I reach a spending level of $500.00 related to my lobbying activity. It costs a minimum of $60.00 to register for that activity, so I will be registering when I get $60.00 in donations which I am actively soliciting beginning NOW.

When I reach $500.00 in spending I am required to file forms with the State of Vermont detailing financial activity. That activity I will keep track of publicly, either here, or on some other public site.

This is your chance to be serious about legal polygamy which would detach polygamy from the myths of "child abuse," pedophilia and rape. I know you're out there, I know you fear persecution. I know you have in some cases, already been persecuted. If this had happened two years ago, and had this action been taken, such as I am taking right now, YFZ could have been averted.

Beyond money, I need legal help, preferably from inside Vermont.

Beyond legal help, I need a test case, preferably again, a "trio" or better from inside Vermont that wishes to attempt to register their marriage legally through the state of Vermont. This would involve going as soon as possible to Vermont and asking for a marriage license which would be denied based on the fact that it is to a man already married.

I will not promote a polyandry as a test case.

I will not promote a group marriage as a test case.

I will not promote a bisexual union of more than one woman with a man as a test case.

This effort will be to promote the union of one man with more than one woman legally in a relationship that is stated to be heterosexual.

The time is now. If you don't join with me and support this effort, you aren't serious about protecting polygyny or your families. It's entirely possible that if action is taken quickly, the first polygynous union could occur before the end of this year.

While the effort is ongoing to gain court approval, there will be an effort beginning in 2010 in Vermont's annual legislative session to strike the word "two" from our marriage law. That stands less of a chance of approval, but will gain attention for the cause.

I'm willing to go on point. Support me or don't complain about persecution. This is certainly one of the main reasons I have been moved to Vermont by the LORD our God. I cannot divine his complete purpose, but for me to enter the fray at this point I have little doubt of God's purpose. The outcome I pray, and I hope you will pray as well, will be in keeping with his best intents for us as believers.

I'm entirely willing to believe if you don't support me personally in this cause, you still support legalization of polygyny, but you would have to support someone. If that person is not me, I really think I should do less banging of my head against the wall on this issue. You, the reader, who alleges to support polygyny, I cannot regard as serious.

So support ME, in this cause NOW, or support SOMEONE and if you find that someone, let ME know who they are so that I can in turn support them. Support no one and I have to regard you collectively as dilettantes and ultimately cowards, at this moment of historic opportunity.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

AP/San Angelo Standard Times Headline seemingly at odds with article.

The headline says "Judge: FLDS leader Jeffs can't re-interview Texas officials" but the story says that it's hardly over.
"(Warren) Jeffs' attorney, Mike Piccarreta, said Thursday he would file a motion to specifically address re-interviewing the Texas authorities. Piccarreta wants to know when Texas officials found out that a fake phone call had triggered their April 2008 raid on the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints compound in Eldorado.

Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith has opposed the move to re-interview the Texas authorities.

Piccarreta had argued that the raid showed reckless disregard of the truth by Texas authorities and wants all evidence collected from the raid barred from Jeffs' trial in Arizona.

(Judge Steven) Conn said he won't rule on the request to suppress evidence from the raid until after a similar request in Texas has been decided."
So while headlines seem to declare a Piccarreta/Jeffs defeat, it's actually more like a lull. I've said before that I think Conn really doesn't want to do the work of a Texas court, if the Texas court will do it. It's my opinion that Texas will not rule in favor of Jeffs, and I'll bet Judge Conn shares that opinion, but if they did, Judge Conn doesn't have to and he's not going to get in the way of someone doing their job instead of him doing their job for them. It just makes sense.

Supposing that Texas does rule against YFZ evidence, Judge Conn can simply plumb the record for what he needs for his rulings. He also can't get evidence introduced into his courts that Texas suddenly no longer has to give.

Piccarreta is maneuvering. He ought to. It's his job and he hasn't a lot to do in the interim save to depose Sam Brower and Becky Musser in the last half of this month. He could have gotten lucky with his motions before Judge Conn, and that wouldn't have been bad. Hey, it was worth a shot, and it will be worth another shot, and there will be one. A shot that stands a better chance of hitting the mark.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, April 09, 2009

Texas-FLDS legislative hearing set for next week.

April the 14th, that's Tuesday.

The Deseret News:
"The Texas State Legislature's Human Services Committee will hear testimony on the state's response to allegations of abuse at the YFZ Ranch, setting the stage for a highly anticipated inquiry into how the custody case involving the Utah-based polygamous sect was handled.

'We will be there,' FLDS spokesman Willie Jessop said of the hearing."
If I were the FLDS I'd take pictures of everyone there. One is bound to be a secret enemy. Find out who they are.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

I apologize Rozita, Here is a more flattering picture of you in the Public Domain

Not wishing to offend, and believing the picture of Rozita in Cornrows to be her most attractive, I have found a classic work of art in the public domain to the best way to soothe her fevered brow, when I attempt to portray her. Meet the New Rozita.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

What did I tell you?

On me!
"[If the Court accepts gay and lesbian Appellant's argument for] separating the [marriage] statutes from their language and their historical foundations, the groundwork will be laid for other groups to claim the right to marry. The most obvious are polygamists and proponents of group marriage. Following the arguments of Appellants, such persons would have strong claims to fit within the 'purposes' of the marriage statutes."
Before the Supreme Court, Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell as found in the Rutland Herald.

Contact me now if you wish to start a group to push for the legalization of Polygamy in Vermont.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 08, 2009

Warning Teresa Steed. Patrick Crimmins is an effortless liar, don't believe him.

Texas is saying that it's no longer interested in DNA from Teresa Steed's child, and that it's "dropped the matter." This is one of those times I am tempted to employ an epithet, having had Patrick Crimmins lie persuasively and effortlessly to my face.
"Texas authorities confirmed to the Deseret News that (Teresa Steed) did not appear at a hearing scheduled Tuesday in San Antonio. Texas Child Protective Services spokesman Patrick Crimmins said that the girl was unable to be served, so they dropped the matter.

'We did inform the judge about our continued concern for the safety of (Teresa's) baby and that if she or the baby were located, we would come back to court if needed,' Crimmins said in an e-mail to the Deseret News on Wednesday.

(Teresa), whom CPS alleges was married to a 40-year-old man at age 14, has been defiant throughout the child custody proceedings. She gave birth to a child just after CPS returned all 439 children last year. She consistently refused to tell the judge over the custody case where her baby was, putting her at risk for contempt of court. At one point, CPS accused her of switching babies to avoid a DNA test and the agency demanded that she undergo a psychological evaluation.

That apparently never happened. At the same time the agency dropped the girl from court oversight, it also filed a court motion in San Antonio seeking a DNA test for her baby and some oversight over her to monitor her parenting skills."
I don't think that Teresa or those surrounding her believe Patrick in actuality. I'm just letting the rest of you know that the only way we can ever find out if they are trustworthy in this specific matter, would be for Teresa to believe Patrick Crimmins and CPS. If she did, and put her trust in their words, they would snatch her child for a bare minimum of the DNA test so quickly you would hear the sonic booms on the other side of the planet.

Hat tip to Biblical or Christian Polygamy.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

UPDATED - Rozita Loses It. Accuses Modern Pharisee of Herding Nerfs.

Pop goes the cork. (And you were doing so well at not giving me the time of day Rozita.) From her site: "I am writing this blog to anyone who visits my blog and the world." (UPDATE-Rozita went back into hiding like the little coward she is. There is no page in cache and she has blocked the blog to bots so this link no longer works and there is no place to direct a user for a copy of the page)
"It has been almost a year that I have been stalked and harassed by Hugh Mcbryde who supposedly lives in Burlington, VT who is originally from Montana. Due to his obsession with me I would like everyone to know that if anything happens to me to consider Hugh Mcbryde a suspect along with any other possible suspects at the time."
Round-round-round-round I get around...That would be born in Durham NC, moved to Lexington KY, from there to Kwangju (that's the way the spelled it back then) South Korea, Decatur Georgia, Seoul South Korea, Daytona Beach FL, Winter Park FL, Twin Falls ID, Helena MT, Fairfield MT, Kalispell MT, Butte MT, Belgrade MT, and now Vermont. I'm a Travelin' man. Rozita, I'm not obsessed with you, I'm furious that law enforcement will not investigate you. You instigated the largest case of Child Abuse in United States History, as far as I know, and you show no regrets whatsoever.
"I know very little about this man I will include what I do know just in case he needs to be located and Law enforcement have something to go on. He is a 55yr white scruffy looking male who has a website supposedly he is married (or wanna be.)"
I am married. "Scruffy Looking?" Next thing you know she'll call me a "Nerf Herder."
"I will not remain silent or a victim of his and others behavior. I have had racial comments and threats towards me from Hugh. I have never meet this man and his obsession has gone too far. Technology of the internet is growing so rapidly we have yet been able to keep up with laws to govern the internet and computer crimes unless it involves a minor. My advice to all is to be internet safe; DO NOT add friends you don’t know and do not open letters (postal service) from people you don’t know. Last but not least Do NOT be afraid to report individuals who are stalking you or people you may know."
Racial comments? Such as? My only racial observation is that Rozita makes a poor candidate for a member of the FLDS as I know none of them who are black. I have in fact, bemoaned their racism.

Bring it Rozita. I haven't done anything to you legally because I have no standing but if you come after me, I will have standing. Please. I'm BEGGING you. I'd love to get all tied up in a civil lawsuit with the biggest child molester in this country's history.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Vermont House Overrides Gay "Marriage" Veto (UPDATED)

The House vote was 100 to Override the veto, 49 to sustain. I listened to the vote via streaming, FoxNews and CNN also confirm S-115's passage.
Polygamy could easily be next. It is one word and one court case away in Vermont.

Hitting the vote total exactly at 100 suggests the outcome was not in doubt, and all those not needed were released to vote politically to sustain the Governor's veto.

Since the debate is over, I will be removing most blogs referencing the subject. Vermont now joins Sodom, Gomorrah and Gibeah as the first states to legalize gay marriage through assent of the governed.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Why the Vermont Veto of Gay "Marriage" will be overriden (UPDATED).

Vermont Public Radio has an analysis of the upcoming veto override vote in the Vermont State House. The Senate has overriden the veto 23-5 as expected according to the Times-Argus.
"Backers of the bill need 100 votes today in the House to override the governor's veto. Middlebury College political science professor emeritus Eric Davis thinks there are several things have to happen for supporters to reach this total.

First, he says the 5 Republicans who voted for the bill last week need to support the override motion.

Davis thinks this will happen because, unlike other override votes in recent years, the Governor has made a conscious decision not to pressure the Republicans to support his veto..."
This means the Governor is walking the tightrope of trying to have it both ways. It's like he's saying "Stop, or I'll write nasty letters" as opposed to "Stop, or I'll shoot." For the moralistic Republican Crowd (which in general I would have to identify myself with) this amounts to a sop and a real chance. A sop in the sense that he's not fully behind it. It's not like the Governor is going to go out and strong arming party members to hold the line. It's a real chance in that anything can happen. I have been given numerous examples of Democrat/Liberal legislative posturing in this state's recent past that has bills brought to the floor, only to flop in embarrassing ways. This is Vermont, not DC.

Vermont's moralists do in fact stand a chance of holding onto enough votes to uphold the veto. I doubt they will do so if they do nothing, and it's by no means a sure thing that the can sustain the veto if they turn up the heat full blast, but they have a chance. If though certain Democrats opposed to the bill initially, and Republicans, change their votes, it will be because of the window dressing of slightly "substantive" improvements to the bill.
"Bennington Senator Dick Sears - the chairman of the Judiciary Committee - explained that there were only a few changes between this version and one that cleared the Senate last month. Sears said one change made it absolutely clear that religious institutions are not obligated to support same sex marriages.
'(Sears) For example, a same sex couple who wants to get married under our new version wants to use the Knights of Columbus hall. This would allow the Knights of Columbus to say no.' "
This sets the stage for departures from Governor Douglas' unenthusiastic veto of SB-115 and for him to have it both ways. He will be remembered by Moralists as being the man who stood by Traditional Marriage. He hopes that GLBT types will forgive him as doing what he had to do and because it's a long time until his next reelection campaign, sorta like Senator Max Bauchus of Montana voting against the gun lobby right after he was elected a few years back. He was right. By the time he was up for reelection, people had forgiven or forgotten.

The House is debating the Veto right now, and until it is over, you can listen HERE. One of the debate points being made is that the issue will keep coming back, until it passes. The Vermont House overrode the veto, 100-49 as noted above.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, April 06, 2009

Governor Douglas Vetos Vermont Gay "Marriage" Bill

Setting up an override showdown tomorrow morning, Vermont Governor Jim Douglas exercised his constitutional power to kill SB-115.
More at "Vermont Freedom to Marry"

This sets the stage for an override vote. Here is the "Green Mountain Daily's" take on the fight:
"If the pro-equality Republicans hold - and that is a big if (when it comes to Republicans, I am generally highly cynical these days... hopefully I'll be proven wrong), given that Rep. Westman joined their number, that would leave pro-equality 4 votes short, assuming everyone is there (and I'm still hopeful that some of the no-voting Dems will get the - ah - blue flu).

One vote, as has been pointed out already, could come from the Speaker. And the other three may already have lined up. It's already out there that no-voting Democratic Representatives Sonny Audette (South Burlington) and Debbie Evans (Essex) are indicating they will vote for the override as a matter of respect for the process, if not a change of heart on the bill itself. Word from the Statehouse is that Representative Bob South (St. Johnsbury) may be the 4th vote that puts the override over. No word on the other no votes - including Winooski's two Democratic Representatives, who could well find themselves primaried from their intransigence on this issue."
Earlier last week, Bennington Republican Rep. Joseph L. Krawczyk Jr. was singing the opposite tune.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, April 05, 2009

A Blast from the Past, Dr. Don Dean and I, on Polygyny

Many people will say the advocacy of Polygyny is frivolous as few peace seeking Christians would flaunt the laws of the land by taking other wives. I have several things to say in that area.
One, in those nations promoting monogamy through law, there is still divorce, and the pattern of polygynous marriage leads to a better understanding of that unfortunate human necessity born of our sinful natures. The other is, you can get on a computer in Afghanistan or Iran or any other nation in the world, and you can access this forum and others like it. It shows serious myopia to think that we in the west own this discussion.

Polygyny is:
"The condition or practice of having more than one wife at one time."
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright© 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
It is my declaration that the practice of Polygyny is just as valid today as it was when it was practiced in the Old Testament. There are a couple of tired arguments against it that I would like to discourage up front. In that I am addressing these arguments up front, the simple repetition of them would be to engage in one of the most ancient fallacies known as "argumentum ad nauseam." Since I have made the argument already, repeating it is now a fallacy since the argument is answered and that answer must now be replied to.

"It's only allowed (with regret) by God, we shouldn't do it" This is a simple "non sequitur" This argument is based on the absolutely inexplicable connection most people have in their minds between this subject and Christ's statements on divorce. Somehow because Christ says divorce is reluctantly permitted, it is also true that Polygyny is reluctantly permitted. This is an extremely pervasive belief but no proof is ever offered for the connection. There is a secondary connection between this topic and divorce but it has nothing to do with whether or not God merely permits Polygyny in a grudging fashion. Please don't bring it up unless you find the verse that states it. This verse has proved completely hidden to me though I read scripture daily and have for years, cover to cover, front to back, over and over again, version after version. It's probably not there.

"One Flesh" Supposedly this is a devastating argument against polygyny. It assumes a definition of the phrase "one flesh" and thus "begs the question" or is a "circular argument." The reasoning is based on the unfounded notion that One Flesh is made of two components only, and that the function closes after that. No evidence in scripture exists to support that notion, but it's advanced anyway. God is three in one, Christ unifies with the church, which is his bride, and is many many people. The notion that the two become one and nothing else can ever happen after that is a subjective notion, not a scriptural one.

"Cleaving" This is a use of the word in a "Colored" way (Emotive Language). Cleave conjures up certain images and preferred definitions but cleave has definitions that are near polar opposites. , one meaning to cut or divide, the other to cling to. You'd need a philologist to know why. There are many gradations of meaning between those two poles. Context dictates the meaning you select and the context doesn't support the notion of a bilateral exclusiveness. If you're going to go there, you're going to have to prove to me that cleave means only what you want it to mean. This argument could also be termed "Idiosyncratic Language."

"It's Adam & Eve, not Adam & Eve & Amber & Crystal" which is a variation of the "Adam & Eve, not Adam & Steve" argument against homosexual "marriage." This is a "Faulty" or "Hasty Generalization." Neither argument holds water. This is not to say I condone Adam & Steve, I don't. There are other reasons why Adam and Steve should stay away from one another, but they aren't spoken to in the creation story. Using the Adam and Eve monogamy example assumes the story in all it's details, before the fall, to be an archetype for all marriage that we must follow without deviation. It is not possible to argue monogamy from their example unless you embrace all parts of the example. Unless you got married buck naked, I urge you not to go there. There are other ways this supposed archetype get strained as well. You're probably not named Adam, or Eve, you aren't made from a rib or you're not missing one. The list goes on. Adam and Eve's marriage is an archetype ONLY in ways stated elsewhere in scripture to be an archetype or ideal.

"It's bad to divide love" To which I reply it is thus wrong to even have your first child, much less two or more. There's no arguing this, really, but I know some of you will try. This is essentially a use of a "False Dilemma."

"It leads to Strife" An example of "non causa pro causa." This is the human condition. It's also a deceptive argument when appealing to scripture, very few of the patriarchs in scripture can be demonstrated to have been monogamous. Thus all family strife can be conveniently placed at the feet of their polygyny. Never mind that Isaac and Rebecca were monogamous, wow, what problems they had in their family.

"Solomons problems are traced to Polygyny" This is a "red herring." His problems are actually traced to his foreign marriage alliances, in which he took wives that had not renounced their various religions. This was the warning and purpose of the Law against it, and it was what happened to Solomon.

"Deuteronomy 17:17" No, read verse 16. Having read verse 16 it is obvious that you must "Equivocate" to reach the conclusion that a King must be monogamous. Take a deep breath. You're arguing that a King could only possess one horse. The admonition is against many wives, not more than one. The only open ended question in this verse is this: How much is many? Also unless you're a King, it doesn't apply. To make it apply to most people you must engage in "dicto simpliciter." You're ignoring the context of the rule and applying it to a specific situation, namely one that it isn't said to apply to.

"Elders are to be husbands of one wife" Again, "dicto simpliciter." This is a condition of office, not a rant against polygyny. Again, take a deep breath. The argument using this verse employs the notion that it is an ideal to be strived for. Credible, until you realize you've just said women are sub creatures. Besides it's virtual proof that there were polygynous couples in the early church. Otherwise why say anything about it?

"Why can't women have more than one husband?" Because Sarah called Abraham Lord, no one can serve two masters, and man is to woman as God is to man. If you don't recognize where I source these things, you don't belong in this thread. "Faulty generalization," 'red herring & "dicto simpliciter."

"It's Adultery!" This depends on "word magic", "begging the question" and "subjectivism" No, it's not, if you can marry 20 women you can have sex with all of them and it's not adultery, the marriage bed is undefiled. First you must prove that it's wrong to marry more than one woman at a time, then you might have a case. Don't mention this until you can prove polygyny is wrong.

"Lamech was the first Polygynist" The logical fallacy engaged in here is "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" which asserts that because two things occur together, they are related. Lamech is the first Polygynist mentioned in scripture. Nothing is ever said about his Polygyny other than he engaged in it. The argument is that Lamech was a bad dude (which might be implied but not stated in scripture), and he's the "First Polygynist", therefore Polygyny is bad.

"It's against the Law" This speaks to an issue related fallacy known as "Impossible Condition." Those raising this argument don't want to debate the subject until the law changes, thereby postponing the argument they are answering, instead of dealing with its merits. On top of that, it's actually debatable that Polygyny is against the law. It is also important to deal with it because it may not be against the law soon.

"It's against the Vows of Marriage" Again, a "faulty generalization" because not everyone takes these vows. If you did then you have a promise you need to keep, it doesn't make Polygyny wrong, it makes it wrong for whoever took that vow. Besides, those vows are not from scripture anyway.

Up until this point, I've made the milder of the arguments with regard to the practice of polygyny. It is in fact signifigant when you have ALL the written revelation that God intended us to have, that God has not condemned the practice and he has chosen to do so in the face of numerous examples. We're not examining an infinite universe and claiming we haven't SEEN the proof yet, we're examining a finite universe for which I can look at all the proofs that exist. We know the rules of the game, we have the entire book of rules. There ARE NO OTHER RULES. Then there is this, 1st Corinthians 4:6,(NASB)
"Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other."
That we do not exceed what is written? Part of Romans 14 is dedicated to not imposing restrictions, though mostly to with regard to food. Several places in scripture warn against changing the scripture through subtraction, AND addition, so to say that it is not forbidden, refering to scripture, is a COMPELLING argument. Deuteronomy 4:2,(NASB)
"You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."
Just to be sure, in case we missed it, Deuteronomy 12:32,(NASB)
"Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it."
But the we're not done yet. Let's stop off in the middle of the scriptures, Proverbs 30:5 & 6,(NASB)
"Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar."
Ouch, that's strong stuff. As a parting shot, in this continuing theme, though it is about the book of Revelation, we can see that God is sensitive about his word getting changed, because he continues with Revelation 22:18 & 19,(NASB)
"I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book."

The logic is this. God meant to say everything he was going to say in terms of law. He emphasizes this by forbidding additions and subtractions. Thus if he has not banned something, he forbids you, as Christians, from doing so. In discussing the popular arguments against Polygyny I have always been doing it as a courtesy to the people who think they have valid objections. The first part of this post deals with the various arguments people raise against polygyny and their initial refutations. There is of course the possiblity that these arguments can be advanced and an intial refutation does not mean that they could not be advanced. This has in fact been done on occasion and I have modified my argument to deal with those insights.

The last part of this post deals with the roadblock of God's own word when it comes to adding conditions. We can argue about the first part, and of course it is my position that I have trumped everyone's arguments there. This could be proved false someday by a good analysis of the scriptures, but then we would still have to deal with the total absence of condemnation by God in the face of numerous examples of the practice by God's people.

In summation I can say that the second part of the argument, dealing with no condemnation is an Iron Clad proof. It cannot be said that this would be like God never saying "Don't Smoke Marijuana" since no example of pot usage exists in scripture and pot is for intoxication which is forbidden. Many examples of polygyny in every walk of Hebrew life exist. Priests practiced it, common people practiced it and Kings practiced it. Zero condemnation.
More →

Sphere: Related Content