We dare not demean this holy trust

Yesterday, October 30, 2010, was the 275th birthday of Founder and 2nd U.S. President, John Adams. Almost one year to the day before he added his signature to the Declaration of Independence, on July 7, 1775, John Adams penned these sobering words in a three-page letter to his beloved Abigail:

Your Description of the Distresses of the worthy Inhabitants of Boston, and the other Sea Port Towns, is enough to melt an Heart of stone. Our Consolation must be this, my dear, that Cities may be rebuilt, and a People reduced to Poverty, may acquire fresh Property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it.” [italics mine]

Our right to vote as American citizens is a gift bestowed by Almighty God; but it is more than a right or a privilege. Jesus said, “For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.” (Luke 12:48) The right to vote is also a holy trust given each of us by a righteous God who holds us accountable for our stewardship of that right. As an ordained minister and former pastor of five years myself, I am confident that clergy who neglect their duty to teach their flocks proper stewardship of the right and duty to vote will suffer stricter judgment.

Most of us could not tell how many times we have uttered Jesus’ words in “the Lord’s Prayer,” “Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” And yet for some of us, our voting habits undermine the answer to that prayer. We demean our vote when we vote for candidates who favor unrighteous causes such as abortion or same sex unions. We must not treat voting as an optional, inconsequential, or unnecessary exercise or God will withdraw the privilege.

The Book of Proverbs tells us that “Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” (Proverbs 14:34) With so much, indeed, our liberty at stake in Tuesday’s election, it is unthinkable that any able-bodied Christian would not vote, much less vote for unprincipled candidates or candidates who support expansion of government’s role in our personal lives. If we exalt ungodly men by our vote, it reproaches Christ and debases His Church.

Charles G. Finney, a prominent Second Great Awakening preacher, said the following about a Christian’s vote,

“[T]he time has come that Christians must vote for honest men and take consistent ground in politics or the Lord will curse them ... Christians have been exceedingly guilty in this matter. But the time has come when they must act differently ... Christians seem to act as if they thought God did not see what they do in politics. But I tell you He does see it - and He will bless or curse this nation according to the course they [Christians] take [in politics].”

Renowned Civil War era abolitionist leader, orator, writer, and statesman, the Rev. Frederick Douglas, himself a freed slave, characterized his political views thus:

“I have one great political idea … The best expression of it, I have found in the Bible. It is … ‘Righteous exalteth a nation; sin is a reproach to any people.’ This constitutes my politics, and the whole of my politics. The negative and positive of my politics.”

Wall Builders' website (http://www.wallbuilders.com) succinctly spells out guiding principles for the Christian voter, indeed, for any patriotic American citizen who is committed to the Founders’ ideals as enumerated in America’s Founding Documents. Please watch the “Voter Responsibilities” video linked on the website’s homepage and if you are a pastor, please show the video in your church service(s) tomorrow.

Will our vote on Tuesday count for righteousness and preserve our right to choose our future leaders, or will it be the our last that really counts? America hangs in the balance and this vote will be a referendum on the Church and its leaders.

Eligibility's Onus

In a criminal trial, a defendant carries the benefit of assumption meaning he needs no evidence to support his claim. He is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, the burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is said to rest with the prosecution.

Instead of putting of the onus on Barack Obama where it ought to be, our elected leaders, legal system and a decrepit, barkless, biteless, wino (watchdog in name only) media belittle or ignore American citizens who have a constitutional right to see the evidence they demand. This ambivalence toward a key provision in our Constitution by those charged with guarding and protecting it is a moral outrage and equates to tyranny! Article II, Section I, Clause 4 (the presidential eligibility clause), of the Constitution reads:

No Person except a natural born Citizen or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

Despite numerous legal challenges, accusations, and firsthand accounts that raise legitimate doubts about his place of birth, Barack Obama has not produced a state-certified copy of his alleged Hawaiian birth certificate. Instead, he has spent roughly two-million dollars in legal fees to prevent access to it when "pocket change" would settle the matter once and for all. To make matters worse, our Government, the courts, and the media have brushed-off many Americans' pleas for them to investigate the matter more thoroughly. It is fair to say that these institutions have ceded benefit of assumption to Barack Obama and placed burden of proof on birthers. To those who are willing to give Barack Obama a pass on his birth and education records I ask:

• What is Mr. Obama hiding?
• Has our compulsion to be a "color blind" society blinded us?
• Did electing America's first black president prove we are a post-racial society or gullible one?
• Which is more important, being a post-racial society or a free society?
• Are we wiser than the Constitution’s signers?
• Do we really want our troops, our sons and daughters, under the command of a foreign Commander in Chief?
• Are we willing to have our nation transformed into something our forbears would not recognize, by an impostor who has no generational affiliation with it or affinity for it?
• Are we willing to watch a man of dubious citizenship dismantle our way of life?
• Are the personal “benefits” unconstitutional governance might heap on us individually more valuable to us than the time-tested constitutional principles that have prospered us so prodigiously, despite the fact that we have violated many of them for decades?
• Do we want to be known as the generation who threw away the greatest, Providence-inspired form of government in history, in exchange for a promise by a Marxist usurper who rode in on a Trojan horse named “Hope and Change?” 

Since Barack Obama took office, America has bled liberty faster than the Deepwater Horizon has been gushing crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. His administration’s policies are doing to America what crude oil is doing to our Gulf States. We cannot afford to wait until November 2010 to stanch the hemorrhaging; November may be too late. We must act now!

Experience has taught me not to flow with the current on issues others are ignoring because most people are wrong most of the time and what most people deem insignificant is often the locus of the crux of a matter. To date, everything conservatives have done to impede Mr. Obama's revolutionary agenda has been flatly ignored, but not the birth certificate issue; it is the one issue that concerns him enough to spend $1,000,000 to see that it doesn't see the light of day.

Granted, efforts to evict Barack Obama from the White House before November 2012 may fail, but if we shine the light of truth on his eligibility, we may put him on his heels and slow the advance of his progressive agenda. We might also reduce his chances of reelection in 2012. As an added benefit, we will educate the public on an important, though heretofore unneeded, Constitutional provision.

One of America's greatest Founders and second President, John Adams, once said, “Facts are stubborn things.” I would add that facts are sometimes frightening things because they make us face things we'd rather not. Has history not shown that sweeping truth under the rug is far riskier than facing it? Will we, like John Adams, defend what is true and just and virtuous about America, or will we allow truth and justice to be cast to the ground to prolong an illusory liberty?

Each state's Democratic Party is required to certify their Party's nominee as eligible to be President of the United States. Aspiring presidential candidates, on the other hand, are not presumed eligible to hold the office until someone proves otherwise; onus probandi rests with the presidential candidate who alleges his constitutional eligibility. Indeed, an aspiring presidential candidate must be presumed ineligible unless and until he produces evidence to support his claim. In other words, no birth certificate, no White House.

America’s Most Credible News Source

It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breathtaking speed, against the backdrop of a passive, hapless … people.


From the mouth of Rush Limbaugh this statement gets lost in talk radio static.  When a Russian journalistmakes it, however, every American ought to lean in and listen just as they might if E. F. Hutton was about to speak. It is the opening sentence in  Stanislav Mishin’s article, American Capitalism Gone with a Whimper, which appeared in the April 27, 2009 edition of PRAVDA On-Line¹, a Web-based reincarnation of the former official organ of the Soviet Union’s Central Committee, Pravda, which Russian Federation President Boris Yeltzin ordered shut down in 1991.²

Mishin derides American capitalist arrogance given our inability to arrest Marxism’s influence. He evinces sarcastic admiration for the speed with which upstart Marxist rookie, Barak Obama, and his comrades, are showing up Russia’s Bolsheviks, who “wrote the book” on social revolution. In particular, Mishin cites profligate Government deficit spending and private industry takeovers by the Obama Administration as examples of their bold and aggressive style.

The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more than another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.

Mishin continues, citing various social strategies statists have implemented to weaken American resolve against totalitarianism:

… the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years … Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters … First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture … Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more than Sunday circuses …

He concludes by exhorting fellow Russians who own businesses and industries in America to “look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.”

When the Russian media become a more reliable news source of information about goings-on in America than the American media, it is time to stop indulging America’s mainstream media.

© 2009 Unspun Publications.

¹PRAVDA On-Line is an Internet-based newspaper run by former Pravda newspaper employees and is unrelated to Pravda. (Source: http://www.wikipedia.org/)
²Pravda (Russian: Правда, "Truth") was a leading newspaper of the Soviet Union and an official organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party between 1912 and 1991. The Pravda newspaper was started in 1912 in St. Petersburg. It was converted from a weekly Zvezda. It did not arrive in Moscow until 1918. During the Cold War, Pravda was well known in the West for its pronouncements as the official voice of Soviet Communism. (Similarly Investia was the official voice of the Soviet government.) After the paper was closed down in 1991 by decree of President Yeltsin, many of the staff founded a new print newspaper with the same name, which is now a tabloid-style Russian news source. (Source: http://www.wikipedia.org/)

Anecdotal Castles

All sandcastles eventually melt into the rising tide, or blow away in swirling coastal winds. No sandcastle has ever stood the test of time or an ocean’s ebb and flow. Sandcastles are anecdotal.

Liberal Apologists’ justifications remind me of sandcastles. When cornered by irrefutable facts and sound reason, Liberals always resort to anecdotal evidence. They dare not stray too close to the rhythmic battering of objective analysis or their constructs will crumble like sandcastles at high tide. Liberalism is anecdotal.

Every time I channel surf into a debate between a Liberal and a Conservative, I listen carefully to the Liberal response to any Conservative point. If the original question doesn't get lost in obfuscation, the Liberal’s retort almost always begins with some form of “Yes, but."  I call this Apologetics by Exception or Liberal Water Torture.

Conservatism’s house rests on foundational principles that have endured more than two centuries of assault by tyranny. Liberalism’s house is a sandcastle built on shifting sands of anecdotal, "Wrigley’s Believe It or Not," exceptions to the rule. It is easier to make a snowball out of sand than it is to understand Liberal reason, if it can be called “reason.”

The Liberal’s utopian dream is not built upon a solid foundation of time-tested truths, but upon seeming exceptions to those truths. If Liberals succeed in instantiating their idea of social utopia, America will enter the anecdotal narrative of nations that have succumbed to governance by exception.

US Healthcare: An Open Letter to the Democratic Apparatchik

Fortunately for law-abiding citizens, dumb criminals eventually end up in jail. But I am concerned about another more dangerous “super criminal” that is destroying our beloved nation right under our noses! I refer to them as "smart criminals." These high-IQ outlaws don't dabble in petty theft. They always go for the BIG heist. These banditos are some of the smartest desperados ever to brandish—well, a vote, a filibuster or a veto.
Once seated, smart criminals waste no time. With the drive of a crack addict in search of a fix, smart criminals will trample any liberty that gets between them and power. They rush to enact laws that ‘legitimize’ pick pocketing the American people and embezzle their constituents legislatively. No longer is organized crime at war with Government; they are bedfellows!

For the time being, a bunch of these power junkies have gained majorities in the highest political assemblies in this Land, and the White House. As Americans have observed since the '08 presidential election, smart criminals and political power make a combustible mixture. To those who pay more than lip service to the Founders Dream, these faux patriots use the US Constitution as kindling for their national version of "Bonfire of the Vanities" and our liberties go up in smoke. Next up for the pyre—the best health care system in the world.

The Democratic Party has mastered its mendacious craft of misleading the American people continually and some Republicans have dissembled with them. They have become a brood of vipers and the “light that is in them is darkness.” Progressives disguise their nefarious legislation with euphemistic names and then pimp it to the American people. They slipped the “National Economic Suicide Act” by an unwary electorate under the name, “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.” Their next major legislative caper involved deleting the first two words from "End of Affordable Health Choices Act." I'd feel less violated by a thief pointing a gun in my face. At least the guy with the gun is honest!

Perhaps you think my line of reasoning is insulting or out of line. You should be grateful that a natural-born American citizen is willing to tell you the truth. There are a lot of naked emperors running around DC these days so consider my letter a friendly tap on the shoulder.

Now that the current brood of smart criminals has set its sights on the US healthcare system, and knowing they are always in a hurry to get back to uh—"the business of the American people," I have limited myself to one simple multiple-choice question.

Which of the following five major Federal social programs enacted since the dawn of the American Republic in 1776 has 1) been so successful that it justifies seizure of an additional 20% of American GDP by today’s Federal Government; 2) stayed within the bounds of its enacting legislation, and 3) not far exceeded its original intent beyond anything it’s originators could have imagined? Place a check mark next to each program that matches each of these criteria.

a Medicare
b Medicaid
c Social Security
d Welfare
e Federal Income Tax
f None of the above

To facilitate informed responses, historical background information for each program is provided below:

Medicare and Medicaid: In 1945, President Harry Truman asked Congress for legislation to establish a national health insurance plan. Contentious debate ensued with forward-thinking opponents warning of “socialized medicine.” By the end of his administration, Truman had abandoned his plan for universal health coverage. Fast-forward 20 years and its déjà vu all over again. In an act reminiscent of “Night of the Living Dead,” Truman is reincarnated as Lyndon B. Johnson and on July 30, 1965, signs Truman's exhumed dream into law as Medicare and Medicaid. Before you throw yourself on the back of the hearse headed to Johnson’s “Great Society,” however, you might want to consider the following facts.

In 1966, 19 million people enrolled in Medicare and 4 million in Medicaid with combined federal outlays in 1967 totaling $4.4 billion. Today, the Truman/Johnson dream has morphed into one BIG nightmare and the Federal Government has night terrors that a sleepwalking American public might awaken to the abysmal state of federal health insurance programs. Today there are 43 million people enrolled in Medicare, 51 million in Medicaid, and combined federal outlays totaling $514 billion or 21% of the Federal budget! Facing the prospect of already below-cost Medicare payments being further reduced, Doctors are reluctant to participate or are fleeing Federal health insurance programs altogether. Can you blame me for wanting the Federal Government to keep its cotton-pickin’ hands off my healthcare?

Social Security: In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law. The original Social Security tax rate was 1% for both employers and employees—on the first $3,000 earned. Seventy-four years later, the rate has nearly octupled to 7.65% for both employer and employee—on the first $102,000 earned. Social Security is expected to be unsustainable in a dozen years or so and rumor has it the current batch of criminals wants to do away with the cap altogether! I guess higher-paid Americans still aren't paying their ‘fair share.’ Do I have it about right?

Welfare: America’s poorest of the poor used to receive aid from private individuals and organizations such as churches, and small state-based programs. In 1935, President Franklin Roosevelt signed Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) into law. This initial “welfare” bill provided $18 per month for one child and $12 for each additional child. Since its birth in 1935, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) has come a long way—baby! Says Michael Tanner in The Poverty of Welfare: Helping Others in Civil Society (August 2003),

Welfare may have started with the best of intentions, but it has clearly failed. It has failed to meet its stated goal of reducing poverty. But its real failure is even more disastrous. Welfare has torn apart the social fabric of our society. Everyone is worse off. The taxpayers must foot the bill for programs that don’t work. The poor are dehumanized, seduced into a system from which it is very hard to escape. Teenage girls give birth to children they will never be able to support. The work ethic has eroded. Crime rates soar. Such is the legacy of welfare. Tanner ought to know what he's talking about. As a Senior Fellow and Policy Scholar at the Cato Institute, Tanner also leads research into a variety of domestic policies with emphasis on health care reform, social welfare policy, and Social Security. I'll take my chances with Tanner. Why don’t you criminals have a chat with Turner before you destroy healthcare.

Federal Income Tax: President Abraham Lincoln signed the Revenue Act of 1862 into law to help fund the American Civil War. No problem there. The Act also established a Commissioner of the Revenue and instituted the Federal income tax as a "temporary measure" that would terminate in "the year eighteen hundred and sixty-six.” No problem there either—serious times demand serious action. The Revenue Act taxed incomes above $600 at a rate of 3% and those over $10,000 at 5% and required employers to withhold taxes from pay and send the money to the Commissioner. When the deadline to terminate the Federal income tax rolled around in "the year eighteen hundred and sixty-six,” total tax revenues had climbed to an all-time high of $310 million and a temporary Federal tax system that beneficent to the Federal Government wasn’t about to be terminated. By 2007, total tax revenues as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) had mushroomed to 28.3%. Compared to the amount of taxes Americans paid under the temporary Revenue Act of 1862, today’s taxpayers quantify their taxes in the number of months out of each year they must work before The Godfather is paid off. Would someone who knows the actual meaning of temporary please speak up?!

"Stupid is as stupid does," so says Forrest Gump's Mama. How many times does a country need to be misled by smart criminals before it learns its lesson? Apparently, at least five. This legislation will push America closer to tyranny and finish off the Founders’ dream. Is this the legacy Democrats want to leave to posterity? Please, I implore you; do not do this to America. Do not do this to future generations of Americans.

Now the Really Smart Criminals Want to Take Over Healthcare

Fortunately for law-abiding citizens, dumb criminals eventually end up in jail. But these are no ordinary criminals. The banditos I'm talking about are the smartest desperados ever to brandish a filibuster. I refer to them as "really, really smart criminals (RRSCs)." RRSCs don't waste time on petty theft. They head straight for political power where they can pickpocket the American people—legally. RRSCs embezzle their constituents by legalizing their crimes before they commit them. No longer is “organized crime” at odds with Government; they are bedfellows!

With the same recklessness that a crack addict pursues a fix, RRSCs will destroy anything that gets between them and their lust for power. For the time being anyway, a bunch of these power junkies have managed to gain a majority in the highest political assemblies in the Land. As we have seen at an alarming pace since the 2008 presidential election, RRSCs and political power make a volatile mixture. Unfortunately for true patriots, America's RRSCs are using the US Constitution as kindling for their national version of "Bonfire of the Vanities" and our liberties are going up in smoke. Next up for the pyre? The finest healthcare system in the world—ever.

Using the same technique they employed to defuse suspicion over the "Porkulus Bill” by calling it the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,” RRSCs are again flawlessly executing the "Give Your Bill A Name That Jukes Your Constituents" strategy spelled out in the "Really, Really Smart Criminals Handbook (RRSCH),” as they “grease the skids” for their next legislative caper by calling the "Now Your Representatives Are Going to Destroy US Healthcare” bill the "Affordable Health Choices Act.” These guys are good—really good. I'd feel less violated by a thief pointing a gun at my head than I do when my representatives steal my wealth and liberty under false pretenses. At least the guy with the gun is being honest.

To those who are clamouring for Government-sponsored health care reform, I would suggest an honest review of Federal Government performance with other major federal social programs such as, Social Security, Welfare, Medicare and Medicaid, and the federal income tax:

Social Security: In 1935, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law, the original tax rate was 2%, 1% for employers, 1% for employees, on the first $3,000 of wages earned. Since its inception, the Social Security tax rate has climbed to 15.3%, 7.65% for employers, 7.65% for employees, on the first $102,000 of wages earned. Social Security is expected to be insolvent in about ten years.

Welfare: Before Welfare, the “poorest of the poor” in America received aid from private individuals and organizations such as churches, and small state-based programs. In 1935, President Franklin Roosevelt signed the “Aid for Dependant Children (AFDC)” bill into law. This initial “welfare” bill provided $18/month for one child and $12 for each additional child. According to Michael Tanner in, The Poverty of Welfare: Helping Others in Civil Society (August 2003),

“… Welfare may have started with the best of intentions, but it has clearly failed. It has failed to meet its stated goal of reducing poverty. But its real failure is even more disastrous. Welfare has torn apart the social fabric of our society. Everyone is worse off. The taxpayers must foot the bill for programs that don’t work. The poor are dehumanized, seduced into a system from which it is very hard to escape. Teenage girls give birth to children they will never be able to support. The work ethic has eroded. Crime rates soar. Such is the legacy of welfare.”

Tanner is a Sr. Fellow and Policy Scholar at the Cato Institute and leads research into a variety of domestic policies with an emphasis on health care reform, social welfare policy, and Social Security.

Medicare and Medicaid: In 1945, President Harry Truman asked Congress for legislation establishing a national health insurance plan. Contentious debate ensued with opponents warning of “socialized medicine.” By the end of his administration, Truman had abandoned his plan for universal health coverage. On July 30, 1965, however, President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare and Medicaid into law pursuant to his vision for a “Great Society.” In 1966, 19 million people enrolled in Medicare and 4 million in Medicaid with combined federal outlays for both programs of $4.4 billion in 1967. Today, 43 million people are enrolled in Medicare and 51 million in Medicaid with combined federal outlays for both programs totaling $514 billion, 21% of the federal budget. Doctors facing the prospect of already below-cost Medicare payments being further reduced, are reluctant to participate or are abandoning federal health insurance programs altogether.

Federal Income Tax: President Abraham Lincoln signed the Revenue Act of 1862 into law to help fund the American Civil War. The act also established the Commissioner of the Revenue and specified that the Federal income tax was a temporary measure that would terminate in "the year eighteen hundred and sixty-six.” Annual incomes above $600 were taxed at a rate of 3%. Incomes over $10,000 were taxed at a rate of 5%. Employers were required to withhold taxes and send the withheld funds to the Commissioner of the Revenue. Tax revenues reached a new high in 1866, totaling $310 million. By 2007, total tax revenues as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) had mushroomed to 28.3%. The amounts working Americans pay in taxes each year have reached obscene levels. We’ve come a long way since “the year eighteen hundred and sixty-six” when the “temporary” Federal income tax was supposed to end.

It would take much less time to write or read about every successful Federal social program because the page would be blank. Given its track record, what would possess the American people to turn the best healthcare system in the world over to an organization that has mismanaged every social program it has ever supervised? If we, the American electorate, allow our Federal Government to seize control of our healthcare system, then we have become the proverbial abused woman who, believing her man’s assurances that “it will never happen again,” goes back for more.

In behavior that suggests self-loathing taken to a new low, Americans are about to turn the best healthcare system ever over to a bunch of really, really smart criminals who have proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that they are not up to the task. Have we lost our collective mind?!! If we do this, we prove our own stupidity and deserve the abuse we will get.

Feline Hit Man Headed for the Pound

Michael Vick killed dogs, but Tyler Weinman committed the unimaginable—cat abuse.[1] Investigators have been combing through Weinman’s Internet history and veterinary records of the deceased cats to find out if Weinman’s is just another case of a sadistic adolescent thrill seeker or honor killing by a dog lover over Vick’s crimes against canines. Police also want to know if Weinman acted alone, but the cat’s got Weinman’s tongue. The prosecutor may try to apply the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Statute if other cat killers are involved.

The teenage kitty killer was released from jail today on $250,000 bond. Weinman will wear an electronic monitoring bracelet and remain under house arrest while he awaits trial on 19 counts of catslaughter. The question that has cat lovers choking on hairballs is “Why, would he stoop to such barbarism when there are humane ways to terminate Tabby?” One bereaved cat owner meowed, “Poor defenseless Tigger,” and fainted. Neighborhood kitty litter boxes have been filling up fast because cat owners are afraid to let their cats out at night to use their neighbor’s gardens. "I've been going through cat litter like a mouse through a box of Grape Nuts," one cat owner quipped. Feline activists and police are worried that there could be copycats.

Cat Coroner Henry Harebawl darted around the crime scene earlier today to assess the carnage. “These cats are in full rigor. I’m finding paws and claws everywhere!” he said. “By the looks of these carcasses, these puddy tats were probably catnapped around midnight and drugged with catnip; toxicology reports will tell us for sure. The toms usually go on the prowl for kitties around midnight. They were probably slain shortly after that; the Cat Examiner’s autopsy reports will pinpoint the time of death.” Harebawl also mentioned that “Cat owners, desperate to save their furniture, are so afraid of furtive feline rescuers that they won't carry kitty into a vet clinic in broad daylight. They end up turning to back alley cat butchers to get rid of their pissing pussycats.”

Callie Calico of Cats Against Cat Abuse (CACA) was on the scene early to make sure investigators didn't overlook anything. "I lost my kitty to a cat abuser," she said." Calico added, "After that traumatic experience, I founded CACA and have given my life to stopping this kind of abuse from happening to other cat lovers. We're working for a cat abuse-free world."

Weinman will be arraigned on July 6 and could get up to 158 human years in prison. That’s about 843 in cat years for the purr sadist. If the prosecutor makes this a hate crime, Weinman's sentence could be longer. The defense is hoping that prosecution will accept the lesser charge of involuntary catslaughter by reason of insanity in exchange for a no contest plea. Lead investigator Bloodhound Bill Bowser (a.k.a. “Snoopy”) snapped at rumors that Weinman could end up in the same prison cell as Michael Vick. “Not on your leash!" Bowser growled. "They’d end up fighting like cats and dogs."

If my satiric take on this story strikes the reader as insensitive or offensive, I've hit my mark. I refuse to raise an eyebrow over the wanton slaughter a few cats in a society that approves the wanton slaughter of 4,000 helpless unborn human beings who are butchered, poisoned, chemically burned, and dismembered in the sanctuary of their mothers' wombs each and every day. Our priorities and indignation are perverse and our damnation is just.

I would only ask that readers be equally indignant over the wanton slaughter every year in America of 1.5 million unborn human beings who are of inestimable value to God who made them, certainly far more valuable than any number of cats. If your contempt for cat abuse exceeds your disdain for child killing, then there is something in you that is as twisted as the neurosis that motivated Tyler Weinman to torture cats.

© 2009 Spin Cipher Publishing.

[1] Actual story can be found on numerous online news websites doing a Google search on “South Florida Cat Killer.”