<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>The American View Weblog of JLOF</title>
        <description>Featured blog entries for JLOF</description>
        <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:31:57 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.2</generator>
        <item>
            <title>Howard Phillips Right On Souter; Pat Robertson Fooled Because He Was And Is Republican Party ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=389</link>
            <description>Well, no, Pat Robertson knew nothing about Souter, or so he says. And he knew nothing because he was and is a Republican Party cheerleader. Indeed, by his own testimony, he admits that he relied on those pushing Souter for information about Souter - not a very thorough investigation I would say.</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
            <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Since Bible And Catholic Catechism Denounce Homosexuality, Why Did John Roberts Help ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=374</link>
            <description>In their attempts to defend the indefensible – John Roberts helping advance the homosexual agenda by coaching homosexual activists to win &quot;special rights&quot; in the Romer v. Evans Supreme Court case – many supposedly Christian &quot;leaders&quot; have left the impression that Roberts had no choice but to do what he did because his law firm took this case.</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rah! Rah! Siss! Boom! Ba! Roberts Played Key Role In Helping Homosexuals Get Special Rights But ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=365</link>
            <description>On the “NBC Nightly News” (8/5/05), Jay Sekulow is shown saying with, if you’ll pardon the expression, a straight face: “This was not a situation where [Roberts] was advocating a particular position. And that’s why I think that this is why this ended up the way it has. No one has withdrawn their support for John Roberts.” But, of course, Roberts &lt;em&gt;&lt;i&gt;was&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/em&gt; helping homosexuals advocate a particular position – special “rights” for homosexuals. He did this very effectively. The homosexuals won their case. And they believe they won because of Roberts’ crucial help. </description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wow! John Roberts Wrote Memo To Attorney General About Me! – But No Reply To Charge Too Many ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=368</link>
            <description>Wow! John Roberts Wrote Memo To Attorney General About Me! – But No Reply To Charge Too Many Carter-Holdovers Under Reagan - &quot;To The Attorney General, From John Roberts: Talking Points for Meeting With Lofton of Conservative Digest, Thursday, January 28, 10:00 a.m.&quot;</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>False Reporting By Steve Ertelt’s 'LifeNews. ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=324</link>
            <description>A footnote: When I called Ertelt's bogus reporting to the attention of &quot;World&quot; magazine publisher Joel Belz, he, at first, reacted in way I found hopeful. He sounded like he was concerned and would check out what I told him. Days turned into weeks, however. No reply. Then this curt email: &quot;We have no responsibility to respond to your comments and queries. Please do not address further questions to any of our staff.&quot;</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Top 10 Questions That It Might Be OK To Ask John Roberts But We’re Not Sure They Are Frivolous ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=370</link>
            <description>Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), a former judge on the Texas Supreme Court, has said that John Roberts must, in his confirmation hearing, not be asked where he stands on partial-birth abortion or any &quot;hot button&quot; issues. This is like saying he can't be asked where he stands on murder since partial-birth abortion is really infanticide.  In any event, we guess that all that's left to ask Roberts are questions about -- well, &quot;cold button&quot; issues. So, here's what I came up with. </description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>John Lofton, Recovering Republican: His Story; How He Put Away Childish Things And, By God's ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=340</link>
            <description>I first drank deeply of Republicanism in 1964 when Barry Goldwater told the convention that nominated him to be President that freedom was made orderly in our country by &quot;our Constitutional government.&quot; In fact, he said, in front of God and everybody that government should perform &quot;only Constitutionally-sanctioned tasks.&quot;  Then and there I was hooked.</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Didn't Dr. Dobson Tell Karl Rove No Support For Miers Or ANY Judicial Nominees Unless They ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=426</link>
            <description>We did not discuss Roe v. Wade in any context or any other pending issue that will be considered by the Court. I did not ask that question. You know, to be honest, I would have loved to have known how Harriet Miers views Roe v. Wade</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Exclusive &quot;TAV&quot; Interview: Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht Talks About His ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=418</link>
            <description>Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht has known Harriet Miers for more than 30 years. The following interview of Justice Hecht by &quot;T.A.V.&quot; Editor John Lofton took place by telephone on October 10, 2005.</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
            <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NPLAC Implores President Bush To Withdraw Miers Nomination; Correct Flawed Process</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=425</link>
            <description>The time has come for President Bush to realize and accept that his nomination of Harriet Miers to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court was ill-advised and he should withdraw her nomination. With 45 million children's lives lost to abortion, the stakes are simply too high to gamble on another 'stealth' candidate. If the president remains reluctant to take this step, then NPLAC believes that Ms. Miers should then remove herself from this process. </description>
            <author>Stephen G. Peroutka</author>
            <pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Miers Nomination Jilts Pro-Lifers, Instead of 'Jolt' to Supreme Court Status Quo</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=407</link>
            <description>While Ms. Miers may be satisfactory to President Bush, there is nothing in her record that should satisfy pro-lifers. It is incumbent upon President Bush to provide irrefutable proof that his nominee is, in fact, Scalia- or Thomas-like, and that he has not reneged on his campaign promise.</description>
            <author>Stephen G. Peroutka</author>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;Kennel-Fed Conservative&quot; Brother Buchanan Endorsed Bush But Is Now Barking About ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=401</link>
            <description>Well, better late than never, I guess, as they say – but not really in this case. You blew it, Brother Pat. The Constitution Party's 2004 Presidential candidate Michael Anthony Peroutka represented precisely the kind of &quot;authentic conservatism&quot; you are now barking about and calling for. But, you did not endorse him. So, please, my long-time friend, zip it. You have no credibility on this subject and it's your own fault.</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>No, Mr. President, We Are Very Different People From Those Who Rebuilt Their City After The ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=403</link>
            <description>In his national TV address from New Orleans telling us, proudly, about all the un-Biblical and un-Constitutional aid the Federal Government would be giving to help victims of Hurricane Katrina, President Bush said: &quot;We're the heirs of men and women who…rebuilt Chicago after a great fire.&quot; Well, yes, if he was making a purely biological point. But, a resounding NO! if he meant we're the same kind of Americans who rebuilt their city after the great Chicago Fire. When this disaster occurred, there were no mobs screaming for the Federal Government to rebuild that city, as the following article by Daniel T. Oliver says. This piece is from the February 2000 issue of &quot;The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty.&quot; At the time he wrote it, Mr. Oliver was a research associate at the Washington D.C.-based &quot;Capital Research Center&quot; and a freelance writer. A version of this article appeared in the Center's newsletter, Alternatives in Philanthropy</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;Minuteman Project&quot; Founder Jim Gilchrist – A Man With A True American View – Running ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=382</link>
            <description>As a result of their study, the Immigration Reform Caucus observation team issued a number of workable recommendations—which I endorse in principle, and which I will work hard to see implemented if I become your Congressman. Among the team’s findings are these:</description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Profile In Moral Cowardice: Jay Sekulow Uses Pro-Life Issue To Raise Millions Of Dollars But ...</title>
            <link>http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=391</link>
            <description>Pat Robertson's supposedly pro-life &quot;American Center For Law &amp; Justice&quot; has raised millions of dollars on the abortion issue. But, strangely, the &quot;ACLJ's&quot; Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow is adamantly against Bush Supreme Court nominee John Roberts being asked about the abortion issue in his upcoming confirmation hearing. </description>
            <author>John Lofton</author>
            <pubDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
