THE OTHER SHOE DROPS: Turning back the tide of information overload with a digest of the latest developments in news conservatives need to pay attention to:

† What freedom of speech means to Muslims (the U.S. edition): There they go again. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) exercised prior restraint on a speech retired Lieutenant General William G. “Jerry” Boykin planned to give at a prayer breakfast at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point last week. Boykin – who is an ordained minister – has likened the War on Terror to a war against Satan and CAIR has objected to his presence at other prayer meetings as well.

Washington Times columnist Frank Gaffney notes that “CAIR and its fellow Muslim Brotherhood fronts are not simply trying to muzzle Gen. Boykin”:

They have gone after a number of other truth-tellers about the doctrine the Brothers seek to insinuate into this country - the totalitarian, supremacist politico-military-legal program the Islamists call Shariah.

For example, another colleague, former Rep. Fred Grandy, was removed from his position as one of Washington's most popular talk-radio-show hosts when he refused to allow Muslim critics to dictate who could appear on his program and what they could say.

In the fall, Stephen Coughlin, one of the nation's foremost non-Muslim experts on Shariah, similarly was subjected to a CAIR-led effort to deny his ability to speak. In that case, he was denied by the Obama administration the opportunity to provide training to CIA personnel about what impels our enemies to engage in murderous and stealthy forms of jihad, namely Shariah.

More recently, New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly has been subjected to a campaign of vilification by CAIR and its friends. His offense? Mr. Kelly gave an interview to the makers of a superb documentary, "The Third Jihad," and allowed that film to be used in training his officers.

CAIR's desire to suppress this film is not hard to understand. After all, "The Third Jihad" brilliantly exposes what it and other Muslim Brotherhood fronts are up to in this country. In the words of the Brotherhood's own strategic plan, that is "a kind of grand jihad ... in destroying and eliminating the Western civilization from within" by our own hands.

† Are you smarter than a fifth-grade atheist? (Obama isn’t.): Speaking to about 3,000 people at the annual National Prayer Breakfast, President Barack Hussein Obama described his understanding of the Christian faith and explained how this faulty foundation  compelled him to squeeze the rich, force the middle class to buy health insurance and send troops to prevent human rights abuses in Uganda (but not in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Turkey), The Washington Post reports:

“For me, as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,’ ” Obama said. “It mirrors the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, or the Jewish doctrine of moderation and consideration for others.” …

Obama described his “faith journey” again in terms that coincide with the central themes of his reelection effort, drawing on biblical passages that have helped underpin his belief in what is called “the social gospel.” …

[He] laid out a simple scriptural grounding for his policies: caring for the least of these, being one’s brother’s keeper, demanding much of those to whom much has been given.

For example, Obama also said this:

“[W]hen I talk about our financial institutions playing by the same rules as folks on Main Street, when I talk about making sure insurance companies aren’t discriminating against those who are already sick, or making sure that unscrupulous lenders aren’t taking advantage of the most vulnerable among us, I do so because I genuinely believe it will make the economy stronger for everybody, but I also do it because I know that far too many neighbors in our country have been hurt and treated unfairly over the last few years, and I believe in God’s command to love thy neighbor as thyself. I know a version of that Golden rule is found in every major religion and every set of beliefs from Hinduism to Islam to Judaism to the writings of Plato.”

The Stiletto has already dealt with Obama’s misconstruing the meanings of being your brother’s “keeper” and loving thy neighbor as thyself. RedStateNews tackles Obama’s notion that a Christian’s moral and religious obligations to the poor can be fulfilled by paying higher taxes:

While Obama may have been correct in saying that government mandated, shared responsibility is equal to the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, he is incorrect to group in Jesus’ teaching, “for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.” Aside from the fact that Jesus was discussing requirements from God, not the government, he was actually teaching his disciples that they were stewards of God’s gift of Revelation. Their requirement was to spread the good news of Jesus Christ. … Jesus very much emphasized the importance of giving to the poor, but as a reaction in joy to what we’ve been given; not because of a law. Giving out of obligation is not truly giving, it’s merely following the rules. …

The Bible also teaches that everything we have, including money, belongs to God. We are called to be good stewards with His money. The government is the epitome of mismanaging money. … So it is that welfare money ends up spitting out of strip club ATMs, and those same people who paid their charity to the government wonder why government hasn’t solved the issue. Perhaps they should ask the 27 Democrats who voted against stopping welfare checks from being used at strip clubs, casinos and liquor stores.

The “social gospel” that Obama learned from the preaching of Rev. Jeremiah Wright is not found anywhere in the New Testament.

† The accidental nominee: The confusion over whether Mitt Romney (R-MA) or Rick Santorum (R-PA) won the IA caucus, prompts The New York Times to discuss the potential for errors and fraud in caucus elections – four years too late, alas (related article, fourth item on the page):

Those in favor of the caucus format, in which party members typically attend meetings at a set time to vote, are worried that additional problems will further undermine a traditional system that has been in declining use, as more states move to the comparative convenience and reliability of a primary. …

As the Republican race continues, the Nevada caucus, in particular, will be closely watched for signs of trouble. Four years ago, both parties’ caucuses were riddled with problems before, during and after the vote. There were lawsuits, and difficulty accommodating high turnout, and after the counting was done, candidates discovered that whoever won the most votes would not necessarily get the most delegates.

This year, despite assurances that the process was improved, there were new concerns, like the decision to allow counties to set their own rules, which means that people voting in different parts of the state will have very different voting experiences. …

Four years ago, the mastery of the labyrinthine rules and procedures in often-overlooked caucus states was a critical part of President Obama’s strategy to win delegates during the bruising battle for the Democratic nomination. [Emphasis, The Stiletto.]

The difficulty Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign had in caucus states led supporters to push unsuccessfully to remove them from the nomination process, saying they limited participation and lacked protections to ensure fairness.  [Emphasis, The Stiletto.]

The boldfaced bits are The Times’ euphemisms for what Hillary’s supporters described as widespread voter intimidation and fraud in caucus states that deprived their candidate of the nomination.

† Fed up with farmers: Agriculture groups and “family farmers” successfully pressured the Obama administration to weaken proposed new rules that would have sharply limited child labor on farms (related article, eighth item on the page), The Washington Times reports:

Communities across the rural heartland had attacked the rules, saying they threatened a traditional way of life and could undermine the viability of many family farming operations.

The Labor Department announced Wednesday it would "repropose" the new regulations, allowing for more public comment on whether children could engage in farm jobs, including working with livestock and equipment.

Department officials said they were seeking a balance between protecting child workers in hazardous conditions and "respecting rural traditions."

The "parental exemption" rule, which is covered by the department's Wage and Hour Division, sets the rules on which children may be allowed to work on family farms.

Contrary to the bucolic image of Farmer John teaching John Jr. how to drive a tractor or shuck corn on the family’s acreage, the ugly truth is that commercial farmers want to preserve the tradition of their illegal alien farm workers to bring their children into the fields and orchards with them.

† It’s not news if it happens to a journalist: Jan Brewer’s pointedly pointed finger at President Barack Hussein Obama led to accusations ranging from disrespect to racism, but it turns out that in 2006, NBC’s Brian Williams practically poked President Bush in the chest with his finger during an interview – and the MSM took no notice of the incident back then (related article, seventh item on the page). page). Similarly, Obama’s own finger-pointing has gone unremarked upon.

In a Washington Times op-ed, National Review Online’s Jonah Goldberg calls “the wildly overhyped confrontation” between the two politicians “a harbinger of greater inanities to come” because Obama “can't run on his record”:

Nothing excites the base of the Democratic Party more - or gets more free media - than wildly implausible hysterics over racism, even when there's so little evidence to support the claim. …

[F]or reasons that say a lot more about the weaknesses of the first black president, liberals yearn to … make this campaign into something more exciting than a referendum on Mr. Obama.

† AZ becomes the epicenter of civility: In an interview with Martin Bashir about Republicans supposedly being “disrespectful” towards President Barack Hussein Obama, Jesse Jackson said, “Demonizing the President is both morally wrong and dangerous,” adding that it will lead to “somebody shoots an AK-47 in the White House.” Never mind that the only person who shot at the White House since Obama took office is a Mexican-American fellow who hung around the Occupy D.C. encampment. (related article, seventh item on the page). Wasn’t there some sort of organization formed in AZ to restore civility to political discourse by denouncing the sort of unfounded accusations that Jackson made?

† So easy, a conservative can do it: Part III: On the heels of yet another study that links conservatism and low IQ (related article, fourth item on the page), comes this Match.com survey that finds Republicans have more satisfying sex (that is to say, they have more orgasms) than Democrats (53 percent vs.40 percent). So if Dems are so smart, how come they’re not as good in the sack as Repubs? If other pseudo-scientific studies of conservatives (whom researchers always conflate with Republicans) are to be believed, it’s because they are “dumb.” Sex is, after all, instinctual, and does not require a high IQ.

† Contraceptive fail: Another oral contraceptive manufacturer has switched the active and inert pills in the 28-day blister packs, The Wall Street Journal reports:

Drug maker Pfizer Inc. recalled about a million packs of birth-control pills that weren't packaged correctly, which raised the risk of unplanned pregnancies among women who relied on the pills.

Pulled from shelves were Lo/Ovral-28 pills and their Norgestrel generic versions …

Pfizer said Wednesday that it believes only 30 packs had packaging problems, including having the active and inert tablets out of order, or lacking the proper amount of each kind of pill. the company said it recalled a million packs in the U.S. to be safe. …

The pills were made and shipped last year by a Pfizer plant in upstate New York, on the Canadian border. To encourage proper use, active pills in the packs are colored white, while the inert tablets are pink. An alert customer noticed that her pack had a pink pill where a white one should have been, and complained to the company on Oct. 19, a Pfizer spokeswoman said.

Neither the Food and Drug Administration, nor Pfizer – which says it has fixed the problems with packaging pills and inspecting the blister packs – have received any reports of unintended pregnancies.