Motivational-Educational-Historical-Inspirational-Enjoyable
"Daily Motivations"
What you get by achieving your goals is not as important as what you become by achieving your goals. -- Zig Ziglar
The charity that hastens to proclaim its good deeds, ceases to be charity, and is only pride and ostentation. -- William Hutton
Don't be sweet, lest you be eaten up; don't be bitter, lest you be spewed out. -- Jewish Proverb
"The Patriot Post"
"I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers. If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth.. And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except to sovereign people, is still the newest and most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man." -- Ronald Reagan
"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin." -- Ronald Reagan
"Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of..... On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important questions upon which rest the happiness and the liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves." --Dr. Joseph Warren
"The year Kentuckians first sent me to Washington ... the Republican candidate for president won 49 of 50 states. That same year you could walk from Maine to California and from Oregon to Florida, without leaving a state that had a Republican in the Senate. You would have found Republican governors on the East Coast, the West Coast, the Great Plains, and above and below the Mason Dixon Line. We were everywhere.... In politics, there's a name for a regional party: it's called a minority party. And I didn't sign up to be a member of a regional party. I know no one in this room did either. As Republicans, we know that commonsense conservative principles aren't regional, but I think we have to admit that our sales job has been [regional]. And in my view, that needs to change." -- Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell at the GOP's National Committee winter meeting
"The BIG lie" -- "I can pledge to you that no earmark or any of that, any description you want to make of it, will be in the bill that passes the House. ... There will be no earmarks in the economic recovery package that passes the House." -- Nancy Pelosi
"ADF"
ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT ADF MEDIA RELATIONS: (480) 444-0020 or www.telladf.org/pressroom
Firefighters forced to participate in ‘Gay Pride Parade’ win heated legal battle
ADF-allied attorney receives favorable verdict on harassment charge against city of San Diego on behalf of firefighters
SAN DIEGO — An Alliance Defense Fund allied attorney representing four San Diego firefighters received a favorable jury verdict Tuesday in a lawsuit against the city. The San Diego Fire Department disregarded the firefighters’ objections to taking part in the city’s “Gay Pride Parade” celebrating homosexual behavior and retaliated against them for later complaining about the harassment they endured during the event.
“Government employees should never be forced to participate in events or acts that violate their sincerely held beliefs,” said ADF-allied attorney Charles LiMandri, the West Coast Regional Director of the Thomas More Law Center. “We are pleased with the jury’s verdict recognizing the firefighters’ right to abstain from activities that they consider morally offensive and that subject them to harassment.”
After being forced to participate–despite numerous objections–in San Diego’s 2007 “Gay Pride Parade,” four firefighters from the SDFD were sexually harassed through lewd cat calls and obscene gestures at the event, which was replete with sexual displays and graphic images. The firefighters then suffered harassment and retaliation after complaining to superiors about the parade. The city was well aware of the firefighters’ objection to participating in the parade because of its lascivious nature exhibited in past years, including unwanted sexual comments and gestures from participants and spectators.
“Many people may mistakenly think the ‘gay pride’ parade is merely a ‘fun’ event,” said ADF Senior Counsel Joe Infranco, who is co-counsel in the case. “They never would have imagined the crude sexual harassment these firefighters were forced to endure. But in truth, the goal of homosexual behavior advocates is to undermine society’s long-held values. They continue to seek this, whether by demanding participation in ‘gay pride’ parades or by trampling the democratic process to redefine marriage.”
After the lawsuit Ghiotto v. City of San Diego was filed in the Superior Court for the County of San Diego, the fire department changed its policy so employees will no longer be forced to participate against their will.
ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.
"Heritage Foundation"
The Heritage Foundation
THURSDAY, FEB. 19, 2009
The ‘Buy America’ Threat to Our Economic Recovery
As destructive as we believe the economic stimulus bill that President Barack Obama signed Tuesday is, the Obama Administration could undo a significant portion of the legislation's damage today, and this weekend. President Obama will travel to Ottawa today to meet with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Also today, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will travel to South Korea before moving onto China Friday. Obama and Clinton can help avert disaster for America and the world by reassuring our global trading partners that the "Buy America" provisions snuck into the economic stimulus bill by the protectionist left are completely meaningless.
Recent Entries
Is Nuclear Energy Safer Than Wind?
Don’t Ditch Winston
Canada: A Valued Partner in Need of Reassurance
Does Obama Oppose the Fairness Doctrine?
Shocking: Americans Oppose Giving More Money to Detroit
There has been a renewed debate in this country over the effectiveness of the New Deal, but there is one thing that the vast majority of economists all agree on: the protectionist Smoot-Haley Tariff Act of 1930 played a significant role in worsening the Great Depression. Smoot-Hawley cut the amount of American imports in half and dramatically shrunk exports. Unemployment grew from 3.2% in 1929 to 8.7% in 1930 and peaked at 24.9% in 1933. While the "Buy America" provisions in the economic stimulus bill are not as pernicious as Smoot-Hawley, they come at a perilous time for world trade and the world economy.
According to a recent World Trade Organization report, the economic downturn has prompted only a few instances of protectionism world wide ... so far. Embracing the protectionist "Buy America" provisions in the economic stimulus bill would send a clear message to our world trading partners that the United States is turning its back on free trade and would spark a devastating trade war at a time the U.S. economy can least afford one.
Candidate Obama sent some very distressing signals about his commitment to free trade. He told primary voters in Ohio, "Ten years after NAFTA passed, Senator Clinton said it was good for America. Well, I don’t think NAFTA has been good for America — and I never have." Fortunately for the American economy, President Obama has refined that position. In a recent interview, Obama reassured the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that, "It’s not in anybody’s interest to see that trade diminish." His deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough was even clearer: "This is no time to -- for anybody to give the impression that somehow we are interested in less rather than more trade."
But many Canadians are not convinced by Obama's new promises. Addressing the "Buy America" provisions directly, a column in the Globe and Mail noted: "While the bill was amended to comply with international law, we believe these reassurances are largely false." Canada is one of our largest trading partners with the equivalent of $1.5 billion a day in goods crossing between us. Obama must reassure Canada, and the world, that the "Buy America" provisions in the stimulus bill were a meaningless hat tip to his labor base. Otherwise, not only will American taxpayers not get the best value for their taxpayer stimulus dollars, but the very foundation of our economic recovery will be undermined.
QUICK HITS
The Federal Reserve issued a bleak forecast yesterday, projecting high unemployment through 2011.
The Obama Administration unveiled a $275 billion plan to help select homeowners avoid foreclosure yesterday.
The Obama Administration doubled taxpayer commitment to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, promising to reimburse the companies for up to $400 billion in losses on their investments in mortgage loans.
The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said yesterday, that 2009 will be "a tough year" and said the U.S. will have to keep about 60,000 troops in Afghanistan for at least the next three to four years.
Because Americans do not talk about race as often as he thinks they should, Attorney General Eric Holder called the United States "a nation of cowards" yesterday.
"Simple Truths" - Just another, and beautiful! - oyh
http://www.thejoymovie.com:80/
"The Web"
George Jones - Tribute - Turn on your sound and scroll down for pics
Click here 50,000
http://home.comcast.net/~singingman7/TNOTW.htm
"ACRU"
February 19, 2009
ACRU Launches FreedomtoListen.org
There is a growing clamor by liberal members of Congress to reinstate the effect of the Fairness Doctrine (rescinded by Ronald Reagan in 1987) by either congressional action or regulation by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The Fairness Doctrine, more aptly described as the Censorship Doctrine, would infringe upon the American people's opportunity to listen to commentary and news of their choice on the radio.
Without a staunch defense of this basic American freedom, all other constitutionally protected liberties, for which our brave men and women have fought and died, will be put at risk. The American Civil Rights Union, through this campaign, will expose, illuminate and fight any and all efforts to take away our Freedom to Listen.
Is the Stimulus Act Anti-Religious?
The stimulus bill included a caveat that federal funds may not be used for religious worship.
Tobin Grant | posted 2/18/2009 01:23PM
President Obama signed into law a $787 billion economic stimulus bill that includes a provision authorizing funds for higher education institutions. Some conservative church-state watchers have decried the caveat's language as discriminatory against religious schools.
The bill was approved by both the U.S. House and Senate at the end of last week, including a qualification that federal funds may not be used to renovate facilities "(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or school department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission."
Last week, former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee called the stimulus bill "anti-religious." The Christian Coalition said the Democratic Congress is trying to satisfy "anti-Christian whims." Likewise, the Traditional Values Coalition declared that the economic package "stimulates anti-Christian bigotry." The American Center for Law and Justice stated that "this provision has nothing to do with economic stimulus and everything to do with religious discrimination." And Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) called the bill "an attack on people of faith," and introduced an amendment that would remove restrictions for giving federal money to religious universities.
However, the language in the stimulus bill is neither new nor unusual, since restrictions have been part of federal higher education policy for over 40 years. Rather than inhibit religion, these restrictions make possible federal funding to religious colleges and universities.
In the final version of the stimulus bill, funds for higher education are included as part of the block grants to states. Not only does the bill state that these funds may be used to renovate facilities at private institutions, it also states that governors may not consider "the type or mission" of a college or university. The states must consider religious institutions along with public and other private colleges and universities.
There are only two major restrictions on the use of funds. First, the funding cannot be used for athletic facilities or other events where admission is charged. Second, the facilities must have a religiously neutral purpose.
Even with these two restrictions, nearly all buildings at religious colleges and universities would qualify for funding. The only facilities that would not qualify are chapels, church buildings, and others that are most often used for explicitly religious purposes. The key is to define the primary purpose of a facility. If its purpose is religious teaching or worship, then the building is ineligible. If the facility is used for classes, housing, or study, however, then it can be renovated using funds from the stimulus bill.
When the Senate originally considered the stimulus bill, it voted down an amendment by DeMint that would have removed the religious restrictions. The DeMint Amendment's stated purpose was "to allow the free exercise of religion at institutions of higher education that receive funding" from the stimulus bill. The irony is that without the inclusion of such language, funds would not be permitted to go toward religious colleges or universities at all.
At issue is whether the restrictions would mean that no religious activity could occur in a federally funded facility, or whether some religious activity could occur so long as the primary purpose is religiously neutral. DeMint argued that the restrictions would eliminate all religious activity. He claimed that "any university or college that takes any of the money in this bill to renovate an auditorium, a dorm, or student center could not hold a National Prayer Breakfast there any longer because of what is written in this bill."
This is highly unlikely. Moreover, this is not a change in policy. Federal funding of facilities and programs have included these restrictions for nearly half a century. Even with the stimulus bill signed into law, student religious life will be the same as it was before.
When the DeMint Amendment came up for a vote, it was defeated 43—52. The vote was nearly a straight, party-line vote. Only a couple of Republicans voted against it, and only a handful of Democrats supported it.
For advocates of religious higher education, it is likely best that the amendment failed. Here's why: With the restrictions, religious colleges and universities are able to qualify for the same type of funding as public and secular schools do. Without them, such funding would likely be considered unconstitutional.
The history of federal funding for higher education facilities goes back to the Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963. As with the stimulus bill, the act allowed funding to go to private colleges and universities. However, the act explicitly prohibited funding for "any facility used or to be used for sectarian instruction or as a place for religious worship." Grants were also prohibited for facilities "primarily in connection with any part of the program of a school or department of divinity."
In 1971, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of such prohibitions in Tilton v. Richardson. At issue was whether federal support for facilities such as libraries, music halls, or science buildings was unconstitutional because the colleges were religiously affiliated. In a split decision, the court found that the act was constitutional. Grants may go to support "religiously neutral" facilities at religious colleges because the purpose of the act was to promote education, not religion.
In the nearly four decades since Tilton v. Richardson, the constitutionality of federal funding for projects and programs at religious institutions has been upheld in the courts and supported by Congress. In the last Supreme Court case to consider public funds and religion at colleges, Rosenberger v. University of Virginia in 1995, the court found that as long as the purpose of a facility is religiously neutral, students have the right to use that facility for religious purposes, even at public universities If a college allows students to use a conference room for any social function, it must allow them to use it even as a place to pray and study the Bible together.
Funding of higher education is, in some sense, our largest faith-based initiative. And like other faith-based initiatives, what allows the government to support education at religious colleges and universities is the necessary caveat that the federal funding be used for religiously neutral purposes. Far from being "anti-religious," the restrictions in the stimulus bill are the same old prohibitions that have allowed the federal government to help religious colleges and universities educate students for the past 40 years.
Tobin Grant is an associate professor of political science at Southern Illinois University — Carbondale. He is coauthor of Expression vs. Equality: The Politics of Campaign Finance Reform and dozens of academic articles on politics and religion.
From one of my friends - While I continue to wait by my mailbox, waiting for my Obama "Stimulus" check, it seems, maybe, it is already in the mail! Will each of you agree?
Hey folks, great news...I just got my stimulus package in the mail today...
hope you got yours as well. It is really swell...
Mine had...watermelon seeds, kool-aid, cornbread mix, and a coupon for KFC.
Now I have everything I've wanted in life.
Notice: The first line in third full paragraph, "create or save" 3.5 million jobs. That is just creative speak, by saying "create or save" there is absolutely no way to measure the outcome. Did he create jobs, or save jobs? How do you measure jobs saved? They are open to use whatever goofy stats they want. In the second paragraph, BO is just trying to keep the troops active in Hitler fashion. Finally, a website for people to share their sob stories? PUKE!! After the bill BO signed Tuesday, he'll need to keep that site going for years!!
Obama Email: A Big First Step - Thank You
NOTE: This item’s also posted for discussion on page 17 of this ongoing thread here:
http://www.asmainegoes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=680901#680901
From: President Barack Obama
Subject: A big first step -- thank you
Friend --
Today, I signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law.
This is a historic step -- the first of many as we work together to climb out of this crisis -- and I want to thank you for your resolve and your support.
You organized thousands of house meetings. You shared your ideas and personal stories. And you informed your friends and neighbors about the need for immediate action. You continue to be a powerful voice for change throughout the country.
The recovery plan will create or save 3.5 million jobs, provide tax cuts for working and middle-class families, and invest in health care and clean energy.
It's a bold plan to address a huge problem, and it will require my vigilance and yours to make sure it's done right.
I've assigned a team of managers to oversee the implementation of the recovery act. We are committed to making sure no dollar is wasted. But accountability begins with you.
That's why my administration has created Recovery.gov, a new website where citizens can track every dollar spent and every job created. We'll invite you and your neighbors to weigh in with comments and questions.
Our progress will also be measured by the tens of thousands of personal stories submitted by people who are struggling to make ends meet. If you haven't already, you can read stories from families all across the country:
http://my.barackobama.com/yourstories
Your stories are the heart of this recovery plan, and that's what I'll focus on every day as President.
With your continued support, we'll emerge a stronger and more prosperous nation.
Thank you,
President Barack Obama
"The email Bag"
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Obama supporters
http://current.com/items/89808318/dear_ame...
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Obama supporters, et al:
We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile; slate it up to irreconcilable differences, and go on our own ways.
Here is a model dissolution agreement:
Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes. We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O'Donnell (you are however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move them).
We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies, and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan Hockey Moms, greedy CEO's, and Rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood.
You can make nice with Iran, Palestine, and France, and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protestors. When our allies or way of life are under assault, we'll provide them job security. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian Values.. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, and Shirley McClain. You can have the U.N. But we will no longer be paying the bill. We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru Station Wagon you can find. You can give everyone healthcare, if you can find any practicing Doctors (that is practicing, Howard Dean) who will follow to your turf (sic). We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach The World To Sing, Kum Ba Ya, or We Are the World. We'll practice trickle down economics, and you can give trickle up poverty its best shot. Since it often so offends you we'll keep our History, our Name, and our Flag.
Would you agree to this? If so please pass it along to other likeminded patriots, and if you do not agree just hit delete and hang on. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you ANWAR on who will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S. please take Barbra Streisand.
Baptist Shampoo
While shopping in a grocery store, two Baptist church ladies happened to pass by the beer, wine, and liquor section.
One asked the other if she would like a beer. The second good Baptist sister answered that, indeed, it would be very nice to have one, but that she would feel uncomfortable about purchasing it. The first sister replied that she would handle that without a problem.
She picked up a six-pack and took it to the cashier.
The cashier had a surprised look, so the good Baptist sister said, 'This is for washing our hair.' Without blinking an eye, the cashier reached under the counter and put a package of pretzel sticks in the bag with the beer and said, 'The curlers are on me.'
IN GOD WE TRUST!
No comments:
Post a Comment