ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20090727

Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable



“My Comments”

First of all, may I ask everyone to pray for Preacher Hank Parker of Unionville Baptist Church, Monroe, NC who was too sick to attend Church on Sunday and deliver a sermon. I tell others, Preacher Hank works only some eighty (80) hours weekly for God and his Church as a full-time Pastor, leaving some eighty eighty-eight (88) hours left for his family of a weekly schedule. Additionally, at the Sunday evening service, while our Youth Group were presenting an inspirational skit with Pastor Hank’s daughter, Kelsey Parker performing a star act which was so physical, Kelsey was overcome by exertion. Kelsey returned some time later, joining the Youth Group with their singing. After the singing and moments later, Kelsey collapsed from “fainting” while in the Sanctuary. The EMS was called who came and treated Kelsey for overexertion, then released her to go home with rest and more fluids. With that, please pray for Preacher Hank and daughter Kelsey for a quick recovery. At the time, keep Preacher Hank’s wife, Wendy and other daughter Brittany in (y)our Prayers.

Secondly, on Monday morning, I am going to be required to put my computer into Tekshop of North Carolina, Inc. Two of my most important files for this publication is locked up and I don't know how to unlock it, but Jim Rankin will. With that in mind, ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report may be delayed for a couple of days.



"Daily Motivations"

"Leave nothing for tomorrow which can be done today." -- Abraham Lincoln
(1809-1865)

"The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather a lack of will." -- Vince Lombardi (1913-1970)



"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)

"God showed His great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners." (Romans 5:8)

On a cold Christmas Eve in 1952, when Korea was in the throes of civil war, one young woman struggled along a village street, obviously soon to deliver a child. She pleaded with passersby, "Help me! Please ... my baby!" No one paid any attention to her.

She had heard of a missionary who lived in a neighboring village who might help her. Hurriedly, she began walking to that village. But the night was so cold. Snow began to fall. Realizing that her time was near to deliver her baby, she took shelter under a bridge. There, alone, her baby was born on Christmas Eve.

Worried about her newborn son, she took off her own clothes, wrapped them around the baby, and held him close in the warm circle of her arms. On Christmas day, the missionary braved the new snow to deliver Christmas packages. As he walked along, he heard the cry of a baby. He followed the sound to a bridge. Under it, he found a young mother frozen to death, still clutching her crying newborn son. The missionary tenderly lifted the baby out of her arms.

When the baby was ten years old, his now adoptive father told him the story of his mother's death on Christmas Eve. The young boy cried, realizing the sacrifice his mother had made for him.

The next morning, the missionary rose early to find the young boy's bed empty. Seeing a fresh set of small footprints in the snow outside, he bundled up warmly in a winter coat and followed the trail. It led back to the bridge where the young mother had died.

As the missionary approached the bridge, he stopped, stunned. Kneeling in the snow was his son, naked and shivering uncontrollably. Moving closer, he heard the boy say through chattering teeth: "Mother, were you this cold for me?"

As we picture our Lord Jesus Christ hanging on the cross, we ask, "Lord, did you suffer that much for me?" The answer, of course, is a resounding "yes."



"The Patriot Post"

"Nothing so strongly impels a man to regard the interest of his constituents, as the certainty of returning to the general mass of the people, from whence he was taken, where he must participate in their burdens." -- George Mason, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 17, 1788

"We have duties, for the discharge of which we are accountable to our Creator and benefactor, which no human power can cancel. What those duties are, is determinable by right reason, which may be, and is called, a well informed conscience." -- Theophilus Parsons, the Essex Result, 1778

"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave." -- John Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772

"Mr. Speaker, the Cap and Trade bill proposes what amounts to endlessly increasing taxes on any enterprises that produce carbon dioxide or other so-called greenhouse gas emissions. We need to understand what that means. It has profound implications for agriculture, construction, cargo and passenger transportation, energy production, baking and brewing -- all of which produce enormous quantities this innocuous and ubiquitous compound. In fact, every human being produces 2.2 pounds of carbon dioxide every day -- just by breathing. So applying a tax to the economy designed to radically constrict carbon dioxide emissions means radically constricting the economy. And this brings us to the fine point of it. When you discuss the folly of the Hoover Administration -- how it turned the recession of 1929 into the depression of the 1930's, the first thing that economists point to is the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act that imposed new taxes on over 20,000 imported products. Waxman Markey [cap and trade bill] is our generation's Smoot Hawley. In fact, it's worse because it imposes new taxes on an infinitely larger number of domestic products on a scale that utterly dwarfs Smoot-Hawley. ... In the most serious recession since the Great Depression -- why would members of this house want to repeat the same mistakes that produced that Great Depression? Watching how California has just wrecked its economy and destroyed its finances, why would they want to do the same thing to our nation? Mr. Speaker, this is deadly serious stuff. It transcends ideology and politics. This House has just made the biggest economic mistake since the days of Herbert Hoover." -- California Rep. Tom McClintock



"NFL News"

Open Letter to the NFL.

To contact NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, send the email To: password@nil.com with Subject: Password Help. Provide the following information in the Body of your e-mail: Login ID; First Name; Last Name; Registered E-mail Address; Zip Code; Date of Birth. - oyh

You may also use the NFL “Contact Form” at: http://www.nil.com/contact-us

Dear Mr. Commissioner Goodell,

I read the article in today's Washington Post (9-25-09) on page 1, entitled "Question Facing Goodell: Does Vick Know How It Feels?"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/24/AR2009072401951.html

The article states, "According to reports, after a three-hour meeting with Vick on Thursday, Goodell has tentatively decided to allow him to attend the opening of training camp next week," and adds that you stated, "we are engaging in a careful and thoughtful process, and no decisions have been made," spokesman Greg Aiello said.

The Washington Post article also states and I believe, too, "Vick killed and maimed animals for sport and treated them as discardable when they were played out and used up. His presence on the field will associate the NFL with cruelty as public entertainment and put the worst possible connotation on a word so often used to describe the league: 'gladiatorial.' People will assume Vick learned this inhumane behavior playing the game, and some will say the league sanctions it."

I agree with the Ethical Treatment of Animals representatives. They "have called on Goodell to give Vick a full psychological evaluation before allowing him to play, claiming he shows signs of antisocial personality disorder, which means he takes pleasure in harming things, is remorseless, and the chance of his recidivism is high."

The article also states, "According to PETA, Vick enjoyed placing pets in the cage with fighting pit bulls." ..."PETA President Ingrid Newkirk told the Newport News Daily Press, 'Saying sorry and getting his ball back after being caught enjoying killing dogs in hideously cruel ways for many years doesn't cut it.'"

Just remember HE ADMITTED TO THIS AWESOME ACT OF CRUELTY! No matter what good he has done in the past, there is no remorse that could even touch forgiveness of such acts of cruelty! Mr. Goodell, you should not even listen to Vick's supposedly remorse. He is just saying that to get you on his side. He is not sorry. He just wants to get back his job as an example to the nationwide community which now he can't possibly do; no matter how much good he thinks he can do.

Again, Vick is a very sick man and I beg of you to not reinstate him!

Thank you in advance for your attention to these notations from the Washington Post and others mentioned in the July 25, 09 edition, front page.

Nellie Austin

NFL Fan



"The Web"

Confucius Says:

Man who run in front of car get tired.



Man who run behind car get exhausted.



Rasmussen: Obama Double-Digit Negatives

A new Rasmussen Reports poll shows that President Barack Obama's rating in Rasmussen's Presidential Approval Index has hit negative double digits for the first time.

The survey found that 29 percent of voters strongly approve of Obama's job performance, while 40 percent strongly disapprove.

Rasmussen calculates its Presidential Approval Index by subtracting the "strongly disapprove" figure from the "strongly approve" figure. As a result, Obama's overall score is a minus-11. That's the first time his rating has reached negative double digits.

Other results of the poll:

49 percent somewhat approve of Obama's performance.

50 percent disapprove of Obama's performance.

76 percent see Obama as liberal.

48 percent see Obama as very liberal.

54 percent primarily blame former President George W. Bush for America's economic woes.

25 percent say the U.S. economy has been aided by the economic stimulus package.

53 percent oppose the Democratic healthcare reform package.

37 percent say deficit reduction should be Obama's top priority.

20 percent say healthcare should be Obama's top priority.

The poll is based on answers from 1,500 likely voters. It has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.



Obama’s Healthcare Plan

-Did Obama's speech make you cry from boredom and lack of veracity? Here is what he should have said about his health care bill

http://www.aconservativevoicetoday.com/2009/07/did-obamas-speech-make-you-cry-from.html

Pg 22 of the HC Bill mandates the Government will audit books of all employers that self insure.

Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill — a Government committee (good luck with that!) will decide what treatments/benefits a person may receive.

Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill — YOUR HEALTHCARE WILL BE RATIONED!

Pg 42 of HC Bill — The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you.

PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill — HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Pg 58 HC Bill — Government will have real-time access to individual's finances and a National ID Healthcard will be issued!

Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Government will have direct access to your bank accts for election funds transfer.

PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community organizations (read: ACORN).

Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Government will create an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Government control.

PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill — Government mandates linguistic appropriate services. Example — Translation for illegal aliens.

Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Government will use groups, i.e. ACORN & Americorps, to sign up individuals for Government HC plan.

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill — Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans. AARP members — your Health care WILL be rationed.

PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill — Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice.

pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue Government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Government Monopoly.

pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill — Doctors/ AMA — The Government will tell YOU what you can earn.

Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE.

Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.

Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)

Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (the GOVERNMENT) will have access to ALL Americans' finances and personal records.

PG 203 Line 14-15 HC — "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that.

Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected.

Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill — Doctors — doesn't matter what specialty — will all be paid the same.

PG 253 Line 10-18 Government sets value of Doctor's time, professional judgment, etc. Literally, value of humans.

PG 265 Sec 1131 Government mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries.

Pg 317 L 13-20 OMG!! PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government tells Doctors what/how much they can own.

Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion — Government will mandate hospitals cannot expand.

Pg 354 Sec 1177 — Government will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs people!

PG 425 Lines 4-12 Government mandates Advance Care Planning Consultations. Think Senior Citizens end of life prodding.

PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in how to die.

PG 427 Lines 15-24 Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The Government has a say in how your life ends.

PG 429 Lines 10-12 "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from the Government to end a life!

Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATION. 1 monthly payment to a community-based organization. (Like ACORN?)

Obama IS a socialist, there is no doubt about it now.



Obama Health Plan to Cover 12 Million Illegals

By: David A. Patten

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/health_care_obama/2009/07/19/237484.html?s=al&promo_code=83A3-1

On Friday, Democrats moved one step closer to giving free health insurance to the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal aliens when they successfully defeated a Republican-backed amendment, offered by Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., that would have prevented illegal aliens from receiving government-subsidized health care under the proposed plan backed by House Democrats and President Barack Obama.

The House Ways and Means Committee nixed the Heller amendment by a 26-to-15 vote along straight party lines, and followed this action by passing the 1,018-page bill early Friday morning by a 23-to-18 margin, with three Democrats voting against the plan.

The Democratic plan will embrace Obama’s vision of bringing free government medical care to more than 45 million uninsured people in America – a significant portion of whom are illegal aliens.

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, costs under the Obama plan being proposed by the House will saddle citizens with $1.04 trillion in new federal outlays over the next decade.

Congressional Democrats and Obama have argued that their health plan is necessary to contain rising health care costs.

But, last Thursday, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf testified before the Senate Budget Committee and warned lawmakers that the proposed “legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs."

A key factor increasing costs is that Democratic plan provides for blanket coverage to as much as 15 percent of the U.S. population not currently insured, including illegals.

Democrats had insisted throughout the health-care reform debate that illegals would be ineligible for the so-called public option plan that is to be subsidized by taxpayers.

"We're not going to cover undocumented aliens, undocumented workers," Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, told reporters in May. "That's too politically explosive."

Republicans, however, point out that the Democrats, by refusing to accept the Heller amendment, would deny health agencies from conducting simple database checks to verify citizenship. Many states give illegals driver licenses, which will be sufficient to get free health care under the plan.

Critics also contend that millions of illegals who already have counterfeit Social Security cards or other fraudulent documents. There is no enforcement mechanism in the legislation, experts say, to prevent illegals who use fake IDs to obtain jobs from also obtaining taxpayer-subsidized health insurance.

GOP representatives introduced the amendment to provide a way to weed out non-citizens from the program.

A description of the amendment on Heller's Web site state it would "better screen applicants for subsidized health care to ensure they are actually citizens or otherwise entitled to it."

The Web post added, "The underlying bill is insufficient for the purpose of preventing illegal aliens from accessing the bill’s proposed benefits, as it does not provide mechanisms allowing those administering the program to ensure illegal aliens cannot access taxpayer-funded subsidies and benefits."

The Heller amendment would have required that individuals applying for the public health care option would be subject to two systems used to verify immigration status already in use by the government: The Income and Eligibility Verification System (IEVS) and the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program.

The two systems cross-reference Social Security numbers and employment information to establish whether an individual is a U.S. citizen.

Critics: Free Health Care Means More Illegals

A recent Rasmussen Reports poll found that an overwhelming 80 percent of Americans oppose covering illegals in any public health care bill.

Anti-immigration activists say the availability of low-cost benefits, including health insurance and in-state tuition, will only lure more immigrants to come to the United States.

Political analyst Dick Morris, in his recently released best-selling book “Catastrophe”, warns that giving illegal free health care will lead to a flood of new illegals who can take advantage of such a benefit not offered in their home countries.

William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration, agrees with that sentiment, writing, "Each state and federal elected official must know that illegal aliens should not be given licenses, in-state tuition, mortgages, bank accounts, welfare, or any other benefit short of emergency medical care and law enforcement accommodations before they are deported."

But a small fraction of illegals end up deported, as many make widespread use of fake IDs to easily gain access to government benefits programs.

"Experts suggest that approximately 75 percent of working-age illegal aliens use fraudulent Social Security cards to obtain employment," wrote Ronald W. Mortensen in a recent Center for Immigration Studies research paper. Mortensen says one of the big misconceptions about illegals is that they are undocumented.

James R. Edwards Jr., co-author of The Congressional Politics of Immigration Reform, recently wrote on National Review Online that "it's hard to envision how health reform can avoid tripping the immigration booby trap."

Edwards says none of the legislation under consideration actually requires any state, federal, or local agency to check the immigration status of those who apply for the program.

The assumption is that companies have vetted their employees to ensure they are eligibility for legal employment – a difficult task for employers given the active market in fraudulent documents. Thus Edwards maintains "some of the money distributed … inevitably would go to illegal aliens."

The estimates of illegal aliens in the United States without health insurance vary. The most commonly cited statistic, attributed to the Center for Immigration Statistics and the U.S. Census Bureau, holds that 15 percent to 22 percent of the nation's 46 million uninsured are illegal aliens. That would be between 6.9 million and 10.1 million people. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama claimed the nation United States has 12 million or more undocumented aliens.

John Sheils of the Lewin Group, a health care consulting firm owned by UnitedHealth Group, recently told National Public Radio that about 6.1 million illegals – about half of all illegals in the United States – lack documentation and therefore would not be legally eligible for benefits under the current health care reforms.

Sheils says the other half of the nation's illegals – 5 million to 6 million – use false documents to obtain on-the-books employment. Many of them are already insured under their employers' plans, he added.

"A lot of those people are getting employer health benefits as part of their compensation," Sheils told NPR.

Certainly, some contend that undocumented workers who are gainfully employed and receiving benefits such as health insurance are contributing to society. But the fact remains that, once equipped with a fake ID, a person in the United States illegally can obtain both a job and the benefits that go with it.

Estimates of the cost of providing illegals with medical care vary. Most uninsured illegals who need medical attention obtain it from hospital emergency rooms. And several states are already straining under the huge burden of paying for the health costs of illegal aliens.

According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), in 2004 California's estimated cost of unreimbursed medical care was $1.4 billion. Texas estimated its cost at $850 million annually, and Arizona at $400 million.

Non-border states shoulder heavy burdens as well. Virginia's annual cost of providing health care for undocumented workers is approximately $100 million per year, FAIR reports, while Florida's health care cost is about $300 million annually.

One of the ironies of the proposed legislation is that it would fine American citizens who opt not to purchase insurance coverage, but would exempt illegals from such fines. This is presumably due to the fact that they are not supposed to participate in the program anyway.

Even if no illegals were likely to benefit from health care reform, Democrats have made it clear that amnesty is the next item on their ambitious legislative agenda.

"I've got to do health care, I've got to do energy, and then I'm looking very closely at doing immigration," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., declared in June.

Reid explained the urgent need for amnesty in terms very similar to those that Democrats have used to press for health care reform. "We have an immigration system that's broken and needs repair," Reid said.

Immigration expert Edwards, for one, says health-care reform may itself need serious medical attention before it is healthy enough pass through Congress.

"The American people may soon realize how much health reform will benefit immigrants and cost the native-born," he writes. "When that happens, the volatile politics of immigration could derail universal health care."



Hoyer Says Abortion Funding in Health-Care Bill Splits House Democrats

By Edwin Mora and Marie Magleby

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=51370

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D.-Md.)

Washington (CNSNews.com) - House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) admitted Tuesday that there is dissension among House Democrats about whether the final health-care reform bill should include federal funding for abortions -- so much so, that the issue is still under discussion in the Democratic Caucus.

“There are very strong feelings on both sides of that issue, and we are working to resolve them so we have the votes to pass this bill,” Hoyer said at his weekly pen-and-pad news conference on Capitol Hill.

Hoyer also assured reporters that he believes a “public option” for government-funded health care would be part of the final bill, but said that the details are still the subject of negotiations with conservative Blue Dog Democrats, who don’t want the government-run insurance mandate.

“I think there’s going to be a public option,” he said. “And I don’t think the pubic option is a non-negotiable item for the Blue Dogs. They have certain things they want to see in a public option – they’d like to see the trigger, but I don’t think that is going to happen. But they also want to see a level playing field and I think that, to the extent that we can affect, it’s going to happen. So there are ways and means of moving forward on that.”

Hoyer, meanwhile, echoed President Obama, who expressed confidence Monday that Congress was “closer than ever before” to reaching agreement on the health-care reform bill.

“Everybody wants to see a health-care reform bill that they can vote for,” Hoyer said. “I don’t think there are any of you that have found anybody that says ‘I don’t want to do health-care reform.’”

But the majority leader clarified, however, that he was referring only to Democratic lawmakers and blasted congressional Republicans of wanting the bill to fail “without considering the needs of the American people.”

“I’m not talking about the Republican side,” Hoyer said. “I’m talking about our side of the aisle. On the Republican side of the aisle, as I’ve told you, they want us to fail.

“Their (Republicans’) interest is much more in making failure happen than progress for the American people,” he said.

Hoyer specifically cited Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.)’s vocal opposition to the Democrat-sponsored health-care reform bill as evidence of Republican intentions, quoting DeMint as saying, “’If we re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.’”

According to Hoyer, DeMint’s comment “is consistent with the Luntz memo, and consistent with what, clearly, the Republicans are trying to do.”

Hoyer was referring to a strategy memo written by Republican pollster Frank Luntz, “The Language of Healthcare 2009,” which counseled the GOP with 10 points on how to frame its response to the Democratic health-care plan.

Ironically, Luntz’ memo is a Republican counterpart to a June 2008 memo by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake – “How to Talk About Health Care Reform” -- which counseled “progressives” (liberals) on what language to use to the American public to sell health-care reform.

Hoyer, who did not mention Lake’s strategy memo, did follow the strategy it laid out Tuesday, saying Republicans “were opposed to a health-care bill that, clearly, Americans want – and they have indicated that in poll after poll.”

“(Republicans) want us to fail notwithstanding the fact that our failure will be the failure to get the American public fully involve in the security of health-care coverage,” Hoyer said.

According the latest polls, however, American approval for President Obama’s handling of health-care reform has fallen to 49 per cent while disapproval has reached 44 per cent, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News Poll.

In addition, a new USA Today/Gallup poll shows that 50 per cent of Americans disapprove while 44 per cent approve of Obama’s approach to health-care reform.



To the Members of the United States Senate:

http://conservativehq.com/chq-original/letter-to-senators/

We, the undersigned 156 conservative and constitutional cause leaders, activists and other concerned citizens, respectfully submit a statement in opposition to the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court.

Even President Obama's Supreme Court Nominee Rejects His Views on the Constitution

But Confirmation Conversions Are Not Acceptable for Lifetime Appointments

It is historic, as far as we know, that a nominee to the Supreme Court has gone on record at her confirmation hearing to reject the underlying judicial philosophy of the President who made the nomination.

President Obama said his judicial nominee would be someone with "empathy" and "who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook.'' "That's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges," he said.

Top presidential advisor David Axelrod said in a May 26, 2009 interview that President Obama nominated Judge Sotomayor because "he wanted someone whose philosophy of judging was his," which as applied to the law and constitutional principles was to "be ready to adapt them to a modern context."

In his opening statement at the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings, Sen. Jeff Sessions said, "I will not vote for and no senator should vote for an individual nominated by any president who believes it is acceptable for a judge to allow their personal background, gender, prejudices or sympathies to sway their decision in favor of or against the parties before the court. In my view, such a philosophy is disqualifying."

In response to questioning from Sen. Jon Kyl about whether she agreed with the president's judicial philosophy, Judge Sotomayor replied, "No, sir, I wouldn't approach the issue of judging the way the president does. Judges can't rely on what's in their heart. They don't determine the law. Congress makes the laws. The job of a judge is to apply the law."

Some observers noted that judge Sotomayor appeared to have a "confirmation conversion" about following the law, not personal preferences.

Voters will have their chance to render their judgment about President Obama and his views of governing at the polls. If Judge Sotomayor were confirmed for the Supreme Court, however, her appointment would be for life.

We the undersigned believe that Judge Sotomayor did have a confirmation conversion, perhaps based on her realization that the judicial philosophy she shares with President Obama is in fact disqualifying for confirmation to our highest court, or perhaps because that judicial philosophy is unpopular. It is not an objectionable judicial philosophy that judges may check constitutional abuses by the other branches. However, a judicial philosophy that goes beyond the authority granted by Article III of the Constitution should be disqualifying.

Given that an appointment to the Supreme Court is for life, the statements by the President and his advisors, and Judge Soto mayor's pre-confirmation statements that conflicted with her confirmation testimony, we believe her judicial philosophy is indeed one that should disqualify her from appointment to the Supreme Court.

This is a matter of whether the nominee has demonstrated that she will abide by the role of the judiciary consistent with, and as constrained by, the Constitution.

Judge Sotomayor's rulings, whether dealing with the 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, private property rights, criminal law, use of foreign law, race, equal protection and other areas of law, demonstrate that if she is consistently "empathetic" at all, it is in favor of government power, even beyond constitutional constraints.

Americans are witnessing how much more ideological President Obama is in office compared to "candidate" Obama. He has shown a disturbing disregard for the constitutional limits on presidential and other government power. While we do not hold Judge Sotomayor responsible for her sponsor's ideology, we do believe the Constitution would be placed in further jeopardy if she were confirmed to a lifetime position on the Supreme Court.

We urge the Senate to reject Judge Sotomayor. Judge Sotomayor should remain a judge on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals where her decisions would be subject to the check of the Supreme Court.

President Obama should nominate another candidate whose views of judicial power are demonstrably consistent with Article III of the Constitution. That means the next nominee's views of the judiciary should be demonstrably inconsistent with the President's, whose views are not consistent with Article III, even before that nominee's confirmation hearings.

Respectfully,

(Organization name for identification purposes only)

Carolee Adams
President, Eagle Forum of New Jersey

Bob Barr
Liberty Guard

David Bergeron
Troup County
Georgia Right to Life

Morton C. Blackwell
Conservative Leadership PAC

L. Brent Bozell
Media Research Center

Floyd Brown
President, Western Center for Journalism

H. William Burgess
President, Aloha for All

Thomas Patrick Burke
The Wynnewood Institute

Kathryn Ciano
Vice President, Federalist Society

James N. Clymer
Constitution Party

Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D.
The Beverly LaHaye Institute
Concerned Women for America

Kay R. Daly
Coalition for a Fair Judiciary

David Y. Denholm
Public Service Research Council

Mario Diaz
Concerned Women for America

Elaine Donnelly
President, Center for Military Readiness

Dan Douglass
Interim Hawaii State Coordinator
Campaign for Liberty

Brandon Dutcher
Chairman,
Oklahoma Center-Right Coalition

Fran Eaton
Editor, IllinoisReview.com
former State Pres. Eagle Forum of IL

Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com

Richard W. C. Falknor
Maryland Center-Right Coalition

Mark Fitzgibbons, Esq.
American Target Advertising

Corinne Fuller
His Helping Hand Foundation

Alan M. Gottlieb
Chairman, Citizens Committee for the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Diane Gramley
American Family Association of PA

Sandy Greiner
American Future Fund

William F. Harvey
Emeritus Dean & Professor
Indiana University School of Law
--Indianapolis

Robert Heckman
Capital City Partners

Dr. Carl Herbster
President, AdvanceUSA

Dee Hodges
Maryland Taxpayers Association

David James
President, The Liberty Committee

Patti Kanduch
CWFA of Montana

Richard Kimble
Young America's Foundation

Andrea Lafferty
Traditional Values Coalition

Jimmy LaSalvia
GOProud.org

Harry Levine
VictoryNH.com

Steve Lonegan
Recent NJ GOP gubernatorial candidate

Michelle Madd
CWFA of Colorado

Jeffrey Mazzella
President
Center for Individual Freedom

Abraham H. Miller, Ph.D.
Abraham H. Miller Research

Chuck Muth
Citizen Outreach

Phyllis H. Nemeth
CWFA of California

Richard Norman
The Richard Norman Company

Kent Ostrander
The Family Foundation

Kathleen Patten
American Target Advertising

Ron Pearson
Council for America

Howard Phillips
The Conservative Caucus

Don Racheter
Iowa Wednesday Group

Paul A. Rahe
Hillsdale College

Alfred S. Regnery
The American Spectator

Beverly Roberts
CWFA of Texas

Ron Robinson
Young America's Foundation

Dick Rowland
Center-Right Coalition Meetings-Hawaii

Linda D. Schauer
CWFA of South Dakota

Howard Segermark
Coordinator, Committee for
Consumer-Centered Healthcare

Rev. Louis P. Sheldon
Traditional Values Coalition

Marcena Springer
North Texas CWFA

Judy Stemen
American Family Association

Hon. Steve Stockman
Congressman (ret.)
Presidential Trust

Herbert W. Titus
William J. Olson, P.C.

Piero A. Tozzi, Esq.
C-FAM Catholic Family
& Human Rights Institute

Richard A. Viguerie
ConservativeHQ.com

Mark Williamson
Founder & President
Federal Intercessors

Wendy Wright
Concerned Women for America

Craig Zinkoski
Central NJ/Ocean Co. ACT! For America!

Joshua & Kimberly Abbott
Concerned Citizens - Virginia

Jared Bristol
Concerned Citizen – Maine

Henry C. Clark
Concerned Citizen – New York

John Kekes
Concerned Citizen – New York

Robert J. Muckenhirn
Concerned Citizen – Virginia

Tracy Oetting
Concerned Citizen – Washington

Lauren Patten
Concerned Citizen – Texas

Donna Rastorfer
Concerned Citizen

Dr. Marvin & Elisabeth Schoenecke
Concerned Citizens – Missouri

LaNeil Wright Spivy
Concerned Citizen - Texas

Bret Ulibarri
Concerned Citizen – Massachusetts

Mary Helen Warren
Concerned Citizen - Massachusetts Gary W. Aldrich
Former senior FBI Special Agent
Bestselling author & Patrick Henry scholar

Michael Bass
Conservatives for Change

Helen Blackwell
Virginia Chairman, Eagle Forum

Kenneth Boehm
National Legal and Policy Center

Bill Brooks
North Carolina Family Policy Council

Mary Beth Brown
Author and Columnist

Sandra Puanani Burgess
Co-Founder & Vice President, Aloha for All

Dr. Paul Cameron
Family Research Institute

Kellyanne Conway, Esq.
The Polling Company, Inc.
WomanTrend

David Crowe
Restore America

Marjorie Dannenfelser
Susan B. Anthony List

Candace de Russy
National Review

Tanya Ditty
CWFA of Georgia

Michael P. Donnelly, Esq.
Adjunct Professor Patrick Henry College
Staff Counsel, HSLDA

Douglas S. Doudney
Coalition For Property Rights

Carol Dufrense
CWFA of Ohio

Michelle Easton
Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute

Barbara Elliott
Center for Renewal

Joseph Farah
WorldNetDaily

Don Feder
Don Feder Associates

Peter Flaherty
National Legal and Policy Center

Erin Gabel
CWFA of Ohio
Shari Goodman
Calabasas-West Valley ACT Chapter

Paul Gottfried
Raffensperger, Professor of Humanities
Elizabethtown College

William Greene, Ph.D.
President, RightMarch.com

Colin A. Hanna
Let Freedom Ring

Linda Harvey
President, Mission America

Mike Hodge
The Valley American

Deborah Honeycutt, MD
MHealthS, Inc.

Haven Howard
CWFA of Missouri

Phillip L. Jauregui
Judicial Action Group

Gary G. Kreep
United States Justice Foundation

Peter LaBarbera
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

Tana-Lee
ACT! for America

Curt Levey
Committee for Justice

Micki Lewis
ACT-MIAMI

Tim Macy
Gun Owners of America

Jim Martin
60 Plus Association

Tom McClusky
FRCAction

Manny Miranda
Third Branch

Janne Myrdal
CWFA of North Dakota

C. Preston Noell, III
Tradition, Family, Property, Inc.

William J. Olson
William J. Olson, P.C.

Karl Ottosen
US Federation of Small Businesses

Lowell T. Patterson
Constitution Party

Tony Perkins
Family Research Council

Larry Pratt
Gun Owners of America

Bobbi Radeck
CWFA of Ohio

William Redpath
Chairman, Libertarian National Committee

David A. Ridenour
The Nat. Center for Public Policy Research

Janet Robey
CWFA of Virginia

Allen Roth
Board of ACU
New York State Conservative Party

Austin Ruse
President, Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute

Nancy Schaefer
Eagle Forum of Georgia

Ilya Shapiro
Cato Institute

John M. Snyder
Citizens Committee for the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Mathew D. Staver
Liberty Counsel
Liberty University School of Law

James A. Stever
Professor, University of Cincinnati

Matthew Taylor
Private Sector Solution Advocacy

Kerri Houston Toloczko
Institute for Liberty

Kathryn Ulibarri
Massachusetts Citizens For Life
Worcester Youth Coalition For Life

Carrie Walker
Director, CWFA of Michigan

William Wilson
Americans for Limited Government

Tom Winter
Eagle Publishing

Richard Ziser
Nevada Concerned Citizens

Bruce & Robin Bradley
Concerned Citizens – Alabama

Mario A. Calabrese
Concerned Citizen – District of Columbia

Roy D. Kaylor
MSGT USMC (Ret)

Donna Maxey
Concerned Citizen

Len Munsil, Esq.
Concerned Citizen – Arizona

Larry Passage
Concerned Citizen – New Jersey

Elfrieda Peninger
Concerned Citizen – Missouri

Edward Reott
Concerned Citizen - Utah

Ken & Cindi Slaughter
Concerned Citizens

Linda Stillings
Concerned Citizen

Mary Underdahl
Concerned Citizen - Utah

The following individuals signed the letter after it was sent to Senators:

Frank Gaffney
Center for Security Policy

Fr Frank Pavone
Priests for Life
Michael W. Grebe

Yvonne D. Trotter, Ph.D. Mark A. Trotter Irma Fiordalisi



Palin Ethics Investigation Lawyer's Revelation to FindLaw

It must be so painful for the Liberal Democrats, the "ACLU", as well as the Liberal TV and Print Media, to continue to pursue any and every effort to politically and financially destroy Sarah Palin at all cost. Sarah Palin is one of the most "honorable" individuals "ever" in public like. Sarah Palin is "right" on the "fiscal and social issues" of the day. Sarah Palin is so Blessed herself, and is able to communicate these Blessings to the masses of people. - oyh

CONFIDENTIAL REPORT: PAYING PALIN'S LEGAL FEES VIOLATES ALASKA LAW

(July 21, 2009) - Thomas Daniel, the lawyer hired by Alaska's Personnel Board to investigate an ethics complaint involving Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's legal defense, confirmed to FindLaw that a copy of his confidential report had somehow become public. Daniel said "I suspect the complainant released it, but don't know for sure." Daniel concluded in his report that probable cause exists to "believe payment of the Governor's legal fees by the Alaska Fund Trust will violate the [Alaska's] Ethics Act." Read more...

http://blogs.findlaw.com/courtside/2009/07/palin-ethics-investigation-lawyer-tells-findlaw-i-suspect-the-complainant-released-report.html

Palin Ethics Investigation Lawyer Tells FindLaw: "I Suspect The Complainant Released" Report

By Joel Zand on July 21, 2009 7:37 PM | No TrackBacks

Thomas Daniel (inset) the lawyer hired by Alaska's Personnel Board to investigate an ethics complaint involving Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's legal defense fund set up to help pay the cost of defending allegations of misconduct while in
Thomas M. Daniel

http://pview.findlaw.com/view/2078871_1?channel=LP

office, confirmed to FindLaw that a copy of his confidential report had somehow become public. Daniel said "I suspect the complainant released it, but don't know for sure."

Eagle River, Alaska resident Kim Chapman filed the ethics complaint against Gov. Palin on April 27, 2009, alleging that Palin's Alaska Fund Trust violated two Executive Branch ethics laws that 1) prohibit using an official position for personal gain, and 2) bar public officials from accepting gifts that seek to influence how official duties are performed.

"It is a copy of my report," Daniel told FindLaw, but emphasized that "the release was not authorized," and that "there was no deadline" to make it public." The only person capable of waiving the confidentiality provision to which he remained bound, Daniel stated in his report, is Gov. Palin.

The Palin Ethics Complaint Investigation Report's Conclusions and Recommendations

In his report, Daniel concluded that the trust set up to pay Palin's legal fees created:

probable cause to believe that payment of the Governor's legal fees by the Alaska Fund Trust will violate the [State's] Ethics Act prohibition against a public officer accepting gifts intended to influence performance of official duties.

He recommended that Gov. Palin could take corrective action "to resolve this [ethics] complaint without the necessity of a formal hearing." The recommendations included having Palin:

refuse to accept payment of her legal fees and costs from the Alaska Fund Trust and withdraw her authorization for the trust to be recognized as her 'official legal defense fund.' I also recommend that seek reimbursement from the state for the cost of defending the ethics complaints that have been dismissed.

Finally, Daniel urged Alaska's state legislature to weigh "amending the Ethics Act to require the state to reimburse a public official for legal fees and costs" for defending Ethics Act complaints that are ultimately dismissed.

You can read a copy of the report here, that was posted on the Anchorage Daily News home page:

Palin Ethics Complaint Report

Related Resources:

Investigator rules against Palin in ethics probe
Alaska Personnel Board

Thomas Daniel, the lawyer hired by Alaska's Personnel Board
Palin's Future Remains a Mystery, Reuters, (Jul. 9, 2009)
Palin seeks review of Monegan firing case Anchorage Daily News, (Sept. 3, 2008)
Related Resources

• Thomas Daniel, the lawyer who authored the ethics complaint report

http://pview.findlaw.com/view/2078871_1?channel=LP



"The e-mail Bag"

AMA THOUGHTS ON THE STIMULUS PACKAGE

The American Medical Association has weighed in on the new economic stimulus package.

The Allergists voted to scratch it, but the Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.

The Gastroenterologist had sort of a gut feeling about it, but the

Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve.

The Obstetricians felt they were all laboring under a misconception.

Ophthalmologists considered the idea shortsighted.

Pathologists yelled, "Over my dead body!" while the

Pediatricians said, 'Oh, Grow up!'

The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the

Radiologists could see right through it.

Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing.

The Internists thought it was a bitter pill to swallow, and the

Plastic Surgeons said, "This puts a whole new face on the matter."

The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the

Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea.

The Anesthesiologists thought the whole idea was a gas, and the

Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no. In the end, the

Proctologists won out, leaving the entire decision up to the ass holes in Washington ..