If you support our national security issues, you may love and appreciate the United States of America, our Constitution with its’ freedoms, and our American flag.
If you support and practice our fiscal issues, you may value worldly possessions.
If you support and value our social issues, you may love Judeo-Christian values.
If you support and practice all these values, that is all good; an insignia of “Wisdom” . - Oscar Y. Harward
National Debt Clock-Click Here-Real Time
Thursday, October 8, 2009
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091008
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
Starting right now, work on adopting the mind set that you're a huge stakeholder in the success of your organization. Fact is, you really are one. -- Steve Ventura
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
"I am the LORD, the God of all the peoples of the world. Is anything too hard for Me?" (Jeremiah 32:27)
Perhaps you have heard the saying, "Expect great things from God; attempt great things for God." It came from a sermon preached by William Carey more than two centuries ago.
Carey lived in an era in which no one had attempted to reach the whole world for Christ since the first century. His supernatural dream was to see the church send missionaries in every direction around the globe.
After 17 centuries of spiritual inertia, could one man, whose formal education ended at age 12, make a difference? He could if he "expected great things from God", and "attempted great things for Him."
As Carey began to meet with various pastors urging them to consider sending missionaries, his words seemed to fall on deaf ears. One elderly pastor impatiently told Carey that when God wanted to reach the nations, He would do it without consulting Carey or the pastor!
Carey sought for like-minded believers. In no time he was sent to India. Sometimes he had to fight the Indian caste system; sometimes the British government. In 1812, his printing plant burned to the ground, along with years of translation work. Carey's wife and two of his children tragically died on the mission field.
But despite the great personal costs, he never gave up.
His organization translated the Bible into 34 Asian languages, founded a college, began countless churches and mission stations, started 100 schools, many newspapers, and succeeded in tremendous social reform.
More importantly, Carey single-handedly launched a movement of world evangelism which continues today.
"The Patriot Post"
"No country upon earth ever had it more in its power to attain these blessings than United America. Wondrously strange, then, and much to be regretted indeed would it be, were we to neglect the means and to depart from the road which Providence has pointed us to so plainly." -- George Washington
"Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people. The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. [Wednesday] the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie. ... To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency? A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong.. Dead wrong. .... I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time. In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come." -- Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu
"Most of our country's serious problems can be laid at the feet of Congress and the White House and not at capitalism. Take the financial crisis. One-third of the $15 trillion of mortgages in existence in 2008 are owned, or securitized by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, the Federal Housing and the Veterans Administration. Banks didn't mind making risky loans and Wall Street buyers didn't mind buying these repackaged loans because they assumed that they would be guaranteed by the federal government: read bailout by taxpayers. Under a capitalist system, financial institutions would not have been intimidated or encouraged into making risky loans and neither would they have been bailed out if they did so. Social Security, Medicare and its coverage of prescription drugs have an unfunded liability that exceeds $100 trillion. When those roosters come home to roost, they will make the financial meltdown we've been though look like child's play. Not withstanding all of the demagoguery, it is capitalism not socialism that made us a great country and it's socialism that will be our undoing." -- economist Walter Williams
"I am one of those who do not believe that a national debt is a national blessing, but rather a curse to a republic; inasmuch as it is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country." -- President Andrew Jackson (1767-1845)
OPINION IN BRIEF
"The real reason Obama insists upon making the young and healthy buy insurance they don't want is not the relatively minor free-rider problem, but the potentially ruinous adverse selection problem: The most expensive patients are the ones who are most likely to sign up for coverage. To keep the official 10-year price tag of his plan below that magical $1 trillion threshold, he needs to balance sick people who rack up big bills with healthy people who pay for insurance but don't use it. Instead of acknowledging this reality, Obama portrays the healthy uninsured as irresponsible leeches. Even if Obama could make a plausible moral argument for the unprecedented step of demanding that all Americans buy insurance -- not in exchange for a particular privilege, such as driving on public roads, but simply by virtue of being alive -- he would be hard pressed to cite the constitutional authority for such a mandate. ... Obama might be on firmer ground if he portrayed the levy imposed on people who decline to buy insurance as an exercise of the congressional tax power. But he does not want to admit he is forsaking his campaign promise to refrain from raising taxes on households earning less than $250,000 a year. That's why ... he insisted that the 'excise tax' imposed on the uninsured by the Senate health care bill he supports is not really a tax. How so? After Obama signed a bill raising the federal cigarette tax, his press secretary explained that the tax pledge was still intact because 'people make a decision to smoke.' Likewise, Obama might argue, people make a decision not to buy health insurance. The lesson is clear: If you don't want to pay higher taxes, don't make any decisions." -- columnist Jacob Sullum
"There has been a sudden disclosure that, in the influential Senate Finance Committee's health care bill, there is a dangerous provision that could deny crucial health treatments for Medicare patients. This is ... a section that penalizes doctors for Medicare patients who, for at least five years (from 2015 to 2020), authorize total treatments that wind up in the top 10 percent of national annual Medicare costs per patient. The 1 in 10 Medicare doctors who spend beyond this limit will themselves lose 5 percent of their own total Medicare reimbursements. Considering the already low rates Medicare doctors get -- and the president pledges they will get lower -- this could be a heavy penalty. As Burke Balch, director of the National Right to Life's Center for Medical Ethics, says: 'This .... means that all doctors treating older people will constantly be driven to try to order the least-expensive tests and treatments for fear they will be caught in that top 10 percent. Note that this feature operates independently of any considerations of quality, efficiency or waste....' Medicare doctors will not be the only losers. As the doctors struggle to keep abreast of the continually falling limit of the money they can authorize for their contingent of patients, consider what those patients will lose in the quality of their treatment. ... Even if this insidious provision does not survive in the eventual Senate bill, or is excluded from the subsequent House-Senate Conference Committee report on what President Obama will eventually enact into law, its actual existence is a further warning to all of us to pay very close attention to all the health care 'reform' bills before any of them becomes law." -- columnist Nat Hentoff
Please Sign Our Petition Insisting That Abortion Coverage Be Excluded In Any Health Care Reform
Abortion should not be considered health care!
As the House and Senate leadership continue political maneuvering to advance a national health care bill, one thing is abundantly clear ... the majority of Americans do not want their tax dollars used to fund abortion.
President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Reid and Speaker of the House Pelosi have repeatedly stated that abortion will not be included in the health care legislation currently being considered in Congress. However, in both the House and Senate, several important pro-life amendments that would have prevented the federal funding and coverage of abortion as well as protected the conscience rights of health care providers who refuse to participate in abortion were defeated. The message is clear; if abortion is not explicity excluded in the legislation, it will be included.
Please sign our petition letting Congressional leaders and the White House know that you insist that your tax dollars not be used to cover abortion and that health care legislation must explicitly exclude abortion coverage. The petitions will be delivered to Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker of the House Pelosi and the White House on Friday, October 16. If you have already joined thousands of others in signing the petition, please forward this to a friend.
Please Sign Our Petition Insisting That Abortion Coverage Be Excluded In Any Health Care Reform
P.S. Please forward this email to at least one friend.
October 7, 2009
Supreme Court to Hear Mojave Desert Cross Case
Today the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case of a World War I memorial cross in the Mojave Desert.
The ACRU filed an amicus brief http://www.theacru.org/ACRU%20Buono%20Merits%20Brief.pdf in this case.
Salazar v. Buono is the latest case arising from the battle of militant atheists against people of faith. In the Mojave Desert National Preserve there is a memorial in the form of a cross dedicated to World War I soldiers. The plaintiff, Buono, brought suit with the backing and legal support of the ACLU to have the cross removed, arguing that having a cross on public land was unconstitutional. After years of litigation, the federal government took the extraordinary step of passing a law that would allow the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) to take the plot of land with the cross, in exchange for the VFW donating land of equal value to the National Park Service.
Committed to seeing the cross removed, Buono obtained a court order to prevent the land exchange from being completed. The Ninth Circuit federal appeals court affirmed this order. The Supreme Court has taken the case to determine if the plaintiff even has legal standing to continue this case. On June 8, 2009, the ACRU filed an amicus brief in favor of the preserving the cross.
Support the ACRU by donating here https://www.theacru.us/donate/.
The American Civil Rights Union
3213 Duke St., #625
Alexandria, VA 22314
(877) 730-ACRU (2278)
Higher taxes in health care bill
By ERICA WERNER (AP)
WASHINGTON — Congressional tax experts say Senate health care legislation would impose $29 billion more in taxes on health care industries than originally thought.
The Joint Committee on Taxation says drug companies, medical device manufacturers and insurers would pay $121 billion over 10 years as a result of taxes in the Senate Finance Committee bill.
That's compared with $92 billion originally calculated.
The tax experts said the reason for the change is that the companies won't be able to deduct the fees from their corporate income taxes.
The new numbers come Tuesday as the Finance Committee is preparing to vote on the bill and could bolster GOP arguments that it contains too many new taxes.
Reid ‘Likely’ to Make Entire Health Bill an Amendment to Unrelated Tax Bill That House Passed in March
By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) (AP Photo)
(CNSNews.com) -- A senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told CNSNews.com that it is “likely” that Reid will use H.R. 1586—a bill passed by the House in March to impose a 90-percent tax on bonuses paid to employees of certain bailed-out financial institutions—as a “shell” for enacting the final version of the Senate’s health care bill, which Reid is responsible for crafting.
Under the procedure, the substance of House Resolution 1586 would be removed and replaced with the entire Senate health care package. The maneuver would initially require the support of 60 senators to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 1586 (i.e., end debate on the congressional procedure and move forward).
If Reid wins 60 votes, then debate begins on his health care package. Reid could then decide to block all amendments and attempt to get a vote on the entire package.
However, a senator could filibuster the final vote, requiring another 60-vote majority to move forward. But if Reid decides to allow any amendments, each amendment could be filibustered, requiring a 60-vote majority to move to a final vote on each of them. An amendment that has the support of more than 50 but less than 60 senators could end up stopping the bill if neither side backs down. But if Reid is able to structure the debate so that all 60 senators who caucus with the Democrats stick with the party on cloture votes, he can pass the bill and send it to back to the House--where it originated as an entirely different bill in substance.
If the House were to then vote on the bill as passed by the Senate without amending it, it could be sent directly to the president for his signature without going through a House-Senate conference committee and another round of votes in each chamber.
Concerning that point, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told CNSNews.com on Tuesday that he would not rule in or rule out the possibility of the House holding a direct vote on the Senate health care bill without amending it if it came to the House in the form of H.R. 1586.
The actual final text of the legislation will be determined by Reid himself, who will consolidate the legislation approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and the still-unapproved legislation from the Senate Finance Committee. Reid will be able to draft and insert textual language that was not expressly approved by either committee.
“It is not definite, but at this point likely, since it is what is available on the calendar,” said the senior aide about Reid using H.R. 1586 as a vehicle for the final text of the Senate health care bill.
“If we received another revenue raising bill from the House, we could use that as well,” said the aide. “The underlying text of the bill only matters in the fact that it is a revenue raising bill so that it can serve as a vehicle for us to use. That is all it is. Once you substitute another bill into it that is what the legislation becomes.”
The aide explained that the health care bill will contain tax provisions and that because the Constitution allows only the House to originate revenue bills, the health care bill must originate in the House. To comply with that constitutional mandate, the Senate must attach its version of the health-care bill to a tax bill that has already passed the House.
“Constitutionally we cannot, we can’t bring that [Reid’s final version of the health care bill] to the Senate floor because anything that’s considered a revenue raising measure, constitutionally we can’t just do that over in the Senate, it has to start in the House,” said the aide. “So, what we do whenever we have situations where you have legislation that’s a revenue raising measure that we end up taking up before the House does, we have to use a bill that’s already been passed by the House that’s on the calendar and available to us and use that just as a shell measure.”
“So you just bring that to the floor [H.R. 1586], then you amend it with a complete substitute of, you know, whatever bill you want to consider,” said the aide. “In this case it would be that health reform bill. That would substitute the language. So you wouldn’t have the language from the House bill even to consider anymore, it would be this new language that would be, in this case the health bill.”
In a piece entitled "Congress' Secret Plan to Pass Obamacare," Heritage Foundation analyst Brian Darling described the same procedure described by Reid’s aide.
“Majority Leader Reid may, with the proper amount of votes in the Senate (60), offer the Health Care reform bill coming out of the Senate as a complete substitute to an unrelated House-passed bill--H.R. 1586, a bill to impose a tax on bonuses received by certain TARP recipients,” wrote Darling. “This means that the entire health care reform effort will be included as an amendment to a TARP bill that has been collecting dust in the Senate for months.”
H.R. 1586 was approved by the House on March 19 as a means of getting back tax dollars that were paid out in bonuses this year to employees of AIG and other financial institutions that had received more than $5 billion in bailout money from the federal government. In the intervening six-and-a-half months, the Senate has not acted on this House bill.
The senior aide to Reid stressed the constitutional necessity of using an already-approved House tax bill as the vehicle for passing the Senate’s health care reform package.
“I mean, this is constitutional, you have to do it,” said the aide. “I mean the House has to start revenue raising measures. And when you have cases, which happen, it happens all the time where the Senate actually ends up going first on something, you have to use, you know, the House shell bill to do that. And it’s whatever is available on the calendar and in this case, it happens to be this bill [H.R. 1586].”
Darling said that when this technique is used, the bill does not have to go to conference if the House votes on the bill again without changing what the Senate has done.
The senior aide to Reid said “it is still early to say” if the final bill will go to conference, but said that the “next likely step” would in fact be a conference committee to iron out the difference between the House and Senate versions of health care reform.
In a Sept. 17 interview at the Latino Congressional Caucus gala, Majority Leader Reid told CNSNews.com that he would put together the final version of the health care bill and that it would differ in some ways from the Finance Committee’s bill.
“The bill that came out of the Finance Committee isn’t something that is going to get the immediate approval of everybody in America or every senator, but it’s part of the process,” said Reid. “That bill will go now to full committee. They will have a markup. They’ll report a bill out of that committee and then I will take that bill and the bill from the HELP Committee and put it together and bring it on the floor. That’s the bill we need to focus on.”
President Barack Obama gestures while addressing a health insurance reform rally, Saturday, Sept. 12, 2009, in Minneapolis. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)
“What’s in that bill (Finance Committee) is not what we’re going to wind up voting on,” said Reid.
“We’ll find out before a bill gets on the floor how much it will cost,” said Reid. “I don’t think we should be locked into any number.”
Darling said that as majority leader Reid has broad power to shape the final version of the bill.
“The Leader has the power to write a bill any way his caucus will allow,” said Darling.
“There are no effective limits,” he said, “but the Leader is limited by the general parameters of the Senate HELP and Finance Committee products so that he can claim it is a merging of the two bills.”
Darling also said Reid can put “whatever he wants” into the final bill.
“There is not a limit of the subject matter of the bill,” said Darling. “Reid can put whatever he wants into the bill if the Democrat caucus allows it. It is up to him whether a public option is in the bill or whether the Senate inserts a trigger before a public option comes into effect.”
“Senator Reid is limited by what the Senate will tolerate,” said Darling. “There is no way to stop the Senate Majority Leader from moving to proceed to a House-passed bill, then offering up his own version of Obamacare. Because the Democrat caucus has a working majority of 60 votes, they can do what they want and individual Republican members only have the power to extend debate and attempt to offer Amendments. If Reid uses a parliamentary procedure to block amendments, by ‘Filling the Tree,’ then members will have to get the consent of the Leader to offer Amendments. Reid is only limited by the lengths his caucus allows to pass a bill.”
The timeline for this process is still unclear. An amendment proposed by Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) in the Finance Committee markup would have required the full text of that committee’s bill to be posted online for 72 hours before the committee could vote on it. But that amendment was defeated.
Reid’s senior aide did not want to get into the specifics of the bill because it is “too early,” but said the final bill Reid brings to the floor will likely include not only sections of the Senate Finance and HELP committee bills that overlap but also sections that do not overlap.
“There are several portions of the two bills that overlap, the portions that do not will likely be included in the final bill as well,” said the aide. “That bill will then of course be open to amendments on the floor where I would anticipate certain portions of the bill have a possibility of being taken out.”
A Republican Senate leadership aide echoed Darling’s analysis, saying the Senate Democratic leadership can redraft the health care bill any way it wants before bringing it to the floor.
Obama's HRC appearance will 'alienate' Americans
Allie Martin - OneNewsNow
The president of an organization dedicated to exposing the homosexual activist agenda believes President Barack Obama will alienate many Americans when he speaks this weekend at a meeting of the largest homosexual-rights group in the nation.
On Saturday night, Obama will deliver the keynote address at the 13th annual National Dinner in Washington, DC -- an annual event organized by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest homosexual activist group in the United States.
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, says it is clear President Obama is trying to appease homosexual activists, many of whom have been vocal about their disappointment with the chief executive.
"The problem with having the homosexual lobby as an ally is that they're very loud and obnoxious -- and if they don't get their way immediately, they start carping and complaining," says LaBarbera.
"That's what they've been doing -- they're saying Obama is not moving fast enough," he continues. "But the further and faster Obama moves on the gay agenda, the more he will alienate mainstream and middle-of-the-road Americans."
LaBarbera points out that HRC has "Bible studies" online that claim homosexuality is not sinful. Among those studies is one HRC says is designed to train individuals to "move people of faith and congregations from acceptance to public advocacy."
Palin Urges Troop Buildup in Afghanistan
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is urging President Barack Obama to increase the number of U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan.
Palin says in a posting on her Facebook page Tuesday that this is "not the time for cold feet, second thoughts, or indecision."
Instead, the former Alaska governor writes it's time "to act as commander in chief and approve the troopers so clearly needed in Afghanistan."
Palin's posting comes as Obama decides whether to add to the 21,000 additional U.S. troops sent earlier this year.
The top three U.S. military officials overseeing the war favor continuing the fight against an emboldened Taliban and have concluded they need tens of thousands more U.S. troops beyond the 68,000 already there.
FCC's Genachowski Agreed to Have Diversity Czar Lloyd Appear Before Congress. When Will That Be, Mr. Chairman?
By Seton Motley (Bio | Archive)
The news wing of the Media Research Center, CNSNews.com, yesterday reported that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) refused their request for an interview with Chief Diversity Officer Mark Lloyd about his tremendously disturbing First Amendment and communications policy views.
(Not to mention his affinity and admiration for Venezuelan dictatorial thug Hugo Chavez and his demand that "white people" "step down" "so someone else can have power.")
These are views which certainly deserve additional explanation from the man himself. We have analyzed his record at great length, but all of it from the outside looking in. Some direct questions to - and answers from - Mr. Lloyd would be most helpful.
The FCC told CNSNews that it's their policy not to make staffers available to the media. And that is in fact fine; the FCC said its Commissioners are the front line officials and they themselves speak to the media, not those who work for them.
But Congress - and Congressional oversight - is a different story. And Congressman Greg Walden of Oregon agrees. So too does FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. During a September 17 convening of the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet, Congressman Walden - who is on said Subcommittee - asked Genachowski if Lloyd would be made available for questions (video at right).
Genachowski said that he would. But thus far, he has not yet set the date. It is time that he do so.
Lloyd has a long and troubling track record of virulent opposition to the First Amendment, particularly as it pertains to the rights of conservative and Christian talk radio hosts and stations. It is time he discuss his views with someone besides fellow Leftist Fellows at liberal think tanks and on Socialist media "reform" panels.
Chairman Genachowski, it's time to make this hearing happen. Soon.
—Seton Motley is Director of Communications for the Media Research Center and Contributing Editor for NewsBusters.org.
Lied To Enough Already?
Individuals nationwide, regardless of political allegiance, have taken to the streets this year in opposition to the radical liberal agenda and assert that we're taxed enough already, but we should also recognize that liberals have lied to us enough already in regards to the further taxes we oppose.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) continued her regularly scheduled display of dishonesty during a recent discussion of the value-added tax.
The Hill reports:
A new value added tax (VAT) is "on the table" to help the U.S. address is fiscal liabilities, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Monday night.
Pelosi, appearing on PBS's "The Charlie Rose Show" asserted that "it's fair to look at" the VAT as part of an overhaul of the nation's tax code.
"I would say put everything on the table and subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves," Pelosi told Rose when asked if the value-added tax has any appeal to her. (snip)
Pelosi said that any new taxes would come after the Congress finishes the healthcare debate currently consuming most lawmakers' times, and that it may come as part of a larger overhaul to the tax code.
The speaker also emphasized that any reworking of the tax code would not result in an increase in taxes on middle-class Americans. (emphasis added)
Liberal spending is out of control, and as proposed would reach a level in relation to the nation's Gross Domestic Product unseen since World War II. It should not come as surprise to anyone that high spending necessitates high taxes as source of the revenue that the government needs to support their expenditures. Therein explains why liberals have placed the value-added tax on deck. Under a VAT, everything is taxed.
Madam Speaker, if the reworking of the tax code calls for the implementation of a value-added tax, then contrary to your assertion, that would be an increase in taxes on middle-class Americans. The VAT is not an income tax, but a consumption tax that would be enforced on top of the income tax. Unlike the wealthy, who can redirect a portion of their money to other means in lieu of consumption, the poor and middle-class have to consume. As a result, the VAT will hit the people liberals claim they don't want to tax the hardest. But please, don't let the truth get in the way of facts. Just continue the charade of lying to us about the ramifications of liberal tax proposals. It's more important that you continue to prop up the president's phony campaign pledge of no tax increases on individuals that earn less than $250,000 a year. Never mind that ship sailed in early February when the president signed an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) into law and buried within it was an increase on the tobacco tax--the largest tax increase in U.S. history.
The liberals in our legislative and executive branches are trying their damndest to tax us into indentured servitude. How do we know? Because their proposals of cap-and-trade, socialized medicine, and a reworking of the tax code all call for large tax increases, yet they continue to insist otherwise by either outright lying or playing semantics with the word tax. It is rather unfortunate that they are arrogant enough to believe that you will take whatever they say at face value and that you're too apathetic to find out the truth on your own, otherwise they wouldn't continue to take the same page from their broken playbook.
Exit question: Are there any forms of taxation they oppose?
Guard your wallets.
J.C. Arenas is a frequent contributor to American Thinker and welcomes your comments at jcarenas.com
Obama Administration Ethics Coverup? Right to Work Foundation Responds to Labor Department Stonewalling
By Anthony Riedel
After President Barack Obama made numerous promises for a more transparent government, the Department of Labor (DOL) has, for nearly six months, hidden Big Labor insiders Hilda Solis and Deborah Greenfield activities from National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
Witnessing the Administration's corrupt Big Labor political paybacks, the Foundation swiftly sprang into action requesting all documents showing exchanges between Labor Secretary Hilda Solis and union bosses and all documentation regarding policy enforcement concerning Big Labor, the pro-compulsory unionism group American Rights at Work, and ACORN. The Foundation also seeks all documents showing communications between AFL-CIO union lawyer Deborah Greenfield and her former bosses.
Greenfield, a member of Obama's presidential transition team, is a high-ranking official inside Obama’s Labor Department. One item sending red flags is the fact that Greenfield is an AFL-CIO lawyer in a lawsuit challenging DOL union disclosure rules -- the very disclosures that the Obama Administration intends to end. Greenfield and her fellow union partisans have fought for and succeeded in rolling back union disclosure rules that provide details to rank-and-file workers about the use and misuse of their forced union dues.
Freedom@Work readers may remember that the Foundation filed its disclosure demand (pdf) in April. Foundation attorneys are now reiterating that demand and gearing up to litigate if necessary. (To view a pdf copy of the appeal, click here.)
Upon entering office, President Barack Obama claimed his Administration would be transparent -- but his Administration's behavior has failed to keep the President’s word. The Obama Administration's delay in this particular raises questions that DOL may be attempting to cover up some embarrassing ethics violations.
You can watch the Foundation's video regarding the original FOIA request here on our Youtube.com channel.
"The e-mail Bag"
Not Evil Just Wrong
More Women Jokes On Men!
Q. How are men like noodles?
A. They are always in hot water, they lack taste, and they need dough.
Q. Why is psychoanalysis a lot quicker for men than for women?
A. When it's time to go back to his childhood, he's already there.
Q. Why is it good that there are female astronauts?
A. When the crew gets lost in space at least the women will ask for directions.
Q. What does a man consider to be a seven course meal?
A. A hot dog and a six pack.
Q. What's the best way to force a man to do sit ups?
A. Put the remote control between his toes.