ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091203

Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable

Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!



"Daily Motivations"

Only you can make you happy. -- Marty Martinson

"The time to be happy is now. The place to be happy is here. The way to be happy is to make others so." -- Robert G. Ingersoll



"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)

And you know that Jesus came to take away our sins, and there is no sin in Him. (1 John 3:5)

Do you strive to live a pure and holy life? What disciplines help you do that?

In the time of Jesus, there were religious experts called Pharisees. The highest value of life, in their view, was maintaining holiness---which, for them, meant not touching anything or anyone they might consider "unclean." Holiness was a matter of staying on the defense socially, and avoiding certain people entirely.

What really bothered them about Jesus was the way He sought out "unclean" people---those with diseases, those with clear and unmistakable sin in their lives. Wasn't He forfeiting His personal purity by associating with lowly individuals? It seemed an outrage! Yet Jesus led history's holiest life even while seeking out those who needed to see and touch true purity. And in Him, they touched it. Perhaps one of the great secrets of holiness is that it can't be hoarded.

Life demands a certain balance. We don't want to spend time with those who can pull us down; we want to steer clear of temptation. But our holy God wants us to share true purity with those who desperately need it. He wants us to bring healing and hope, just as His Son did.

Your View of God Really Matters …

We are a reflection of God's pure light to an unclean world. How will your light touch the darkness of another life today? Don't hoard your light.



"The Patriot Post"

"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman." -- Thomas Paine

"It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent both in order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe." -- James Madison, A Memorial and Remonstrance, 1785

"[R]eligion, or the duty which we owe to our creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and this is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other." -- Virginia Bill of Rights, Article 16, 1776



The Founding Fathers on Jesus, Christianity and the Bible

Samuel Adams

SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; “FATHER OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS

I . . . [rely] upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins.10

The name of the Lord (says the Scripture) is a strong tower; thither the righteous flee and are safe [Proverbs 18:10]. Let us secure His favor and He will lead us through the journey of this life and at length receive us to a better.11

I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.12

He also called on the State of Massachusetts to pray that . . .

the peaceful and glorious reign of our Divine Redeemer may be known and enjoyed throughout the whole family of mankind.13
we may with one heart and voice humbly implore His gracious and free pardon through Jesus Christ, supplicating His Divine aid . . . [and] above all to cause the religion of Jesus Christ, in its true spirit, to spread far and wide till the whole earth shall be filled with His glory.14
with true contrition of heart to confess their sins to God and implore forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ our Savior.15
Endnotes

10. From the Last Will & Testament of Samuel Adams, attested December 29, 1790; see also Samuel Adams, Life & Public Services of Samuel Adams, William V. Wells, editor (Boston: Little, Brown & Co, 1865), Vol. III, p. 379, Last Will and Testament of Samuel Adams.

11. Letters of Delegates to Congress: August 16, 1776-December 31, 1776, Paul H. Smith, editor (Washington DC: Library of Congress, 1979), Vol. 5, pp. 669-670, Samuel Adams to Elizabeth Adams on December 26, 1776.

12. From a Fast Day Proclamation issued by Governor Samuel Adams, Massachusetts, March 20, 1797, in our possession; see also Samuel Adams, The Writings of Samuel Adams, Harry Alonzo Cushing, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908), Vol. IV, p. 407, from his proclamation of March 20, 1797.


13. Samuel Adams, A Proclamation For a Day of Public Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer, given as the Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, from an original broadside in our possession; see also, Samuel Adams, The Writings of Samuel Adams, Harry Alonzo Cushing, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908), Vol. IV, p. 385, October 14, 1795.

14. Samuel Adams, Proclamation for a Day of Fasting and Prayer, March 10, 1793.

15. Samuel Adams, Proclamation for a Day of Fasting and Prayer, March 15, 1796.



"Liberty Counsel"

Online version easier to read? Go to www.LC.org

December 2, 2009

Liberty Counsel Goes to Court Today Against the ACLU

This afternoon Liberty Counsel returns to federal court in Pensacola, Florida to combat the ACLU’s harassment of teachers, staff and students in the Santa Rosa County School District.

We are representing Christian Educators Association International in an attempt to overturn the court order that was the reason for contempt charges brought against school employees for a mealtime prayer with other adults. Liberty Counsel successfully defended Principal Frank Lay, Athletic Director Robert Freeman, and Michelle Winkler from contempt charges sought by the ACLU.

In a blatant attempt at intimidation, the ACLU recently sent a letter to the school district, complaining of 16 separate instances where it alleges the court order has been violated. The ACLU, sore from its losses, is stalking school employees seeking to punish them. The ACLU is even prying into their personal lives, asking whether they are organizing prayer meetings in their churches regarding the case.

The ACLU is investing enormous amounts of money and resources to terrorize school officials into silence and to make public schools religion-free zones. Pray that these forces of evil will be defeated so that the district employees and students will be set free from unconsitutional restrictions on their freedom.

Our lead trial counsel for this case is attorney Harry Mihet, who suffered persecution as a pastor's son growing up in communist Romania. He understands the risk of losing religious freedom in America.

Litigating against the deep-pocketed ACLU is costly and time-consuming. This case is expected to end tomorrow, but could also extend into Friday. Please pray that Liberty Counsel will have the resources to continue this push-back against the ACLU bullies.

We are honored to have you and other patriotic, God-fearing Americans join this enormous battle with fervert prayer and financial support. As always, to God be the glory.

Read our News Release for more details.

Give a tax-deductible year-end gift to Liberty Counsel to combat the ACLU and preserve religious freedom in America.

Receive our Liberty Alerts via RSS

Follow us on and

Forward this Liberty Alert to your entire e-mail list of family and friends, and encourage them to subscribe.

Liberty Counsel does not charge clients for representation, so we depend on individuals, groups and churches that care about advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family. Liberty Counsel is recognized by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization that accepts tax-deductible donations. Donate or order resources from the Liberty Counsel online store.

Mathew D. Staver - Founder and Chairman
Anita L. Staver - President
Liberty Counsel - 1-800-671-1776
PO Box 540774 - Orlando, FL 32854



"Chuck Sproull"

Here is what I sent to "IndianaPatriots" involved with "PatrioticResistance."

By Chuck Sproull

I believe our selection of the next set of American political leaders (President and senators, representatives, and judges) should not be based on party names like democrat (change the "t" to a "p" if you want) or republican, or liberal or conservative. But we should be looking at the core values below the surface that govern each of their outward lives and decisions.

The well-educated John Adams had a deep insight when he wrote "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and
religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Immoral "whales" like Obama, Pelosi and Reid are proving the validity of Adam's prophecy.

I believe Adam's concept of "moral and religious people" can be mapped into the concept of "mature" (dictionary definition - "fully developed"). This is more fundamental than religious or political or legal issues, but is more of an emotional issue.

We need leaders whose core values are unselfishness (content with the necessities of life), honesty (love for truth - words that describe reality), courage (to keep learning and face new realities of life), well-educated (including US History and the Bible), humility (to submit to standards that are good for all people, like the Ten Commandments, weights and measures, and traffic regulations...), concern for well-being of others, responsible on the job, moral and self-disciplined (with God's Law written in their hearts), faithful in normal marriage...etc.

Over the past several generations, because of a growing number of negative influences in the homes and public schools (no spanking, no Bible studies, no prayer) I have observed a growing number of immature (not fully developed, uneducated) voters and political leaders, whose
emotional core values are the opposite of "mature." They are selfish (love personal pleasures and wealth, are domineering and abusive), dishonest (change the definitions of good words to disguise their evil behavior), afraid (to face realities of life like the existence of a loving God who wants to save us from all our sins), proud (don't have God's Law written in their hearts so they need strong legal systems to force them to obey standards and laws and to punish them when they disobey), concern only for their selves, lazy and irresponsible (love welfare), immoral and not self-disciplined), un-faithful in marriage...etc. Emotional immaturity is producing a generation of leaders and followers who love socialism.

So to reverse this downward trend we don't just need a majority of "Republicans" in office, we need more emotionally mature and well educated leaders who understand the great value of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and limited government with less foolish spending and
loser taxes, who will reverse the economic trend of inflation (selfishness) and stabilize the cost of living and medical support. There is no requirement for living to be so costly.

Chuck Sproull - Springville IN



"The Web"

Three things In Life

http://www.dobhran.com/GReetingS/GRinspire595.htm




Dolly Parton - Coat of many colors

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1zJzr-kWsI



Seven issues to watch as the Senate begins amending the healthcare bill

By Jeffrey Young

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/69673-seven-issues-to-watch-as-senate-begins-amending-healthcare-bill

Senators will be asked to cast their votes on numerous amendments as they begin a debate to reshape the country’s healthcare system.

Some amendments will be designed to improve the bill, some to satisfy a special interest or pet peeve. Still others will be presented as poison pills.

Here are seven issues likely to arise during the amendment process.

Public option: An issue that unites Republicans and divides Democrats on ideological grounds inevitably was bound to haunt the Senate Democratic leadership. The notion of creating a government-run health insurance plan to compete with private companies is seen as vital by liberal Democrats but centrists range from skeptical to deeply antagonistic, even though states could opt out.
The best hope for a positive outcome for the Democrats could rest on the chances that liberal Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) along with centrist public option supporter Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) can forge yet another compromise version of the program to satisfy centrists such as Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), who have threatened to filibuster the bill over the public option. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) is waiting in the wings with her “trigger” compromise.

Abortion: It wouldn’t be American politics if the forces on both sides of the abortion issue weren’t at loggerheads. The healthcare bill already includes language that is supposed to keep federal dollars away from abortion funding but the Catholic bishops, and Nelson, don’t think it goes far enough. Democratic Sens. Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.) and Kent Conrad (N.D.) each voted in committee to beef up the abortion restrictions so their actions on the floor will be key. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) authored the failed committee amendments and is sure to raise objections to the bill on abortion.

Health insurance excise tax: The proposed tax on high-cost health insurance plans, a key to raising revenue and reducing long-term healthcare costs according to the Congressional Budget Office, may enjoy support in the White House but many Democrats and labor unions remain staunchly opposed to what they view as a middle-class tax hike. Already scaled down several times – the original idea was to tax the value of all workplace health benefits – Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and others will look to shrink it further, if not eliminate it, but will need to raise additional taxes to make up the difference.

Prescription drugs: The pharmaceutical industry struck a grand bargain this summer with the White House and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to limit its financial exposure from healthcare reform to $85 billion and to support the Democrats’ efforts. That deal has held uneasily since and Democrats are eyeing the chance to take a bite out of a long-time nemesis. Like in the House, Democrats are eager to require larger rebates from pharmaceutical firms who sell drugs to state Medicaid programs and use the additional money to sweeten the Medicare prescription drug benefit. A handful of Republicans such as Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and David Vitter (La.) would likely join, or even start, any effort to permit the import of medicines from abroad.

Affordability: Because almost everyone would be required to obtain health coverage, providing fair and adequate subsidies to low- and middle-income people has presented a challenge for lawmakers trying to keep the bill on budget. Liberal Democrats get more attention when they talk about the public option but they have complained about the subsidy levels almost as much, while Snowe has also been adamant that the bill does too little to ensure insurance is less expensive. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), a key swing vote, wants more help for small businesses and the self-employed. Trouble is, every dollar of assistance paid out has to come from somewhere.

Insurance exchanges: The concept of creating an online marketplace where consumers can comparison-shop for healthcare hasn’t been very controversial. But what types of plans people could buy and who will be allowed to buy them has been a point of contention. Democrats will be looking to provide access to the most generous but most affordable plans they can. Meanwhile, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), under an agreement with Reid and Baucus, will offer an amendment to let more people beyond individuals and small-business employees buy insurance on the exchanges. The exchanges wouldn’t launch until 2014, either, so Landrieu and others want to move that date closer.

Medicare cuts: Republicans have railed about the hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to Medicare contained in the bill though Democrats insist they are seeking to make the program more efficient and are not cutting anyone’s benefits. Because these cuts are essential to financing the rest of the bill, however, they’re here to stay – though some could be scaled back. The deep cuts to private Medicare Advantage plans, for instance, could be mitigated to assuage senators from states with large senior populations. Medical interests from physicians to home healthcare providers will also be seeking concessions.



ObamaCare: Let the Rationing Begin

by Dr. David Janda

http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/29/obamacare-let-the-rationing-begin/

Last week, the Federal Government Ivory Tower trumpeted important news. One of its illustrious Task Forces has decided that women in their 40’s would be the first to experience “Medical Darwinism.”

The United States Preventive Services Task Force, comprised of 16 appointees, decreed that:

1. Women in their 40’s no longer need routine yearly mammograms

2. Women aged 50-74 are to have mammograms only every other year

3. Self breast exams are no longer to be done at any age

Of note, this Task Force does NOT have even one member who is a cancer specialist or oncologist, let alone a breast cancer specialist. This panel based its recommendations NOT on comprehensive new clinical studies or research, but rather on computer projections of certain data points. A review of previous recommendations by the same Federal Government reveals that these recommendations are diametrically at odds with recommendations made just six months ago. So, what changed in six months?

New studies? No. What changed was the introduction of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Health Care Reform legislation, whose heart and core is based on rationing and denying care. (Note the omission of the word “soul.”) This method is the most inhumane and unethical means of cutting costs.

Let’s NOT let this Panel’s rationing objective get in the way of the real facts about breast cancer:

1. Breast Cancer is the number 1 killer of women globally…..500,000 women will die this year

2. Seventeen percent of Breast Cancer deaths occur in women diagnosed in their 40’s

3. Twenty-two percent of Breast Cancer deaths occur in women diagnosed in their 50’s

4. One of the leading factors in INCREASED survival rates in breast and other types of Cancer is based on EARLY diagnosis and intervention.

5. Those countries with higher death rates from Cancer have health care delivery systems based on rationing tests and treatments.

The recommendations made by the “Ivory Tower” Federal Panel do not even pretend to address these five points. However, they are completely in line with The Obama-Pelosi-Reid Health Care Legislation agenda— to deny and ration care as a means to cut costs.

On Sunday, November 22, Fox News Sunday interviewed Senator Arlen Specter, who was a Democrat before he was Republican before he was a Democrat. Senator Specter let the “secret agenda” of Obama-Pelosi-Reid slip . When questioned on the fact that The Senate Bill cuts $500 Billion in Medicare spending over ten years, yet in ten years there will be 30 percent more people in Medicare, Senator Spector stumbled. He admitted that Congress has NEVER cut Medicare benefits in its history and then confessed, “This Bill has a provision….a CURE….in how we can CUT Medicare—a Commission.” That’s right, a non-elected Commission will be appointed by The President. Starting in 2015, this Commission will oversee Medicare and its expenditures, but this Commission will NOT be accountable to the public. Initially, it will oversee cuts to Medicare Advantage, the same program that services 10 million Seniors. Using this type of panel to make such cuts, when it is NOT accountable to or elected by the public, is like bombing an enemy from 40,000 feet…..destruction occurs but you don’t see their faces. And, by 2019, ALL limits are off, and every American can become the target of the carpet bombing.

The bad news is that through this legislation authored by Obama-Pelosi-Reid, every American is facing more than one bomber. Through the hidden health care portion of The Stimulus Bill we are facing a squadron of bombers: The Federal Coordinating Council of Comparative Effectiveness Research, The National Coordinator of Health Information Technology Office, and The Medicare Commission in The Health Care Bill.. Their mission is to deny and ration care, and, as stated in The Stimulus Bill, “To guide medical decisions at the time and place of care.” Say so long to your privacy, doctor-patient privilege, choice, and control over your health care options and access.

Today it is mammogram screening tests. Tomorrow it will be the rationing and denial of treatment, if Obama-Pelosi-Reid have their way. Every American will become a victim of their rationing boards. Faceless, unaccountable, and unelected, these commissions will control 17% of this country’s GNP, and 100% of your health care options.

So, how is that “Hope” and “Change” looking so far?



White House Dismisses ‘Climategate’ Because ‘Most People’ Believe in Global Warming

By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/57795

(CNSNews.com) - As President Barack Obama prepares to travel to a global climate summit next week in Copenhagen, the White House is dismissing the “climategate” controversy that has arisen over the leak of email communications between top climate-change scientists that some skeptics say cast doubt on the legitimacy of the science behind the theory that human activity is causing global warming.

Obama will be attending the United Nations Climate Change Conference on Dec. 9. The conference in Copenhagen comes soon after the emails released by a computer hacker has led one Republican U.S. senator to call for an investigtation.

Some global warming skeptics have referred to the e-mails--from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit in England--as “climategate.”

But White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs dismissed the controversy on Monday, saying that most people don’t dispute global warming.

“In the order of several thousand scientists have come to the conclusion that climate change is happening,” Gibbs said. “I don’t think that any of that is, quite frankly among most people, in dispute.”

Leading global-warming skeptic Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, wants an investigation into the content of the e-mails. He has asked all government agencies to retain e-mails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit.

“It appears that, in an attempt to conceal the manipulation of climate data, information disclosure laws may have been violated,” Inhofe said in a statement last week. “I certainly don't condone the manner in which these emails were released; however, now that they are in the public domain, lawmakers have an obligation to determine the extent to which the so-called ‘consensus' of global warming, formed with billions of taxpayer dollars, was contrived in the biased minds of the world's leading climate scientists.”

One of the e-mails said, “If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the U.K., I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone.” It was written by Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU)

The texts of some of the 3,000 e-mails were posted by the Wall Street Journal last week.

Another e-mail suggested that scientists “hide the decline” in the earth’s temperatures.

Obama will announce plans in Copenhagen that include reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, according to the White House.

“In light of the President’s goal to reduce emissions 83 percent by 2050, the expected pathway set forth in this pending legislation would entail a 30 percent reduction below 2005 levels in 2025 and a 42 percent reduction below 2005 in 2030,” a White House release last week said.



White House still listening to Van Jones 'green' advice

Communist-group founder on team influencing environmental policies

By Aaron Klein

© 2009 WorldNetDaily
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=117548

Van Jones

Van Jones, President Obama's controversial former "green jobs" czar, serves on the advisory board of an independent environmental organization actively working with the White House, WND has learned.

Jones resigned in September after it was exposed he founded a communist revolutionary organization and signed a statement that accused the Bush administration of possible involvement in the 9/11 attacks.

Jones is one of 20 advisers to the University of Colorado–based Presidential Climate Action Project, or PCAP, which draws up climate-policy recommendations for the White House and has been working with members of the Obama administration.

The PCAP last September released a lengthy proposal to guide the environmental policies during the first 100 days of the 44th U.S. president regardless of whether Obama or Sen. John McCain won the election.

William S. Becker, the PCAP's executive director, confirmed to WND his group is "about to propose a new and more assertive strategy for President Obama to raise the bar on the U.S. climate goal, with or without Congress."

Becker told WND his group's initial proposals have received a "very positive reception from the moment we delivered (the 100-day proposal) last November to John Podesta, co-chair of Obama's transition team."

"We continue to work with some colleagues inside the (Obama) administration, as well as continuing to push for bold action from the outside," he said.

Becker said the White House "adopted quite a few of our recommendations or variations of them."

He cited a few examples of the influence of the PCAP and other environmental groups on Obama's policies:

The PCAP recommended that the U.S. reach a bilateral climate deal with China prior to the upcoming U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. The U.S. has since signed several agreements with China to share technology that reduces greenhouse-gas emissions.

The PCAP recommended an executive order that removed the gags from federal climate scientists. This became one of Obama's first actions on environmental policy.

The PCAP recommended an overhaul of federal energy management to beef up efficiency requirements for federal agencies and to restore absolute carbon reduction targets that had been rescinded by the Bush administration. The Obama administration issued a new federal energy management order in October, including a requirement that agencies develop absolute targets for greenhouse-gas reductions.

The PCAP recommended (as did many others) that the Environmental Protection Agency embrace California's vehicle emission standards and begin the process of regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. The EPA is doing both.

The PCAP recommended major budget increases for states and communities to engage in energy and climate actions and to weatherize the homes of low-income families. This was part of Obama's stimulus package.
The PCAP describes itself as seeking to engage the "best thinking of America's leaders in government, science and civil society to identify actions that will empower all elements of society to meet the challenges of energy security and climate change." The group actively promotes the theory of global warming.

A means to fight racial 'justice'

WND reported Jones was a founder and leader of the communist group Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM.

STORM's official manifesto, titled "Reclaiming Revolution," had been published on the Internet until WND and other websites linked to the online publication.

A review of the 97-page treatise found that the manual describes Jones' organization as having a "commitment to the fundamental ideas of Marxism-Leninism."

"We agreed with Lenin's analysis of the state and the party," read Jones' manifesto. "And we found inspiration in the revolutionary strategies developed by Third World revolutionaries like Mao Zedong and Amilcar Cabral."

Cabral is the late Marxist revolutionary leader of Guinea-Bissau and the Cape Verde Islands. Jones named his son after Cabral and reportedly concludes every e-mail with a quote from the communist leader.

Speaking to the East Bay Express in 2005, Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested.

"I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist. I met all these young radical people of color – I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said.

Jones boasted to the East Bay Express that his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class "justice."

Jones went on to found the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, named after a little-known civil rights firebrand and socialist activist.

Succeeding revelations by WND included:

Jones previously served on the board of an environmental activist group at which a founder of the Weather Underground terrorist organization is a top director.

Jones was co-founder of a black activist organization that has led a campaign prompting major advertisers to withdraw from Glenn Beck's top-rated Fox News Channel program. The revelation followed Beck's reports on WND's story about Jones' communist background.

Jones and other White House appointees may have been screened by an ACORN associate.

One day after the 9/11 attacks, Jones led a vigil that expressed solidarity with Arab and Muslim Americans as well as what he called the victims of "U.S. imperialism" around the world.

Just days before his White House appointment, Jones used a forum at a major youth convention to push for a radical agenda that included spreading the wealth and "changing the whole system."

Jones' Maoist manifesto while leading the group Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM, was scrubbed from the Internet after being revealed by WND.

Jones was the main speaker at an anti-war rally that urged "resistance" against the U.S. government – a demonstration sponsored by an organization associated with the Revolutionary Communist Party.

In a 2005 conference, Jones characterized the U.S. as an "apartheid regime" that civil rights workers helped turn into a "struggling, fledgling democracy."

Jones signed a petition calling for nationwide "resistance" against police, accusing them of using the 9/11 attacks to carry out policies of torture.
Editor's note: This article included research by Brenda J. Elliott.



All the President's Climategate Deniers

by Michelle Malkin

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2009/12/02/all_the_presidents_climategate_deniers

"The science is settled," we've been told for decades by zealous proponents of manmade global warming hysteria. Thanks to an earth-shaking hacking scandal across the pond, we now have mountains of documents from the world's leading global warming advocacy center that show the science is about as settled as a southeast Asian tsunami. You won't be surprised by the Obama administration's response to Climategate.

With pursed lips and closed eyes and ears, the White House is clinging to the old eco-mantra: The science is settled.

Never mind all the devastating new information about data manipulation, intimidation and cult-like coverups to "hide the decline" in global temperatures over the last half-century, they say. The science is settled.

Never mind what The Atlantic's Clive Crook, after wading through the climate science e-mail files of the U.K.'s Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, called the overpowering "stink of intellectual corruption" -- combined with mafia-like suppression of dissent, suppression of evidence and methods, and "plain statistical incompetence" exposed by the document trove. The science is settled.

Never mind the expedient disappearance of mounds of raw weather station data that dissenting scientists were seeking through freedom of information requests from the Climatic Research Unit. The science is settled.

In March, President Obama made a grandiose show of putting "science" above "politics" when lifting the ban on government-funded human embryonic stem cell research. "Promoting science isn't just about providing resources -- it's about protecting free and open inquiry," he said during the signing ceremony. "It's about letting scientists like those who are here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient -- especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda -- and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."

Yet, the pro-sound science president has surrounded himself with radical Climategate deniers who have spent their entire professional careers "settling" manmade global warming disaster science through fear mongering, intimidation and ridicule of opponents.

-- Science czar John Holdren, who will testify on Capitol Hill this week at a hearing on Climategate, infamously hyped weather catastrophes and demographic disasters in the 1970s with his population control freak pals Paul and Anne Ehrlich. He made a public bet against free-market economist Julian Simon, predicting dire shortages of five natural resources as a result of feared overconsumption. He lost on all counts. No matter.

Holdren's failure didn't stop him from writing forcefully about mass sterilization and forced abortion "solutions" to a fizzling, sizzling, overpopulated planet. And it didn't stop him from earning a living making more dire predictions.

In 1986, Ehrlich credited Holdren with forecasting that "carbon-dioxide climate-induced famines could kill as many as a billion people before the year 2020." He went on to Harvard and the White House. On the "Late Show with David Letterman" earlier this year, Holdren fretted that his son "might not see snow!"

Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist and Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball notes that Holdren turned up in the Climategate files belittling the work of astrophysicists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in the Solar, Stellar and Planetary Sciences Division. Holdren put "Harvard" in sneer quotes when mocking a research paper Baliunas and Soon published in 2003 showing that "the 20th century is probably not the warmest nor a uniquely extreme climatic period of the last millennium." First, deny. Next, deride.

-- Energy Secretary Steven Chu picked derision as his weapon earlier this year when peddling the Obama administration's greenhouse-gas emission policy. "The American public … just like your teenage kids, aren't acting in a way that they should act," The Wall Street Journal quoted Chu. He dismissed dissent by asserting that "there's very little debate" about the impact of "green energy" policy on the economy.

There's "very little debate," of course, because dissenters get crushed.

-- The Obama team's chief eco-dissent crusher is climate czar Carol Browner. She oversaw the destruction of Environmental Protection Agency computer files in brazen violation of a federal judge's order during the Clinton years requiring the agency to preserve its records.

Over the past year, the EPA has stifled the dissent of Alan Carlin, a senior research analyst at the agency who questioned the administration's reliance on outdated research on the health effects of greenhouse gases. Recently, they sought to yank a YouTube video created by EPA lawyers Allan Zabel and Laurie Williams that is critical of cap-and-trade. Browner reportedly threatened auto execs in July by telling them to "put nothing in writing … ever" about their negotiations with her.

And she is now leading the "science is settled" stonewalling in the wake of Climategate. "I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists," she said. "These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real." Book-cookers are good at making it seem so.

In any case, last year, more than 31,000 scientists -- including 9,021 Ph.D.s -- signed a petition sponsored by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine rejecting claims of human-caused global warming.

But hey, who's counting? The science is settled.



A Get Out of Jail Free Card for Terrorists?

by John Armor

http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnArmor/2009/11/17/a_get_out_of_jail_free_card_for_terrorists?page=full&comments=true

Late on Friday, Attorney General Holder announced President Obama’s decision that the alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammad and his confederates would be tried in federal court in New York City rather than before a military tribunal. A firestorm of protest has erupted over whether the terrorists can be safely held in New York City, or whether this is good or bad for "international relations."
Most of these discussions entirely miss the main point. Trials are about finding the facts, and punishing the guilty. This decision by the President, the opposite of what he said on the campaign trail, will sharply increase the odds that the terrorists will beat the rap on a technicality, and walk out of the courtroom free just blocks from Ground Zero.

Here are some of the critical differences between a military tribunal and an ordinary, U.S. criminal trial:

First: The constitutional guarantee of “a speedy trial” applies in criminal court; it does not apply in a military tribunal. Under Supreme Court cases, a delay of five years from the arrest of the defendant to the bringing of charges is clearly excessive. Another terrorist/defendant has already filed a motion in another trial to dismiss all charges on this ground, as soon as he came into a criminal court.

If that minor defendant beats the rap on this technicality, it would probably mean that all charges would be dismissed, without trial, against Khalid Sheik Mohammad and his cohorts.

Second: In criminal court, but not in a tribunal, the defense can force the government either to reveal the methods of intelligence gathering, or drop the charges. There are already several instances of people charged with espionage, caught red-handed with secret documents, who walked out of court free as a bird, because the government had to protect its intelligence efforts in time of war. The same may happen, here.

Third: All the defendants have confessed. But the jury will never hear those confessions, because of how the confessions were obtained. In a military tribunal, those confessions would be admissible.

Even worse, in the military tribunal at Gitmo, all the defendants announced their intention to plead guilty, in return for the opportunity to make statements about justified jihad in court. Obama stopped that process in its tracks by presidential order. All these defendants would have been found guilty and sentenced months ago, absent the President’s interference.

Fourth: Criminal defendants are entitled to a “jury of their peers.” Anyone want to bet that ACLU-supported lawyers won’t claim that such a jury must include some Muslims? And if so, what are the odds at least one juror will hold out for “not guilty,” or at least for “no death penalty” if there is a conviction? Neither of those would apply in a tribunal, where the judge and jury is a panel of nine U.S. military officers.

Fifth: There is a unanimous (8-0) Supreme Court decision, Ex Parte Quirin (1942), holding it constitutional to try Nazi bombers who entered the U.S. from submarines, before a military tribunal, not a criminal court trial subject to the Bill of Rights. This is a short decision, written in plain English, that even laymen can read and understand. It has been affirmed in recent years as good law by the current Supreme Court.

Somewhere in the bowels of the Justice Department is a memo written by career lawyers, reciting all of these points. But the business of this Attorney General is to do what he’s told, no matter whether that outcome is moral, legal or constitutional. This is a continuation of the Marc Rich pardon under President Clinton.

The moving of this trial displays to our enemies that we are both cowardly and foolish. That display WILL cause additional deaths of American soldiers and civilians. The only way this dangerous decision can be stopped is if Congress votes to de-fund it. Otherwise, there is a chance that the defendants, who have already confessed, will walk free into the streets of New York City.



Conservatives Don’t Need a Litmus Test for RINOs

Written by Richard Viguerie

http://conservativehq.com/blog_post/show/470

In an interview with the Baltimore Sun today, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele publicly rejected the candidate “litmus test” proposed by a group of national conservatives. The concept behind the proposal is to force a certain “conservative ideological purity” on to candidates and elected officials in the Republican Party so that Republicans don’t end up supporting socialist-statist policies. The RNC will vote on the proposal next month when it holds its annual meeting.

While well intentioned, the litmus test proposal would do little to solve the two fundamental problems within the Republican Party: bad leadership and conservative acquiescence to bad leadership.

RINOs such as Dede Scozzafava and Florida Governor Charlie Crist aren’t the real issue. Scozzafava, Crist, and others who rightly deserve the “RINO” tag are merely an annoyance. Besides irritating their fellow Republicans with their all too frequent wrong votes, RINOs haven’t really had a great deal of impact on the direction of Republican party policies over the past decade.

The current Republican leadership has consistently supported our national slide to socialism. I’m talking about Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader John Boehner, and the leading architect of Republican endorsed socialist-statism, former Bush White House political advisor Karl Rove. These “leaders” have consistently abandoned constitutional principles of limited government in favor of socialist-statist programs, all in the name of “winning.”

The Bush supported Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 was the largest Federal Government give-away program in decades. Former Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay broke a few arms in the party to make sure this legislative travesty passed, and former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert cheered him on. At the time of its passage, Karl Rove mistakenly crowed that the legislation meant that the Republican Party had wrapped up electoral dominance for years to come.

In the fall of 2008, both Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Boehner voted in favor of President Bush’s now infamous Troubled Asset Relief Program legislation, a $700 billion bailout of large financial institutions which merely transferred large piles of money from average taxpayers to Wall Street fat cats who had run their businesses into the ground, based in part on requirements forced on them by Congress.

During both of these disasters, as well as many others, most of the national conservative leadership maintained its silence as the “pragmatists” destroyed free markets and conservative principles.

National conservatives who want to fix the Republican Party shouldn’t waste their time forcing symbolic litmus test votes on the Republican National Committee. Instead, they should consider focusing their considerable energies on solving the real problem. Now is the time to put new leaders at the helm of the House, the Senate, the RNC, the NRCC, and the NRSC.

A litmus test is only as good as the character of the person who endorses it. It’s easy for professional politicians to say they support something in order to pass a test that gives them access to campaign cash. The more important test is true devotion to the limited government principles embodied in our Constitution.

The road to new leadership for the Republican Party goes through the 2010 primaries. The current Republican members of Congress aren’t going to throw McConnell and Boehner out. But the Republicans elected in November of 2010 can get that job done. Conservatives can help make that a reality by supporting boat-rocking principled conservative candidates in the upcoming primaries, and making sure they win in November.



"The e-mail Bag"

FIRST BOOK OF GOVERNMENT

Obama is the shepherd I did not want.
He leadeth me beside the still factories.
He restoreth my faith in the Republican party.
He guideth me in the path of unemployment for his party's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the bread line,
I shall fear no hunger, for his bailouts are with me.
He has anointed my income with taxes,
My expenses runneth over.
Surely, poverty and hard living will follow me all the days of my life,
And I will live in a mortgaged home forever.
I am glad I am American,
I am glad that I am free.
I wish I was a dog ...
And Obama was a tree.

Brings a tear to your eye, doesn't it?