ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20100211

Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable

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



"Daily Motivations"

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." -- Aristotle

"We don't live in a world of reality, we live in a world of perceptions." -- Gerald J. Simmons

An investment in knowledge pays the best interest. -- Benjamin Franklin



"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)

The LORD is close to all who call on Him, yes, to all who call on Him sincerely. (Psalm 145:18 NIV)

Why is it that God is within us, yet so many of us live our lives with little awareness of His presence? We face life's problems without taking advantage of His wisdom. We cope with crises without calling upon the limitless strength that He offers. Why does this happen?

It certainly is not because God wants it to be so. The Lord longs to maintain a close friendship with us. I believe the key word in the above verse is "sincerely." How sincere are you? Do you really want to have a relationship with Him? Or are you simply looking for instant help from the immediate problem of the day? Do you wish to partake in a rich and full relationship with the King of all kings? Or are you concerned that He might interfere with the way you want to run your life?

Those impure motives will never cause God to stop reaching out to you, but they will make it difficult for you to know the fullness of His love and power. Only when we come to a sincere desire for Him, will we discover what He has wanted us to have all along.

The Lord desires daily fellowship with us through the Holy Spirit who indwells us. The moment you receive Christ into your life, He enters your heart in the person of the Holy Spirit. Though you may not always be aware of Him, He takes permanent residence inside you every moment of every day.

Your View of God Really Matters …

What would you have to give up to allow the Holy Spirit to control your life? What would you gain by the Holy Spirit controlling your life? In your heart, which do you want more? It really is your choice.



"The Patriot Post"

Great Quotes From Great Leaders

http://www.greatleadersmovie.com/?SRC=DI1810&utm_source=Walk+the+Talk+Master+List&utm_campaign=5e2e7b62af-DI_1_8_10&utm_medium=email



"It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what it will be to-morrow." -- Federalist No. 62

"If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Cooper, 1802

"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate - look to his character...." -- Noah Webster, Letters to a Young Gentleman Commencing His Education, 1789

"[A] good moral character is the first essential in a man, and that the habits contracted at your age are generally indelible, and your conduct here may stamp your character through life. It is therefore highly important that you should endeavor not only to be learned but virtuous." -- George Washington, letter to Steptoe Washington, 1790

"[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt." -- Samuel Adams, essay in The Public Advertiser, 1749



"The Web"

Newt Gingrich: Impeach judges - Crush and Replace the Left - 2012 "Victory or Death!" Pt.5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtjfMjjce2Y

Morning Bell: Is USA Today Serving the Goals of Al-Qaeda?

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/10/morning-bell-is-usa-today-serving-the-goals-of-al-qaeda/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

Yesterday, USA Today ran an editorial on the Obama administration’s handling of terrorism, writing: “Officials’ handling of Christmas Day attack looks like amateur hour.” Graciously given the space to respond to this charge, Obama administration Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan replied: “Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.”

Got that? The Obama administration considers any criticism of its national security policies, even from as benign a source as USA Today, as serving “the goals of al-Qaeda.” And the problems with Brennan’s letter don’t end there:

Interrogation Contradictions: First Brennan asserts that “Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was thoroughly interrogated and provided important information.” But just one sentence later Brennan admits: “The most important breakthrough occurred after Abdulmutallab was read his rights.” So which is it? Was the first interrogation so thorough that no active and useful intelligence was lost, or did “the most important breakthrough” come over a month later, giving al-Qaeda a month’s head start?

Coordination Contradictions: Brennan asserts “Senior counterterrorism officials from the White House, the intelligence community and the military were all actively discussing this case before he was Mirandized and supported the decision to charge him in criminal court.” But this has been directly contradicted by the sworn testimony of National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair and FBI Director Robert Mueller. Someone is not telling the truth about a vital national security matter. Congress must investigate.

False Miranda History: Brennan writes: “Would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid was read his Miranda rights five minutes after being taken off a plane he tried to blow up. The same people who criticize the president today were silent back then.” But Brennan leaves out the fact that Reid was arrested in December 2001, before the military detention system was in place. This is like accusing George Washington of treason for not using machine guns against the British. He didn’t use them because they didn’t exist yet!

Military vs. Civilian Custody: Brennan writes: “There is little difference between military and civilian custody, other than an interrogator with a uniform. The suspect gets access to a lawyer, and interrogation rules are nearly identical.” That is perhaps the most fatuous sentence in Brennan’s op-ed. The roles of lawyers in the civilian and military system are completely different. In military custody, detainees are not read their Miranda rights and their lawyer’s purpose is to challenge his detention as an enemy combatant. Under civilian custody, the suspect is read his Miranda rights and his lawyer is there to make sure he does not say anything that will incriminate himself. The situations are completely different, not “nearly identical.”

Military vs. Civilian Trials: “Cries to try terrorists only in military courts lack foundation.” The false choice of all civilian or all military trials is what lacks foundation. There are hundreds of witnesses who stand ready to testify and send Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to jail. We do not need his testimony to be admissible. There is nothing stopping the administration from questioning Abdulmutallab as an enemy combatant without reading him Miranda rights and then trying him in civilian court later.

Last month, The Washington Post editorial board, who has endorsed every single Democratic Presidential candidate since 1988, wrote:

UMAR FAROUK Abdulmutallab was nabbed in Detroit on board Northwest Flight 253 after trying unsuccessfully to ignite explosives sewn into his underwear. The Obama administration had three options: It could charge him in federal court. It could detain him as an enemy belligerent. Or it could hold him for prolonged questioning and later indict him, ensuring that nothing Mr. Abdulmutallab said during questioning was used against him in court.

It is now clear that the administration did not give serious thought to anything but Door No. 1. This was myopic, irresponsible and potentially dangerous.

Myopic. Irresponsible. Potentially dangerous. That is a spot-on assessment of the Obama administration’s knee-jerk Miranda-rights-for-everyone counterterrorism policy. And admitting as much would be the first step to defeating, not supporting, al-Qaeda.



GOP blocks Obama labor board nominee

US Senate Vote: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00022


By SAM HANANEL
Associated Press Writer

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9DOV2PO0&show_article=1

House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio, left, and Senate Minority Leader...

WASHINGTON (AP) - Senate Democrats on Tuesday failed to push through President Barack Obama's choice of a union lawyer to serve on the National Labor Relations Board after two of their own joined Republicans to block the nomination.
By a 52-33 vote, Democrats fell far short of the 60 needed to overcome a GOP filibuster of the nomination of Craig Becker.

The vote is a setback for organized labor, which was counting on a strong pro-union voice on the agency that oversees union elections and referees labor-management disputes.

It's also a blow to the NLRB, which has postponed hundreds of cases for more than two years while political wrangling has stalled nominations to fill three vacancies on the five-member board.

Republicans have held up Becker's confirmation for months, saying they fear he would circumvent Congress to make labor laws more union-friendly.

But the task for Democratic leaders turned more difficult when two Democrats—Sen. Ben Nelson, of Nebraska, and Sen. Blanche Lincoln, of Arkansas—joined Republicans in opposing Becker. Both have come under intense pressure from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups to oppose the nominee.

"Mr. Becker's previous statements strongly indicate that he would take an aggressive personal agenda to the NLRB, and that he would pursue a personal agenda there, rather than that of the administration," Nelson said in a statement.

Democrats had tried to push Becker through before Republican Scott Brown of Massachusetts came into office and took away Democrats' 60 vote supermajority. Brown voted against Becker.

Becker, a lawyer for the AFL-CIO and the Service Employees International Union, has spoken favorably on "card check" legislation that would take away the right of employers to demand secret ballot union representation elections. Some of his legal writings suggest that its goals could be accomplished by the NLRB without Congress having to pass the legislation.



Drillgate

http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/drillgate/293441098434

Many of us appreciated the President mentioning in his State of the Union address that “tough decisions” had to be made regarding offshore drilling. People have had doubts about his seriousness in regards to domestic energy policy because our Department of the Interior dragging its feet on Virginia’s offshore oil and gas leases. Still, we’ve held out hope that America’s voice will be heard on energy.

And now Vince Haley at Big Government reports this shocker:
In April of 2009, during a discussion about offshore exploration in San Francisco, Salazar said that President Obama directed him to “to make sure that we have an open and transparent government” and that “these are not decisions that are going to be made behind closed doors.” Salazar went on to say that President Obama wanted to make sure that DOI was “maximizing the opportunity for the public to give us guidance on what it is that they want to do.”

Yet, more than four months after the comment period ended, the Department of the Interior has failed to make any public announcement about the results, even though sources have told American Solutions for months the comments show a 2-1 advantage in support of offshore drilling.

It took American Solutions almost four months and the power of the Freedom of Information Act to finally uncover indirect confirmation that, out of over 530,000 comments submitted, pro-drilling comments outnumbered anti-drilling comments by a 2-1 margin.

In an email dated October 27, 2009, Liz Birnbaum, director of the Minerals Management Service, informs other Interior officials that a preliminary tabulation of the results of the comment period had not yet gone to Secretary Salazar, adding “[s]o the Secretary can honestly say in response to any questions that he’s [SIC] has not yet seen the analysis of the comments – staff is still working on it. I did, however, confirm to him the 2-1 split that these guys [at American Solutions] are emphasizing.”

When a public employee is on record condoning purposeful deception of the American people, the taxpayer should no longer have to fund his or her job. Secretary Salazar should immediately fire Liz Birnbaum for purposefully deceiving him, and in turn, the American people. It’s not possible for the Secretary to honor pledges of openness, honestly, and transparency in government if his staff is going to deliberately undermine such pledges.

Public opinion polls already measure near 70% support for offshore drilling, so the results from a public comment period that reflect the same public sentiment should not be surprising. But after all this talk of wanting the public’s input, Secretary Salazar and his team must find it a real stumbling block to have to explain all their anti-energy development actions in light of the comment period results to which they previously attached such great importance
As Haley notes in his article, it’s astonishing that the Obama administration is dragging its feet on offshore drilling at a time when we’re so desperate for economic recovery and jobs. It’s no surprise that an overwhelming majority of Americans support offshore drilling: it will provide millions of good jobs and billions in revenue, and it will make us more secure by reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

Mr. President, we appreciate you asking for our input. We’ve provided it, so thank you for accepting it. With no time to waste, it’s time to listen to the American people – finally – and drill, baby, drill!

- Sarah Palin



China PLA officers urge economic punch against U.S.

Chris Buckley
BEIJING

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6183KG20100209

Members of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force Aviation stand at attention during a training session at the 60th National Day Parade Village in the outskirts of Beijing, September 15, 2009.

Credit: Reuters/Joe Chan

BEIJING (Reuters) - Senior Chinese military officers have proposed that their country boost defense spending, adjust PLA deployments, and possibly sell some U.S. bonds to punish Washington for its latest round of arms sales to Taiwan.

World

The calls for broad retaliation over the planned U.S. weapons sales to the disputed island came from officers at China's National Defence University and Academy of Military Sciences, interviewed by Outlook Weekly, a Chinese-language magazine published by the official Xinhua news agency.

The interviews with Major Generals Zhu Chenghu and Luo Yuan and Senior Colonel Ke Chunqiao appeared in the issue published on Monday.

The People's Liberation Army (PLA) plays no role in setting policy for China's foreign exchange holdings. Officials in charge of that area have given no sign of any moves to sell U.S. Treasury bonds over the weapons sales, a move that could alarm markets and damage the value of China's own holdings.

While far from representing fixed government policy, the open demands for retaliation by the PLA officers underscored the domestic pressures on Beijing to deliver on its threats to punish the Obama administration over the arms sales.

"Our retaliation should not be restricted to merely military matters, and we should adopt a strategic package of counter-punches covering politics, military affairs, diplomacy and economics to treat both the symptoms and root cause of this disease," said Luo Yuan, a researcher at the Academy of Military Sciences.

"Just like two people rowing a boat, if the United States first throws the strokes into chaos, then so must we."

Luo said Beijing could "attack by oblique means and stealthy feints" to make its point in Washington.

"For example, we could sanction them using economic means, such as dumping some U.S. government bonds," Luo said.

The warnings from the PLA come after weeks of strains between Washington and Beijing, who have also been at odds over Internet controls and hacking, trade and currency quarrels, and President Barack Obama's planned meeting with the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan leader reviled by China as a "separatist."

MILITARY SPENDING BOOST

Chinese has blasted the United States over the planned $6.4 billion arms package for Taiwan unveiled in late January, saying it will sanction U.S. firms that sell weapons to the self-ruled island that Beijing considers a breakaway province of China.

China is likely to unveil its official military budget for 2010 next month, when the Communist Party-controlled national parliament meets for its annual session.

The PLA officers suggested that budget should mirror China's ire toward Washington.

"Clearly propose that due to the threat in the Taiwan Sea, we are increasing military spending," said Luo.

Last year, the government set the official military budget at 480.7 billion yuan ($70.4 billion), a 14.9 percent rise on the one in 2008, continuing a nearly unbroken succession of double-digit increases over more than two decades.

The fresh U.S. arms sales threatened Chinese military installations on the mainland coast facing Taiwan, and "this gives us no choice but to increase defense spending and adjust (military) deployments," said Zhu Chenghu, a major general at China's National Defence University in Beijing.

In 2005, Zhu stirred controversy by suggesting China could use nuclear weapons if the United States intervened militarily in a conflict over Taiwan.

The United States switched official recognition from Taiwan to China in 1979. But the Taiwan Relations Act, passed the same year, guarantees Taiwan a continued supply of defensive weapons.

China has the world's biggest pile of foreign currency reserves, much of it held in U.S. treasury debt. China held $798.9 billion in U.S. Treasuries at end-October.

But any attempt to use that stake against Washington would probably maul the value of China's own dollar-denominated assets.

China has condemned previous arms sales, but has taken little action in response to them. But Luo said the country's growing strength meant that time has passed.

"China's attitude and actions over U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan will be increasingly tough," the magazine cited him as saying. "That is inevitable with rising national strength."



Foreign energy firms getting windfall of U.S. stimulus funds

Money is used to buy turbines made abroad

By Brooke Williams Watchdog Institute

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/feb/09/foreign-energy-firms-getting-windfall-of-us/

China’s A-Power Energy Generation Systems lists a vacant office in downtown San Diego as its U.S. address. Brooke Williams

Online: Local wind-energy leaders explain why U.S. firms are falling behind in getting stimulus dollars on 10News.com. And for the workshop’s full investigation into wind-power funding, go to investigativereportingworkshop.org.

Of the more than $2 billion the federal government has given out to boost the economy and create green-energy jobs, more than three-quarters has gone to foreign-owned companies that dominate the global wind-power industry. This latest finding by the Investigative Reporting Workshop, a nonprofit at American University in Washington, D.C., is illustrated clearly in San Diego County, where about a dozen commercial wind developers have offices.

La Jolla is the headquarters for Eurus Energy America, the subsidiary of a Japanese firm that received $91 million in federal stimulus money for a wind farm in western Texas. It plans to apply for more money to fund a wind project in Oregon.

EnXco, a French-owned firm with American headquarters in Escondido, has received $69.5 million in stimulus money for its wind farm in Indiana. It installed 53 German-made turbines at the site. EnXco also is operating the Texas wind farm for Eurus.

A-Power Energy Generation Systems, a Chinese-owned company that might get federal grants through a consortium building a wind farm in western Texas, lists a vacant office in downtown San Diego as its U.S. address on recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Cannon Power Group of San Diego has received $19 million to expand a wind farm east of Portland in Washington. The company spent about half of that money overseas to pay for wind turbines it said it couldn’t get stateside.

The Reporting Workshop’s initial analysis of wind-energy grants was released in October and outraged some lawmakers. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., cited the group’s report — and news that $450 million in stimulus money might go to a group installing Chinese-made wind turbines in Texas — when he asked the secretary of energy to deny federal financing to firms that use foreign-made turbines.

American wind companies are receiving stimulus grants, but some such as Cannon Power spend much of that money abroad because few U.S. companies manufacture turbines.

Mark Anderson, chief executive officer of Eurus Energy America, a subsidiary of Tokyo-based Eurus Energy Holdings Corp., said his company would not have been able to move forward with other projects without the guarantee of stimulus money.

Eurus received $91 million in grants for the Bull Creek Wind Farm in Texas. It has the capacity to power about 48,000 homes a year.

Eurus is building a wind farm in Oregon. The company plans to seek green grants for that project, Anderson said.

“We plan to put more and more money into the United States,” he said.

Eurus employs 20 people in San Diego, Anderson said, and has assets worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

Its Texas project created between 300 and 400 jobs for construction, including 10 for operation, and is benefiting the local economy through property taxes and land leases, Anderson said. For the project, Eurus bought Mitsubishi turbines, which are manufactured abroad.

EnXco, the French-owned firm based in Escondido, also went abroad to buy turbines, from German manufacturer REpower. A spokesman for enXco said the project created more than 200 construction jobs as well as a dozen permanent jobs. It has the capacity to power about 29,000 homes per year.

A-Power, based in northeast China, is part of a group building a wind farm in western Texas using turbines it is manufacturing in China. This is the project that affronted Schumer after the group announced plans to collect $450 million in stimulus grants.

In a letter, Schumer asked Energy Secretary Steven Chu to reject requests for stimulus grants from companies that buy key components abroad.

“In all due respect, I remind the secretary there is a four-letter word associated with the stimulus — J-O-B-S,” Schumer told ABC News. “Very few jobs here, lots of jobs in China. That is not what I intended or any other legislator who voted for the stimulus intended.”

Chu responded on Facebook: “But manufacturers will not build plants here and grow their production capacity here unless there is domestic demand; and, until recently, that was not the case.”

In SEC filings this year, A-Power Energy Generation Systems lists a suite in a high-rise in downtown San Diego as its business and mailing address. However, the suite door is locked, and a building manager said A-Power is not a tenant.

When reached on his cell phone, Chief Operating Officer John Lin said he did not have time to answer questions.

Gary Hardke, president of Cannon Power Group, a renewable-energy company near Torrey Pines, said his company had no choice but to go abroad to buy parts for its wind farm in Klickitat, Wash. Two main U.S. manufacturers, GE Energy and Clipper Windpower, either did not make a turbine the size that Cannon wanted or were sold out.

Cannon bought the turbines — made up mostly of blades, towers and nacelles (the part in the middle that houses components such as the rotor and generator) — from Siemens, a German company that also was the main contractor.

In all, Hardke estimated, more than 50 percent of the stimulus grant went to Siemens.

“I appreciate that cosmetically it doesn’t look good, but the reality is … the grants (must) go into the project costs,” he said.

Cannon is expecting $151 million more in stimulus grants to expand the wind farm and hopes all the parts will come from the United States.

Hardke pointed to ways the stimulus cash will do what lawmakers intended — boost the local economy. Cannon pays about $3 million a year to lease land from about 40 individual owners as well as $2 million in property taxes.

The project is in a county where nearly 20 percent of residents earn less than the poverty level, according to a 2009 U.S. Census release. It created more than 300 construction jobs, Hardke said, and 20 to 30 to operate the farm.

“There isn’t a family in Klickitat that doesn’t know someone employed by the project,” he said.

“The ongoing economic development benefit in rural America is really significant.

The icing on the cake, he said, is “clean energy — really significantly helping the environment.”



"The e-mail Bag"

Are you a Democrat, a Republican, or a Southerner?

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/are-you-a-democrat-a-republican-or-a-southerner/question-582567/

Here is a little test that will help you decide.
The answer can be found by posing the following question:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children.

Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you.

You are carrying a Kimber 1911 cal. 45 ACP, and you are an expert shot. You have mere s econds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?

THINK CAREFULLY AND THEN SCROLL DOWN:

Democrat's Answer :

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Does the pistol have appropriate safety built into it? Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? Should I call 9-1-1? Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have paint and weed day and make this happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.. This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for few days and try to come to a
consensus.



Republican's Answer:

BANG!



Southerner's Answer:

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG ! Click..... (Sounds of reloading) BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click Daughter: 'Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?! ' Son: 'Can I shoot the next one?!' Wife: 'You ain't taking that to the Taxidermist!