ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20100312

Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable

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



"Daily Motivations"

"Our thoughts and imagination are the only real limits to our possibilities." -- Orison Swett Marden

Joy is not in things; it is in us. -- Richard Wagner

"The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one." -- Mark Twain



Welcome The Rain

http://www.walkthetalk.com/welcome_the_rain/wtr_movie.htm?utm_source=Walk+the+Talk+Master+List&utm_campaign=5af736f351-DI_2_1_10&utm_medium=email



"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)

He comforts us in all our troubles so that we can comfort others. When others are troubled, we will be able to give them the same comfort God has given us. (2 Corinthians 1:-4)

Have you ever watched geese fly south for the winter? By flying in their famous "V" formation, the birds fly 71 percent farther than if they flew independently. The beating wings of the lead flyer create an updraft for the goose directly behind it. Then, when the lead flyer tires out, it drops back and a fresher member of the flock takes its place.

Sick or wounded geese fly inside the "V," where there is the least wind resistance. The others help an ailing goose if it is forced to land. Two other geese follow the sick one down, nursing and protecting their fallen comrade until it either recovers or dies. Only then do they fly off.

God teaches us a lesson through those geese. When we stand together, we are far greater than the sum of our parts. God will often place someone who needs you right in your path. You will speak to someone at work or receive a phone call from an old friend. That little prompting in your spirit will tell you, "This is a time for ministry. The Lord wants me to help and encourage this person."

You should also expect God to send comforters when you are the one who needs comfort. Some Christians are prideful about accepting help. They have learned this not from the Bible but from the world, which teaches independence and self-sufficiency. Let your trial become an opportunity to draw closer to other believers.

Your View of God Really Matters …

Is it difficult for you to accept help from others---even when you really need it? Or are you too busy to even notice when someone is hurting so that you can encourage them? Today, ponder the real life applications of being a part of the Body of Christ when you or someone else is hurting.



"The Patriot Post"

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams



This Week's 'Braying Jenny' Award

"[I]t is inappropriate to look at any particular short period of time to discern the long-term trend." --NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco, when asked whether she agreed with Phil Jones' assertion that there has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995

File this one under "Keen Sense of the Obvious." Using short-term observations to make long-term predictions is exactly what the "global warming consensus" crew has been doing for the last 15 years.



Hope 'n' Change: Lawyers Still Have Outsized Influence

Battle lines are being drawn for the upcoming health care summit that Barack Obama is orchestrating to save his signature legislative agenda item. The vocal and powerful trial lawyer lobby has made clear that they don't want tort reform on the table when Obama and the Democrats meet with key Republicans on Feb. 25. The American Association for Justice and other trial lawyer groups practically own the Democrat Party, and their power has been felt twice in recent years when the livelihood of these ambulance chasers has been threatened. They killed medical liability reform under George W. Bush, and they have thus far kept meaningful tort reform out of pending legislation.

Obama has signaled a willingness to discuss malpractice reform, though he remains against caps on lawsuits. His supposedly open-minded view on tort reform is light on details, however, and that makes Republicans skeptical about how much he is willing to give on the issue. DNC Chair Howard Dean spoke an inconvenient truth when he said that Democrats "did not want to take on the trial lawyers.." If Obama's past performance is any guide, the trial lawyers will be able to keep him right where they want him -- their hip pocket.



Count on Government Waste

If you thought spending upwards of $2.5 million on advertising during the Super Bowl to promote the upcoming census was a waste of money, that's just the tip of the iceberg. An audit of last fall's address canvassing portion of the census, in which workers fixed the GPS coordinates of households in preparation for this spring's count, found that it cost almost 25 percent more than the original estimate of $356 million. The extra $88 million in expenses found during the audit are an obvious concern since the bulk of the work is yet to be done. Among the excuses given were workers who were paid for the training but quit before the work actually began and others who fudged their mileage reimbursements to pad their paychecks.

The census is mandated by the Constitution to determine proportional representation through an accurate count of the populace, but in more recent times states have pushed hard for the largest possible compliance rate in order to ensure they receive "their share" from the federal trough. Consequently, the census questions become quite a bit more intrusive than "How many people live at this residence?" According to the Census Bureau, the count determines the fate of over $400 billion in federal funding. That's where the real fraud will begin.



National Security - Warfront With Jihadistan: Second Thoughts on KSM

Of the many judgments that history will make to describe Barack Hussein Obama's regime, incompetence will be near the top. As prime evidence, look no further than the badly botched handling of the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

Attorney General Eric Holder decided soon after BHO was sworn in that KSM and his murderous cohorts did not commit acts of war to be tried before military commissions, but rather ordinary, run-of-the-mill criminal acts that could be prosecuted in a New York City federal court. Quite naturally, this led to a firestorm of criticism aimed at the administration. Obama tried to douse the flames early, essentially saying, "Hey, we'll give KSM a fair trial, and then we'll execute him." Way to poison the jury pool, Mr. President. Way to show the world how "fair" our justice system is.

With that tack not fooling the American people, with a looming Senate vote that could stop civilian trials for terror suspects, and with cost estimates for a NYC trial going through the roof, Obama began fast-tracking his backtracking. When asked about the administration's options for KSM, neither Holder nor White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs would rule out a military trial, a stunning retreat from Obama's previous position. Additionally, Obama says he is now planning to insert himself into the debate about where to try KSM, which raises the obvious question: Where has he been all this time?

Add to this debacle the administration's handling of the Christmas Day undi-bomber, and the release this week of two new documents that lay out Obama's defense and homeland security strategy for the next four years -- documents that assiduously avoid using the words Islam, Islamic, or Islamist -- and the picture that emerges is one of a grossly and recklessly incompetent administration. If the subject weren't national survival, this might be a fine comedy. But no one is laughing.

In related news, Fox News reports, "The U.S. Army is investigating allegations that soldiers were attempting to poison the food supply at Fort Jackson in South Carolina." It appears that the Fort Jackson Five are part of the "09 Lima" Arabic translation program and are Muslim.



Business & Economy - Income Redistribution: The Deficit Commission

While Democrats on the Hill are working to circumvent paygo to increase the federal deficit on "emergency items," Barack Obama signed an executive order Thursday creating a bipartisan fiscal commission tasked with addressing the nation's $12.3 trillion debt. "It keeps me awake at night, looking at all that red ink," the president said, just before again lamenting that he "inherited" the mess. The poor dear.

To head the commission, Obama chose Alan Simpson, a former RINO Senate whip, and Erskine Bowles, Bill Clinton's former chief of staff. The commission will have 18 members, six chosen by the president, six by congressional Democrats and six by congressional Republicans. GOP leaders haven't yet decided whether to participate.

This year's deficit is projected to hit $1.6 trillion, or almost 11 percent of GDP. The administration forecasts the deficit to remain above $1 trillion for three consecutive years. The commission's mandate is to make recommendations by December for reducing that deficit to 3 percent of GDP. Given that Obama also called Thursday for another $50 to $100 billion stimulus plan, however, this commission is laughable.

Also amusing is its "bipartisan" nature. CNBC's Larry Kudlow said, "Simpson's to the left of Erskine Bowles," adding, "It's an excuse to raise taxes -- when we need to be cutting tax rates." The Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore agreed, writing, "Don't expect any tax cuts from the Obama deficit reduction panel. This is looking with each passing day like a political ploy to make a tax increase seem imperative and unavoidable. If that's what Mr. Obama wants, that's what he's likely to get with Alan Simpson helping to run the show."

As the supply of U.S. debt begins to outstrip demand for it, the federal budget is absolutely a major concern. The trouble is, Obama's policies are taking us in the wrong direction.



The BIG Lie

"Our work is far from over but we have rescued this economy from the worst of this crisis." --Barack Obama

Read more on the administration's celebration of the stimulus anniversary here.



Obama Extends Loan for Nuclear Plant

A 50 percent loan default rate would be enough to make most lenders say, "thanks but no thanks" -- but not the federal government. Despite Congressional Budget Office and Government Accountability Office reports estimating that the risk of default for new nuclear reactors could climb to 50 percent, President Obama announced an $8.33 billion federal loan guarantee to construct two nuclear reactors in Georgia. And in case this isn't enough, the president's 2011 budget would bring to $54.5 billion the government subsidies for nuclear energy projects -- projects which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has basically regulated out of the financial reach of private enterprise.

Politico gave the move the ironic title of "nuclear olive branch" to the GOP, but as the Heritage Foundation noted, "President Obama's nuclear loan guarantee announcement is really nothing more than a transparently cynical attempt to revive his moribund cap-and-trade/energy tax proposals currently languishing in the Senate." The White House has made clear that it expects Republican cooperation on other administration priorities in return.

While we support energy independence, no single approach is a panacea. Yet in its quest for political points, Obama has found yet one more thing at which to fling taxpayer finances.



Village Academic Curriculum: Bible Placement is a 'Hate Crime'

An eighth grade teacher in North Carolina has been suspended while investigators review recent events surrounding her, her class, a Bible and Facebook. Melissa Hussain is Muslim, and when her students left a Bible on her desk, she posted pointed criticisms on Facebook, including one calling the incident a "hate crime." She posted, "I can't believe the cruelty and ignorance of people sometimes," vowed that she wouldn't let the matter "go unpunished," and bragged that she "was able to shame her kids."

It's possible that the students were taunting the teacher -- they had previously put a picture of Jesus on her desk, wore T-shirts with his picture on the front and sang "Jesus Loves Me" in her classroom. It's no secret that junior high kids can behave immaturely, but Hussain shouldn't stoop to their level. Hussain lives in a free country, but if this had occurred in a Muslim nation, the Christian students would certainly not "go unpunished."



To Keep and Bear Arms

According to Fulton County police, a man in Atlanta, Georgia, called in two electricians to an empty home with the intention of robbing them. When the first electrician entered the home, he was immediately robbed and then shot in the leg. Shortly after, the second electrician, unaware that the first electrician was in a predicament, was also shot in the leg. However, he pulled out his own gun and shot the perpetrator in the head. The perp was taken to a hospital where he is in critical condition. Police believe that a second suspect may have been involved and may also have a gunshot wound.

May Youmans, a witness to the scene, praised the second electrician, saying, "I'm just glad that the electrician had a weapon.. He retaliated against [the robber] so they wouldn't think about doing it again to no one else."

In other Second Amendment news, Monday, Feb. 22, will mark the end of the 94-year-old ban on carrying loaded firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. Congress passed a law last May lifting the ban by revoking the National Park Service's ability to set its own gun policy. State law now governs each park. Somehow it's fitting that this recognition of gun (and state) rights will occur on George Washington's birthday. We think the man who led an army of citizen soldiers in the fight for our independence would approve.



And Last...

First, let us say that we support conservation, a word that shares the same root as "conservative." But the latest recommendations from the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change leave us wondering when Al Gore joined the Church. During Lent, which began Wednesday and lasts for 40 days, Catholics traditionally give up something in observance. According to the latest Public Policy Insights newsletter, "the Archdiocese of Washington's Environmental Outreach Committee has created a particularly useful new tool: a calendar that lists 40 carbon-fasting measures individuals can take to reduce their carbon footprint." In other words, the faithful are being asked to give up carbon for Lent.

Now, you too can "Show reverence for life and for the Earth" by doing various "green" things, all for the annual Catholic Climate Covenant. For example, you might give up "one light bulb from your home," or "Turn down your thermostat by at least one degree." And don't forget to "Check the tire pressure of your car" or to "Learn about mountaintop removal mining."

Jesus said, "Let your light shine before others." This calendar, however, is apparently referring to 3 Gore-inthians: "Don't let your light shine -- turn it off to save energy."



"The Web"

Can Nancy Pelosi Get the Votes?

The Senate bill's abortion language is not the House Speaker's only problem.
By MICHAEL BARONE

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703701004575113292688090292.html
Are there enough votes in the House to pass the Senate's health-care bill? As of today, it's clear there aren't. House Democratic leaders have brushed aside White House calls to bring the bill forward by March 18, when President Barack Obama heads to Asia. Nevertheless, analysts close to the Democratic leadership tell me they're confident the leadership will find some way to squeeze out the 216 votes needed for a majority.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has indeed shown mastery at amassing majorities. But it's hard to see how she'll do so on this one. The arithmetic as I see it doesn't add up.

The House passed its version of the health bill in November by 220-215. Of those 220, one was a Republican who now is a no. One Democrat who voted yes has died, two Democrats who voted yes have resigned, and one Democrat who voted no has resigned as well. So if everyone but the Republican votes the way they did four months ago, the score would be 216-215.

View Full Image

Chad Crowe

But not everyone is ready to vote that way. The House bill included an amendment prohibiting funding of abortions sponsored by Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak. The Senate bill did not. Mr. Stupak says he and 10 to 12 other members won't vote for the Senate bill for that reason. Others have said the same, including Minnesota's James Oberstar, chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and Dan Lipinski, a product of the Chicago Democratic machine.

Mrs. Pelosi may have some votes in reserve—members who would have voted yes if she needed them in November and would do so again. But we can be pretty sure she doesn't have more than 10, or she wouldn't have allowed the Stupak amendment to come forward at the last minute the first time. She also might get one or two votes from members who voted no and later announced they were retiring.

But that's not enough—and there are other complications. Voting for the Senate bill means voting for the Cornhusker kickback and the Louisiana purchase—the price Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid paid for the votes of Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu. It's not hard to imagine the ads Republicans could run attacking House members for sending money to Nebraska and Louisiana but not their home states.

To be sure, Democratic leaders say they want to repair the Senate bill by subsequent legislation that could be passed with 51 votes in the Senate under the reconciliation process. But they have yet to produce such a bill. It can't include the Stupak amendment, which experts say doesn't qualify for the reconciliation process. And there's no way they can credibly promise the Senate will pass it. Senate rules allow many forms of obstruction. The reconciliation process is littered with traps.

There is also the House's historic lack of trust in the Senate, which is on display by Democrats who voted yes in November. "No, I don't trust the U.S. Senate," Wisconsin's Steve Kagen told WLUK-TV in Green Bay, this week. New York's Dan Maffei was quoted in the Syracuse Post-Standard on Monday that "I will trust the president, but I will not trust the Senate."

"I am not inclined to support the Senate version," Nevada's Shelley Berkley told the New York Times last week. "I would like something more than a promise. The Senate cannot promise its way out of a paper bag." Her district voted 64% for Barack Obama.

Other Democrats who voted yes seem to be wavering. "I don't think reconciliation is a good idea," Indiana's Baron Hill was quoted recently in Bloomberg News. New York's Michael Arcuri says he's a no for now. "There would have to be some dramatic changes in it for me to change my position," he recently told the Utica Observer-Dispatch.

"I think we can do better," California's Dennis Cardoza told the New York Times last week. "If the Senate bill is not fixed, that"—voting no—"is not a flip-flop," Nevada's Dina Titus told the Las Vegas Review-Journal last week. "I see that as standing by your convictions." Most of these members represent districts which went Republican some time in the past decade—and could easily do so again if national polls are an indicator.

There's a more fundamental problem for the Democratic leadership: Their majority is not as strong as their 253-178 margin suggests.

A Democratic House majority tends to have fewer members with safe seats than a Republican majority. Consider that in 2005 Speaker Dennis Hastert had 214 Republican members elected in districts Mr. Bush carried, just four seats short of a majority. Today Speaker Nancy Pelosi has 208 Democratic members elected in districts Mr. Obama carried, eight seats short of a majority.

The Democratic bedrock is actually slightly smaller than the Republican bedrock was four years ago, even though the Democrats have 31 more members. That's partly because of Republican gerrymandering earlier in the decade, but it's more because Democratic voters tend to be bunched in relatively few districts. Mr. Obama carried 28 districts with 80% or more; John McCain didn't reach that percentage in any district.

A lot of Democrats—most Black Caucus members and many "gentry liberals" (to use urban scholar Joel Kotkin's term) like Mrs. Pelosi—are elected in overwhelmingly Democratic districts. This means there aren't that many faithful Democratic voters to spread around to other seats.

As a result, more than 40 House Democrats represent districts which John McCain carried. Most voted no in November and would presumably be hurt by switching to yes now. Moreover, Mr. Obama's job approval now hovers around 48%, five points lower than his winning percentage in 2008. His approval on health care is even lower.

Another 32 House Democrats represent districts where Mr. Obama won between 50% and 54% of the vote, and where his approval is likely to be running under 50% now. That leaves just 176 House Democrats from districts where Mr. Obama's approval rating is not, to borrow a real-estate term, under water. That's 40 votes less than the 216 needed.

"If there is a path to 216 votes, I am confident the Speaker will find it," writes Bush White House legislative strategy analyst Keith Hennessey on his blog. "She has a remarkable ability to bend her colleagues to her will." True, but perhaps that ability has led Democrats in the White House and on Capitol Hill to embark on what will be remembered as a mission impossible.

Mrs. Pelosi, whom I have known for almost 30 years, may turn out to be even shrewder than I think. But she may be facing a moment as flummoxing as the one when Democratic Speaker Thomas Foley lost the vote on the rule to consider the crime and gun control bill in August 1994, or when Republican Speaker Dennis Hastert saw the Mark Foley scandal explode on the last day of the session in September 2006. Both were moments when highly competent and dedicated House speakers saw their majorities shattered beyond repair.

That moment, if it comes, will occur some time between now and the Easter recess. The Democrats' struggle to get 216 votes is high stakes poker.



Colorado Democrats strangle Internet entrepreneurs

By Michelle Malkin

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/11/colorado-democrats-strangle-internet-entrepreneurs/

Reader Monica e-mails about how my governor, Colorado Democrat Bill Ritter, is squeezing folks who make money online through the Amazon affiliates program. Politicians don’t want to make tough spending cuts, so they’re targeting Internet commerce. First, some background:

The enduring skirmish in Colorado between Amazon.com and lawmakers over collecting online sales taxes has become the new front in a larger national war with billions of potential tax dollars at stake.

For years, it has pitted the anti-tax online giants, armed with a favorable 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision, against public officials and brick- and-mortar retailers that say it is time for Amazon and others to pay their fair share.

Now, Colorado legislative leaders’ political scrap with Amazon is being watched across the country by lawmakers and online-industry experts who say it’s yet another example of how confusion still reigns nationally without strong intervention from Congress.

This week, Amazon fired thousands of affiliates in Colorado, saying it refused to be forced to collect taxes under a new state law. Those affiliates were online partners that routed sales to Amazon.

“Everyone should be playing by the same tax rules,” said Craig Shearman, government-affairs spokesman for the National Retail Foundation, who says economically devastated government budgets need a shot of revenue.

…Online retailers often cite a 1992 Supreme Court decision to bolster their case against taxation. It effectively barred states from requiring online merchants to collect sales tax on their behalf, except where they have a physical presence.

But the court also suggested that Congress could give that power to states if it wanted to.

Monica shares her story:

I think it is important to know what is going on.

I got the letter yesterday and had my affiliate account closed. While it wasn’t a lot of money, it was some income for my family.

I wrote to our state legislators and the Governor last night. Doesn’t make sense to me how cutting off money to the state in the form of people’s income is helping to stimulate the economy. And they are blaming Amazon, but they are just a business, doing what they need to do to stay in business. The legislators were warned this would happen and did it anyways. No cutting of spending, no balancing the budget…just trying to use those of us who work hard to do their work for them.

The Democrats are going after the little businesses now. Something to be aware of.

P.S. Below is the letter I sent to the Governor and a copy to my representative and my senator last night. I really doubt they care.

Dear Gov. Ritter,

Up until today, I have been an associate in Amazon.com’s affiliate program. Because of the recent actions of you and the state legislature, I no longer will receive any income from Amazon when visitors to my websites click on an Amazon link. I have lost this income. Therefore, I will not be paying state income tax on this income. I also will not have this income available to spend in the state. I fail to see how this is helping the state of Colorado or our economy. You can continue to blame Amazon.com for this; but, Governor, we are not stupid. We can see who is to blame for this. It is the decision of our legislators and you, who signed this bill. You were informed that this would occur and decided to sacrifice small business owners in the state in order to continue irresponsible spending and a lack of resolve in cutting the budget.

As long as you continue to hurt those of us who work hard and do contribute to the state’s coffers, you and the legislators who voted for this will continue to face a budget crisis and will face an election crisis come next election.

I ask that you work to rescind this damaging legislation as quickly as possible to mitigate the damage to thousands of small business owners in Colorado.

Sincerely,
Monica Mayhak

***

The fallout, via Complete Colorado:

A move by Amazon to sever all ties with affiliates in Colorado already has some Fort Collins companies looking to move their businesses to other states.

Monday, Luke Knowles, CEO of Kinoli Inc., a Fort Collins-based interactive design and development Web site that has thousands of affiliates, received an e-mail from Amazon indicating it would no longer pay him advertising fees because of a new state law aimed at collecting sales tax on online purchases.

The loss of Amazon, one of his top grossing merchants, will hurt his bottom line as other affiliates who rely on Amazon also are cutting ties with his company, Knowles said.

The end result is that he is strongly considering moving the company to Montana because it does not have a general sales tax.

Heckuva job, Gov. Ritter!



Morning Bell: Bigger Government Is Not the Solution to Big Government Problems

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/11/morning-bell-bigger-government-is-not-the-solution-to-big-government-problems/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

The final details of the financial regulatory reform bill being negotiated by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Bob Corker (R-TN) are still being hammered out, but the underlying contours are clear: more government bureaucracy layered on top of our existing impenetrable and unaccountable financial regulatory system. Specifically, the Dodd/Corker plan reportedly still contains these elements:

The Consumer Financial Protection Agency – There is still debate over whether this new entity will be a stand alone agency, housed in the Department of Treasury, or housed in the Federal Reserve. Wherever the new entity ends up, the bottom line will be the same: a massive new bureaucracy afforded ambiguous grants of almost unlimited power. Although intended to help consumers, the net result of such a move would be to stifle the innovations that would bring them improved, lower-cost financial products.

Permanent TARP – Details are sketchy here, too, but reports are that federal bureaucrats, possibly the FDIC, will be given new “resolution authority” powers backed by a permanent $50 billion slush “resolution fund.” If this new power is given to the FDIC, it would be the first time the FDIC’s authority was extended beyond the banks that it directly insures. But more importantly, these provisions would establish a permanent TARP – the radioactively unpopular $700 billion Wall Street bail out slush fund.

The Agency for Financial Stability – Sold as purely a monitoring and information gathering entity, without the proper limiting language, a new systemic risk agency could essentially draft any financial firm into the federal financial regulatory system and subject it to a wide variety of restrictions that could include compelling large financial firms to sell off portions of themselves, drop lines of business, break up, or otherwise reduce the “risk” that the regulators believe they may impose on the financial system.

Instead of allowing for risky behavior to be properly priced by the marketplace, taken together these new bureaucracies would almost guarantee more big bank bailouts costing taxpayers untold billions of dollars. The new regulators could declare any problem with a major financial institution to be a potential systemic risk and tap into the fund to bail it out.

There is a better solution. Heritage fellow David John explains:

A better approach to preventing another crisis is to modify U.S. bankruptcy law to accommodate the special problems of resolving huge financial firms and to allow the courts to appoint receivers with the specialized knowledge necessary to best deal with their failure. By creating an open process controlled by an impartial judiciary guided by established statutory rules, financial firms, investors, taxpayers, and others would have the advance knowledge that large financial firms that were once known as “too big to fail” can now be closed if necessary without risking disaster. In addition, requiring all larger financial services firms to hold significant amounts of capital to cover losses would greatly reduce the systemic risk that they could pose to the financial system.

Higher capital levels would enable many firms that would fail under today’s capital levels to survive a crisis, saving shareholders and bondholders their investments, employees their jobs, and taxpayers billions of dollars in federal bailouts. Congress and the Administration need to learn and heed the lessons of 2008, or a repeat crisis will just be a matter of time.



Judge orders Washington to resume funding ACORN

Larry Neumeister - Associated Press Writer

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=933010

NEW YORK - A federal judge who found it unconstitutional that Congress tried to cut funding to the activist group ACORN has rejected a government request to change her mind and has ordered government agencies to make it clear the funding isn't blocked.

In a written ruling Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon made permanent her conclusion last year that the cutoff of funding was unconstitutional. She ordered all federal agencies to put the word out about it.

The Brooklyn judge said ACORN was punished by Congress without the enactment of administrative processes to decide if money had been handled inappropriately. She said the harm to ACORN's reputation continues because the government never rescinded its advice to withhold funding after it was distributed to "hundreds, if not thousands, of recipients."

ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, describes itself as an advocate for low-income and minority home buyers and residents. Critics of the group say it has engaged in voter registration fraud and embezzlement and has violated the tax-exempt status of some of its affiliates by engaging in partisan political activities.

Last year, a series of videos filmed at ACORN offices around the country sparked a national scandal and helped drive the organization to near ruin. In one video, ACORN employees were shown apparently advising a couple posing as a prostitute and her boyfriend to lie about her profession and launder her earnings; Brooklyn prosecutors said they did not commit a crime. (See related article)

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=683088

In asking the judge to reconsider her December ruling, the government cited a Dec. 7 report written by Scott Harshbarger, former attorney general for Massachusetts. It said the report "reinforces Congress' purpose in preventing fraud, waste and abuse" by describing ACORN's long-standing management problems.

The report concluded that ACORN leadership at every level was thin, the government noted.

The judge, however, wrote that it was "unmistakable that Congress determined ACORN's guilt before defunding it." She said Congress is entitled to investigate ACORN but cannot "rely on the negative results of a congressional or executive report as a rationale to impose a broad, punitive funding ban on a specific, named organization."

She said the Code of Federal Regulations establishes a formal process for deciding when federal contractors can be suspended or debarred. She added that "the existence of these regulations militates against the need for draconian, emergency action by Congress."

The government planned to review the judge's ruling and consider whether to appeal, spokesman Robert Nardoza said.

The legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which says it's dedicated to protecting the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, welcomed Wednesday's decision.

"The judge's ruling is a complete rebuke to the right wing's smear tactics that unfortunately Congress fell for," legal director Bill Quigley said. "This is why we have a system of checks and balances."



Who Is The Stimulus Money Stimulating? Teachers

by Veronique de Rugy

http://biggovernment.com/vderugy/2010/03/10/who-is-the-stimulus-money-stimulating-teachers/

Based on the Recovery.gov data, more than two third of the 594,754.3 jobs “created or saved” with the stimulus funds were “created or saved” in the Department of Education (see chart). Basically, what the administration meant by shovel ready projects was funding for your next door teacher.

Now, let’s recap some of findings and news of the previous weeks.

1. Most jobs are created in the Department of Education

2. In 2009, for the first time ever, more public-sector employees (7.9 million) belonged to a union than did private-sector employees (7.4 million) despite there being five times more wage and salary workers in the private sector.

3. A third of all union jobs are in Education

4. 33 percent of the education industry is unionized

5. The union boss, Andy Stern, was appointed to be on the president’s debt commission.

It all makes sense, doesn’t it?

Now, what do you think the chance are that the stimulus funds for education will be made permanent?

(Cool chart and data here)

Re: Obama Appoints SEIU's Stern to Debt Panel -- [Veronique de Rugy]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmRjMzYzYTRiNzU4Y2E0NjE5ODRlOGJiM2ZkMTNkNWM=

Look at this chart. It shows that in 2009, for the first time ever, more public-sector employees (7.9 million) belonged to a union than did private-sector employees (7.4 million) despite there being five times more wage and salary workers in the private sector.

So now, with a union boss on the debt commission and these many public employees unionized, with 33 percent of the education industry unionized and 31 percent of union members belonging to the education industry, what do you think are the chances that the stimulus spending on education will be made permanent?

Same question with the transportation funds.



Attorney: Obama's remark reflects 'mob rule' mentality

Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has taken issue with President Obama for comments during the State of the Union address.

During his speech in late January, the president criticized the Supreme Court for its recent decision on the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. "With all due deference to the separation of powers, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections," Obama said while six of the nine justices were seated before him. http://www.onenewsnow.com/ap/vid/default.aspx?videoId=20061

Speaking in Alabama on Tuesday, Roberts acknowledged anyone is free to criticize the court -- but that "the setting, the circumstances, and the decorum" must be considered.

"The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court -- according the requirements of protocol -- has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling," said the chief justice. (See earlier article) http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=931010

Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel http://www.lc.org/ believes Roberts' comment about the president's statement as being "very troubling" is generous. Barber contends the administration has become more of a "mob rule."

"And when I say 'mob rule,' I mean the Chicago mob mentality [as compared to] what we would expect, the type of professionalism and presidential presentation," Barber clarifies. "President Obama has really besmirched the office -- [he] has really lowered what we have come to expect from the highest office in the world."

On Tuesday, Roberts questioned whether justices should even be in the audience during the State of the Union address. Barber sympathizes with the chief justice.

"If they're going to be targeted for that and ridiculed -- and, frankly, verbally abused as President Obama did in his most recent State of the Union -- I think Justice Roberts has a good point," says the Liberty Counsel attorney. "Maybe they shouldn't be there if the president is going to take the opportunity to politicize the court and to use the court as a political prop to try to further his agenda."

In additional comments about the annual speech to Congress, Justice Roberts said it has "degenerated into a political pep rally."



"The e-mail Bag"

You Might Be A Redneck

http://www.countryhumor.com/redneck/mightbe.htm

Thank you Jeff Foxworthy!

 There has ever been crime-scene tape on your bathroom door.
 You've ever been kicked out of the zoo for heckling the monkeys.

 The taillight covers of your car are made of red tape.

 You think a subdivision is part of a math problem.

 You've ever bathed with flea and tick soap.