We have reached a time when any member(s) and/or associate(s) with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) should be disqualified as an elected or appointed member of our Federal Judiciary.
When we revisit some fifty (50) years ago and more, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) was identified as a group restricting persons of the Negroid race as less than equal to anyone of the Caucasian race. Americans have educated our way of thinking and recognizing each and every individual as equal regardless of race, thanks to President Kennedy, President Johnson, and a majority of the Republican Party members on Capitol Hill. The main-stream media fails to remind America that members of the Republican Party on Capitol Hill supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 more so than members of the Democrat Party.
Prior to the civil rights era, members of the KKK and many others are now recognized as those who were determined to restrict our Declaration of Independence and US Constitution http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/doi/text.html which clearly points out, ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’….
In today’s society, it seems the ACLU is determined to destroy our ‘Creator’ in any and all parts of (y)our government and all public groups and forums. Furthermore, the ACLU appears to be twisting our freedoms from ‘Godly’ individualism and transferring these rights to a ‘secular’ government, contrary to the Declaration ‘That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness’….
When you study the founding fathers, ‘almost all’ expressed their beliefs in ‘God’. No one wrote more on this issue than James Madison http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/madison. Additionally everyone should read and understand the Federalist Papers, http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/madison.htm. Our founding fathers believed in our Almighty ‘God’. Why is the ACLU determined to restrict or erase our ‘God’ from (y)our government and all public groups and forums?
Every ‘God’ fearing American should insist each member of the US Senate to ‘reject’ any ACLU associated appointment(s) to our Federal Judiciary. Each citizen should further consider each and every candidate for any other appointments and/or elections, then disqualify any association with the ACLU.
God Bless America!
Oscar Y. Harward
Monday, April 26, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
‘Early Voting’ 2010 Republican Party Primary
Republican Primary Election 2010 is now in progress. Monroe’s ‘Early Voting’ location, dates, and times started on April 15 and continues through May 1.
Union County Public Library
316 E Windsor St., Monroe, NC 28112.
Primary Schedule - April 15 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 8:30am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Other ‘Early Voting’ locations, dates, and times are also listed below.
Hemby Bridge Fire Dept.
Indian Trail, NC 28079
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Stallings Fire Dept.
4616 Old Monroe Rd
Indian Trail, NC 28079
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Wesley Chapel Fire Dept.
8821 New Town Rd
Waxhaw, NC 28173
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Wingate Community Center
315 W Elm St
Wingate, NC 28174
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Others who failed to vote during the ‘Early Voting’ can cast their vote on Primary Election Day, May 4 at their local precinct location.
America, the State of North Carolina, and Union County, NC are in an economic crisis and many are suffering from a recession with many job losses in our own communities and throughout our entire nation. This year is the most important occasion in my entire political life for supporting candidates for election or re-election who support fiscal and social issues, as well as supporting a national defense. Conservative Christian values and common sense as defined by our founding fathers are principally important. For this reason, I am asking each of you to consider supporting the following list of candidates on the Republican Party Primary ballot.
US Senate – Richard Burr
US House District 8 – Hal Jordan
NC Senate District 35 – Wyatt Thomas Tucker
NC House District 68 – Jeffrey Mark Gerber
District Attorney District 20B – Clayton Jones
County Comissioner(s) – Jonathan Ryan Thomas
Jerry Bennett Simpson
Matthew Todd Johnson
Court of Appeals – (Calabria) - Ann Marie Calabria
Court of Appeals – (Elmore) - Steve Walker
Union County Public Library
316 E Windsor St., Monroe, NC 28112.
Primary Schedule - April 15 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 8:30am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Other ‘Early Voting’ locations, dates, and times are also listed below.
Hemby Bridge Fire Dept.
Indian Trail, NC 28079
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Stallings Fire Dept.
4616 Old Monroe Rd
Indian Trail, NC 28079
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Wesley Chapel Fire Dept.
8821 New Town Rd
Waxhaw, NC 28173
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Wingate Community Center
315 W Elm St
Wingate, NC 28174
Primary Schedule - April 22 - May 1 - Mon - Fri 10:00am - 6:00pm - Sat 9:00am - 1:00pm
Others who failed to vote during the ‘Early Voting’ can cast their vote on Primary Election Day, May 4 at their local precinct location.
America, the State of North Carolina, and Union County, NC are in an economic crisis and many are suffering from a recession with many job losses in our own communities and throughout our entire nation. This year is the most important occasion in my entire political life for supporting candidates for election or re-election who support fiscal and social issues, as well as supporting a national defense. Conservative Christian values and common sense as defined by our founding fathers are principally important. For this reason, I am asking each of you to consider supporting the following list of candidates on the Republican Party Primary ballot.
US Senate – Richard Burr
US House District 8 – Hal Jordan
NC Senate District 35 – Wyatt Thomas Tucker
NC House District 68 – Jeffrey Mark Gerber
District Attorney District 20B – Clayton Jones
County Comissioner(s) – Jonathan Ryan Thomas
Jerry Bennett Simpson
Matthew Todd Johnson
Court of Appeals – (Calabria) - Ann Marie Calabria
Court of Appeals – (Elmore) - Steve Walker
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20100406
Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
Tell Congress: Sign the No Pork Pledge!
http://www.cagw.org/ccagw/
Since 1991, Citizens Against Government Waste’s Congressional Pig Book has documented more than 100,000 pork-barrel projects costing taxpayers $290 billion. The proliferation of pork-barrel earmarks over the past 20 years has corresponded with the debasement of the federal budgetary process and Americans’ growing mistrust of their elected officials. As lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.) have illustrated, lawmakers and lobbyists trade in earmarks as their “currency of corruption,” undermining our democratic system of government.
Congress has enacted several reform measures since 2007 to reduce pork barreling and increase earmark accountability and transparency, yet earmarks continue to figure prominently in one scandal after another on Capitol Hill. In an effort to encourage more members of Congress and candidates for office to kick the earmarking habit, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) has created the No Pork Pledge
(House version) http://www.cagw.org/assets/earmark-reform-pledge-house-final-10-31-07.pdf
(Senate version) http://www.cagw.org/assets/earmark-reform-pledge-senate-final-10-31-07.pdf.
As signatories to CCAGW’s No Pork Pledge, incumbents and candidates vow not to request any pork-barrel earmark, which is defined as meeting one of the following criteria:
Requested by only one chamber of Congress
Not specifically authorized
Not competitively awarded
Not requested by the President
Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding
Not the subject of congressional hearings
Serves only a local or special interest
Please tell your Representative and Senators today to sign CCAGW's No Pork Pledge! https://secure2.convio.net/cagw/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=615
"Daily Motivations"
I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something. I will not refuse to do the something I can do. -- Helen Keller
"We must not believe the many, who say that only free people ought to be educated, but we should rather believe the philosophers who say that only the educated are free." -- Epictetus
"Nobody will believe in you unless you believe in yourself." -- Liberace
Action Steps for Enhancing Your Integrity
Establish integrity as your top priority. Make it the cornerstone of all your actions and decisions.
Never compromise your integrity by rationalizing a situation as an “isolated incident.” People are watching everything you do – there are no “isolated incidents.” Firmly decide where your boundaries are, communicate those boundaries, and then stay within them.
Never allow achieving results to become more important than the means to their achievement. For long-term sustained results, how you win is just as important as winning, itself.
For greater success as a leader, maintain your integrity and keep earning employee trust by continually asking yourself these three questions:
1. Are integrity and trust my top priorities? Do I subject my life and work to the highest scrutiny each and every day?
2. Are there areas of conflict between what I believe, what I say, and how I behave?
3. Has compromise crept into my day-to-day life … “under the radar
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
But the Holy Spirit produces this kind of fruit in us ... patience .... (Galatians 5:22)
My good friend and spiritual mentor from many years ago, Dr. Henrietta Mears, firmly believed as a young woman that God would call her to go overseas as a missionary. But she was not blessed with good eyesight, which she recognized would be an obstacle to her service overseas. In time she realized God was not calling her into missions.
Ultimately Dr. Mears became the Director of Christian Education at the First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood, California. From that position she had a global impact. She certainly had a tremendous influence on Vonette and me, as well as Richard Halverson (who would become Chaplain of the United States Senate), Billy Graham, and thousands of others.
She founded Gospel Light Publications and Forrest Home Christian Conference Center, where hundreds of thousands experienced new life in Christ. But she had to be patient and obedient as God worked out His perfect will for her.
Step by step, God lays out His special plan for each of us. In His perfect time, God shows us what He wants us to see. We may be interested in the details of the plan, but He is always interested in the details of the relationship as we depend on Him daily. In our souls we may be saying, "Just tell me, Lord! I cannot wait---I want to know now!" But the gentle voice of the Spirit replies, Be patient. Know Me well, and the future will take care of itself, if you will simply trust Me.
Your View of God Really Matters …
Do you need wisdom for the future? He knows the answers. Ask Him for guidance then start moving in faith, trusting Him to lead your steps.
"The Patriot Post"
"On every unauthoritative exercise of power by the legislature must the people rise in rebellion or their silence be construed into a surrender of that power to them? If so, how many rebellions should we have had already?" --Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Query 12, 1782
"The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex." --James Madison, Federalist No. 48
Editorial Exegesis - Slaughter House Rules
"We're not sure American schools teach civics any more, but once upon a time they taught that under the U.S. Constitution a bill had to pass both the House and Senate to become law. Until this week, that is, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving to merely 'deem' that the House has passed the Senate health-care bill and then send it to President Obama to sign anyway. Under the 'reconciliation' process that began [Monday] afternoon, the House is supposed to approve the Senate's Christmas Eve bill and then use 'sidecar' amendments to fix the things it doesn't like. Those amendments would then go to the Senate under rules that would let Democrats pass them while avoiding the ordinary 60-vote threshold for passing major legislation. This alone is an abuse of traditional Senate process. But Mrs. Pelosi & Co. fear they lack the votes in the House to pass an identical Senate bill, even with the promise of these reconciliation fixes. House Members hate the thought of going on record voting for the Cornhusker kickback and other special-interest bribes that were added to get this mess through the Senate, as well as the new tax on high-cost insurance plans that Big Labor hates. So at the Speaker's command, New York Democrat Louise Slaughter, who chairs the House Rules Committee, may insert what's known as a 'self-executing rule,' also known as a 'hereby rule.' Under this amazing procedural ruse, the House would then vote only once on the reconciliation corrections, but not on the underlying Senate bill. If those reconciliation corrections pass, the self-executing rule would say that the Senate bill is presumptively approved by the House -- even without a formal up-or-down vote on the actual words of the Senate bill. Democrats would thus send the Senate bill to President Obama for his signature even as they claimed to oppose the same Senate bill. They would be declaring themselves to be for and against the Senate bill in the same vote. Even John Kerry never went that far with his Iraq war machinations. ... This two-votes-in-one gambit is a brazen affront to the plain language of the Constitution, which is intended to require democratic accountability. Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution says that in order for a 'Bill' to 'become a Law,' it 'shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.' This is why the House and Senate typically have a conference committee to work out differences in what each body passes. ... If Congress can now decide that the House can vote for one bill and the Senate can vote for another, and the final result can be some arbitrary hybrid, then we have abandoned one of [James] Madison's core checks and balances." --The Wall Street Journal
Upright
"It speaks to the sturdiness of the system our founders installed that it is, as intended, so resistant to passing major legal and cultural changes against the overwhelming will of the public. So resistant that, in frustration, the Democratic speaker of the House has been driven to consider breaking her oath of office and violate the Constitution in order to get her way." --columnist Tony Blankley
"The debate over health care reform has been messy and often chaotic, but here we are a year later and Barack Obama and his radical agenda might yet win. If it does, he will have put in place the structure for taking over everything else." --Washington Times editor emeritus Wesley Pruden
"Though the two issues may seem utterly unrelated, they do have this in common -- both health care and higher education are realms of American life in which government has undermined the operation of market forces and caused artificially high prices. These are two arenas in which the Democrats now propose to do exactly the wrong thing. Their reform reinforces old errors and will infinitely compound the problem of rising prices." --columnist Mona Charen
"In his book 'Dreams From My Father' Obama gives the distinct impression that his gifts are too great for the smallness of our political stage. He regrets not having been born during the civil rights era when the grandness of the cause would have measured up to the grandness of his ambition. He is in search of something big that will allow him to make his mark on the world as Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King did. Hence, the defeat of ObamaCare would not just be par for the course in the rough-and-tumble world of politics for him. It would be sign of his ordinariness, his mortality, and that, to him, is unendurable." --Forbes columnist Shikha Dalmia
Insight
"A fanatic is a person who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." --former England Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
"There can be no prescription old enough to supersede the Law of Nature and the grant of God Almighty, who has given to all men a natural right to be free, and they have it ordinarily in their power to make themselves so, if they please." --American lawyer and patriot James Otis (1725-1783)
The Demo-gogues
Just words, just politics ... just the Constitution: "We have debated this issue now for more than a year. Every proposal has been put on the table. Every argument has been made. I know a lot of people view this as a partisan issue, but, look, the fact is both parties have a lot of areas where we agree -- it's just politics are getting in the way of actually getting it done." --Barack Obama
Arrogance: "The American people want to know if it's still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I don't know about the politics. But I know what's right." --Barack Obama (We're waiting for you to get out of the way so we can look out for our own interests, not have you do whatever you "know" is right whether we want it done to us or not.)
Big Brother: "You know what? It's been such a long time since we made government on the side of ordinary working folks, where we did something for them that relieved some of their struggles." --BO
Non Compos Mentis: "Well, a lot of those folks, your employer it's estimated would see premiums fall by as much as 3,000 percent [sic], which means they could give you a raise." --Barack Obama
Glass half empty: "I have no intention of not passing this bill. Let me say it in a positive way: I have faith in my members that we will be passing this legislation." --House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
She may be a dreamer: "Think of an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer or a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance." --Nancy Pelosi (So the rest of us can pay for these unemployed artists and photographers to have insurance?)
Democrats to defeat death! "Today, 70 Americans will die for lack of health insurance, 70." --Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) (So why don't most provisions in this bill kick in for four years?)
Village Idiots
Never mind the cost: "Senator Brown comes from a state that has a health care plan that's similar to the one we're trying to enact here. We're just trying to give the rest of America the same opportunities that the people of Massachusetts have." --White House adviser David Axelrod
Shut up, she explained: "[I]nstead of spending your energy attacking the parts of the president's [health care] proposal you don't like, you can use it to strengthen the parts you do." --Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
He blames global warming: "The odds have shifted toward much larger downpours. And we have seen that happen in the Northeast, we've seen it happen in the Northwest -- in both of those regions are among those that scientists have predicted for a long time would begin to experience much larger downpours." --Al Gore
Hollywood chimes in: "I think the people running climate change denial campaigns are sociopaths." --actress Lucy Lawless, a.k.a. "Xena: Warrior Princess"
Short Cuts
"House Democrats conjured a strategy Monday that would allow the House to avoid a vote on the health care bill. Instead they would deem the bill passed and send it to the president. We ordered Iraq not to look, this is for mature democracies only." --comedian Argus Hamilton
"Last year, the House was passing bills without reading them. This year, they're passing bills without voting on them." --former House Speaker Newt Gingrich
"What kind of leader sends congressmen out on a kamikaze mission in an election year and right before a recess? The kind of leader whose followers are diminishing in number." --Human Events editor Jed Babbin
"Democrats, though, continue to close their eyes and cover their ears while loudly singing the la la song." --The Washington Times' Kerry Picket
"President Obama would like the House to vote on his health care plan on either St. Patrick's Day or the day after. That means Congress will be voting on health care either when they're drunk, or when they're hung over." --comedian Jay Leno
"The Web"
Citizens Against Government Waste - Give The Stimulus Back To The Taxpayers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Ols9kk37A
After America, There is No Place to Go
I don't believe I am the only one to see frightening similarities.
America Truly is the Greatest Country in the World.
Don't Let Freedom Slip Away.
By: Kitty Werthmann
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/after-america-there-is-no-place-to-go/blog-254691/
What I am about to tell you is something you've probably never heard or will ever read in history books.
I believe that I am an eyewitness to history. I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history. We elected him by a landslide 98% of the vote. I've never read that in any American publications. Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.
In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25% inflation and 25% bank loan interest rates.
Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn't want to work; there simply weren't any jobs. My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people, about 30 daily.
The Communist Party and the National Socialist Party were fighting each other. Blocks and blocks of cities like Vienna, Linz, and Graz were destroyed. The people became desperate and petitioned the government to let them decide what kind of government they wanted.
We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933. We had been told that they didn't have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living. Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group -- Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back.
Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.
We were overjoyed, and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed.
After the election, German officials were appointed, and like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.
Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn't support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.
Hitler Targets Education Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children:
Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler's picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn't pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles, and had physical education.
Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail.
The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free. We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.
My mother was very unhappy. When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn't do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun no sports, and no political indoctrination. I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing. Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler. It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn't exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.
Equal Rights Hits Home:
In 1939, the war started and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn't work, you didn't get a ration card, and if you didn't have a card, you starved to death. Women who stayed home to raise their families didn't have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.
Soon after this, the draft was implemented. It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps. During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys. They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines. When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat. Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.
Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare:
When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers. You could take your children ages 4 weeks to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, 7 days a week, under the total care of the government. The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.
Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls:
Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna . After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full. If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.
As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families. All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.
We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables. Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn't meet all the demands. Soon, he went out of business.
If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.
We had consumer protection. We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.
Mercy Killing Redefined:
In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated. So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work. I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van. I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months. They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.
As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.
The Final Steps - Gun Laws:
Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long after-wards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.
No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.
Totalitarianism didn't come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles.
The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.
After World War II, Russian troops occupied Austria. Women were raped, preteen to elderly. The press never wrote about this either. When the Soviets left in 1955, they took everything that they could, dismantling whole factories in the process. They sawed down whole orchards of fruit, and what they couldn't destroy, they burned. We called it The Burned Earth. Most of the population barricaded themselves in their houses. Women hid in their cellars for 6 weeks as the troops mobilized. Those who couldn't, paid the price. There is a monument in Vienna today, dedicated to those women who were massacred by the Russians. This is an eye witness account.
Its true those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.
America Truly is the Greatest Country in the World.
Don't Let Freedom Slip Away!
"After America, There is No Place to Go."
Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed'
by Anne E. Kornblut
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/04/obamas-17-minute-2500-word-res.html
CHARLOTTE - Even by President Obama's loquacious standards, an answer he gave here on health care Friday was a doozy.
Toward the end of a question-and-answer session with workers at an advanced battery technology manufacturer, a woman named Doris stood to ask the president whether it was a "wise decision to add more taxes to us with the health care" package.
"We are over-taxed as it is," Doris said bluntly.
Obama started out feisty. "Well, let's talk about that, because this is an area where there's been just a whole lot of misinformation, and I'm going to have to work hard over the next several months to clean up a lot of the misapprehensions that people have," the president said.
He then spent the next 17 minutes and 12 seconds lulling the crowd into a daze. His discursive answer - more than 2,500 words long -- wandered from topic to topic, including commentary on the deficit, pay-as-you-go rules passed by Congress, Congressional Budget Office reports on Medicare waste, COBRA coverage, the Recovery Act and Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (he referred to this last item by its inside-the-Beltway name, "F-Map"). He talked about the notion of eliminating foreign aid (not worth it, he said). He invoked Warren Buffett, earmarks and the payroll tax that funds Medicare (referring to it, in fluent Washington lingo, as "FICA").
Always fond of lists, Obama ticked off his approach to health care -- twice. "Number one is that we are the only -- we have been, up until last week, the only advanced country that allows 50 million of its citizens to not have any health insurance," he said.
A few minutes later he got to the next point, which seemed awfully similar to the first. "Number two, you don't know who might end up being in that situation," he said, then carried on explaining further still.
"Point number three is that the way insurance companies have been operating, even if you've got health insurance you don't always know what you got, because what has been increasingly the practice is that if you're not lucky enough to work for a big company that is a big pool, that essentially is almost a self-insurer, then what's happening is, is you're going out on the marketplace, you may be buying insurance, you think you're covered, but then when you get sick they decide to drop the insurance right when you need it," Obama continued, winding on with the answer.
Halfway through, an audience member on the riser yawned.
But Obama wasn't finished. He had a "final point," before starting again with another list -- of three points.
"What we said is, number one, we'll have the basic principle that everybody gets coverage," he said, before launching into the next two points, for a grand total of seven.
His wandering approach might not matter if Obama weren't being billed as the chief salesman of the health-care overhaul. Public opinion on the bill remains divided, and Democratic officials are planning to send Obama into the country to persuade wary citizens that it will work for them in the long run.
It was not evident that he changed any minds at Friday's event. The audience sat politely, but people in the back of the room began to wander off.
Even Obama seemed to recognize that he had gone on too long. He apologized -- in keeping with the spirit of the moment, not once, but twice. "Boy, that was a long answer. I'm sorry," he said, drawing nervous laughter that sounded somewhat like relief as he wrapped up.
But, he said: "I hope I answered your question."
Connect the Dots on CAIR’s Foreign Funding and Lobbying at CAIRObservatory.org
by Frank Gaffney
http://biggovernment.com/fgaffney/2010/04/03/connect-the-dots-on-cairs-foreign-funding-and-lobbying-at-cairobservatory-org/
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), claims to be “America’s largest Islamic civil liberties group.” But that’s a myth. As we reported here on BigGovernment.com last fall, only 1% of CAIR’s latest reported revenues actually came from Muslim American members.
Meanwhile foreign donors have given CAIR over $6,000,000 in cash and loans, and over $50,000,000 in pledges. That’s 1% from American members; tens of millions from Saudi Arabia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. Shouldn’t there be a law to let the American public know the truth about CAIR and their foreign donors? Of course, and there is one. CAIR just doesn’t follow it.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), enacted just before World War Two, still requires foreign agents spreading propaganda to register so Americans can know what they are up to. Back then the problem was foreign agents working for the Nazis. Today the problem is foreign agents like CAIR, defending Jihadists in the media and pushing Muslim Brotherhood values in America.
The Center for Security Policy recently unveiled a unique new tool to expose CAIR as a foreign agent of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and several of its member states. The CAIR Observatory website (http://www.cairobservatory.org) presents comprehensive open-source evidence and analysis alleging that CAIR has acted as a foreign agent on behalf of Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.
The centerpiece of the website is the report “CAIR and the Foreign Agents Registration Act,” which details the foreign funding, foreign direction and domestic political influence operations of CAIR in the United States.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA) requires any agent of a foreign principal — not just foreign governments but foreign political parties, corporations, non-governmental organizations and even individuals — to register with the U.S. Department of Justice as a foreign agent.
The report documents these CAIR activities as a foreign agent:
CAIR received at least $2,192,203 in Contributions, Income and Money from foreign principals in the form of 10 distinct transactions
CAIR received a $2,106,251 mortgage loan from a foreign principal for their Washington, D.C. headquarters
CAIR secured the promise of at least $54,500,000 in pledges from foreign principals
CAIR met and coordinated with foreign principals on at least 30 occasions
CAIR engaged in at least 50 political influence operations on behalf of foreign principals in the United States And the Center for Security Policy has additional evidence that cannot be made public at this time documenting another $2.4 million in foreign donations and loans given to CAIR since 2000.
The goal of the CAIR Observatory website (http://www.cairobservatory.org/) is to build a model for researching and compiling evidence of illegal behavior by Muslim Brotherhood front organizations, with a focus on organizations operating in the United States as unregistered foreign agents for the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and its member states. The website’s name — “CAIR Observatory” — is a direct counter to the so-called “Islamophobia Observatory” maintained by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The Jeddah, Saudi Arabia-based OIC has been a contributor to CAIR, and the two have a history of coordinated meetings, tactics and goals.
CAIRObservatory.org will regularly feature new reports and short documentaries spotlighting specific examples of CAIR’s FARA violations, and will be frequently updated with new evidence on CAIR’s ongoing activities as a currently unregistered foreign agent.
Starting next week we’ll begin to expose specific CAIR political operations targeting the U.S. Congress.
For more information contact CAIRObservatory.org Editor Adam Savit (savit@securefreedom.org).
Morning Bell: Red Tape Rising
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/04/05/morning-bell-red-tape-rising/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Just three days after President Barack Obama’s health plan was signed into law, AT&T announced that due to an obscure tax change in the bill, the nation’s largest telephone company would take a $1 billion hit to its bottom line this quarter. According to health benefits analysts this tax law modification would shave as much as $14 billion from U.S. corporate profits. While it would have been better had these tax losses been made more public before Congress voted, at least these tax charges are transparent and easily quantifiable enough to get noticed by the American people. Unfortunately the same cannot be said of the hundreds of new regulations that the federal government will enforce as it tries to implement Obama’s redistributionist health agenda.
In addition to the federal government’s explicit taxes and spending, Americans are also burdened with a slew of hidden taxes imposed by an ever-increasing number of regulations. More than 50 agencies have a hand in federal regulatory policy, enforcing more than 150,000 pages of rules. Many of these regulations provide needed benefits. Most Americans would agree on the need for security regulations to protect citizens from terrorist attacks, although the extent and scope of those rules may be subject to debate. But each regulation comes at a cost–a “regulatory tax” imposed on all Americans. According to a 2005 study commissioned by the Small Business Administration, the cost of all regulations then on the books was some $1.1 trillion per year.
Worse than the existing size of our country’s regulatory burden, is the pace at which it has been growing. Contrary to what most liberals and media elites would have you believe, President George Bush had a decidedly mixed record on regulation. While he should be praised for strengthening the role of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in screening new regulations, by every objectively measurable metric the size and scope of the regulatory state grew significantly under his tenure. And President Bush’s last years in office were his worst. In 2008 36 major regulations were enacted by the Bush administration, and in 2009 some $15 billion in new regulatory costs were imposed on the American people.
President Bush doesn’t deserve all the blame for that $15 billion in new costs for 2009. About $4.4 billion is attributable to regulations approved by the Obama administration. While that may seem like a significant decrease, it is actually an ominous sign when put in context. Regulatory activity always increases near the end of a presidency and is slower at the beginning. So in President Bush’s first year, he enacted only one major rule and he was in his third year in office before the new regulatory costs he inflicted on the American people hit President Obama’s one-year $4 billion mark. And that $4 billion does not yet include all the regulations for Obamacare. Or all of the regulations Obama’s EPA wants to pass under the Clean Air Act. Or any of the new financial regulations that Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) want to inflict on the American people.
There are some things Congress can do now to help better manage the onslaught of federal regulations. First the authority and scope of OIRA should be protected. Establishing a sunset date for all new regulations would also help. But ultimately things will not change for the better until policymakers exercise the will and resolve to guard against the deluge. As Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked last week: “If Congress can’t control what a few mortgage finance bureaucrats do with your dollars, why would anyone trust Congress to control what tens of thousands of bureaucrats will do with your health? … Should unchecked centralized government be allowed to grow and grow in power … or should its powers be limited and returned to the people?”
Congressman: 'I don't worry about the Constitution'
'I believe it says we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=135553
A Democrat congressman from Illinois says when it comes to the health-care reform plan adopted by Congress and signed into law by President Obama, he just doesn't concern himself with what the Constitution requires.
The comment came in a heated exchange recorded recently between Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill., and constituents.
While being pressed on the complications of the "Obamacare" plan, as critics have dubbed it, he was asked, "Where in the Constitution?"
"I don't worry about the Constitution on this to be honest," Hare said.
Instead, he said, he worries about peoples' lives:
"It's people's lives. It's people's children. It's when you take your child to the hospital and you think it's really bad and your heart is thumping, thumping, thumping while you're waiting for the doctor to tell you what it is and then the doctor comes out and says it's going to be ok, except you don't have insurance and you're stuck with a $10 or $15,000 bill. …"
When the congressman stated he doesn't concern himself with the Constitution, one of the constituents muttered, "Jackpot, brother."
"I care more about the people that are dying every day that don't have health insurance," Hare said.
"You care more about that than the U.S. Constitution, which you swore to uphold," a constituent challenged.
"I believe it says we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," Hare responded.
Another constituent pointed out those words come from the Declaration of Independence.
"Doesn't matter to me," Hare stated. "Either one."
The question about the constitutionality of health care was repeated later, specifically challenging where in the document such action is authorized.
"I don't know. I don't know," the congressman said.
A constituent later called the congressman a liar for claiming he had read the 2,700-page health care plan three times, and the congressman walked out of the meeting, ending it.
Commenters on the YouTube page where the video was posted were incensed:
I cannot WAIT to get these Socialist (sic) out of office.
Someone needs to bring a huge bucket o' tar and a couple truckloads of feathers to Capitol Hill, and that right soon.
I am so tired of seeing these hypocrites shedding all these crocodile tears for those "30 million poor uninsured." Give me a break already! They could care less about your health. This is all about control. Once they can force you to buy health insurance, then they can force you to buy anything. The bottom line to this health-control debate can be summed by by asking a very simple question: "If this is such a great and wonderful plan, why did Congress and the president exempt themselves?"
This man is a lawless thug. His oath means nothing that he swore to. He plays o[n] emotion instead of dealing in facts. Typical, he justifies his actions based on emotion instead of rule of law and the Constitution. When you no longer follow the law, there is tyranny, not matter what the justification is.
In a commentary at the Dakota Voice, the author suggested, "Isn't it refreshing when liberals actually come out and say what they mean? It's such a rare treat, it deserves to be celebrated when it happens."
The author pointed out that while Hare "says he cares more about these mysterious people who are 'dying without health care,'" the facts are that "genuinely poor people have had access to Medicaid and other government health care programs for years, and no one is turned away from emergency room when life-saving treatment is needed … not even illegal aliens."
"But again, let's not be too hard on Rep. Hare. This kind of honesty from a socialist Democrat is priceless."
What Obamacare will cost doctors
Chris Link, MD
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/04/what_obamacare_will_cost_docto.html
One of the most interesting, if unanticipated, effects of posting YouTube videos is managing the "comments" section. I have a serie s of politically oriented song parodies that I have posted over the past eight months. The first, "One Single Payer System", has more than one million views (thanks to links posted in blogs such as The American Thinker). However, I did not realize I would be taking up the job of de facto moderator for a running debate with more than 1,200 entries in the case of "Single Payer".
One post asked a very good question: "Why can't we just put everyone in the country on Medicare?" Aside from the problem of a huge expansion in the unfunded obligations for the Medicare program, currently estimated to be $89 trillion, my immediate thought was that you can't stay in business as a physician at Medicare reimbursement rates.
I used my specialty, anesthesiology, to illustrate the problem. Using the best information I could find and the example of my own solo practice, I came up with some sobering figures.
Anesthesiologists bill for most surgical cases with a combination of base units depending on the particular surgery (e.g. cardiac bypass has a higher base value than a hernia repair), plus one time unit for every 15 minutes. The average anesthesiologist bills 10,198 units in a year. Medicare pays, on average, $20.925 per unit. Now $213,393 a year sounds like a pretty decent living for most of us and it certainly would be until you start backing out expenses.
A billing service is in the neighborhood of 6% ($12,804) and average malpractice is about $23,000. I'm paying around $15,000 a year for health insurance for a family of four. Various expenses for continuing education, computers, cell phone, office supplies, etc. adds up to around $5,000. AMA, state and local medical society and American Society of Anesthesiologists dues add up to $1,700, if one chooses to join. I'd like to retire someday, so I put away 10% for retirement. Self-employment taxes take $17,154. And I have no employees or office. Most medical practices have a much higher overhead both in real terms and as a percent of revenue.
So what's left?
$117,753, but without the "doctor fix" it would be $85,770. All that in exchange for 50-60 hours a week (including being on-call), coming out of school with an average student loan debt of $156,000 with a payment of over $1,000 per month, and putting your life on hold until at least age thirty. Suddenly it doesn't look like such an attractive option.
And then there's the guy you knew in college who coasted through studying sociology and went to work for the US Department of Health and Human Services right after graduation. He's had eight years to climb through the bureaucratic ranks and is now one of the 19% of the federal workforce that makes over $100,000 and that's before bonuses and overtime. And you always thought he was kind of an idiot.
The average pay of a federal worker in now $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector. Excellent fringe benefits widen the gap even more.
Most of my colleagues are similar to me in coming from middle class backgrounds. I worked to go to school and probably paid for half of my education at a state university. I borrowed money for medical school. Another significant number of doctors are second or third generation physicians, but very few come from well-to-do non-medical backgrounds. And what will happen when medicine is no longer an attractive option for bright motivated youth to move up the socioeconomic ladder?
See that assistant supervisor at your local DMV? The guy sitting in the office drinking coffee, shuffling reports and playing solitaire on the computer?
Meet your heart surgeon.
"The e-mail Bag"
Old Sea Story
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2300699/posts
There's an old sea story in the Navy about a ship's Captain who inspected His sailors, and afterward told the Chief Boson that his men smelled bad.
The Captain suggested perhaps it would help if the sailors would change underwear occasionally. The Chief responded, "Aye, aye sir, I'll see to it immediately!
The Chief went straight to the sailors berth deck and announced, "The Captain thinks you guys smell bad and wants you to change your underwear.
Pittman, you change with Jones, McCarthy, you change with Kwiatkowski, and Brown you change with Schultz. Now get to it!!!"
THE MORAL:
Someone may be promising "Change" in Washington; but don't count on things smelling any better!
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
Tell Congress: Sign the No Pork Pledge!
http://www.cagw.org/ccagw/
Since 1991, Citizens Against Government Waste’s Congressional Pig Book has documented more than 100,000 pork-barrel projects costing taxpayers $290 billion. The proliferation of pork-barrel earmarks over the past 20 years has corresponded with the debasement of the federal budgetary process and Americans’ growing mistrust of their elected officials. As lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.) have illustrated, lawmakers and lobbyists trade in earmarks as their “currency of corruption,” undermining our democratic system of government.
Congress has enacted several reform measures since 2007 to reduce pork barreling and increase earmark accountability and transparency, yet earmarks continue to figure prominently in one scandal after another on Capitol Hill. In an effort to encourage more members of Congress and candidates for office to kick the earmarking habit, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) has created the No Pork Pledge
(House version) http://www.cagw.org/assets/earmark-reform-pledge-house-final-10-31-07.pdf
(Senate version) http://www.cagw.org/assets/earmark-reform-pledge-senate-final-10-31-07.pdf.
As signatories to CCAGW’s No Pork Pledge, incumbents and candidates vow not to request any pork-barrel earmark, which is defined as meeting one of the following criteria:
Requested by only one chamber of Congress
Not specifically authorized
Not competitively awarded
Not requested by the President
Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding
Not the subject of congressional hearings
Serves only a local or special interest
Please tell your Representative and Senators today to sign CCAGW's No Pork Pledge! https://secure2.convio.net/cagw/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=615
"Daily Motivations"
I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something. I will not refuse to do the something I can do. -- Helen Keller
"We must not believe the many, who say that only free people ought to be educated, but we should rather believe the philosophers who say that only the educated are free." -- Epictetus
"Nobody will believe in you unless you believe in yourself." -- Liberace
Action Steps for Enhancing Your Integrity
Establish integrity as your top priority. Make it the cornerstone of all your actions and decisions.
Never compromise your integrity by rationalizing a situation as an “isolated incident.” People are watching everything you do – there are no “isolated incidents.” Firmly decide where your boundaries are, communicate those boundaries, and then stay within them.
Never allow achieving results to become more important than the means to their achievement. For long-term sustained results, how you win is just as important as winning, itself.
For greater success as a leader, maintain your integrity and keep earning employee trust by continually asking yourself these three questions:
1. Are integrity and trust my top priorities? Do I subject my life and work to the highest scrutiny each and every day?
2. Are there areas of conflict between what I believe, what I say, and how I behave?
3. Has compromise crept into my day-to-day life … “under the radar
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
But the Holy Spirit produces this kind of fruit in us ... patience .... (Galatians 5:22)
My good friend and spiritual mentor from many years ago, Dr. Henrietta Mears, firmly believed as a young woman that God would call her to go overseas as a missionary. But she was not blessed with good eyesight, which she recognized would be an obstacle to her service overseas. In time she realized God was not calling her into missions.
Ultimately Dr. Mears became the Director of Christian Education at the First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood, California. From that position she had a global impact. She certainly had a tremendous influence on Vonette and me, as well as Richard Halverson (who would become Chaplain of the United States Senate), Billy Graham, and thousands of others.
She founded Gospel Light Publications and Forrest Home Christian Conference Center, where hundreds of thousands experienced new life in Christ. But she had to be patient and obedient as God worked out His perfect will for her.
Step by step, God lays out His special plan for each of us. In His perfect time, God shows us what He wants us to see. We may be interested in the details of the plan, but He is always interested in the details of the relationship as we depend on Him daily. In our souls we may be saying, "Just tell me, Lord! I cannot wait---I want to know now!" But the gentle voice of the Spirit replies, Be patient. Know Me well, and the future will take care of itself, if you will simply trust Me.
Your View of God Really Matters …
Do you need wisdom for the future? He knows the answers. Ask Him for guidance then start moving in faith, trusting Him to lead your steps.
"The Patriot Post"
"On every unauthoritative exercise of power by the legislature must the people rise in rebellion or their silence be construed into a surrender of that power to them? If so, how many rebellions should we have had already?" --Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Query 12, 1782
"The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex." --James Madison, Federalist No. 48
Editorial Exegesis - Slaughter House Rules
"We're not sure American schools teach civics any more, but once upon a time they taught that under the U.S. Constitution a bill had to pass both the House and Senate to become law. Until this week, that is, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving to merely 'deem' that the House has passed the Senate health-care bill and then send it to President Obama to sign anyway. Under the 'reconciliation' process that began [Monday] afternoon, the House is supposed to approve the Senate's Christmas Eve bill and then use 'sidecar' amendments to fix the things it doesn't like. Those amendments would then go to the Senate under rules that would let Democrats pass them while avoiding the ordinary 60-vote threshold for passing major legislation. This alone is an abuse of traditional Senate process. But Mrs. Pelosi & Co. fear they lack the votes in the House to pass an identical Senate bill, even with the promise of these reconciliation fixes. House Members hate the thought of going on record voting for the Cornhusker kickback and other special-interest bribes that were added to get this mess through the Senate, as well as the new tax on high-cost insurance plans that Big Labor hates. So at the Speaker's command, New York Democrat Louise Slaughter, who chairs the House Rules Committee, may insert what's known as a 'self-executing rule,' also known as a 'hereby rule.' Under this amazing procedural ruse, the House would then vote only once on the reconciliation corrections, but not on the underlying Senate bill. If those reconciliation corrections pass, the self-executing rule would say that the Senate bill is presumptively approved by the House -- even without a formal up-or-down vote on the actual words of the Senate bill. Democrats would thus send the Senate bill to President Obama for his signature even as they claimed to oppose the same Senate bill. They would be declaring themselves to be for and against the Senate bill in the same vote. Even John Kerry never went that far with his Iraq war machinations. ... This two-votes-in-one gambit is a brazen affront to the plain language of the Constitution, which is intended to require democratic accountability. Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution says that in order for a 'Bill' to 'become a Law,' it 'shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.' This is why the House and Senate typically have a conference committee to work out differences in what each body passes. ... If Congress can now decide that the House can vote for one bill and the Senate can vote for another, and the final result can be some arbitrary hybrid, then we have abandoned one of [James] Madison's core checks and balances." --The Wall Street Journal
Upright
"It speaks to the sturdiness of the system our founders installed that it is, as intended, so resistant to passing major legal and cultural changes against the overwhelming will of the public. So resistant that, in frustration, the Democratic speaker of the House has been driven to consider breaking her oath of office and violate the Constitution in order to get her way." --columnist Tony Blankley
"The debate over health care reform has been messy and often chaotic, but here we are a year later and Barack Obama and his radical agenda might yet win. If it does, he will have put in place the structure for taking over everything else." --Washington Times editor emeritus Wesley Pruden
"Though the two issues may seem utterly unrelated, they do have this in common -- both health care and higher education are realms of American life in which government has undermined the operation of market forces and caused artificially high prices. These are two arenas in which the Democrats now propose to do exactly the wrong thing. Their reform reinforces old errors and will infinitely compound the problem of rising prices." --columnist Mona Charen
"In his book 'Dreams From My Father' Obama gives the distinct impression that his gifts are too great for the smallness of our political stage. He regrets not having been born during the civil rights era when the grandness of the cause would have measured up to the grandness of his ambition. He is in search of something big that will allow him to make his mark on the world as Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King did. Hence, the defeat of ObamaCare would not just be par for the course in the rough-and-tumble world of politics for him. It would be sign of his ordinariness, his mortality, and that, to him, is unendurable." --Forbes columnist Shikha Dalmia
Insight
"A fanatic is a person who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." --former England Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
"There can be no prescription old enough to supersede the Law of Nature and the grant of God Almighty, who has given to all men a natural right to be free, and they have it ordinarily in their power to make themselves so, if they please." --American lawyer and patriot James Otis (1725-1783)
The Demo-gogues
Just words, just politics ... just the Constitution: "We have debated this issue now for more than a year. Every proposal has been put on the table. Every argument has been made. I know a lot of people view this as a partisan issue, but, look, the fact is both parties have a lot of areas where we agree -- it's just politics are getting in the way of actually getting it done." --Barack Obama
Arrogance: "The American people want to know if it's still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I don't know about the politics. But I know what's right." --Barack Obama (We're waiting for you to get out of the way so we can look out for our own interests, not have you do whatever you "know" is right whether we want it done to us or not.)
Big Brother: "You know what? It's been such a long time since we made government on the side of ordinary working folks, where we did something for them that relieved some of their struggles." --BO
Non Compos Mentis: "Well, a lot of those folks, your employer it's estimated would see premiums fall by as much as 3,000 percent [sic], which means they could give you a raise." --Barack Obama
Glass half empty: "I have no intention of not passing this bill. Let me say it in a positive way: I have faith in my members that we will be passing this legislation." --House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
She may be a dreamer: "Think of an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer or a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance." --Nancy Pelosi (So the rest of us can pay for these unemployed artists and photographers to have insurance?)
Democrats to defeat death! "Today, 70 Americans will die for lack of health insurance, 70." --Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) (So why don't most provisions in this bill kick in for four years?)
Village Idiots
Never mind the cost: "Senator Brown comes from a state that has a health care plan that's similar to the one we're trying to enact here. We're just trying to give the rest of America the same opportunities that the people of Massachusetts have." --White House adviser David Axelrod
Shut up, she explained: "[I]nstead of spending your energy attacking the parts of the president's [health care] proposal you don't like, you can use it to strengthen the parts you do." --Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
He blames global warming: "The odds have shifted toward much larger downpours. And we have seen that happen in the Northeast, we've seen it happen in the Northwest -- in both of those regions are among those that scientists have predicted for a long time would begin to experience much larger downpours." --Al Gore
Hollywood chimes in: "I think the people running climate change denial campaigns are sociopaths." --actress Lucy Lawless, a.k.a. "Xena: Warrior Princess"
Short Cuts
"House Democrats conjured a strategy Monday that would allow the House to avoid a vote on the health care bill. Instead they would deem the bill passed and send it to the president. We ordered Iraq not to look, this is for mature democracies only." --comedian Argus Hamilton
"Last year, the House was passing bills without reading them. This year, they're passing bills without voting on them." --former House Speaker Newt Gingrich
"What kind of leader sends congressmen out on a kamikaze mission in an election year and right before a recess? The kind of leader whose followers are diminishing in number." --Human Events editor Jed Babbin
"Democrats, though, continue to close their eyes and cover their ears while loudly singing the la la song." --The Washington Times' Kerry Picket
"President Obama would like the House to vote on his health care plan on either St. Patrick's Day or the day after. That means Congress will be voting on health care either when they're drunk, or when they're hung over." --comedian Jay Leno
"The Web"
Citizens Against Government Waste - Give The Stimulus Back To The Taxpayers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Ols9kk37A
After America, There is No Place to Go
I don't believe I am the only one to see frightening similarities.
America Truly is the Greatest Country in the World.
Don't Let Freedom Slip Away.
By: Kitty Werthmann
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/after-america-there-is-no-place-to-go/blog-254691/
What I am about to tell you is something you've probably never heard or will ever read in history books.
I believe that I am an eyewitness to history. I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history. We elected him by a landslide 98% of the vote. I've never read that in any American publications. Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.
In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25% inflation and 25% bank loan interest rates.
Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn't want to work; there simply weren't any jobs. My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people, about 30 daily.
The Communist Party and the National Socialist Party were fighting each other. Blocks and blocks of cities like Vienna, Linz, and Graz were destroyed. The people became desperate and petitioned the government to let them decide what kind of government they wanted.
We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933. We had been told that they didn't have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living. Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group -- Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back.
Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.
We were overjoyed, and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed.
After the election, German officials were appointed, and like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.
Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn't support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.
Hitler Targets Education Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children:
Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler's picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn't pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles, and had physical education.
Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail.
The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free. We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.
My mother was very unhappy. When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn't do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun no sports, and no political indoctrination. I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing. Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler. It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn't exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.
Equal Rights Hits Home:
In 1939, the war started and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn't work, you didn't get a ration card, and if you didn't have a card, you starved to death. Women who stayed home to raise their families didn't have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.
Soon after this, the draft was implemented. It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps. During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys. They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines. When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat. Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.
Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare:
When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers. You could take your children ages 4 weeks to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, 7 days a week, under the total care of the government. The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.
Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls:
Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna . After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full. If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.
As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families. All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.
We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables. Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn't meet all the demands. Soon, he went out of business.
If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.
We had consumer protection. We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.
Mercy Killing Redefined:
In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated. So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work. I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van. I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months. They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.
As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.
The Final Steps - Gun Laws:
Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long after-wards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.
No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.
Totalitarianism didn't come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles.
The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.
After World War II, Russian troops occupied Austria. Women were raped, preteen to elderly. The press never wrote about this either. When the Soviets left in 1955, they took everything that they could, dismantling whole factories in the process. They sawed down whole orchards of fruit, and what they couldn't destroy, they burned. We called it The Burned Earth. Most of the population barricaded themselves in their houses. Women hid in their cellars for 6 weeks as the troops mobilized. Those who couldn't, paid the price. There is a monument in Vienna today, dedicated to those women who were massacred by the Russians. This is an eye witness account.
Its true those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.
America Truly is the Greatest Country in the World.
Don't Let Freedom Slip Away!
"After America, There is No Place to Go."
Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed'
by Anne E. Kornblut
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/04/obamas-17-minute-2500-word-res.html
CHARLOTTE - Even by President Obama's loquacious standards, an answer he gave here on health care Friday was a doozy.
Toward the end of a question-and-answer session with workers at an advanced battery technology manufacturer, a woman named Doris stood to ask the president whether it was a "wise decision to add more taxes to us with the health care" package.
"We are over-taxed as it is," Doris said bluntly.
Obama started out feisty. "Well, let's talk about that, because this is an area where there's been just a whole lot of misinformation, and I'm going to have to work hard over the next several months to clean up a lot of the misapprehensions that people have," the president said.
He then spent the next 17 minutes and 12 seconds lulling the crowd into a daze. His discursive answer - more than 2,500 words long -- wandered from topic to topic, including commentary on the deficit, pay-as-you-go rules passed by Congress, Congressional Budget Office reports on Medicare waste, COBRA coverage, the Recovery Act and Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (he referred to this last item by its inside-the-Beltway name, "F-Map"). He talked about the notion of eliminating foreign aid (not worth it, he said). He invoked Warren Buffett, earmarks and the payroll tax that funds Medicare (referring to it, in fluent Washington lingo, as "FICA").
Always fond of lists, Obama ticked off his approach to health care -- twice. "Number one is that we are the only -- we have been, up until last week, the only advanced country that allows 50 million of its citizens to not have any health insurance," he said.
A few minutes later he got to the next point, which seemed awfully similar to the first. "Number two, you don't know who might end up being in that situation," he said, then carried on explaining further still.
"Point number three is that the way insurance companies have been operating, even if you've got health insurance you don't always know what you got, because what has been increasingly the practice is that if you're not lucky enough to work for a big company that is a big pool, that essentially is almost a self-insurer, then what's happening is, is you're going out on the marketplace, you may be buying insurance, you think you're covered, but then when you get sick they decide to drop the insurance right when you need it," Obama continued, winding on with the answer.
Halfway through, an audience member on the riser yawned.
But Obama wasn't finished. He had a "final point," before starting again with another list -- of three points.
"What we said is, number one, we'll have the basic principle that everybody gets coverage," he said, before launching into the next two points, for a grand total of seven.
His wandering approach might not matter if Obama weren't being billed as the chief salesman of the health-care overhaul. Public opinion on the bill remains divided, and Democratic officials are planning to send Obama into the country to persuade wary citizens that it will work for them in the long run.
It was not evident that he changed any minds at Friday's event. The audience sat politely, but people in the back of the room began to wander off.
Even Obama seemed to recognize that he had gone on too long. He apologized -- in keeping with the spirit of the moment, not once, but twice. "Boy, that was a long answer. I'm sorry," he said, drawing nervous laughter that sounded somewhat like relief as he wrapped up.
But, he said: "I hope I answered your question."
Connect the Dots on CAIR’s Foreign Funding and Lobbying at CAIRObservatory.org
by Frank Gaffney
http://biggovernment.com/fgaffney/2010/04/03/connect-the-dots-on-cairs-foreign-funding-and-lobbying-at-cairobservatory-org/
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), claims to be “America’s largest Islamic civil liberties group.” But that’s a myth. As we reported here on BigGovernment.com last fall, only 1% of CAIR’s latest reported revenues actually came from Muslim American members.
Meanwhile foreign donors have given CAIR over $6,000,000 in cash and loans, and over $50,000,000 in pledges. That’s 1% from American members; tens of millions from Saudi Arabia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. Shouldn’t there be a law to let the American public know the truth about CAIR and their foreign donors? Of course, and there is one. CAIR just doesn’t follow it.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), enacted just before World War Two, still requires foreign agents spreading propaganda to register so Americans can know what they are up to. Back then the problem was foreign agents working for the Nazis. Today the problem is foreign agents like CAIR, defending Jihadists in the media and pushing Muslim Brotherhood values in America.
The Center for Security Policy recently unveiled a unique new tool to expose CAIR as a foreign agent of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and several of its member states. The CAIR Observatory website (http://www.cairobservatory.org) presents comprehensive open-source evidence and analysis alleging that CAIR has acted as a foreign agent on behalf of Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.
The centerpiece of the website is the report “CAIR and the Foreign Agents Registration Act,” which details the foreign funding, foreign direction and domestic political influence operations of CAIR in the United States.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA) requires any agent of a foreign principal — not just foreign governments but foreign political parties, corporations, non-governmental organizations and even individuals — to register with the U.S. Department of Justice as a foreign agent.
The report documents these CAIR activities as a foreign agent:
CAIR received at least $2,192,203 in Contributions, Income and Money from foreign principals in the form of 10 distinct transactions
CAIR received a $2,106,251 mortgage loan from a foreign principal for their Washington, D.C. headquarters
CAIR secured the promise of at least $54,500,000 in pledges from foreign principals
CAIR met and coordinated with foreign principals on at least 30 occasions
CAIR engaged in at least 50 political influence operations on behalf of foreign principals in the United States And the Center for Security Policy has additional evidence that cannot be made public at this time documenting another $2.4 million in foreign donations and loans given to CAIR since 2000.
The goal of the CAIR Observatory website (http://www.cairobservatory.org/) is to build a model for researching and compiling evidence of illegal behavior by Muslim Brotherhood front organizations, with a focus on organizations operating in the United States as unregistered foreign agents for the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and its member states. The website’s name — “CAIR Observatory” — is a direct counter to the so-called “Islamophobia Observatory” maintained by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The Jeddah, Saudi Arabia-based OIC has been a contributor to CAIR, and the two have a history of coordinated meetings, tactics and goals.
CAIRObservatory.org will regularly feature new reports and short documentaries spotlighting specific examples of CAIR’s FARA violations, and will be frequently updated with new evidence on CAIR’s ongoing activities as a currently unregistered foreign agent.
Starting next week we’ll begin to expose specific CAIR political operations targeting the U.S. Congress.
For more information contact CAIRObservatory.org Editor Adam Savit (savit@securefreedom.org).
Morning Bell: Red Tape Rising
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/04/05/morning-bell-red-tape-rising/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Just three days after President Barack Obama’s health plan was signed into law, AT&T announced that due to an obscure tax change in the bill, the nation’s largest telephone company would take a $1 billion hit to its bottom line this quarter. According to health benefits analysts this tax law modification would shave as much as $14 billion from U.S. corporate profits. While it would have been better had these tax losses been made more public before Congress voted, at least these tax charges are transparent and easily quantifiable enough to get noticed by the American people. Unfortunately the same cannot be said of the hundreds of new regulations that the federal government will enforce as it tries to implement Obama’s redistributionist health agenda.
In addition to the federal government’s explicit taxes and spending, Americans are also burdened with a slew of hidden taxes imposed by an ever-increasing number of regulations. More than 50 agencies have a hand in federal regulatory policy, enforcing more than 150,000 pages of rules. Many of these regulations provide needed benefits. Most Americans would agree on the need for security regulations to protect citizens from terrorist attacks, although the extent and scope of those rules may be subject to debate. But each regulation comes at a cost–a “regulatory tax” imposed on all Americans. According to a 2005 study commissioned by the Small Business Administration, the cost of all regulations then on the books was some $1.1 trillion per year.
Worse than the existing size of our country’s regulatory burden, is the pace at which it has been growing. Contrary to what most liberals and media elites would have you believe, President George Bush had a decidedly mixed record on regulation. While he should be praised for strengthening the role of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in screening new regulations, by every objectively measurable metric the size and scope of the regulatory state grew significantly under his tenure. And President Bush’s last years in office were his worst. In 2008 36 major regulations were enacted by the Bush administration, and in 2009 some $15 billion in new regulatory costs were imposed on the American people.
President Bush doesn’t deserve all the blame for that $15 billion in new costs for 2009. About $4.4 billion is attributable to regulations approved by the Obama administration. While that may seem like a significant decrease, it is actually an ominous sign when put in context. Regulatory activity always increases near the end of a presidency and is slower at the beginning. So in President Bush’s first year, he enacted only one major rule and he was in his third year in office before the new regulatory costs he inflicted on the American people hit President Obama’s one-year $4 billion mark. And that $4 billion does not yet include all the regulations for Obamacare. Or all of the regulations Obama’s EPA wants to pass under the Clean Air Act. Or any of the new financial regulations that Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) want to inflict on the American people.
There are some things Congress can do now to help better manage the onslaught of federal regulations. First the authority and scope of OIRA should be protected. Establishing a sunset date for all new regulations would also help. But ultimately things will not change for the better until policymakers exercise the will and resolve to guard against the deluge. As Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked last week: “If Congress can’t control what a few mortgage finance bureaucrats do with your dollars, why would anyone trust Congress to control what tens of thousands of bureaucrats will do with your health? … Should unchecked centralized government be allowed to grow and grow in power … or should its powers be limited and returned to the people?”
Congressman: 'I don't worry about the Constitution'
'I believe it says we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=135553
A Democrat congressman from Illinois says when it comes to the health-care reform plan adopted by Congress and signed into law by President Obama, he just doesn't concern himself with what the Constitution requires.
The comment came in a heated exchange recorded recently between Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill., and constituents.
While being pressed on the complications of the "Obamacare" plan, as critics have dubbed it, he was asked, "Where in the Constitution?"
"I don't worry about the Constitution on this to be honest," Hare said.
Instead, he said, he worries about peoples' lives:
"It's people's lives. It's people's children. It's when you take your child to the hospital and you think it's really bad and your heart is thumping, thumping, thumping while you're waiting for the doctor to tell you what it is and then the doctor comes out and says it's going to be ok, except you don't have insurance and you're stuck with a $10 or $15,000 bill. …"
When the congressman stated he doesn't concern himself with the Constitution, one of the constituents muttered, "Jackpot, brother."
"I care more about the people that are dying every day that don't have health insurance," Hare said.
"You care more about that than the U.S. Constitution, which you swore to uphold," a constituent challenged.
"I believe it says we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," Hare responded.
Another constituent pointed out those words come from the Declaration of Independence.
"Doesn't matter to me," Hare stated. "Either one."
The question about the constitutionality of health care was repeated later, specifically challenging where in the document such action is authorized.
"I don't know. I don't know," the congressman said.
A constituent later called the congressman a liar for claiming he had read the 2,700-page health care plan three times, and the congressman walked out of the meeting, ending it.
Commenters on the YouTube page where the video was posted were incensed:
I cannot WAIT to get these Socialist (sic) out of office.
Someone needs to bring a huge bucket o' tar and a couple truckloads of feathers to Capitol Hill, and that right soon.
I am so tired of seeing these hypocrites shedding all these crocodile tears for those "30 million poor uninsured." Give me a break already! They could care less about your health. This is all about control. Once they can force you to buy health insurance, then they can force you to buy anything. The bottom line to this health-control debate can be summed by by asking a very simple question: "If this is such a great and wonderful plan, why did Congress and the president exempt themselves?"
This man is a lawless thug. His oath means nothing that he swore to. He plays o[n] emotion instead of dealing in facts. Typical, he justifies his actions based on emotion instead of rule of law and the Constitution. When you no longer follow the law, there is tyranny, not matter what the justification is.
In a commentary at the Dakota Voice, the author suggested, "Isn't it refreshing when liberals actually come out and say what they mean? It's such a rare treat, it deserves to be celebrated when it happens."
The author pointed out that while Hare "says he cares more about these mysterious people who are 'dying without health care,'" the facts are that "genuinely poor people have had access to Medicaid and other government health care programs for years, and no one is turned away from emergency room when life-saving treatment is needed … not even illegal aliens."
"But again, let's not be too hard on Rep. Hare. This kind of honesty from a socialist Democrat is priceless."
What Obamacare will cost doctors
Chris Link, MD
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/04/what_obamacare_will_cost_docto.html
One of the most interesting, if unanticipated, effects of posting YouTube videos is managing the "comments" section. I have a serie s of politically oriented song parodies that I have posted over the past eight months. The first, "One Single Payer System", has more than one million views (thanks to links posted in blogs such as The American Thinker). However, I did not realize I would be taking up the job of de facto moderator for a running debate with more than 1,200 entries in the case of "Single Payer".
One post asked a very good question: "Why can't we just put everyone in the country on Medicare?" Aside from the problem of a huge expansion in the unfunded obligations for the Medicare program, currently estimated to be $89 trillion, my immediate thought was that you can't stay in business as a physician at Medicare reimbursement rates.
I used my specialty, anesthesiology, to illustrate the problem. Using the best information I could find and the example of my own solo practice, I came up with some sobering figures.
Anesthesiologists bill for most surgical cases with a combination of base units depending on the particular surgery (e.g. cardiac bypass has a higher base value than a hernia repair), plus one time unit for every 15 minutes. The average anesthesiologist bills 10,198 units in a year. Medicare pays, on average, $20.925 per unit. Now $213,393 a year sounds like a pretty decent living for most of us and it certainly would be until you start backing out expenses.
A billing service is in the neighborhood of 6% ($12,804) and average malpractice is about $23,000. I'm paying around $15,000 a year for health insurance for a family of four. Various expenses for continuing education, computers, cell phone, office supplies, etc. adds up to around $5,000. AMA, state and local medical society and American Society of Anesthesiologists dues add up to $1,700, if one chooses to join. I'd like to retire someday, so I put away 10% for retirement. Self-employment taxes take $17,154. And I have no employees or office. Most medical practices have a much higher overhead both in real terms and as a percent of revenue.
So what's left?
$117,753, but without the "doctor fix" it would be $85,770. All that in exchange for 50-60 hours a week (including being on-call), coming out of school with an average student loan debt of $156,000 with a payment of over $1,000 per month, and putting your life on hold until at least age thirty. Suddenly it doesn't look like such an attractive option.
And then there's the guy you knew in college who coasted through studying sociology and went to work for the US Department of Health and Human Services right after graduation. He's had eight years to climb through the bureaucratic ranks and is now one of the 19% of the federal workforce that makes over $100,000 and that's before bonuses and overtime. And you always thought he was kind of an idiot.
The average pay of a federal worker in now $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector. Excellent fringe benefits widen the gap even more.
Most of my colleagues are similar to me in coming from middle class backgrounds. I worked to go to school and probably paid for half of my education at a state university. I borrowed money for medical school. Another significant number of doctors are second or third generation physicians, but very few come from well-to-do non-medical backgrounds. And what will happen when medicine is no longer an attractive option for bright motivated youth to move up the socioeconomic ladder?
See that assistant supervisor at your local DMV? The guy sitting in the office drinking coffee, shuffling reports and playing solitaire on the computer?
Meet your heart surgeon.
"The e-mail Bag"
Old Sea Story
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2300699/posts
There's an old sea story in the Navy about a ship's Captain who inspected His sailors, and afterward told the Chief Boson that his men smelled bad.
The Captain suggested perhaps it would help if the sailors would change underwear occasionally. The Chief responded, "Aye, aye sir, I'll see to it immediately!
The Chief went straight to the sailors berth deck and announced, "The Captain thinks you guys smell bad and wants you to change your underwear.
Pittman, you change with Jones, McCarthy, you change with Kwiatkowski, and Brown you change with Schultz. Now get to it!!!"
THE MORAL:
Someone may be promising "Change" in Washington; but don't count on things smelling any better!
Monday, April 5, 2010
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20100405
Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
There are no real secrets to success. Success in anything has one fundamental aspect – effort… Take action with commitment. -- Sam Parker
"I keep my friends as misers do their treasure, because, of all the things granted us by wisdom, none is greater or better than friendship." -- Pietro Aretino
"No great performance ever came from holding back." -- Don Greene
212 Degrees
http://212motivator.com/?SRC=DI021710&utm_source=Walk+the+Talk+Master+List&utm_campaign=e45ac8f6c5-DI_02_17_10&utm_medium=email
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
I am the light of the world. If you follow Me, you won't be stumbling through the darkness, because you will have the light that leads to life. (John 8:12)
Because our society has rejected God and His holy inspired Word as the standard for truth, we have lost our reference point for reality.
Our culture often defines truth based on public opinion polls. We live in a media culture of sizzle and hype which influences public thinking. Advertisers and spin-doctors are constantly at work to influence our thinking. Educational institutions promote diversified views at the expense of truth. Even many journalists are no longer satisfied with reporting the facts. Instead, they slant and often invent the news to fit their own interpretation and ambitions.
This is the nature of the world system controlled by Satan, who is the father of lies (John 8:44). These masters of deception, distortion, and manipulation take truth out of context or give only half-truths. Without His truth, we are left to grope about. Even many Christians have bought into these lies. But God's truth is a light that shows us the difference between falsehood and truth, and frees us to do what is right and good.
Every day, we make choices about what we want to do or perceive to be true. Only God can free us from the deceptions and distortions of the world's system. He has given us the Bible as a handbook for identifying truth, and His Spirit, the Counselor of Truth, within us as our Guide.
Like a powerful floodlight, God's truth will expose the foolishness and destructiveness of every myth promoted by the world. God is the only unchanging source of truth.
Your View of God Really Matters …
How much have you been affected by the myths and half-truths of society and popular culture? What does your checkbook show? What about your preferred entertainment choices? Your language? Your clothes? Your integrity in business dealings? Do all these things demonstrate that you are listening to God's truth or listening to the world?
"The Patriot Post"
"I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary...." --Thomas Jefferson
Opinion in Brief
"For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, or any other good or service, whether a person can afford it or not, it must diminish someone else's rights, namely their rights to their earnings. The reason is that Congress has no resources of its very own. Moreover, there is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy giving them those resources. The fact that government has no resources of its very own forces one to recognize that in order for government to give one American citizen a dollar, it must first, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American. If one person has a right to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn. To argue that people have a right that imposes obligations on another is an absurd concept. A better term for new-fangled rights to health care, decent housing and food is wishes. If we called them wishes, I would be in agreement with most other Americans for I, too, wish that everyone had adequate health care, decent housing and nutritious meals. However, if we called them human wishes, instead of human rights, there would be confusion and cognitive dissonance. The average American would cringe at the thought of government punishing one person because he refused to be pressed into making someone else's wish come true. None of my argument is to argue against charity. Reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else's pockets to do so is despicable and deserves condemnation." --economist Walter E. Williams
The Gipper
"Welfare is another of our major problems. We are a humane and generous people and we accept without reservation our obligation to help the aged, disabled, and those unfortunates who, through no fault of their own, must depend on their fellow man. But we are not going to perpetuate poverty by substituting a permanent dole for a paycheck. There is no humanity or charity in destroying self-reliance, dignity, and self-respect ... the very substance of moral fiber." --Ronald Reagan
Liberty
"It's all supposed to be voluntary, those 'home visits' that are tucked into the mammoth Obamacare bill. If you have a strong stomach, and a stronger bottom, you can find home visitation on pages 568-595. That's Section 2951 of H.R. 3590, the Senate [health care] bill.... The bill provides for federal funding and supervision for this vast expansion of government intrusion into family life. This is the Nanny State on steroids. Is your family being 'targeted' for such home visitations? Let's see if you fit into one of these very broad categories: Families where Mom is not yet 21. (No mention here whether she is married or not.) Families where someone is a tobacco user. (Does this include the White House? Watch out, Sasha and Malia! Does Grandpa, whom you love and have taken in, enjoy his after-dinner pipe?) Families where children have low student achievement, developmental delays, or disabilities. As if that list were not wide-ranging enough, here's the net that can encompass tens of millions: Families with individuals who are serving or formerly served in the armed forces, including such families that have members of the armed forces who have had multiple deployments outside the United States. [Emphasis added.] ... Do you spank your children? You should know that HHS bureaucrats think you are an abuser. Do you support the Second Amendment? How would you like HHS bureaucrats asking your children if you maintain firearms in the home for family protection? Do you home-school your kids? Take care. Members of Congress who have tried to abolish home-schooling are big backers of this health care bill. Do you wonder why? ... One thing is clear: For life and liberty, we must defeat ObamaCare." --columnist Ken Blackwell
Government
"The most disturbing part of the ObamaCare debate is not about where Republicans and Democrats disagree, but where they agree. Take this issue of those with pre-existing illnesses. Many Republicans actually support government action to prevent insurance companies from refusing to insure them. Ignoring the benefits of cost-lowering free market competition and the role of charity, many Republicans believe it acceptable to force an insurance company -- in business to insure against unknown risks -- to 'insure' someone currently experiencing a known risk. ... But this should not surprise anyone who observes the allegedly 'fiscally conservative,' 'pro-free market,' 'limited government' party in action. From the acceptance of the New Deal to government bailouts of private industry, Republicans -- sooner or later -- go along. ... The entire ObamaCare debate starts off in the wrong place -- with Republicans agreeing that 'reform' is necessary, health care 'costs too much' and that government must 'make health care more affordable.' But it is because of government -- laws, regulations and policies -- that users pay more for services and drugs than they otherwise would." --columnist Larry Elder
Culture
"It was once the proud declaration of many educators that 'We are here to teach you how to think, not what to think.' But far too many of our teachers and professors today are teaching their students what to think, about everything from global warming to the new trinity of 'race, class and gender.' Even if all the conclusions with which they indoctrinate their students were 100 percent correct, that would still not be equipping students with the mental skills to weigh opposing views for themselves, in order to be prepared for new and unforeseeable issues that will arise over their lifetimes, after they leave the schools and colleges. Many of today's 'educators' not only supply students with conclusions, they promote the idea that students should spring into action because of these prepackaged conclusions -- in other words, vent their feelings and go galloping off on crusades, without either a knowledge of what is said by those on the other side or the intellectual discipline to know how to analyze opposing arguments. ... A philosopher once said that the most important knowledge is knowledge of one's own ignorance. That is the knowledge that too many of our schools and colleges are failing to teach our young people." --economist Thomas Sowell
Faith & Family
"If anyone was looking for a self-righteous extreme feminist, they found one in Angie Jackson. This is a woman who was so proud she was aborting her baby that she announced she would 'tweet' her chemical-cocktail abortion live, as it happened, on Twitter. The liberal media found this made-for-TV slaughter fascinating, and not at all a controversy worthy of discussing with two sides. Newsweek's Sarah Kliff proclaimed: 'One hundred thousand people have watched Angie Jackson's abortion. Late last month, Jackson posted a video of herself to YouTube, recorded after she took RU-486, a medication used to end pregnancies.' Kliff asked only 'why shame remains' about the act of killing one's baby. Jackson was honored for her courage in 'demystifying' and 'destigmatizing' the procedure: 'We need 10,000 more of her,' proclaimed Peg Johnston, chair of something called the Abortion Care Network. This desire for 10,000 more unashamed abortions is what 'pro-choice' is all about." --columnist L. Brent Bozell
Political Futures
"Republicans were fired from their control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the election of 2006 for a number of reasons. Spending too much generally was one of them. Bloating appropriations bills with 'earmarks' to reward friends and supporters was another. Iraq was certainly a major contributing factor. But, what weighed House Republicans down like an anchor around their collective necks was: Scandal. Duke Cunningham's written menu of acceptable bribe amounts. Jack Abramoff buying Members and staff like heads of romaine lettuce at Whole Foods. And the father of all the scandals, Mark Foley. I won't regurgitate the whole sordid Foley story here ... but it involved the Florida Republican having inappropriate text-message conversations with a 16-year-old male page; the House Republican Leadership knowing about it; and nothing being done. The implication was that Speaker's office thought it was more important to protect the GOP brand than to protect a teenaged page from the predations of a Member of the House. Foley became the shorthand for everything voters disliked -- hated -- about Republicans in the House. ... It is important to remember what that felt like, four long years ago, because House Democrats [now] find themselves in much the same position." --political analyst Rich Galen
The Last Word
"'Maybe it will take a woman to clean up the House,' Nancy Pelosi boasted before the 2006 midterm elections. Looks like those XX chromosomes didn't give her much advantage over the old cleaning crew. ... On Thursday afternoon, by a vote of 402-1, the House overwhelmingly passed a privileged resolution offered by the Republican leadership demanding a formal House Ethics Committee investigation of Pelosi and her (mis)handling of harassment allegations concerning disgraced former New York Rep. Eric Massa. The soft-on-corruption ethics panel (see under 'Rangel, Charlie') had decided to shut down its investigation after Massa abruptly resigned on Monday. But with reports piling up on how Massa kept a Capitol Hill playhouse filled with young, low-paid male staffers, and how Pelosi's office had fielded complaints of his bizarre and inappropriate behavior back in October, the House decided to pry the lid back open and put a stop to what the resolution calls the 'public ridicule' the seeming cover-up has invited. Housecleaner Pelosi cannot be pleased by the second-guessing of her handiwork. Color her an un-merry maid. Even Democratic Rep. Patrick Kennedy, fresh from his raving House floor meltdown over media coverage of the Massa mess, voted for the GOP-initiated House resolution. Finally: Bipartisanship we can believe in!" --columnist Michelle Malkin
"The Web"
Billy Graham's daughter says he'd like to preach again
Associated Press
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=955596
JEFFERSON CITY, MO - The Rev. Billy Graham's daughter says the 91-year-old evangelist would like to preach one more time, and his family is "praying that he'll have that opportunity."
Anne Graham Lotz spoke with reporters Monday in Missouri, where she was the keynote speaker at a prayer gathering in the state Capitol Rotunda. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=955410
Lotz says her father has trouble hearing, seeing, and walking, but gets out of bed on his own and watches television to keep up with the news. Unable to read his Bible, Graham has caretakers write verses of Scripture in large letters for him, and Lotz says he prays now more than ever.
She adds that he misses his wife Ruth, who died in 2007, "but he's not ready to go join her yet."
Media, Lies, and Video Tape
http://www.visiontoamerica.org/story/media-lies-and-video-tape.html
Nobody likes a racist…
Nobody likes a race hustler either.
On Saturday March 20th the leftist media reported what they described as a horrible story from their sources at the conservative-hating Huffington Post. The media claimed that members of the Congressional Black Caucus were called n*ggers and spat on by tea party protesters as they walked from the Longworth office building to the Rayburn office building. At least one report said that it was “a chorus” of racist hatred. Another report said the Congressional members heard the n-word at least 15 times. Reporters from ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX News, (including Bill O’Reilly), MSNBC, and so on, repeated this horrible story.
Unfortunately, it was a fake. The media had no evidence… Nothing. As the story was a complete fabrication. It was totally made up.
Story Preview Window
Source: http://biggovernment.com/hoftandjackson/2010/04/01/its-time-for-the-black-caucus-race-hustlers-to-apologize-for-slandering-tea-party-patriots/#more-99842
It’s Time For the Black Caucus Race Hustlers to Apologize For Slandering Tea Party Patriots
by Jim Hoft and Kevin Jackson
Nobody likes a racist…
Nobody likes a race hustler either.
On Saturday March 20th the leftist media reported what they described as a horrible story from their sources at the conservative-hating Huffington Post. The media claimed that members of the Congressional Black Caucus were called n*ggers and spat on by tea party protesters as they walked from the Longworth office building to the Rayburn office building. At least one report said that it was “a chorus” of racist hatred. Another report said the Congressional members heard the n-word at least 15 times. Reporters from ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX News, (including Bill O’Reilly), MSNBC, and so on, repeated this horrible story.
Unfortunately, it was a fake. The media had no evidence… Nothing. As the story was a complete fabrication. It was totally made up.
In fact, several videos were later released that proved that there was no “chorus” of racist hatred and no one screamed the n-word. It was all a lie.
Several people, including Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. filmed the entire episode and could not find any evidence of racist hate. Let’s get his video, before the DNC alters it!
He found nothing.
Last Wednesday, video was released that confirmed the spitting incident was bogus, too.
Dan Riehl reported:
There’s some higher resolution video below I hadn’t seen before. Unlike what was claimed during recent Tea Party protests in Washington, DC, it would appear Cleaver was simply walking close by in front of a protester. The protester’s hands were cupped as he was shouting. While it appears Cleaver may have experienced a spraying of sorts as a result of the yelling, it does not support a conclusion that he was intentionally spat upon, as claimed.
Here’s the video:
Again. Another liberal lie.
On Thursday of last week Andrew Breitbart at Big Government offered $10,000 to any of the reported victims for proof of a racial attack. No one will! And, in this economy you know someone would if they could. No one came forward. Nothing happened. It was all a lie.
It’s time for these race hustlers to apologize to the tea party movement and the American people for this horrible racist lie.
We demand that these Black Caucus members apologize for their fabricated hate story.
This post was co-authored by Jim Hoft and Kevin Jackson, blogger at The Black Sphere and author of The Big Black Lie.
ACORN disappearance 'a shell game'
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=958482
A conservative activist and former presidential candidate is skeptical that the controversial group ACORN has really gone away, despite the fact that it officially disbanded on April 1.
Reuters recently reported that the liberal group would formally disband due to falling revenues but that its state chapters would reorganize under new names. ACORN's funding began to dry up after a team of undercover investigative reporters released videos showing ACORN workers giving advice on how to flout the law. There have also been numerous reports of ACORN registering fraudulent voters.
The scandal prompted Congress to vote to prohibit ACORN from receiving federal funding, even though a federal judge later ruled the prohibition illegal.
Gary Bauer, president of American Values and chairman of Campaign for Working Families, is not convinced the organization is finished. "I think this is a shell game," he suspects. "They're going to reopen their doors, perhaps under a new name, because the ACORN name has rightfully been totally damaged by their activities."
Bauer notes that any group that engages in voter irregularities can make a big difference in close elections.
"I think a lot of people are beginning to notice that in recent years virtually every close election, when the recount takes place [it] ends up going to the liberal," he points out. "That's way beyond what the law of averages would tell you would normally happen."
The conservative activist is convinced the group will be up and operating under new ownership in time for the elections this fall.
Who in the White House Authorized a Bribe
Posted by Caleb
http://www.westernjournalism.com/?p=6955
After watching Obama twist arms, beg, borrow and steal to pass ObamaCare, it may come as no surprise to some that Obama’s administration has offered federal jobs for political purposes to two Democratic candidates. What ought to catch people’s attention is that this action constitutes a federal crime.
Did Barack Obama or members of his administration directly violate federal law by offering federal jobs to Rep. Joe Sestak and former Colorado legislator Andrew Romanoff? The best way to answer these and a myriad of other ethical questions is for Congress to join Rep. Darrell Issa in calling for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate this corruption.
Title 18, Chapter 11, Section 211 of the United States Code states that “Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”
Obama is practicing Chicago Style Politics
The Obama administration has been accused by two Democratic primary candidates, Joe Sestak and Andrew Romanoff, of offering them high profile jobs. The jobs allegedly offered included the Secretary of the Navy and a position within the U.S. Agency for International Development. In return for these favors the two would withdraw from their Senate challenges to Obama’s allies, Sen. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado.
The Denver Post, hardly a right-wing newspaper, reported that “Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s deputy chief of staff and a storied fixer in the White House political shop, suggested a place for Romanoff might be found in the administration and offered specific suggestions, according to several sources who described the communication to The Denver Post. Romanoff turned down the overture, which included mention of a job at USAID, the foreign aid agency, sources said.”
The White House subsequently denied the story and claimed that no job was offered. But with no investigation into this corruption, how will we know how deep the rabbit hole runs?
In February, Pennsylvania Congressman Joe Sestak launched a new charge of bribery by accusing the Obama White House of offering him the Secretary of the Navy job in exchange for his agreeing to abandon his race against Specter. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that this exchange occurred during a TV interview with Comcast anchor Larry Kane: “‘Was it secretary of the Navy?’ Kane asked. ‘No comment,’ Sestak said.’Was it [the job] high-ranking?’ Kane asked. Sestak said yes, but added that he would ‘never leave’ the Senate race for a deal.”
Sestak has later confirmed that yes, he was offered a job, but he has been unwilling to go into greater details. After stonewalling and avoiding the question for weeks, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated that he talked to people in the White House about the claim and that, “I’m told whatever conversations have been had are not problematic.” He added that the incident is “in the past.”
We hate to rain on Mr. Gibbs’ parade, but the incident is hardly “in the past.” If the president of the United States or someone high up in his administration committed a felony the public deserves to know about it. Whoever committed that felony must be brought to justice. This administration is no stranger to corruption, as witnessed by the billions in sweet deals to purchase Congressional votes for ObamaCare.
Obama even tried to influence Democratic Congressman Jim Matheson, who voted against the initial health bill, by appointing his brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. While this corruption is ill fitting for the White House, these incidents pale in comparison to the most recent allegations. The offering of a federal job in order to affect an election constitutes a direct violation of federal law and must be investigated.
Fortunately for those of us who still believe in the rule of law, Rep. Darell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has called for a special prosecutor to probe these allegations. Congressman Issa is confident that a special prosecutor will be appointed. “What you have is a credible allegation by a member of Congress of a felony,” Issa told Fox News. “It is a felony to offer somebody a federal job in order to get them to affect an election.”
We are watching our very system of government corrupted before our very eyes. We encourage all Americans who still believe in our Constitution and the rule of law to join us and Rep. Issa in calling for a special prosecutor to investigate these crimes of the Obama administration.
By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, The White House Watch
Army suggests brain scan for eligibility challenger
Flight surgeon questions Obama's right to be commander in chief
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=135313
The U.S. Army is – unofficially – suggesting a brain scan and medical evaluation for an officer who announced he would refuse to follow further orders until and unless President Obama documents his constitutional eligibility to be commander in chief.
Lt. Col. Terry Lakin is the highest-ranking and first active-duty officer to refuse to obey orders based on President Obama's eligibility.
A spokeswoman for the developing case of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, a flight surgeon with 18 years in the service, said the recommendation came to Lakin today from an officer whose name was not being used who implied that those higher up the chain of command thought it was a good idea.
The suggestion was described to WND by spokeswoman Margaret Calhoun Hemenway, a veteran Washington appointee and now volunteer spokeswoman, as being presented in a "solicitous" manner.
Officially, the U.S. Army says it has no plans for formal action at this point against the officer. But the controversy also raises the prospect that the government may be unwilling to pursue a prosecution because of the possible ramifications – including a defense demand for a court-ordered discovery process that would target Obama's historical documentation.
As WND reported, Lakin is an active-duty flight surgeon charged with caring for Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey's pilots and air crew.
The top-ranking, highly decorated officer says he's refusing all orders until Obama releases his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate to prove his eligibility to serve as commander in chief.
"I feel I have no choice but the distasteful one of inviting my own court martial," Lakin said in a statement. "The Constitution matters. The truth matters."
He continued, "For the first time in all my years of service to our great nation, and at great peril to my career and future, I am choosing to disobey what I believe are illegal orders, including an order to deploy to Afghanistan for my second tour of duty there. I will disobey my orders to deploy because I – and I believe all servicemen and women and the American people – deserve the truth about President Obama's constitutional eligibility to the office of the presidency and the commander in chief.
"If he is ineligible, then my orders – and indeed all orders – are illegal because all orders have their origin with the commander in chief as handed down through the chain of command."
Lakin is not the first active-duty officer to raise the challenge. Others have included Army doctor Capt. Connie Rhodes and Army reservist Maj. Stefan Cook. But Lakin is the highest-ranking officer to raise the question.
In a statement to WND today, George Wright of Army Public Affairs said the Army has "no reaction" to Lakin's statements, and "at this point, the Army will take no formal action."
He said, "Lt. Col. Lakin has stated his intent to violate Articles 87 and 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but has not done so. Whether his actions to date violate any law or policy is for his chain of command to determine."
Wright said the Army had no information on in-channel concerns Lakin previously raised in 2009, and there was "no comment" on whether Obama needs to document his eligibility to serve as president under the U.S. Constitution's requirement that the commander in chief be a "natural born citizen."
Although a "natural born citizen" is undefined in the Constitution, many legal analysts believe the requirement was put there to prevent dual allegiances on the part of the president. Some believe those with dual citizenship would be ineligible. Obama wrote in his book his father was a subject to the United Kingdom, making Obama likely a dual citizen.
"Lt. Col Lakin is free to express his personal views. The Army has no comment on his concerns, nor the views that he espoused," Wright told WND.
Hemenway said the medical suggestions were delivered to Lakin today while he is on leave, only hours after WND contacted the Pentagon and Army headquarters, asking for comment.
She said the suggestion – at this point – remained "informal."
But the background already has been assembled in the case, should there be a prosecution, for the defense to come to court with specific demands for proof of the validity of the chain of command, up to the commander in chief.
Support for Lakin is being generated at the Safeguard Our Constitution.com website, established by the American Patriot Foundation.
One of the organizers behind the group, serving in emeritus status, is John Hemenway, an attorney who previously fought in the U.S. court system on behalf of a retired military officer, Gregory S. Hollister, who also questioned Obama's eligibility.
The case ultimately was dismissed by Judge James Robertson who ruled that the dispute had been "twittered" during the 2008 election campaign.
In that opinion, Robertson sarcastically wrote: "The plaintiff says that he is a retired Air Force colonel who continues to owe fealty to his commander in chief (because he might possibly be recalled to duty) and who is tortured by uncertainty as to whether he would have to obey orders from Barack Obama because it has not been proven – to the colonel's satisfaction – that Mr. Obama is a native-born American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be president.
"The issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court," Robertson wrote.
The judge also suggested sanctions against Hemenway for bringing the case, and Hemenway responded that process then would provide him with a right to a discovery hearing to see documentation regarding the judge's statements – not supported by any evidence introduced into the case – that Obama was properly "vetted."
Hemenway warned at the time, "If the court persists in pressing Rule 11 procedures against Hemenway, then Hemenway should be allowed all of the discovery pertinent to the procedures as court precedents have permitted in the past.
"The court has referred to a number of facts outside of the record of this particular case and, therefore, the undersigned is particularly entitled to a hearing to get the truth of those matters into the record. This may require the court to authorize some discovery," Hemenway said.
WND columnist Vox Day earlier wrote about this very scenario, calling it a "Get out of war" free card.
The comments followed the case of Cook, the reservist who challenged his deployment orders over questions about their legality under Obama.
"Rather than contesting the suit," Day wrote, "the Army took the highly peculiar step of revoking the major's deployment order, suggesting that the Pentagon generals are not entirely confident that they can demonstrate the legitimacy of their purported commander in chief.
"The Pentagon's decision to back down rather than risk exposing Obama's birth records to the public means that every single American soldier, sailor, pilot and Marine now holds a 'get out of war free' card. Not only every deployment order, but every order issued from an officer in the line of command can now be challenged in the knowledge that the top brass are afraid to respond for fear that their commander could be exposed for a fraud.," he wrote at the time.
"It is one thing for Obama to deny the curiosity of the American public by hiding behind the courts. It is very much another for him to deny the right of the men and women of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, who are sworn to risk their lives upholding the Constitution of the United States of America, to be certain their orders are legitimate," he said.
Calhoun Hemenway, who separately writes for FamilySecurityMatters.org, told WND she is an unofficial spokeswoman for the case and that Lakin's legal counselors have suggested he not comment a great deal at this point while he is on leave and before he returns to his duties.
Calhoun Hemenway, a former White House appointee serving in the Department of Defense and at NASA, said the Lakin case presents a problem for the Army, since it cannot simply "rescind" orders as it has in previous military disputes over orders under Obama's chain of command.
That's because Lakin has indicated plans to reject all orders.
In his video message now posted on YouTube, Lakin, an 18-year veteran personally pleads with the president to stop withholding the key document which would put to rest many of the doubts that continue to linger more than a year into Obama's term.
"President Obama, I ask you to respect and uphold the Constitution. Be transparent and show your honesty and integrity. Release your original, signed birth certificate, if you have one, thus proving your birth on American soil, and thus assure the American people that you are lawfully eligible to hold the office of the presidency and serve as commander in chief of the Armed Forces."
At FSM, Calhoun Hemenway wrote, "LTC Lakin, a native of Colorado whose residency is Tennessee, has explained to his superiors that he cannot understand how his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution does not allow military officers to pursue proof of eligibility from the commander in chief. In fact, efforts on his part to seek affirmation of the president's constitutional eligibility have been met with legal evasions."
The website set up for his case reveals that he pursued two separate internal complaint procedures in 2009, trying to ascertain the needed information.
Despite the posting on the Internet of an electronic copy of a "Certification of Live Birth," more information is needed, Calhoun Hemenway wrote.
"The Western Journalism Center released an authoritative explanation of the Obama birth controversy that helps to explain the confusion on Capitol Hill which revolves mostly around Obama's online Certification of Live Birth (COLB)," she wrote.
That explanation says: "The Certification of Live Birth is not a copy of the original birth certificate. It is a computer-generated document that the state of Hawaii issues on request to indicate that a birth certificate of some type is 'on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.' And there is the problem. Given the statutes in force in 1961, the Certification of Live Birth proves nothing unless we know what is on the original birth certificate. There are several legal areas (involving ethnic quotas and subsidy) for which the state of Hawaii up until June 2009 did not accept its computer-generated Certification of Live Birth as sufficient proof of birth – or parentage – in Hawaii. Why should the citizens of the United States be content with lower standards for ascertaining the qualifications of their president?"
Obama's actual response to those who question his eligibility to be president under the Constitution's requirement that the U.S. president be a "natural born citizen" has been to dispatch both private and tax-funded attorneys to prevent anyone from gaining access to his documentation.
Besides Obama's actual birth documentation, the still-concealed documentation for him includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
WND has reported on a multitude of cases that have been brought over the issue of Obama's eligibility. Some are by critics who have doubts about whether he was born in Hawaii in 1961 as he has written, and others are from those who question whether the framers of the Constitution specifically excluded dual citizens – Obama's father was a subject of the British crown at Obama's birth – from being eligible for the office.
The issue has prompted a number of state legislatures to work on proposals that would require presidential candidates to submit proof of their eligibility. And a similar proposal has been introduced in Congress by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla.
The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
However, none of the cases filed to date has been successful in reaching the plateau of legal discovery, so that information about Obama's birth could be obtained.
The White House has not replied to numerous requests for comment.
"The e-mail Bag"
Obama died, George Washington met him at the Pearly Gates. He slapped him across the face and yelled, "How dare you try to destroy the nation I helped conceive?"
Patrick Henry approached, punched him in the nose and shouted, "You wanted to end our liberties but you failed."
James Madison followed, kicked him in the groin and said, "You're the epitome of why our government is to provide for the common defense!"
Thomas Jefferson was next, beat Obama with a long cane and snarled, "It was evil men like you who inspired me to write the Declaration of Independence."
The beatings and thrashings continued as George Mason, James Monroe and 66 other early Americans unleashed their anger on the radical, socialist, leader.
As Obama lay bleeding and in pain, an Angel appeared. Obama wept and said, "This is not what you promised me."
The Angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you in Heaven. What did you think I said?"
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
There are no real secrets to success. Success in anything has one fundamental aspect – effort… Take action with commitment. -- Sam Parker
"I keep my friends as misers do their treasure, because, of all the things granted us by wisdom, none is greater or better than friendship." -- Pietro Aretino
"No great performance ever came from holding back." -- Don Greene
212 Degrees
http://212motivator.com/?SRC=DI021710&utm_source=Walk+the+Talk+Master+List&utm_campaign=e45ac8f6c5-DI_02_17_10&utm_medium=email
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
I am the light of the world. If you follow Me, you won't be stumbling through the darkness, because you will have the light that leads to life. (John 8:12)
Because our society has rejected God and His holy inspired Word as the standard for truth, we have lost our reference point for reality.
Our culture often defines truth based on public opinion polls. We live in a media culture of sizzle and hype which influences public thinking. Advertisers and spin-doctors are constantly at work to influence our thinking. Educational institutions promote diversified views at the expense of truth. Even many journalists are no longer satisfied with reporting the facts. Instead, they slant and often invent the news to fit their own interpretation and ambitions.
This is the nature of the world system controlled by Satan, who is the father of lies (John 8:44). These masters of deception, distortion, and manipulation take truth out of context or give only half-truths. Without His truth, we are left to grope about. Even many Christians have bought into these lies. But God's truth is a light that shows us the difference between falsehood and truth, and frees us to do what is right and good.
Every day, we make choices about what we want to do or perceive to be true. Only God can free us from the deceptions and distortions of the world's system. He has given us the Bible as a handbook for identifying truth, and His Spirit, the Counselor of Truth, within us as our Guide.
Like a powerful floodlight, God's truth will expose the foolishness and destructiveness of every myth promoted by the world. God is the only unchanging source of truth.
Your View of God Really Matters …
How much have you been affected by the myths and half-truths of society and popular culture? What does your checkbook show? What about your preferred entertainment choices? Your language? Your clothes? Your integrity in business dealings? Do all these things demonstrate that you are listening to God's truth or listening to the world?
"The Patriot Post"
"I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary...." --Thomas Jefferson
Opinion in Brief
"For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, or any other good or service, whether a person can afford it or not, it must diminish someone else's rights, namely their rights to their earnings. The reason is that Congress has no resources of its very own. Moreover, there is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy giving them those resources. The fact that government has no resources of its very own forces one to recognize that in order for government to give one American citizen a dollar, it must first, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American. If one person has a right to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn. To argue that people have a right that imposes obligations on another is an absurd concept. A better term for new-fangled rights to health care, decent housing and food is wishes. If we called them wishes, I would be in agreement with most other Americans for I, too, wish that everyone had adequate health care, decent housing and nutritious meals. However, if we called them human wishes, instead of human rights, there would be confusion and cognitive dissonance. The average American would cringe at the thought of government punishing one person because he refused to be pressed into making someone else's wish come true. None of my argument is to argue against charity. Reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else's pockets to do so is despicable and deserves condemnation." --economist Walter E. Williams
The Gipper
"Welfare is another of our major problems. We are a humane and generous people and we accept without reservation our obligation to help the aged, disabled, and those unfortunates who, through no fault of their own, must depend on their fellow man. But we are not going to perpetuate poverty by substituting a permanent dole for a paycheck. There is no humanity or charity in destroying self-reliance, dignity, and self-respect ... the very substance of moral fiber." --Ronald Reagan
Liberty
"It's all supposed to be voluntary, those 'home visits' that are tucked into the mammoth Obamacare bill. If you have a strong stomach, and a stronger bottom, you can find home visitation on pages 568-595. That's Section 2951 of H.R. 3590, the Senate [health care] bill.... The bill provides for federal funding and supervision for this vast expansion of government intrusion into family life. This is the Nanny State on steroids. Is your family being 'targeted' for such home visitations? Let's see if you fit into one of these very broad categories: Families where Mom is not yet 21. (No mention here whether she is married or not.) Families where someone is a tobacco user. (Does this include the White House? Watch out, Sasha and Malia! Does Grandpa, whom you love and have taken in, enjoy his after-dinner pipe?) Families where children have low student achievement, developmental delays, or disabilities. As if that list were not wide-ranging enough, here's the net that can encompass tens of millions: Families with individuals who are serving or formerly served in the armed forces, including such families that have members of the armed forces who have had multiple deployments outside the United States. [Emphasis added.] ... Do you spank your children? You should know that HHS bureaucrats think you are an abuser. Do you support the Second Amendment? How would you like HHS bureaucrats asking your children if you maintain firearms in the home for family protection? Do you home-school your kids? Take care. Members of Congress who have tried to abolish home-schooling are big backers of this health care bill. Do you wonder why? ... One thing is clear: For life and liberty, we must defeat ObamaCare." --columnist Ken Blackwell
Government
"The most disturbing part of the ObamaCare debate is not about where Republicans and Democrats disagree, but where they agree. Take this issue of those with pre-existing illnesses. Many Republicans actually support government action to prevent insurance companies from refusing to insure them. Ignoring the benefits of cost-lowering free market competition and the role of charity, many Republicans believe it acceptable to force an insurance company -- in business to insure against unknown risks -- to 'insure' someone currently experiencing a known risk. ... But this should not surprise anyone who observes the allegedly 'fiscally conservative,' 'pro-free market,' 'limited government' party in action. From the acceptance of the New Deal to government bailouts of private industry, Republicans -- sooner or later -- go along. ... The entire ObamaCare debate starts off in the wrong place -- with Republicans agreeing that 'reform' is necessary, health care 'costs too much' and that government must 'make health care more affordable.' But it is because of government -- laws, regulations and policies -- that users pay more for services and drugs than they otherwise would." --columnist Larry Elder
Culture
"It was once the proud declaration of many educators that 'We are here to teach you how to think, not what to think.' But far too many of our teachers and professors today are teaching their students what to think, about everything from global warming to the new trinity of 'race, class and gender.' Even if all the conclusions with which they indoctrinate their students were 100 percent correct, that would still not be equipping students with the mental skills to weigh opposing views for themselves, in order to be prepared for new and unforeseeable issues that will arise over their lifetimes, after they leave the schools and colleges. Many of today's 'educators' not only supply students with conclusions, they promote the idea that students should spring into action because of these prepackaged conclusions -- in other words, vent their feelings and go galloping off on crusades, without either a knowledge of what is said by those on the other side or the intellectual discipline to know how to analyze opposing arguments. ... A philosopher once said that the most important knowledge is knowledge of one's own ignorance. That is the knowledge that too many of our schools and colleges are failing to teach our young people." --economist Thomas Sowell
Faith & Family
"If anyone was looking for a self-righteous extreme feminist, they found one in Angie Jackson. This is a woman who was so proud she was aborting her baby that she announced she would 'tweet' her chemical-cocktail abortion live, as it happened, on Twitter. The liberal media found this made-for-TV slaughter fascinating, and not at all a controversy worthy of discussing with two sides. Newsweek's Sarah Kliff proclaimed: 'One hundred thousand people have watched Angie Jackson's abortion. Late last month, Jackson posted a video of herself to YouTube, recorded after she took RU-486, a medication used to end pregnancies.' Kliff asked only 'why shame remains' about the act of killing one's baby. Jackson was honored for her courage in 'demystifying' and 'destigmatizing' the procedure: 'We need 10,000 more of her,' proclaimed Peg Johnston, chair of something called the Abortion Care Network. This desire for 10,000 more unashamed abortions is what 'pro-choice' is all about." --columnist L. Brent Bozell
Political Futures
"Republicans were fired from their control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the election of 2006 for a number of reasons. Spending too much generally was one of them. Bloating appropriations bills with 'earmarks' to reward friends and supporters was another. Iraq was certainly a major contributing factor. But, what weighed House Republicans down like an anchor around their collective necks was: Scandal. Duke Cunningham's written menu of acceptable bribe amounts. Jack Abramoff buying Members and staff like heads of romaine lettuce at Whole Foods. And the father of all the scandals, Mark Foley. I won't regurgitate the whole sordid Foley story here ... but it involved the Florida Republican having inappropriate text-message conversations with a 16-year-old male page; the House Republican Leadership knowing about it; and nothing being done. The implication was that Speaker's office thought it was more important to protect the GOP brand than to protect a teenaged page from the predations of a Member of the House. Foley became the shorthand for everything voters disliked -- hated -- about Republicans in the House. ... It is important to remember what that felt like, four long years ago, because House Democrats [now] find themselves in much the same position." --political analyst Rich Galen
The Last Word
"'Maybe it will take a woman to clean up the House,' Nancy Pelosi boasted before the 2006 midterm elections. Looks like those XX chromosomes didn't give her much advantage over the old cleaning crew. ... On Thursday afternoon, by a vote of 402-1, the House overwhelmingly passed a privileged resolution offered by the Republican leadership demanding a formal House Ethics Committee investigation of Pelosi and her (mis)handling of harassment allegations concerning disgraced former New York Rep. Eric Massa. The soft-on-corruption ethics panel (see under 'Rangel, Charlie') had decided to shut down its investigation after Massa abruptly resigned on Monday. But with reports piling up on how Massa kept a Capitol Hill playhouse filled with young, low-paid male staffers, and how Pelosi's office had fielded complaints of his bizarre and inappropriate behavior back in October, the House decided to pry the lid back open and put a stop to what the resolution calls the 'public ridicule' the seeming cover-up has invited. Housecleaner Pelosi cannot be pleased by the second-guessing of her handiwork. Color her an un-merry maid. Even Democratic Rep. Patrick Kennedy, fresh from his raving House floor meltdown over media coverage of the Massa mess, voted for the GOP-initiated House resolution. Finally: Bipartisanship we can believe in!" --columnist Michelle Malkin
"The Web"
Billy Graham's daughter says he'd like to preach again
Associated Press
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=955596
JEFFERSON CITY, MO - The Rev. Billy Graham's daughter says the 91-year-old evangelist would like to preach one more time, and his family is "praying that he'll have that opportunity."
Anne Graham Lotz spoke with reporters Monday in Missouri, where she was the keynote speaker at a prayer gathering in the state Capitol Rotunda. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=955410
Lotz says her father has trouble hearing, seeing, and walking, but gets out of bed on his own and watches television to keep up with the news. Unable to read his Bible, Graham has caretakers write verses of Scripture in large letters for him, and Lotz says he prays now more than ever.
She adds that he misses his wife Ruth, who died in 2007, "but he's not ready to go join her yet."
Media, Lies, and Video Tape
http://www.visiontoamerica.org/story/media-lies-and-video-tape.html
Nobody likes a racist…
Nobody likes a race hustler either.
On Saturday March 20th the leftist media reported what they described as a horrible story from their sources at the conservative-hating Huffington Post. The media claimed that members of the Congressional Black Caucus were called n*ggers and spat on by tea party protesters as they walked from the Longworth office building to the Rayburn office building. At least one report said that it was “a chorus” of racist hatred. Another report said the Congressional members heard the n-word at least 15 times. Reporters from ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX News, (including Bill O’Reilly), MSNBC, and so on, repeated this horrible story.
Unfortunately, it was a fake. The media had no evidence… Nothing. As the story was a complete fabrication. It was totally made up.
Story Preview Window
Source: http://biggovernment.com/hoftandjackson/2010/04/01/its-time-for-the-black-caucus-race-hustlers-to-apologize-for-slandering-tea-party-patriots/#more-99842
It’s Time For the Black Caucus Race Hustlers to Apologize For Slandering Tea Party Patriots
by Jim Hoft and Kevin Jackson
Nobody likes a racist…
Nobody likes a race hustler either.
On Saturday March 20th the leftist media reported what they described as a horrible story from their sources at the conservative-hating Huffington Post. The media claimed that members of the Congressional Black Caucus were called n*ggers and spat on by tea party protesters as they walked from the Longworth office building to the Rayburn office building. At least one report said that it was “a chorus” of racist hatred. Another report said the Congressional members heard the n-word at least 15 times. Reporters from ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX News, (including Bill O’Reilly), MSNBC, and so on, repeated this horrible story.
Unfortunately, it was a fake. The media had no evidence… Nothing. As the story was a complete fabrication. It was totally made up.
In fact, several videos were later released that proved that there was no “chorus” of racist hatred and no one screamed the n-word. It was all a lie.
Several people, including Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. filmed the entire episode and could not find any evidence of racist hate. Let’s get his video, before the DNC alters it!
He found nothing.
Last Wednesday, video was released that confirmed the spitting incident was bogus, too.
Dan Riehl reported:
There’s some higher resolution video below I hadn’t seen before. Unlike what was claimed during recent Tea Party protests in Washington, DC, it would appear Cleaver was simply walking close by in front of a protester. The protester’s hands were cupped as he was shouting. While it appears Cleaver may have experienced a spraying of sorts as a result of the yelling, it does not support a conclusion that he was intentionally spat upon, as claimed.
Here’s the video:
Again. Another liberal lie.
On Thursday of last week Andrew Breitbart at Big Government offered $10,000 to any of the reported victims for proof of a racial attack. No one will! And, in this economy you know someone would if they could. No one came forward. Nothing happened. It was all a lie.
It’s time for these race hustlers to apologize to the tea party movement and the American people for this horrible racist lie.
We demand that these Black Caucus members apologize for their fabricated hate story.
This post was co-authored by Jim Hoft and Kevin Jackson, blogger at The Black Sphere and author of The Big Black Lie.
ACORN disappearance 'a shell game'
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=958482
A conservative activist and former presidential candidate is skeptical that the controversial group ACORN has really gone away, despite the fact that it officially disbanded on April 1.
Reuters recently reported that the liberal group would formally disband due to falling revenues but that its state chapters would reorganize under new names. ACORN's funding began to dry up after a team of undercover investigative reporters released videos showing ACORN workers giving advice on how to flout the law. There have also been numerous reports of ACORN registering fraudulent voters.
The scandal prompted Congress to vote to prohibit ACORN from receiving federal funding, even though a federal judge later ruled the prohibition illegal.
Gary Bauer, president of American Values and chairman of Campaign for Working Families, is not convinced the organization is finished. "I think this is a shell game," he suspects. "They're going to reopen their doors, perhaps under a new name, because the ACORN name has rightfully been totally damaged by their activities."
Bauer notes that any group that engages in voter irregularities can make a big difference in close elections.
"I think a lot of people are beginning to notice that in recent years virtually every close election, when the recount takes place [it] ends up going to the liberal," he points out. "That's way beyond what the law of averages would tell you would normally happen."
The conservative activist is convinced the group will be up and operating under new ownership in time for the elections this fall.
Who in the White House Authorized a Bribe
Posted by Caleb
http://www.westernjournalism.com/?p=6955
After watching Obama twist arms, beg, borrow and steal to pass ObamaCare, it may come as no surprise to some that Obama’s administration has offered federal jobs for political purposes to two Democratic candidates. What ought to catch people’s attention is that this action constitutes a federal crime.
Did Barack Obama or members of his administration directly violate federal law by offering federal jobs to Rep. Joe Sestak and former Colorado legislator Andrew Romanoff? The best way to answer these and a myriad of other ethical questions is for Congress to join Rep. Darrell Issa in calling for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate this corruption.
Title 18, Chapter 11, Section 211 of the United States Code states that “Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”
Obama is practicing Chicago Style Politics
The Obama administration has been accused by two Democratic primary candidates, Joe Sestak and Andrew Romanoff, of offering them high profile jobs. The jobs allegedly offered included the Secretary of the Navy and a position within the U.S. Agency for International Development. In return for these favors the two would withdraw from their Senate challenges to Obama’s allies, Sen. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado.
The Denver Post, hardly a right-wing newspaper, reported that “Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s deputy chief of staff and a storied fixer in the White House political shop, suggested a place for Romanoff might be found in the administration and offered specific suggestions, according to several sources who described the communication to The Denver Post. Romanoff turned down the overture, which included mention of a job at USAID, the foreign aid agency, sources said.”
The White House subsequently denied the story and claimed that no job was offered. But with no investigation into this corruption, how will we know how deep the rabbit hole runs?
In February, Pennsylvania Congressman Joe Sestak launched a new charge of bribery by accusing the Obama White House of offering him the Secretary of the Navy job in exchange for his agreeing to abandon his race against Specter. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that this exchange occurred during a TV interview with Comcast anchor Larry Kane: “‘Was it secretary of the Navy?’ Kane asked. ‘No comment,’ Sestak said.’Was it [the job] high-ranking?’ Kane asked. Sestak said yes, but added that he would ‘never leave’ the Senate race for a deal.”
Sestak has later confirmed that yes, he was offered a job, but he has been unwilling to go into greater details. After stonewalling and avoiding the question for weeks, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated that he talked to people in the White House about the claim and that, “I’m told whatever conversations have been had are not problematic.” He added that the incident is “in the past.”
We hate to rain on Mr. Gibbs’ parade, but the incident is hardly “in the past.” If the president of the United States or someone high up in his administration committed a felony the public deserves to know about it. Whoever committed that felony must be brought to justice. This administration is no stranger to corruption, as witnessed by the billions in sweet deals to purchase Congressional votes for ObamaCare.
Obama even tried to influence Democratic Congressman Jim Matheson, who voted against the initial health bill, by appointing his brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. While this corruption is ill fitting for the White House, these incidents pale in comparison to the most recent allegations. The offering of a federal job in order to affect an election constitutes a direct violation of federal law and must be investigated.
Fortunately for those of us who still believe in the rule of law, Rep. Darell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has called for a special prosecutor to probe these allegations. Congressman Issa is confident that a special prosecutor will be appointed. “What you have is a credible allegation by a member of Congress of a felony,” Issa told Fox News. “It is a felony to offer somebody a federal job in order to get them to affect an election.”
We are watching our very system of government corrupted before our very eyes. We encourage all Americans who still believe in our Constitution and the rule of law to join us and Rep. Issa in calling for a special prosecutor to investigate these crimes of the Obama administration.
By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, The White House Watch
Army suggests brain scan for eligibility challenger
Flight surgeon questions Obama's right to be commander in chief
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=135313
The U.S. Army is – unofficially – suggesting a brain scan and medical evaluation for an officer who announced he would refuse to follow further orders until and unless President Obama documents his constitutional eligibility to be commander in chief.
Lt. Col. Terry Lakin is the highest-ranking and first active-duty officer to refuse to obey orders based on President Obama's eligibility.
A spokeswoman for the developing case of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, a flight surgeon with 18 years in the service, said the recommendation came to Lakin today from an officer whose name was not being used who implied that those higher up the chain of command thought it was a good idea.
The suggestion was described to WND by spokeswoman Margaret Calhoun Hemenway, a veteran Washington appointee and now volunteer spokeswoman, as being presented in a "solicitous" manner.
Officially, the U.S. Army says it has no plans for formal action at this point against the officer. But the controversy also raises the prospect that the government may be unwilling to pursue a prosecution because of the possible ramifications – including a defense demand for a court-ordered discovery process that would target Obama's historical documentation.
As WND reported, Lakin is an active-duty flight surgeon charged with caring for Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey's pilots and air crew.
The top-ranking, highly decorated officer says he's refusing all orders until Obama releases his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate to prove his eligibility to serve as commander in chief.
"I feel I have no choice but the distasteful one of inviting my own court martial," Lakin said in a statement. "The Constitution matters. The truth matters."
He continued, "For the first time in all my years of service to our great nation, and at great peril to my career and future, I am choosing to disobey what I believe are illegal orders, including an order to deploy to Afghanistan for my second tour of duty there. I will disobey my orders to deploy because I – and I believe all servicemen and women and the American people – deserve the truth about President Obama's constitutional eligibility to the office of the presidency and the commander in chief.
"If he is ineligible, then my orders – and indeed all orders – are illegal because all orders have their origin with the commander in chief as handed down through the chain of command."
Lakin is not the first active-duty officer to raise the challenge. Others have included Army doctor Capt. Connie Rhodes and Army reservist Maj. Stefan Cook. But Lakin is the highest-ranking officer to raise the question.
In a statement to WND today, George Wright of Army Public Affairs said the Army has "no reaction" to Lakin's statements, and "at this point, the Army will take no formal action."
He said, "Lt. Col. Lakin has stated his intent to violate Articles 87 and 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but has not done so. Whether his actions to date violate any law or policy is for his chain of command to determine."
Wright said the Army had no information on in-channel concerns Lakin previously raised in 2009, and there was "no comment" on whether Obama needs to document his eligibility to serve as president under the U.S. Constitution's requirement that the commander in chief be a "natural born citizen."
Although a "natural born citizen" is undefined in the Constitution, many legal analysts believe the requirement was put there to prevent dual allegiances on the part of the president. Some believe those with dual citizenship would be ineligible. Obama wrote in his book his father was a subject to the United Kingdom, making Obama likely a dual citizen.
"Lt. Col Lakin is free to express his personal views. The Army has no comment on his concerns, nor the views that he espoused," Wright told WND.
Hemenway said the medical suggestions were delivered to Lakin today while he is on leave, only hours after WND contacted the Pentagon and Army headquarters, asking for comment.
She said the suggestion – at this point – remained "informal."
But the background already has been assembled in the case, should there be a prosecution, for the defense to come to court with specific demands for proof of the validity of the chain of command, up to the commander in chief.
Support for Lakin is being generated at the Safeguard Our Constitution.com website, established by the American Patriot Foundation.
One of the organizers behind the group, serving in emeritus status, is John Hemenway, an attorney who previously fought in the U.S. court system on behalf of a retired military officer, Gregory S. Hollister, who also questioned Obama's eligibility.
The case ultimately was dismissed by Judge James Robertson who ruled that the dispute had been "twittered" during the 2008 election campaign.
In that opinion, Robertson sarcastically wrote: "The plaintiff says that he is a retired Air Force colonel who continues to owe fealty to his commander in chief (because he might possibly be recalled to duty) and who is tortured by uncertainty as to whether he would have to obey orders from Barack Obama because it has not been proven – to the colonel's satisfaction – that Mr. Obama is a native-born American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be president.
"The issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court," Robertson wrote.
The judge also suggested sanctions against Hemenway for bringing the case, and Hemenway responded that process then would provide him with a right to a discovery hearing to see documentation regarding the judge's statements – not supported by any evidence introduced into the case – that Obama was properly "vetted."
Hemenway warned at the time, "If the court persists in pressing Rule 11 procedures against Hemenway, then Hemenway should be allowed all of the discovery pertinent to the procedures as court precedents have permitted in the past.
"The court has referred to a number of facts outside of the record of this particular case and, therefore, the undersigned is particularly entitled to a hearing to get the truth of those matters into the record. This may require the court to authorize some discovery," Hemenway said.
WND columnist Vox Day earlier wrote about this very scenario, calling it a "Get out of war" free card.
The comments followed the case of Cook, the reservist who challenged his deployment orders over questions about their legality under Obama.
"Rather than contesting the suit," Day wrote, "the Army took the highly peculiar step of revoking the major's deployment order, suggesting that the Pentagon generals are not entirely confident that they can demonstrate the legitimacy of their purported commander in chief.
"The Pentagon's decision to back down rather than risk exposing Obama's birth records to the public means that every single American soldier, sailor, pilot and Marine now holds a 'get out of war free' card. Not only every deployment order, but every order issued from an officer in the line of command can now be challenged in the knowledge that the top brass are afraid to respond for fear that their commander could be exposed for a fraud.," he wrote at the time.
"It is one thing for Obama to deny the curiosity of the American public by hiding behind the courts. It is very much another for him to deny the right of the men and women of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, who are sworn to risk their lives upholding the Constitution of the United States of America, to be certain their orders are legitimate," he said.
Calhoun Hemenway, who separately writes for FamilySecurityMatters.org, told WND she is an unofficial spokeswoman for the case and that Lakin's legal counselors have suggested he not comment a great deal at this point while he is on leave and before he returns to his duties.
Calhoun Hemenway, a former White House appointee serving in the Department of Defense and at NASA, said the Lakin case presents a problem for the Army, since it cannot simply "rescind" orders as it has in previous military disputes over orders under Obama's chain of command.
That's because Lakin has indicated plans to reject all orders.
In his video message now posted on YouTube, Lakin, an 18-year veteran personally pleads with the president to stop withholding the key document which would put to rest many of the doubts that continue to linger more than a year into Obama's term.
"President Obama, I ask you to respect and uphold the Constitution. Be transparent and show your honesty and integrity. Release your original, signed birth certificate, if you have one, thus proving your birth on American soil, and thus assure the American people that you are lawfully eligible to hold the office of the presidency and serve as commander in chief of the Armed Forces."
At FSM, Calhoun Hemenway wrote, "LTC Lakin, a native of Colorado whose residency is Tennessee, has explained to his superiors that he cannot understand how his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution does not allow military officers to pursue proof of eligibility from the commander in chief. In fact, efforts on his part to seek affirmation of the president's constitutional eligibility have been met with legal evasions."
The website set up for his case reveals that he pursued two separate internal complaint procedures in 2009, trying to ascertain the needed information.
Despite the posting on the Internet of an electronic copy of a "Certification of Live Birth," more information is needed, Calhoun Hemenway wrote.
"The Western Journalism Center released an authoritative explanation of the Obama birth controversy that helps to explain the confusion on Capitol Hill which revolves mostly around Obama's online Certification of Live Birth (COLB)," she wrote.
That explanation says: "The Certification of Live Birth is not a copy of the original birth certificate. It is a computer-generated document that the state of Hawaii issues on request to indicate that a birth certificate of some type is 'on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.' And there is the problem. Given the statutes in force in 1961, the Certification of Live Birth proves nothing unless we know what is on the original birth certificate. There are several legal areas (involving ethnic quotas and subsidy) for which the state of Hawaii up until June 2009 did not accept its computer-generated Certification of Live Birth as sufficient proof of birth – or parentage – in Hawaii. Why should the citizens of the United States be content with lower standards for ascertaining the qualifications of their president?"
Obama's actual response to those who question his eligibility to be president under the Constitution's requirement that the U.S. president be a "natural born citizen" has been to dispatch both private and tax-funded attorneys to prevent anyone from gaining access to his documentation.
Besides Obama's actual birth documentation, the still-concealed documentation for him includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
WND has reported on a multitude of cases that have been brought over the issue of Obama's eligibility. Some are by critics who have doubts about whether he was born in Hawaii in 1961 as he has written, and others are from those who question whether the framers of the Constitution specifically excluded dual citizens – Obama's father was a subject of the British crown at Obama's birth – from being eligible for the office.
The issue has prompted a number of state legislatures to work on proposals that would require presidential candidates to submit proof of their eligibility. And a similar proposal has been introduced in Congress by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla.
The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
However, none of the cases filed to date has been successful in reaching the plateau of legal discovery, so that information about Obama's birth could be obtained.
The White House has not replied to numerous requests for comment.
"The e-mail Bag"
Obama died, George Washington met him at the Pearly Gates. He slapped him across the face and yelled, "How dare you try to destroy the nation I helped conceive?"
Patrick Henry approached, punched him in the nose and shouted, "You wanted to end our liberties but you failed."
James Madison followed, kicked him in the groin and said, "You're the epitome of why our government is to provide for the common defense!"
Thomas Jefferson was next, beat Obama with a long cane and snarled, "It was evil men like you who inspired me to write the Declaration of Independence."
The beatings and thrashings continued as George Mason, James Monroe and 66 other early Americans unleashed their anger on the radical, socialist, leader.
As Obama lay bleeding and in pain, an Angel appeared. Obama wept and said, "This is not what you promised me."
The Angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you in Heaven. What did you think I said?"
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Save CMC-Union From Majority GOP Commissioners
In our own community and all across America, a majority of taxpayer are screaming out at President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, as these three leaders and their majority Democrat Party following has crammed ObamaCare down our throats.
On the local level in Union County, NC, we have three Republican Party Union County Commissioners; Chairwoman Kim Rogers, Vice-Chairwoman Tracy Kuehler, and former Chairman Lanny Openshaw who are determined to cram the sale of Carolina Medical Center-Union down the throats of Union County citizens. Any political poll will show an overwhelming majority of citizens objecting to this proposed sale of CMC-Union.
We, as residents of Union County, are mostly pleased with our CMC-Union healthcare facility from all within our community. All wish to see our entire healthcare system continue to improve. Our hospital and their staff, our doctors and their nurses and staff, and all others support has greatly enhanced our entire healthcare system in Union County during the past 15 years.
These three (3) UC Commissions claim the purpose to sell the CMC-Union property is to pay down UC debt, when in fact these commissioners have never seen any spending project they didn’t like, except with the current CMC-Union organization.
Just as I believe SCOTUS will declare ObamaCare as unconstitutional because (1) There is nothing in our US Constitution which will allow any government to command citizens to purchase any healthcare, and (2) While many Democrat Party leaders on Capitol Hill are declaring ObamaCare is a ‘right’, SCOTUS will declare ObamaCare is not a ‘right’. ‘Rights’ come only from our God and our US Constitution.
Locally, it appears forced litigation will be instituted to ‘stop’ these three (3) Union County Commissioner immigrants. While Commissioners Rogers and Kuehler still have more than 2 years on their elected term, Commissioner Openshaw is up for election in the GOP Primary Election of May 4, 2010. By defeating Openshaw in the May 4 Primary Election, we may be able to stop some of the political bleeding. With the voters help by defeating Openshaw in the GOP Primary Election, Union County citizens will win. Later, UC citizens will then win this litigation in the Judiciary.
On the local level in Union County, NC, we have three Republican Party Union County Commissioners; Chairwoman Kim Rogers, Vice-Chairwoman Tracy Kuehler, and former Chairman Lanny Openshaw who are determined to cram the sale of Carolina Medical Center-Union down the throats of Union County citizens. Any political poll will show an overwhelming majority of citizens objecting to this proposed sale of CMC-Union.
We, as residents of Union County, are mostly pleased with our CMC-Union healthcare facility from all within our community. All wish to see our entire healthcare system continue to improve. Our hospital and their staff, our doctors and their nurses and staff, and all others support has greatly enhanced our entire healthcare system in Union County during the past 15 years.
These three (3) UC Commissions claim the purpose to sell the CMC-Union property is to pay down UC debt, when in fact these commissioners have never seen any spending project they didn’t like, except with the current CMC-Union organization.
Just as I believe SCOTUS will declare ObamaCare as unconstitutional because (1) There is nothing in our US Constitution which will allow any government to command citizens to purchase any healthcare, and (2) While many Democrat Party leaders on Capitol Hill are declaring ObamaCare is a ‘right’, SCOTUS will declare ObamaCare is not a ‘right’. ‘Rights’ come only from our God and our US Constitution.
Locally, it appears forced litigation will be instituted to ‘stop’ these three (3) Union County Commissioner immigrants. While Commissioners Rogers and Kuehler still have more than 2 years on their elected term, Commissioner Openshaw is up for election in the GOP Primary Election of May 4, 2010. By defeating Openshaw in the May 4 Primary Election, we may be able to stop some of the political bleeding. With the voters help by defeating Openshaw in the GOP Primary Election, Union County citizens will win. Later, UC citizens will then win this litigation in the Judiciary.
Friday, April 2, 2010
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20100402
Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
'Jesus' Resurrection – Dramatic Testimony
http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/jesus-resurrection.htm
Jesus' Resurrection - Essential to the Christian Faith
Jesus' Resurrection from the dead is as essential to the Christian faith as His death upon the cross. Paul writes in his first letter to the Corinthians "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Paul emphasizes the importance of the Resurrection with his statement "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not" (I Corinthians 15:14-15).
Jesus' Resurrection - An Historical Event?
So, is Jesus' Resurrection from the dead an historical event? It is proclaimed throughout the four Gospels as well as ancient correspondence. If these works are the historical documents they claim to be, then they bare witness to an historical event. According to Aristotle's Dictum, these pieces meet the criteria for legitimate historical documents. However, as they describe miraculous events, they are not recognized by secular society as valid testimony. How then will these accounts be validated? Two questions must be asked. First, do the authors of these literary pieces discredit their work, or do their lives give credit to their testimony? Second, do accepted historical authorities corroborate these accounts?
Jesus' Resurrection - The Disciples' Testimony
The men who believed in Jesus' Resurrection from the dead, known today as Christ's Disciples, certainly had their testimony, as well as their convictions, tested by those who disbelieved. With the exception of John, every one of these men were put to death. These deaths were excruciating and merciless. More so were their lives, as these men were persecuted by the secular world and suffered great hardship for the spreading of their beloved Gospel, which they proclaimed. Paul gives account in his second letter to the Corinthians "Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness." (II Corinthians 11:24-27). Paul was later beheaded after suffering in a Roman dungeon for many years. His death was far less brutal then those of his brethren as he was a Roman citizen and often they were not. These men believed the Lord allowed them to suffer greatly, as there is no better evidence of their sincerity and the truth of their message than their endurance and perseverance without any hope of an earthly reward. Every single one of them could have escaped such torture and humiliation by simply denouncing the Resurrection of Christ. This was the goal of their tormentors. However, not one ceded to their persecutors, and this is dramatic evidence in rebuttal of any conspiracy theory.
Jesus Gave His Life For All Of Us, So All May Be Free From All Sin!
"Daily Motivations"
We are not put on this earth for ourselves, but are placed here for each other. If you are always there for others, then in time of need, someone will be there for you. -- Jeff Warner
"Do not look to the ground for your next step; greatness lies with those who look to the horizon." -- Norwegian Proverb
"Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future." -- Paul Boese
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
Let everyone in the world fear the LORD, and let everyone stand in awe of Him. (Psalm 33:8)
If we could just grasp even a part of the magnificent holiness of God, then the whole earth would shake with people falling to the ground in worship and adoration of Him. Such a view would precipitate a healthy fear of God, which is the necessary starting point.
True knowledge of God's holiness always elicits a worshipful response from us. Moses fell to his face before the burning bush. Isaiah said, "Woe is me!" (Isaiah 6:5). We cannot stand in the presence of God without acknowledging His holiness and seeing our own sin.
Whenever I meditate on the holiness of God, I am impressed with how worthy He is of our worship. I want to become absorbed with His holiness, rather than with His might, His wisdom, or His other magnificent attributes.
As we meditate on God's supreme holiness, we cannot help but be overcome with a sense of awe. Music can help us express our awe for our Lord. Many of the Christian hymns capture the spirit of worship. I encourage you to select one of them, such as "Holy, Holy, Holy", or "Agnus Dei" and begin to worship God right now.
When we concentrate on God's holiness---His moral perfection and absolute purity---the only appropriate response is humble adoration, which is the basis for all worship.
Your View of God Really Matters …
Read Isaiah 6:1-8 then put yourself in Isaiah's place as you hear or sing a song such as "Holy, Holy, Holy", or "Agnus Dei".
"The Patriot Post"
"One hundred and seventy-three despots would surely be as oppressive as one." --James Madison, Federalist No. 48
"If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it be otherwise in a body to which the people send 150 lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing, & talk by the hour? That 150 lawyers should do business together ought not to be expected." --Thomas Jefferson, autobiography, 1821
From the 'Non Compos Mentis' File
"[W]e have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." --House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), confirming that too much Botox can kill brain cells
The BIG Lie
On Monday, Barack Obama declared, "Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill, which reduces most people's premiums."
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) disagreed, albeit indirectly: "Anyone who would stand before you and say, 'Well, if you pass health care reform next year's health care premiums are going down,' I don't think is telling the truth."
See the video. http://patriotpost.us/perspective/2010/03/11/durbin-calls-obama-a-liar/
Regulatory Commissars: Pulling the Corker Out of the Bottle
Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) stunned his Republican colleagues by working with Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT) this week to breathe new life into Democrats' financial "reform" package. Feeling pressure from his right, however, Corker has since pulled out of the deal, which Dodd is now pushing without him.
The House version of the bill, crafted by Massachusetts liberal Barney Frank, was recently considered dead in the Senate, and for good reason. It included a $4 trillion bailout provision for rickety financial institutions that would make TARP the official policy of the federal government. No more bankruptcies, no more survival of the fittest -- both characteristics of a free market. Instead, the government would be allowed to manipulate the markets on the backs of taxpayers. This bill would also create the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA), a massive new federal bureaucracy that would have the power to oversee and ultimately regulate not only financial institutions, but also virtually any organization that deals with consumers.
Corker, a freshman senator with an American Conservative Union rating of 83, should have joined his colleagues in the first place and let the bill die in negotiations. Instead, he worked with Dodd to keep the CFPA alive. His office stated that he doesn't support the bailout provision, but he did in fact vote for the TARP-bank bailout in 2008. Wall Street likes the bailout provision, because it coats big firms with Teflon to keep them from failing under almost any circumstances. It's a good thing that Corker, who has received $3 million in campaign funds from the finance industry since taking office in 2007, reconsidered when he did. Still, he shouldn't have put himself in that position in the first place.
Health Care and Student Loans?
Senate Democrats want to attach a provision to the health care reconciliation bill that would allow the government essentially to take over all student loan lending in the country. Democrats are having enough problems passing health care on its own, and this latest parliamentary trick could shake up the delicate vote balance. The student-lending bill would federalize all higher education lending and would thus cause the loss of tens of thousands of private sector jobs. Senators representing states where those jobs stand to be lost are now wavering on whether they can support health care with this completely unrelated provision attached to it. What a shame.
The student-lending bill doesn't stand much chance of passage on its own. The $67 billion that the White House claims will be saved by the legislation is more than offset by $77 billion in new costs. That figure is a lowball estimate as it doesn't take into account the rate of student loan defaults or accurately figure new spending increases over time. Worst of all, virtually no one in the Senate has seen this bill, and the public isn't aware of the details, let alone the fact that it may become law without much debate.
In related news, according to Roll Call, "The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress' original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package." We'll soon see how Democrats plan to work around this legal obstacle.
New & Notable Legislation
Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) announced a measure that would cut Congress's salary by 5 percent in 2011. It has 21 cosponsors so far, and, if passed, it would save taxpayers $4.7 million. Granted, that's a drop in the bucket considering the deficits we're facing these days, but it would be an important symbolic step for Congress to recognize the economic woes being felt in the private sector. The House voted against an automatic pay raise in 2009 and 2010, but it hasn't taken an actual cut in pay since 1933.
The Senate voted 62-36 Wednesday to extend jobless benefits and temporary business tax breaks. Six Republicans and all but Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska voted for the bill, which will add about $130 billion to the deficit over the next 18 months. The GOP "yes" votes were mostly the usual suspects, Christopher Bond (MO), Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Olympia Snowe (ME), David Vitter (LA) and George Voinovich (OH).
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) proposed an amendment last week to block the White House's arbitrary seizure of over 10 million acres of land in nine Western states. The land was designated as "monuments" under a questionable application of the Antiquities Act of 1906, in order to prevent resources development. DeMint pointed out that during times of economic stress, the government should be freeing up resources for development, not locking them up. Unfortunately, most of his colleagues disagreed. His amendment was defeated 58-38.
Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) introduced the "Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010," which would provide for military, rather than civilian, detention of terrorism suspects. The bill is ostensibly a response to the Christmas Day undi-bomber incident, in which the perpetrator was read his Miranda rights. It permits detentions based on "the potential intelligence value of the individual," or "such other matters as the President considers appropriate." That's a lot of uncomfortable leeway. Furthermore, the military would have the power to detain high-value detainees indefinitely "without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported." Given that Obama's Homeland Security team views right-wingers as threats, one wonders just where this could lead. With "friends" like McCain...
Finally, in a bid to put their big-spending past behind them (or at least make a good campaign statement), the House GOP adopted a unilateral one-year ban on earmarks Thursday. To paraphrase Ben Franklin, that's a good promise ... if you can keep it.
National Security -- On the Warfront With Jihadistan
As the Long War continues, both expected and unexpected targets were picked off by various American and allied forces this week. In Pakistan, Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that Maulana Faqir Mohammed, a top Pakistani Taliban commander, was probably killed last weekend after helicopters hit a building in Pakistan's Mohmand region, killing at least 16 Taliban militants. Although Malik could not confirm Mohammed's death, he was quoted as saying, "We had real-time intelligence that Faqir Mohammad was in a meeting with another commander, Qari Zia-ur-Rehman, in the hideout at the time of the attack." If true, we got two jihadis for the price of one. Meanwhile, the good hunting continued on Wednesday as U.S. missile strikes killed at least 12 militants near Pakistan's Afghan border.
Also this week, Pakistani officials claimed that an American, Adam Gadahn, a 31-year-old who has appeared in al-Qa'ida videos urging jihad against the West, had been captured. U.S. defense officials said they had received no indication of any such arrest, and by Friday, Pakistani officials were backing away from the story. Gadahn, who grew up in Riverside County, California, before converting to Islam at a nearby Orange County mosque is the first American charged with treason since 1952, and the U.S. government is offering $1 million for information leading to his capture.
Finally, on Monday, a Pennsylvania woman named Colleen LaRose, but known to authorities as "Jihad Jane" (not to be confused with Hanoi Jane), was charged in federal court with using the Internet to recruit jihadis to carry out murders and other violent attacks overseas. One of her targets was Lars Vilks, an artist who had exercised his free speech rights by drawing a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad. The indictment alleges that LaRose received orders to murder someone in Sweden, and to do so in such a way that it would frighten "the whole Kufar [non-believer] world." It also states that LaRose agreed to commit the murder, and that her appearance and American citizenship would help her blend in and carry it out.
Profiles of Valor: U.S. Marine Corps 1st Lt. Elliot Ackerman
AckermanOn November 10, 2004, then-2nd Lt. Elliot Ackerman of the United States Marine Corps led a platoon into Fallujah -- at that time, still a hotbed of insurgent activity. The platoon's mission was to establish a foothold from which the battalion would then clear the city. As the Marines pushed into the city, enemy fighters attacked from all sides. Twice in the early fighting, Ackerman risked himself to pull wounded Marines to safety, and then organized their evacuation. As the battle raged, however, the vehicle sent to evacuate the wounded couldn't find their position, so Ackerman again headed into the open and risked what his citation called a "gauntlet of deadly enemy fire" to direct the vehicle to the Marines.
Later in the battle, Ackerman and his team were working to clear a building when he saw some of his Marines exposed on a rooftop. He ordered them down, but took their place to mark targets for American tanks. Under a barrage of enemy fire, he suffered shrapnel wounds in his leg but continued to direct both the attack and four medical evacuations. For his bravery and leadership, Ackerman was awarded the Silver Star. Semper Fi!
Business & Economy -- Income Redistribution: You Paid for It
Executive salaries reach $500,000, hourly fees top $600, and millions of your dollars are propping it all up. Welcome to the underworld of the environmental industry. According to Richard Pollock of Pajamas Media, "environmental activist groups have surreptitiously received at least $37 million from the federal government for questionable 'attorney fees'" related to lawsuits that "had nothing to do with environmental protection or improvement."
Since 2000, nine national environmental groups have filed the astounding number of 3,300 lawsuits, most based on "alleged procedural failings of federal agencies" rather than "substance or science." Not only has Uncle Sam doled out the millions, but Washington has "neither tracked nor accounted for" any of the outgo. Wyoming attorney Karen Budd-Falen, who helped uncover the fraud, says the $37 million is just the "tip of the iceberg," estimating the actual number is in the hundreds of millions.
Interestingly, according to the Washington Examiner, compensation for the top 10 paid environmental executives ranges from $308,000 to $496,000. Pajamas Media notes that of the $3.4 million that environmental PACs have given in federal campaign contributions since 2000, approximately 87 percent was to Democrats. Coincidence? We think not.
Eco-activists aren't the only ones greening themselves with your money. It seems Wake Forest University is using a $71,623 federal "we must rescue the economy now" stimu-less grant to study the effects of cocaine on a specific neurotransmitter in addicted monkeys. The economic benefit? Apparently a job "saved." For the record, we believe taxpayer dollars already fund too much monkey business in Washington; there's certainly no need to fund it anywhere else.
Administration Delays Oil Drilling
In 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama risked the ire of his leftist comrades when he championed offshore drilling as an opportunity to free America from dependence on foreign oil; he shrewdly hedged his bets in order to lure centrists and other undecideds into his camp. However, as with so many other issues, Obama's campaign promises are proving worthless.
Despite the fact that Americans favor offshore drilling by a 2 to 1 margin, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar has used every tool in his bureaucratic box to hinder it, including extending the public comment period before beginning the drilling program, voiding existing contracts for onshore drilling in Utah and announcing the delay of the offshore program until 2012. This program would have created 1.2 million real jobs per year and not doing it will cost the U.S. $2.36 trillion over the next 20 years. Surprise! Economic recovery is not the real agenda of this administration.
Judicial Benchmarks: 9th Circuit Approves of Pledge
"A federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is constitutional," reports the Associated Press. Atheist Michael Newdow had filed suit in 2004, claiming his daughter shouldn't be required to say the Pledge at school. However, his daughter and her mother, from whom Newdow is separated, are Christians who don't object to the Pledge, and the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the case saying Newdow didn't have standing. He refiled on behalf of other parents, but, in a 2-1 ruling, a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected his argument that the phrase "under God" violates the separation of church and state. Yes, the Ninth Circuit. Amazing, isn't it?
This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award
"I guess what we all underestimated was the degree, the depths of dishonesty, and dirtiness, and cynicism to which the climate change denial movement would be willing to stoop to advance their agenda." --Michael Mann, author of the dirty, dishonest and cynical "hockey stick" graph showing a recent spike in warming
Second Amendment: Guns For Dummies
Federal authorities at the ATF recently intercepted a large shipment of rifles labeled "toys" in Tacoma, Washington, that it claimed "could have had far-reaching and potentially devastating ramifications if they had gotten into the hands of individuals who wanted to do harm in the American population." Could the weapons seizure have prevented a shooting rampage across the nation? Perhaps -- except for one problem. The guns actually were toys.
Apparently, the ATF thought there was no limit to the widespread damage these mostly plastic Airsoft BB guns could have inflicted upon hapless Americans. The lightweight plastic BB ordnance fired by such heavy artillery may actually sting or leave welts on bare skin if fired at close range. Undeterred by such an obvious blunder, the agency justified its seizure by declaring the toy BB guns could be converted into real, fully automatic machine guns -- which is true, if virtually all of the toy's parts were replaced with real machine gun parts from a real weapon. The same holds true for any other toy being converted to the real thing from scratch, like toy pickups or spaceships. The old adage never to attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity continues to be true, especially when it comes to bureaucratic bungling. Perhaps in the future, the ATF could refer to Guns for Dummies to help them identify real weaponry.
To Keep and Bear Arms
A burglar had the surprise of his life when he broke into a soon-to-be Marine's home in Delhi Township, Ohio. In the middle of the night, Kevin Boyle noticed that his door had been opened and quickly confronted the suspect. After warning him not to move, Boyle noticed him pull out what appeared to be a gun and raise it towards him. Fortunately, he had his own .45 caliber handgun ready.
Boyle fired two shots at the suspect and ran to get behind the corner wall for protection. He immediately called the police for help. The suspect took off to escape in the woods. It appears a car was waiting to pick him up. He remains on the run, and there is no evidence that he was struck by the bullets.
"I'm glad no one got hurt, including him. He probably thought he could get in for a quick little burglary and luckily I was ready to keep myself safe," said Boyle, who is two months away from leaving for Marine training camp. We'd call that successful early training.
"Liberty Counsel"
Liberty Alert
April 1, 2010
Homeland Security Raid of Religious Tracts Violates Fourth Amendment
www.LC.org
Yesterday a federal district court in Dallas, Texas ruled http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/opinion_rundus_033010.pdf that agents of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) illegally conspired to violate the Fourth Amendment rights of Darrel Rundus when they confiscated his "Million Dollar Bill" gospel tracts.
The judge ruled that DHS violated the Fourth Amendment guarantee against unlawful search and seizure. The ruling contains harsh language against the DHS agents, stating their behavior was inappropriate and they illegally conspired to violate the rights of Rundus.
Liberty Counsel represents Rundus and his Christian ministry, Great News Network (GNC). In June 2006, DHS agents entered GNN’s office without a warrant or permission, and threatened an employee with arrest to pressure him into giving up the gospel tracts, which the agents referred to as "contraband."
The front of the tract has markings similar to paper currency, but no one would ever get the tracts confused with real money. The front is printed with: "This bill is not legal tender," "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Department of Eternal Affairs." The back has statements such as, "The million dollar question: Will you go to Heaven?" The tract then contains the story of salvation written around all four sides. Rundus says that the tracts are extremely effective in sharing his faith with others.
We are grateful to God for this tremendous victory. All of us at Liberty Counsel want to continue to help people like Darrel Rundus reach others with the gospel. We do not charge for our services, but rely on your faithful donations.
Read the Court Opinion in this case. http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/opinion_rundus_033010.pdf
Read our News Release for more details. http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14100&PRID=922
"The Web"
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA): Guam could 'tip over and capsize'
http://dailyradar.com/beltwayblips/video/youtube-3-25-2010-hank-johnson-guam-tip-over-wmv/
Poll: Almost Two-Thirds of U.S. Oppose Health Law
By: Dan Weil
http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Poll-Two-Thirds-Oppose-Health-Law/2010/03/31/id/354336
Almost two-thirds of Americans believe the new healthcare law is too expensive and gives too much authority to the government for healthcare, according to a USA Today/Gallup Poll.
That could be bad news for Democrats in November’s congressional elections.
Supporters "are not only going to have to focus on implementing this kind of major reform," Robert Blendon, a Harvard professor of health policy and political analysis, told the paper.
"They're going to have to spend substantial time convincing people of the concrete benefits of this legislation."
Poll respondents are worried that the reform package will cost them more while lessening their quality of care.
Even President Obama has acknowledged problems on the cost front. "We are still going to have adjustments that have to be made to further reduce costs," he said Tuesday on NBC’s Today,
To some extent, poll respondents have contradictory views of the new legislation. A plurality believes the law will generally improve healthcare coverage and the overall health of Americans.
But 65 percent say the government’s role in healthcare is being expanded too far, 64 percent say the program will cost the government too much, 58 percent say it doesn’t do enough to brake rising costs and 51 percent say it doesn’t do enough to regulate the healthcare industry.
Half of respondents in the March 26-28 poll say the law is “a bad thing,” while 47 percent view it as “a good thing.”
That’s a shift from a poll March 22 — one day after the House approved the legislation — in which supporters outnumbered opponents 49 to 40 percent.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted March 23-26 produced mixed results for Democrats.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s approval rating dropped to 29 percent from 35 percent in January.
But approval of Obama’s handling of healthcare reform rose to 48 percent from 43 percent.
Obama's radical recess appointments
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=957272
A grassroots non-denominational church lobby is blasting President Barack Obama for using recess appointments for two individuals who are so radical they couldn't even be confirmed by a Democratic-controlled Senate.
Since Congress adjourned on Friday (March 26), President Obama has appointed no less than 15 of his languishing nominees. The Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) is concerned about two in particular, including radical professor Chai Feldblum who is to serve as a commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
TVC executive director Andrea Lafferty says Feldblum is way out of the mainstream (see earlier article).
"She has stated that sexual liberty trumps religious liberty, she's opposed the Boy Scouts being able to determine who should be Scout leaders, and she also is the author of ENDA (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act), which is a bill that will force Christians and everybody to have to hire transgendered people," Lafferty explains. In addition, while speaking at a forum in 2004, Feldblum stated that "gay sex is morally good."
Lafferty also notes her outrage that Obama chose during the congressional recess to appoint Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board, which is supposed to be an impartial arbitrator.
"They're supposed to be fair," Lafferty says of the NLRB. "[But] there is nothing moderate about Becker's point of view. He has done nothing but work for union thugs and push unionism all across the country, so it's an outrage that this man was put in a position where he's supposed to be fair and balanced, and it's not possible."
The TVC executive director admits she is somewhat relieved that the recess appointments can only serve without Senate confirmation through the rest of the current session of Congress, which runs through the end of 2010.
Groups Blast Obama's Appointment of Gay Activist
By Nathan Black|Christian Post Reporter
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100331/groups-blast-obama-s-appointment-of-gay-activist/index.html
Conservative and Christian groups are increasingly voicing opposition to President Obama's recent recess appointment of a homosexual activist to his administration.
Chai Feldblum, a lesbian Georgetown University Law Center professor, was appointed over the weekend as commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
"She is way beyond what most Americans would consider mainstream," said Shari Rendall, director of Legislation and Public Policy at Concerned Women for America, in a statement Tuesday.
Feldblum, who was nominated by Obama in September, is the primary author of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which would make it illegal for employers to make decisions on hiring, firing, promoting or paying an employee based on sexual orientation.
Religious employers have argued that they themselves would be discriminated against under ENDA.
Gay rights groups praised the appointment of Feldblum. Opponents, meanwhile, maintain that the openly lesbian professor "would not be impartial in her decision-making process."
"From her own account, Feldblum would have a difficult time ever deciding that religious liberties should trump homosexual rights," said Rendall.
Feldblum has acknowledged the conflict that exists between "laws intended to protect the liberty of LGBT people ... and the religious beliefs of some individuals whose conduct is regulated by such laws."
But in such conflicts, she said society should side with the liberty of LGBT people over the liberty of the religious.
She was willing to make a very limited exception to ENDA, specifically for "enterprises that are engaged in by ... religious belief communities that are specifically designed to inculcate values in the next generation."
"We want to change the American workforce and revolutionize social norms," she said earlier. "Our current public policies undermine the moral and political unit of same-sex couples and families and that's a moral wrong that needs to be rectified."
Feldblum, who has been fighting for LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) rights for the last 20 years and supports polyamory, believes it is only a matter of time before America enters an "era of full LGBT liberty."
Other groups that have publicly denounced the appointment of Feldblum include the Traditional Values Coalition and Family Research Council.
Obama made 15 appointments to his administration over the weekend when Congress began its Easter recess, bypassing the normal confirmation process. Recess appointees serve through the end of the current Congress unless they receive Senate confirmation.
Clinton Blasted for Pushing Abortion in Canada’s G8 Maternal Health Plan
By Patrick B. Craine
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10033108.html
OTTAWA, Ontario, March 31, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Canadian and U.S. pro-life leaders are denouncing U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after she weighed in Tuesday on the debate over the Canadian government's G8 maternal and child health initiative, insisting plainly that abortion is necessary for maternal health.
"You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion," she told reporters when asked about Canada's G8 initiative.
Reacting to Clinton's comments, Mary Ellen Douglas, national organizer for Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), told LifeSiteNews (LSN), “How dare she stick her pro-abortion nose into Canadian politics. Hasn't she done enough damage to the unborn in the U.S.?”
Clinton made the comments at a news conference following a G8 foreign ministers meeting in Gatineau, Quebec. She began her visit in Ottawa on Monday.
"I do not think governments should be involved in making these decisions. It is perfectly legitimate for people to hold their own personal views based on conscience, religion or any other basis," she said. "But I've always believed the government should not intervene in decisions of such intimacy."
Clinton said that maternal health is a “great concern to me and to my government,” noting that the U.S. government is promoting their own global health initiative that promotes access to contraception. “We are also looking for ways to make women’s choices so that they can avoid abortion – more realistic by providing support for them,” she said.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband agreed with Clinton, saying Britain also does not want to exclude abortion. "We think it's very important to have a comprehensive family planning aspect as part of the development strategy," he told CBC.
Conservative MP Brad Trost criticized Clinton for “pok[ing] her nose in areas that are not her business.”
“Canada can make up its own mind on what its policy is on maternal health care and how we define it,” he said. “The Prime Minister has taken the lead in an initiative to help women's health and rather than trying to interfere in Canada's policies by playing up to a domestic American political audience in her own party, she (Clinton) should stick to more fruitful international matters.”
Clinton's remarks have reheated an ongoing debate over abortion and contraception in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's G8 initiative. Two weeks ago the government indicated that the initiative would not include support for contraception or abortion and that it would simply focus on saving lives through basic care such as inoculations, health services, and food and water, but Prime Minister Harper backed down on contraception following pressure from opposition parties. Since then, the government has repeatedly maintained that they have no intention of debating abortion, leaving it unclear whether or not they will support abortion in the plan.
Pressed by reporters last week about abortion funding, Minister of International Cooperation Bev Oda stated, "We are not closing any options . ... We are not ruling out any options.”
Nevertheless, the Canadian Parliament last Tuesday defeated a Liberal motion proposed by MP Bob Rae that demanded the government offer a “full range of reproductive health services” in the Third World initiative. Though backed by the three opposition parties, the motion failed in a vote of 138-144 because 13 Liberals were absent and three – Paul Szabo, Dan McTeague, and John McKay – opposed it.
Trost noted that the motion's defeat can be interpreted as an indication that the Canadian Parliament does not endorse abortion in the plan.
Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, who began pushing abortion in the G8 initiative within days of its January announcement, has praised Clinton's 'admirable' comments and jumped on them as a sign that the Conservatives are out of step with other G8 countries.
"Canada took a knock in the last two days and it shouldn't have. The government should have stood up and been clear and understand what the international consensus on that issue is," Ignatieff said, according to Canwest.
"I just think that a G8 country like Canada should get up and be clear. Hillary Clinton was admirably clear about what the international consensus on maternal health is. It's what we've been saying, it's what G8 countries have been saying," he continued. "That's the position Canada should take and Canadians need to notice that's not the position taken by this government."
According to Marie Smith, director of the U.S.-based Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues, “Secretary Clinton is revealing to the world that a pro-abortion ideology at the highest levels of the US government has hijacked the noble goal of reducing maternal deaths by re-defining maternal health to include access to abortion.”
“Governments which value the lives of unborn children must now view with suspicion US efforts to reduce maternal mortality to ensure that access to abortion is not included in the aid package,” she added. “Maternal health is about saving the lives of mothers. Abortion is a violent act which destroys the life of the child and often injures the mother.
Colin Mason of the U.S.-based Population Research Institute called Clinton's comments “disengenuous.” “She says that she doesn't think that governments should intervene in 'intimate decisions' like abortion, and yet she insists that the same should make a hard commitment to 'legal, safe abortion.' This is because she knows that any government that commits to providing abortion as part of healthcare, is affirming abortion as a legitimate clinical service.”
“Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly demonstrated her attachment to abortion-on-demand, and these remarks do nothing but reflect that commitment,” he added.
According to Campaign Life Coalition National President Jim Hughes, “Hillary Clinton is merely trying to force her own pro-abortion agenda onto the world stage as she attempts to influence G-8 leaders and oppose Canada’s position.”
“To suggest that we offer women in developing countries the death of their child rather than safe health care as Prime Minister Harper has suggested is a morally bankrupt position,” he added.
Commenting on NDP leader Jack Layton's remark that the Conservatives have let ideology get in the way of maternal health, CLC's Mary Ellen Douglas said, “It is clear by Hillary’s remark that it is the pro-abortion ideology which is getting in the way of maternal health.”
CLC called on pro-life supporters to contact the Prime Minister's office and urge him to stay the course and do what is best for maternal health.
Contact Information:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa
K1A 0A2
Fax: 613-941-6900
E-mail: pm@pm.gc.ca
A Political Stimulus, Not A Job Stimulus
by Veronique de Rugy
http://biggovernment.com/vderugy/2010/04/01/a-political-stimulus-not-a-job-stimulus/
I received many emails on Friday and this weekend about the data published here showing that on average Democratic districts are getting almost twice the amount of stimulus money than Republican districts. Republican districts also received smaller awards on average. The average dollars awarded per Republican district is $260,675,663, while the average dollars awarded per Democratic district is $471,533,539.
Several readers asked if the difference could be explained by the fact that Democratic districts have many more people than Republican districts have. So I looked at the numbers and here is the result. It’s not.
Republican districts get $362 per capita on average
Democratic districts get $692 per capita on average
Also, on average, Democratic districts received one-and-a-half times as many awards as Republican ones. Democratic districts also received two-and-a-half times more stimulus dollars than Republican districts ($122 million vs. $46 million). Of course, there are more Democratic districts than Republican districts in the Congress.
Is the politics part of the allocation decision?
Well I checked for the correlation between political indicators and stimulus funding. I found that there are no effect of political variables (leadership, tenure in office …) on stimulus funds allocation with one exception: the district’s party affiliation (whether the district’s representation was Republican or Democratic) does matter.
So how much does party affiliation mattered? While the effect is significant, because of the specifications of the model, more confidence should be placed on the relationship between the two variables then on the quantification of that relationship. In other words, while I am confident that whether the district is represented by R or D matters for funding, I just can’t tell you how much this factor matters compared to the other factors that went into the allocation decision.
On the other hand, I can tell you what factor was not a part of the allocation decision: the level of unemployment in each district or the deterioration of unemployment in each district. In other words, unemployment levels didn’t matter. That’s not what the money was supposed to address. Or was it?
Here is a chart to illustrate this point. As you can see the districts where unemployment increased the most during the recession aren’t receiving more money that the ones that were hit more lightly.
All the data is available for download here. (Ignore the picture)
Five Years Later, Pro-Life Leaders Remember Terri Schiavo's Murder
By Kathleen Gilbert
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10033104.html
PINELLAS PARK, Florida, March 31, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - On the fifth anniversary of the court-ordered death by starvation and dehydration of Terri Schindler Schiavo, Terri’s family, pro-life leaders and anti-euthanasia advocates have united to call attention to the silent abuse of people with disabilities, and the new dangers posed by the recently-passed federal health care reform legislation.
The Christian Defense Coalition, Faith and Action and Generation Life announced they will pray and leave a single rose on the public sidewalk in front of the Pennsylvania Ave. NW side of the White House to commemorate Terri's death. The groups also reminded Americans that President Obama later called it a "mistake" that, as a U.S. Senator, he had supported Congress' decision to try to save Terri from death.
"End of life issues are a deep concern in this new health care legislation," said Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition and one of the leaders who worked to save Terri's life in Florida, in a press release Tuesday.
"Simply put, how can the American public trust the President and his Administration to deal compassionately with end of life issues when he considered it a 'mistake' to have intervened in attempting to keep a young woman from being starved and dehydrated?"
"Nothing arrested the conscience of the nation like Terri's suffering and needless death," said Rev. Rob Schenck, President of Faith and Action. "Now, she continues her ministry by provoking us all to appreciate and value the worth and dignity of brain injury victims."
Generation Life director Brandi Swindell, who engaged in a 14-day hunger strike while Terri was starved, said that, "as a young woman, my heart broke every day outside of Terri's room thinking about the pain and suffering she was experiencing."
"As a nation, we must offer the most needy of our society compassion, dignity and justice. Regrettably, we forced Terri to die the most painful and barbaric of deaths," said Swindell. "My hope is that we have learned valuable lessons from Terri's death and how we treat the disabled. Those lessons must be founded on equality and human rights for all."
Terri's father, Bob Schindler, did not live to see the fifth anniversary of his daughter's death: the family mourned Mr. Schindler's death of heart failure in August. Terri's mother, Mary Schindler, is still living.
Another blow was delivered to Terri's family earlier this month when an episode of FOX's "Family Guy" mocked the death of their loved one in an episode entitled "Terri Schiavo: The Musical." The show depicted Terri hooked up to various life-support systems and declared her a "vegetable," when in reality Terri required nothing more than a feeding tube and was awake and responsive at the time of her death. Bobby Schindler, Terri's brother and founder of the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, said the episode left him "astonished at the producer’s cruel bigotry directed towards my sister and all cognitively disabled people."
"I wish I could say things have changed for the better since my sister’s death or that people with cognitive disabilities are now better protected in response to the horror she had to endure," said Schindler in an article for Townhall.com Wednesday. "Tragically, however, it seems the rights of the brain-injured, elderly and others are still being violated."
While "the 'death panels' Sarah Palin spoke of sounded like bombastic language," he noted, "many hospitals and facilities already have something frighteningly similar." "Ethics committees are making many life and death decisions about patients, including whether to withhold simple provisions," he said. "In a seemingly clandestine way, these ethics committees – comprised of medical and legal professionals – are empowering facilities to make life and death decisions independent of the family or a person’s own wishes.
"The chilling stories we receive make it clear few citizens have any idea how vulnerable they are when it comes to judgments left in the hands of these ethics committees and facilities," he said. "And with the federal government now controlling our health care, there is no reason not to believe that these types of committees won’t become nationalized. Particularly when a health care system has been sabotaged by cost factors and quality of life judgments."
Schindler expressed concern with the health care rationing that now looms on a national scale following passage of the federal health care bill.
"I think it's very easy to see people like my sister in the crosshairs," Schindler told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview Wednesday.
"These types of ethics committees are going to become nationalized ... it seems to me that it comes down to cost," he said. "Look at assisted suicide - think about the cost of handing somebody some pills to kill themselves, compared to the cost of perhaps giving them the availability of prolonging their lives, if they do have some type of terminal illness."
Schindler pointed out the danger of allowing an administration filled with people who "have no regard for the value of life" to dictate the guidelines for health care on a wide scale. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, whose office is granted sweeping new powers and responsibilities in determining health care guidelines by the new health care legislation, is radically pro-abortion.
"The health care reform is going to reflect their values," said Schindler. "If we have an administration that doesn't value life, then how can we expect it to value life when it comes to whether or not they should care for people like my sister?"
Dr. Mark Mostert of the Institute for the Study of Disabilities & Bioethics commemorated Terri's "legalized medical execution" on his blog Tuesday.
"[H]ere we are five years later. Disability groups trash the Schindlers. The President of the United States thinks intervening to help avoid Terri’s execution was a mistake," wrote Mostert. "Now what?
"Here’s what: Never, ever, let Terri’s memory and her martyrdom be forgotten."
Terri's Life and Hope Concert, featuring Randy Travis and Collin Raye, will be held on April 11th in Indianapolis, Indiana. The concert will benefit the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, a non-profit dedicated to helping persons with disabilities, and the incapacitated, who are in or potentially facing life-threatening situations.
Click here for information on Terri's Life and Hope Concert.
Click here to read Fr. Pavone's National Catholic Register column.
Click here to read Bobby Schindler's Townhall.com column.
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Terri Schiavo Mocked on FOX's Family Guy
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10032315.html
Bob Schindler, Father of Terri Schiavo and Tireless Fighter for Disabled Persons Right to Life, Passes Away
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09083112.html
Bobby Schindler’s Letter to Florida Bishop: When Bishops Don’t Do Their Job – Innocent People Die
www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/mar/07032801.html
Terri Schiavo - Denied Rehab, Food, Water, Holy Communion and Now a Christian Burial
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/mar/05032902.html
"The e-mail Bag"
You Might Be A Redneck
Thank you Jeff Foxworthy!
You've ever filled your deer tag on the golf course.
You have ever used lard in bed.
You own more than 3 shirts with cut off sleeves.
You have ever spray-painted your girlfriends name on an overpass.
Your lifetime goal is to own a fireworks stand.
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
'Jesus' Resurrection – Dramatic Testimony
http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/jesus-resurrection.htm
Jesus' Resurrection - Essential to the Christian Faith
Jesus' Resurrection from the dead is as essential to the Christian faith as His death upon the cross. Paul writes in his first letter to the Corinthians "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Paul emphasizes the importance of the Resurrection with his statement "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not" (I Corinthians 15:14-15).
Jesus' Resurrection - An Historical Event?
So, is Jesus' Resurrection from the dead an historical event? It is proclaimed throughout the four Gospels as well as ancient correspondence. If these works are the historical documents they claim to be, then they bare witness to an historical event. According to Aristotle's Dictum, these pieces meet the criteria for legitimate historical documents. However, as they describe miraculous events, they are not recognized by secular society as valid testimony. How then will these accounts be validated? Two questions must be asked. First, do the authors of these literary pieces discredit their work, or do their lives give credit to their testimony? Second, do accepted historical authorities corroborate these accounts?
Jesus' Resurrection - The Disciples' Testimony
The men who believed in Jesus' Resurrection from the dead, known today as Christ's Disciples, certainly had their testimony, as well as their convictions, tested by those who disbelieved. With the exception of John, every one of these men were put to death. These deaths were excruciating and merciless. More so were their lives, as these men were persecuted by the secular world and suffered great hardship for the spreading of their beloved Gospel, which they proclaimed. Paul gives account in his second letter to the Corinthians "Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness." (II Corinthians 11:24-27). Paul was later beheaded after suffering in a Roman dungeon for many years. His death was far less brutal then those of his brethren as he was a Roman citizen and often they were not. These men believed the Lord allowed them to suffer greatly, as there is no better evidence of their sincerity and the truth of their message than their endurance and perseverance without any hope of an earthly reward. Every single one of them could have escaped such torture and humiliation by simply denouncing the Resurrection of Christ. This was the goal of their tormentors. However, not one ceded to their persecutors, and this is dramatic evidence in rebuttal of any conspiracy theory.
Jesus Gave His Life For All Of Us, So All May Be Free From All Sin!
"Daily Motivations"
We are not put on this earth for ourselves, but are placed here for each other. If you are always there for others, then in time of need, someone will be there for you. -- Jeff Warner
"Do not look to the ground for your next step; greatness lies with those who look to the horizon." -- Norwegian Proverb
"Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future." -- Paul Boese
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
Let everyone in the world fear the LORD, and let everyone stand in awe of Him. (Psalm 33:8)
If we could just grasp even a part of the magnificent holiness of God, then the whole earth would shake with people falling to the ground in worship and adoration of Him. Such a view would precipitate a healthy fear of God, which is the necessary starting point.
True knowledge of God's holiness always elicits a worshipful response from us. Moses fell to his face before the burning bush. Isaiah said, "Woe is me!" (Isaiah 6:5). We cannot stand in the presence of God without acknowledging His holiness and seeing our own sin.
Whenever I meditate on the holiness of God, I am impressed with how worthy He is of our worship. I want to become absorbed with His holiness, rather than with His might, His wisdom, or His other magnificent attributes.
As we meditate on God's supreme holiness, we cannot help but be overcome with a sense of awe. Music can help us express our awe for our Lord. Many of the Christian hymns capture the spirit of worship. I encourage you to select one of them, such as "Holy, Holy, Holy", or "Agnus Dei" and begin to worship God right now.
When we concentrate on God's holiness---His moral perfection and absolute purity---the only appropriate response is humble adoration, which is the basis for all worship.
Your View of God Really Matters …
Read Isaiah 6:1-8 then put yourself in Isaiah's place as you hear or sing a song such as "Holy, Holy, Holy", or "Agnus Dei".
"The Patriot Post"
"One hundred and seventy-three despots would surely be as oppressive as one." --James Madison, Federalist No. 48
"If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it be otherwise in a body to which the people send 150 lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing, & talk by the hour? That 150 lawyers should do business together ought not to be expected." --Thomas Jefferson, autobiography, 1821
From the 'Non Compos Mentis' File
"[W]e have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." --House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), confirming that too much Botox can kill brain cells
The BIG Lie
On Monday, Barack Obama declared, "Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill, which reduces most people's premiums."
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) disagreed, albeit indirectly: "Anyone who would stand before you and say, 'Well, if you pass health care reform next year's health care premiums are going down,' I don't think is telling the truth."
See the video. http://patriotpost.us/perspective/2010/03/11/durbin-calls-obama-a-liar/
Regulatory Commissars: Pulling the Corker Out of the Bottle
Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) stunned his Republican colleagues by working with Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT) this week to breathe new life into Democrats' financial "reform" package. Feeling pressure from his right, however, Corker has since pulled out of the deal, which Dodd is now pushing without him.
The House version of the bill, crafted by Massachusetts liberal Barney Frank, was recently considered dead in the Senate, and for good reason. It included a $4 trillion bailout provision for rickety financial institutions that would make TARP the official policy of the federal government. No more bankruptcies, no more survival of the fittest -- both characteristics of a free market. Instead, the government would be allowed to manipulate the markets on the backs of taxpayers. This bill would also create the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA), a massive new federal bureaucracy that would have the power to oversee and ultimately regulate not only financial institutions, but also virtually any organization that deals with consumers.
Corker, a freshman senator with an American Conservative Union rating of 83, should have joined his colleagues in the first place and let the bill die in negotiations. Instead, he worked with Dodd to keep the CFPA alive. His office stated that he doesn't support the bailout provision, but he did in fact vote for the TARP-bank bailout in 2008. Wall Street likes the bailout provision, because it coats big firms with Teflon to keep them from failing under almost any circumstances. It's a good thing that Corker, who has received $3 million in campaign funds from the finance industry since taking office in 2007, reconsidered when he did. Still, he shouldn't have put himself in that position in the first place.
Health Care and Student Loans?
Senate Democrats want to attach a provision to the health care reconciliation bill that would allow the government essentially to take over all student loan lending in the country. Democrats are having enough problems passing health care on its own, and this latest parliamentary trick could shake up the delicate vote balance. The student-lending bill would federalize all higher education lending and would thus cause the loss of tens of thousands of private sector jobs. Senators representing states where those jobs stand to be lost are now wavering on whether they can support health care with this completely unrelated provision attached to it. What a shame.
The student-lending bill doesn't stand much chance of passage on its own. The $67 billion that the White House claims will be saved by the legislation is more than offset by $77 billion in new costs. That figure is a lowball estimate as it doesn't take into account the rate of student loan defaults or accurately figure new spending increases over time. Worst of all, virtually no one in the Senate has seen this bill, and the public isn't aware of the details, let alone the fact that it may become law without much debate.
In related news, according to Roll Call, "The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress' original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package." We'll soon see how Democrats plan to work around this legal obstacle.
New & Notable Legislation
Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) announced a measure that would cut Congress's salary by 5 percent in 2011. It has 21 cosponsors so far, and, if passed, it would save taxpayers $4.7 million. Granted, that's a drop in the bucket considering the deficits we're facing these days, but it would be an important symbolic step for Congress to recognize the economic woes being felt in the private sector. The House voted against an automatic pay raise in 2009 and 2010, but it hasn't taken an actual cut in pay since 1933.
The Senate voted 62-36 Wednesday to extend jobless benefits and temporary business tax breaks. Six Republicans and all but Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska voted for the bill, which will add about $130 billion to the deficit over the next 18 months. The GOP "yes" votes were mostly the usual suspects, Christopher Bond (MO), Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Olympia Snowe (ME), David Vitter (LA) and George Voinovich (OH).
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) proposed an amendment last week to block the White House's arbitrary seizure of over 10 million acres of land in nine Western states. The land was designated as "monuments" under a questionable application of the Antiquities Act of 1906, in order to prevent resources development. DeMint pointed out that during times of economic stress, the government should be freeing up resources for development, not locking them up. Unfortunately, most of his colleagues disagreed. His amendment was defeated 58-38.
Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) introduced the "Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010," which would provide for military, rather than civilian, detention of terrorism suspects. The bill is ostensibly a response to the Christmas Day undi-bomber incident, in which the perpetrator was read his Miranda rights. It permits detentions based on "the potential intelligence value of the individual," or "such other matters as the President considers appropriate." That's a lot of uncomfortable leeway. Furthermore, the military would have the power to detain high-value detainees indefinitely "without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported." Given that Obama's Homeland Security team views right-wingers as threats, one wonders just where this could lead. With "friends" like McCain...
Finally, in a bid to put their big-spending past behind them (or at least make a good campaign statement), the House GOP adopted a unilateral one-year ban on earmarks Thursday. To paraphrase Ben Franklin, that's a good promise ... if you can keep it.
National Security -- On the Warfront With Jihadistan
As the Long War continues, both expected and unexpected targets were picked off by various American and allied forces this week. In Pakistan, Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that Maulana Faqir Mohammed, a top Pakistani Taliban commander, was probably killed last weekend after helicopters hit a building in Pakistan's Mohmand region, killing at least 16 Taliban militants. Although Malik could not confirm Mohammed's death, he was quoted as saying, "We had real-time intelligence that Faqir Mohammad was in a meeting with another commander, Qari Zia-ur-Rehman, in the hideout at the time of the attack." If true, we got two jihadis for the price of one. Meanwhile, the good hunting continued on Wednesday as U.S. missile strikes killed at least 12 militants near Pakistan's Afghan border.
Also this week, Pakistani officials claimed that an American, Adam Gadahn, a 31-year-old who has appeared in al-Qa'ida videos urging jihad against the West, had been captured. U.S. defense officials said they had received no indication of any such arrest, and by Friday, Pakistani officials were backing away from the story. Gadahn, who grew up in Riverside County, California, before converting to Islam at a nearby Orange County mosque is the first American charged with treason since 1952, and the U.S. government is offering $1 million for information leading to his capture.
Finally, on Monday, a Pennsylvania woman named Colleen LaRose, but known to authorities as "Jihad Jane" (not to be confused with Hanoi Jane), was charged in federal court with using the Internet to recruit jihadis to carry out murders and other violent attacks overseas. One of her targets was Lars Vilks, an artist who had exercised his free speech rights by drawing a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad. The indictment alleges that LaRose received orders to murder someone in Sweden, and to do so in such a way that it would frighten "the whole Kufar [non-believer] world." It also states that LaRose agreed to commit the murder, and that her appearance and American citizenship would help her blend in and carry it out.
Profiles of Valor: U.S. Marine Corps 1st Lt. Elliot Ackerman
AckermanOn November 10, 2004, then-2nd Lt. Elliot Ackerman of the United States Marine Corps led a platoon into Fallujah -- at that time, still a hotbed of insurgent activity. The platoon's mission was to establish a foothold from which the battalion would then clear the city. As the Marines pushed into the city, enemy fighters attacked from all sides. Twice in the early fighting, Ackerman risked himself to pull wounded Marines to safety, and then organized their evacuation. As the battle raged, however, the vehicle sent to evacuate the wounded couldn't find their position, so Ackerman again headed into the open and risked what his citation called a "gauntlet of deadly enemy fire" to direct the vehicle to the Marines.
Later in the battle, Ackerman and his team were working to clear a building when he saw some of his Marines exposed on a rooftop. He ordered them down, but took their place to mark targets for American tanks. Under a barrage of enemy fire, he suffered shrapnel wounds in his leg but continued to direct both the attack and four medical evacuations. For his bravery and leadership, Ackerman was awarded the Silver Star. Semper Fi!
Business & Economy -- Income Redistribution: You Paid for It
Executive salaries reach $500,000, hourly fees top $600, and millions of your dollars are propping it all up. Welcome to the underworld of the environmental industry. According to Richard Pollock of Pajamas Media, "environmental activist groups have surreptitiously received at least $37 million from the federal government for questionable 'attorney fees'" related to lawsuits that "had nothing to do with environmental protection or improvement."
Since 2000, nine national environmental groups have filed the astounding number of 3,300 lawsuits, most based on "alleged procedural failings of federal agencies" rather than "substance or science." Not only has Uncle Sam doled out the millions, but Washington has "neither tracked nor accounted for" any of the outgo. Wyoming attorney Karen Budd-Falen, who helped uncover the fraud, says the $37 million is just the "tip of the iceberg," estimating the actual number is in the hundreds of millions.
Interestingly, according to the Washington Examiner, compensation for the top 10 paid environmental executives ranges from $308,000 to $496,000. Pajamas Media notes that of the $3.4 million that environmental PACs have given in federal campaign contributions since 2000, approximately 87 percent was to Democrats. Coincidence? We think not.
Eco-activists aren't the only ones greening themselves with your money. It seems Wake Forest University is using a $71,623 federal "we must rescue the economy now" stimu-less grant to study the effects of cocaine on a specific neurotransmitter in addicted monkeys. The economic benefit? Apparently a job "saved." For the record, we believe taxpayer dollars already fund too much monkey business in Washington; there's certainly no need to fund it anywhere else.
Administration Delays Oil Drilling
In 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama risked the ire of his leftist comrades when he championed offshore drilling as an opportunity to free America from dependence on foreign oil; he shrewdly hedged his bets in order to lure centrists and other undecideds into his camp. However, as with so many other issues, Obama's campaign promises are proving worthless.
Despite the fact that Americans favor offshore drilling by a 2 to 1 margin, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar has used every tool in his bureaucratic box to hinder it, including extending the public comment period before beginning the drilling program, voiding existing contracts for onshore drilling in Utah and announcing the delay of the offshore program until 2012. This program would have created 1.2 million real jobs per year and not doing it will cost the U.S. $2.36 trillion over the next 20 years. Surprise! Economic recovery is not the real agenda of this administration.
Judicial Benchmarks: 9th Circuit Approves of Pledge
"A federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is constitutional," reports the Associated Press. Atheist Michael Newdow had filed suit in 2004, claiming his daughter shouldn't be required to say the Pledge at school. However, his daughter and her mother, from whom Newdow is separated, are Christians who don't object to the Pledge, and the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the case saying Newdow didn't have standing. He refiled on behalf of other parents, but, in a 2-1 ruling, a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected his argument that the phrase "under God" violates the separation of church and state. Yes, the Ninth Circuit. Amazing, isn't it?
This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award
"I guess what we all underestimated was the degree, the depths of dishonesty, and dirtiness, and cynicism to which the climate change denial movement would be willing to stoop to advance their agenda." --Michael Mann, author of the dirty, dishonest and cynical "hockey stick" graph showing a recent spike in warming
Second Amendment: Guns For Dummies
Federal authorities at the ATF recently intercepted a large shipment of rifles labeled "toys" in Tacoma, Washington, that it claimed "could have had far-reaching and potentially devastating ramifications if they had gotten into the hands of individuals who wanted to do harm in the American population." Could the weapons seizure have prevented a shooting rampage across the nation? Perhaps -- except for one problem. The guns actually were toys.
Apparently, the ATF thought there was no limit to the widespread damage these mostly plastic Airsoft BB guns could have inflicted upon hapless Americans. The lightweight plastic BB ordnance fired by such heavy artillery may actually sting or leave welts on bare skin if fired at close range. Undeterred by such an obvious blunder, the agency justified its seizure by declaring the toy BB guns could be converted into real, fully automatic machine guns -- which is true, if virtually all of the toy's parts were replaced with real machine gun parts from a real weapon. The same holds true for any other toy being converted to the real thing from scratch, like toy pickups or spaceships. The old adage never to attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity continues to be true, especially when it comes to bureaucratic bungling. Perhaps in the future, the ATF could refer to Guns for Dummies to help them identify real weaponry.
To Keep and Bear Arms
A burglar had the surprise of his life when he broke into a soon-to-be Marine's home in Delhi Township, Ohio. In the middle of the night, Kevin Boyle noticed that his door had been opened and quickly confronted the suspect. After warning him not to move, Boyle noticed him pull out what appeared to be a gun and raise it towards him. Fortunately, he had his own .45 caliber handgun ready.
Boyle fired two shots at the suspect and ran to get behind the corner wall for protection. He immediately called the police for help. The suspect took off to escape in the woods. It appears a car was waiting to pick him up. He remains on the run, and there is no evidence that he was struck by the bullets.
"I'm glad no one got hurt, including him. He probably thought he could get in for a quick little burglary and luckily I was ready to keep myself safe," said Boyle, who is two months away from leaving for Marine training camp. We'd call that successful early training.
"Liberty Counsel"
Liberty Alert
April 1, 2010
Homeland Security Raid of Religious Tracts Violates Fourth Amendment
www.LC.org
Yesterday a federal district court in Dallas, Texas ruled http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/opinion_rundus_033010.pdf that agents of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) illegally conspired to violate the Fourth Amendment rights of Darrel Rundus when they confiscated his "Million Dollar Bill" gospel tracts.
The judge ruled that DHS violated the Fourth Amendment guarantee against unlawful search and seizure. The ruling contains harsh language against the DHS agents, stating their behavior was inappropriate and they illegally conspired to violate the rights of Rundus.
Liberty Counsel represents Rundus and his Christian ministry, Great News Network (GNC). In June 2006, DHS agents entered GNN’s office without a warrant or permission, and threatened an employee with arrest to pressure him into giving up the gospel tracts, which the agents referred to as "contraband."
The front of the tract has markings similar to paper currency, but no one would ever get the tracts confused with real money. The front is printed with: "This bill is not legal tender," "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Department of Eternal Affairs." The back has statements such as, "The million dollar question: Will you go to Heaven?" The tract then contains the story of salvation written around all four sides. Rundus says that the tracts are extremely effective in sharing his faith with others.
We are grateful to God for this tremendous victory. All of us at Liberty Counsel want to continue to help people like Darrel Rundus reach others with the gospel. We do not charge for our services, but rely on your faithful donations.
Read the Court Opinion in this case. http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/opinion_rundus_033010.pdf
Read our News Release for more details. http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14100&PRID=922
"The Web"
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA): Guam could 'tip over and capsize'
http://dailyradar.com/beltwayblips/video/youtube-3-25-2010-hank-johnson-guam-tip-over-wmv/
Poll: Almost Two-Thirds of U.S. Oppose Health Law
By: Dan Weil
http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Poll-Two-Thirds-Oppose-Health-Law/2010/03/31/id/354336
Almost two-thirds of Americans believe the new healthcare law is too expensive and gives too much authority to the government for healthcare, according to a USA Today/Gallup Poll.
That could be bad news for Democrats in November’s congressional elections.
Supporters "are not only going to have to focus on implementing this kind of major reform," Robert Blendon, a Harvard professor of health policy and political analysis, told the paper.
"They're going to have to spend substantial time convincing people of the concrete benefits of this legislation."
Poll respondents are worried that the reform package will cost them more while lessening their quality of care.
Even President Obama has acknowledged problems on the cost front. "We are still going to have adjustments that have to be made to further reduce costs," he said Tuesday on NBC’s Today,
To some extent, poll respondents have contradictory views of the new legislation. A plurality believes the law will generally improve healthcare coverage and the overall health of Americans.
But 65 percent say the government’s role in healthcare is being expanded too far, 64 percent say the program will cost the government too much, 58 percent say it doesn’t do enough to brake rising costs and 51 percent say it doesn’t do enough to regulate the healthcare industry.
Half of respondents in the March 26-28 poll say the law is “a bad thing,” while 47 percent view it as “a good thing.”
That’s a shift from a poll March 22 — one day after the House approved the legislation — in which supporters outnumbered opponents 49 to 40 percent.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted March 23-26 produced mixed results for Democrats.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s approval rating dropped to 29 percent from 35 percent in January.
But approval of Obama’s handling of healthcare reform rose to 48 percent from 43 percent.
Obama's radical recess appointments
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=957272
A grassroots non-denominational church lobby is blasting President Barack Obama for using recess appointments for two individuals who are so radical they couldn't even be confirmed by a Democratic-controlled Senate.
Since Congress adjourned on Friday (March 26), President Obama has appointed no less than 15 of his languishing nominees. The Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) is concerned about two in particular, including radical professor Chai Feldblum who is to serve as a commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
TVC executive director Andrea Lafferty says Feldblum is way out of the mainstream (see earlier article).
"She has stated that sexual liberty trumps religious liberty, she's opposed the Boy Scouts being able to determine who should be Scout leaders, and she also is the author of ENDA (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act), which is a bill that will force Christians and everybody to have to hire transgendered people," Lafferty explains. In addition, while speaking at a forum in 2004, Feldblum stated that "gay sex is morally good."
Lafferty also notes her outrage that Obama chose during the congressional recess to appoint Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board, which is supposed to be an impartial arbitrator.
"They're supposed to be fair," Lafferty says of the NLRB. "[But] there is nothing moderate about Becker's point of view. He has done nothing but work for union thugs and push unionism all across the country, so it's an outrage that this man was put in a position where he's supposed to be fair and balanced, and it's not possible."
The TVC executive director admits she is somewhat relieved that the recess appointments can only serve without Senate confirmation through the rest of the current session of Congress, which runs through the end of 2010.
Groups Blast Obama's Appointment of Gay Activist
By Nathan Black|Christian Post Reporter
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100331/groups-blast-obama-s-appointment-of-gay-activist/index.html
Conservative and Christian groups are increasingly voicing opposition to President Obama's recent recess appointment of a homosexual activist to his administration.
Chai Feldblum, a lesbian Georgetown University Law Center professor, was appointed over the weekend as commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
"She is way beyond what most Americans would consider mainstream," said Shari Rendall, director of Legislation and Public Policy at Concerned Women for America, in a statement Tuesday.
Feldblum, who was nominated by Obama in September, is the primary author of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which would make it illegal for employers to make decisions on hiring, firing, promoting or paying an employee based on sexual orientation.
Religious employers have argued that they themselves would be discriminated against under ENDA.
Gay rights groups praised the appointment of Feldblum. Opponents, meanwhile, maintain that the openly lesbian professor "would not be impartial in her decision-making process."
"From her own account, Feldblum would have a difficult time ever deciding that religious liberties should trump homosexual rights," said Rendall.
Feldblum has acknowledged the conflict that exists between "laws intended to protect the liberty of LGBT people ... and the religious beliefs of some individuals whose conduct is regulated by such laws."
But in such conflicts, she said society should side with the liberty of LGBT people over the liberty of the religious.
She was willing to make a very limited exception to ENDA, specifically for "enterprises that are engaged in by ... religious belief communities that are specifically designed to inculcate values in the next generation."
"We want to change the American workforce and revolutionize social norms," she said earlier. "Our current public policies undermine the moral and political unit of same-sex couples and families and that's a moral wrong that needs to be rectified."
Feldblum, who has been fighting for LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) rights for the last 20 years and supports polyamory, believes it is only a matter of time before America enters an "era of full LGBT liberty."
Other groups that have publicly denounced the appointment of Feldblum include the Traditional Values Coalition and Family Research Council.
Obama made 15 appointments to his administration over the weekend when Congress began its Easter recess, bypassing the normal confirmation process. Recess appointees serve through the end of the current Congress unless they receive Senate confirmation.
Clinton Blasted for Pushing Abortion in Canada’s G8 Maternal Health Plan
By Patrick B. Craine
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10033108.html
OTTAWA, Ontario, March 31, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Canadian and U.S. pro-life leaders are denouncing U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after she weighed in Tuesday on the debate over the Canadian government's G8 maternal and child health initiative, insisting plainly that abortion is necessary for maternal health.
"You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion," she told reporters when asked about Canada's G8 initiative.
Reacting to Clinton's comments, Mary Ellen Douglas, national organizer for Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), told LifeSiteNews (LSN), “How dare she stick her pro-abortion nose into Canadian politics. Hasn't she done enough damage to the unborn in the U.S.?”
Clinton made the comments at a news conference following a G8 foreign ministers meeting in Gatineau, Quebec. She began her visit in Ottawa on Monday.
"I do not think governments should be involved in making these decisions. It is perfectly legitimate for people to hold their own personal views based on conscience, religion or any other basis," she said. "But I've always believed the government should not intervene in decisions of such intimacy."
Clinton said that maternal health is a “great concern to me and to my government,” noting that the U.S. government is promoting their own global health initiative that promotes access to contraception. “We are also looking for ways to make women’s choices so that they can avoid abortion – more realistic by providing support for them,” she said.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband agreed with Clinton, saying Britain also does not want to exclude abortion. "We think it's very important to have a comprehensive family planning aspect as part of the development strategy," he told CBC.
Conservative MP Brad Trost criticized Clinton for “pok[ing] her nose in areas that are not her business.”
“Canada can make up its own mind on what its policy is on maternal health care and how we define it,” he said. “The Prime Minister has taken the lead in an initiative to help women's health and rather than trying to interfere in Canada's policies by playing up to a domestic American political audience in her own party, she (Clinton) should stick to more fruitful international matters.”
Clinton's remarks have reheated an ongoing debate over abortion and contraception in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's G8 initiative. Two weeks ago the government indicated that the initiative would not include support for contraception or abortion and that it would simply focus on saving lives through basic care such as inoculations, health services, and food and water, but Prime Minister Harper backed down on contraception following pressure from opposition parties. Since then, the government has repeatedly maintained that they have no intention of debating abortion, leaving it unclear whether or not they will support abortion in the plan.
Pressed by reporters last week about abortion funding, Minister of International Cooperation Bev Oda stated, "We are not closing any options . ... We are not ruling out any options.”
Nevertheless, the Canadian Parliament last Tuesday defeated a Liberal motion proposed by MP Bob Rae that demanded the government offer a “full range of reproductive health services” in the Third World initiative. Though backed by the three opposition parties, the motion failed in a vote of 138-144 because 13 Liberals were absent and three – Paul Szabo, Dan McTeague, and John McKay – opposed it.
Trost noted that the motion's defeat can be interpreted as an indication that the Canadian Parliament does not endorse abortion in the plan.
Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, who began pushing abortion in the G8 initiative within days of its January announcement, has praised Clinton's 'admirable' comments and jumped on them as a sign that the Conservatives are out of step with other G8 countries.
"Canada took a knock in the last two days and it shouldn't have. The government should have stood up and been clear and understand what the international consensus on that issue is," Ignatieff said, according to Canwest.
"I just think that a G8 country like Canada should get up and be clear. Hillary Clinton was admirably clear about what the international consensus on maternal health is. It's what we've been saying, it's what G8 countries have been saying," he continued. "That's the position Canada should take and Canadians need to notice that's not the position taken by this government."
According to Marie Smith, director of the U.S.-based Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues, “Secretary Clinton is revealing to the world that a pro-abortion ideology at the highest levels of the US government has hijacked the noble goal of reducing maternal deaths by re-defining maternal health to include access to abortion.”
“Governments which value the lives of unborn children must now view with suspicion US efforts to reduce maternal mortality to ensure that access to abortion is not included in the aid package,” she added. “Maternal health is about saving the lives of mothers. Abortion is a violent act which destroys the life of the child and often injures the mother.
Colin Mason of the U.S.-based Population Research Institute called Clinton's comments “disengenuous.” “She says that she doesn't think that governments should intervene in 'intimate decisions' like abortion, and yet she insists that the same should make a hard commitment to 'legal, safe abortion.' This is because she knows that any government that commits to providing abortion as part of healthcare, is affirming abortion as a legitimate clinical service.”
“Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly demonstrated her attachment to abortion-on-demand, and these remarks do nothing but reflect that commitment,” he added.
According to Campaign Life Coalition National President Jim Hughes, “Hillary Clinton is merely trying to force her own pro-abortion agenda onto the world stage as she attempts to influence G-8 leaders and oppose Canada’s position.”
“To suggest that we offer women in developing countries the death of their child rather than safe health care as Prime Minister Harper has suggested is a morally bankrupt position,” he added.
Commenting on NDP leader Jack Layton's remark that the Conservatives have let ideology get in the way of maternal health, CLC's Mary Ellen Douglas said, “It is clear by Hillary’s remark that it is the pro-abortion ideology which is getting in the way of maternal health.”
CLC called on pro-life supporters to contact the Prime Minister's office and urge him to stay the course and do what is best for maternal health.
Contact Information:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa
K1A 0A2
Fax: 613-941-6900
E-mail: pm@pm.gc.ca
A Political Stimulus, Not A Job Stimulus
by Veronique de Rugy
http://biggovernment.com/vderugy/2010/04/01/a-political-stimulus-not-a-job-stimulus/
I received many emails on Friday and this weekend about the data published here showing that on average Democratic districts are getting almost twice the amount of stimulus money than Republican districts. Republican districts also received smaller awards on average. The average dollars awarded per Republican district is $260,675,663, while the average dollars awarded per Democratic district is $471,533,539.
Several readers asked if the difference could be explained by the fact that Democratic districts have many more people than Republican districts have. So I looked at the numbers and here is the result. It’s not.
Republican districts get $362 per capita on average
Democratic districts get $692 per capita on average
Also, on average, Democratic districts received one-and-a-half times as many awards as Republican ones. Democratic districts also received two-and-a-half times more stimulus dollars than Republican districts ($122 million vs. $46 million). Of course, there are more Democratic districts than Republican districts in the Congress.
Is the politics part of the allocation decision?
Well I checked for the correlation between political indicators and stimulus funding. I found that there are no effect of political variables (leadership, tenure in office …) on stimulus funds allocation with one exception: the district’s party affiliation (whether the district’s representation was Republican or Democratic) does matter.
So how much does party affiliation mattered? While the effect is significant, because of the specifications of the model, more confidence should be placed on the relationship between the two variables then on the quantification of that relationship. In other words, while I am confident that whether the district is represented by R or D matters for funding, I just can’t tell you how much this factor matters compared to the other factors that went into the allocation decision.
On the other hand, I can tell you what factor was not a part of the allocation decision: the level of unemployment in each district or the deterioration of unemployment in each district. In other words, unemployment levels didn’t matter. That’s not what the money was supposed to address. Or was it?
Here is a chart to illustrate this point. As you can see the districts where unemployment increased the most during the recession aren’t receiving more money that the ones that were hit more lightly.
All the data is available for download here. (Ignore the picture)
Five Years Later, Pro-Life Leaders Remember Terri Schiavo's Murder
By Kathleen Gilbert
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10033104.html
PINELLAS PARK, Florida, March 31, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - On the fifth anniversary of the court-ordered death by starvation and dehydration of Terri Schindler Schiavo, Terri’s family, pro-life leaders and anti-euthanasia advocates have united to call attention to the silent abuse of people with disabilities, and the new dangers posed by the recently-passed federal health care reform legislation.
The Christian Defense Coalition, Faith and Action and Generation Life announced they will pray and leave a single rose on the public sidewalk in front of the Pennsylvania Ave. NW side of the White House to commemorate Terri's death. The groups also reminded Americans that President Obama later called it a "mistake" that, as a U.S. Senator, he had supported Congress' decision to try to save Terri from death.
"End of life issues are a deep concern in this new health care legislation," said Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition and one of the leaders who worked to save Terri's life in Florida, in a press release Tuesday.
"Simply put, how can the American public trust the President and his Administration to deal compassionately with end of life issues when he considered it a 'mistake' to have intervened in attempting to keep a young woman from being starved and dehydrated?"
"Nothing arrested the conscience of the nation like Terri's suffering and needless death," said Rev. Rob Schenck, President of Faith and Action. "Now, she continues her ministry by provoking us all to appreciate and value the worth and dignity of brain injury victims."
Generation Life director Brandi Swindell, who engaged in a 14-day hunger strike while Terri was starved, said that, "as a young woman, my heart broke every day outside of Terri's room thinking about the pain and suffering she was experiencing."
"As a nation, we must offer the most needy of our society compassion, dignity and justice. Regrettably, we forced Terri to die the most painful and barbaric of deaths," said Swindell. "My hope is that we have learned valuable lessons from Terri's death and how we treat the disabled. Those lessons must be founded on equality and human rights for all."
Terri's father, Bob Schindler, did not live to see the fifth anniversary of his daughter's death: the family mourned Mr. Schindler's death of heart failure in August. Terri's mother, Mary Schindler, is still living.
Another blow was delivered to Terri's family earlier this month when an episode of FOX's "Family Guy" mocked the death of their loved one in an episode entitled "Terri Schiavo: The Musical." The show depicted Terri hooked up to various life-support systems and declared her a "vegetable," when in reality Terri required nothing more than a feeding tube and was awake and responsive at the time of her death. Bobby Schindler, Terri's brother and founder of the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, said the episode left him "astonished at the producer’s cruel bigotry directed towards my sister and all cognitively disabled people."
"I wish I could say things have changed for the better since my sister’s death or that people with cognitive disabilities are now better protected in response to the horror she had to endure," said Schindler in an article for Townhall.com Wednesday. "Tragically, however, it seems the rights of the brain-injured, elderly and others are still being violated."
While "the 'death panels' Sarah Palin spoke of sounded like bombastic language," he noted, "many hospitals and facilities already have something frighteningly similar." "Ethics committees are making many life and death decisions about patients, including whether to withhold simple provisions," he said. "In a seemingly clandestine way, these ethics committees – comprised of medical and legal professionals – are empowering facilities to make life and death decisions independent of the family or a person’s own wishes.
"The chilling stories we receive make it clear few citizens have any idea how vulnerable they are when it comes to judgments left in the hands of these ethics committees and facilities," he said. "And with the federal government now controlling our health care, there is no reason not to believe that these types of committees won’t become nationalized. Particularly when a health care system has been sabotaged by cost factors and quality of life judgments."
Schindler expressed concern with the health care rationing that now looms on a national scale following passage of the federal health care bill.
"I think it's very easy to see people like my sister in the crosshairs," Schindler told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview Wednesday.
"These types of ethics committees are going to become nationalized ... it seems to me that it comes down to cost," he said. "Look at assisted suicide - think about the cost of handing somebody some pills to kill themselves, compared to the cost of perhaps giving them the availability of prolonging their lives, if they do have some type of terminal illness."
Schindler pointed out the danger of allowing an administration filled with people who "have no regard for the value of life" to dictate the guidelines for health care on a wide scale. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, whose office is granted sweeping new powers and responsibilities in determining health care guidelines by the new health care legislation, is radically pro-abortion.
"The health care reform is going to reflect their values," said Schindler. "If we have an administration that doesn't value life, then how can we expect it to value life when it comes to whether or not they should care for people like my sister?"
Dr. Mark Mostert of the Institute for the Study of Disabilities & Bioethics commemorated Terri's "legalized medical execution" on his blog Tuesday.
"[H]ere we are five years later. Disability groups trash the Schindlers. The President of the United States thinks intervening to help avoid Terri’s execution was a mistake," wrote Mostert. "Now what?
"Here’s what: Never, ever, let Terri’s memory and her martyrdom be forgotten."
Terri's Life and Hope Concert, featuring Randy Travis and Collin Raye, will be held on April 11th in Indianapolis, Indiana. The concert will benefit the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, a non-profit dedicated to helping persons with disabilities, and the incapacitated, who are in or potentially facing life-threatening situations.
Click here for information on Terri's Life and Hope Concert.
Click here to read Fr. Pavone's National Catholic Register column.
Click here to read Bobby Schindler's Townhall.com column.
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Terri Schiavo Mocked on FOX's Family Guy
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10032315.html
Bob Schindler, Father of Terri Schiavo and Tireless Fighter for Disabled Persons Right to Life, Passes Away
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09083112.html
Bobby Schindler’s Letter to Florida Bishop: When Bishops Don’t Do Their Job – Innocent People Die
www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/mar/07032801.html
Terri Schiavo - Denied Rehab, Food, Water, Holy Communion and Now a Christian Burial
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/mar/05032902.html
"The e-mail Bag"
You Might Be A Redneck
Thank you Jeff Foxworthy!
You've ever filled your deer tag on the golf course.
You have ever used lard in bed.
You own more than 3 shirts with cut off sleeves.
You have ever spray-painted your girlfriends name on an overpass.
Your lifetime goal is to own a fireworks stand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)