Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
You never know when one kind act, or one word of encouragement, can change a life forever. -- Zig Ziglar
"The act of putting pen to paper encourages pause for thought, this in turn makes us think more deeply about life, which helps us regain our equilibrium." -- Norbet Platt
"Great men are they who see that spiritual thought is stronger than any material force, that thoughts rule the world." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
Do not be afraid or discouraged. For the LORD your God is with you wherever you go. (Joshua 1:9)
Are you discouraged? God tells us not to be. God will help you conquer every discouragement! And when you come through the valleys of discouragement, you will find that God was there all the time. He was waiting patiently for you to exhaust your means and energy and turn to Him for His help. What a tremendous encouragement!
Are you lonely? Some of our most lonely moments can be when we are in a crowd, and yet no one notices us. Our heart aches when we think no one cares. But Jesus is our ever-present friend. He promises, "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you" (Hebrews 13:5, NIV).
He is also with us as we face lonely tasks. When David Livingstone sailed to Africa for the first time as a missionary, a group of his friends accompanied him to the pier to wish him bon voyage. They were concerned for his safety and reminded him of the dangers. One man even tried to convince him to remain in England. But Livingstone opened his Bible and read Jesus' words from Matthew 28:20: "Lo, I am with you always." He turned to the man and smiled. "That, my friend, is the word of a gentleman...So let us be going."
No person or circumstance can ever remove us from the presence of our loving God. Paul writes, "I am convinced that nothing can ever separate us from His love." (Romans 8:38).
He is here with us right now and forever---because He is our ever-present God. He is our guide for life and for eternity. What an incredible truth!
Your View of God Really Matters …
Are you discouraged or lonely? Read Romans 8:38-39. Thank God for his constant love and presence in the midst of your pain. Then, as soon as you are able, share this truth with someone else in need of encouragement.
"The Patriot Post"
"The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex." -- James Madison, Federalist No. 48
"But they have two other Rights; those of sitting when they please, and as long as they please, in which methinks they have the advantage of your Parliament; for they cannot be dissolved by the Breath of a Minister, or sent packing as you were the other day, when it was your earnest desire to have remained longer together." -- Benjamin Franklin, letter to William Strahan, 1784
When Debating a Liberal, Start With First Principles
By Mark Alexander, Publisher, PatriotPost.US
"On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." --Thomas Jefferson
There are only two rules you need to know when debating a liberal.
Rule Number One: You must define the debate in terms of First Principles, which is to say, you must be able to articulate those principles. (Read Essential Liberty for more.)
Conservatives subscribe to the fundamental doctrine of Essential Liberty as enumerated by our Founders in the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. We understand that individual responsibility is the foundation of a free society. We advocate for the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary. We promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values.
In short, conservatives endeavor to conserve Rule of Law as our guiding principle, and any legitimate policy debate must start there.
Liberals, on the other hand, subscribe to principles du jour; whatever solution feels best for the day's most popular, fashionable, or prominent cause célèbre.
In short, they believe that the feel-good solution (a.k..a. "rule of man") supersedes Rule of Law.
For the most part, today's liberals are a case study in hypocrisy, the antithesis of the once noble Democrat Party, the party of Thomas Jefferson.
Liberals speak of unity, but they incessantly foment disunity, appealing to the worst in human nature by dividing Americans into constituent dependencies. They speak of freedom of thought -- except when your thought doesn't comport with theirs. They assert First Amendment rights -- except when it comes to religion or speech that doesn't agree with theirs. They promote tolerance -- except while practicing intolerance and seeking to silence dissenters.
Liberals deride moral clarity because they can't survive its scrutiny. They protest for the preservation of natural order while advocating homosexuality. They denounce capital punishment for the most heinous of criminals while ardently supporting the killing of the most helpless and innocent among us -- the unborn, the infirm and the aged.
Liberals loathe individual responsibility and advocate statism. They eschew private initiative and enterprise while promoting all manner of government control and regulation.
Now, I'm not suggesting that everything liberals believe or support is wrong, but their underlying philosophical doctrine surely undermines our "unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," as established by "the laws of nature and nature's God."
As Ronald Reagan observed, "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
Thus, don't be snookered into defending or denouncing the merits of any issue as framed in liberal terms. Such deliberations are rarely resolved and tend to end in gridlock, or worse, deadlock. (If congressional Republicans really want to end gridlock, they too need to control the debate in terms of First Principles.)
One means of taking control of a debate is to inquire whether an opponent has ever taken an oath to "support and defend" our Constitution. (If you have not, or wish to reaffirm your oath, then we invite you to do so by registering with The Essential Liberty Project.
If your opponent answers "yes," then inquire as to which constitution -- the one upon which our nation was founded, or the so-called "living constitution" adulterated by generations of legislative and judicial diktat.
Of course, you must be prepared to explain the difference -- to explain that only one of these constitutions exists in written form, while the other is a mere fabrication. This can be best accomplished by presenting your copy of the Essential Liberty Guide.
Another means of framing the debate is to ask your opponent to articulate the difference between constitutional Rule of Law and the rule of men. Again, you must be prepared to explain the difference.
You may also start by asking your opponent what "liberal" means. Most liberals will define "liberal" in terms of the issues they support, so ask your opponent if those issues comport with our Constitution.
Once you've framed the debate in terms of First Principles, give your liberal opponent a recess, and a copy of the Essential Liberty Guide.
Principled liberals (admittedly an oxymoron) will remain satisfied that what they feel is equivalent to, or even supersedes, Rule of Law. These poor souls are on their way to becoming über liberals, or Leftists, and are probably beyond any logical redemption.
But if you use your Essential Liberty Guide as an education tool rather than a hammer, some liberals may actually start to come around, and this conversion should be your primary objective.
Further, if confronted by your opponent with a challenge to provide a constitutional defense for some Republican legislation, don't bite. Most Republican legislation, though it may be more in line with our Constitution, rarely comports with the plain language of Rule of Law. Don't let your opponent frame you as a hypocrite. Remember: You are, first and foremost, a constitutional conservative, not a tool of any political party.
Alas, selective interpretation of our Constitution has expanded its meaning beyond any semblance of its original intent, and it will take time and discipline to contract its meaning through due process to restore its original intent.
Finally...
Rule Number Two: You must distinguish between liberals and Leftists. The former subscribe to a plethora of contemporaneous solutions, while the latter are bona fide "useful idiots," those Western apologists for socialist political and economic agendas that terminate with the institution of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist collectivism masquerading as regulation and taxation.
When it comes to debating Leftists, the outcome is utterly dependent on who has superior firepower.
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
"The Web"
No Treats From Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XivhwO_zWWg
Jesus and the Folded Napkin (email) Examined
By Jeff Kluttz
http://www.returningking.com/?p=78
Many of us have received an email concerning Jesus’ folding of his napkin upon his resurrection. As a pastor, I’ve received it dozens of times, myself. At first, I – like many people- found the story fascinating and was actually moved at the thought of it. But, a bit of internet wisdom compelled me to investigate further.
The Email
The email heading asks this question, “Why Did Jesus Fold the Napkin?” And, the answer (with some variations, of course) is contained in the text below, a condensed version of the original email, usually beginning with: “I’VE NEVER HEARD OF THIS!!!”
Why did Jesus fold the linen burial cloth after His resurrection? I never
noticed this… .
The Gospel of John (20:7) tells us that the napkin, which was placed over
the face of Jesus, was not just thrown aside like the grave clothes.
The Bible takes an entire verse to tell us that the napkin was neatly folded, and was placed at the head of that stony coffin.
Early Sunday morning, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the
tomb and found that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance.
She ran and found Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus
loved. She said, ‘They have taken the Lord’s body out of the tomb, and I don’t know where they have put him!’
Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb to see.. The other disciple
outran Peter and got there first. He stooped and looked in and saw the linen cloth lying there, but he didn’t go in.
Then Simon Peter arrived and went inside. He also noticed the linen
wrappings lying there, while the cloth that had covered Jesus’ head was folded up and lying to the side.
Was that important? Absolutely!
Is it really significant? Yes!
In order to understand the significance of the folded napkin, you have to
understand a little bit about Hebrew tradition of that day. The folded
napkin had to do with the Master and Servant, and every Jewish boy knew this
tradition.
When the servant set the dinner table for the master, he made sure that it was exactly the way the master wanted it.
The table was furnished perfectly, and then the servant would wait, just
out of sight, until the master had finished eating, and the servant would not dare touch that table, until the master was finished.
Now if the master were done eating, he would rise from the table, wipe
his fingers, his mouth, and clean his beard, and would wad up that
napkin and toss it onto the table.
The servant would then know to clear the table. For in those days, the wadded napkin meant, ‘I’m done’.
But if the master got up from the table, and folded his napkin, and laid
it beside his plate, the servant would not dare touch the table,
because……….
The folded napkin meant, ‘I’m coming back!’
A Magdalene of Our Times
Written by Gary Isbell
http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/articles/a-magdalene-of-our-times.html
Eve Lavallière, the stage name of Eugénie Fenoglio, was born in Toulon, France, on April 1, 1866. The second child and only daughter of Emile and Albanie Fenoglio, she later described her painful youth. “As a child, I knew not what the love and care of a mother was. My life was tears and suffering from the time I reached the age of reason.” Her father, a tailor, alcoholic and libertine, often gave himself over to jealous brooding and fits of rage. Her mother often had to flee with the children, seeking refuge in relatives’ homes, until her husband had calmed down. This continued until one day, he shot and killed his wife, pointed the pistol at his daughter but did not shoot, and then shot himself.
Eve Lavallière
Eve lived a life of privation and suffering until entering a theater company. Her beauty, voice and poise took her to the best theaters in Paris. She became the foremost actress in France and the idol of the multitudes. The entire world viewed her coiffures and clothing as models and ran after perfumes, soaps and cosmetics “à la Lavallière.”
King Carlos of Portugal, King Leopold II of Belgium, King Edward VII of England, Henry of Bavaria, diplomats, magnates, and princes all came to hear and applaud her. Dazzled by glory, she threw herself “into the vast sea of sin.
“Gold ran through my hands,” Eve confessed. “I had everything the world could offer, everything I could desire. Nevertheless, I regarded myself the unhappiest of souls.” Despite living in a rich palace in Paris, surrounded by luxury, with a carriage and even an automobile—then very rare—at her disposal, she felt tortured by remorse. More than once she attempted suicide, even once after a magnificent performance in London.
On Her Way to Damascus
In June 1917, Eve wanted to rest far from the world’s agitation to prepare the repertoire of songs and pieces she was to perform in the United States. So she rented the palace of Porcherie in Chanceux, near Tours. She retired there with Leonia, a young Belgian refugee she had met in Paris in 1915 and who accompanied her as a lifelong confidante. The trustee of this palace was the parish priest, Father Chasteigner, a simple, austere and pious man, genuinely solicitous for his parishioners’ souls.
The day following Eve’s arrival was a Sunday. Father Chasteigner, noting her absence from Mass, called upon her to express his concern. Eve promised him she would not miss Mass again, and on the following Sunday, when the good pastor preached on the great converted sinners, she attended the Mass with a frivolous attitude.
Eve Lavallière dressed for stage.
Returning to the palace that afternoon, the pastor commented to Eve, “What a pity that you have no faith!”
“But what is faith?” replied Eve, in the tone of one who has permanently lost it.
She then told him of her experiences with spiritism, in which, she said, the devil took part. “I took advantage of the occasion to ask him to restore my youth, which was what I most desired, and to cure me of enteritis. Satan promised he would do so on the condition that I would become his. I accepted, adding that my lifestyle was perfect for gaining him many adepts. Obviously quite content, he disappeared.
“Some days later I was at another session, with a new presence of the devil. I denounced him for failing to fulfill his promise. In reply, he guaranteed that he would grant what I asked, but under one more condition: that I not bless myself when I encountered a funeral. That was the only vestige of religiosity that remained in me.
“But Satan still did nothing for me. In the following session, filled with indignation, I called him an impostor and a cheat. By then I had concluded that spiritism was nothing but a farce and that the devil did not exist.”
“Well, I assure you that he exists,” the good priest said, and with that, he mounted his bicycle and left without further ceremony.
Eve, struck by his conviction, began to think. “If the devil exists, God also exists. And if God exists, what am I doing in this world? What am I doing with my life?”
“On the following morning,” Leonia recalls, “we were walking in front of the castle when the pastor appeared.”
“Mademoiselle,” he said, “what you told me yesterday disturbed me. I confess that I spent the better part of the night in prayer, asking God to inspire me in your regard. I also celebrated Holy Mass for the same intention. Here, I brought you The Life of Saint Mary Magdalene, by Father Henri Lacordaire. Read this book on your knees and you will see what God can do with a soul such as yours.”
“After lunch,” Leonia continues, “Eve settled down near the kitchen and, opening the doors so that the servants might hear, began to read in a loud voice. Enthusiasm seized her. Never had I heard her read with such conviction. Sitting at her feet, I began to cry. The servants were likewise moved. Eve continued reading, her voice broken by sobs.”
Eve and Leonia spent the rest of the week in piety and recollection.
“And I, Reverend Father?”
“Sunday arrived, the tenth of June,” says Leonia. “We went to Mass, but Eve’s disposition differed completely from that of the previous Sunday. It was on this day, during lunch, that I ventured to say to her, ‘I would like to make my first Communion. I have reached 23 years of age without ever receiving, but I want to do so.’”
Eve was quite moved. Not only did she encourage Leonia, but offered to make the necessary arrangements and affirmed that she too would receive Holy Communion with her. At the same time, she told her, “From now on do not address me as ‘my lady.’ Simply call me ‘Eve,’ for you are my sister and I am yours.”
When the pastor arrived later and learned of Leonia’s resolve, he promised to assist her. Since she first needed instructions, he said he would provide her a catechism. The priest then prepared to leave, but Eve detained him.
“And I, Reverend Father?”
“You?”
“Yes, me! I promised this little one that I would help her, be her sponsor, and receive Holy Communion with her.”
“But...”
“Yes, I know well. I am a sinner and have not lived as a Christian, but even so, I hope I still have the right to return to God.”
Leonia writes, “I can still see Eve on the main avenue of the palace, walking decisively at the pastor’s side and, in a loud voice, accusing herself publicly of her sins. The good priest seemed embarrassed.”
“Wait! Wait a moment!” he protested. “And above all, don’t shout so loud!”
“Wait? Wait for what? Can Leonia’s happiness not also be mine?”
“It’s just that... it’s that, compared to you, Leonia is a child. Her case is simple. You, you are Eve Lavallière... you are well known... your life is public. I cannot treat you in the same manner. Moreover, you gave yourself over to spiritism. We are talking about a reserved sin.”1
“Oh, my God! How unhappy I am! God does not concern Himself with me because I am such a sinner.”
“Be calm, Mademoiselle! God does love you, and to prove that, I shall leave immediately for Tours, to request the necessary permission.”
“And if they do not wish to grant it?”
“They will. What motive would they have for refusing? Mademoiselle, I will be back in less than a hour, and I will come with all the powers.” With that, the good priest disappeared on his bicycle. Eve remained in a state of anxiety, lamenting and weeping.
Eve’s sole consolation amid her sorrow, from Leonia’s account, was her confidence in Our Lady! “How good it now feels to think of her. In times past I used to love her, and I never completely forgot her. I used to send her the flowers they offered me. She will have pity on me!”
Nevertheless, as she waited, Eve’s anxiety grew. Despair nearly took hold of her. Falling upon her knees, she raised her hands to Heaven. Bathed in tears, she exclaimed, “Lord, take me! Send me death, I can endure no more!”
Just then, Leonia, peering through the window, shouted, “Good news! I see him, I see him at last! He is pedaling with all his strength!” Eve rushed out to meet him.
“For the rest of my life,” writes Leonia, “I will never forget her great cry of joy. I will ever see her there, kneeling on the grass, expressing to God her happiness and gratitude.”
“The peace of the Lord be with you, my daughter!” said the priest, leaping from his bicycle. “The Vicar-General immediately gave me all the authorizations requested.” Eve stood up, calmed, transfigured. With what attention and gratitude she heard those words of peace!
For an entire week the two friends prepared themselves for confession and Holy Communion. They walked through the wheat-covered fields each morning to the rectory. There they sat side-by-side on the old sofa in the parlor and, like two well-behaved children, recited their catechism lesson. In the afternoon, Father Chasteigner would go to the palace to speak of Heaven and the things of God. Father Chasteigner gave each of them a Rosary, and it was Eve who taught Leonia how to pray it. Preparing for their general confessions, “We wrote out our sins on sheets of paper so as not to forget anything,” said Leonia.
On the afternoon before the important day, the two were in Eve’s room saying their prayers aloud. Eve said, “When I was a child, on the day before first Communion day, we used to ask forgiveness of our parents for the faults we committed against them.” Then, throwing herself on her knees at Leonia’s feet, she implored, “Forgive me, Leonia, for the bad example I have given you and all the affliction I have caused you.” Leonia, in turn, did the same, and afterwards they retired to await the great day.
The château of La Porcherie where Eve Lavalière converted on June 7, 1917.
Dead to the World
Morning finally dawned. It was overcast and raining. “Naturally,” said Eve, “today you have precedence, for you are making your first Communion. Confess and receive Holy Communion ahead of me.”
They found the church draped in mourning, for a Mass was going to be offered later for a soldier killed in the war. “They are preparing for a funeral,” declared Eve. “And on this day, Leonia, we will also bury our life of sin.”
Eve right after her conversion.
"Father Chasteigner was waiting for us in the deserted church,” Leonia recalls. “He lit a candle before the image of the Most Holy Virgin and entered the confessional. I went in first and knelt down. After I had confessed, Eve took her turn. After her confession I had the impression that she had already received Holy Communion, such was the purity of her countenance and so great her recollection.”
The Happiness That Can Only Come From God
Father Chasteigner returned to the sanctuary. Eve and Leonia knelt expectantly at the Communion rail. “While lighting the altar candles, the Reverend Father’s eyes were bathed in tears. As it had been agreed, I received Communion first and Eve right after. The priest’s hand trembled upon giving her the Sacred Host. She was white, as if dead, upon receiving her God. Returning to my place, I remained only a short time in recollection, for prolonged prayer was not for my temperament. But Eve seemed in another world.
“We had been invited to have brunch in the rectory. At a sign from the Reverend Father, I called Eve several times. But she, deeply absorbed, heard nothing. Finally, Father Chasteigner went and roused her himself and she returned to earth.
“What a joyful and radiant celebration! Afterwards, we returned on foot through the sun-drenched fields, the sun having overcome the clouds and rain. Eve was exultant with joy. ‘Does it not seem to you, Leonia, that the fields have prettier tones and that the flowers today are more beautiful than ever?’ We felt ourselves as delicate as shadows.
“Eve always considered that day, June 19, 1917, as the most special day of her life. She considered it the day her life really began. She renounced the theater forever, canceled her contracts, rid herself of her jewels, and repudiated all that reminded her of her worldly life. After her conversion, she was to affirm, ‘It was the devil that led me to God!’
“‘My resolution is made,’ Eve wrote. ‘From now on, only Jesus has a right to my life, for He alone gave me happiness and peace.’”
A True Repentance
“She left Paris in order to be safe from its dangers, distributing her immense fortune to the poor, the missions, and religious houses, and went to live in remote locales. She asked of God much suffering in order to atone for her past sins and ascend to the heights of contemplation, virtue and sanctity.”
The Divine Majesty granted her request for suffering in a variety of ways. For example, she desired to enter a convent to expiate her sins and to labor for the conversion of sinners. Notwithstanding her great ability to love and her purity of heart, she was repeatedly rejected on account of her poor health and notoriety. It was a trial that she fully accepted, realizing it to be God’s will.
For four years she devoted seven months a year serving on a lay-missionary nursing team in Tunisia, but poor health and periods of depression forced her to give up this work and return to France. There, with Leonia, she led a life of prayer, meditation, almsgiving and much suffering from illnesses.
She, who had been the toast of Paris, faced extreme suffering at the end of her life. There was not one of her once-beautiful features that did not become a means of expiation, sanctification and apostolate. Rendering gratitude to God, Eve herself said, “I have sinned through these faculties, good Lord. Now I thank Thee for permitting me to expiate my sins through this suffering.”
In 1929, a large Parisian newspaper published an interview of the former celebrity.
“Do you suffer a lot?”
“Yes, horribly,” she responded.
“Have you any hope of being cured?”
“None. But I am so happy! You cannot imagine how great my happiness is.”
“Even with so much suffering?”
“Yes, and because of it. I am in God’s hands. Tell my friends of days gone by that you met the happiest person on earth.”
In her last letter she wrote, “All my being and all my will are turned toward this last end: to love God, Who loves me so much in spite of my past and present miseries.”
She died on July 10, 1929, at the age of 63. On her grave was placed a simple cross with these words, engraved according to her request:
I left everything for God;
He alone is enough.
O Thou Who didst create me,
Have pity on me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: 1. “Reserved sins” are those that a confessor cannot absolve without special authorization of the bishop or the Pope. This permission is always granted when requested.
Rep. Bachmann: Do We Want ‘To Watch Ourselves Collapse From Our Own Welfare State?’
By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=63559
(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) told CNSNews.com that "expensive entitlement programs" are "bringing our country down," and Americans will have to choose between surviving as a country or collapsing "from our own welfare state."
In an exclusive interview, CNSNews.com asked Bachmann if she supported, for example, phasing out Medicare Part D, a program enacted in 2003 by President George W. Bush and a Republican-controlled Congress that subsidizes the cost of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries. (The program is currently estimated to cost $16.6 trillion over the next 75 years.)
“I think that program needs tremendous reform, because we're now at a precipice here in our nation where we can't afford all of the entitlement programs,” said Bachmann. “Just like you saw with GM and Chrysler, the very weighty, expensive benefit-heavy packages rendered those companies uncompetitive with Toyota and other companies. We're seeing the same thing in the federal government.”
Bachmann continued: “These very expensive wage-and-benefit packages that we're paying to federal employees, but also very expensive entitlement programs are frankly bringing our country down and we have to make a decision: ‘Do we want to survive as a country or are we going to watch ourselves collapse from our own welfare state?’ It's really up to us to make the decision.”
Rep. Bachmann, elected to Congress in the 2006 mid-term election, blamed Democrats for making entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare “unworkable” today.
“They (Democrats) like to act as though they want to save them (entitlement programs) and we want to end them when, in fact, it's been just the opposite,” said Bachmann. “The Democrats unfortunately have been in a situation where they have made those programs unworkable, which means vulnerable people who are dependent on those programs may not have them to take care of the needs that they need.”
“That's what we are trying to do,” she said. “We're trying to help those who are the most vulnerable in the United States to make sure that they can have benefits that they are hoping for and that they worked for but that won't be the case.”
She also warned that the United States is close to losing its AAA bond rating.
“This year, not into the future, but this year is the first year that Social Security is putting more money out than what it’s taking in,” said Bachmann. “Well, that's called being overdrawn at the bank.”
“That’s happening this year, seven years ahead of schedule,” she said. “Medicare is dead broke within seven years, and it could happen sooner than that. In the midst of that, we're seeing a brand new entitlement (the new health care law) waking up that is being forced upon us? When the boat is already sinking financially? Remember, Moodys is coming out saying the United States in all likelihood will lose our triple-A bond rating. This isn't a game anymore, this isn't a political sound-bite anymore. This is reality.”
In a previous interview with CNSNews.com, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) echoed Bachmann’s concerns about entitlement programs. Ryan cited a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that says the federal government already faces a “fiscal gap” of $76 trillion, meaning that over the next 75 years the cost of the benefits promised in federal entitlement programs exceeds the tax revenues expected to pay for them. This amounts to almost $250,000 for every single American and about $650,000 for every American household.
“All those unfunded liabilities, all that debt I’ve been telling you about, is before you pass this budget,” said Ryan. “That’s if we don’t pass the budget. If we pass the Obama budget, it just gets worse. He doubles the debt in five years and triples it in 10.”
A transcript of CNSNews.com’s interview with Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) follows below:
CNSNews.com’s Nicholas Ballasy: “Every House Republican voted against the health care bill. Are you partaking in any efforts to repeal the legislation?”
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.): “Oh, absolutely. The bill passed near midnight on Sunday night. I instructed my staff on Sunday night, ‘We have to repeal this thing.’ I spoke with Mike Pence on the floor and said we've got to repeal, we have to have a discharge petition. At the same time my colleague, Steve King, went to Eric Cantor and gave the same exact message and so that morning, on Monday morning, we independently had bills drawn up for repeal, dropped them, and introduced them first thing in the morning. So did Sen. Jim DeMint [R-S.C.] on the Senate side.
Bachmann: “We're urging all of our colleagues, both in the House and in the Senate, everyone should file repeal bills of Obama-care and we should all get on each others’ bills to let the American public know that we are unanimous in wanting to repeal this unconstitutional bill and replace it with true, good, honest health care reform that will actually benefit the American people and not break the bank.”
Ballasy: “Thirteen state attorneys so far are suing the federal government over the individual mandate in the health care bill. Do you agree with those lawsuits and what do you think the end result will be?”
Bachmann: “Oh, I believe that we're going to see challenges at every level. I was just, as a matter of fact this morning, with the Virginia attorney general, and he is going to be the first one in the country to file his claim. He's in the ‘rocket-docket,’ which is the fastest legal court system in the United States, and he anticipates in about a year and a half, this case should be before the United States Supreme Court.
Ballasy: “Do you think they have the grounds for a repeal, overturning it?”
Bachmann: “I believe, he, I know that the attorney general in Virginia is basing his claim on the individual mandate and I think that there is merit in this claim, because never before in the history of our country has the federal government forced an American to do something pro-actively, forcing an American as a mandate of citizenship to purchase a product or service against their will. And again, this is a government- mandated product and government essentially will set the price on that product.
Bachmann: “So, there’s no way out. The American people will be forced to purchase it. This is the grounds for redistribution of wealth. This is how President Obama will achieve his objective of redistribution of wealth. When you force an American -- as a condition of citizenship -- to purchase a product or service against their will and the federal government essentially sets the price for that product, then there's no freedom left for the individual. It is a different matter when a state makes a mandate -- the federal government is limited. The federal government, Article 1, Section 8, has limited enumerated powers. The federal government is without power to force an American citizen to purchase a product or service against their will. So yes, I do believe there's strong grounds for the unconstitutionality of this individual mandate in Obamacare.”
Ballasy: “I interviewed Delaware Senator Tom Carper (D) who is also a former governor of the state. He said it's not likely that this is ultimately going to be overturned, and he knows some pretty good lawyers who would agree.”
Bachmann: “I would disagree. I think it has a very strong chance of being overturned and I hope that it is, and I think you'll see challenges immediately in the court system, challenges immediately here in the legislature – you've already seen them. We've already seen the lawsuits filed, we've already seen the legislation filed. What's interesting is President Obama campaigned, when he was running for president as being a ‘uniter.’ Unfortunately, the president has proven to be one of the biggest dividers of this nation that we've ever had in the presidency.”
Ballasy: “When looking at the tea party movement, the last rally, we've seen some stories that have come out: Representative [John] Lewis and Representative [James] Clyburn have said there were racial incidents at the tea party. Did you see anything like that, that was consistent with their stories?”
Bachmann: “I did not. We had over 30,000 people here on Saturday [March 20] at the west side of the Capitol, a tremendous group of individuals trying to get the attention of Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi and the Democrats saying, ‘Don't take away my health care from me.’ I met with – the media tends to portray the people who are in the tea party movement as toothless hillbillies, as rubes from the backwater who don't know what they're talking about.”
Bachmann: “Do you know who I met on Saturday? I met surgeons, anesthesiologists, family practice guys, interns, I met pharmacists, I met business owners, lawyers. I met people from all walks of life – apolitical people, 75-year-old women who came out. I didn't see any indication of racial tensions. I didn't see any indication of being personal, against personal members of Congress. What I saw were people that were fighting for their constitutional liberties and fighting for our country. And I think it's a tremendous affront trying to castigate people who are fighting for our country as somehow being racially motivated. I didn't see that at all.”
Ballasy: “You, during your time in Congress, have been critical of excessive government spending and social programs. Can you point to any social program that the Republican Party has dissolved and shut down over the last 50 years?”
Bachmann: “Well, let me go to the first part of your question. President George Bush spent way too much money as president and he did that with the help of a Republican Congress. But in his worst year, he spent something over $450 billion dollars. In just his first year alone, President Obama spent over $1.4 trillion in deficit. There's no comparison. There’s no moral equivalency. George Bush's worst year was $458 billion or more in debt as compared to Barack Obama, $1.4 trillion in debt.”
Bachmann: “This year President Obama is going to break even his own record. He's going to quadruple that amount of debt; that's more than -- if you take all the presidents from the first day George Washington came into office as president through George W. Bush leaving office, President Obama in his first year accumulated more debt than all of those presidents combined. So there's just no comparison in the amount of debt that was accumulated.”
Bachmann: “Now, the second part of your question had to do with spending programs, and I'm without knowledge as to what programs they did or didn’t do away with. I was here during the last two years of President George W. Bush, but that was under Democrat rule in the Congress. Speaker Pelosi dominated the House and [Sen.] Harry Reid [D-Nev.] dominated the Senate, and so I was never here when the Republicans were in control in the House.”
Ballasy: “Do you think programs like Medicare Part D, which had a lot of Republican support, with a Republican-controlled Congress -- and I understand you were not in Congress at that time – but do you think a program like that, specifically Medicare Part D, should that program be dissolved?”
Bachmann: “I think that program needs tremendous reform because we're now at a precipice here in our nation where we can't afford all of the entitlement programs. Just like you saw with GM and Chrysler, the very weighty, expensive benefit-heavy packages rendered those companies uncompetitive with Toyota and other companies. We're seeing the same thing in the federal government. These very expensive wage and benefit packages that we're paying to federal employees, but also very expensive entitlement programs are, frankly, bringing our country down, and we have to make a decision: ‘Do we want to survive as a country or are we going to watch ourselves collapse from our own welfare state?’ It's really up to us to make the decision.”
Ballasy: “You see some Democrats who say, ‘Okay, if Republicans are so concerned about the cost of our social programs that we started, let's see them try to end them, politically. Let's see them try to get out there and tell the American people we're going to end Medicare, we're going to end Social Security over time.’ Do you think those kind of programs could be ended at this time and we could begin to phase those programs out?”
Bachmann: “Well, that's the scare tactics that the Democrats like to bring up every year. They like to act as though they want to save them and we want to end them when, in fact, it's been just the opposite. The Democrats unfortunately have been in a situation where they have made those programs unworkable, which means vulnerable people who are dependent on those programs may not have them to take care of the needs that they need.”
Bachmann: “That's what we are trying to do. We're trying to help those who are the most vulnerable in the United States to make sure that they can have benefits that they are hoping for and that they worked for but that won't be the case because, remember, this year, not into the future, but this year is the first year that Social Security is putting more money out than what it is taking in.
Bachmann: “Well, that's called being overdrawn at the bank. That’s happening this year, seven years ahead of schedule. Medicare is dead broke within seven years and it could happen sooner than that. In the midst of that, we're seeing a brand new entitlement waking up that is being forced upon us? When the boat is already sinking financially? Remember, Moodys is coming out saying the United States in all likelihood will lose our triple-A bond rating. This isn't a game anymore, this isn't a political sound-bite anymore. This is reality. What this means is all of our interest rates will go up if you're buying a home, if you're buying a business, if you're buying a car, student loan, interest rates are going up. Plus for the United States, our interest rates will go up too and that's the biggest problem we have in the United States today is all of the welfare payments we're paying out, the entitlement payments – that, coupled together with interest on the debt, those two alone have the potential of wiping out all other spending at the federal level. It's really about spending. At the end of the day, that's America's problem.”
Ballasy: “The ‘Contract with America’ released by the Republican Party in the 1994 congressional elections called for the following departments to be shut down: Commerce, Education, Agriculture and Energy. Do you think any of these should be closed today?”
Bachmann: “I think that the contract that was made in 1994 was one where, I think it was 10 items -- I wasn't here at the time, I was at home having babies at the time -- but I think that was one where the Republicans promised that they would have a vote on a certain number of bills within the first 100 days. I think the current Republican Congress needs to also come up with a vision for the American people -- how we're going to right the ship. And this is a different time than 1994, and we have to come up with an agenda that gives the best path forward for the United States, and I believe we will.”
Help the American Legion support family of fallen Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder Updated
By Michelle Malkin
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/30/help-the-american-legion-support-family-of-fallen-marine-lance-cpl-matthew-snyder/
My stalwart friends at the American Legion have stepped up to raise funds to cover the legal expenses of fallen Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder’s family. As you all know, Snyder’s funeral was targeted by the evil miscreants of the bogus Westboro Baptist Church. The Snyders took the protesters to court. In October 2007, a jury awarded the Snyders $2.9 million in compensatory damages, $6 million in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and $2 million for causing emotional distress. It was thrown out on appeal by the Fourth Circuit. Federal judges have now ordered the family to pay $16,510 to ringleader Fred Phelps as they pursue a Supreme Court case. SCOTUS agreed earlier this month to hear the Snyders’ appeal.
Regardless of how you feel about the merits of the Snyders’ suit, the Snyders deserve to know that Americans are forever grateful for their son’s heroism and for the family’s sacrifice. We shouldn’t stand by and watch them bankrupted.
MOTHAX at The American Legion Burnpit tells me the group’s National Adjutant is seeding a fund-raising effort for the Sndyers with his own funds. The group will also be submitting an amicus brief in the Snyders’ case and intends to raise enough money to cover the court-ordered legal expenses and any other expenses incurred by the Supreme Court appeal.
They need your help.
Go here to donate now — and spread the word.
More from Cassy Fiano in the Green Room at Hot Air.
Allahpundit has more and the Baltimore Sun, which broke the story, has a follow-up on the outpouring of generosity and support the Synder family has received:
As news of the order to pay Westboro’s court costs spread through the media and online, strangers were moved to send money and set up funds to support Snyder’s court battle.
On Tuesday, Mark C. Seavey, new media director for the American Legion, posted a message on his Legion-affiliated blog, The Burn Pit, urging readers to donate to the Albert Snyder Fund. The American Legion’s message was picked up by conservative political blogger Michelle Malkin, who called the Westboro protesters “evil miscreants” and urged readers to donate.
“Regardless of how you feel about the merits of the Snyders’ suit, the Snyders deserve to know that Americans are forever grateful for their son’s heroism and for the family’s sacrifice. We shouldn’t stand by and watch them bankrupted,” Malkin wrote.
Money from donations will go toward covering the money owed to Phelps, and beyond that, toward preparing further appeals, Seavey said.
“As soon as we heard this we just knew that it was going to go through the roof, and people were going to be upset. We seized on it,” Seavey said. “On an issue like this that cuts across political lines, it’s relatively easy, and it’s the kind of fight we want to wade into because it’s not right or left, it’s right or wrong. We’re going to do the best we can to make sure that Mr. Snyder doesn’t have to deal with this. We’re going to make sure he doesn’t have to pay a red cent.”
In a phone interview Tuesday, Snyder said he was “exhausted” by the long legal ordeal, but heartened by the outpouring of support. He said he has received about 3,000 e-mail messages from people across the country who wanted to show their support and planned to contribute.
“It kind of restores your faith in mankind after dealing with this wacko church,” Snyder said. “Win or lose, I’ll know that I did everything I could for Matt, and for all the soldiers and Marines who are still coming home dying.”
Morning Bell: One Nation Under Arrest
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/31/morning-bell-one-nation-under-arrest/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Before President Barack Obama took over the White House, no United States citizen had ever been forced by the federal government to buy a product against their will. But now, thanks to the passage of Obamacare, Americans, by dint of their mere existence, are now required to purchase Obama administration approved health insurance or face a penalty assessed through the Internal Revenue Code. This is simply unprecedented. The income tax doesn’t kick in until an American earns income. Auto liability insurance doesn’t become mandated until an American chooses to drive (and even then it’s only by the state). And farmers must first grow food before they are subject to the regulations of the Department of Agriculture. But facing federal government sanction for simply breathing? That is a troubling assault on American liberty.
Unfortunately, Obamacare is just the latest example of the growing reach of the federal government into all aspects of our lives. While the final bill passed by Congress specifically made the noncompliance with an IRS individual mandate penalty not a crime, far too often when the spotlight of American attention is not focused on an issue, Congress has gone ahead and criminalized what was once before perfectly normal behavior. Consider, for example, small-time inventor and entrepreneur Krister Evertson, whose story is recounted by Heritage fellows Brian Walsh and Hans von Spakovsky:
In May 2004, FBI agents driving a black Suburban and wearing SWAT gear ran Evertson off the road near his mother’s home in Wasilla, Alaska. When Evertson was face down on the pavement with automatic weapons trained on him, an FBI agent told him he was being arrested because he hadn’t put a federally mandated sticker on a UPS package.
A jury in federal court in Alaska acquitted Evertson, but the feds weren’t finished. They reached into their bag of over 4,500 federal crimes and found another ridiculous crime they could use to prosecute him: supposedly “abandoning” hazardous waste (actually storing, in appropriate containers, valuable materials he was using for the clean-fuel technology he was developing). A second jury convicted him, and he spent 21 months in an Oregon federal prison.
Putting the wrong stamp on a package. Storing your own property own your own land. When did these actions become federal crimes? Why? How can we stop them? A new book launched yesterday and published by The Heritage Foundation answers these questions. One Nation Under Arrest: How Crazy Laws, Rogue Prosecutors, and Activist Judges Threaten Your Liberty documents how over the past 50 years the politicization of American criminal law and practice has created traps for millions of innocent and unwary Americans and threatens to make criminals out of those who are just doing their best to be respectable, law abiding citizens.
In 1998, an American Bar Association task force estimated that there were over 3,000 federal criminal offenses scattered throughout the 50 titles of the United States Code. Just six years later, that number is estimated to be over 4,000 and Columbia law professor John Coffee estimates that the federal government could use the criminal process to enforce as many as 300,000 federal regulations.
Lavrentiy Beria, the chief of the Soviet security and secret police under Stalin reputedly said, “Show me the man, and I’ll find you the crime.” Our country is by no means a Soviet police state yet, but a federal government empowered with a sprawling code that makes all of us potential criminals is more than just an existential threat to American Liberty. This overcriminalization trend must end. Become informed. Learn the issues. Buy the book. And fight back.
From the front lines: Ranchers speak out on border chaos
By Michelle Malkin
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/30/from-the-front-lines-ranchers-speak-out-on-border-choas/
I will continue to keep you updated on the investigation into Arizona rancher Rob Krentz’s brutal murder. The latest:
*Funeral services have been set for April 9-10 in Douglas.
*Police are working on theories about the shooter possibly belonging to “a drug cartel scout or a band of thieves terrorizing Arizona ranches.”
*Open-borders Sen. Johnny Come Lately McCain, in the political battle of his life, is now calling for the National Guard. Don’t read his lips. Read his border security-undermining, law enforcement-abandoning record.
*The Arizona Farm Bureau sends the following statement:
“The murder of Cochise County rancher Rob Krentz this last weekend should not have happened and was preventable,” said Arizona Farm Bureau President Kevin Rogers. He and his organization send their deepest sympathy to the Krentz family for their loss.
According to Rogers, the ranching and farming community along the border, have been asking for a secure border for many years. “Our members are the ones who see the illegal traffic including drug and human cargo smuggling coming across their farms and ranches.” Rogers explained that over the last several years, his members have reported coming face to face with these smugglers that are well armed and menacing. “It is time for the federal government to fix this problem before another one of our ranch or farm families are injured or killed. No family should have to endure what the Krentz family is experiencing.”
Rogers said inaction by Congress can no longer be tolerated. “The border needs to be secured,” said Rogers. His organization has long called for securing the border and fixing the worker visa program so we know who is coming into the U.S. and who is overstaying their permission to be here. “Fixing the worker visa program becomes part of securing the border,” he emphasized.
If this tragedy is connected to smuggling from Mexico, swift action is needed to make sure this will not lead to an escalation in Arizona of the violence associated with the drug cartel brutality now just south of our border. “Until Congress addresses securing the border, all necessary resources should be focused on Arizona’s border,” concluded Rogers.
"The e-mail Bag"
You Might Be A Redneck
Thank you Jeff Foxworthy!
You take a fishing pole into Sea World.
You think a turtleneck is key ingredient for soup.
You've ever stood in line to have your picture taken with a freak of nature.
You think the French Riviera is foreign car.
You go to a stock car race and don't need a program.
No comments:
Post a Comment