Can you afford four more years of Obama?  Are you better off than you were before Obama? 

Do you feel safer than before Obama?  How has Obama secured our borders?  Does the United States have stronger relations with our allies?  Do our enemies still hate us?    Are we more energy independent? 

Do you think the United States is better or worse off than before Obama?  Want more of the same OR real hope and real change for the better? 

Read on to be a better informed voter.  How you vote matters.

 

http://www.usdebtclock.org/      

           

http://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html     

Proverbs 22:7  Good News Translation (GNT)   ⁷ Poor people are slaves of the rich. Borrow money and you are the lender's slave.

Proverbs 21:5  Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)   ⁵ The plans of the diligent certainly lead to profit, but anyone who is reckless certainly becomes poor.^(A)

http://www.nobankruptcy.com.au/blog/2011/06/01/simple-budgeting-for-lazy-people/      "A budget is telling your money where to go instead of wondering where it went.."  - John Maxwell

 

Proverbs 21:20 Good News Translation (GNT)   ²⁰ Wise people live in wealth and luxury, but stupid people spend their money as fast as they get it.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Quiz/Quiz2010.asp?quiz=Pres2012             Take the Quiz!!  Determine Who You Should Support For President.    Please look at their profiles, their answers and their stances and become an educated, informed voter!!

 

 http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979873073       On Friday the credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s, downgraded America’s credit rating for the first time in our nation’s history. http://www.impeachobamacampaign.com/u-s-credit-downgrade-another-obama-first/        The United States earned the top rating the moment such rankings began in 1917 — which means we maintained our AAA rating through the Great Depression, stagflation, malaise, and the 1982 recession. Thirty months of Barack Obama, and it is gone for the first time in history. Change we can believe in???  Today Let Freedom Ring is launching THE OBAMA DOWNGRADE.COM to educate the public that President Obama owns this downgrade for his irresponsible spending and his failed leadership to reduce the deficit by seriously cutting spending. Make sure the American people know that President Obama owns this downgrade. Check out our new web video “The Obama Downgrade” vote, and share it with friends.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbe8e1tIqxQ&feature=player_embedded        What would have averted the credit rating downgrade?? Precisely the spending cuts advocated by the Tea Party!!Obama, the Democratic Party and its members of Congress have spent years blaming former President George W. Bush for the nation’s current economic woes, which is akin to blaming the bank’s tellers for a bank robbery, or for the dishonesty of their bosses, the bank’s executives who were looting the till. Nobody in the liberal dominated media bothers to note that in the last years of the Bush presidency Democrats controlled the Congress and thus had a death grip on the nation’s economy, having complete control over the purse strings. They spent (and spent, and spent) the yet, uncollected taxes of future generations  as well as our own,  as if there were no tomorrow. It wasn’t a Bush Congress that jammed the incredible costs of ObamaCare down the throats of the American people and their children and grandchildren!  It was our spendthrift president and his allies on Capitol Hill doing their classic imitation of the legendary drunken sailors on shore leave. AFTER CREDIT DOWNGRADE TEA PARTY MUST DUMP OBAMA

The United States earned the top rating the moment such rankings began in 1917 — which means we maintained our AAA rating through the Great Depression, stagflation, malaise, and the 1982 recession. Change we can believe in???

 

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=94

Voting Guides

The pro-family organizations listed below provide voters resources for most states. Click on the organizations’ links to get more information.

• American Family Association: Voter Resources
• Christian Coalition: Voter Guides
• Eagle Forum: Election Central
• Family Research Council: Voting Records
• Focus on the Family: CitizenLink
• National Right to Life Committee: Voting Records
• Pew Forum: Religion and Politics 2012

Know the Candidates and Issues
Click here to track Federal legislation and find out how your Congressman and Senators are voting.

Sites like Vote Your Faith, On The Issues, and iVoteValues provide a wealth of non-partisan information on voting and candidates (including biographies, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and interest group ratings). Another way to access voter information for your state is to use a search engine (i.e., google or yahoo) and type in "voter guide" or "voter information" along with key words like "pro-family" or "Christian" and the name of your state.

For instructions on viewing candidates interest group ratings, commonly called "Scorecards," click here.

 http://visiontoamerica.org/6666/are-you-better-off-than-you-were-four-years-ago/                            Still, the unemployment rate stands at an unhealthy 8.6%, and few analysts think it will drop fast enough to reach the 7.4% rate that prevailed when Ronald Reagan won re-election in 1984, or even the 7.5% when Jimmy Carter lost his re-election bid in 1980. Not since Franklin Roosevelt won re-election in 1936 has a president faced a worse jobless situation.  Obama followed FDR-like policies with his Obamanomics that have recreated the economic sufferings of FDR's Great Depression.

More broadly, Mr. Reagan set the modern standard for gauging the economic mood of voters in an election year in that 1980 race, when he unseated Mr. Carter in large measure by asking voters simply: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"  If the coming election is determined by that maxim, or by most traditional measures, President Obama would seem to face bleak prospects. Consider just a few snapshots of leading economic and political indicators:

1.    Unemployment, the economic statistic that packs the most political punch, has risen to 8.6% now from 7.8% the month Mr. Obama took office. It topped 10% briefly in 2009.

2.    The misery index—the combination of the unemployment and inflation rates—has risen to about 12 now from 7.83 when he took office.

3.    Median family income fell in the first two years of the Obama term, after rising the previous four years.

4.    As of September, 12.6% of U.S. mortgage borrowers had missed at least one payment on their mortgage or were in foreclosure, down from a peak of about 15% but still well above the normal range of 5% to 7% in the last two decades, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association.

5.    In large measure because of a decline in home values, household net worth dropped 1.7% over the last year; under every president since 1948, it rose in the year preceding the election.

6.    Mr. Obama's job approval stands at 46% in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, below the levels George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had a year before they were re-elected, and below where George H.W. Bush stood a year before he lost his re-election bid.

7.    Approval of Mr. Obama's handling of the economy is even lower; it stands at 39%.

 

 

http://conservativebyte.com/2012/04/celebrity-obama-crushed-by-rove-ad/

After four years of a celebrity president, is your life any better?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lhXGkeMdOJs

 

http://news.investors.com/article/601827/201202211837/obama-shifting-talk-on-high-gas-prices.htm?Ntt=double-talk-on-energy Energy: When gas prices hit $4 a gallon in 2008, candidate Barack Obama said it was due to previous failed energy policies. Now that prices are heading still higher, President Obama calls it progress. Already, pump prices are higher than they've been in previous years, suggesting they will top $4 soon and possibly reach an unprecedented $5 this summer.

President Obama is starting to notice the political implications. "Progress" isn't exactly how Obama described the country's energy picture in 2008, when gas prices were closing in on $4 a gallon. Then, it was a clear sign of "Washington's failure to lead on energy," which was "turning the middle-class squeeze into a devastating vise-grip for millions of Americans."  "For the well-off in this country," Obama said in May 2008, "high gas prices are mostly an annoyance, but to most Americans they're a huge problem, bordering on a crisis."  In August that year, he declared rising energy costs to be "one of the most dangerous and urgent threats this nation has ever faced" and that gas prices "are wiping out paychecks and straining businesses."

While Gibbs is right that domestic production has climbed in the past three years, Obama's policies had nothing whatsoever to do with it. Oil coming from offshore wells was in the pipeline, so to speak, during the Clinton and Bush years, when those permits were issued. And the oil pouring out of North Dakota is the result of drilling on private lands.  Obama, in fact, has made it clear for years that he has no real interest in boosting domestic production.  When President Bush announced plans in 2008 to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling, Obama dismissed it, saying "it would merely prolong the failed energy policies we have seen from Washington for 30 years."  "Offshore drilling," he said, "would not lower gas prices today, it would not lower gas prices next year and it would not lower gas prices five years from now."  In a big energy speech he gave in August 2008, Obama argued that "if we opened up and drilled on every single square inch of our land and our shores, we would still find only 3% of the world's oil reserves."

And while in office, Obama's done everything he can to limit production (Obama…have you heard of Supply vs. Demand???) — slow-walking offshore permits, killing the Keystone XL pipeline, making it even harder to get oil out of federal lands.

 

http://news.investors.com/article/600809/201202101833/obama-budget-does-nothing-to-end-fiscal-crisis.htm?Ntt=another-year-another-farce              The president's failure will be compounded by the do-nothing Senate Democrats. Majority Leader Harry Reid has not passed a regular budget in three years. And he has already said he has no intention of doing anything with the budget this year either. That is no way to run a lemonade stand, let alone a government.  It's time Washington learned something about fiscal responsibility by looking outside the Beltway.

In my home state of Wyoming, Monday is the day our legislature opens its session to set a two-year budget for 2013 and 2014. That session will last only 20 days, and at the end of it we will have a balanced budget.  Like most states, Wyoming first calculates how much money it expects to take in, then sets its spending to match its income — not the other way around. That's the way families across America do it. They look at how much money they've got coming in and decide whether they can afford a new car, a vacation or even a trip to the movies. They don't schedule a vacation and then tell their boss they need a raise to pay for it.  the simple truth understood by responsible states and families everywhere — you don't spend money you don't have. The record shows that Obama has never been serious about responsible budgeting in the past. American voters will have an opportunity in November to replace him with someone committed to getting our fiscal house in order.

 

 

 

 

 

http://wildervisions.com/2011/07/former-virginia-governor-put-the-people-first/     Former Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder, Democrat, didn’t raise taxes and had to cut services in a way that did not affect the poor.  This is what experience with real Hope and Change sounds and looks like.

 

            

http://patriotupdate.com/videos/gop-ad-destroys-obama-with-his-own-words             

 

                   

NBC’s Matt Lauer on Feb. 1, 2009, just days after hispresidency began --Obama said it was up to him to turn the economy around in three years, and if not, he doesn’t deserve a second term. Here’s the transcript of the relevant portion:

Lauer: "At some point will you say,`Wait a minute. We've spent this amount of money, we're not seeing the results.We've got to change course dramatically.’ "

Obama: "Yeah, look, I'm at the start of my administration.One nice thing about the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I've got four years and...

Lauer: "You're going to know quicklyhow people feel about what's happened."

Obama: "That's exactly right. Andyou know, a year from now I think people are going to see that we're starting tomake some progress. But there's still going to be some pain out there.If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition."

Obama’s last phrase -- "there's going to be aone-term proposition" -- is a little awkward, but we don’t think there’s muchdoubt about his meaning.We understand his comment to mean that if theeconomy isn’t better in three years, the voters might make him a one-termpresident.http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/29/michele-bachmann/michele-bachmann-uses-barack-obamas-one-term-presi/

Things aren't going great for Obama right now, but thatcan always change -- as Obama himself noted in thatABCinterview of early 2010."When your poll numbers drop, you are an idiot," Obama said then.

Proverbs29:16(Contemporary English Version)16 Crime increases when crooks are in power, but law-abiding citizens will see them fall.http://www.grassfire.com/http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/

At ActRight we work every day to make it possible foryou to support your favorite conservative candidates and causes. Our goal hasalways been to lift you up and make your voice heard. ActRight means that youdon't need to be blessed with great wealth or power to make a difference. Allyou need is a computer. We never tell you what to care about or who to support.We put the decision in your hands and amplify your voice. Today we have excitingnews to share with you -- we have launched theActRightAction Center!Starting now, you havea single place where you canfind all thetop conservative action alerts and petitions. We willcontinually gather these actions from all over the conservative world and putthem at your fingertips. Everyday, in five minutes you can make a hugedifference on a number of issues. You can even add actions for others to pluginto.Check it outand let us know what youthink.

 

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46239 Comedian Jon Stewart (Democrat tendenciesaside) suprisingly brought Obama's Solyndra scandal to hisDailyShow​audience yesterday, and did a fine job ofexplaining it to a sizable audience that might have been hearing the details forthe first time. Every now and then, you hear stories about how a shockingnumber of young people get their news from theDaily Show. Stewart’slagging a few days behind high-information observers of the political scene, buthe just helped quite a few people catch up, and produced a really funny segmentin the bargain.

The best comedy is funny in different ways, when viewedfrom different angles. When Stewart talks about Solyndra as a “tailor-madescandal,” he’s zinging Obama critics, but delivering a far sharper jab to thePresident for living down to the lowest expectations of hisdetractors.

Using this example, now you know why Obama and theDemocrats’ $800 Billion plus supposed “Stimulus” did not work, except to linethe pockets of unions and billionaire businessmen who support Democrats. Maybethe time for blaming Bush and the Republicans for the Obama and Democratfailures are over??

Deuteronomy 16:18-20 (New International Reader's Version)  Appoint Judges and Officials  18 Appoint judges and officials for each of your towns. Do it in every town the Lord your God is giving you. They must judge the people fairly. 19 Do what is right. Treat everyone the same. Don't take money from people who want special favors. It makes those who are wise close their eyes to the truth. It twists the words of those who do what is right. 20 Follow only what is right. If you do, you will live. You will take over the land the Lord your God is giving you.

2 Thessalonians 3:8

  nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you

http://news.investors.com/Article/599548/201201311827/congressman-west-is-best-gop-veep-choice.htm?Ntt=an-even-better-pick-for-veep       a proven patriot, a proven conservative and a proven winner, Congressman Allen West of Florida.  To compare West's heroic service to our nation in Iraq and Afghanistan during his 22-year military career to Obama's community organizer days, to his years nodding his head to the vile and dangerous pronouncements of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and to his days learning at the feet of ultraviolent Weather Underground radicals Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

Imagine the reaction if West brought his college transcripts and challenged Obama to produce his. Imagine if others wished to compare West's Bronze Star, three Meritorious Service medals and three Army Commendation medals with the drug paraphernalia from Obama's experimental days.

Pure and simple, West is a proud conservative and a patriot. As he himself has said, "I have traded in my camouflage uniform for a suit, but the commitment to protect the people of the United States is still my mission."

Where did West learn such values? From his parents. Said West: "Both of my parents taught me that it was not necessary to rely on a government handout to achieve my goals. They wanted me to believe in myself and told me that in America, with hard work, all things are possible."

 

 

http://news.investors.com/Article/598993/201201260805/entitlements-soar-under-president-obama.htm     

Barack Obama has been replacing our merit-based society with an entitlement society."  See chart  http://news.investors.com/PhotoPopup.aspx?path=WEBstmp0126-[Converted].gif&docId=598993&xmpSource=&width=800&height=557&caption= 

Newt Gingrich has taken to calling Obama "the best food-stamp president in American history."   This year, more than 46 million (15% of all Americans) will get food stamps. That's 45% higher than when Obama took office, and twice as high as the average for the previous 40 years.

"Once we thought 'entitlement' meant that Americans were entitled to the privilege of trying to succeed in the greatest country in the world," Romney said in a recent speech. "But today the new entitlement battle is over the size of the check you get from Washington."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/unemployment-up-undercounted-jobs/2012/03/08/id/431908?s=al&promo_code=E613-1Gallup’s figures differ from the official government unemployment rate because they do not adjust the figure for seasonal variations or include anyone under 18. The survey suggests that the official figures will also show an increase from January’s 8.3 percent when they are released on Friday, said Gallup’s chief economist Dennis Jacobe.

 Gallup: Unemployment at 9.1%, But 19% Need Jobs
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

http://www.mfc.org/

   www.Judeo-ChristianVoterGuide.com  link to an appropriate non-partisan voter guide


 

http://www.uscitizensassociation.com/pdfs/OBAMA.pdf  

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=9490

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybd7MUixxyg&feature=player_detailpage  Chris Matthews, Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Hussein Obama and his NO Accomplishments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BnLozS-TnM&feature=player_detailpage  Barack Obama Makes confession of inexperience!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2DECDKOFnw&feature=player_detailpage Democrats on Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQadAAlK9c4&feature=player_detailpage  Hillary vs. Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf13OgByyNI&feature=player_detailpage  CNN DEMOCRATS DEBATE - EXPERIENCE & INEXPERIENCE

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6HFbyiFlv4&feature=player_detailpage     VP Joe Biden on Obama and “that the presidency is NOT something that lends itself to On The Job Training”

 

   

 

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HlTxGHn4sH4  Obama: My Plan "Cap and Trade" Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket, passing the cost on to consumers for your home, apartment, food, clothing and fuel et al.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF7Qm31LIDM&feature=player_detailpage  Obama Called for Bankrupting Coal Fired Power Plants

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoCsFsU_irY&feature=player_detailpage  Warren Buffett Slams "Cap and Trade" that Obama and Democrats want as a Regressive Tax on All Americans

http://www.stopepand.com/      A state’s authority and flexibility to regulate its own clean air programs is an essential part of the Clean Air Act.   Obama’s EPA  http://blog.epa.gov/administrator/    is ignoring North Dakota’s authority, local knowledge and judgment about what is best for North Dakota.  The study found that even if every coal plant in the state were shut down, the EPA’s visibility goals could not be met because the visibility issue is caused by sources outside of North Dakota. Obama’s EPA-recommended equipment would cost nearly $700 million, doubling the cost of the solutions identified by the North Dakota Department of Health. This additional cost would inevitably be paid by consumers in this uncertain economy. (Obama’s plan would make electricity rates necessarily skyrocket per Obama http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HlTxGHn4sH4     EPA  or  Cap & Trade, Obama wants to get his way as costs necessarily skyrocket and you the consumer will have to pay, voters in 2012 will have their say.)  Obama’s EPA requirement makes no sense, increasing our citizens’ electric bills for no visible benefit, while failing to recognize the common sense, cost-effective approach recommended by the State of North Dakota in its implementation plan.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoCsFsU_irY&feature=player_detailpage

Obama’s EPA solution is not the right answer for North Dakota (or any other state).        

 

Basin Electric Power Cooperative                       Minnkota Power Cooperative, Inc.                     

Montana-Dakota Utilities Co.                              Dakota Gasification Company                           

North American Coal Corporation                       Otter Tail Power Company

City of Grafton                                                  Dakota Westmoreland Corporation                    

Falkirk Mining Company                                     The Coteau Properties Company                       

Energy and Environmental Research Center        Mor-Gran-Sou Electric Cooperative                   

North Dakota Association of Rural Electric Cooperatives            

North Dakota Farmers Union                              North Dakota Farm Bureau                                

North Dakota Chamber of Commerce                 North Dakota Petroleum Council            

Kadrmas, Lee & Jackson                                   United Mine Workers of America Local 1011      

North Dakota Electrical Workers Council IBEW   

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1426

North Dakota Ethanol Producers Association      North Dakota Grain Growers Association

North Dakota Propane Gas Association              North Dakota Retail Association

Utility Shareholders of North Dakota                   Verendrye Electric Cooperative

Full list on link below:  http://www.stopepand.com/files/pdf/Joint%20letter%20on%20regional%20haze.pdf       

 

Saturday Night Live:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKxiNFN7Y0w&feature=player_detailpage   10/5/09 SNL Obama skit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJjqHbFcwVw&feature=player_detailpage  SNL: The Great Divider Accomplishes NOTHING

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHEh1ML5OTU&feature=player_detailpage   SNL Spoofs Obama And BIden

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IswEIwg-p34&feature=player_detailpage  SNL Parody Obama on the Bush tax cuts for the rich in HD

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn_BeOcYv5M&feature=player_detailpage   First 100 Days - Top 10 Obama Gaffe's - 4/29/09 - Compares Bush's Gaffe's

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCkvvFJtLJE&feature=player_detailpage  Obama’s Church?

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400629&tab=votes   Obama voting record, missed votes.

www.ccagw.org    Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), the nation's largest taxpayer watchdog organization with more than 1 million members and supporters nationwide.  CCAGW is a 501(c)(4) nonpartisan, nonprofit organization

 

http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Hussein_Obama http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=BS030017  http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/michaelramirez/     http://www.zazzle.com/barack_obama_are_you_experienced_08_tshirt-235471705972501185             http://www.cafepress.com/+anti-obama+t-shirts?page=3             http://www.zazzle.com/57+million+voted+for+the+experienced+guy+tshirts    http://superstore.wnd.com/specialty-items/BUMPER-STICKERS?range=61%2C71%2C71              http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north935.html    tax humor.

 

http://news.investors.com/Article/583959/201109061842/Why-The-Bias-Matters.htm  Sen. John McCain would have won the 2008 presidential election — and by a near-landslide 56% to 42% — instead of losing 53% to 46%.

This is the most startling of the conclusions reached by Tim Groseclose, a professor of political science at UCLA who has expanded on an innovative study he conducted from 2002 to 2005 and has put the findings in a new book, "Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind."

As the study did (not only in the media but especially among social scientists), "Left Turn" will no doubt draw fire from the left. But the original research successfully navigated peer review, ultimately being accepted by the Harvard-based Quarterly Journal of Economics. So there's little reason to think the conclusions in "Left Turn" should be any less valid.

It isn't our purpose, however, to judge Groseclose's methodology. We just want to bring attention to conclusions such as: Media bias aids Democratic candidates by eight to 10 percentage points in a typical election, every mainstream national news outlet has a liberal bias, and only four of 100 news outlets examined lean right and even those can't be considered far right.

http://news.investors.com/Article.aspx?id=600445&p=1&ibdbot=1          

Media Defends Planned Parenthood, Not Catholic Church

Freedom of the Press?? Journalism?? When the abortion giant's funding was in jeopardy, the media provided 24/7 coverage with a decidedly liberal slant. When the feds assaulted First Amendment religious freedom, you could hear the crickets chirp.  Where do you get your “news”??

Secular progressive bias in the media was never more evident than in the past few weeks with the difference in coverage of two major news stories — the temporary cutoff of funds from the Susan G. Komen Foundation to Planned Parenthood and the ultimatum from the Obama administration that the Catholic Church and its institutions had a year to find a way to violate their consciences and beliefs and provide contraceptive services as mandated by ObamaCare.

A study by the Media Research Center (MRC) shows that in the first 60 hours after the Feb. 1 announcement that Komen was cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood, no fewer than 13 major stories appeared on CBS, NBC and ABC morning and evening news shows with 35 clips and quotes coming from supporters or representatives of Planned Parenthood and only 11 from Komen representatives or supporters.  By contrast, MRC notes, when the Obama administration announced on Jan. 20 that it was giving religious institutions one year to comply with a mandate for coverage of sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs and contraception in their health plans without a co-pay, it took CBS 10 days to air one news brief on the controversy while NBC and ABC said nothing for two weeks.

You will hear nothing about the First Amendment right of religious freedom, the ban on prohibiting the free exercise thereof or the ballyhoo about “separation of church and state” that's invoked only by the left when convenient for their “beliefs”.

With 65 million Catholics watching their religious freedoms trampled by the state (who and what will be next??  You??  Divide and conquer, chip away here and then there on your rights, 1^st Amendment, 2^nd Amendment and on down our Bill of Rights..), this should be an election issue. It also should be an education issue, as Catholics operate more than 7,000 schools educating children of all faiths, backgrounds and economic conditions. It should be a health issue as well, since one in six patients in the United States is in a Catholic hospital.

How many hospitals will close, how many doctors will quit, how many charities also providing needed services will shut down rather than submit their consciences to the will of the state? This is a major story that has received scant coverage because it fails to send tingles up the legs of the secular progressives in the mainstream media.

There is no shortage of people to interview. No fewer than 153 Catholic bishops have expressed public outrage over and opposition to the mandate by the Department of Health and Human Services. But as noted by David Addington, vice president of domestic and economic policy at the Heritage Foundation, it's not just Catholics who are in revolt.

Groups including the National Council of Evangelicals, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, the Lutheran Church of Missouri Synod, and the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America have all expressed opposition, just without network talking heads showing up at their door.

It's a sad commentary on their liberal and secular bias when the media ignore the Obama administration's assault on freedom of religion while rushing to the aid of a taxpayer-funded administration ally, Planned Parenthood. 

 

“If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."”        Mark Twain       Where do you get your news??  Voters wake up & smell the media bias.  

"(With) a grain of salt," in modern English, is an idiom which means to view something with skepticism.

 

 

 

http://news.investors.com/Article/598018/201201171910/newsweeks-andrew-sullivan-defends-president-obama.htm?Ntt=who-is-calling-whom-dumb            Media Bias:  a puff piece in Newsweek with the subtle title of "Why Are The President's Critics So Dumb?"  ( sound familiar: 13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm )  The Democratic National Committee couldn't have said it better.  

When ObamaCare was being shoved down our throats behind closed doors, the president said he had simply not made the case clearly enough so that opponents in flyover country, those bitter townsfolk clinging to their Bibles and guns, could get it.

So egregious are these added taxes and costs the Obama administration has had to issue 1,200 waivers to favored companies and labor unions supporting the president's re-election. Meanwhile, insurance costs have risen, not fallen, and the promise of health care rationing and doctor shortages looms.

Sullivan repeats administration talking points on nonexistent employment growth. But as we've pointed out, unemployment remains at an unacceptably high 8.5% and the figure is that low only because we don't count those who have dropped out of the work force or limp along with part-time jobs.

 

 

 

http://culturaloffering.com/2008/10/27/wealth-redistribution--the-grades-example.aspx           imagine your teacher or professor announcing that those students getting A's will have two grade points deducted so that the students getting F's and D's can have their grades lifted to a C.  The individuals getting B's will have one grade point deducted and used for the same purpose.  After all, isn't it fair that those students getting A's and B's should help out students who aren't as fortunate?  Make sense?" I asked.  

            "No.  The reason we get A's and B's is that we are working harder or maybe we are smarter.  It isn't our fault that some kids are getting D's and F's," he answered.  "Well, you'll still do okay.  Getting a C is still passing, and you will have helped out the other students," I argued.

             "If you do that, there is no reason for me to study hard," he reasoned.  "I'll take it easy."  "But if you take it easy, where will we get the grade points to help those D and F students?" I asked.  "We have to get the points somewhere."  "I don't know," he said.  He now understands the economic effect of redistribution through taxation.    Also, contrast Communism, Socialism, Fair results, fair outcomes, fair share, income inequality, class warefare, welfare, hand out   versus    Capitalism, hand up, opportunity society, fair shake, merit,performance, effort, smart & hard work, behavior, attitude, talent, persistence, skills, experience, content of character.

            (The College Republicans at the University of California-Merced ask fellow students, who support raising taxes on the rich, if they would be willing to redistribute their GPAs. They don’t think it’s a good idea because they earned their grades.) Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/20/students-not-eager-to-redistribute-gpa-scores/#ixzz1KAckeFqh

 

 

communism works?!  Which country is it working in?!  North Korea, Russia, Cuba?  Are people flocking there to live? Risking their lives on rafts to get there? 

 The liberal Miami Herald today had an article about tourists visiting Cuba.  They hated to admit that the place is a falling apart poverty stricken mess.  They didn’t use the “c” word of course to explain why it suddenly went bad when Castro took over.  All they would offer was, “…There’s no way tourism alone can prop up a system so enfeebled by the weight of government bureaucracy, market controls and limits on personal freedoms.”

“…a system enfeebled by the weight of government bureaucracy, market controls and limits on personal freedoms…”  sounds like the Obama administration.    do you want America to look like Cuba?  stop defending communism!

The “utopia” of communism killed 94 million, according to The Black Book of Communism.  The breakdown of the number of deaths is as follows:

65 million in the People’s Republic of China, 20 million in the Soviet Union, 2 million in Cambodia, 2 million in North Korea, 1.7 million in Africa, 1.5 million in Afghanistan, 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe, 1 million in Vietnam, 150,000 in Latin America, 10,000 deaths resulting from actions of the international Communist movement and Communist parties not in power

http://www.lazymaths.com/more-math/the-us-tax-system-explained%e2%80%93with-beer/#more-3454  

    

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/534171/201005141842/Alinskys-Star-Pupil-Uses-Rules-As-A-Manual-For-Social-Surgery.aspx  Obama took a break from his Harvard studies to travel to Los Angeles for eight days of intense training at Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation, a station of the cross for acolytes. In turn, he trained other community organizers in Alinsky agitation tactics. In 1988, he even wrote a chapter for the book "After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois," in which he lamented organizers' "lack of power" in implementing change.

Alinsky was more than a socialist. He was a moral anarchist.  Alinsky was a big fan of Lenin, whom he called a "pragmatist." He claimed that his own philosophy was anchored in "hope" for a more just world. "Agitate," he egged on fellow radicals, "create disenchantment and discontent with the current values," even if none exist.

Alinsky describes "the Haves" of American society as having fallen "asleep" — ripe for slaughter. "It is as though the great law of change had prepared the anesthetization of the victim prior to the social surgery to come."

Is Obama acting as Alinsky's star social surgeon, the first to possess the necessary power to carve up the American economy for mass redistribution? If so, "Rules for Radicals" may be his operating manual. More of us should read it.

 

 

  http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/513434/200911241903/Thankful-For-Plenty.aspx                    After reaching land in 1620, the Pilgrims — led by Gov. William Bradford — set about organizing their society along communal lines. Each would give according to his ability, and each would receive according to his needs — a kind of primitive communism. 

Profiteering would not be allowed. All land and production would be publicly owned. It was an ugly disaster from the start.  Strong men ceased working hard when it became clear others weren't pulling their weight. Frustrated at being unable to better their own lot in life, some even resorted to theft.  Within months, people were starving. Literally. Nearly half the colony of 106 died in the first awful winter of 1621. The winter of 1622 was little better. Paradise had turned into a death camp.  Gov. Bradford later wrote that the colony was beset by "confusion and discontent." Something had to change. But what?

Desperate, Bradford and the other elders abandoned the colony's cherished communalism, instead allowing settlers to "set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land."  Basic agrarian capitalism, in short.  As Bradford wrote in his "History of Plymouth Plantation," "This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been ... . (I)nstead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many."  By 1623, the bounty produced by the colony's privately owned farm parcels was substantial. Famine no longer stalked the people, and survival was no longer in doubt. That year, the first real Thanksgiving was held.  Today, in an era of bailouts and massive government spending, capitalism has come under sustained and withering criticism.  

   http://www.getoutofthestands.com/early-settlers-collectivism-and-thanksgiving/  William Bradford’s experience with collectivism communism~socialism didn’t work in America in the 1600s and why Obamunism redistributional socialism is not working any better.   http://www.academia.org/inside-the-first-thanksgiving/

 

http://www.forbes.com/2008/11/03/obama-fabian-socialist-oped-cx_jb_1103bowyer.html

http://news.investors.com/article/602067/201202231805/rick-santorum-questions-religion-of-president-obama.htm?Ntt=obamas-real-faith-is-a-legitimate-issue

Obama's faith — Black Liberation Theology (BLT) — is actually a front for Marxism and communism. That makes it not only a legitimate topic of discussion, but a critical issue worth investigating.

As professor James Cone, the father of BLT, once explained it, "Black theology seeks to prepare all nonwhites for revolutionary action."

• "Together," Cone wrote in his memoir, "black religion and Marxist philosophy may show us the way to build a completely new society."

• Cone's book, "Black Theology & Black Power," was required reading for parishioners of Obama's church in Chicago. Trinity United Church of Christ, in fact, is the BLT Vatican of BLT in America — and Obama was steeped in this doctrine for 20 years.

• Obama in his memoir defended the doctrine as sensible, and has called it "the best education I ever had."

Four years ago, Obama quit his church and threw his crackpot preacher under the bus to get elected. But he has yet to find another church. Nor has he disavowed any part of BLT. The few in the media who've quizzed him about it have been stiff-armed.

"Obama declined requests for an interview or to respond to written questions about his thoughts on Jesus, Cone or Black Liberation Theology," McClatchy Newspapers reported in March 2008, just months after we first raised the issue here.

Obama's pseudo-faith, which has little to do with spirituality, cannot be separated from his politics — they're one and the same. His theology is more relevant to the national debate than that of any other presidential candidate in American history.

 

 

http://news.investors.com/article/602831/201203011830/pbs-clinton-documentary-historical-revisionism.htm?Ntt=honest-clinton-documentary

More MEDIA BIAS:  Public Television touted the Bill Clinton documentary as a long-awaited warts-and-all piece. USA Today called the two-parter a "solid and even-handed account ... of a remarkably skillful politician with an immense intellect." While calling it "tedious and predictable," the Washington Post described the documentary as "honest."

Clinton entered office in January 1993. According to the NBER, did he inherit a recession? Not even close. The recession began in July 1990 and ended eight months later, in March 1991 — a full 19 months before Clinton was even elected.

"In the winter of 1993 ... the economic crisis . .. showed few signs of abating"? Jan. 29, 1993, seven days after Clinton took office, the New York Times wrote, "U.S. Says Economy Grew at Fast Pace in Fourth Quarter: The economy grew at a faster-than-expected annual rate of 3.8% in the final quarter of 1992, the strongest performance in four years, the Commerce Department reported today."

The confusion is understandable. Many in the media suffer from CRAP — Clinton Recession Amnesia Problem. CRAP spares few victims.  as Investor's Business Daily noted, 90% of the newspaper stories on the economy were negative.  Who could that help get elected??? Yet the following month, when Clinton defeated Bush 41, suddenly only 14% of economic news stories were negative!??

 

 

http://news.investors.com/article/602711/201202291817/recovery-no-panacea-for-obama-re-election.htm?Ntt=tide-doesnt-raise-all-boats                  In 1988, Bush won with 53.4% of the popular vote and 426 electoral votes. Two decades later, Obama won by thinner margins — 52.5% of the popular vote and 365 electoral votes.  Abroad, Bush's presidency was marked by enormous success: the collapse of the USSR, the end of the Cold War and an almost flawless victory in the Persian Gulf War. So stratospherically popular, big-name Democrats refused to challenge him.

Compared with Bush's robust election-year recovery, the Congressional Budget Office's latest projection has economic growth at less than 3% this year. Bush's highest unemployment rate was 7.8%; Obama's lowest has been 7.8% — in February 2009.

In sum, Bush won the presidency by a bigger margin, had greater global success, suffered a less severe recession and smaller deficits, and enjoyed a stronger and faster economic recovery. And he still lost re-election — with 37.5% of the popular vote and 168 electoral votes.  Unlike Bush 41, Obama has not alienated his political base. Pressured by Democrats, Bush accepted higher taxes — breaking his 1988 "no new taxes" pledge in a deficit-reduction deal. The result was an irreparable fissure into which stepped third party candidate Ross Perot.

Bush 41 proved it was the political factor that was determinative — not the economy or the deficit. Had Bush 41 received just half of Perot's votes, he would have won resoundingly. With all of them, he would have won in a landslide — with Clinton only remembered for the magnitude of his defeat.  And into the White House stepped Bill Clinton, with just 43% of the popular vote — substantially lower than McCain's 46.5% in 2008.

 

 

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/04/obama-alinsky-love-song        The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, Alinsky being the notorious community organizer from Chicago who wrote books with titles like Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals. On it, fists are raised—meaning insurrection is in the air.  And down at the very bottom, crawling across the poster in small print, it mentions the panel discussions that will follow the Sunday performances. The panelists are that era's usual "progressive" suspects: Leon Despres, Monsignor Jack Egan, Studs Terkel . And state senator Barack Obama.

The play finishes with Alinsky announcing he’d rather go to Hell than Heaven. Why? “More comfortable there. You see, all my life I’ve been with the Have-Nots: here you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of money, there you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of virtue. I’d be asking more questions, organizing them. They’re my kind of people – Hell would be Heaven for me.”
             That’s The Love Song of Saul Alinsky. It’s radical leftist stuff, and it revels in its radical leftism.  And that’s Barack Obama, our president, on the poster.  This was also the period just before Barack Obama served with Bill Ayers, from 1999 through 2002 on the board of the Woods Foundation. They gave capital to support the Midwest Academy, a leftist training institute steeped in the doctrines of -- you guessed it! -- Saul Alinsky, and whose alumni now dominate the Obama administration and its top political allies inside and out of Congress. 
             Stanley Kurtz, author of Radical-in-Chief  described the Midwest Academy as a "crypto-socialist organization.” Yet almost no one has heard of Midwest Academy, because the media does not want you to know that the president is a radical's radical whose presidency itself is a love song to a socialist "community organizer."

But is it a good thing to impress the sort of people who show up to laud The Love Song of Saul Alinsky? Here are the other members of the Obama panel (Birds of a feather flock together):

Leon Despres: Despres knew Saul Alinsky for nearly 50 years, and together they established the modern concept of “community organizing.” Despres worked with secret Communist and Soviet spy Lee Pressman to support strikers at Republic Steel in Chicago in 1937; the strike ended in tragedy when 14 rioting strikers were killed and many wounded in a hail of police bullets.  Despres worked with another Communist Party front, the Chicago Civil Liberties Committee, but eventually left because of the “Stalinism” of its leaders.   Also in 1937, Despres and his wife delivered a suitcase of “clothing” to Leon Trotsky, then hiding out from Stalin’s assassins in Mexico City. Despres and his wife not only met with the exiled Russian Communist, but Despres’s wife sat for a portrait with Trotsky pal and Marxist muralist Diego Rivera while Leon took Rivera’s wife Frida Kahlo to the movies.

Quentin Young: From 1970 until at least 1992, Quentin Young was active in the Communist Party front organization, the Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights – a group dedicated to outlawing government surveillance of radical organizations.  He was also a member of the Young Communist League. Young, a confidante and physician to Barack Obama, is credited with having heavily influenced the President’s views on healthcare policy.

Timuel Black: An icon of the Chicago left, Black was originally denied officer training because military intelligence claimed he had secretly joined the Communist Party. Black also worked closely with the Socialist Party in the 1950s, becoming president of the local chapter of the Negro American Labor Council, a organization founded by Socialist Party leader A. Phillip Randolph.
In the early ‘60s Black was a leader of the Hyde Park Community Peace Center, where he worked alongside former radical Trotskyist Sydney Lens and the aforementioned Communist Dr. Quentin Young.  Black served as a contributing editor to the Hyde Park/Kenwood Voices, a newspaper run by Communist Party member David S. Canter. By 1970, Timuel Black was serving on the advisory council of the Communist Party controlled Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights.  Timuel Black says he has been friends with domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, “going back to 1968, since long before I knew Barack.” In April 2002, Black, Dohrn and Democratic Socialists of America member Richard Rorty spoke together on a panel entitled “Intellectuals: Who Needs Them?” The panel was the first of two in a public gathering jointly sponsored by The Center for Public Intellectuals and the University of Illinois, Chicago. Bill Ayers and Barack Obama spoke together on in the second panel at that gathering. Communist academic Harold Rogers chaired Timuel Black’s unsuccessful campaign for Illinois State Representative.
Studs Terkel: A sponsor of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace in 1949, which was arranged by a Communist Party USA front organization known as the National Council of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions.
Roberta Lynch: A leading member of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and a leader of the radical Marxist New American Movement (NAM).

 

http://news.investors.com/article/605491/201203231859/obama-really-is-the-food-stamp-president.htm?Ntt=best-food-stamp-president-ever

Obama wants to expand government into every corner of our lives, and make as many Americans dependent on it as possible.  Obama really is the Best Food Stamp President…

That's true of ObamaCare, his crony capitalist policies, his tax policies. But it's nowhere more true than when it comes to food stamps.  Food stamp enrollment climbed an average 153,000 a month under Bush. Under Obama, it's climbed an average 403,000 a month.

• As of last December, there were 46.5 million on food stamps. That's 65% higher than at any time in the past four decades.

• Today, 14.8% of Americans get food stamps. That's also a record-shattering number. In Bush's last year, the figure was 9.3%.

• Obama's Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack even claimed that all this food stamp spending was accelerating economic growth. "It's the most direct stimulus you can get in the economy during these tough times," he said last August.

 

http://news.investors.com/article/607115/201204091829/sowell-comments-on-passing-scene.htm?Ntt=notes-on-the-passing-scene

How long do politicians have to keep on promising heaven and delivering hell before people catch on, and stop getting swept away by rhetoric?

With all the talk about people paying their "fair share" of income taxes, why do nearly half the people in this country pay no income taxes at all? Is that their "fair share"? Or is creating more recipients of government handouts, at no cost to themselves, simply a strategy to gain more votes?

Some people are puzzled by the fact that so much that is said and done by politicians seems remote from reality. But reality is not what gets politicians elected. Appearances, rhetoric and emotions are what get them elected. Reality is what the voters and taxpayers are left to deal with, as a result of electing them.

When politicians say "spread the wealth," translate that as "concentrate the power," because that is the only way they can spread the wealth. And once they get the power concentrated, they can do anything else they want to, as people have discovered — often to their horror — in countries around the world.

 

http://news.investors.com/article/606265/201203301828/obama-echoes-communist-manifesto-in-blueprint-for-change.htm?Ntt=the-channeling-of-marx&p=full

Less than a century ago, the Bolshevik revolution in Russia portrayed a life-or-death "class struggle" between capitalists and workers. The Bolsheviks were inspired by Karl Marx, another trained lawyer who never spent a day in the private sector. They followed his 1848 blueprint for worker revolution, "The Communist Manifesto."

Marx argued that capitalism splits industrial society into two hostile camps: the "bourgeois" — whom he described as anyone employing a worker, owning a business or making money from investments — and the "proletariat" that he figured made up the other 90% of society. He claimed that the wealth controlled by the top 10% "exists solely due to its nonexistence in the hands of those (other) nine-tenths."  In other words, profits produced by merchants, entrepreneurs and investors don't really belong to them. Marx believed they were stolen from workers and that workers would one day rise up and, justifiably, "wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeois."

Turning the tables, the working class would then become the ruling class — though Marx believed this would happen in stages.  Socialism was the first or "lower" phase of communist society, he envisioned, where democracy and vestiges of capitalism are still present but only as a means to an end.

The final or "higher" phase of communism abandons state capitalism altogether and runs a centrally planned economy under a new constitution.

Marx argued the dreams of the "individual" should be sacrificed for the "collective."

"Individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations." (Actually it wasn't Marx who said that — it was Obama, in a little-noticed 1995 interview he conducted with a liberal Chicago journal.)

Marx also called for abolishing the traditions, institutions and religions of the old order, arguing that the masses couldn't fully serve "the State" if they still clung to religion. (Again, hearing any echoes?)

The Bolsheviks struck in 1917. Their leader, V.I. Lenin, immediately declared war on banks, scapegoating "vile" and "greedy" bankers and merchants for all the problems of the underclass. His battle cry, as he seized banks and shops, was "Loot the looters!"

For the revolution to succeed, Lenin said he had to first control capital. And if he controlled banks, he could more easily control the industries they financed.

Nationalizing medicine was also key. If the communists controlled health care, Lenin said, they could own and control families — from cradle to grave.

Lenin's other main target was the education system. If the Reds socialized schooling, from kindergarten to college, they could brainwash the masses into serving the state instead of their own "selfish" interests.

By 1920, Lenin had established "free" universal health care (excluding the "deprived class" of merchants) and "free" higher education for all (except for the sons and daughters of merchants, who were blocked from college).

He also had succeeded in nationalizing all commercial banks as well as transportation.

How did the new ruling class finance (at least in the initial stages, before the USSR went bankrupt) its "fairer" economy? By soaking the rich with punitive taxes, redistributing their wealth and shaking down bankers. Sound familiar?

Such battle lines have, tragically, been redrawn in America, the same capitalist nation that defeated Soviet communism only two decades ago.

On one side are the people who create wealth. On the other are those who loot it.

This election, the most critical in American history, will decide who wins.

 

 

 

http://news.investors.com/article/604330/201203141813/documentary-designed-to-shield-obama-from-past.htm?Ntt=why-the-effort-to-hide-obamas-unsullied-past&p=full

The videotape of Obama praising and hugging his America-bashing, Constitution-trashing law professor Derrick Bell isn't the only evidence that's been hidden from the public. A 1998 video of Obama praising the late Marxist agitator Saul "The Red" Alinsky alongside a panel of hard-core Chicago communists also exists. Yet it, too, has been withheld.

So has a 2003 video of Obama speaking at a Chicago dinner held in honor of former PLO spokesman Rashid Khalidi. Anger at Israel and U.S. foreign policy were expressed during the private banquet.  Why have Obama's remarks and actions during the controversial event been suppressed? Perhaps it's because the radical Khalidi — a close friend and neighbor of Obama, who held a 2000 political fundraiser in his home for him — has strongly defended the use of violence by Palestinians against Israel, while expressing clearly anti-American views.

But if Alinsky is not a problem, why did Obama disguise the name of his radical Alinsky trainer Jerry Kellman in his memoir? And why did he also try to shield from readers the identity of his Alinsky mentor John McKnight, who wrote him a letter of recommendation to Harvard?  If his Alinskyite indoctrination is of no concern, why did Obama leave out his weeks-long training at Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation in Los Angeles? This station of the cross for Alinsky acolytes is strangely missing from all 500 pages of his tediously detailed memoir.  For that matter, the late Alinsky is not cited by name in either of the president's autobiographies, even though leftist activists confess this father of community organizing had a powerful influence on Obama.

Moreover, if communist Frank Marshall Davis wasn't a controversial factor in Obama's life, why did Obama also mask his identity in his first memoir? If listening, spellbound, at the feet of a known subversive isn't a red flag, why keep his real profile a secret?

Obama also couldn't find room in "Dreams From My Father" to mention the most striking thing about his father's politics. Obama Sr. was a pro-Soviet socialist, who as a government economist wrote a communist tract for Kenya in 1965.  If this published paper wasn't a big deal, as Obama apologists have suggested, why is it conveniently missing from the 143-page section Obama devoted to boast about his father's career in Kenya?

Likewise, if the papers Obama Jr. himself wrote at Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School are not just as radical and offensive to average Americans, why not release them, along with the transcripts (or at least the titles) of the courses he took at these schools? Why the massive gap in disclosure concerning his academic years?

Harvard professor Bell had a huge influence on Obama, who in turn taught his own law students the radical theories he learned from Bell. Yet he never mentioned Bell or the Harvard strike he led on his beloved professor's behalf in either autobiography. If he wasn't trying to fool people, why leave this seminal event out?

Even more radical — and influential — than Bell was Harvard law professor Robert Unger, who taught Obama a couple of courses, including one called "Reinventing Democracy." Like Bell, Unger called U.S. jurisprudence a sham system designed to protect the rich at the expense of the poor. But Unger also taught Obama how to dismantle it. He argued for seizing all private capital and redistributing it.

Obama kept up communications with Unger long after he graduated, but those contacts stopped in 2008. "I am a leftist, and by conviction as well as by temperament, a revolutionary," Unger explains. "Any association of mine with Barack Obama in the course of the campaign could do only harm."  There you have it.  it's guilt by participation.

Obama at one point was an employee of the radical shakedown group Acorn, and later trained its goons in Alinsky agitation tactics. He also worked with Pentagon-bombing Marxist Bill Ayers on the board of the Woods Fund, where the two comrades doled out cash to other radical groups.  In other words, Obama didn't just rub elbows with radicals, he operated as a one. It's now plain he and his fellow travelers are intentionally suppressing information that could provide the voting public a clearer link between the incumbent and radicalism.

 

 

http://news.investors.com/article/607798/201204131846/jack-welch-blasts-obama-blame-game-webhed-jack-welch-blasts-obamas-finger-pointing-presidency.htm?Ntt=welch-hits-finger-pointer-in-chief&p=full

A business icon has ripped the administration's "divide and conquer" strategy, the president's refusal to take responsibility for his policies and for an enemies list that would make a disgraced ex-president proud.

We now have the Obama Principle. It's like the Peter Principle, in which people rise to the level of their incompetence, except as redefined by this administration you refuse to recognize your incompetence and constantly blame others when things go wrong.

While Obama says he wants an "America that can last," we long for a president who can govern, who sits in the Oval Office in this time of crisis instead of jet-setting from one fundraiser to another. Ronald Reagan worked with Tip O'Neill. Bill Clinton worked with Newt Gingrich. Obama couldn't work with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to produce a budget as deficits soared.

When Obama's creeping socialism and industrial policy of picking winners and losers fails, he seeks scapegoats rather than solutions.

President Obama is the Steve Urkel of presidents, the bumbling sitcom character who, when his ill-conceived plans and blundering actions caused disaster, would look around plaintively and asked, "Did I do that?"At least Urkel knew he had nobody to blame but himself.  Not Obama.

 

 

 

http://www.grassfire.com/24098/images/OLFrontBack.jpg

Answering the call to chronicle and detail Obama’s Lies, Grassfire Nation’s researchers have compiled a chilling 122-page resource highlighting the dangerous and dishonest nature that is Obama …     Get Two Copies of 69 Obama Lies When You Help Grassfire   When you help with a contribution of any amount, we will send you two copies of 69 Obama Lies: Deceptions and Attacks on our Constitution and way of life. Keep one and pass the other off to a friend.

 

 

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx                             

 

 

 

 

http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/the-bible-and-government 

 

Politicians have become very good at promising to cut spending and then trying to raisetaxes.
That's why I need you tojoin our Tea Party DebtCommission and vote nowto tell Washington what America wants to cut.For example,whichspending cut would you prioritize here?

On November 17th we will hold our final Tea Party Debt Commission hearing on Capitol Hill and urge Congress to implement our plan which over 10 years will balance the budget without tax increases, cut $9 trillion in spending, and reduce federal spending to just 18 percent of GDP. Read more about what the Tea Party Debt Commission will cut. 

  

 

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Obama-Carter-Gallup-approval/2011/11/29/id/419436?s=al&promo_code=D9C0-1            Obama’s 43 percent rating in Gallup’s daily presidential job approval index today is far below Democrat Jimmy Carter’s 51 percent at the same point in his presidency. Carter has been considered one of the 20th century’s worst presidents, according to the index.   Political experts consider the ratings a crystal ball with the potential for predicting a president’s chances for re-election.

Historically, it has been difficult for incumbents to remain in office if their approval ratings are below 47 percent. At this same stage of Dwight Eisenhower’s term, the popular Republican president had an approval rating of 78 percent.   Bedard chronicles the approval ratings of other presidents at this point in their presidencies:

Harry S. Truman — 54 percent

Lyndon B. Johnson — 44 percent

Richard M. Nixon — 50 percent

Ronald Reagan — 54 percent

George H.W. Bush — 52 percent

Bill Clinton — 51 percent

George W. Bush — 55 percent.

 

         

http://www.christianreader.com/make-your-vote-count                  This anthology of present-day issues will fortify you with the biblical perspective on which to base your decisions. With the Bible as the ultimate source of answers, you can be sure that your decisions will be grounded in faithful stewardship and godly obedience.  This book is not about being a Republican or Democrat; it's not about endorsing candidates or telling you how to cast your vote. It simply provides a biblical foundation upon which to make voting decisions that will both honor God and best serve our country when voting.

 

 

 

http://visiontoamerica.org/7015/rubio-to-obama-you-are-turning-america-into-a-deadbeat-nation/         Senator Marco Rubio said that under the President’s first term in office, “more and more people have come to believe that America is becoming a deadbeat nation.”  Rubio went on to pledge that he would challenge any further increase in the debt ceiling, arguing that “we [Congress] need to make it routine to actually spend no more than we take in.” In the letter obtained by HUMAN EVENTS, the Florida Senator said that President Obama’s upcoming request to increase the debt ceiling by a whopping $1.2 trillion will cause the nation’s public debt to surpass the $16 trillion mark.  “I will oppose your request to continue borrowing and spending recklessly.”  President Obama is expected to request the new borrowing power from Congress once the Senate and House return from their holiday recess.  The president must notify Congress when the debt closes within $100 billion of the ceiling, according to the Budget Control Act passed in August.  This triggers for Congress their only available option to block an increase, in this case $1.2 trillion, by passing legislation. However, even if the House and Senate do that, the president can still veto their objections.  In short, there is very little Republicans can do in a Democratic-controlled Senate to block an increase.

 

  

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=573037&p=1       The tough-talking Perry, who succeeded George W. Bush in Austin in 2000, is the governor of a large state facing all the hot-button issues — immigration and border security, states' rights and the 10th amendment, the fight against ObamaCare and the EPA's growing presence as a job-killing shadow government pushing the states around.

 
Perry and Texas are at war with the Obama administration, a war in which the White House literally let Texas burn as wildfires consumed millions of acres and endangered countless lives even as the president was flying Air Force cargo planes to Mexico where a few hundred acres were ablaze.

Perry also leads a state whose population is growing as its economy grows, a stark contrast to the debt-ridden, job-killing stimulus the Obama administration imposed on the country. 

http://www.amazon.com/Fed-Up-Fight-America-Washington/dp/0316132950        

 

       

        

http://www.nolanchart.com/article4425-a-fabian-socialist-dream-come-true.html      In 1942, Stuart Chase, in his book "The Road We Are Traveling" spelled out the system of planning the Fabians had in mind; the interesting thing is to look at that plan in comparison to 2008 America. It should be evident that while Socialist no longer use the name that the plan is Socialism at its heart.

1. Strong, centralized government.

2. Powerful Executive at the expense of Congress and the Judicial.

3. Government controlled banking, credit and securities exchange.

4. Government control over employment.

5. Unemployment insurance, old age pensions.

6. Universal medical care, food and housing programs.

7. Access to unlimited government borrowing.

8. A managed monetary system.

9. Government control over foreign trade.

10. Government control over natural energy sources, transportation and agricultural production.

11. Government regulation of labor.

12. Youth camps devoted to health discipline, community service and ideological teaching consistent with those of the authorities.

13. Heavy progressive taxation.

 

 

George Bernard Shaw unmasked the simple mindset of the semi-secret Fabian Socialist Society, as he was one of their number. Shaw stated:  "Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well."  George Bernard Shaw: The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928, pg. 470) (as quoted in The Creature From Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin p. 101.)

 

http://www.marklevinshow.com/article.asp?id=2376432     Mark Levin, author of Liberty and Tyranny, is back with a new book, Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America, and it’s sure to be one another bestseller. Levin provides what is in essence a graduate school seminar on political philosophy, examining four influential utopian works — Plato’s Republic, Thomas More’s Utopia, Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan and Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto — and three authors who extoll the vision of limited government: John Locke, Charles Montesquieu and Alexis de Tocqueville.

 

 

         

             

http://cainconnections.com/home    

 

http://conservativebyte.com/2011/10/cain-43-obama-41/                        Voters shows Cain attracting 43% support, while Obama earns 41%.  Election 2012: Generic Republican 47%, Obama 41%  The president’s Job Approval remains the best single indicator for his reelection prospects. On Election Day next year, his Job Approval rating is likely to nearly match his vote total. 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/563427/201102161837/-And-Razing-Cain.aspx               Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, current radio talk-show host and possible 2012 GOP presidential contender                      Cain challenges the liberal orthodoxy by saying people should find inspiration in "God, yourself and the greatest country in the world," not from the government. On that score, he says "stupid people are running this country."

 

We are burdened, he says, by "too much regulation, legislation and taxation," and the "only way to fix our messed-up tax code is to throw it out and put in a whole new system." He denounces a regulatory burden that places $10,000 in compliance costs on business for every worker hired as we wonder why businesses aren't hiring.

His is a government that allows wealth creation rather than redistribution and promises a better life for our children rather than an unconscionable burden of debt.

That's not what an African-American is supposed to say. Worse yet, he says it without a teleprompter.               http://www.hermancain.com/                    

 

 

Cain: Obama Couldn't Run a Pizza Joint   Fast-rising GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO emerging as a strong contender in the Iowa caucuses, blasted President Barack Obama’s leadership abilities in an exclusive Newsmax interview, saying Obama “could not run one Godfather’s pizza restaurant.”  http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/herman-cain-obama-gop/2011/06/02/id/398657?s=al&promo_code=C60E-1                

Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

 

www.hermancain.com                  Mr. President! More speeches, more spending, and more tax trinkets are not a bridge to solving America’s economic problems. It didn’t work before.  “We Waited 30 Months for this?”    -Herman Cain  Indeed, it seems Mr. Obama's first term has been spent advancing a legislative agenda that pays no mind to our ailing economy and the Americans whose sufferings are casualties in his ideological war. After a failed stimulus package, preferential industry bailouts, and the disastrous government overhaul of the health-care industry, it seems the plight of the American worker has remained an afterthought.

This is the worst jobs recovery since the Great Depression. If the Obama administration's aim was to merely tie for last place with the previous worst recovery, it would have created eight million more jobs, based on comparative data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. If our recovery were more typical of the postwar era, as former Sen. Phil Gramm reported on this page in April, we would have 14 million more jobs today.

As a longtime leader in the business community, I know firsthand that government does not create jobs. It can only create the conditions in which businesses operate. These conditions can spur growth, or they can suppress it. The conditions imposed by the Obama administration have suppressed growth and jobs.   
            On Thursday, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial entitled "My Plan to Revive Economic Growth." In the piece, Herman details how the "9-9-9 Plan" will jump-start our economy and create jobs. In case you missed it, you can read it here .  On Friday, the Washington Times praised Herman's plan, calling it an "economic-recovery solution." Senior editor Emily Miller says, "With one end of Pennsylvania Avenue being run by a former community organizer and the other end by career politicians, fresh ideas like Mr. Cain's are exactly what the country needs." Click here to read the full editorial .

 

During his first question regarding the crippled economic condition of America, Cain explained his "9-9-9" economic plan that would establish a 9 percent tax on personal income, a 9 percent tax on corporate income and a 9 percent tax on sales.

"If 10 percent is good enough for God, then 9 percent is good enough for government," Cain said.

The plan would also eliminate taxes on repatriated profits, payroll, estates and capital gains and their dividends. http://www.hermancain.com/wp-content/themes/hc/images/economicgrowth.pdf 

During his second question regarding the constitutionality of Obamacare's individual mandate, Cain outlined his role in the defeat of President Clinton's attempt at a government overhaul of the health care industry, also known as "Hillarycare." In 1994, Newsweek named Cain the primary "saboteur" of the proposal after Cain challenged President Clinton on the effects on businesses and their employees should the legislation pass. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptrTa8C_Pl4&feature=youtu.be           

"The individual mandate is absolutely unconstitutional," Cain said, responding to both Obamacare and Governor Romney's health care law of Massachusetts.

Mr. Cain also discussed reforming Social Security to move from an "entitlement system to an empowerment system," as well as the need for immigration reform that secures our borders, enforces current laws, promotes the path to citizenship and empowers the states.

Now, more than ever, we need someone like Herman Cain: a leader who's balanced budgets, created jobs for 40 years and who understands the greatness of America. We might not have the war chests of career politicians, but we do have the integrity of ideas and the support of "we the people" to take back our government! Together, we can elect Herman Cain- a man with the values and vision to restore the American Dream for generations to come.

      

http://news.investors.com/Article/589964/201110311848/Cains-No-Clinton.htm      The press is reporting that GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain was once accused of sexual harassment. OK, and Bill Clinton was elected to the White House not once but twice.  Do you remember Clinton favorites:  Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick AND Monica Lewinsky!!  So why is this even an issue?  Even if something had happened, we wonder why the media are making such a big deal of this. Didn't the double election of Clinton eliminate sexual impropriety as an issue in politics? If it didn't, then the media's John Edwards cover-up should have.  If randy sexual behavior is OK for Democrats, why is the accusation against Cain a legitimate news item?

 

http://bible.cc/exodus/20-16.htm                  Never lie when you testify about your neighbor. ( a long time human sin ) - Not only false oaths, to deprive a man of his life or of his right, are here prohibited, but all whispering, tale-bearing, slander, and calumny; in a word, whatever is deposed as a truth, which is false in fact, and tends to injure another in his goods, person, or character, is against the spirit and letter of this law. Suppressing the truth when known, by which a person may be defrauded of his property or his good name, or lie under injuries or disabilities which a discovery of the truth would have prevented, is also a crime against this law. He who bears a false testimony against or belies even the devil himself, comes under the curse of this law, because his testimony is false. By the term neighbor any human being is intended, whether he rank among our enemies or friends.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=373081     The first one was Sharon Bialek, who claimed that Cain grabbed her crotch in a car. Then we found out Bialek was in constant financial trouble, had been involved in a paternity lawsuit, was known as a "gold digger," had a string of debts and had twice filed for personal bankruptcy. Also, she admitted she knew Obama's dirty tricks specialist, David Axelrod. Her personal history is relevant because she produced no evidence. We had to take her word (which was not helped by seeing her standing with Gloria Allred).

The second one, Karen Kraushaar, made unspecified allegations of a "hostile environment" when she was working for Cain, but refuses to say what those allegations were. This despite the fact that the National Restaurant Association waived her confidentiality agreement, thus allowing her to go public.

That's one "she," but no "said."  Cain said he had once told Kraushaar she was as tall as his wife – which would be one of the more worthy sexual harassment claims settled by an American company in recent years.  Why won't she say? We're not talking about rape. Kraushaar can't say, "I don't want to relive being told I was the same height as his wife!" With all the nonsense that passes for a "hostile environment," either Kraushaar tells us what Cain allegedly did, or her blind accusation is worth less than nothing.

As if that weren't enough, then it turned out that Kraushaar had also filed a complaint at her next job just three years later, charging that a manager had circulated a sexually explicit joke email comparing computers to men and women. She demanded a raise and the right to work at home.  Maybe Kraushaar is the most unlucky woman in the world. But the simpler explanation is that she is not a credible witness on the workplace atmosphere.

And now we have Ginger White stepping forward to claim that she had a 13-year affair with Cain. Cain admits he was friends with White, but he categorically, adamantly denies having an affair with her.

White has the whole combo-platter of questionable accuser attributes: She's another financially troubled, twice-divorced, unemployed single mother, who has claimed sexual harassment in the past, declared bankruptcy once, was accused of stalking and had a libel judgment entered against her just this year. So far in 2011, she's had nine liens put on her property.  But we're supposed to ignore all of that because she's the third woman of questionable character to make an implausible allegation. Liberals say there's a pattern, but the only pattern is of their making far-fetched accusations of a sexual nature against Cain.

White's proof that she had a 13-year affair is that she has two of Cain's books signed by him – one with the incriminating inscription, "Friends are forever! Everything else is a bonus," and the other, "Miss G, you have already made a 'big difference!' Stay focused as you pursue your next destination." (I know – filthy!)

If that's proof of an affair, I've had thousands of them without even realizing it.

Also, White produced evidence that Cain had texted or called her cell phone 61 times during four non-consecutive months – but did not reveal what those texts said. ("Would you please return my lawn mower?") Again, if that's proof of an affair, I'm having hundreds of them at this very moment.

This is the sort of evidence you get with an actual sexual predator: Bill Clinton's accusers had gifts, taped phone conversations with him and a semen-stained dress.

Gennifer Flowers produced taped telephone calls with Clinton totaling thousands of words between them, with him counseling her on how to deny their affair: "If they ever hit you with it, just say no, and go on. There's nothing they can do ... But when they – if somebody contacts you, I need to know. ... All you got to do is deny it."  Paula Jones had multiple same-day witnesses – including the state troopers who worked for Clinton and had already told the press about a "Paula" they brought to Clinton's hotel room. And that was for a single incident.  Monica Lewinsky had lots of gifts from Clinton, including a hat pin, two brooches, a marble bear figurine, a T-shirt from Martha's Vineyard and Walt Whitman's "Leaves of Grass," all of which she mysteriously placed with Clinton's secretary, Betty Currie, during the investigation, as well as a semen-stained dress, which Monica kept.

Ginger White claims she had a 13-year affair with Cain – and all she has are two books with inscriptions that could have been written to an auto mechanic who waited in line at a Cain book signing. Even her business partner during the alleged affair says White never mentioned Cain's name.

These women are like triple-A ball players with the stats being: number of bankruptcies, smallest bank account, number of liens, most false claims, number of children out of wedlock, degrees of separation from David Axelrod, total trips to human resources and so on.  That wouldn't be dispositive – except for the fact that their only evidence is their word.

But this is how liberals dirty you up when they've got nothing: They launch a series of false accusations, knowing that Americans with busy lives won't follow each story to the end and notice that they were all blind alleys.  The liberal media is an old story, but it's still a big story when it comes to creating the impression of scandal out of thin air.  Most people say, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." I say, "Where there's smoke around a conservative, there are journalists furiously rubbing two sticks together."

 

 

http://www.dennisprager.com/columns.aspx?g=90a1ba2c-1d3e-4037-83da-6fbbfaa9b23d&url=what_does_adultery_tell_us_about_character             To religious readers, I point to God Himself, who apparently thought that King David deserved to remain king -- and even have the Messiah descend from him -- despite a particularly ugly form of adultery (sending Bathsheba's husband into battle where he would assuredly be killed).  Who would you prefer for president? A pro-life conservative who had had an affair, or a pro-choice man of the left who had always been faithful to his wife?

Jimmy Carter, to the best of our knowledge, has been faithful to his wife throughout their long marriage. That is certainly commendable. Did it make him in any way a better president? Has it given moral acuity to the man who wrote a book equating democratic Israel with apartheid South Africa?

And the American who, perhaps singlehandedly, may have prevented inter-racial war in America, Martin Luther King Jr., committed adultery on a number of occasions.

Would John F. Kennedy, a serial adulterer while in the White House, have been any different a president were he faithful?

Just knowing that a man or a woman had extramarital sex may tell us nothing about the person. I have always wanted to know: Why is sexual sin in general and adultery in particular the one sin that many religious people regard as defining a person as well as almost unforgiveable?

Nothing here is in any way meant to be a defense of adultery.  I believe it violates one of the Ten Commandments. As a married person, I know how much it would hurt my wife and how much it would hurt me if the other had an affair. But marriage is too complex an arena to draw any immediate conclusions about a person. Are we to label a man who takes loving care of his chronically ill wife and who has a discreet affair no more than an adulterer who merits disdain and mistrust? Is a woman who stays in an emotionally abusive marriage for the sake of her children someone with little integrity because she sought to be held in another man's loving arms? The questions and nuances are innumerable.  And what is adultery? Women have called my show to tell me that a man who gets a lap dance has committed adultery. Others go further -- merely attending a strip show, or looking at Playboy, is adultery. To my mind, this is emotion -- not reason, morality or religion -- talking. Yes, many Christians cite Jesus as saying that a man who lusts after a woman other than his wife has committed adultery with his heart. But he made it clear that this is adultery (SET ITAL) with his heart (END ITAL). And if someone believes the two are morally identical, why not start asking candidates if they have ever lusted for any woman other than their wife?

In choosing a president of the United States, adultery would greatly matter to me is if it were engaged in indiscreetly. I don't trust the integrity or conscience of a man or woman who publicly humiliates his or her spouse.  Beyond that, I do not want to know anything about the sexual life of any candidate. Media reporting or questioning about candidates' sexual lives constitutes a form of hypocrisy so deep that the English language does not have a word for it. Media people report (or don’t report depending on what political party they vote for) on the sexual lives of candidates -- for virtually any public office -- on the grounds that since these politicians have great power, the public needs to know all about them. Yet, they offer no insight into their own sexual lives, even though some in the news media are far more powerful than almost any politician except the president of the United States.

 If we cannot trust a candidate who committed adultery, then why can we trust a news reporter or editor who has committed adultery?

  

 

 

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/herman-cain-wont-retract-planned-parenthood-planned-genocide

Cain originally made the assertion on March 15 when he spoke at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., and CNSNews.com’s White House Correspondent Fred Lucas asked Cain if the Republican-controlled Congress should stop federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

“Here’s why I support de-funding Planned Parenthood, because you don’t hear a lot of people talking about this: When Margaret Sanger--check my history--started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world,” Cain responded.

“You don’t see that talked that much about,” Cain said. “It’s not Planned Parenthood. No, it’s planned genocide. You can quote me on that.”

In response to a follow-up question from another reporter at the Heritage Foundation event--who asked if Cain wanted to defund Planned Parenthood because of what it is doing now or because of why it was founded--Cain said he believed Planned Parenthood was continuing to carry out its original mission.

“It’s carrying out its original mission,” said Cain. “I’ve talked to young girls who go in there and they don’t talk about how you plan parenthood. They don’t talk about adoption as an option. They don’t say bring your parents in so you we can talk to you before you make this decision.

“Talk to some young lady who has gone into some of these centers to see what kind of conversation takes place,” said Cain. “They have basically carried out their original mission. There’s not any planning other than to abort the baby.

“When they have an objective to put 75 percent [Planned Parenthood facilities] in African American communities, says to me they are targeting blacks,” Cain said. “They are doing the same thing at the other 25 percent, I guess.”

On “Meet the Press” Sunday, Schieffer pressed Cain to justify his assertion that Planned Parenthood targeted black babies.

“Do you have any proof that that was the objective of Planned Parenthood?” asked Schieffer.

“If people go back and look at the history and look at Margaret Sanger`s own words, that`s exactly where that came from,” said Cain. “Look up the history. So if you go back and look up the history. Secondly, look at where most of them were built.

“Seventy-five percent of those facilities were built in the black community,” said Cain. “In Margaret Sanger`s own words, she didn`t use the word genocide, but she did talk about preventing the increasing number of poor blacks in this country by preventing black babies from being born.”

Schieffer than asked Cain if Planned Parenthood was not in fact doing something beneficial for the black community by locating its clinics in black neighborhoods.

“So you would not see any advantage to having young mothers get counsel and advice that Planned Parenthood could give them, I mean, with so many black babies born out of wedlock?” asked Schieffer.

“There are a lot of centers that offer sincere counseling, rather than Planned Parenthood claiming to be those centers when in fact they would rather for the young lady to come in and say they want to get an abortion and facilitate that,” said Cain.

“Plenty of centers out there genuinely do that,” said Cain. “What I`m saying is Planned Parenthood isn`t sincere about wanting to try to counsel them not to have abortions.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control, 36.5 percent of the abortions done in the United States in 2007 were done on black babies. However, according to the Census Bureau, 12.4 percent of the overall U.S. population is black. That means that black babies are aborted at a rate that is almost triple the rate of blacks in the nation’s population.

Planned Parenthood, which receives funding from the federal government, is the nation’s leading abortion provider.

According to a fact sheet Planned Parenthood has posted on its website, the group did 332,278 abortions in 2009.  That same year, according to Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report, it also received $363.2 million in government grants and contracts. Earlier this year, Planned Parenthood Spokesman Tait Sye told Bloomberg Businessweek that 90 percent of that $363.2 million came directly from the federal government or from Medicaid, a federal-state partnership.

Where is the uproar from Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the New or Old Black Panthers, NAACP etc.???

 

 

The Ten Commandments According to Obama            http://patriotdepot.com/anti-obama/      

I. Thou shalt have no God in America, except for me. For we are no longer a Christian nation and, after all, I am the chosen One. (And like God, I do not have a birth certificate.) SOURCE

II. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, unless it is my face carved on Mt. Rushmore. SOURCE

III. Thou shalt not utter my middle name in vain (or in public). Only I can say Barack Hussein Obama. SOURCE

IV. Remember tax day, April 15th, to keep it holy. SOURCE

V. Honor thy father and thy mother until they are too old and sick to care for. They will cost our public-funded health-care system too much money. SOURCE

VI. Thou shalt not kill, unless you have an unwanted, unborn baby. For it would be an abomination to punish your daughter with a baby. SOURCE

VII. Thou shalt not commit adultery if you are conservative or a Republican. Liberals and Democrats are hereby forgiven for all of their infidelity and immorality, but the careers of conservatives will be forever destroyed. SOURCE

VIII. Thou shalt not steal, until you've been elected to public office. Only then is it acceptable to take money from hard-working, successful citizens and give it to those who do not work, illegal immigrants, or those who do not have the motivation to better their own lives. SOURCE

IX. Thou shalt not discriminate against thy neighbor unless they are conservative, Caucasian, or Christian. SOURCE

X. Thou shalt not covet because it is simply unnecessary. I will place such a heavy tax burden on those that have achieved the American Dream that, by the end of my term as President, nobody will have any wealth or material goods left for you to covet. SOURCE

 

   

Proverbs 29:2   (NLT)    ² When the godly are in authority, the people rejoice.      But when the wicked are in power, they groan.

 

Proverbs 6:16-19  (NIV)  ¹⁶ There are six things the LORD hates,    seven that are detestable to him:     ¹⁷ haughty eyes,       a lying tongue,       hands that shed innocent blood,     ¹⁸ a heart that devises wicked schemes,       feet that are quick to rush into evil,     ¹⁹ a false witness who pours out lies       and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

 

Micah 2:1-3 (TNIV)   Human Plans and God’s Plans

 ¹ Woe to those who plan iniquity,    to those who plot evil on their beds!  At morning’s light they carry it out    because it is in their power to do it. ² They covet fields and seize them,    and houses, and take them. They defraud people of their homes,    they rob them of their inheritance.  ³ Therefore, the LORD says:    “I am planning disaster against this people,    from which you cannot save yourselves.
You will no longer walk proudly,    for it will be a time of calamity.

 

The Twelve Steps   http://www.12step.com/12steps.html

Below are the 12 Steps in their entirety. Please click on an individual step to learn more about it. 

Step 1  We admitted we were powerless over alcohol, drugs, sin etc.—that our lives had become unmanageable.

 Step 2  Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, could restore us to sanity. 

Step 3  Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him. 

Step 4  Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves. 

Step 5  Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs. 

Step 6  Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character. 

Step 7  Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings. 

Step 8  Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all. 

Step 9  Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others. 

Step 10  Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it. 

Step 11  Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His Will for us and the power to carry that out. 

Step 12  Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics and sinners, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/479959/200906181835/A-Handy-Guide-To-The-Age-Of-Obama.aspx

 

 

                        Perhaps, though, this handy guide to Age of Obama "logic" might be of some assistance.

• 1. The budget. Wanting to cut $17 billion from the budget, as President Obama has promised, is proof of financial responsibility. Borrowing $1.84 trillion this year for new programs is "stimulus." The old phrase "out-of-control spending" is inoperative.

• 2. Unemployment. The number of jobs theoretically saved, or created, by new government policies — not the actual percentage of Americans out of work, or the total number of jobs lost — is now the far better indicator of unemployment.

• 3. The private sector. Nationalizing much of the auto and financial industries, while regulating executive compensation, is an indication of our new government's repeatedly stated reluctance to interfere in the private sector.

• 4. Race and gender. Not what is said but who says it and about whom reveals racism and sexism. For example, an Hispanic female judge isn't being offensive if she states that Latinas are inherently better judges than white males.

• 5. Random violence. Some assassinations represent larger American pathologies, but others do not. When a crazed lone gunman murders someone outside the Holocaust Museum or shoots an abortion doctor, we should worry about growing right-wing and Christian extremism.

But when an African-American Muslim convert brags about his murder of a military recruitment officer or an Islamic group plots to kill Jews and blow up a military jet, these are largely isolated incidents without larger relevance.

• 6. Terrorism. Acts of terror disappeared about six months ago. Thankfully, we live now in an age where there will be — in the new vocabulary of the Obama administration — only occasional "overseas contingency operations" in which we may be forced to hold a few "detainees."

At the same time, ongoing military tribunals, renditions, wiretaps, phone intercepts and predator-drone assassinations are no longer threats to the Constitution. And just saying you're going to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay is proof that it is almost closed.

• 7. Iraq. The once-despised Iraq War thankfully ended around Jan. 20, 2009, and has now transformed into a noble experiment that is fanning winds of change throughout the Middle East. There will be no need for any more Hollywood cinema exposes of American wartime crimes in Iraq with titles like "Rendition," "Redacted," "Lions for Lambs" and "Stop-Loss."

• 8. The West. Western values and history aren't apparently that special or unique. As President Obama told the world during his recent speech in Cairo, the Renaissance and Enlightenment were, in fact, fueled by a brilliant Islamic culture, responsible for landmark discoveries in mathematics, science and medicine.

Slavery in America ended without violence. Mistreatment of women and religious intolerance in the Middle East have comparable parallels in America.

• 9. Media. The media are disinterested and professional observers of the present administration. When television anchormen and senior magazine editors bow to the president, proclaim him a god or feel tingling in the legs when he speaks, it is quite normal.

• 10. George W. Bush. Former President Bush did all sorts of bad things to the United States that only now we are learning will take at least eight years to sort out. "Bush did it" for the next decade will continue to explain the growing unemployment rate, the most recent deficit, the new round of tensions with Iran and North Korea, and the growing global unrest from the Middle East to South America.

Once we remember and accept the logic of the above, then almost everything about this Age of Obama begins to make sense.

           

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/562252/201102041932/Why-Not-Just-Let-Obama-Be-Reagan-.aspx             Today, Obama presides over a struggling economy marked by 9% unemployment — the 21st straight months its been at 9% or higher, the longest stretch since World War II. Though the economy now is technically expanding again for the first time since 2007, there's virtually no job growth. Since the economy left recession in June 2009, just 94,000 private-sector jobs have been created.

As bad as things are today, they were worse when Reagan entered office. The economy was in the worst downturn since the Depression and on its way to a second recession. Unemployment was poised to peak at 10.8%. In 1980, inflation averaged 13.5% year over year. The prime rate of interest stood at 20.5% as 1981 arrived. The economy was a shambles.

It was common at the time to think that the U.S. was in eclipse — that it would soon be overtaken by the USSR, or Japan, or even Europe. That may sound funny now, but it wasn't then.

Reagan emanated optimism. He did so because he believed — indeed, he knew — that his principles were the right ones. He believed in individual rights and responsibility, small but effective government, a strong defense and the rule of law.

Comparing how Reagan brought the economy roaring back with Obama's lack of success is instructive.

During Reagan's first term, unemployment fell from a peak of 10.8% to below 5% by the time he left office. During the 1980s, the Reagan boom economy created 19 million jobs.

As for the economy, real GDP rose 37% as inflation, once the scourge of the economy, steadily fell over the 1980s.

But didn't tax cuts starve the government of revenues? A total myth. Income tax revenues rose 54% from 1980 to 1989, 28% after inflation. Total tax revenues grew 99.4%.

How does this compare with Obama? Not only has he not cut spending, but through an $862 billion "stimulus" and $1 trillion in new health care spending, the budget has grown massively.

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/548002/201009211903/More-CEOs-Seeing-Obama-As-Bad-Hire.aspx                        Problem is, CEOs have walked away from prior White House luncheons shocked at (1) Obama's dismissive reaction as they try to explain the harm of his anti-business policies and (2) his shallow understanding of business and economic matters.

They're not just put off by the president's harsh depiction of "fat cat bankers" and other anti-business bashings. They're more disturbed by his arrogant ignorance. "The truth is that not even the Franklin Roosevelt administration was as hostile to and ignorant about free enterprise as this administration is," said publisher Steve Forbes.

Few before the election dared call Obama the "s" word. Independent voters, who ensured Obama's victory, generally considered him to be a centrist or slightly left of center. Now they view him as extremely liberal. And by Democrats' own polling, a solid majority — 55% — of all likely voters now think "socialist" is a more accurate way to describe Obama.

Hate to say we told you so. But we did.

 

 

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2010/10/28/brass_oldies_part_iii/page/full/                     the "actual words 'separation of church and state' do not appear in the text of the Constitution." Either the separation of church and state is there or it is not there. It is not a question of some "strictest" technicality.

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States begins, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution about a "wall of separation" between church and state, either directly or indirectly. The Church of England was an "established church." That is, it was not only financed by the government, its members had privileges denied to members of other religions.

The people who wrote the Constitution of the United States had been British subjects most of their lives, and knew exactly what an "established church." meant. They wanted no such thing in the United States of America. End of story-- or so it should have been.

For more than a century, no one thought that the First Amendment meant that religious symbols were forbidden on government property. Prayers were offered in Congress and in the Supreme Court. Chaplains served in the military and presidents took their oath of office on the Bible.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/550958/201010191855/Decrees-Of-Separation.aspx                What the Constitution does say, in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, is that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" — a restriction imposed upon the state to prevent its interference in religious practice.

Talk-radio king and Landmark Legal Foundation President Mark R. Levin explained the confusion of liberal judges and trial lawyers in his 2005 book, "Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America."

The "Wall of Separation" phrase comes not from the Constitution, but from President Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802. As Levin notes, the obscure comment was virtually ignored for nearly a century and a half. It wasn't until 1947 when Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black ruled in the Everson case — which actually upheld the use of taxpayer money to transport children to Catholic and other parochial schools — that the Jefferson metaphor was used to establish "the anti-religious precedent that has done so much damage to religious freedom."

Is it any wonder that the newest Supreme Court justice, Elena Kagan, did not require the study of constitutional law when she was dean of Harvard Law School — but did require the study of foreign law? Those future federal judges graduating Harvard might catch onto the fable liberal activists have gone to such trouble weaving.

 

   

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/church-339789-one-catholic.html                 The church model the young American state wished to separate from was that of the British monarch, who remains to this day Supreme Governor of the Church of England. This convenient arrangement dates from the 1534 Act of Supremacy. The title of the law gives you the general upshot, but, just in case you're a bit slow on the uptake, the text proclaims "the King's Majesty justly and rightfully is and ought to be the supreme head of the Church of England." That's to say, the sovereign is "the only supreme head on earth of the Church" and he shall enjoy "all honors, dignities, pre-eminences, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, immunities, profits and commodities to the said dignity," not to mention His Majesty "shall have full power and authority from time to time to visit, repress, redress, record, order, correct, restrain and amend all such errors, heresies, abuses, offenses, contempts and enormities, whatsoever they be."

None of this should come as a surprise. As Philip Klein pointed out in the American Spectator two years ago, the Obamacare bill contained 700 references to the Secretary "shall," another 200 to the Secretary "may," and 139 to the Secretary "determines." So the Secretary may and shall determine pretty much anything she wants, as the Obamaphile rubes among the Catholic hierarchy are belatedly discovering. His Majesty King Barack "shall have full power and authority to visit, repress, redress, record, order, correct, restrain and amend all such errors, heresies, abuses, offenses, contempts and enormities whatsoever they be." In my latest book, I cite my personal favorite among the epic sweep of Commissar Sebelius' jurisdictional authority:

 

 

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Henry_VIII_of_England                   Henry VIII (June 28, 1491 – January 28, 1547) was King of England and Lord of Ireland (later King of Ireland) from April 22, 1509, until his death. He is famous for having been married six times and for wielding the most untrammeled power of any British monarch. Notable events during his reign included the break with Rome and the subsequent establishment of the independent Church of England, the Dissolution of the Monasteries, and the union of England and Wales.  Several significant pieces of legislation were enacted during Henry VIII's reign. They included the several Acts which severed the English Church from the Roman Catholic Church and established Henry as the supreme head of the Church in England.  As a result of the church-state relationship that emerged under Henry VIII (with the king as head of the church, following Martin Luther's model) and of efforts to impose membership of the Church of England on the whole population, other denominations evolved during the years that followed Henry's reign. These include the Congregationalists, Baptists, Unitarians, and Presbyterians.  The Statute in Restraint of Appeals prohibited appeals from English ecclesiastical courts to the Pope. It also prevented the Church from making any regulations without the King's consent. The Ecclesiastical Appointments Act 1534 required the clergy to elect Bishops nominated by the Sovereign. The Act of Supremacy 1534 declared that the King was ‘the only Supreme Head in Earth of the Church of England’; the Treasons Act 1534 made it high treason, punishable by death, to refuse to acknowledge the King as such. Technically, the English Reformation dates from this Act. The Pope was denied sources of revenue such as Peter's Pence.

 

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html           Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

http://myloc.gov/Exhibitions/creatingtheus/BillofRights/Pages/SlObjectList.aspx

Fearing abuses of rights and the restoration of the Roman Catholic Church under the Catholic King James II (reigned 1685–1688), the English parliament deposed James. They invited his Protestant daughter and son-in-law to assume the throne, but imposed the 1689 Declaration of Rights on the King William III (reigned 1689–1702) and Queen Mary II (reigned 1689–1694) as a precondition to being crowned. However, Parliament was more concerned with protecting its own rights and privileges than those of individuals.

http://myloc.gov/Exhibitions/CreatingtheUS/interactives/bill_of_rights/HTML/religion/enlarge1-transcribe.html

That as Religion, or the Duty which we owe to our divine and omnipotent Creator, and the Manner of discharging it, can be governed only by Reason and Conviction, not by Force or Violence; and therefore that all Men shou'd enjoy the fullest Toleration in the Exercise of Religion, according to the Dictates of Conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the Magistrate, unless, under Colour of Religion, any Man disturb the Peace, the Happiness, or Safety of Society, or of Individuals. And that it is the mutual Duty of all, to practice Christian Forbearance, Love, and Charity towards Each other.

http://myloc.gov/Exhibitions/CreatingtheUS/interactives/bill_of_rights/HTML/religion/enlarge2-transcribe.html

Fourthly. That in article 1st, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be inserted these clauses, to wit: "The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner or on any pretext infringed."

 

http://myloc.gov/Exhibitions/CreatingtheUS/interactives/bill_of_rights/HTML/beararms/index.html

An armed citizenry was seen as a bulwark against tyranny. Moreover, Americans undoubtedly were familiar with British efforts to restrict gun ownership in England, Scotland, and particularly Ireland. Where did this idea come from? »

Fourthly. That in article 1st, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be inserted these clauses, to wit: . . . "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person."

 

Attacking the Electoral College is a favorite past time of liberal Democrats, so why are Republicans carrying their banner?  They will try to baffle you with statistics, while telling you how this will bring candidates out of the urban centers and into the rural areas.  When politicians tell you things, ask yourself: “how do they benefit if I believe it?”  If their claims were true, the Democrats and the unions would be fighting this tooth and nail.  Why then, are the Democrats on board with this?

It's because they know this will move us closer to a true democracy, where majority rules and can strip the rights from the minority with a simple vote.  Two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.  John Adams said, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself."  This is very similar to the 17th Amendment, which established direct elections of United States Senators by popular vote.  It is one step further from a republic and closer to a democracy.  The 17th Amendment neutered states' rights and destroyed the balance of power between states and the federal government.  You can certainly see where that got us: a federal government that walks all over the states.

The proponents of this scheme claim it's a states' rights issue.  Well, they are right: the National Popular Vote will hammer a nail in the states' rights coffin.  If our state does not want to lose more power to the federal government, we need to say NO to the National Popular Vote.  If you don't believe me, read the Cato Institute's analysis of it.  read the Cato Institute's analysis of it. Again, I urge you to call your MN Representative and Senator today, as this bill will come up for a floor vote at any time.  Tell them to vote NO on National Popular Vote.

 

 

 

http://jobcreatorsalliance.org/Competitiveness.aspx       

1.     The U.S. ranks 49th in regulatory competitiveness, well behind China and other competitors.

2.     Worldwide, American high school students currently rank 25th in math and 17th in science.

3.     Many talented immigrants are unable to get visas that allow them to start companies in the U.S. so are returning to their home country and creating jobs there instead.

4.     Regulations cost the U.S. economy more than $1.75 trillion in 2008, equivalent to $15,500 per household.  Regulatory costs per employee are 36 percent higher for small businesses than for large firms.

5.     In 2006, Sarbanes-Oxley cost public companies $6 billion, enough to have hired 128,000 workers.

 

 

  

  

http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2011/02/03/will-obama-voluntarily-pay-more-for-2010-taxes/             As I begin my annual ritual of preparing my tax return I recall that during a campaign debate, then Senator Barack Obama said of taxes:

OBAMA: Well, I don’t mind paying a little more.

The IRS will accept payments from those taxpayers that wish to voluntarily pay more.  Will President Obama’s tax return reflect a higher payment for 2010 than what was required? Have any of his returns reflected this higher payment?

Obama wants the top 2% of earners to pay higher taxes.  Will he set the example by voluntarily paying extra until he gets the higher rate implemented?

 

 

http://soundpolitics.com/archives/013900.html    Want higher taxes? Then pay more

The Washington Legislature just can't find one more penny of spending to cut, so they have to force you and me to pay more for the state's high-paid employees. EFF WA They need a new source for the revenue they need.

There are so many people in favor of higher taxes in this state; Olympia is crawling with them. Let them pay more  "Don't cut here; don't cut there." Surely they will pay voluntarily pay higher taxes when they are given the opportunity.

Hey, Legislature: Create a way that people can voluntarily pay additional taxes.

Virginia tried it and collected $1500 this year. Old Dominion Watchdog

As disputes rage in Richmond over proposed fees to balance the troubled state budget, some citizens want to send even more than they have to into a fund that collects voluntary giving to the state.

But not many.

Contributions to the "Tax Me More Fund" have hovered between $1,000 and $1,700 most years ever since lawmakers created it in 2002, according to the Virginia Department of Taxation. Exceptions include the fund's first year, when taxpayers contributed $6,602, and a low point in 2006 when $19.36 was do

Arkansas, Massachusetts, Kansas and New Hampshire have voluntary funds. Probably other states as well.

And the United States government accepts gifts. Treasury Direct - They received $3 million last year from 300 million people; that's one cent per person.

 

Pay Higher Taxes Voluntarily if you think taxes should go up and you don’t pay enough in taxes:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm    The Bureau of the Public Debt may accept gifts donated to the United States Government to reduce debt held by the public. Acting for the Secretary of the Treasury, Public Debt may accept a gift of:

Money, made only on the condition that it be used to reduce debt held by the public.

An outstanding government obligation, made only on the condition that the obligation be retired and the redemption proceeds used to reduce debt held by the public.

Other intangible personal property made only on the condition that the property is sold and the proceeds from the sale used to reduce the public debt.

Gifts to reduce debt held by the public may be inter vivos gifts or testamentary bequests.

The fiscal year to date information includes total gifts received for the months of October through September. For the years 1996 and 1997, monthly data is not available.

Read about how to make a contribution to reduce the debt.  How do you make a contribution to reduce the debt?

 

 

  

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/541918/201007281900/An-Unserious-Presidency-On-View.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/540548/201007151900/The-White-House-Against-The-World.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/540126/201007122007/Boot-On-Neck-Policies-Choke-US-Recovery.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/566710/201103211847/About-Chiles-Miracle.htm

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/566651/201103211745/Obama-Applies-Incoherence-To-Confusion.htm

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/535719/201005271857/Slick-Real-Slick.aspx

Obama’s gulf oil disaster

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/540365/201007141837/Fouling-Up-Spill-Just-To-Exploit-Another-Crisis-.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/541156/201007211852/The-Smoking-Gun-For-Media-Bias.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/540557/201007151900/Rubios-Plan-Based-On-What-Works.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/538296/201006231849/Even-Europe-Sees-What-US-Doesnt.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/566397/201103171834/Unions-Join-In-Challenging-EPA.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/539037/201006301859/Dropping-The-Shield.aspx

 

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/534728/201005201852/Water-Sanity-For-Central-California.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/566527/201103181807/Social-Security-A-Classic-Case-Of-Debt-Denial.aspx

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=531839  Obama’s salary cap

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/543143/201008091903/American-Citizenship-Is-Not-A-Birthright.aspx

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/537464/201006151904/Brewers-Yeast.aspx

prior to the 14th Amendment — passed July 3, 1866, and ratified six days later — to be a citizen of the United States you had to be a citizen of one of the states.

 

his Democrat policies?

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/559419/201101101912/Tragedy-In-Tucson-On-iPalins-iHands-.aspx

 

 

 http://www.agiftfromgod.info/Home_Page.php

 http://www.biblegateway.com/

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New Century Version)¹⁶ All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for showing people what is wrong in their lives, for correcting faults, and for teaching how to live right. ¹⁷ Using the Scriptures, the person who serves God will be capable, having all that is needed to do every good work.

Peter 2:11 (New Century Version) Live for God ¹¹ Dear friends, you are like foreigners and strangers in this world. I beg you to avoid the evil things your bodies want to do that fight against your soul.

Philippians 3:7-14 (Contemporary English Version)⁷But Christ has shown me that what I once thought was valuable is worthless. ⁸Nothing is as wonderful as knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. I have given up everything else and count it all as garbage. All I want is Christ ⁹and to know that I belong to him. I could not make myself acceptable to God by obeying the Law of Moses. God accepted me simply because of my faith in Christ. ¹⁰All I want is to know Christ and the power that raised him to life. I want to suffer and die as he did, ¹¹so that somehow I also may be raised to life.

 

 12I have not yet reached my goal, and I am not perfect. But Christ has taken hold of me. So I keep on running and struggling to take hold of the prize. 13My friends, I don't feel that I have already arrived. But I forget what is behind, and I struggle for what is ahead. 14I run toward the goal, so that I can win the prize of being called to heaven. This is the prize that God offers because of what Christ Jesus has done.

John 15:1-14 (New King James Version) 1 “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away;[a] and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. 3 You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.
5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. 7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will[b] ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you. 8 By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples.
9 “As the Father loved Me, I also have loved you; abide in My love. 10 If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.
11 “These things I have spoken to you, that My joy may remain in you, and that your joy may be full. 12 This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends. 14 You are My friends if you do whatever I command you.

Psalm 119:103-116 (New Living Translation) 103 How sweet your words taste to me; they are sweeter than honey. 104 Your commandments give me understanding; no wonder I hate every false way of life.  105 Your word is a lamp to guide my feet and a light for my path. 106 I’ve promised it once, and I’ll promise it again: I will obey your righteous regulations. 107 I have suffered much, O Lord;  restore my life again as you promised. 108 Lord, accept my offering of praise, and teach me your regulations. 109 My life constantly hangs in the balance,  but I will not stop obeying your instructions. 110 The wicked have set their traps for me,      but I will not turn from your commandments. 111 Your laws are my treasure;  they are my heart’s delight. 112 I am determined to keep your decrees to the very end.  113 I hate those with divided loyalties, but I love your instructions.
 114 You are my refuge and my shield; your word is my source of hope.
 115 Get out of my life, you evil-minded people, for I intend to obey the commands of my God. 116 Lord, sustain me as you promised, that I may live!      Do not let my hope be crushed.

John 14:15-17 (Contemporary English Version) 15Jesus said to his disciples:    If you love me, you will do as I command. 16Then I will ask the Father to send you the Holy Spirit who will help [a] you and always be with you. 17The Spirit will show you what is true. The people of this world cannot accept the Spirit, because they don't see or know him. But you know the Spirit, who is with you and will keep on living in you.

John 15:9-14 (Contemporary English Version)9I have loved you, just as my Father has loved me. So remain faithful to my love for you. 10If you obey me, I will keep loving you, just as my Father keeps loving me, because I have obeyed him.

    11I have told you this to make you as completely happy as I am. 12Now I tell you to love each other, as I have loved you. 13The greatest way to show love for friends is to die for them. 14And you are my friends, if you obey me.

Proverbs 8:17-18 (New Century Version) 17 I love those who love me,  and those who seek me find me. 18 Riches and honor are mine to give.   So are wealth and lasting success.

Job 34:21 (New Living Translation) ²¹ “For God watches how people live; he sees everything they do.

Jeremiah 17:10 (New International Version) 10 "I the LORD search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve."

Luke 8:14 (The Message) 14"And the seed that fell in the weeds—well, these are the ones who hear, but then the seed is crowded out and nothing comes of it as they go about their lives worrying about tomorrow, making money, and having fun.

Matthew 6:33 (New Century Version)33 Seek first God's kingdom and what God wants. Then all your other needs will be met as well.

Acts 3:19 (GOD’S WORD Translation)19So change the way you think and act, and turn to God to have your sins removed.

Psalm 119:9 (New International Version) 9 How can a young man keep his way pure? By living according to your word.

Matthew 25:13 (New Century Version)13 "So always be ready, because you don't know the day or the hour the Son of Man will come.

1 Timothy 2 1 First, I tell you to pray for all people, asking God for what they need and being thankful to him.2 Pray for rulers and for all who have authority so that we can have quiet and peaceful lives full of worship and respect for God.

  Jeremiah 18:7-10 (New International Reader's Version) 7 "Suppose at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is going to be pulled up by the roots. And I tell it that it will be torn down and destroyed. 8 But suppose the nation I warned turns away from its sins. Then I will not do what I said I would. I will not bring trouble on it as I had planned.  9 "Suppose at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is going to be built up and planted. 10 But it does what is evil in my sight. It does not obey me. Then I will think again about the good things I had wanted to do for it.

2 Chronicles 7:14 (Contemporary English Version) 14If my own people will humbly pray and turn back to me and stop sinning, then I will answer them from heaven. I will forgive them and make their land fertile once again.

Proverbs 29:16 (Contemporary English Version)16Crime increases when crooks are in power, but law-abiding citizens will see them fall.

1 Timothy 5 1 Never speak harshly to an older man,[a] but appeal to him respectfully as you would to your own father. Talk to younger men as you would to your own brothers. 2 Treat older women as you would your mother, and treat younger women with all purity as you would your own sisters.

Matthew 19:4-12 (Contemporary English Version)4Jesus answered, "Don't you know that in the beginning the Creator made a man and a woman? 5That's why a man leaves his father and mother and gets married. He becomes like one person with his wife. 6Then they are no longer two people, but one. And no one should separate a couple that God has joined together."     7The Pharisees asked Jesus, "Why did Moses say that a man could write out divorce papers and send his wife away?"     8Jesus replied, "You are so heartless! That's why Moses allowed you to divorce your wife. But from the beginning God did not intend it to be that way. 9I say that if your wife has not committed some terrible sexual sin, [a] you must not divorce her to marry someone else. If you do, you are unfaithful." 10The disciples said, "If that's how it is between a man and a woman, it's better not to get married."     11Jesus told them, "Only those people who have been given the gift of staying single can accept this teaching. 12Some people are unable to marry because of birth defects or because of what someone has done to their bodies. Others stay single for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who can accept this teaching should do so."

Hebrews 13:4 (New Century Version)4 Marriage should be honored by everyone, and husband and wife should keep their marriage pure. God will judge as guilty those who take part in sexual sins.

1 Timothy 4:12 (New Living Translation)12 Don’t let anyone think less of you because you are young. Be an example to all believers in what you say, in the way you live, in your love, your faith, and your purity.

Jude 1:6-8 (New Century Version)6 And remember the angels who did not keep their place of power but left their proper home. The Lord has kept these angels in darkness, bound with everlasting chains, to be judged on the great day. 7 Also remember the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah[a] and the other towns around them. In the same way they were full of sexual sin and people who desired sexual relations that God does not allow. They suffer the punishment of eternal fire, as an example for all to see.  8 It is the same with these people who have entered your group. They are guided by dreams and make themselves filthy with sin. They reject God's authority and speak against the angels.

Matthew 5:18 (New Century Version)18 I tell you the truth, nothing will disappear from the law until heaven and earth are gone. Not even the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will be lost until everything has happened.

Peter 2:1-10 (New International Version)False Teachers and Their Destruction  1But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.  4For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them into gloomy dungeons[b] to be held for judgment; 5if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; 6if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men 8(for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)— 9if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.[c] 10This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature[d] and despise authority.

Matthew 4:17   17 From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, "Change your hearts and lives, because the kingdom of heaven is near."

Ezekiel 18:23  23 "When sinful people die, it does not give me any joy," announces the Lord and King. "But when they turn away from their sins and live, that makes me very happy.

1 Corinthians 6:19 (The Message)  16-20There's more to sex than mere skin on skin. Sex is as much spiritual mystery as physical fact. As written in Scripture, "The two become one." Since we want to become spiritually one with the Master, we must not pursue the kind of sex that avoids commitment and intimacy, leaving us more lonely than ever—the kind of sex that can never "become one." There is a sense in which sexual sins are different from all others. In sexual sin we violate the sacredness of our own bodies, these bodies that were made for God-given and God-modeled love, for "becoming one" with another only in marriage. Or didn't you realize that your body is a sacred place, the place of the Holy Spirit? Don't you see that you can't live however you please, squandering what God paid such a high price for? The physical part of you is not some piece of property belonging to the spiritual part of you. God owns the whole works. So let people see God in and through your body.

Isaiah 44:2 (Contemporary English Version) ²I am your Creator. You were in my care even before you were born.

 Psalm 139:13-16 (New Living Translation) 13 You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body
      and knit me together in my mother’s womb. 14 Thank you for making me so wonderfully complex!
      Your workmanship is marvelous—how well I know it.  15 You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion, as I was woven together in the dark of the womb. 16 You saw me before I was born.  Every day of my life was recorded in your book. Every moment was laid out before a single day had passed. 

James 4:1-8 (New Century Version) Give Yourselves to God  ¹ Do you know where your fights and arguments come from? They come from the selfish desires that war within you.² You want things, but you do not have them. So you are ready to kill and are jealous of other people, but you still cannot get what you want. So you argue and fight. You do not get what you want, because you do not ask God.³ Or when you ask, you do not receive because the reason you ask is wrong. You want things so you can use them for your own pleasures.  ⁴ So, you are not loyal to God! You should know that loving the world is the same as hating God. Anyone who wants to be a friend of the world becomes God's enemy.⁵ Do you think the Scripture means nothing that says, "The Spirit that God made to live in us wants us for himself alone"?^{[a] 6} But God gives us even more grace, as the Scripture says.

 

http://www.menofintegrity.org/christian.html                 "Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out many demons and perform many miracles?' Then, I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me you evildoers!'" -- Matthew 7:22-23 In other words, none of the "things" we do count for anything without a personal relationship with Jesus. Not going to church. Not giving money to the church, or to charity. Not doing good deeds. Not being confirmed or going through catechism classes. Not even being baptized. All of these things may be done by Christians, but they do not MAKE someone a Christian. The ONLY thing that matters is whether or not Jesus knows you, and the only way that happens is by accepting Him as your personal Lord and Saviour.  If you are still not sure what it means to be a Christian, and would like to know more about having a personal relationship with God, through his Son Jesus Christ, send email to us by clicking here, and we will be glad to talk with you.

 

 

Matthew 7:1-2  "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." (NIV)

 

2 Timothy 4:2 (New International Reader's Version)        ² Preach the word. Be ready to serve God in good times and bad. Correct people's mistakes. Warn them. Cheer them up with words of hope. Be very patient as you do these things. Teach them carefully.

 

Romans 10:13-14  New International Version (NIV)      ¹³ for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”^{[a]  14} How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?

 

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/562840/201102101920/What-Egyptians-Really-Do-Want.aspx

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/565887/201103141822/President-Turns-Prudence-Into-Procrastination.aspx

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=324

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/538572/201006251832/Tossing-A-Few-Legal-Queries-Into-The-Void.aspx       Judicial nominee questions

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/532253/201005041808/One-Sidedness-Now-Epidemic-In-Newsrooms.aspx                      embrace the left-wing, America-bullies-world, dissenters-are-racist, pro-amnesty, gay-marriage-is-a-right, pro-Roe worldview.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/546665/201009091755/Media-Bias-The-Chasm-Widens.aspx

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/ArticlePrint.aspx?id=545302                    How “brilliant” can Obama be?

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/544033/201008171834/Atlas-Shrugged-The-CliffsNotes-Today.aspx

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/544040/201008171834/Obamas-Progressive-Failures.aspx

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/550958/201010191855/Decrees-Of-Separation.aspx

           

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/479959/200906181835/A-Handy-Guide-To-The-Age-Of-Obama.aspx  

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/567728/201103311739/To-President-George-W-Bush-From-Barack-With-Apologies.aspx

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/568301/201104061653/How-Next-War-In-Mideast-Will-Shape-Up-And-When.htm

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/568392/201104061846/A-Win-For-Free-Trade-and8212-At-Last.htm

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/567397/201103281859/Mum-On-Middle-East-Misogyny.aspx          The latest savagery involves a 26-year-old Libyan woman bound and raped by 15 men in Tripoli. The government claims she's a "prostitute," but her family says she's a law student.

Earlier, Libyan thugs abducted and sexually abused a New York Times photographer over two days. While she was tied up, they punched her in the face.

But this pales next to the heinous public attack on "60 Minutes" correspondent Lara Logan by the "freedom-loving" troglodytes in Tahrir Square, Cairo.  Would a crowd of 200 American men stand by and cheer such an assault on a Muslim woman in a public square in our capital? Never. But in Egypt, which is notorious for sexual harassment of foreign women, this is accepted behavior.  Egyptian women aren't immune from it. The few who dared join the protests in Tahrir Square were rounded up by Egyptian police and subjected to "virginity tests." Those who failed the tests were beaten and given electric shocks.  Brotherhood sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi has warned that women who fail to wear the headscarf are asking to be raped.

http://www.gospelway.com/religiousgroups/islam.php        Learn about the Muslim faith.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/567268/201103251856/Editorial-Obama-Doctrine-Is-All-Bark-No-Bite.aspx                  Obama, who as a former Illinois state senator voted "present" more than a hundred times, said in 2007 as an unaccomplished freshman U.S. senator that America should not unilaterally and without congressional consultation and approval engage in military action when the U.S. is not directly threatened, is doing just that in Libya.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/567121/201103241838/Stealth-And-Trade.aspx                     As John Merline reported in IBD way back in 1997, from 1990 to 1995 the EPA gave the American Lung Association some $5 million. JunkScience.com reports that the EPA has given the ALA an additional $20 million the past decade.  In return, the ALA is putting up billboards in opposition to reining in an EPA

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/567396/201103281859/Foxed-In.aspx                       Media Matters, which uses millions in Soros cash to attack nonliberal press organizations

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/527639/201003171843/De-Fence-De-Fence.aspx                 The two-tier fence in San Diego runs 14 miles along the border with Tijuana. The first layer is a high steel fence, with an inner, high, anti-climb fence with a no-man's land in between.  It has been amazingly effective. According to a 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service, illegal alien apprehensions in the San Diego sector dropped from 202,000 in 1992 to 9,000 in 2004.  Cameras and sensors played a part, but the emphasis was on physical barriers and roads that were patrolled by real live border guards, not robots. Then in 2006 the Democrats took back Congress and, in 2008, the White House. Former border state Gov. Napolitano reportedly once said: "You show me a 50-foot fence, and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder at the border."

    

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/what-happened-to-obamas-passion.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all            Drew Westen is a professor of psychology at Emory University and the author ( A committed liberal writing in the liberal & Obama defending New York Times has an astounding revelation that now may become common knowledge and accepted truth for even the most hardcore Democrat and voters alike. )

Like most Americans, at this point, I have no idea what Barack Obama — and by extension the party he leads — believes on virtually any issue.

As a practicing psychologist with more than 25 years of experience, I will resist the temptation to diagnose at a distance, but as a scientist and strategic consultant I will venture some hypotheses.

The most charitable explanation is that he and his advisers have succumbed to a view of electoral success to which many Democrats succumb — that “centrist” voters like “centrist” politicians. Unfortunately, reality is more complicated. Centrist voters prefer honest politicians who help them solve their problems. A second possibility is that he is simply not up to the task by virtue of his lack of experience and a character defect that might not have been so debilitating at some other time in history. Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he (Obama) had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he had voted "present" (instead of "yea" or "nay") 130 times, sometimes dodging difficult issues.

 

 

If George W. Bush had doubled the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

   If George W.. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved? 
        If George W. Bush had criticized a state law that he admitted he never even read, would you think that he is just an ignorant hot head?

   If George W. Bush joined the country of Mexico and sued a state in the United States to force that state to continue to allow illegal immigration, would you question his patriotism and wonder who's side he was on?

 

If George Bush had pronounced the Marine Corps like Marine Corpse would you think him an idiot?

 

If George W. Bush had put 87,000 workers out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records of any industry because one company had an accident would you have agreed?

 

 

If George W. Bush had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87000 American workers unemployed would you support him?

 

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a TelePrompTer installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

 

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

 

If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

 

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

 

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

 

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

 

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?

 

If George W.. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the nonexistent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

 

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

 

If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States , would you have said that he is clueless.

 

If George W. Bush would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in Texas , would you have thought he was a self important, conceited, egotistical jerk.

 

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

 

If George W. Bush had misspelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoes as proof of what a dunce he is?

 

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?

 

If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

 

If George W.. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

 

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America , would you have approved.

 

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

 

 

Every statement in this email is factual and directly attributable to Barrack Hussein Obama. Every bumble is a matter of record and completely verifiable.

http://connect.freedomworks.org/         Use FreedomConnector to connect with Tea Party activists and other conservatives taking action for less government and more freedom.

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/issues AFP is an organization of grassroots leaders who engage citizens in the name of limited government and free markets on the local, state and federal levels. The grassroots activists of AFP advocate for public policies that champion the principles of entrepreneurship and fiscal and regulatory restraint.

http://www.ij.org/publications  The Institute for Justice

http://cei.org/issues     The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a non-profit public policy organization dedicated to advancing the principles of limited government, free enterprise, and individual liberty. Our mission is to promote both freedom and fairness by making good policy good politics. We make the uncompromising case for economic freedom.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/              Devoted to educating taxpayers about tax policy and the total tax burden borne
by Americans at all levels of government

http://www.thecontract.org/      individual liberty, limited government, and economic freedom.

http://stimuluswatch.org/2.0/page/faq               quarterly reports from funding recipients at Recovery.gov website. This official site is the source for all our data.

http://www.uso.org/about-us-faqs.aspx

http://whatwilltheylearn.com/               Many college guides and ranking systems measure institutions' prestige and reputation, but our guide looks at what students are actually required to learn.

http://www.needymeds.org/        NeedyMeds is a 501(c)(3) non-profit information resource devoted to helping people in need find assistance programs to help them afford their medications and costs related to health care.

http://www.conservative.org/congress-ratings/       

http://www.repealhealthcareact.org/Default.asp?SourceID=7&bhcp=1

http://biggovernment.com/tag/government-shutdown/                   liberal Democrats are acting like bratty teens who have maxed out their parents’ credit card and are whining that the fact that the card has been shredded is denying their “freedom.”  They would prefer to whine about getting more in allowance (raise taxes) to pay for their reckless spending.

   http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/trump-obama-romney-palin/2011/04/11/id/392535?s=al&promo_code=C107-1            Newsmax Poll: Donald Trump Overwhelms Obama, GOP Field in 2012 Race   Read more on Newsmax.com: Newsmax Poll: Trump Overwhelms Obama, GOP Field in 2012 Race    Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=20536&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD                        Medicaid Reform Working in Rhode Island

 

  

 

 

http://townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/2010/11/11/of_course_sarah_palins_unfit_shes_a_republican     Barbara Walters gushed over John F. Kennedy Jr. and foresaw a political future for him. Never mind that the young man had flunked the New York bar exam -- twice.

"Dumb" former President George W. Bush, caricatured as a slacker in an Oliver Stone movie, made better grades in college than did Al Gore, his opponent in 2000. Gore dropped out of divinity school after earning five F's. Then he entered law school and dropped out. He won a Nobel Peace Prize for his anti-global warming crusade, and his documentary won an Academy Award, but Gore got a D in science at Harvard. Bush also scored higher on his verbal SAT than did Rhodes scholar and "brainy" presidential candidate Bill Bradley.

"Dumb" former President Ronald Reagan majored in economics. But the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, who ran for the presidency, got expelled from Harvard for hiring someone to take a Spanish test.

"Dumb" Republican former President Gerald Ford was ridiculed as a bumbling doofus by Chevy Chase on "Saturday Night Live." Democratic former President Lyndon Baines Johnson famously quipped that Ford, who played football for the University of Michigan, "spent too much time playing football without a helmet." But Ford graduated from Yale Law School, the same school that produced Bill and Hillary Clinton.

The worldly and literate Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who ran for president in 2004, didn't exactly kill on his military aptitude test. He got half the questions right and half the questions wrong -- dead average. He explained his poor showing by insisting, "I must have been drinking the night before."

Vice President Joe Biden's 1988 quest for the presidency evaporated when he plagiarized a speech by a British politician. When someone questioned his academic credentials at a campaign stop, the offended Biden claimed that he had a full academic scholarship at law school and graduated in the top half of his class.

In fact, he had a need-based half-scholarship and graduated near the bottom -- 76th out of 85. Palin, if she decides to run, faces a grueling series of challenges -- just like the other candidates. Except she'll not benefit from the selective standard that liberals apply when evaluating "their own."

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/509935/200910221829/War-On-Fox-Alters-Checks-And-Balances.aspx                       Fox News is no monopoly. It is a singular minority in a sea of liberal media. ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, CNN, MSNBC vs. Fox. The lineup is so unbalanced as to be comical — and that doesn't even include the other commanding heights of the culture that are firmly, flagrantly liberal: Hollywood, the foundations, the universities, the elite newspapers.  Fox and its viewers (numbering more than CNN's and MSNBC's combined) need no defense.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/481959/200907101905/Congress-Needs-A-Read-The-Bill-Bill.aspx                 A group called http://www.letfreedomringusa.com/ Let Freedom Ring is asking lawmakers to pledge they'll read legislation before voting on it. It believes a bill should be publicly accessible 72 hours before a vote.  We'd prefer a slightly larger window, but getting just three days of light on proposed law would be an achievement. Congress knows that the longer the public has to think about what's in a bill, the harder it is to ram through. That's why the Democrats are in such a hurry to move cap-and-trade and health care legislation.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/552586/201011031922/A-Party-Of-Great-Opportunities.aspx         Diversity: Women, Hispanics and two African-American congressmen-elect rode the GOP wave to victory. Sorry, Mr. President, these Republicans will not ride in the back of the bus. They intend to drive it.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/558631/201101031909/Americas-Timeless-Constitution.aspx                        What the left refuses to admit is that the Constitution is a document of universal and timeless principles. It is amendable and in its original form still speaks to us today through its humane protection of individual rights and necessary limits on government power.  There is no policy question so tightly twisted that it can't unwind it, no legal puzzle too confounding for it to resolve. It is written in a vernacular far more straightforward than the baffling statutes written today by lawmakers who maim our language. If it is confusing to the political left, clear understanding is no further away than a copy of the the Federalist Papers.  its simple brilliance becomes increasingly evident. It deserves respect, not the contempt heaped upon it by the left.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/541314/201007221919/JournoGate-Continued-Pouncing-On-Palin.aspx

the Daily Caller published exchanges from a private forum called JournoList that showed how 400 top mainstream reporters and their activist buddies conspired in an attack against Palin the minute she entered the presidential race. “journalists” from the Nation, Mother Jones, Time, Politico, Bloomberg, etc. cooking up approaches, arguments, "narratives" and templates to paint a false picture of the candidate.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/541494/201007231906/JournoLisms-Bias.aspx                        all these left-leaning journalists, an estimated 400 in all, used the JournoList site to refine their messages for maximum effect. It was an exercise in mass propaganda, getting everyone to sing from the same ideological hymnal — which explains the tedious sameness of the mainstream media's 2008 election coverage.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/530806/201004201834/Tea-Party-Goal-Restore-Limits-Of-Constitution.aspx            the Tea Party message comes together in the "Contract From America," the product of an online vote.  Of the top 10 planks in the Contract, the No. 1 issue is protect the Constitution. That's followed by reject cap-and-trade, demand a balanced budget and enact fundamental tax reform. And then comes number five: restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government in Washington.  Filling out the Contract, the bottom-five planks are end runaway government spending; defund, repeal and replace government-run health care; pass an all-of-the-above energy policy; stop the pork; and stop the tax hikes.  What's so significant to me about this Tea Party Contract From America is the strong emphasis on constitutional limits and restraints on legislation, spending, taxing and government control of the economy. Undoubtedly, the emphasis is there because no one trusts Washington.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/536098/201006021837/A-Gun-For-Grandpa.aspx                Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old Army veteran who lives in a high crime area of Chicago thinks the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution he fought to protect gives him the right to bear arms to protect himself and his wife as he once protected his country. He sued and the Supreme Court will soon rule on his case and Chicago's gun ban.

Here is yet another example of guns saving lives — the side of the equation that never makes the headlines. In many instances, merely brandishing a firearm has been sufficient to thwart off an assault or home invasion, but instances of the successful defensive use of firearms never seem to make the headlines or the statistics.

Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote in 2008 that in his city only two classes of people can possess firearms — criminals and politicians.

In a 5-4 decision in 2008, Heller v. District of Columbia, written by Justice Anton Scalia, the high court overturned D.C.'s draconian gun ban and ruled that Americans did indeed have an individual right to keep and bear arms.  http://www.uhuh.com/guns/2ndquotes.htm     

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/543752/201008131843/SOS-From-A-Troubled-Sowell.aspx                        The fact that America is still the world's strongest military power means "absolutely nothing," Sowell says, "if our enemies are willing to die and we are not. It took only two nuclear bombs to get Japan to surrender — and the Japanese of that era were far tougher than most Americans today.

 "That such an administration could be elected in the first place, headed by a man whose only qualifications to be president of the United States at a dangerous time in the history of the world were rhetoric, style and symbolism — and whose animus against the values and institutions of America had been demonstrated repeatedly over a period of decades beforehand — speaks volumes about the inadequacies of our educational system and the degeneration of our culture."

Sowell pursues all this and more in "Dismantling America," a must read for those who haven't been exposed to Dr. Sowell and an important reread for close followers of his outstanding column.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/568738/201104111831/Why-Is-Obama-Always-So-Far-Behind-Curve-.aspx        Libya, the budget, pick an issue.  Now, though, it is past time to move on and lead. Slogans such as "win the future" are rhetorical cotton candy. They melt in your mouth and leave nothing behind. The president needs to say explicitly what he wants and how he's going to get there. "Change" won't do anymore. It's leadership we need.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/535315/201005251829/One-Wild-Ride.aspx                        California could have met the public's needs without added revenues or summertime budget theatrics. All it needed to do was to tie spending growth to economic or demographic indicators that accurately track growth and the need for services.

Using either personal income or the sum of inflation and population growth as an index, it would have been able to set surpluses aside in fat years and maintain its programs in lean ones. Overall it would have spent less — about $50 billion less since 1999.  (Might the Federal government learn from this?)

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/470840/200903101818/Upbeat-On-Uptick.aspx       It was in March 1938 that the uptick rule — requiring that a short sale be made only at a price "higher than the last different price" — was first established.

Then, as now, the market was under pressure, having sold off 50% from its year-earlier high (which itself was 50% off the 1929 peak). And "bear raids," in which unchecked short sellers hammered stocks with impunity, were the order of the day.  With panic in the air, the uptick rule provided at least some relief, requiring short sellers to wait until a stock ticked up an eighth- or quarter-point before their trades could be executed.  The intent was to prevent them from accelerating the downward momentum from a security already reeling from a crisis-induced decline.

The rule remained in effect until its repeal by the Securities and Exchange Commission in April 2007. The SEC felt the rule was no longer needed in a period of relative market tranquility.  It was also felt that the change from fractional to decimal trading, where trades differed by pennies instead of eighths or fourths, rendered the rule impotent.

The timing couldn't have been worse.  We also hope that the market's reaction is similar to that after the original rule was set. After undercutting 100 on March 31, 1938, the Dow industrial average shot up 50% in four months. Yesterday's 390-point rally, with the uptick-rule news getting at least some of the credit, looked like a pretty good start.

 

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/557376/201012201910/Kill-The-Lame-Duck.aspx                Enter the 20th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Ratified on Jan. 23, 1933, it was designed to end forever the excesses of lame duck sessions, but because of the way it was written utterly failed to accomplish one of its main purposes.

We forget that in the early days of a growing nation it was not easy to get around. Presidents were inaugurated in and Congresses lasted until March largely because newly elected representatives of the people had difficulty getting back and forth between their districts and states to Washington, D.C.

This unfortunately let defeated legislators work their mischief, such as in 1801 when members of the New Federalist party saw it as a good opportunity for the wholesale appointment of judges.

In 1922, Warren G. Harding and defeated Republicans tried to use it to pass unpopular bills, just as today's Democrats have tried to do.

By 1933, we had trains and automobiles, if not jet planes, but travelling cross country was still time-consuming and not without its difficulties. Yet it was thought that the reason for such a huge gap between election and taking office was no longer necessary.

Besides, moving the presidential inauguration from March to Jan. 20 and the start of Congress to early January, it was also thought, would end lame duck sessions forever. It was believed that legislators would be unwilling to travel to Washington for a few weeks after Thanksgiving.

We cannot function as a democracy without a president. We can, however, function for short periods without a Congress.  Some would say it is preferable since, as it has been observed, neither liberty nor property is safe when the legislature is in session.

We propose a 28th amendment to end the term of a Congress at one minute after midnight on the day of the election.  If two years isn't long enough to get the people's business done, they should find another line of work. Senators and congressmen the voters sent home should do just that: Go home.

The only reason for legislators to be in Washington between November and January should be to move in or move out.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/559599/201101121838/Perspectives-Of-A-Russian-Immigrant-No-14.aspx                        The ideals of equality and the supremacy of the collective good over the individual had to be constantly reinforced. There was a promise of a bright future ahead, despite any temporary misery.  The information that the population received was controlled, regulated and propagated. Opposition did not have a voice. All forms of media, art and entertainment supported the government vision. The state's ultimate goal was to destroy the concept of self-interest.

Now, with the new powers the Federal Communications Commission has grabbed under the Orwellian guise of "net neutrality," it is American Democrats who feel they need to control all avenues of information, so that they can more easily do work "for the people."

A Nov. 7 editorial in the New York Times opined that Democrats need to provide "a clear and convincing voice to help Americans understand that Democratic policies are not bankrupting the country, advancing socialism or destroying freedom."

It doesn't matter what labels are attached to the Obama administration. What's significant is that it's controlling more and more of the economy and the people by imposing a centralized bureaucratic structure in control of energy, land, banking, human health and life.

The social mobility of individuals pursuing their potential, which is so unique to the USA, is being replaced with three groups of citizens: those who are part of the bureaucratic machine, those who have connections to the machine and the masses.

It is ironic that people who think that the U.S. Constitution is outdated support the vision of the Democratic Party — the party promoting government bureaucrats and desperately looking to suppress voices of the opposition.

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/544234/201008181842/How-To-Go-Extinct.aspx   even the UAW leadership was unable to persuade 631 Indianapolis union members to accept a pay cut so their plant could stay in business.

After all, UAW now owns General Motors, so it was comical seeing them worry about costs just like any other owner. The bottom line was that the plant would shut unless GM could sell it to JD Norman Industries with reduced salaries. Starting pay would fall from $29.90 to $15.50 an hour under the deal the UAW negotiated.

No one likes to see a wage cut, but still, amazingly, the workers said no. Years of UAW indoctrination that auto makers were bottomless pits of money and only "greedy" managers kept workers from earning more prompted the gear-turners to say no. They even chased UAW men out of their union hall.

As satisfying as it is to see the UAW endure the wrath of its rank and file, the workers will soon find themselves on the unemployment lines as a result of their refusal to adapt to reality in bad times.  The Indianapolis Star reports that the workers are "wagering that even if the plant closes, they can transfer to GM locations in other states and keep the UAW base wage of $29 per hour." Bloated worker costs prompt companies to move to other states, if not countries, to keep costs down. And no business wants to hire workers who have a record of militant inflexibility.

In effect, workers have chosen a $390 weekly unemployment check — about $20,000 a year — over a $30,000 pay package with benefits and prospects of better pay as the economy improves.

Meanwhile, the losses will mount. Indianapolis will lose $1.8 million in property taxes and $550,000 in payroll taxes as the plant shuts down, according to the Star. Nonunion workers at the plant will lose jobs, and so will small businesses in the area.  Should a financially troubled state like Indiana now support those who willingly walk away from decent jobs?

 

  http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/539970/201007091902/Defending-Marriage.aspx                               Marriage was never defined at a federal level because no one thought it was necessary — just as no one thought necessary until recently to decide the Second Amendment meant what it said about an individual's right to bear arms in defense of home and family. But modern-day political and judicial liberal activism has made action on some dormant issues necessary.

 

Joseph Tauro, a federal district court judge in Boston, said he is "convinced that the federal government's long history of acquiescence in this area indicates that, indeed, the federal government traditionally regarded marital status determination as the exclusive province of state government." Unfortunately, activist judges didn't share that view of states' rights.

Tauro acts as if the federal government was usurping power from the states. The Defense of Marriage Act was passed to stop the usurpation of power by activist judges who wouldn't let the people and their elected state legislatures decide the issue. They would impose same-sex marriage by judicial fiat. If states' rights is the issue, let the state legislatures, not the courts, decide the matter.

This country and healthy societies around the world and throughout history have given marriage between a man and a woman special legal protection because of the recognition that it is the one institution that ensures the society's future through the orderly procreation and upbringing of children.

If legislators want to pass or revise laws to facilitate the assignment of benefits between committed individuals or groups, fine. Illinois just passed a law letting people leave their estate to their pets without granting them the right to marry their cat or form a civil union with Spot.

Nor is this a civil rights issue. Laws barring interracial marriage were unconstitutional only because of the racial bias involved. To say only men and women of the same race could marry was discriminatory. To say only a man and a woman whatever the race can marry is not.

If Judge Tauro does not like where the feds drew the line, where would he draw it? Are laws against polygamy also unconstitutional and financially unfair? If two men or two women can marry, why not more than two? Can brothers and sisters form "civil unions"? Can fathers marry daughters, if they both consent?

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/519900/201002021927/No-Surprise-Abstinence-Works.aspx               But now a study financed by the federal government and conducted by a team of University of Pennsylvania researchers, led by Dr. John Jemmott, has found that an abstinence-only approach can be superior to the kinds of sexual education programs that presume early sexual activity to be inevitable. Heritage's Robert Rector and Kirk A. Johnson indicating that teens who practice abstinence perform better academically and are nearly twice as likely to graduate from college.

Along those lines, one important component of the Jemmott study's abstinence program was its emphasis on the stupidity of early sex. Pupils were told to write down the pros and cons of sexual activity at their age. Naturally, they found that the cons they thought of outnumbered the pros.

While Planned Parenthood contends that sex education can be thanked for the decline in the teen pregnancy rate over the last 20 years, the American Life League points out that before 1990, teen pregnancy was going up nearly every year as sex-ed programs dominated public and private school instruction — and that it was during the early 1990s that abstinence programs were becoming popular.

The findings of this new study should shock no one. No one would disagree that adolescents must learn that discipline and diligence are prerequisites to success in school, and in the workplace where they will be spending their adulthood.

By the same token, making it clear to early teens that a lack of self-control in the sexual sphere can and will wreck their lives is a smarter starting point than teaching them how to use a condom.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/PhotoPopup.aspx?path=ISSpreg0203_3100202.png&docId=519900&xmpSource=&width=776&height=432&caption=           

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/547746/201009171932/More-Proof-We-Canand8217t-Stop-Poverty-By-Making-It-More-Comfortable-.aspx                     On Jan. 8, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson delivered a State of the Union address to Congress in which he declared an "unconditional war on poverty in America." Then, the poverty rate in America was around 19% and falling rapidly. Last week, it was reported that the poverty rate this year is expected to be roughly 15%, and is climbing.

Between then and now, the federal government spent more than $13 trillion fighting poverty, and state and local governments added another couple of trillion. Yet the poverty rate never fell below 10.5%.

The federal government now has 122 separate anti-poverty programs (defined as either means-tested programs or programs whose legislative language specifically refers to their purpose as combating poverty).

That amounts to $14,849 for every poor man, woman and child in America. Given that the poverty line is $10,830, it would have been cheaper just to mail every poor person a check for $11,000.

Clearly we are doing something wrong. Throwing money at the problem has neither reduced poverty nor made the poor self-sufficient. In fact, the whole theory underlying our welfare programs is wrong-headed. We focus far too much on making poverty more comfortable, and not enough on creating the prosperity that will get people out of poverty.

Observers have known for a long time that the surest ways to stay out of poverty are to finish school, not get pregnant outside marriage (so have sex ONLY if married) and get a job or two or three, any job(s), and stick with it. That means that if we wish to fight poverty, we must end those government policies —high taxes and regulatory excess — that inhibit growth and job creation.

We must protect capital investment and give people the opportunity to start new businesses. We must reform our failed government school system to encourage competition and choice. We must encourage the poor to save and invest.

More importantly, the real work of fighting poverty must come not from the government, but from the engines of civil society. An enormous amount of evidence and experience shows that private charities are far more effective than government welfare programs.  While welfare provides incentives for counterproductive behavior, private charities can use their aid to encourage self-sufficiency, self-improvement, and independence.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/551115/201010201907/Pulling-Up-Anchor.aspx                        Appropriately enough, Pearce says legislators in 12 states are joining him in the effort to clarify the wording of the 14th Amendment: Alabama, Delaware, Idaho, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah.  It was not intended to bestow citizenship on those who enter the country illegally. 

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html   Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, regarded as the father of the 14th Amendment, said it meant that "every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your constitution itself. A natural born citizen . . ."

Illegal aliens are foreign nationals who owe their allegiance to their country of origin and are subject to that country's jurisdiction. A requirement that becoming a citizen by birth requires one or both parents to be a citizen or legal resident is not xenophobic but a valid interpretation of the l4th Amendment's original intent.

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/520061/201002031913/Dont-Touch-Dont-Ask-Dont-Tell.aspx                    As commander in chief, Obama also has a constitutional duty to protect the nation. Allowing homosexuals to serve openly is fraught with problems, including:

• Recruitment. Yes, more gays and lesbians would sign up, but at roughly 2% of the population, they represent a limited recruiting pool. Meantime, recruiting of straights would suffer — not just in the Bible Belt but also the Sun Belt, with its fast-growing pool of Hispanic recruits. Legacy enlistment would also fall off, as veterans dissuade their sons from joining an openly gay military. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says gay men remain the top risk group for AIDS. Blood on the battlefield — dressings, transfusions — will be an issue, since HIV is a blood-borne pathogen.

• Morale: Of U.S. troops serving in combat units — where unit cohesion is most critical — just 21% say they know for certain someone in their unit is gay, according to a Zogby poll of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.  What if everybody knew? Most say it would hurt morale. Among all soldiers surveyed who do not know of a gay or lesbian in their unit, nearly 60% say open knowledge of one would have a negative impact on their unit.  And commanding officers who come out of the closet would more than likely lose trust among their units.

• Logistics. Housing openly gay rank-and-file soldiers poses a coordination nightmare.

Quartering them together would bring complaints from straights, who could argue they're denied the same rights. Mixing gays in barracks with straights risks harassment and hostility. For straights uncomfortable with rooming and showering with gays, it's a privacy issue.

As former Joint Chiefs Chairman Colin Powell has argued, homosexual behavior is "inconsistent with maintaining good order and discipline."

Several female West Point graduates have complained about being approached by lesbians in the Army. There simply is no compelling national security reason to do what Obama plans to do. It smacks of pure politics.

Nor is it even a pressing issue. The DADT policy was functioning largely without controversy until Frank and the gay lobby made it a federal case.

Obama's attention would be better focused on Islamic fanatics in the military, the economy & jobs, the deficit, budget & spending etc. Now those are real problems.

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/540253/201007131904/Senator-From-Stir.aspx                     A new study says Minnesota's freshman senator squeaked out a recount victory with illegal votes cast by convicted felons. Is this why Democrats are trying so hard to have all felons vote?

An 18-month study conducted by Minnesota Majority,  http://www.minnesotamatters.net/             a conservative watchdog group, has found that at least 341 felons in largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul voted illegally in the 2008 Minnesota Senate race. This was the campaign that culminated with a six-month recount that gave the victory to former "Saturday Night Live" comedian Al Franken over incumbent Republican Norm Coleman.  The final recount vote in the race showed Franken beating Coleman by a scant 312 votes, with the illegal votes cast by felons possibly being Franken's margin of victory.

The Minnesota recount was conducted under the auspices of Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, who has extensive ties to the Acorn organization that's been under repeated investigation for vote fraud and was endorsed by the community activist group in 2006.

A bill, H.R. 3335, introduced by Rep. John Conyers, Michigan Democrat, would allow convicted felons not now in jail, including those in "residential community treatment centers" as well as those on probation or parole, to vote. The bill would let Conyers' wife, a former Detroit City Council member who pleaded guilty to felony charges of bribery, vote after she completes her sentence.  The bill is co-sponsored by Rep. Alcee Hastings, a disgraced former federal judge who was removed for corruption and perjury. Other co-sponsors include the ethically challenged Charlie Rangel, who's been accused of tax fraud, and Barney Frank, whose partner was alleged to have run a prostitution ring out of his apartment.

If we are serious about the adage that crime does not pay, it shouldn't pay at the ballot box either. The thought that a sitting U.S. senator might owe his seat to the fraudulent voting of convicted felons should give everyone pause.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/552518/201011021903/George-Soros-And-The-Margin-Of-Theft.aspx            In 2006, along with Minnesota's Ritchie, the SOS project endorsed and helped elect Jennifer Brunner in Ohio.  As Soviet dictator Josef Stalin once remarked in a sentiment George Soros holds dear, "The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything."

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/541414/201007231844/Perspectives-Of-A-Russian-Immigrant-Elena-Kagan-And-The-Urge-To-Alter.aspx                           My grandparents and parents lived in a socialist country where people were forced to conform to government dictates in order to survive. God-based religion was eliminated from the public sphere. Churches and synagogues were demolished or converted to other uses.  Private property was confiscated, business owners were vilified, and the government regulated every aspect of people's lives in the name of the greater good.

No individual or business can harm another as much as powerful and unaccountable centralized government. The reason people of all ethnicities, religions and backgrounds come to and succeed in America more than anywhere else is that America has a Constitution that limits the power of government.

 

http://www.heartland.org/schoolreform-news.org/Article/28954/Trigger_Law_Would_Spur_School_Reform.html                              The new law lets parents or guardians whose children attend a failing public school trigger one of four school intervention models simply by signing a petition.  But the parent trigger's impact is already being felt across the nation. Connecticut lawmakers quickly passed a trigger law in the spring. Now legislators in several other states, including Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota and West Virginia, are preparing parent trigger legislation for the upcoming session.

The trigger lets parents decide the management of the schools their children attend. The threat of shutting down the school entirely is important in convincing school officials to take parents seriously. No school is closed or converted into a charter school without a majority of parents approving the change. And including the charter option in effect lifts the cap that many states impose on the number of charter schools.

Naturally, teacher unions hate the idea, spreading disinformation and going so far as to call it the "lynch mob" law.   By itself, the parent trigger may not turn around the nation's low-performing schools, but it can help reframe the way parents and policymakers approach education reform.

It's one more choice. And it strengthens the only special interest that matters: parents and children.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/520815/201002101908/Money-For-Nothing.aspx   History shows us that spending increases do not equate with improved results. Though there are a lot of problems in America's public school system, a lack of funding is not one of them.  Washington's spending habits are based on politics, not results, and the White House's proposed education spending hike has the rancid smell of a political payoff.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/459153/200901211837/California-School-Days.aspx                           Competition in the business world produces a better product at less cost. Why shouldn't it be so in education? Well, it is.  According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 70% of the countries that outperformed the U.S. in combined math and science literacy among 15-year-olds had more schools competing for students. Countries ranging from Japan to Latvia all had more education options than American students.

Vicki E. Murray, senior fellow in education studies at the Pacific Research Institute, reports that among the 32 countries participating in the latest OECD assessment, the U.S. led in teaching hours per public school year — 1,080 — compared with an international average of 803.  The issue, it would seem, is not the time spent teaching.

Germany and the Netherlands, she notes, average around 773 hours, Finland 600, with Korea at roughly 575. Japan trails at 500 teaching hours per school year, roughly one-half ours, and routinely cleans our school clock. Students need quality time, not quantity. Gimmicks like all-year schools don't work.

Nor is money the issue. California has the eighth-largest economy in the world and spends about $40 billion on K-12 education. Yet it ranks No. 48 among the states in basic reading and math performance.

U.S. cumulative spending per student between the ages of 6 and 15 is $80,000, according to Murray, and our average math score is 475 out of 1,000. Sweden spends as much, but its students perform 100 points higher. The Slovak Republic spends just $15,000 and has an average student score just below 500.

Study after study has shown no correlation between dollars spent and educational performance, and things such as standardized testing and school report cards will show not only this but just how much of our education dollars are often wasted.   Let parents pick the schools as they pick other products they consume. And let schools compete for students as companies compete for customers.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/544402/201008191856/Some-Who-Cant-Teach-Still-Do.aspx                            But if experiences in California are any gauge, making the firings stick won't be easy. There, teachers are protected like an endangered species.

In February, LA Weekly exposed the ugly side of civil service in a story headlined: "Why firing the desk sleepers, burnouts, hotheads and other failed teachers is all but impossible." Its five-month investigation found that LAUSD officials spent $3.5 million in the last 10 years "trying to fire just seven of the district's 33,000 teachers for poor classroom performance — and only four were fired." Each of the legal battles to fire the four took roughly five years.

LA Weekly also discovered that 32 underperforming teachers were recommended for firing, then "secretly paid $50,000, on average, to leave without a fight.  "Moreover, 66 unnamed teachers are being continually recycled through a costly mentoring and retraining program but failing to improve, and another 400 anonymous teachers have been ordered to attend the retraining."

As alarming as these numbers are, they're only a small part of the problem. LA Weekly reckons as many as 1,000 LAUSD teachers responsible for 30,000 children cannot teach and can't be fired.  In one example, a teacher who "kept a stash of pornography, marijuana and vials with cocaine residue at school" was marked for firing, "but a commission balked, suggesting that firing was too harsh."

The Times also found that a "male middle school teacher spotted lying on top of a female colleague in the metal shop" wasn't fired because "the district did not prove that the two were having sex."

Another teacher kept her job despite being cited for poor judgment, failing to report child abuse, insulting students, not planning lessons adequately and failing to supervise her class. Still other teachers simply hung around the house while receiving full pay as they fought their firings. "Once the board approves a dismissal, teachers may appeal to Commissions on Professional Competence, review panels that have final administrative authority on who gets fired or laid off in California schools."

Even the board's decision doesn't end the process. Fired teachers can take their grievances to the courts.

Dignity and honor seem to be character traits of a bygone era, made obsolete by workers — aided and abetted by unions and lawyers — who refuse to leave their jobs when found guilty of gross incompetence and even lacking in common decency.

Teachers should take the opportunity to break with this trend by embracing information that reflects their job performance and accepting the consequences. It's the world most of us live in. They shouldn't be exempt.  When a nonunion worker doesn't perform, he or she is usually dismissed without too much trouble.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/537597/201006161850/Behind-The-White-Houses-Anti-Israel-Agenda.aspx                 While Obama's father and stepfather were Muslim, and he himself studied Islam as a child in Indonesia, there's no evidence that the president practices Islam. But Obama, who speaks some Arabic, has made it clear that he identifies at least culturally with Islam. He has waxed fondly of its traditions, once describing the Islamic call to prayer as "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth."

But it was at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago that his political views on Israel likely cemented. His old church called for a South African-style boycott of Israel for its "apartheid" against Palestinians while Obama sat in its pews for some 20 years.

Trinity also sang the praises of Hamas, even reprinting the group's terrorist manifesto in its church bulletin. Written by Hamas deputy chief Mousa Abu Marzook, a fugitive terrorist, the letter was featured on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's "Pastors Page" under the title "A Fresh View of the Palestinian Struggle."

Wright, a one-time member of the Nation of Islam, gave Jew-bashing sermons while mentoring Obama. He once joined Louis Farrakhan on a trip to Libya to pay homage to Moammar Gadhafi. In 1995, Obama joined Wright in Farrakhan's Million Man March.

In 2008, Wright honored the Farrakhan as a hero on the cover of his church magazine, a publication the Obamas presumably received. Both Islamism and the radical "Black Liberation Theology" Wright preached reject the Jews as God's chosen people.  No media have dared ask what Obama believes, though his church had a role in shaping his views — and those views are now shaping U.S. foreign policy.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/25/AR2011012504783.html?nav=emailpage                    The new technologies that will drive these changes are detailed in a study called "Technology Horizons" that was prepared last year by Werner Dahm, who was then chief scientist of the Air Force. He urged research on "cyber resilience" and "electromagnetic spectrum warfare," including lasers and other beam weapons. And he stressed that unmanned systems, coordinated by advanced software, can give "operational advantages over adversaries who are limited to human planning and decision speeds."   Lasers are only a few years away from being practical weapons, Pentagon officials say. Ground-based lasers could revolutionize air defense, and a new generation of solid-state lasers may be small enough for airborne platforms. "Directed-energy systems will be among the key 'game-changing' technology-enabled capabilities," wrote Dahm

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/519748/201002011829/Doesnt-Obama-See-Message-Hes-Sending-.aspx                    There is almost nothing the Obama administration does regarding terrorism that makes me feel safer.  Whether it is guaranteeing captured terrorists that they will not be waterboarded, or whether it is reciting terrorists their rights, or whether it is the legally meandering and confusing rule that some terrorists will be tried in military tribunals and some in civilian courts, what is missing is a firm recognition that what comes first is not the message sent to America's critics but the message sent to Americans themselves.

When, oh when, will this administration wake up?  The announced closing of Guantanamo has also suffered from a peculiar Obama-style naivete.  Bit by bit, circumstances are forcing President Obama and his aides to come to grips with reality. A military tribunal would fit them fine. If it is good enough for your average GI accused of murder or some such thing, it ought to be good enough for a foreign national with mass murder on his mind. But more is at stake here than America's image abroad — namely the security and peace of mind of Americans in America.  Repeatedly, the administration has shown poor judgment

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/522844/201003031430/Right-To-Bear-Arms-Means-Just-That.aspx               Otis McDonald, 76, an Army vet who lives in a high-crime area of Chicago, thinks the Constitution gives him the right to bear arms to protect himself and his wife as he protected his country. We think so too. 

In a 5-4 decision ( Which President’s & Senators’ Justice voted against your 2^nd Amendment right???  Be careful who you vote for President and as Senators especially)

* Page 6 shows Justice votes: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf  in 2008, Heller v. District of Columbia, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court overturned the District of Columbia's draconian, 32-year-old ban on the private ownership of handguns. Scalia wrote that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

 

"More Guns, Less Crime," John Lott points out that the Windy City's murder rate fell relative to America's other 50 largest cities before the ban and rose afterward.

In an essay Monday for FoxNews.com, Lott noted that after the D.C. gun ban was ruled unconstitutional, murders in Washington plummeted 25% from 2008 to 2009. D.C.'s murder rate, he reports, is down to 23.5 per 100,000 people, its lowest since 1967.  More guns do seem to mean less crime.

 

·         Page 6: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf  A survey of contemporary legal authorities plainly shows that, at that time, the ratifying public understood the Clause to protect constitutionally enumerated rights, including the right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 1–34.

ALITO, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered theopinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II–A, II–B, II–D, III–A, andIII–B, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Parts II–C, IV, and V, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA and KENNEDY, JJ., join. SCALIA, J., filed a concurring opinion. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring in part andconcurring in the judgment.

4 Dissenters against your 2^nd Amendment rights:  STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG and SO-TOMAYOR, JJ., joined.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=570410&p=1    As Trump pointed out, it took him a mere 24 hours to produce his own birth certificate; why has it taken the president years?  

The Trump extravaganza, as clownish as it may sometimes be, has painted a picture for the public of a politician who promised transparency, but whose life becomes more mysterious the more it is scrutinized. Sound bite by sound bite, Trump is exposing a president confident in the power of his own coolness at a time when the world needs an America that practices not multilateralist sweet talk, but independent toughness.

Trump may have a big mouth, but he has shone a spotlight on Obama's efforts to spend himself into the history books

We're not about to become rabid with Trump Fever.   As we've said before, even the least of the possible GOP candidates has more real experience — and more common sense — than this ex-community organizer who spent his legislative career running for president. Trump has made skillful business deals; the others, such as Sarah Palin and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, have managed state budgets, or fixed sick companies like Mitt Romney.

Unlike President Obama, the accomplishments of each extend beyond making speeches.

 

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/520668/201002091834/Exposing-The-Fallacy-Of-Fairness-And-Political-Correctness-It-Breeds.aspx                           David Riesman, I believe — who said: "The tests are not unfair. Life is unfair and the tests measure the results." In the language of the politically correct, achievement is equated with privilege. Such verbal sleight of hand evades the question whether individuals' own priorities and efforts affect outcomes, whether in education or in other endeavors. No need to look at empirical evidence when a clever phrase can take that whole question off the table.

Those with that vision do not want to even discuss evidence that students from different groups spend different amounts of time on homework and different amounts of time on social activities. What they need are the attitudes, priorities and behavior which produce the outcomes desired. Most of us want to be fair, in the sense of treating everyone equally. We want laws to be applied the same to everyone. We want educational, economic or other criteria for rewards to be the same as well.

Apparently those who are lagging are to continue to think and act as they have in the past — and yet somehow have better outcomes in the future. And, if they don't get the same outcomes as others, then according to this way of seeing the world, it is society's fault!

Society may lavish thousands of dollars per year on schooling for a youngster who does not bother to study, and yet when he or she emerges as a semiliterate adult, it is considered to be society's fault if such youngsters cannot get the same kinds of jobs and incomes as other youngsters who studied conscientiously during their years in school.

It is certainly a great misfortune to be born into families or communities whose values make educational or economic success less likely.

Track meets discriminate against those who are slow afoot. Tests in school discriminate against students who did not study.  Disregarding criteria in the interest of "fairness" — in the sense of outcomes independent of inputs — adds to the handicaps of those who already have other handicaps, by lying to them about the reasons for their situation and the things they need to do to make their situation better.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/521868/201002221853/Borderline-Dereliction-Of-Duty.aspx                             The 2006 Secure Fence Act???  Name the last time a suicide bomb blew up in an Israeli pizza parlor killing dozens. The Israeli-West Bank barrier, begun in 2002, is nearly finished after a focused effort to build something to keep terrorists out.  The 450-mile wall has already cut terrorism by 90%

Morocco had a problem on its southern border with Polisario terrorists, so in 1987 it built a 10-foot sand wall known as the Berm, spanning 1,677 miles. Bunkers and land mines were added to discourage invaders.

Saudi Arabia, too, had a problem with illegal immigrants and al-Qaida terrorists on its southern border — some 400,000 illegals from Yemen had already crossed over. So from 2003 to 2008 it built the Saudi-Yemen Barrier, even against flak from the Bush administration.  Today, the 1,100-mile southern border has a network of sandbags, concrete-filled pipelines and electronic detection equipment. The result was effective enough to encourage the Saudis to begin another on their northern border.

These countries, all poorer in resources and expertise than the U.S., managed to actually get something done fast enough to make a difference to a pressing problem.

It took the U.S. a tad more than eight years from the announcement in 1961 to put a man on the moon. Now we can't build a fence in seven?  Shovel ready project for two birds?  This is not border control. That's politics. And it leaves our border unguarded at a bad time.

 

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/526927/201003101951/Motown-To-Notown.aspx  the United Auto Workers union, through its greed and shortsightedness, is largely responsible for Detroit's collapse — and for the waning economic might of much of the Rust Belt. GM, after ignoring its foreign competition for decades, is 60% government-owned. Chrysler is 10% government-owned, and largely controlled by its union. Only Ford, which not-coincidentally rejected government bailouts in 2008, has a semblance of financial health.

None of this is surprising. Each American car made with UAW labor carries an extra $2,000 cost just to take care of UAW retirees.

In 2008 alone, the average worker for a Big Three automaker earned $73.20 an hour in total compensation. Workers at Toyota and other foreign makers, by comparison, earned $48 or less, which is a very good wage that doesn’t price you out of a job. The average U.S. manufacturing worker earned just $31.59 that year.

Saddled with such costs, U.S. auto companies couldn't compete or make a consistent profit.   The Big Three's union-caused implosion has decimated Detroit's tax base. As auto factories have shuttered, hundreds of thousands of laid-off workers have migrated elsewhere, causing hundreds of small businesses to fail. Of course, the local economy hasn't been helped by a corrupt city government and high taxes.

There's a lesson in this for cities, states AND the FEDERAL Government  (whose own budgets are exploding from extreme union wages & benefits)  that believe their key industries are immune to the rules of economics. That high taxes don't matter. That corruption is OK.  Look at Detroit. Who will be next??