Monday, November 21, 2011

From Jesus Daily

PRAY for family and friends of a teenager murdered by his mom.
PRAY for 16-year old Brandon who underwent surgery for Cerebral Palsy.
PRAY for everyone seeking a job and those without food or clean water.
PRAY for those who need the love of our Lord and Savior JESUS today.
Comment your own prayer needs and Like others to pray for them.
It would be a great tragedy if a super tax hike came out of a supercommittee compromise deal. It would do great harm to the economy -- just as much harm as President Obama's various tax-hike threats. And on the Republican side, a super tax hike would irreparably split the GOP.
OK. Here's the good news. In a CNBC interview this week, I asked supercommittee co-chair Jeb Hensarling about an idea from the Democrats to raise taxes by $600 billion to $800 billion. About $300 billion of that might be upfront, with $500 billion later from some tax-reform overhaul. This would be an unmitigated economic disaster.
But Hensarling was blunt: "Not going to happen, Larry." He said no such deal has been presented to him. And if it were, he and other Republicans on the supercommittee would not support it.
Hensarling then added, "We put $250 billion of what is known as static revenue on the table, but only if we can bring down rates. We believe we can bring the top individual rate down to 28, 29, maybe at most 30 percent, and bring the corporate rate down to the median of the EU, 25 percent." For emphasis, he said, "We have gone as far as we feel we can go."
The Texan was referring to the Sen. Pat Toomey plan, which would lower the personal tax rate to 28 percent and head down from there, while at the same time putting limits on personal deductions (such as mortgage interest) for upper-income taxpayers. In other words, flatten the rates and broaden the base.
Net revenues would go up in this scheme for two reasons: First, the reduction in personal tax breaks; second, the economic-growth impact would be positive. This calls on the research of Harvard professor Martin Feldstein, who urged Congress to trade off lower rates with fewer deductions since the (SET ITAL) incentive (END ITAL) effect of taking home more after-tax income would benefit the economy.
Trouble is, Democrats don't buy into it -- at least not yet. Senate supercommittee members Patty Murray and John Kerry have opposed real tax reform. And it has been reported that House supercommittee member Xavier Becerra opposes it (although Chris van Hollen might be looking at it).
But the whole trouble with the machinations of the two sides in this deficit-cutting episode is that the closer you get to the Nov. 23 deadline, the more compromises are made. Democrats are pulling hard for higher tax (SET ITAL) rates, (END ITAL) which would damage the economy, while Republicans are making no progress getting any meaningful health care entitlement reform.
And the GOP is in danger of losing the narrative. Most of the noise is coming from Democratic proposals for higher taxes, while Republicans have not taken any entitlement-spending-cut scalps.
In all likelihood, Hensarling will succeed in his conference with the idea of making the Georget W. Bush tax rates permanent in return for about $300 billion of loophole-closers. The deeper-tax-rate-cut Toomey reform doesn't seem to be gaining traction.
Trouble is, so-called tax reform would probably be handed over to the tax-writing committees in the Senate and House for a decision next year. At deal-time this year -- if there is a deal -- we won't know what the tax-rate picture will actually look like. At least, that's a risk. But it's possible in a worst-case scenario that personal-deduction limits (SET ITAL) will be (END ITAL) hammered out upfront, without any assurances of lower tax rates next year.
All this leads me back to this question: Where are the super spending cuts? Nowhere. So why not fall back on the across-the-board budget-cutting trigger known as sequestration? That's the $1.2 trillion backup plan if a $1.5 trillion deal cannot be reached. (Hensarling called the $1.2 trillion backstop very important.)
Then at least some spending will be cut. And the trigger is probably better than a deal that uses Iraq and Afghanistan spending cuts that would happen anyway or fiddles around with the current-services baseline from which reductions are measured.
For defense hawks who object -- since 50 percent of the trigger would come out of national security -- any spending measures would have a shelf life of only one year: 2013. After that, new presidents and Congresses will do what they will.
In another interview, Rep. Ron Paul (now in a dead heat for first place in Iowa polling) told me the GOP should forget tax hikes and trigger $1.2 trillion in spending cuts. Out on the campaign trail, Newt Gingrich agrees.
But for investors and people in business, a super tax hike would be the worst possible outcome. So take the spending-cut sequestration now, and then fight the real battle in November 2012. That's better than a supercommittee deal at any cost.
To find out more about Lawrence Kudlow and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

JESUS.......I cry out to You......because I am Dirty.
JESUS.......I cry out to You......because I am Weak.
JESUS.......I cry out to You......because I am Alone.
JESUS.......I cry out to You......because I am Afraid.
JESUS.......I cry out to You......because I am Broken.
JESUS.......I cry out to You......because I am Desperate.
Will you hold me? Put me back together? Cleanse me? Thank You Jesus!!!

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Townhall

You knew it would take a little while, but federal government over-reach has gone so far now as to try to regulate the affairs of other, sovereign nations.
With the growing poverty problem in the United States and 25 percent of the American public either un-banked or under-banked there’s a great benefit to the financial products that are being offered by the sovereign nations in Indian Country, who understand better the needs of the customers for their products than the fat cat Senators in DC who will leave the town richer than when they arrived.
This week the Senate Banking committee held hearings under the spine-chilling name Opportunities and Challenges for Economic Development in Indian Country.
“Opportunities” for whom? “Economic Development” that benefits whom?
Not for Native Americans, that’s for sure.
Hey, there may be a recession on but a US Senator still has to make a buck.
Native Americans, without federal assistance, are already providing valuable banking services for those Americans who are otherwise neglected by traditional financial institutions.
For example the types of loans that tribes offer help people with immediate short term needs like car repairs, utility bills, or child care.
But not content with the disaster that they have created in the rest of the country, the Senate, still under Democrat control, is now making a land-grab to regulate banking operations in Indian Country too, while denying them the basic tools for self-sufficiency like municipal bond offerings.
It doesn’t matter to Senators that under the constitution, various laws, court decisions and, oh yeah, treaty obligations the US has with sovereign Indian nations, that the federal government does not have the authority to interfere in Native American affairs.
“The United States has both a moral duty and a legal obligation to the tribes,” says Senator Jonathan Windy Boy, a Democrat state senator from Montana and former Chippewa Cree Tribe Vice-Chairman. “It’s unconstitutional and violates long-standing treaties that allow us to govern our own affairs.”
Since when has a little formality like the law stopped this round of Senate Democrats from doing anything they like?
But where the law has been unsuccessful in keeping government hands off Native banking, perhaps public opinion might work.
Zogby today released a poll that shows that 55 percent of adults “say that, in general, they feel the federal government already has too many regulations, while a quarter (25%) say there is just the right amount.”
Democrats still haven’t heard that message despite huge- and I mean really freaking big- electoral defeats they have suffered in Virginia, New Jersey, New York, Nevada and Colorado
The Zogby survey also showed that 88 percent of adults think the “U.S. Government should keep its word and honor Native American treaties it has made with the nation’s Indian tribes.”
Instead of looking to try to regulate existing banking services, says Dante Desiderio, executive director of the Native American Finance Officers Association, Congress should give the tribes the same financing abilities that other governments in the US enjoy.
“Other state and local governments typically provide roads, water, parking to attract businesses with no challenges to their bond offerings,” says Desiderio. “State and local governments routinely finance golf courses, marinas and convention centers. Even the new stadiums are built with the proposed use tax-exempt financing.” But he says that when tribes try to finance basic services like water systems and reservoirs, they are disallowed from using the basic tools of the municipal bond market.
“Conflicting views as to what Congress intended,” concludes Desiderio, “are paralyzing the ability of tribes to access the low-cost benefits of tax-exempt financing—the very benefit that was intended for tribes by” a Congressional act passed in 1982.
It’s time the federal government lived up to its word and gave the tribes the same tools that every other state and city has, rather than trying to stick them with the same regulatory nonsense that has killed retail banking in these United States.
John Ransom

John Ransom

John Ransom is the Finance Editor for Townhall Finance. You can follow him on twitter @bamransom and on Facebook: bamransom.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Subject: 2010 U.S. Census Map


Just glide your cursor over the map and it displays every USA county.
Can't imagine how long it took to create this map!

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Cleverly done!!!



Twas the Month before Christmas




Twas the month before Christmas




When all through our land,




Not a Christian was praying




Nor taking a stand.




Why the PC Police had taken away




The reason for Christmas - no one could say.




The children were told by their schools not to sing




About Shepherds and Wise Men and Angels and things.




It might hurt people's feelings, the teachers would say




December 25th is just a ' Holiday'.




Yet the shoppers were ready with cash, checks and credit




Pushing folks down to the floor just to get it!




CDs from Madonna, an X BOX, an I-Pod




Something was changing, something quite odd!




Retailers promoted Ramadan and Kwanzaa




In hopes to sell books by Franken & Fonda.




As Targets were hanging their trees upside down




At Lowe's the word Christmas - was no where to be found.




At K-Mart and Staples and Penny's and Sears




You won't hear the word Christmas; it won't touch your ears.




Inclusive, sensitive, Di-ver-si-ty




Are words that were used to intimidate me.




Now Daschle, Now Darden, Now Sharpton, Wolf Blitzen




On Boxer, on Rather, on Kerry, on Clinton!




At the top of the Senate, there arose such a clatter




To eliminate Jesus, in all public matter.




And we spoke not a word, as they took away our faith




Forbidden to speak of salvation and grace




The true Gift of Christmas was exchanged and discarded




The reason for the season, stopped before it started.




So as you celebrate 'Winter Break' under your 'Dream Tree'




Sipping your Starbucks, listen to me.




Choose your words carefully, choose what you say




Shout MERRY CHRISTMAS,




not Happy Holiday!




Please, all Christians join together and




wish everyone you meet




MERRY CHRISTMAS




Christ is The Reason' for the Christ-mas Season!




If you agree please forward, if not, simply delete.

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Subject: Christmas 2011 -- Birth of a New Tradition


This is worth a thought when you start your annual Christmas gift buying........
Gym membership? It's appropriate for all ages who are thinking about some health improvement.
Who wouldn't appreciate getting their car detailed? Small, American owned detail shops and car washes would love to sell you a gift certificate or a book of gift certificates.
As the holidays approach, the giant Asian factories are kicking into high gear to provide Americans with monstrous piles of cheaply produced goods --merchandise that has been produced at the expense of American labor. This year will be different. This year Americans will give the gift of genuine concern for other Americans. There is no longer an excuse that, at gift giving time, nothing can be found that is produced by American hands. Yes there is!

It's time to think outside the box, people. Who says a gift needs to fit in a shirt box, wrapped in Chinese produced wrapping paper?
Everyone -- well almost EVERYONE gets their haircut. How about gift a certificate
from your local American hair salon or barber?

Are you one of those extravagant givers who think nothing of plonking down the Benjamins on a Chinese-made flat-screen? Perhaps that grateful gift receiver would like his driveway sealed, or lawn mowed for the summer, or driveway plowed all winter, or games at the local golf course.

There are a bazillion owner-run restaurants -- all offering gift certificates. And, if your intended isn't the fancy eatery sort, what about a half dozen breakfasts at the local breakfast joint. Remember, folks this isn't about big National chains -- this is about supporting your home town Americans with their financial lives on the line to keep their doors open.


How many people couldn't use an oil change for their car, truck or motorcycle, done at a shop run by the American working guy?

Thinking about a heartfelt gift for mom? Mom would LOVE the services of a local cleaning lady for a day.

My computer could use a tune-up, and I KNOW I can find some young guy who is
struggling to get his repair business up and running.

OK, you were looking for something more personal. Local crafts people spin their own wool and knit them into scarves. They also make jewelry, and pottery and beautiful wooden boxes.

Plan your holiday outings at local, owner operated restaurants and leave your server a nice tip. And, how about going out to see a play or ballet at your hometown theatre.

Musicians need love too, so find a venue showcasing local bands.

Honestly, people, do you REALLY need to buy another ten thousand Chinese lights for the house? When you buy a five dollar string of lights, about fifty cents stays in the community. If you have those kinds of bucks to burn, leave the mailman, trash guy or babysitter a nice BIG tip.

You see, Christmas is no longer about draining American pockets so that China can build another glittering city. Christmas is now about caring about US, encouraging American small businesses to keep plugging away to follow their dreams. And, when we care about other Americans, we care about our communities, and the benefits come back to us in ways we couldn't imagine.
Oh, the changes he has made as President since being elected. The shirt still fits him and nothing is better!!!
Description: cid:1.1324851631@web81006.mail.mud.yahoo.com
The Quote of the Decade: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America 's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.” ~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006!
 



Thank you Alan.  Remember the BS Obama has been telling us for years  

SO VERY TRUE!!!!

Is the Bible the Inspired Word of God?
By Jason Carlson and Ron Carlson
During a question and answer session at a recent speaking engagement, a university student asked me, "Why do you believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God?" Now this is a very interesting question; and probably one of the most important questions any Christian could ask themselves.
What is so special, so unique about the Bible that Christians believe it is literally the inspired word of God?

In answering this student's question, I encouraged him to consider the following facts about the Bible:

First, the Bible is not just one single book. This is a more common misconception than many people realize, especially with people who do not come from a Judeo-Christian background. Rather than being a single book, the Bible is actually a collection of 66 books, which is called the canon of scriptures. These 66 books contain a variety of genres:
history, poetry, prophecy, wisdom literature, letters, and apocalyptic just to name a few.

Second, these 66 books were written by 40 different authors. These authors came from a variety of backgrounds: shepherds, fishermen, doctors, kings, prophets, and others. And most of these authors neverknew one another personally..

Third, these 66 books were written over a period of 1500 years. Yet again, this is another reminder that many of these authors never knew or collaborated with one another in writing these books.

Fourth, the 66 books of the Bible were written in 3 different languages. In the Bible we have books that were written in the ancient languages of Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic; a reflection of the historical and cultural circumstances in which each of these books were written.

And finally, these 66 books were written on 3 different continents: Africa, Asia, and Europe . Once again, this is a testament to the varied historical and cultural circumstances of God's people.

Think about the above realities: 66 books, written by 40 different authors, over 1500 years, in 3 different languages, on 3 different continents. What's more, this collection of books shares a common storyline- the creation, fall, and redemption of God's people; a common
theme - God's universal love for all of humanity; and a common message- salvation is available to all who repent of their sins and commit to following God with all of their heart, soul, mind and strength. In addition to sharing these commonalities, these 66 books contain no historical errors or contradictions. God's word truly is an amazing. After I had shared the above facts with this student, I offered him the following challenge: I said to him, "If you do not believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, if you do not believe that the Bible is of a supernatural origin, then I challenge you to a test." I said to the student, "I challenge you to go to any library in the world, you can choose any library you like, and find 66 books which match the characteristics of the 66 books in the Bible. You must choose 66 books, written by 40 different authors, over 1500 years, in 3 different languages, written on 3 different continents. However, they must share a common storyline, a common theme, and a common message, with no historical errors or contradictions." I went on to say, "If you can produce such a collection of books, I will admit that the Bible is not the inspired word of God." The student's reply was almost instantaneous, he emphatically stated, "But that's impossible!"

"But that's impossible!" It truly is impossible, for any collection of human writings. However, the Bible passes this test. The Bible contains 66 books, written by 40 different authors, over 1500 years, in 3 different languages, on 3 different continents, with no historical errors or contradictions. The entire Bible, from Genesis toRevelation, bears the mark of Divine inspiration.
The next time you encounter someone who asks you why you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, try sharing this challenge with them. Better yet, don't wait until you're asked, just go ahead and share this challenge with a friend today. You don't even have to mention the Bible up front, just ask them if they think it would be realistic to assemble such a collection of books.


Alan thank you for emailing me this

Dear Londa,

This is it. We're officially less than a year away from deciding who will be President for the next 4 years.

Will it be Barack Obama? Not if FreedomWorks for America can help it!

What do you say? Will you help us FIRE OBAMA and get America back on the right track?

If your answer is "YES!" -- I'm counting on your help in our FIRE OBAMA moneybomb. The support has been overwhelming, but our deadline is Saturday at midnight, so your immediate support is critical.

Can you make a gift of $20.12, $50, $100, $250 or more to help us reach our new $500,000 goal?

If you can donate $20.12 or more, we'll send you a free "FIRE OBAMA!" bumper sticker for your car.

FreedomWorks for America is poised to be a HUGE player in the 2012 elections, building on the unparalleled electoral success enjoyed by FreedomWorks PAC in the 2010 elections -- success made possible by donations like yours. In case you haven't heard the details of just how effective we were...
  • Multiple independent studies show that no other Tea Party organization's endorsement actually made a real difference in the elections.
  • Only an endorsement from FreedomWorks PAC actually led to a candidate getting more votes. A lot more, actually -- our involvement added 2.7% of the vote!
So what makes FreedomWorks for America the very best organization to support if you want to defeat Barack Obama in 2012? And why exactly was our endorsement so valuable last go-round?
It's because of our grassroots-focused battle plans. We do the real, on-the-ground politicking that ultimately makes the difference between win or lose.

T.V. ads may be flashy -- but they're expensive, and in the end, don't change the hearts and minds of voters. But we know face-to-face grassroots work DOES.
As you probably know, Obama has set his sights on raising $1 BILLION to stay in the White House, and he's well on his way with millions upon millions flowing in from unions, Hollywood elites and other powerful progressive special interests.

FreedomWorks for America CAN fight back and FIRE OBAMA with our unique brand of grassroots politics, but only with your generous financial support. The good news is -- thanks to our door-to-door, person-to-person approach -- every one dollar of ours pulls the weight of many more of his.

We simply have decades of on-the-ground campaign experience that allows every dollar to be stretched to the max -- more than any other political organization or campaign out there.

And with Barack Obama's campaign coffers already overflowing, our FIRE OBAMA moneybomb is critical to helping up keep pace. We can't afford to let him have a huge head start.

Won't you help us today? If you planned on contributing even a single dollar during the 2012 election cycle, your absolute best investment is with FreedomWorks for America.

Remember, for a symbolic gift of $20.12, we'll send you a complimentary FIRE OBAMA bumper sticker. Of course, if you can gift make a larger gift -- $50, $100, $250 or more, for instance -- you will still receive the bumper sticker, and you'll help us reach our goal even faster.

I fear what will happen to America if Obama is re-elected, but I'm hopeful that -- with your support -- we can defeat him. But we must never forget how serious the threat is.

So please, I ask you to consider the most generous contribution you can afford today. With FreedomWorks for America, your investment will go further than any other group, so please give generously -- $20.12, $50, $100 or more if you can.

I'm glad to have you on our side in this fight.

Sincerely,

Armey Signature
Dick Armey
Chairman, FreedomWorks

P.S. Time is running out to meet our FIRE OBAMA moneybomb goal by midnight Saturday, and I'm counting on your immediate support to help meet our goal. Please, click here to make a contribution of whatever you can afford.
Persecuted Christian? Don't Expect These Pastors To Speak Up




About half of all the pastors in America's churches today do not want to tell their congregations that there are forces in the world that persecute Christians for their beliefs, because it's a "downer," according to the results of a startling new poll.

The Barna Research Associates survey, commissioned by Open Doors USA, says a significant majority of American Christians, some three out of four, want to hear about the persecuted church.

But the same study showed that 52 percent of America's pastors don't want to talk about persecution and have no plans to talk about it.

In the nationwide poll of more than 800 Christians, 74 percent of America's churchgoers want to hear about the persecuted church.

But the same survey said only 48 percent of the pastors want to discuss the issue.

See the plight of the persecuted, in "A Cry From Iran: The Untold Story of Iranian Christian Martyrs"

Open Doors President Carl Moeller says the survey shows that American Christians are not isolationists.

"Much of what we've been hearing from people and in my experience of speaking with people all over the country would indicate that American Christians really want to know what's happening to their brothers and sisters in Christ all around the world, particularly those that are suffering for their faith in Christ," Moeller said.

Moeller said that perception led him to commission the study.

"And so, we did a survey with Barna that was two parts. The first part was asking pastors when they think they might preach on persecution or the suffering church around the world," Moeller said.

"We had several options there, but 48 percent said they weren't ever planning on preaching about persecuted Christians. Some said they would be preaching on it sometime in the future and a few said they preach on it regularly," Moeller said.

"That 48 percent kind of stuck with me. 'Wow, 48 percent never plan to talk about the persecuted church," Moeller said.

Moeller said the story was different in part two of the study.

"Seventy-four percent of American Christians who go to church regularly said they would like to hear sermons from time-to-time on the suffering church or persecuted Christians," Moeller said.

"That was a huge gap, we thought. Almost half of the pastors in American were never planning on preaching on something but three-quarters, almost three-quarters of their congregations want to hear on it regularly," Moeller said.

"We thought that that was worthy of reporting back to the American press and to the American church, pastors in particular," he said.

"People are really hungry; they want to know, they want to pray. They want to do something, speak out, take action, on behalf of suffering Christians wherever they can," Moeller said.

Christian human rights group International Christian Concern's Middle East Area Specialist Aidan Clay believes the problem comes from the pulpits.

"The persecuted church reminds us that the decision to follow Christ is all or nothing," Clay said. "It reminds us that Jesus promises persecution in the Scriptures and that the Christian life was not intended to be easy."

Clay said the reality about Christian persecution isn't popular.

"That's a difficult teaching to swallow in some American churches today that are centered on self-improvement and feel-good sermons. And, perhaps pastors fear that the topic of Christian persecution will drive complacent Christians or those who are unsure what they believe out of the church," Clay said.

Clay said he's pleasantly surprised that the message of persecution has a solid impact on American Christians.

"However, I’ve learned when speaking to Western Christians that the opposite is true. Upon hearing the stories of the persecuted, Western Christians are enlivened, driven to prayer, and begin seeking ways to assist and raise awareness," Clay said.

"Even complacent Christians often find greater purpose when awakened to the harsh realities Christians face in other parts of the world. We are strengthened and encouraged when hearing the stories of Christians who remain joyful and continue to trust God after being imprisoned or even tortured for following Jesus," Clay said.

Moeller agreed, saying that sometimes persecution stories bring out the best in American churches.

"Persecution teaches us what the global church, the suffering church, has learned that maybe we've forgotten. I think that maybe there's a disconnect in this way," Moeller said.

"When we speak about persecution, the initial perspective that Americans have is that it's a horrible message of suffering and destruction. The straight fact of the matter is that it's actually a story of inspirational courage and fortitude and faith," he said.

"There's great inspiration that comes from being exposed to what the suffering church is going through. So if I can put it this way: I think American pastors are still hoping to mobilize their congregations to a level of engagement with the Gospel," Moeller said.

"But they have forgotten that we can be inspired, not just by clever stories about our neighborhood evangelism which can give us techniques in how to share our faith, but we can be inspired by the big story of Christ's church expanding," Moeller said.

"It's an epic story that can inspire the church to reach out," Moeller said.

Moeller added that the story of the persecuted church can teach the American church something that many other lessons cannot.

"Just because people are concerned about their own personal lives doesn't mean that they can't draw strength and encouragement from those that are going through suffering," Moeller said.

"I like to refer to my mom who said a very wise thing to me one time. She said, 'Carl, experience is not the best teacher. Someone else's experience is the best teacher," Moeller said.

"In many ways, the American church is longing for the kind of personal purpose and satisfaction that comes from being deeply connected to God's plan for the world," Moeller said.

"They (American Christians) are finding a deep hunger to be connected to deep things for their own personal benefit, to grow in their faith by being inspired by the suffering church," Moeller said.

"I think once people understand that there are Christians who are standing firm, they want to know, 'How can I also stand firm in the struggles in my life,'" Moeller said.

Clay said that some Christians even gain comfort from the stories of persecuted believers.

"And, there is great comfort in knowing that we are not alone, but part of the same church that was built and has endured because of the trials, sufferings and perseverance of faithful men and women before us who never gave up despite the cost," Clay said.

"Those are the footsteps that we follow. When hearing about the devotion of today's persecuted Christians, we are motivated to honor their sacrifices by living out our own faith purposefully in obedience to Scripture," Clay said.
'Christian Not Welcome' Sign in Public Square




Discussions about the most contentious issues, and even some not-so-contentious ones, are routinely labeled “debates.”

For instance, there’s the “debate” over abortion, the “debate” over so-called same-sex “marriage,” and even the debate over who should be playing quarterback for the Denver Broncos.

But are these really debates? If by “debate” you mean a discussion where both sides get a fair chance to make their respective cases, the answer is increasingly “no.”

Jennifer Lahl, a bioethicist, recently learned this the hard way. She was invited to a meeting of fertility specialists in Canada to discuss her documentary, "Eggsploitation," about egg donation.

Lahl told organizers that while she was happy to debate the issue, she would not go simply to be mugged. The organizers assured her “that they really wanted to hear from [her] and engage all sides of the issue.”

As you might guess, that’s not what happened. As Lahl told readers at BreakPoint, before she spoke, another presenter began by telling the audience he was a “Darwinist, secularist, and Jewish.”

What does that have to do with the ethics of egg donation? Nothing, of course. People can be any or all of these things and still be troubled by the exploitative nature of egg donation. In fact, the other presenter actually shared some of Lahl’s concerns!

But the announcement had everything to do with what came next: a personal attack on Lahl based on her Christian faith. His so-called “presentation” consisted of slides showing where Lahl attended school, who her co-workers were, and her writings for Christian websites. His goal for the audience to know who Lahl was, not what she had to say. Her Christian credentials, in his estimation, disqualified her from even being heard.

And how did the audience respond? While one woman told a Canadian newspaper she was “ashamed” of how Lahl had been treated, the crowd, for the most part, cheered the “verbal mauling” that she received.

Sadly, Lahl’s experience is much more common than you would expect. As she asks in her BreakPoint.org article, “Who is allowed in the public square?” the answer is “not Christians.”

The directness of this attack and its unvarnished prejudice is intended to silence people like Lahl. It’s a way of saying, “If you disagree with the prevailing orthodoxy, this is what you can expect.”

Lahl, to her credit, refuses to be intimidated. In her words, she resolves not be silenced, especially at such a time as this. Sadly, her response is increasingly uncommon. What could be called a “spiral of silence” has taken hold in public discussion of moral issues. People are reluctant to speak out for fear of being treated as Lahl was.

The only response is to refuse to be intimidated. Remember two things: First, the Christian view of things like marriage and the sanctity of life is actually the majority view in this country. We’re not out of step with public opinion. The other side is! Second, remember that personal attacks, however painful, should be seen as admissions of the weakness of the other side’s case.

That’s why, instead of avoiding the debate, we should insist that it actually take place. Instead of remaining silent, we must speak out.
Israel on Edge over Preparations to Attack Iran




Israel for the past week has been on edge as local media brings to light intensive government discussions over whether or not to launch a preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

It started last Friday when Israel's largest newspaper, Yediot Ahronot, ran a frontpage editorial asserting that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak had already determined that a strike on Iran was necessary, and were applying pressure to get the rest of the cabinet to give a green light.

Days later, the Knesset was embroiled in constant debate over the necessity of attacking Iran before it could build a nuclear bomb. Western intelligence officials now believe Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, but may still be two years away from fielding operational warheads.

A number of government officials blasted the fact that the debate over whether or not to strike Iran had burst forth into the public domain, arguing that if such a strike is deemed necessary, Israel may have lost all hope of surprising the enemy.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in an interview with Israel Radio did not refute that an Iran strike is being discussed, but did say that much of what is being reported in the media is inaccurate.

Fueling local fears that an attack on Iran is imminent were three major military exercises conducted over the past week:

1.On Wednesday, Israeli Air Force pilots returned from a large-scale joint exercise with the Italian Air Force. The drills included long-range refueling. The only current threat far enough from Israel to require its fighters to refuel mid-air is Iran.

2.Earlier this week, Israel successfully test fired a new "ballistic" version of Jericho III long-range missile. The new Jericho III enables Israel to deliver heavy payloads to targets anywhere in the Middle East, Africa, Europe, Asia and much of North America. Foreign media also noted that the missiles could be fitted with the hundreds of nuclear warheads Israel is believed to possess.

3.On Thursday, Israel's Home Front Command conducted a major drill in the Tel Aviv region simulating a long-range enemy missile strike on Israel's population centers. Iran has warned that if Israel strikes its nuclear facilities, missiles will rain down on Israeli cities. Syria would presumably join Iran in such an attack.

On top of all the local activity, British newspaper The Guardian reported on Wednesday that the British military is "accelerating" preparations to take part in a US-led strike on Iran.

The report came just days after the head of the British military, Gen. David Richards visited Israel. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak is currently in London holding talks with Britain's top defense officials.

London's Daily Mail followed up with a report citing officials who said US President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron had determined that after years of diplomatic efforts, there is now no alternative to military intervention as a means of halting Iran's nuclear program.

Obama and Cameron "are preparing for war after reports that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons," reported the paper.

While a strike on Iran is certainly not a given, all the talk and obvious preparations have put most Israelis on edge.

Many in Israel believe there will ultimately be no choice but to strike Iran's nuclear facilities - just as Israel did to Iraq in 1981 and to Syria in 2007 - but know that such a move will carry a heavy price tag.

Even if Israel does not play a direct role in a military operation against Iran, it would bear the brunt of the retaliation. And if Iran responded by firing unconventional weapons at Tel Aviv, Israel would be compelled to launch a counter-strike.
Is the U.S. a Friend or Enemy of Israel?




This question always elicits different opinions. Obviously, in part, the answers depend on one's definition of "friend" or of "enemy."

The most famous articulation of U.S. policy vis-à-vis Israel was made by Henry Kissinger in 1975 when talking to an Iraqi diplomat. To wit:

We don't need Israel for influence in the Arab world. On the contrary, Israel does us more harm than good in the Arab world[.] ... We can't negotiate about the existence of Israel but we can reduce its size to historical proportions[.]

Before the '67 War, U.S. policy was mostly hostile in that the U.S. imposed an embargo on arms to Israel for 20 years, from '47 to '67; was passive during the War of Independence, expecting Israel to be defeated in short order; and ordered Israel out of Sinai after Israel conquered it in the Sinai Campaign.

This policy was ameliorated in the aftermath of the '67 War as reflected in Res. 242 of the UNSC, which established the principle that Israel was entitled to secure and recognized borders before withdrawing from the conquered territories.

By that resolution, the U.S. recognized that an agreement on borders had to be negotiated and that of necessity, Israel would be retaining some of the land. Of course, a friend should have taken the position that Israel was entitled to keep all the land it had acquired in the defensive war.

But the U.S. was committed to being friends with the Arabs, particularly Saudi Arabia, and this commitment excluded it. That has always been U.S. policy, right up until today.

The Arabs totally objected to this resolution and set out their rejection at the Khartoum Conference in 1968, which reiterated the three "nos": no negotiations, no recognition, and no peace. President Nixon, who subsequently hired Kissinger, assumed office shortly thereafter and tried to move the U.S. position closer to that of the Arabs.

He presented the Rogers Plan, which required full withdrawal. This plan never got traction but always reflected the opinion of the Arabists in the State Department.

Kissinger's statement, above quoted, begged the issue and merely referred to the reduction of Israel's size to "historic proportions."

When Israel negotiated the Oslo Accords without the knowledge of the U.S., the reference point was Res. 242, and nothing was said about the creation of a state, settlement construction, or Jerusalem except that it would be a final status issue.

Shortly thereafter, the U.S. quietly negotiated an agreement with Israel limiting Israeli construction in Judea and Samaria to infilling for natural growth. I am sure Israel didn't ask for such an agreement.

During the intifada II, Sen. Mitchell was sent to study the Arab violence. On April 30, 2001, he submitted the Mitchell Report, which rewarded the violence by demanding that settlement construction cease.

As part of the lead-up to the Iraq War, President Bush openly announced his support for a Palestinian state in 2002 and entertained the Saudi Plan which the Saudis presented in 2002. He agreed to set up the Roadmap for negotiations and agreed to include a reference in it to the Saudi Plan and the Mitchell Report.

The U.S. obviously hadn't given up on the Rogers Plan and the demand for full withdrawal. PM Sharon was given no choice in the matter. The Roadmap was launched one week after the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

President Bush recanted a bit in his letter to Sharon in '04 in which he referred to Res. 242 but not the Saudi Plan, which was then called the Arab Initiative, as the basis for negotiations.

Upon taking office, President Obama disavowed Res. 242, the longstanding agreement permitting infilling, and disavowed the Bush letter as binding. He openly has embraced the Saudi Plan and has called for negotiations based on the '67 armistice lines with swaps. In doing so, he has pulled the rug out from under Israel -- or, in today's parlance, has thrown Israel under the bus.

Of course, the U.S. would be a real enemy were it to declare Israel has no right to exist. The fact that the U.S. is committed to Israel's existence, or so we are told, and has extensive military cooperation with Israel, suggests that she is a friend. But, given this history, requiring Israel to return to the '67 lines, even with swaps, suggests that she is really an enemy.

You decide.
Survey Finds Anti Semitism Rising In America




Swastikas were found painted on the facades of the Jackson Heights and East Elmhurst branches of the Queens Library and on the door of Congregation Tifereth Israel on Thursday.

The Anti-Defamation League today condemned the anti-Semitic graffiti. The ADL says there were 133 anti-Jewish incidents reported across New York City in 2010.

A nationwide ADL survey released just yesterday found that anti-Semitic attitudes have risen in America.

The ADL survey found that 15 percent of Americans - nearly 35 million adults - hold deeply anti-Semitic views. That's up three percent from 2009.

"The fact that anti-Semitic attitudes have increased significantly over the past two years is troubling and raises questions about the impact of broader trends in America - financial insecurity, social uncertainty, the decline in civility and the growth of polarization - on attitudes toward Jews," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director.

19-percent answered "probably true" to the statement "Jews have too much control/influence on Wall Street," an increase from 14-percent in 2009.

Several cases of anti-Semitism have been documented at various Occupy Wall Street across the country.

The survey also found that anti-Semitic views among the African-American population have remained steady, but are consistently higher than the general population.

In 2011, 29-percent of African-Americans expressed strongly anti-Semitic views, according to the survey.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Dear Londa,

As I told you on Tuesday, Glenn Beck has helped FreedomWorks for America launch an important fundraising drive for our "FIRE OBAMA!" campaign. Our target is $200,000 -- and with support from every Glenn Beck fan and FreedomWorks member we would easily shatter that goal.

Please click below to listen to Glenn's powerful appeal, and then consider supporting this vital effort with a donation $20.12, $50, $100 or more. Gifts of $20.12 or more receive a "Fire Obama!" bumper sticker as a symbol of our thanks.

LISTEN HERE!

As you are probably aware, FreedomWorks for America is the new political arm of FreedomWorks, dedicated to electing principled fiscal conservatives and defeating progressives. Naturally, one of our most important tasks will be to ensure Barack Obama is defeated one year from now.

It's a tall order, but I'm confident it can be done. And because it is so important, I'm counting on the support of Glenn Beck supporters and FreedomWorks members like you to make it happen.

Will you please click here to hear more from Glenn, and consider a generous donation of $100, $50, or perhaps a symbolic $20.12?

Thanks, as always, for whatever support you can lend.

Sincerely,
Kibbe Signature
Matt Kibbe
President and CEO, FreedomWorks

P.S. Whatever you do, don't forget to listen to Glenn's message here!
The presidential playbook generally calls for a successful candidate to swing to the middle when they are running unopposed for their party’s nomination.
But as we enter perhaps the final year of the Obama administration, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for anyone to make an appeal to the center, if indeed a center even exists in American politics anymore.
Obama has destroyed the political center in this country, and for that we can be thankful.
Because Obama’s policies have exposed the basic problem with the bipartisan approach favored by establishment Republicans and so-called Blue Dog Democrats.
Both of those centrist elements have often led the country to believe that limited government meant accepting half the social and economic agenda that more radical Democrats propose.
Romneycare is a great example of that. In attempt to provide half-a-loaf- or perhaps half and aspirin is better-Romneycare offers the worst of socialism with none of the benefits of capitalism. Romenycare is nonsense, filled with wonkishness, wrapped in the Beltway- and it doesn’t even attempt to address the problem of spiraling healthcare costs that it was originally supposed to solve. In fact, it pushes costs higher.
Somewhere along the line, however, voters got wise to the Washington dodge: You don’t really have solve problems in DC or state capitals- actually you can even try to make them worse- you just have to wrap “solutions” into a complicated system. Now your job is to convince everyone that the system doesn’t work because it’s someone else’s fault.
The days of that dodge are drawing rapidly to a close.
That’s what happens when you spend 40 cents of every dollar on government, but yet still cry for more; that’s what happens when you spend us to the brink of default and still can’t figure out how to stop the spending; that’s what happens when spend more money in ten years then the top ten years of the New Deal added together; and then you try to tell the country the patently ridiculous lie that it’s not enough.
A sagging economy, world-wide unrest, spiraling debt, domestic dissatisfaction fueled by internet social organizations have given rise to populist movements of the Tea Parties and Occupy Wall Street, that while fundamentally different, are expressions of the same unrest.
And still Obama remains stuck at the far left of his party’s spectrum, fueling leftist fantasyland policies that don’t work, often with an assist by the center of American politics.
But no matter how far left Obama swings, it won’t be enough for his critics on the left. In the meantime, the rest of us suffer from policies crafted by compromise and outright deceit.
One candidate in the Nevada Senate race is running a grassroots campaign by calling out Obama’s failed policies in the housing sector, by promoting policies that will hurt housing worse still.
Nevada real estate has been particularly hard hit by dropping real estate prices, so running against the administration’s policies makes sense. The candidate opposing Obama’s policies however isn’t Republican Dean Heller, who is also vying for the Silver State’s Senate seat.
Instead it’s Democrat Congress-tron Shelley Berkley (D-Confused).
Berkley is running ads on Facebook under the heading: “Big Banks are to Blame,” with text that says: “Millions of Americans lost their homes b/c of big banks, yet Pres. Obama WON’T investigate. Shelley Berkley is asking why not? Join her.”
The click-through directs people to a petition site that asks: “Tell President Obama: Hold Banks Accountable.”
Let’s get back to shareholders holding companies accountable. Let’s stop rendering our economy unto 435 tyrants in Congress plus one Cesar Chavez in the White House.
Because when Shelley Berkley had the opportunity to hold banks accountable, she voted for TARP.
In fact, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington have Berkley on their “Dishonorable Mention” list, for mixing personal profit with politics. She’s an opportunist even amongst the professional class of opportunists operating in Washington.
But that won’t stop some in the GOP from reaching across the aisle and trying to craft a compromise, punitive measure that punishes banks, kind of- because that’s what opportunists do.
It's time we stop accepting half the left's agenda for double the price and call that limted government.
Voters have one year in which to stop it and one hell of an opportunity.
PS- If you friend me on Facebook you get sneak peeks of columns!
PS Part 2- The email function at the top of the page working again. Sorry it took so long. Let the Hate Mail begin!



John Ransom | Create Your Badge

Friday, November 4, 2011

Alexander's Essay – November 3, 2011

Populist Socialism on the Rise


The "99 Percent" are really the "35 Percent" but their cadres are growing


"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If 'Thou shalt not covet' and 'Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free." --John Adams, 1787


The populist message of the Occupy Movement, the agelessly adolescent class warriors who make up Barack Hussein Obama's Red October Uprising, now has the support of some 35 percent of Americans, mostly urbanites.

The Occupiers have now infested cities from coast to coast, including Oakland, Seattle, Denver, Austin, Chicago, Atlanta, Baltimore, New York and Boston.

Their mantra is simple (by necessity): "We are the 99 Percent, and we're all victims of the 1 Percent." By any objective standard, the 99 Percenters are not the brightest bunch, and they really represent the roughly 20 percent of Americans who are irrevocably dependent upon government subsidies and pay no income tax. Thus, this 20 percent has no vested interest in the cost of government and is predisposed to vote for the redistribution of others' incomes rather than work for their own. The underlying assumption is that it's easier to confiscate wealth than create it.

This "entitled" 20 percent combines with the 10 percent of American labor who are collectivists and another 5 percent who are perpetual malcontents to thus form Barack Hussein Obama's entrenched socialist constituency of Useful Idiots.

The intellectually challenged Occupy morons have built their movement around the errant assertion that if the assets of the 1 Percent were entirely redistributed, everyone would live happily ever after. Unfortunately, what the 35 Percenters really want, "redistributive justice" as Obama calls it, would require the redistribution of income from the other 65 percent of Americans families who live on earned income, so that everyone could be equally impoverished.

Post your comments

Of course, there's a problem with liquidating the assets of the 1 percent (comprised of more celebs and pro athletes than Wall Street bankers), or even the top 25 percent of the so-called rich: Most of their assets are on paper, and the rest of that "wealth" is in the form of small businesses and real property that support the jobs of tens of millions of Americans who actually work for a living -- and take pride in their occupations.

Thus, liquidation would result in the collapse of the entire economy, leaving everyone under the same statist tyranny as Obama's 35 Percenters -- equally miserable, equally dependent upon the government, and that much closer to Obama's mandate to implement Democratic Socialism.

Fact is, socialist economies always fail. In the inimitable words of former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, "Socialist governments ... always run out of other people's money. They then start to nationalize everything."

Of course, socialists never let reality intrude upon their classist fantasies of universal equality and happiness. Nineteenth-century historian Alexis de Tocqueville once observed, "Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude."

If you have any doubt about the socialist motives of the Occupy Movement, consider this proclamation from my daily American Communist Party communiqué (yes, I subscribe to certain leftist publications, so, yes, I know my enemy): "We Are the 99%! The AFL-CIO has taken another step to embrace the Occupy Movement by creating their own We Are the 99% website. Also, CPUSA Chair Sam Webb has an article on the movement at the People's World: 'Occupy: embrace the new, build the movement.'"

Next, I suggest you review the official list of Occupy supporters, including Marxists, Nationalists, Fascists and even Islamists. What a sorry lot for a supporting cast.

Occupy v Tea Party

Given all this, it's not surprising that the Occupiers' highest-profile support emanates from Obama himself, who says, "People are frustrated and the [Occupy] protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works. ... I think it expresses the frustrations that the American people feel. ... The American people understand that not everybody's been following the rules. These days, a lot of folks doing the right thing are not rewarded. A lot of folks who are not doing the right thing are rewarded."

As to the Occupy Movement's momentum, Obama says their agenda "will express itself until 2012 and beyond until people feel they are getting back to old-fashioned American values. That's going to express itself politically in 2012 and beyond."

By "old-fashioned" we suspect he's merely re-warming some propaganda from one of the most notable of 20th-century socialists, that inheritance welfare liberal Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It was FDR, after all, who channeled Karl Marx when he proclaimed, "Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle."

Roosevelt issued a collectivist "bill of rights" in which he said that the government should ensure "the right to a useful and remunerative job ... the right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation ... the right of every family to a decent home ... the right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health ... the right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age ... the right to a good education."

For his part, Obama has been clear in his collectivist rhetoric: "[T]he wealthiest Americans have made out like bandits. ... It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Our nation is at a critical juncture, and the adversaries of Liberty are well funded. However, a great national debate about the proper role of government is underway, and your support is critical to keep that momentum moving in the right direction.

The Patriot Post, since its inception, has been plowing the fields and sowing the seed for this Great Awakening. Our goal is to ensure that the movement remains, first and foremost, about the restoration of constitutional integrity, and to support its momentum.

There is still much to be done, however, and the defeat of Barack Obama and his socialist hordes next November is not preordained.

If we are to restore the cause of Liberty, we need your help. We can restore the integrity of our Constitution only by growing the ranks of conservative voices. We cannot undo generations of civic negligence in one or two election cycles, but we can -- no, we must -- halt our nation's downward spiral toward the tyranny of Democratic Socialism.

I thank you for your vigilance, strength, preparedness and faithfulness on so many fronts.

As always, we rely upon your generosity to maintain our clarion call for Liberty -- a call which we continue to broadcast to countless thousands of our military, collegiate, political and mission field readers, all of whom are vital links in the chain to hold back tyranny and restore Liberty.

And so it is with due respect to the urgency of our times that I humbly request that you support The Patriot Post today!




Thank you for the honor and privilege of serving you as editor and publisher of The Patriot Post. We are humbled to count you among our ranks.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Libertas aut Mortis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, The Patriot Post
The Real Meaning of Words


Love






Sorrow






Innocence





Departure





Pain





Respect




Compassion





Friendship






Patience





Rescued





Best friends






Divine






"Life is
not about waiting for the storms to pass .... it's about caring and
loving your relatives and friends while you can touch and see them, and they are still among us.





May you always walk in sunshine, my friend!!



Be especially kind to all you meet, each of us carries a burden that others can't see.