Tuesday, April 3, 2012

From Prophecy News

A Cashless Society May Be Closer Than Most People Would Ever Dare To Imagine




Most people think of a cashless society as something that is way off in the distant future. Unfortunately, that is simply not the case. The truth is that a cashless society is much closer than most people would ever dare to imagine. To a large degree, the transition to a cashless society is being done voluntarily.

Today, only 7 percent of all transactions in the United States are done with cash, and most of those transactions involve very small amounts of money. Just think about it for a moment. Where do you still use cash these days? If you buy a burger or if you purchase something at a flea market you will still use cash, but for any mid-size or large transaction the vast majority of people out there will use another form of payment.

Our financial system is dramatically changing, and cash is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. We live in a digital world, and national governments and big banks are both encouraging the move away from paper currency and coins. But what would a cashless society mean for our future? Are there any dangers to such a system?

Those are very important questions, but most of the time both sides of the issue are not presented in a balanced way in the mainstream media. Instead, most mainstream news articles tend to trash cash and talk about how wonderful digital currency is.

For example, a recent CBS News article declared that soon we may not need "that raggedy dollar bill" any longer and that the "greenback may soon be a goner"....

It's what the wallet was invented for, to carry cash. After all, there was a time when we needed cash everywhere we went, from filling stations to pay phones. Even the tooth fairy dealt only in cash.

But money isn't just physical anymore. It's not only the pennies in your piggy bank, or that raggedy dollar bill.

Money is also digital - it's zeros and ones stored in a computer, prompting some economists to predict the old-fashioned greenback may soon be a goner.

"There will be a time - I don't know when, I can't give you a date - when physical money is just going to cease to exist," said economist Robert Reich.

So will we see a completely cashless society in the near future?

Of course not. It would be wildly unpopular for the governments of the world to force such a system upon us all at once.

Instead, the big banks and the governments of the industrialized world are doing all they can to get us to voluntarily transition to such a system. Once 98 or 99 percent of all transactions do not involve cash, eliminating the remaining 1 or 2 percent will only seem natural.

The big banks want a cashless society because it is much more profitable for them.

The big banks earn billions of dollars in fees from debit cards and they make absolutely enormous profits from credit cards.

But when people use cash the big banks do not earn anything.

So obviously the big banks and the big credit card companies are big cheerleaders for a cashless society.

Most governments around the world are eager to transition to a cashless society as well for the following reasons....

-Cash is expensive to print, inspect, move, store and guard.

-Counterfeiting is always going to be a problem as long as paper currency exists.

-Cash if favored by criminals because it does not leave a paper trail. Eliminating cash would make it much more difficult for drug dealers, prostitutes and other criminals to do business.

-Most of all, a cashless society would give governments more control. Governments would be able to track virtually all transactions and would also be able to monitor tax compliance much more closely.

When you understand the factors listed above, it becomes easier to understand why the use of cash is increasingly becoming demonized. Governments around the world are increasingly viewing the use of cash in a negative light. In fact, according to the U.S. government paying with cash in some circumstances is now considered to be "suspicious activity" that needs to be reported to the authorities.

This disdain of cash has also grown very strong in the financial community. The following is from a recent Slate article....

David Birch, a director at Consult Hyperion, a firm specializing in electronic payments, says a shift to digital currency would cut out these hidden costs. In Birch’s ideal world, paying with cash would be viewed like drunk driving—something we do with decreasing frequency as more and more people understand the negative social consequences.

“We’re trying to use industrial age money to support commerce in a post-industrial age. It just doesn’t work,” he says. “Sooner or later, the tectonic plates shift and then, very quickly, you’ll find yourself in this new environment where if you ask somebody to pay you in cash, you’ll just assume that they’re a prostitute or a Somali pirate.”

Do you see what is happening?

Simply using cash is enough to get you branded as a potential criminal these days.

Many people are going to be scared away from using cash simply because of the stigma that is becoming attached to it.

This is a trend that is not just happening in the United States. In fact, many other countries are further down the road toward a cashless society than we are.

Up in Canada, they are looking for ways to even eliminate coins so that people can use alternate forms of payment for all of their transactions....

The Royal Canadian Mint is also looking to the future with the MintChip, a new product that could become a digital replacement for coins.

In Sweden, only about 3 percent of all transactions still involve cash. The following comes from a recent Washington Post article....

In most Swedish cities, public buses don’t accept cash; tickets are prepaid or purchased with a cell phone text message. A small but growing number of businesses only take cards, and some bank offices — which make money on electronic transactions — have stopped handling cash altogether.

“There are towns where it isn’t at all possible anymore to enter a bank and use cash,” complains Curt Persson, chairman of Sweden’s National Pensioners’ Organization.

In Italy, all very large cash transactions have been banned. Previously, the limit for using cash in a transaction had been reduced to the equivalent of just a few thousand dollars. But back in December, Prime Minister Mario Monti proposed a new limit of approximately $1,300 for cash transactions.

And that is how many governments will transition to a cashless society. They will set a ceiling and then they will keep lowering it and lowering it.

But is a cashless society really secure?

Of course not.

Bank accounts can be hacked into. Credit cards and debit cards can be stolen. Identity theft all over the world is absolutely soaring.

So companies all over the planet are working feverishly to make all of these cashless systems much more secure.

In the future, it is inevitable that national governments and big financial institutions will want to have all of us transition over to using biometric identity systems in order to combat crime in the financial system.

Many of these biometric identity systems are becoming quite advanced.

For example, just check out what IBM has been developing. The following is from a recent IBM press release....

You will no longer need to create, track or remember multiple passwords for various log-ins. Imagine you will be able to walk up to an ATM machine to securely withdraw money by simply speaking your name or looking into a tiny sensor that can recognize the unique patterns in the retina of your eye. Or by doing the same, you can check your account balance on your mobile phone or tablet.

Each person has a unique biological identity and behind all that is data. Biometric data – facial definitions, retinal scans and voice files – will be composited through software to build your DNA unique online password.

Referred to as multi-factor biometrics, smarter systems will be able to use this information in real-time to make sure whenever someone is attempting to access your information, it matches your unique biometric profile and the attempt is authorized.
Are you ready for that?

It is coming.

In the future, if you do not surrender your biometric identity information, you may be locked out of the entire financial system.

Another method that can be used to make financial identification more secure is to use implantable RFID microchips.

Yes, there is a lot of resistance to this idea, but the fact is that the use of RFID chips in animals and in humans is rapidly spreading.

Some U.S. cities have already made it mandatory to implant microchips into all cats and all dogs so that they can be tracked.

All over the United States, employees are being required to carry badges that contain RFID chips, and in some instances employers are actually requiring employees to have RFID chips injected into their bodies.

Increasingly, RFID chips are being implanted in the upper arm of patients that have Alzheimer's disease. The idea is that this helps health care providers track Alzheimer's patients that get lost.

In some countries, microchips are now actually being embedded into school uniforms to make sure that students don't skip school.

Can you see where all of this is headed?

Some companies are even developing RFID technologies that do not require an injection.

One company called Somark has developed chipless RFID ink that is applied directly to the skin of an animal or a human. These "RFID tattoos" are applied in about 10 seconds using micro-needles and a reusable applicator, and they can be read by an RFID reader from up to four feet away.

Would you get an "RFID tattoo" if the government or your bank asked you to?

Some people out there are actually quite excited about these new technologies.

For example, a columnist named Don Tennant wrote an article entitled "Chip Me – Please!" in which he expressed his unbridled enthusiasm for an implantable microchip which would contain all of his medical information....

"All I can say is I’d be the first person in line for an implant."

But are there real dangers to going to a system that is entirely digital?

For example, what if a devastating EMP attack wiped out our electrical grid and most of our computers from coast to coast?

How would we continue to function?

Sadly, most people don't think about things like that.

Our world is changing more rapidly than ever before, and we should be mindful of where these changes are taking us.

Just because our technology is advancing does not mean that our world is becoming a better place.

There are millions of Americans that want absolutely nothing to do with biometric identity systems or RFID implants.

But the mainstream media continues to declare that nothing can stop the changes that are coming. A recent CBS News article made the following statement....

"Most agree a cashless society is not only inevitable, for most of us, it's already here."

Yes, a cashless society is coming.

Are you ready for it?

Monday, April 2, 2012

From Patriot Post

Brief · April 2, 2012

The Foundation


"In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example ... of charters of power granted by liberty. This revolution in the practice of the world, may, with an honest praise, be pronounced the most triumphant epoch of its history, and the most consoling presage of its happiness." --James Madison

Opinion in Brief


The Constitution of the Left

"Finding herself with a bit of time on her hands, Justice Ginsburg swung by Cairo last month to help out the lads from the Muslim Brotherhood building the new Egypt: 'I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,' she advised them. Instead, she recommended the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the European Convention on Human Rights. That's why the fate of the republic will come down to a 5-4 vote. Because four-ninths of the constitutional court think the American constitutional order is as déclassé as a 2006 BlackBerry. ... [I]f the establishment wants to invent a new 'right' -- i.e., yet another intrusion by government -- it goes ahead and does so. If it happens to conflict with this year's constitution, they rewrite it. The United States is the only Western nation in which our rulers invoke the Constitution for the purpose of overriding it -- or, at any rate, torturing its language beyond repair. Thus, in [the] debate on whether Obamacare is merely the latest harmless evolution of the interstate-commerce clause, the most learned and highly remunerated jurists in the land chewed over the matter of whether a person, simply by virtue of being born, was participating in a 'market.' Had George III shown up at the Constitutional Convention to advance that argument with a straight face, the framers would have tossed aside the quill feathers and reached for their muskets." --columnist Mark Steyn

Share your thoughts on the importance of the Constitution.

Essential Liberty


"Liberal commentators were shocked this past week when in three days of oral argument in the lawsuits challenging Obamacare, five Supreme Court justices -- a majority -- asked questions strongly suggesting they think the legislation is unconstitutional. ... [T]he justices are not the only federal officials who take an oath to uphold the Constitution. So do the president and vice president, Cabinet members and other appointees, and every member of Congress. ... That means that every federal official has an obligation to act in line with the Constitution as he or she understands it. And that doesn't necessarily mean obeying Supreme Court decisions. ... Clearly the two parties are divided on the constitutionality of the Obamacare mandate. Polls have shown large majorities of voters think the provision is unconstitutional, though one can wonder whether many have given the matter much thought. But they're certainly giving it more thought after this week and will likely give it more when the decision comes down. Voters can reasonably ask candidates for Congress their views on this and other constitutional issues and call on them to vote against measures they consider beyond Congress' constitutional powers." --political analyst Michael Barone


Government


"'I place economy among the first and most important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers to be feared,' Thomas Jefferson once wrote. 'To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.' ... Remember the clash on Capitol Hill last year over raising the debt ceiling? It may have seemed like a huge battle at the time, but it was merely a holding action -- a rear-guard maneuver to buy a little time. Because which direction has federal spending gone since then? Up, of course, soaring toward new record levels and endangering our economic future. ... [M]any lawmakers seem content to make meaningless trims, not serious cuts. They act as if we can allow Social Security and Medicare spending to continue growing -- and growing -- on autopilot. They seriously think we can slash defense spending, yet continue fielding a world-class military. ... No, you and I aren't paying enough, that's the problem -- or so we're told. As if past tax hikes haven't proved, time and again, that government will quickly consume any additional funds, and then some. ... 'We must make our choice between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude,' Jefferson writes. 'If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.' Lawmakers should heed the words of our third president -- and have the courage to steer us off the path of financial misery." --Heritage Foundation president Ed Fuelner

The Gipper


"This is the real task before us: to reassert our commitment as a nation to a law higher than our own, to renew our spiritual strength. Only by building a wall of such spiritual resolve can we, as a free people, hope to protect our own heritage and make it someday the birthright of all men." --Ronald Reagan

Re: The Left


"Once again [last] week, the president was out on the campaign trail bashing and oil and gas companies. And he continued to spread major falsehoods about this industry, which I guess is the polite way to put it. Obama is obsessed with oil and gas. He is a prisoner of the left-wing environmental groups. And really, he's extending his leftist class-warfare attack from rich people to successful oil and gas producers. What seems to have Obama especially steamed is the fact that the conventional-energy companies are profitable. Especially the five largest. So he wants to tax them. He then wants to redistribute their income to his favorite green-energy firms. Sound familiar? I don't know which is more important to the president -- the fact that he hates fossil fuel or the fact that he hates success. ... But President Obama is too busy spewing falsehoods to support his ideological agenda than to take account of the facts. And while he's at it, one of the greatest, pro-growth revolutions ever is taking place right under his nose. It's the oil and gas shale miracle, which if left unfettered will turn America and Canada into an energy-independent New Middle East inside of 10 years. ... Obama should quit the demagoguery, stop bashing oil and gas, stop taxing success and let our ingenious, creative, free-enterprise private economy spur America to a new generation of prosperity." --economist Larry Kudlow

Political Futures


"Obama is telling the Russians not to worry, that once past 'my last election' and no longer subject to any electoral accountability, he'll show 'more flexibility' on missile defense. It's yet another accommodation to advance his cherished Russia 'reset' policy. Why? Hasn't reset been failure enough? Let's do the accounting. In addition to canceling the Polish/Czech missile defense system, Obama gave the Russians accession to the World Trade Organization, a START treaty that they need and we don't ... and a scandalously blind eye to their violations of human rights and dismantling of democracy. Obama even gave Putin a congratulatory call for winning his phony election. In return? Russia consistently watered down or obstructed sanctions on Iran, completed Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr, provides to this day Bashar al-Assad with huge arms shipments used to massacre his own people..., conducted a virulently anti-American presidential campaign on behalf of Putin, pressured Eastern Europe and threatened Georgia. On which of 'all these issues' -- Syria, Iran, Eastern Europe, Georgia, human rights -- is Obama ready to offer Putin yet more flexibility as soon as he gets past his last election? Where else will he show U.S. adversaries more flexibility?" --columnist Charles Krauthammer

Insight


"It is a dangerous concept that men of the armed forces must owe their primary allegiance to these temporary occupants of The White House, instead of to the country and the Constitution to which they have sworn to defend." --General Douglas MacArthur (1880 - 1964)

Faith & Family


"Abortion is a feminist sacrament. The movie 'October Baby' just debuted on 390 screens and registered in eighth place [last] weekend, with an estimated $1.7 million gross. ... Naturally, the critics just couldn't judge this movie by artistic standards. It had to be savaged because it is so politically incorrect. New York Times film critic Jeannette Catsoulis bared her ideological fangs at this improbable movie: 'Not even a dewy heroine and a youth-friendly vibe can disguise the essential ugliness at its core: like the bloodied placards brandished by demonstrators outside women's health clinics, the film communicates in the language of guilt and fear.' Ouch. A celebration of life is 'essential ugliness.' ... Notice how the Times couldn't focus on the movie without imagining the horror of conservative state legislators reducing a 'woman's dominion' over the termination of unborn children, no matter how advanced the pregnancy. ... But if you do consider abortion a crime -- against God -- isn't that the kind of compassionate message Hollywood preaches regularly? Such is the militancy of this issue in Hollywood." --columnist L. Brent Bozell

Culture


"The former Charleston, S.C., black chief of police, Reuben Greenberg, said the problem facing black America is not racial profiling. He said, 'The greatest problem in the black community is the tolerance for high levels of criminality.' Former Los Angeles black police Chief Bernard Parks, defending racial profiling, said: 'It's not the fault of the police when they stop minority males or put them in jail. It's the fault of the minority males for committing the crime. In my mind, it is not a great revelation that if officers are looking for criminal activity, they're going to look at the kind of people who are listed on crime reports.' Are former police Chiefs Greenberg and Parks racist? According to the Uniform Crime Report for 2009, among people 18 or younger, blacks were charged with 58 percent of murder and non-negligent manslaughter, 67 percent of robberies, 42 percent of aggravated assaults and 43 percent of auto thefts. As for murder, more than 90 percent of the time, their victims were black. These statistics, showing a strong interconnection among race, youth and crime, are a far better explanation for racial profiling and suspicion than simple racism." --economist Walter E. Williams


Reader Comments


"I just wanted to say thank you Mark Alexander for such a well-written essay, Race-Bait Political Hustlers. I think you are absolutely right. I knew the minute Al Sharpton showed up this entire incident would be completely blown out of proportion with race rhetoric. He does know how to ignite a fire. I think there are a lot of similarities between him and our current POTUS. I will sure be glad when people quit falling for the act that both of these men put on so well." --J Tatum

"Trayvon Martin's shooting will not affect Obama's campaign. The issues are the economy, federal budget, and ObamaCare. By November this story will be forgotten and something else will be the media's focus. This story knocked Sandra Fluke off the talk shows and the front page." --Chris

"If our country is to be salvaged from the wreckage reeked upon it by Obama, this atrocity of a health care law will be struck down. If the conservative justices stay true to their beliefs, that the U.S. Constitution is the law of the land, ObamaCare will be nullified." --Jill

"Whether or not the Supreme Court 'kills' ObamaCare, Republicans had better get off their rumps and get very serious about constructing a viable and fiscally responsible health care program or we will still have BHO for another four years!" --Dick

"We will eventually have some form of socialized medicine, ObamaCare or not. The general public -- which includes the lamestream media -- likes 'free stuff' and they have no clue that 'free stuff' is not free. And when it is made 'free' its quality and availability will suffer -- and so will we." --Grant

The Last Word


"[I]t sure would be intellectually honest if more people started framing their arguments in the terms, 'I don't like freedom on this issue and here is why...' You pretty much never see that. I mean, gun control is an anti-freedom stance, but they never argue it that way. I think maybe that's why they don't understand how unpopular their stance is. The same thing with the health care debate. The mandate is an anti-freedom stance, but they try to say they're for more freedom by ending worries about health care, which is BS. One thing is freedom and one thing isn't; it's not debatable. Putting a gun to someone's head and saying,'You must buy health insurance!' isn't freedom and no one should pretend it is. It's okay to take an anti-freedom stance, you just should frame it [in] terms of why you think your ideas are better than liberty. And that will probably also help you understand why so many people don't like your views, as the left always seems to get caught off guard by that." --humorist Frank J. Fleming

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team



CLICK HERE FOR

Patriot Headline Report

For News That Matters Most -- Around the Clock
We value your time. As a service to you, our editorial team evaluates hundreds of reputable news sources each day for headlines that are relevant to Essential Liberty – the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. We post links to the most notable news 24 hours a day. Skip the Drudgery of wading through celebrity reports and other non-news. –Mark Alexander, Executive Editor

CLICK HERE FOR

The Right Opinion

The Web's
Best Columnists
Our editorial team has evaluated and selected these nationally syndicated columnists who write about subjects that are relevant to our mission – the advancement of Liberty. While we don't agree with every position taken, we find these authors best reflect good Right Thinking. We post these essays – without advertising or frills – by 0800 ET each day. –Mark Alexander, Executive Editor


(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

From AIPAC

March 14, 2012

Dear Friend of Israel:

Last week, more than 13,000 pro-Israel activists gathered in Washington, D.C. for the largest AIPAC Policy Conference in history.

This year's conference featured President Barack Obama, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and more than two-thirds of Congress as honored guests. Delegates from all 50 states also participated in a record 531 lobbying appointments on Capitol Hill.

While much was achieved during our three days in Washington, there is still much work to be done, and that is why I am writing to ask for your assistance.
Your contribution today will ensure we are able to be effective in our work with Congress during these dangerous and difficult times.

Please also watch your email in the coming weeks for more action alerts when your help will be needed to contact Congress in support of vital legislation that strengthens America and Israel.

Thank you in advance for your help and support.

Sincerely,

Jonathan E. Missner
Director of National Affairs and Development

P.S. The renewed urgency of Iran's nuclear threat and the ongoing unrest in the Middle East are sobering reminders that we can never take Israel’s security — or U.S. support for Israel — for granted. Please join the team that has successfully worked with Congress to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship for six decades. Please become a supporter of AIPAC today.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

From Patriot Post

Brief · March 12, 2012

The Foundation


"Liberty is a word which, according as it is used, comprehends the most good and the most evil of any in the world. Justly understood it is sacred next to those which we appropriate in divine adoration; but in the mouths of some it means anything, which enervate a necessary government; excite a jealousy of the rulers who are our own choice, and keep society in confusion for want of a power sufficiently concentered to promote good." --Oliver Ellsworth

Essential Liberty




The Obama approach to the Constitution

"[F]or the past week America has watched the media elite and some in Washington bend over backward to turn attention away from an issue that is fundamental to the future of this country: Obamacare's attack on individual liberty. ... It all stems from a decision by the Obama Administration to mandate that religious employers, including schools, hospitals, and charities, provide health care coverage for abortion-inducing drugs and contraception. ... Some have attempted to make this a debate about other issues, but despite their efforts, the core complaint about this anti-conscience mandate remains: The President's policy is an unprecedented attack on all Americans' rights as protected by the First Amendment. ... No matter the direction the debate has taken, the deeply flawed policy remains, as does the opposition. Fortunately, Americans are not powerless to take action against this continuing encroachment on liberty. To begin with, Congress can and should take action now to stand in opposition to this anti-conscience mandate and ensure that the liberties guaranteed under the First Amendment remain intact. As Obamacare's two-year anniversary approaches, we've already seen two monumental reasons it must be repealed: the individual mandate and the anti-conscience mandate. But these are by no means the last of Obamacare's attacks on Americans' liberty." --Heritage Foundation's Mike Brownfield

What's the prescription for what ails our nation?

Re: The Left


"Sandra Fluke [is] ... really just another professional femme-a-gogue helping to manufacture a false narrative about the GOP 'war on women.' I'm sorry the civility police now have an opening to demonize the entire right based on one radio comment -- because it's the progressive left in this country that has viciously and systematically slimed female conservatives for their beliefs. We have the well-worn battle scars to prove it. And no, we don't need coddling phone calls from the pandering president of the United States to convince us to stand up and fight. At his first press conference of the year on Tuesday, the Nation's Concern Troll explained that he phoned Fluke to send a message to his daughters and all women that they shouldn't be 'attacked or called horrible names because they are being good citizens.' After inserting himself into the fray and dragging [his daughters] Sasha and Malia into the debate, Obama then told a reporter he 'didn't want to get into the business of arbitrating' language and civility. Too late, pal. ... He's leading by example. So no, we won't get any phone calls from Mr. Civility. Acknowledging the war on conservative women would obliterate The Narrative. Enjoy the silence." --columnist Michelle Malkin




The Gipper


"Freedom and the dignity of the individual have been more available and assured here than in any other place on earth. The price for this freedom at times has been high, but we have never been unwilling to pay that price." --Ronald Reagan

Government


"The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 2011 manufacturing output grew by 11 percent, to nearly $5 trillion. Were our manufacturing sector considered a nation with its own gross domestic product, it would be the world's fourth-richest economy. Manufacturing productivity has doubled since 1987, and manufacturing output has risen by one-half. However, over the past two decades, manufacturing employment has fallen about 25 percent. For some people, that means our manufacturing sector is sick. ... For the most part, rising worker productivity and advances in technology are the primary causes of reduced employment and higher output in the manufacturing, agriculture and telecommunications industries. My question is whether Congress should outlaw these productivity gains in the name of job creation. It would be easy. Just get rid of those John Deere harvesting machines that do in a day what used to take a thousand men a week, outlaw the robots and automation that eliminated many manufacturing jobs and bring back manually operated PBX telephone switchboards. By the way, if technological advances had not eliminated millions of jobs, where in the world would we have gotten the workers to produce all those goods and services that we now enjoy that weren't even thought of decades ago? The bottom line is that the health of an industry is measured by its output, not by the number of people it employs." --economist Walter E. Williams

Opinion in Brief


"Members of the Obama administration have been pointing out how hard it would be to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, now that they have been built deep underground and dispersed. That would have been something to consider during the time when President Obama was taking leisurely and half-hearted measures to create the appearance of trying to stop the Iranian nuclear program, while vigorously warning Israel not to take military action. Time was never on our side. The risks go up exponentially the longer we wait. ... Nor should we assume that we can remain safe by throwing Israel to the wolves, once the election is over, as might well happen if Obama is re-elected and no longer has any political reasons to pretend to be Israel's friend. That kind of cynical miscalculation was made by France back in 1938, when it threw its ally, Czechoslovakia, to the wolves by refusing to defend it against Hitler's demands, despite the mutual defense treaty between the two countries. Less than two years later, Hitler's armies were invading France -- using, among other things, tanks manufactured in Czechoslovakia. This was just one of the expedient miscalculations that helped bring on the bloodiest and most destructive war the world has ever known. Dare we repeat such miscalculations in a nuclear age?" --economist Thomas Sowell

For the Record


"When the people of Iran rose up following obviously rigged elections in June, 2009, Mr. Obama declined to offer any support for the Green Revolution in the streets. Instead, green turned to red -- the red bloodstains on the cobblestones as the mullahs' hired guns shot down pro-democracy demonstrators. Mr. Obama has allowed Ahmadinejad, Iran's putative head of state, to come to America to address the UN General Assembly and to deliver his rants against his neighbor, Israel. Ahmadinejad was further allowed to disport himself at Columbia University. All the while, Ahmadinejad had two American hikers locked up on trumped up charges. The Obama administration betrayed our new allies in Eastern Europe -- Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic -- by ditching our anti-ballistic missile plans. For what purpose? To gain Russia's cooperation in dealing with Iran. Did we get it? Actually, no. Russia is busily pulling the teeth of UN resolutions dealing with Iran and Iran's puppet state, Syria. ... Now, President Obama assures Israel he 'has their back.' Well, thanks to President Obama, Israel's back is to the wall. ... So, are Mr. Obama's words of assurance to Israel something substantial? Or are they, in Hillary's words, just words?" --columnist Ken Blackwell

Click Here

DEFEAT Obama in 2012!

There is no time to waste. Now is the time to move full steam ahead. Press them hard until the deed is done. Promote the defeat of Obama and his Socialist regime in 2012 with the help of these best-selling shirts, stickers, posters and more.


Reader Comments


"Why in the world would any Republican or conservative in their right mind want a brokered convention? How much time does that give the candidate to go up against Obama -- six weeks at best? I believe that Mitt Romney is our best bet and he should be paired on a ticket with a young and articulate conservative. Mark Alexander is correct in his assertion that we will self-destruct if the current internal strife continues, and the consequence WILL be the election of Obama. And the consequence of that would be...." --Lady Liberty

"I applaud Mark Alexander's column, 'The Politics of Self Destruction,' for boldly exposing how we, as Republicans, can be our own worst enemies. While most of the reader comments supported that thesis, some demonstrated it. Alexander mentioned a couple of vice presidential prospects, including Marco Rubio, and some readers objected, saying that Rubio is no more eligible than Obama. As both an advocate of our Constitution and an attorney specializing in immigration, I can attest to the fact that Rubio most certainly would qualify under the plain language of our Constitution and its Fourteenth Amendment, as a 'natural born citizen.' Further, there is no legal comparison between the controversy about Obama's citizenship which questions where he was born (unfounded in my opinion), and Rubio's citizenship based on the legal status of his parents. The latter, in fact, did have legal status at the time of Rubio's birth. Finally, as a Florida citizen, let me just say that I do not think Marco Rubio would agree to be on a presidential ticket with Mitt Romney, but that is another discussion." --From the Sunshine State

Alexander's Reply: As noted in reply to the first objection to Rubio, for the record, Marco Antonio Rubio was born May 28, 1971, in Miami, Florida. His parents were resident aliens at the time of his birth, seeking and soon to receive their status as naturalized U.S. citizens. You may correctly assume that, because Rubio's parents were in the United States legally and thus, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," he does qualify as a natural born citizen while under the same clause, the children of illegal aliens are most decidedly not "natural born citizen of the United States." If you do not understand this assertion, read on.

Regarding "birthright citizenship," let me offer a few unadulterated facts. Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution as ratified in 1789, states: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

By all accepted definitions of citizenship at the time, Marco Rubio is a "natural born citizen," as were many of our ancestral Founders.

After the War Between the States, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was passed to ensure that slaves born in the U.S., and legally subject to its jurisdiction, had the same rights of citizenship as all Americans. It stated, "All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States."

Concerned about the integrity of the Civil Rights Act given the Supreme Court's decision a decade earlier in Dred Scott v. Sandford denying citizenship to blacks, and that some future Congress would reverse this legislation, the 14th Amendment was proposed to ensure rights of citizenship. In the plain language of its authors, those who are born to parents legally in the U.S., whose parents have no allegiance to a foreign power (as diplomats), are thus, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," and have claim to birthright citizenship. (This would clearly exclude those born to illegal aliens.)

By the constructionist interpretation of the 14th Amendment, Marco Rubio is, indeed, a "natural born citizen."

The Rule of Law as outlined by the 14th Amendment stood until 1982 when it was adulterated by judicial activists who concluded in Plyler v. Doe, that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful." That opened the floodgates for "anchor babies," a gate that should be closed -- but that would require a judiciary that abides by its oath to uphold the Rule of Law.

Thus, as adulterated, not only is Marco Rubio a "natural born citizen," but so is everyone else born in the U.S., regardless of whether their parents were here legally or illegally. However, there is no comparison between the questions of Obama's citizenship and that of Marco Rubio, which seems to have inspired some reader comments. The legitimate questions about Obama's citizenship are based on where he was actually born -- as posited by some who argue he was not born in the United States. (I would note that enormous political capital has been thrown down this rathole for the last four years, much to the detriment of the campaign to defeat Obama.)

For further reading, I have authored several essays on this subject, including "On the Fourteenth Amendment," and more particularly, "Birthright Citizenship?" and "Immigration Policy: 'Subject to the jurisdiction therof'."

Now, for those so predisposed, you may resume the effort to self-destruct, but understand that effort is worth more to Obama's re-election than any ad share he can buy.

"In response to Friday's Digest about Sandra Fluke and the contraception issue, Insurance, including health insurance, is designed as a safety net so that a family, individual or organization won't suffer financial devastation in the case of an unforeseen event, such as illness, injury or other medical malady. The coverage generally pays for treatment associated with the condition, as long as such coverage is deemed appropriate by the medical community. Please tell me, for what medical malady would contraception provide treatment?" --Steve

The Last Word


"At times, I find myself wondering if, after a thousand postings, I will eventually run out of things to carp, whine and scream about. I should only be so lucky, for it would mean that liberalism had finally all but vanished from our nation's capital, and the likes of Barack Obama, Harry Reid , Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Henry Waxman, Sheila Jackson Lee, Patty Murray, Charles Schumer and Pat Leahy, had all been returned to the various zoos from which they'd been on loan. In the spirit of bi-partisanship, I would acknowledge that there are a fair number of naïve bumpkins in both parties. Although they are far more numerous in the voting blocs of Democrats, even in the GOP there are those I refer to as Utopians. Whereas on the Left, such lunkheads tend to think that if only a thousand more laws are enacted, we will achieve Nirvana; on the Right are those who believe there is an ideal presidential candidate who will somehow combine the best elements of George Washington, Abe Lincoln and Ronald Reagan. Anything short of that and they threaten to stay home and sulk on Election Day, even if the alternative is to allow an international disaster like Obama to be re-elected." --columnist Burt Prelutsky

From Americans For Prosperity

Dear Londa,
President Obama is coming after AFP.
Instead of addressing the massive problems facing America’s future, President Obama is focusing on attacking and discrediting his opponents.
And, once again, AFP is Public Enemy #1.
First, his reelection campaign dedicated their first TV ad of 2012 to attacking AFP—because we exposed the truth about his Solyndra scam that channeled over $500 million taxpayer dollars to one of his donors’ failing green energy company.
And now, President Obama’s campaign started circulating an online petition to demand that AFP release private personal information about our activists and donors.
Londa, you know these baseless, desperate attacks are typical from President Obama’s shameless attack machine—but what’s worse is that these attacks are simply not true.
On the road each year, I get to meet thousands of people. And let me tell you—I’ve never seen anyone but solid, patriotic Americans at an AFP rally, no matter what Obama and his allies want you to think.
Instead, I get to meet everyday folks like you, your neighbors, and your friends—hard-working, middle-class Americans who are scared to death about President Obama’s dangerous tax and spend policies, and what they’re doing to our nation.
And, frankly, you and I know we need to change course before it’s too late.
Londa, with over 90,000 individual donors, AFP is truly dependent on the generosity of activists like you. And we simply can’t continue to win more critical policy fights without your help.
That’s why I’m asking you today to pitch in and help us show President Obama and his liberal allies just how deep nationwide support for AFP—and for economic freedom—really goes.
Please click here to contribute just $5 or $10—or whatever you can afford right now—to help us continue to win the fight against President Obama’s disastrous policy agenda for America.
Londa, thank you for everything you’ve helped us do over the last three years. I know that, at the end of the day, we’ll win the fight for the future of America—and celebrate the permanent return of economic freedom.
Sincerely,

Tim Phillips, President
Americans for Prosperity

P.S. With President Obama’s attack machine in full swing, we need to set the record straight—and show him just how much Americans care about bringing prosperity back to our nation. Click here to contribute $5 or $10 to AFP to help us fight back against Obama’s politics-as-usual—and restore economic freedom to our nation.

From Freedom Works

Dear Londa,
You and I know that since the days of Woodrow Wilson, the progressive movement has been on the march to incrementally take over our private lives with public programs.
And this March, progressives across America are celebrating the two year anniversary of ObamaCare as proof that this radical health care takeover will now be permanent.
But there remains hope that we can End ObamaCare Now.
The Supreme Court is preparing to decide the fate of ObamaCare and we’re sending thousands of signatures to the Court with one clear voice: End ObamaCare Now.
EONscreenshot.png
Thousands of Americans have signed already…opposing Obama’s individual mandate…his health care rationing board…and the billions in new spending hidden in ObamaCare.
Celebrate the two year anniversary of ObamaCare by committing to do everything you can to help repeal this radical law. Now is the time to act. Sign our petition to End ObamaCare Now.
We’ve taken ObamaCare straight to the Supreme Court, filing a legal brief through our Constitution Defense Fund and rallying our 1.5 million members—members like you—to End ObamaCare Now!
If you want to restore freedom in America's health care system, challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare is critical and we’re leading that fight. Urge the Supreme Court to respect individual liberty and reject the individual mandate by signing our petition to End ObamaCare Now!
If we are going to beat back the progressive agenda…if we are going to stem the rising tide of Big Government…we must End ObamaCare Now.
Sign the petition right now.
Thank you.
In Liberty,
Matt Kibbe Signature

Monday, March 12, 2012

From Townhall Finance

 Bennett for Mar 09, 2012
By Bennett - Mar 09, 2012

From Townhall Finance

Research Shows Obamacare Resulted in 25 Additional Democratic Losses in 2010 Elections, but Was It a Long-Term Victory for the Left?
  • I like to think people in the United States still believe in liberty, and I’ve cited some polling data in support of American Exceptionalism.
And it seems like that philosophical belief in individualism and limited government sometimes has an impact in the polling booth. According to a recent study, Obamacare was poison for Democrats in 2010.
Here’s an excerpt from a report in The Hill.
Voting for President Obama’s healthcare reform law cost Democratic incumbents 5.8 percentage points of support at the polls in 2010, according to a new study in the journal American Politics Research. The study helps explain why Democrats lost 66 House seats, significantly more than the median academic forecast of 44 to 45 seats, study co-author Brendan Nyhan of Dartmouth College writes on his blog. Democrats in the lead-up to the elections took a number of tough votes — notably on the Wall Street bailout, the stimulus and cap-and-trade — but none was as unpopular as their support for the healthcare reform law. “We show that the roll-call effect on vote share was driven by healthcare reform. Democratic incumbents who voted yes performed significantly worse than those who did not,” Nyhan writes. “We then provide simulation evidence suggesting that Democrats would win approximately 25 more seats if those in competitive districts had voted no, which accounts for the gap between the academic forecasts and the observed outcomes.”
As with any statistical study, you should take the results with a big grain of salt. That caveat aside, the conclusions of the study seem quite plausible. And since I’m not a fan of Obamacare and think the law will be much more costly than advertised, I’m not shedding any tears for politicians who lost their jobs after voting for the new entitlement.
But the 2010 election may have been a Pyrrhic victory – a short-run victory that paves the way for long-run defeat.
I think the left made a clever calculation that losses in the last cycle would be an acceptable price to get more people dependent on the federal government. And once people have to rely on government for something like healthcare, they are more likely to vote for the party that promises to make government bigger.
One of the most-viewed posts on this blog is the set of cartoons drawn by a former Cato intern, one showing how the welfare state begins and the other showing how it ends.
This is why Obamacare – and the rest of the entitlement state – is so worrisome. If more and more Americans decide to ride in the wagon of government dependency, it will be less and less likely that those people will vote for candidates who want to restrain government.
Europe is a good example. The supposedly “conservative” leaders of major nations such as Spain, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom are a bunch of big-government statists.
That being said, I’m not a complete pessimist. The Medicaid and Medicare reforms in last year’s Ryan budget would largely solve the problem, especially since any Obamacare subsidies presumably could be eliminated as part of such reforms.
I’m just not holding my breath that we’ll get real entitlement reform in the next four years.

The Latest Batch of Political Jokes

Continuing my tradition of periodically sharing the good political jokes from the late-night talk show hosts (you can enjoy previous editions by clicking here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here), you’ll find below the latest ones that passed the got-me-to-laugh test.
Jay Leno
  • While visiting a GM plant President Obama pledged to buy a Chevy Volt after his presidency ends in five years. Today Mitt Romney said, “Make it one year and I’ll buy it for you.”
  • I think Romney’s a good man but he just doesn’t inspire people. Even his new campaign slogan: “I guess you’re stuck with me.”
  • Not a good day for Rick Santorum. I haven’t seen him this depressed since they invented the birth control pill.
  • It’s leap day tomorrow. This is God’s way of punishing us by making the election year even longer.
  • President Obama talked about rising gas prices today. He focused on the positive things his administration has done when it comes to energy prices. So, in other words, it was the shortest speech he’s ever given.
  • President Obama is starting to get a little overconfident. In an interview with Univision radio, he said, “My presidency isn’t over yet, and I’ve still got five more years.” Even his predictions are over budget.
  • I saw the worst reality show last night. Have you seen this one? It’s called “The Republican Debate.”
  • Rick Santorum is claiming that Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have teamed up against him. Which is kind of ironic — that Santorum can be brought down by two men forming a civil union.
  • Santorum says that Satan has his sights set on the United States of America. And today Satan said he tries to avoid politics because it makes him feel dirty.
  • Italian police seized $6 trillion worth of fake, worthless U.S. bonds. Let that be a lesson. If you want to try and sell worthless financial instruments, you’d better be Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. That’s the only way you’re going to get away with it.
David Letterman
  • It’s tax time. I switched to a new tax guy and I think he’s fantastic. He wants me to establish my full-time residence in Syria.
  • Every time I drive up to my new tax guy’s office, he says the same thing. “You weren’t tailed, were you?”
  • Today is the 100th anniversary of the Oreo cookie. For New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, it’s a holy day.
Conan
  • A new study found that government employees are the happiest workers. The study was not conducted at the DMV.
  • It’s being reported that Snooki is pregnant. When Rick Santorum heard the news, he immediately came out in favor of birth control.
  • Mitt Romney has accused Rick Santorum of saying outrageous things just so Santorum can appeal to the most extreme voters. Santorum denied this and said, “That’s exactly the kind of misrepresentation I’d expect from gay abortion doctor Mitt Romney.”
  • As of today, Rick Santorum will be assigned Secret Service agents. This is the first time Santorum has agreed to use any kind of protection.
Jimmy Kimmel
  • Kid Rock gave Mitt Romney an endorsement. He also endorsed porn, Jack Daniels, and hepatitis C.
Jimmy Fallon
  • Mitt Romney accused the other GOP candidates of pandering to voters to get support. Romney was like, “I would never pander to voters. I mean, unless you guys want me to.”
Craig Ferguson
  • President Obama is trying to come up with a new campaign slogan that would replace “hope and change.” He’s thinking of going with “I am not Mitt Romney.”
  • There are rumors that Mitt Romney will ask Ron Paul to be his running mate. He was originally going to reach out to Rick Santorum. But Rick’s not crazy about other dudes reaching out for him.
  • Everyone throws beads on Mardi Gras. The beads are paid for by local businessmen who ride on elaborate floats and toss little trinkets to the desperate masses in the streets. Which is also Mitt Romney’s economic plan.
  • People should stop believing bizarre stories about U.S. presidents. George Washington did not have wooden teeth. Abe Lincoln did not write the Gettysburg address on an envelope. And President Obama wasn’t born in Kenya. It was Tanzania.
  • Obama was going to be born in Kenya but it wasn’t socialist enough.
I can’t resist one parting shot, regarding the Conan joke about happy government workers. Of course they’re happy, since their compensation is twice as high as people in the productive sector of the economy.
Daniel J. Mitchell

Sunday, March 11, 2012

From Bible Masters

FRUITFULNESS Robert Kerr

John 15: 1 - 16

I/ THE VINE AND THE BRANCHES

John 15:1-2
I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. {2} Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

In John 15:1-2 the Lord Jesus taught about fruit bearing. Christ Himself is the true vine, and we are His branches. He said "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away; and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit". The idea is that every Christian should be in such close touch with Christ that, as the sap comes from the vine into the branch with life-giving, fruit-bearing power, so the Holy Spirit may flow from Christ through us, making us fruit bearing Christians.

II/ THE SECRET OF FRUITFULNESS:

John 15:3-7
Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. {4} Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. {5} I am the vine, ye the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. {6} If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast into the fire, and they are burned. {7} If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.

Again He said, "Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches; He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing". There is no way to win souls except by abiding in Christ, being in touch with Him, knowing His will, feeling His heartbeat, being wholly committed to His will and work!

Remember that the Lord Jesus wants souls saved. That is what He died for. That is what the Great Commission means. Christ came to "seek and to save that which was lost" again, "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners". If I abide in Christ, my aim, my purpose, my burden, my business, my work, will be the same as His! And my fruit will be the fruit He wants. The fruit of a Christian is another Christian. If you are not a witness, then the Bible makes it clear that you do not abide in Christ. Your heart is not at one with His heart. Whatever your activity, whatever your reputation, however sanctimonious you feel, and however much of a Pharisee you are in your life, you do not abide in Christ, if you do not witness.

A. First consider what Vine you are tapped into:
Ask yourself, How many things do I attach myself to for my well-being? Some people think their vine is their Individual Retirement Account, College degrees popularity, business connections, possessions, or social relationships. Some people think the church is their vine. They attach themselves to a system of religion. But our vine should be Jesus Christ. Attending a church is not necessarily evidence of a vine-branch relationship. In fact, it can be a parasitic relationship. Sometimes people are like parasites because they attend Church only for what it will do for them. If the Church quits doing for them they quit. Not even a Sunday School Class or a Bible-study group or a Church can be a substitute for Jesus Christ as your sustenance for living.

B. Second consider the Branches:
The branches tapped into the true vine grow rapidly. They must be tended, carefully, which requires drastic pruning on a regular basis. To have a fruitful vine, the vinedresser(The Father) must cut off the fruitless shoots and other things that gather on the fruit-bearing branches that tend to sap the strength of the vine. There are two kinds of branches:

1. The Professing Branches: "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away" A fruitless branch cannot represent a Christian. Jesus said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so, every good tree bringeth forth good fruit .. Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them" Math 7:16-17,20. In verse 2 "in me" sounds like the people who don’t bear fruit are Christians. But these are those who are superficially attached(parasites). In Rom 11:20 Paul pictured Israel as an olive tree However, some of the branches of that tree weren’t saved. Verse 20 says "Because of unbelief they were broken off". In I John 2:19 John says "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us"

2. The Possessing Branches: "Every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit". Every believer in Christ gets purged because "whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth" Heb 12:6 If you could look at your problems as a divine procedure for becoming more fruitful, you might be tempted to pray for trouble! The Greek word translated "purgeth" (kathairo) means "to clean". Extrabiblical Greek literature uses the word to refer to cleansing grain(separating it from the waste material). What instrument does God use to purge us? Jesus said "Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you". Have you ever noticed how much more sensitive you are to the Word of God when you’re in trouble? Trouble opens our eyes to receive the divine "purging" performed by the Word.




C. Third, consider the meaning of Abiding:
The word "Abide" simply means "to remain". The mark of a Christian is that He or She remains (or lasts). Not by their own strength because it would mean that their salvation was based on their ability to "hang in there". Rather, remaining in Christ is evidence that a person is saved. It is like the good soil, the seed remained in the ground and grew, it was not plucked out by the birds, or choked by the thorns, or killed by the heat of the day. Abiding means Lasting. It means keeping the faith. It means being faithful. It means staying true. It means remaining in Christ. The wonderful part of it is that Jesus said "Abide in me, and I will abide(remain) in you".

III/ THE MARKS OF A TRUE DISCIPLE

John 15:8-11
Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. {9} As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. {10} If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. {11} These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and your joy might be full.

IV/ THE CALL TO FRUITFULNESS

John 15:16
Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

1. Fruit is produced in all periods of life. - Psalms 92:13-14
"Those that be planted in the house of the LORD shall flourish
in the courts of our God. {14} They shall still bring forth
fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing;"

2. Spiritual Fruit should be perennial.(lasting) Ezekiel 47:12
"And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on
that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not
fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall
bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their
waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof
shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine."

3. There are many varieties. - Galatians 5:22-23
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, {23} Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

4. It will grow only upon good ground - Matthew 13:8
But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.


5. Spiritual fruit is without defect - Ephesians 5:9
(For the fruit of the Spirit in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)

6. It is the product of heavenly wisdom. James 3:17
But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.


On a scale of 1 to 5, how fruitful would you say your life is?
What do you need to do to abide more closely in Christ?

From Townhall Finance

Obama Misplaces "My" Jobs Bill
Get Mark Levin's new book free!

While news yesterday from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that unemployment remained unchanged and that 227,000 jobs were created in February shows that the Obama-induced stimulus slide in the economy has slowed, it also contains some significant bad news for the president.
As the labor participation rates edged back up, the number of people without jobs also edged up a bit too from 12.758 million to 12.806 in the last month. And while the 227,000 jobs created for January is better than less-than-200,000 jobs that we have come to expect, much of the gain is in temporary employment, signaling perhaps, at best a bottom for labor.
But what it’s not signaling most certainly is a robust recovery.
As our own Mike Shedlock points out, employment in 2012 is roughly the same as it was back in 2001. In essence, Obama has compressed a lost decade into just three years. Additionally, the BLS already is making significant downward revisions to employment for new business estimates they made in the January report via the birth/death model and other seasonal adjustments , according to Shedlock.


And the hanky-pankery isn't just confined to birth/death numbers. As John Crudele of the New York Post reported early this week:
Take, just as a single example, Labor’s report in early February. It showed that 243,000 new jobs were created in January.
The only problem was that the number wasn’t true. The pure, undoctored, not seasonally adjusted figure showed there was really a loss of 2.689 million jobs.
There is always a loss of jobs after the Christmas season. And any professional in the financial industry who doesn’t know that needs to get into another line of work.
As I’ve reported before, the 2.689 million job loss turned into a gain of 243,000 only because Labor’s seasonal adjustment programs expected the job losses to be bigger. The warm winter weather probably kept some people from being put out of work, and this threw off Washington’s calculations.
Now here’s another brief reminder: We’ve been here before with the Obama economy- like last year- and it won’t take much- think rising gas prices, Israeli air strike- for the economy to go back into the tank.
So don’t count me as one of the people who thinks the employment report is Obama’s friend.
In part that’s because Obama jettisoned his business-friendly chief-of-staff, Bill Daley, in favor of the more radical, whacko-wing of the White House who is determined to wage a class warfare campaign around spending a ton more money.
And the longer economic conditions remain stable, yet, essentially weak, the more likely it is that Americans are going to reject Obama’s massive spending programs and class warfare rhetoric, without which, he’d have an administration bereft of any ideas at all.
Obama: Pass MY Jobs Bill!
It wasn’t too long ago that the employment crisis was so grave that Chicago’s very own Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. was suggesting the president suspend the Constitution. Previously Governor Bev Perdue (Democrat) was suggesting that we suspend elections to address employment, thereby ensuring that she wouldn’t get to run for reelection this year. Both were foolish arguments back then and both appear even stupider in light of events.
The biggest crisis that both progressives were concerned with wasn’t jobs; it’s the crisis created by six years of failed policies- the possibility of failed elections.
And that’s about the size of it for Obama too.
It’s wasn’t too long ago that the president was touring the country foolishly demanding that Congress pass his pork-spending bill he called “My Jobs Bill 2.0” before letting Congress even read it. “Pass my jobs bill now,” said the president before he had even delivered a copy of it to Congress- or wrote it.
“[I]f you love me, you've got to help me pass this bill," said Obama as he kicked off the desperation reelection tour back in September.
But hey, guess what?
The economy has stopped sliding backward and has added jobs since, primarily because a Republican-controlled Congress has gotten the president to stop screwing around with the economy. Congress has gotten tough with out-of-control regulations like the MACT Act and Dodd-Frank and the economy has started to its proper job.
In the meantime, Obama has somehow misplaced the campaign rhetoric supporting “My Jobs Bill” along with “My Foolish Budget” and “My Invisible Energy Policy.”
Instead he’s taken to campaigning about income inequality and tax increases.
And I’ll take my chances on those arguments at time when people would be happy to have any rising income, any lower spending and any affordable energy no matter the form.


"Like" me on Facebook and you'll get sneak peaks of columns and, as an added bonus, I will never raise your taxes. Send me email and I just might mention you on Sunday.
John Ransom

John Ransom

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