| |
 |
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
| Chronicle · December 14, 2011 The Foundation"Our properties within our own territories [should not] be taxed or regulated by any power on earth but our own." --Thomas JeffersonEditorial Exegesis"The headlines say the representatives at the United Nations climate conference in South Africa reached an agreement. But the real story is that the meeting only produced an agreement to start more talks on a deal to replace the Kyoto Protocol by 2015 with emissions limits that won't be in effect until 2020. Despite the uncertainty of such a proposition, one official, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, South Africa's foreign minister, nevertheless had the nerve to claim 'We have saved planet Earth for the future of our children and our great-grandchildren.' Apparently she's forgotten that the alarmists have said that global warming must be solved now -- that Prince Charles traveled to Rio de Janeiro 33 months ago and lamented that the world had 'less than 100 months' to save itself. ... So why bother with framing a treaty that won't start until 2020? Won't that be too late? It's never too late, though, to continue scaring the public in hopes it will eventually give in and follow the alarmists and their asinine ideas. ... In the absence of such a deal, some conference representatives proposed a global climate court of justice that would let climate change 'victims' force the rich, top carbon dioxide-producing countries to pay up. Jonathan Verschuuren, a professor of international and European environmental law writing for Radio Netherlands, assures us that 'a climate court will certainly not materialize' because 'the world's industrialized countries have more sense than that.' Yes, the industrialized nations should have more sense than that. But do they? ... What if, for instance, voters re-elect President Obama and turn Congress back to the Democrats, and the British bring back the Labor Party? If so, an international climate court isn't so unlikely, is it? With the science incomplete, corrupt scientists, the alarmists exaggerating the case and the socialists itching to collect from all, a climate court could do more damage to the U.S. than the Axis powers ever could." --Investor's Business DailyWhat should we be doing about possible global warming? Essential Liberty"The United States possesses 1.4 trillion barrels of recoverable oil, more than the oil the entire world has consumed during the past 150 years, according to an Institute for Energy Research report released last week. Add in an estimated 2.7 quadrillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas and 486.1 billion short tons of recoverable coal, and our energy reserves exceed those of any other nation on Earth. The American economy will not prosper until we get government out of the way and let the private sector power our future using the most efficient sources available. For that to happen, the next administration must reject any redistributionist U.N. treaty designed to soak billions from U.S. taxpayers based on bogus climate claims." --The Washington Times
Upright"[Last] Wednesday, Politico ran a story about the International Association of Machinists Union at Boeing agreeing to approve a contract extension.... Democrats, including Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder ... abhor the idea of making voters bring some form of photo identification to the polls. Yet the IAM ... required a photo ID of all who wished to vote in a contract ratification election. ... [T]he photo-ID requirement in the union's elections would appear to be far from an isolated instance. Gosh, I wonder why? At some point during all these years of covering the voter-ID issue, you would think that someone in the press, much of which is unionized ... would have noted that unions at least occasionally and likely far more than occasionally require that members present a photo ID to be able to cast their ballots. Nope. How typically irresponsible." --NewsBusters contributing editor Tom Blumer"In the end, last week's meeting of Eurozone leaders produced nothing more than an agreement to produce an agreement. ... Yet amidst the general ineptitude, there was one defining moment: British Prime Minister David Cameron rejected the deal. Apparently one leader in Europe still believes in the idea of national sovereignty. ... Yet who is kidding whom? Despite all the pie-in-the-sky pronouncements, coupled with threats of 'isolation' aimed at Britain for daring to resist the 'superior wisdom' of EU elitists, nothing has been done to address the immediate liquidity crisis affecting both European banks and governments. The ultimate arbiter of this latest agreement will be the worldwide markets, specifically the bond markets. They will ultimately reveal whether investors, as they were last Friday, can be sold yet another pig in a poke masquerading itself as yet another grand bargain." --columnist Arnold Ahlert "Some politicians claim that politicians create jobs. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says, 'My job is to create jobs.' What hubris! Government has no money of its own. All it does is take from some people and give to others. That may create some jobs, but only by leaving less money in the private sector for job creation. Actually, it's worse than that. Since government commandeers scarce resources by force and doesn't have to peddle its so-called services on the market to consenting buyers, there's no feedback mechanism to indicate if those services are worth more to people than what they were forced to go without. The only people who create real, sustainable jobs are in private businesses -- if they're unsubsidized." --columnist John Stossel Insight"There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly." --American author and poet Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)"There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice." --Charles de Montesquieu (1689-1755) Support The Patriot Post TodayOur team works tirelessly to consolidate a week's worth of the best insightful conservative analysis and the most outrageous comments made by assorted leftists in the media, politics and culture. Indeed, The Patriot Post's Chronicle is a one-of-a-kind information buffet that you won't find anywhere else.We depend on your support to keep this priceless resource coming to your inbox every Wednesday. Help us by making a secure online donation to our 2011 Year-End Campaign. If you prefer to support us by mail, please use our printable donor form. We still must raise $123,500 before year's end. Thank you! Nate Jackson Managing Editor
The Demo-goguesA sad case for re-election: "The reason they still support me is because they understand what an incredible mess had been made as I was coming into office, and we've been spending the last three years cleaning it up. The good news is that the economy is starting to strengthen. We've seen some positive signs. The unemployment rate has ticked down." --Barack ObamaFairy tales: "Millionaire job creators are like unicorns: They're impossible to find and don't exist." --Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) Government as Santa: "Christmas is coming. ... We've got to put money into the pockets of the American people -- the payroll tax cut, unemployment benefits extending -- and we cannot go home unless we do. ... It's not about where we have our Christmas dinner. It's about if the American people are going to have a Christmas dinner that they can pay for with some level of comfort." --House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Left-theology: "I want to be judged as a good and faithful servant, and therefore, I will stand with my Democratic colleagues on these issues and stay here until we do take care of those who are considered the least of these. And I can't believe as we are in the season of advent, the celebration of the birth of our Savior. He came, yes to bring salvation, but also to bring equity and justice into the world, that we would be so heartless and unChristian. It goes against the precepts of all religions and even every human value that we would end unemployment insurance." --Rep. Donna Christenson (D-Virgin Islands), arguing that Christian tenants of individuals caring for the poor are actually government responsibilities Propaganda: "The message I have for climate deniers is this: you are endangering humankind. It is time for climate deniers to face reality, because the body of evidence is overwhelming and the world's leading scientists agree. ... Problems do not go away by pretending they do not exist. And the longer that vocal minority insists on keeping their heads in the sand, the more it endangers billions of people around the globe and threatens to dramatically and negatively reshape the world as we know it." --Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) Over the top: "They have attached a poison pill -- literally, colleagues -- because it will kill 8,100 more people more than would have otherwise been killed from pollution. So have that for a Christmas gift." --Barbara Boxer on Republicans trying to roll back a Clean Air Act provision Fast and loose with statistics: "That is simply not true [that unemployment has risen since Obama took office]. In fact, unemployment has now dropped below 9 percent. It's continuing to drop." --DNC chief and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) (Unemployment was under 8 percent when Obama took office.) DezinformatsiaBelly Laugh of the Week: "You gave up a lot. You said you wanted a balanced approach. You didn't get it. You cut a trillion dollars and set up the framework to cut another trillion plus, and the Republicans gave up nothing. ... It seems to be all the compromising is being done by you." --CBS's Steve Kroft to Barack ObamaDefending class warfare by denying it exists: "People are accusing [Barack Obama] now of class warfare. It seems a bit trite to say that, because in any kind of society where you have this kind of financial meltdown, isn't it instinctively the right thing to do that the rich should contribute a little bit more to the recovery than those with no money?" --CNN's Piers Morgan Newspulper Headlines:If Only Herman Cain Were There to Remind Him: "Rick Perry Forgot How Many Supreme Court Justices There Are" --TheAtlanticWire.comBreaking News From 1962, 1981, 2000: "Newt Takes No-Adultery Pledge" --Politico.com Answers to Questions Nobody Is Asking: "Why Mitt Romney Is Like Jan From 'The Brady Bunch'" --FoxNews.com Too Much Information: "Bill Clinton Says Wife Hillary 'Just Wants a Good Night's Sleep'" --New York Post Free Kool-Aid!: "Crusade for Fewer People on the Earth Seeks Volunteers" --HumanEvents.com Bottom Story of the Day: "Obama Raises Money for Re-Election Bid" --Associated Press (Thanks to The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto) Village IdiotsThe BIG Lie, Part I: "Nobody in the Justice Department has lied." --Attorney General Eric Holder on the botched "Fast & Furious" scandalThe BIG Lie, Part II: "[Lying] all has to do with your state of mind and whether or not you had the requisite intent to come up with something that can be considered perjury or a lie." --Eric Holder when asked about the difference between "lying" and "misleading" The BIG Lie, Part III: "As we work to avoid future losses and further mistakes, it is unfortunate that some used inflammatory and inappropriate rhetoric about one particular tragedy that occurred near the Southwest Border in an effort to score political points." --Eric Holder on the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry More class warfare: "There are people who can afford to give a little bit more. And you know what? In the end, we'll get it back. It's certainly better to do that than finance -- than be secretive billionaires financing the Tea Party because you have untold needs for untold wealth. For what reason?" --Hollywood movie mogul Harvey Weinstein The 1 Percent: "I think that we will end up taxing the rich, and that's just fine by me. ... [A]ll the rich people I know, like Ted Turner and Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, they're all saying, 'Tax us.'" --Hanoi Jane Fonda Short Cuts"Joe Biden visited Greece last week on the debt crisis. I don't want to say the vice president doesn't know much, but he kept asking for John Travolta." --comedian Jay Leno"Vladimir Putin slammed the U.S. government for noting how his United Russia Party stuffed ballot boxes and cheated to win on Tuesday. He misunderstood. When the U.S. president and the Secretary of State are both from Chicago there's a real chance it was a compliment." --comedian Argus Hamilton "Citing budget cuts, the Obama administration will reduce the number of National Guard troops protecting the US-Mexico border. The remaining troops will be tasked with holding up 'Welcome to America' signs." --Fred Thompson
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team Patriot News Review
The Right Opinion
Grassroots Commentary
Policy and Analysis
(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 of American liberty.) Follow The Patriot Post:     | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
Dear Londa,
Two years ago we began a truly ambitious project. We called it “Take America Back!”
With your help, we worked to transform the Tea Party protest movement into an Election Day tidal wave that delivered the House of Representatives to a fiscal conservative majority. And sent six new, rock-solid conservative senators to Washington – including freedom champions like Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and others.
This year you have helped us help the Tea Party movement grow and mature even further – taking the power established first as a protest movement and applying it to the difficult task of legislating change.
Words cannot express my appreciation for your patriotism and my pride in your trust in us.
A truly momentous year is drawing to a close. And, of course, an even bigger one is about to start. So today I must ask for your continued support as we close out this momentous year and get ready for an even more challenging 2012.
If you have already made an End-of-Year gift, please accept my deepest thanks. But if not – or if you can spare another contribution to advance the cause of liberty today – please make your most generous gift of $10, $25, or $50 – or any other amount – right now.
You’ve helped us transform the Tea Party into a massive movement so powerful that it is literally redefining the future of our nation as we know it.
But NOW is our chance to take this movement to the next step.
NOW is the time to go beyond just defining the policy debate in Washington – as you helped us do in 2011 – to truly changing the culture of America.
NOW is the time to turn America’s growing frustration with oppressive big government into the unshakable belief in the power of free markets and limited government.
Londa, this is the tipping point – so please make your End-of-Year gift right now while you’re thinking about it. As you are aware, we simply can’t overestimate the importance of 2012 in determining America’s future.
This is the year we either resign ourselves to a socialist future or commit ourselves to a true renewal of liberty and prosperity.
Your generous gift will help us Take America Back – not just in 2012, but in 2013 and beyond.
Americans fear for their future – and the American people see that the Progressive model has failed.
Simply put, our goal is to replace the Progressive vision with the Founders’ vision of limited government and expanding liberty. Our nation can no longer afford to support the failed ideas of Progressivism. The time is now ripe to reinstate fiscal conservatism and economic freedom.
WE MUST NOT SQUANDER THIS OPPORTUNITY!
Londa, please make your End-of-Year gift of $10, $25, or $50 – or any other amount – right now to help us win this fight for the future of America.
Thank you again for your crucial support of FreedomWorks in 2011. We made history together. I look forward to working with you through 2012 and beyond.
Sincerely,
Dick Armey
Chairman, FreedomWorks
P.S. Now is the time to turn America’s growing frustration with over bloated government into an unshakable belief in the power of free markets and limited government. With your help, we will Take America Back! With your continued support, FreedomWorks can have another remarkable year in the fight for freedom in 2012. Please make your End-of-Year gift TODAY!
Two years ago we began a truly ambitious project. We called it “Take America Back!”
With your help, we worked to transform the Tea Party protest movement into an Election Day tidal wave that delivered the House of Representatives to a fiscal conservative majority. And sent six new, rock-solid conservative senators to Washington – including freedom champions like Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and others.
This year you have helped us help the Tea Party movement grow and mature even further – taking the power established first as a protest movement and applying it to the difficult task of legislating change.
Words cannot express my appreciation for your patriotism and my pride in your trust in us.
A truly momentous year is drawing to a close. And, of course, an even bigger one is about to start. So today I must ask for your continued support as we close out this momentous year and get ready for an even more challenging 2012.
If you have already made an End-of-Year gift, please accept my deepest thanks. But if not – or if you can spare another contribution to advance the cause of liberty today – please make your most generous gift of $10, $25, or $50 – or any other amount – right now.
You’ve helped us transform the Tea Party into a massive movement so powerful that it is literally redefining the future of our nation as we know it.
But NOW is our chance to take this movement to the next step.
NOW is the time to go beyond just defining the policy debate in Washington – as you helped us do in 2011 – to truly changing the culture of America.
NOW is the time to turn America’s growing frustration with oppressive big government into the unshakable belief in the power of free markets and limited government.
Londa, this is the tipping point – so please make your End-of-Year gift right now while you’re thinking about it. As you are aware, we simply can’t overestimate the importance of 2012 in determining America’s future.
This is the year we either resign ourselves to a socialist future or commit ourselves to a true renewal of liberty and prosperity.
Your generous gift will help us Take America Back – not just in 2012, but in 2013 and beyond.
Americans fear for their future – and the American people see that the Progressive model has failed.
Simply put, our goal is to replace the Progressive vision with the Founders’ vision of limited government and expanding liberty. Our nation can no longer afford to support the failed ideas of Progressivism. The time is now ripe to reinstate fiscal conservatism and economic freedom.
WE MUST NOT SQUANDER THIS OPPORTUNITY!
Londa, please make your End-of-Year gift of $10, $25, or $50 – or any other amount – right now to help us win this fight for the future of America.
Thank you again for your crucial support of FreedomWorks in 2011. We made history together. I look forward to working with you through 2012 and beyond.
Sincerely,
Dick Armey
Chairman, FreedomWorks
P.S. Now is the time to turn America’s growing frustration with over bloated government into an unshakable belief in the power of free markets and limited government. With your help, we will Take America Back! With your continued support, FreedomWorks can have another remarkable year in the fight for freedom in 2012. Please make your End-of-Year gift TODAY!
From Prophcy News
The 'United States Of Europe' Beckons
It has long been said that the euro was just a step towards a federal Europe. When the European currency went into crisis, as it would be assured to do so, it would force closer fiscal integration--effectively meaning closer political union.
Closer union appears to be coming true. The euro, in its old form, has fallen into crisis and the price European countries have to pay is a large loss of sovereignty. Nationalists would consider this disastrous. In reality, there are not so many nationalists in Europe these days and many countries, and their populations, consider themselves European and see little problem with further integration.
What is set to happen is that the European super state will hold the cheque book of euro member countries; or at least be able to snap it shut should any one country wish to run away with its local budget.
Money is power and once ultimate budget power is gone, political power will subsequently be drawn into the federal centre. This illuminates the character of the current crisis; it is purely political. Come what may, economic ramifications of the crisis are secondary to those of the political necessities.
Central banks and their job, of fixing interest rates, is the primary bastion of central state control over free markets. Consequently, it is not surprising that this is where the economic trouble has come to a head.
A decade of low interest rates has allowed states in the developed world to build up titanic debts. Europe, with its socialized model, has bloated to such a degree that the world demands higher interest rates to support its debt levels than most of Europe can afford to pay.
Due to these countries sharing a single currency they cannot adjust their currency through relation to cope. They cannot “print” and the ECB is bound by charter and German ire from doing so on their behalf.
They therefore need a hand-out from the better off members of the currency union, in this case Germany.
Germany will only accede to this if it, or a proxy, has control over the purse strings to make sure the wastrel of Europe won’t spend Germany into ruin as well.
The U.K. doesn’t like this one bit as it sees many problems. The U.K. doesn’t like the idea of a United States of Germany and sees that, in a federal Europe, Germany will rule. There is no real reason to loath this idea, except geopolitical pettiness, which of course politics abounds in.
The other reason is the U.K. feels Europe is gunning for the British financial sector, which accounts for 20-25% of the U.K. economy.
This is ironic, as U.K. politicians and media have been pillorying the financial sector for years. However, now like an abusive spouse, the British government is frightened of losing its rich wife. That aside, the perception is that Europe wants to strip that financial industry from London and ship it to Frankfurt and Paris; a unified euro based Europe would present a platform to do just that, leaving Britain a poor toothless semi-autonomous region. From an investors point of view the questions are many; will this political process solve the economic crisis of Europe and how should one invest accordingly?
The obvious outcome of this whole mess is stagflation. Most of Europe will be trying to get their economies back into balance through austerity, which means lowering the fat share of GDP made up by government spending. This won’t make it easy for the real economy initially, so there will be no recovery in sight for a long time.
There will undoubtedly be inflation, which will give a lift to economic activity. It still remains to be seen though if Germany will let the EU have any meaningful bout of inflation, to evaporate its mountain of debt.
It is the level of inflation that will set the clock to recovery running - 5-7% means five years of austerity, 2-3% a decade or more.
Yet the story is not over until the countries of the euro zone sign on the dotted line and perhaps have a round of referendum. Even then, as is the way of politics, a deal is a deal on until the deal is broken. Large parts of Europe may simply not be able to stomach the prospect of a decade of stagnation, so a deal may simply not hold for long.
The key indicator is inflation. If that starts to rise then the investor can be sure that the real recovery is on its way. Otherwise Europe will be in for a Japanese style lost economic generation, with a strong Euro and a moribund economy as far out as is guessable.
Ultimately the market will decide on the lead up to the spring agreement. The sovereign bond yields of Europe will ebb and flow and if the market flatly refuses to fund euro governments, whatever the politicians agree, then the Euro will break up and Europe will go back to the way it was in 1990s. If the markets will lend to Spain, Italy and Portugal at around 5% then a new era of the United States of Europe beckons
From Prophcy News
Israeli Conflict Becomes Major Issue in GOP Debate
Earlier this week, Newt Gingrich told an Isreali TV station the Palestinians are an "invented" people out to destroy Israel, a statement that prompted significant disagreement between the candidates in this weekend's GOP debate on whether it is better to exercise "truth" or "prudence" in the Middle East.
When asked about the comment, Gingrich was completely unapologetic for his controversial remarks.
"Somebody ought to have the courage to tell the truth," Gingrich insisted. "[The Palestinian power groups Fatah and Hamas] are terrorists. They teach terrorism in their schools. They have textbooks that say, 'If there are 13 Jews and 9 Jews are killed, how many Jews are left?'
We pay for those textbooks through our aid money. It's fundamentally time for somebody to have the guts to stand up and say, 'Enough lying about the Middle East.'"
He went on to say, "Is what I said factually correct? Yes. Is it historically true? Yes. … The fact is, the Palestinian claim to a right of return is based on a historically false story. Somebody ought to have the courage to go all the way back to the 1921 League of Nations mandate for a Jewish homeland, point out the context in which Israel came into existence, and 'Palestinian' did not become a common term until after 1977.
This is a propaganda war in which our side refuses to engage. … You're not going to win in the long run if you're afraid to stand firm and stand for the truth."
Twice, moderator George Stephanopoulos hinted that such bold words would "make life more difficult for the Israelis."
"How would we know the difference?" Gingrich responded. "The Israelis are getting rocketed every day. We're not making life more difficult. The Obama administration's making life more difficult. … I feel quite confident an amazing number of Israelis found it nice to have an American tell the truth about the war they are in the middle of and the casualties they're taking and the people who surround them who say, 'You do not have the right to exist, and we want to destroy you.'"
Most of the other candidates on stage, however, suggested Gingrich overstepped prudent foreign policy.
"I happen to agree with most of what the speaker said, except by going down and saying the Palestinians are an 'invented' people," Romney asserted. "That, I think, was a mistake on the speaker's part."
He continued, "I think we're very wise to stand with our friends, Israel, and not get out ahead of them. … Israel does not want us to make it more difficult for them to sit down with the Palestinians. Ultimately, the Palestinians and the Israelis are going to have to agree on how they're gonna settle differences between them."
Ron Paul took the criticism even further.
"That's just stirring up trouble," Paul said of Gingrich's words. "And I believe in a non-interventionist foreign policy. I don't think we should get in the middle of these squabbles."
Rick Santorum – who has been bluntly vocal about opposing Iran in the Middle East and Islamic radicalism in the U.S. – stumbled through his response on stage, but WND caught up with the candidate after the debate to clarify his position on Gingrich's comments.
"The first priority of a candidate for president and president of the U.S. is to be sided with the state of Israel," Santorum told WND, "and I would not be making a statement of that nature that would clearly cause a stir in the Middle East without first working with our allies to determine whether this was something that was helpful or not.
"That's not to say Gingrich is not factually correct," Santorum clarified, "but there's a lot of factually correct things that may be, in fact, counterproductive to inject into the dialogue.
"I would at least check with our allies to see whether they think that would be helpful or not before I would launch into something like that," he concluded.
In his continued defense, Gingrich asserted, "Sometimes it is helpful to have a president of the United States with the courage to tell the truth, just as was Ronald Reagan who went around his entire national security apparatus to call the Soviet Union an 'evil empire' and who overruled his entire State Department in order to say, 'Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.' Reagan believed the power of truth restated the world and reframed the world. I am a Reaganite, I'm proud to be a Reaganite. I will tell the truth, even if it's at the risk of causing some confusion sometimes with the timid."
When asked, Rick Perry dismissed the controversy.
"I think this is a minor issue that the media is blowing way out of proportion," Perry said. "We have a president of the United States who has put the most muddled foreign policy in place that is causing the problems in the Middle East. … This president is the problem, not something that Newt Gingrich said."
From Prophcy news
Internet Piracy Bill: A Free Speech 'Kill Switch'
What began as an attempt to restrain foreign piracy on the Internet has morphed into a domestic “kill switch” on First Amendment freedom in the fastest-growing corner of the marketplace of ideas.
Proposed federal legislation purporting to protect online intellectual property would also impose sweeping new government mandates on internet service providers – a positively Orwellian power grab that would permit the U.S. Justice Department to shut down any internet site it doesn’t like (and cut off its sources of income) on nothing more than a whim.
Under the so-called “Stop Online Piracy Act” (SOPA) the federal government – which is prohibited constitutionally from abridging free speech or depriving its citizens of their property without due process – would engage in both practices on an unprecedented scale. And in establishing the precursor to a taxpayer-funded “thought police,” it would dramatically curtail technology investment and innovation – wreaking havoc on our economy.
Consider this: Under the proposed legislation all that’s required for government to shutdown a specific website is the mere accusation that the site unlawfully featured copyrighted content. Such an accusation need not be proven – or even accompanied by probable cause. All that an accuser (or competitor) needs to do in order to obtain injunctive relief is point the finger at a website.
Additionally, SOPA would grant regulators the ability to choke off revenue to the owners of these newly classified “rogue” websites by accusing their online advertisers and payment providers as co-conspirators in the alleged “piracy.” Again, no finding of fact would be required – the mere allegation of impropriety is all that’s needed to cut the website’s purse strings.
Who’s vulnerable to this legislation?
“Any website that features user-generated content or that enables cloud-based data storage could end up in its crosshairs,” writes David Sohn, senior policy council at the Center on Democracy and Technology. “(Internet Service Providers) would face new and open-ended obligations to monitor and police user behavior. Payment processors and ad networks would be required to cut off business with any website that rights-holders allege hasn't done enough to police infringement.”
The Center’s president and CEO, Leslie Harris, points a bleak picture of the impact SOPA and its companion legislation in the U.S. Senate would have on the world wide web, arguing that the legislation would “(jeopardize) the continued development of powerful new forums for free expression and political dissent.”
“If these bills pass, there will be major collateral damage to Internet innovation, online free expression, the inner workings of Internet security, and user privacy,” Harris writes.
Google’s public policy director Bob Boorstin takes it one step further, arguing that the bills “would put the U.S. government in the very position we criticize repressive regimes for doing – all in the name of copyright.”
The proliferation of free expression on the Internet has spawned a vibrant new marketplace of ideas – toppling the old legacy media construct and ushering in an era of enhanced accountability in which thousands of new voices provide heightened scrutiny of our elected officials.
Obviously, silencing those voices and stifling the web’s innovative potential would exact a heavy toll on this new accountability – and on the U.S. economy. In a letter urging their colleagues to oppose SOPA, U.S. Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Darrell Issa speak to this very concern.
“Online innovation and commerce were responsible for 15 percent of U.S. GDP growth from 2004 to 2009,” Reps. Lofgren and Issa write. “Before we impose a sprawling new regulatory regime on the Internet, we must carefully consider the risks that it could pose for this vital engine of our economy.”
Safeguarding intellectual property is certainly an important goal. The ability to protect one’s work product is vital to the proper functioning of the free market – and key to preserving its innovative potential. However in enhancing property protections, we cannot permit the government to trample over our right to free speech and due process.
SOPA is the equivalent of curing a headache with a guillotine. It may stop piracy, but it would shut down our economy and unconstitutionally erode our most basic freedoms in the process.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
In This Issue: AUL plays key role in South Dakota abortion case detailing possible suicide risks for women and more elements of President Obama’s Health Care Law reveal a pro-abortion bias in the coming coverage.
Eighth Circuit Court Calls on AUL in South Dakota case
demonstrating the risk of suicide following abortion
demonstrating the risk of suicide following abortion
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals late last week asked AUL to re-file an amicus brief detailing the risk of suicide following abortion. The request came as part of the Circuit’s extremely rare move to rehear arguments on South Dakota’s law requiring that women be informed of the risk of suicide that can follow abortion (“suicide advisory”). At the heart of the matter is whether women in South Dakota will be told the possible consequences of choosing abortion.AUL originally filed the brief two years ago on behalf of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), Christian Medical & Dental Associations (CMDA), and other medical organizations, demonstrating to the appellate court testimony and medical evidence detailing an increased risk of suicide following abortion.
While two judges on the original Eighth Circuit panel voted to strike South Dakota’s suicide advisory, the third—Judge Gruender—wrote a strong and well-reasoned dissent that included much of the information and arguments cited in AUL’s brief.
His analysis appears to have sparked the Eighth Circuit’s very rare decision to reconsider the previous decision striking the suicide advisory. If the Eighth Circuit upholds the advisory, that would allow for every state in the Eighth Circuit—Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and North Dakota—to enact similar requirements. And it could spark a test case before the U.S. Supreme Court that would enable the Court to look at medical data that specifically verifies what it only assumed to be true in 2007 when it decided Gonzales v. Carhart (a decision upholding the federal ban on partial-birth abortion): that women suffer psychological harm after abortion.
AUL’s brief, re-filed this week, will now be considered by the entire Eighth Circuit panel as it reconsiders the constitutionality of South Dakota’s suicide advisory. Oral argument in the case will be heard on January 9. For more analysis of this case from AUL’s legal team, click here.
![[object Object]](http://action.aul.org/images/content/pagebuilder/11657.jpg){kind=small}
The Road to Roe (and Doe)
Tuesday marked the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court oral arguments in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. (Actually the first round of arguments, though they didn’t know that at the time. The re-arguments in Roe and Doe were made on October 11, 1972.)Roe was argued at 10am on Monday, December 13, 1971. Sarah Weddington, at 26, represented the Texas plaintiffs; Jay Floyd, an Assistant Attorney General, represented the State of Texas. That argument was immediately followed by the argument in Doe. Margie Pitts Hames represented the Georgia plaintiffs. Dorothy Beasley, an Assistant Attorney General, represented the State of Georgia.
For understanding how and why Roe and Doe were decided the way they were, reading the transcripts of the two oral arguments is essential, and it’s helpful to listen to the oral arguments while following the transcripts. As a service to researchers, AUL has produced corrected copies of the transcripts based on a close comparison of the official transcripts with the audios. To listen to such crucial legal history, click here.
Good Morning America
On C-SPAN’s nationally broadcast “Washington Journal” program Monday morning, AUL president and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest answered some thoughtful and extremely quirky questions about abortion in our society as well as the possible impact of the issue in the 2012 elections. To see the 45 minute broadcast, click here.
The Real Concern:
Obama’s Insurance Mandate
It is truly remarkable how quickly a new law or regulation can be characterized as “indispensable,” observed AUL Senior Vice President for Legal Affairs William Sanders and AUL staff attorney Mary Harned writing for LifeNews. The Planned Parenthood Action Fund is currently fundraising with a plea that “millions of women” could be on the verge of losing their existing contraceptive coverage.Why? Because concerned Americans, including some members of Congress, want the Obama Administration to modify its new regulation that requires private insurance plans to cover all “FDA-approved contraceptives,” including those that have a life-ending mechanism, under the authority of the preventive care mandate in the Affordable Care Act.
While this requirement is accompanied by a narrow exception for religious employers only—narrowly defined as those that have the “inculcation of religious values” as their purpose, primarily employ and serve persons who share their religious tenets, and have a non-profit status under IRS (hence, for instance, pro-life groups such as AUL would have no basis to object to the life-ending “contraception” coverage because we do not meet all three criteria)—by August 2012 most employers who have an objection to providing insurance coverage for contraception, including drugs classified as “contraception” that have a life-ending mechanism, will be forced to choose between providing such coverage or no insurance coverage for their employees at all.
For more of their analysis, click here.
In the News
Dr. Charmaine Yoest Featured in a Citizens United Unique Production
This week in Iowa, Citizens United's movie The Gift of Life premieres. This film features personal stories told by those who have been impacted by abortion. These poignant stories of suffering, love and life are intertwined with discussions by policy experts, including AUL's Charmaine Yoest, and it is narrated by former Gov. Mike Huckabee. For more details, click here.
Plan B “Emergency Contraception” in the News: Many journalists covered the events of last week in which HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ decided NOT to allow so called “emergency contraception” to be made available over the counter, citing concerns over the ability of young girls to use the drugs without adult supervision. “AUL [Americans United for Life] was very pleased that the administration took the viewpoint that young girls need adult supervision for taking what is a dangerous drug,” said group spokeswoman Kristi Hamrick to World Magazine. “It was a good decision, however AUL would encourage the administration to review much more broadly the healthcare guidelines … with those same sentiments. Presently the preventive care guidelines are calling abortion-inducing drugs contraceptives.” AUL was widely covered for its analysis of the events. To read more, click here.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Dear Joan of Ark,
You tell me nothing of your back-ground. You have made several comments & I thank you very much for that. I want people option. I will not argue the case as I am not a lawyer. I believe in the people of whom I get my info. No matter how you look at it the government of the U.S. is not what I forefathers had planned. I want to hear both sides & I will place it on my blogger.
I will not run pron, sexual matters, or cuss words. I want American to be great like it was, where it laws was for ALL the people. Where people became U.S. citizens not where today you're not an American & just do their countries ways. THIS IS AMERICA home OF Americans !! Our country was built on the belief of GOD. One true GOD not mans gods!!
You tell me nothing of your back-ground. You have made several comments & I thank you very much for that. I want people option. I will not argue the case as I am not a lawyer. I believe in the people of whom I get my info. No matter how you look at it the government of the U.S. is not what I forefathers had planned. I want to hear both sides & I will place it on my blogger.
I will not run pron, sexual matters, or cuss words. I want American to be great like it was, where it laws was for ALL the people. Where people became U.S. citizens not where today you're not an American & just do their countries ways. THIS IS AMERICA home OF Americans !! Our country was built on the belief of GOD. One true GOD not mans gods!!
Dear Friend of Life,
In 2011, Americans United for Life played a critical role in the passage of 28 new life-saving laws in states around the country. We continued our efforts to help states "opt-out" of Obamacare's pro-abortion provisions. And we released a groundbreaking exposè, The Case for Investigating Planned Parenthood, that played a key role in leading to a Congressional investigation of the abortion giant.
Thanks to your partnership, AUL is restoring a culture of life in America. But there is so much more work to be done and that's why I'm writing to you today.
To maintain this momentum of life-saving work in 2012 and meet our year-end online budget we must raise at least $185,000 by December 31st. It's that simple. We believe this goal is achievable – but not without your continued support.
Please follow this secure link to make an immediate contribution of $50, $100, $250 or whatever you can afford to help us meet this critical goal. There is no limit to what you can give today and your donation could be written-off as a charitable contribution for federal tax purposes.
Our strategy team has an ambitious plan for building on this year's pro-life gains in 2012. Next year will be a major election year and AUL plans to make life a central focus of the national debate. But as we grow stronger, Planned Parenthood, NARAL and the pro-abortion extremists are fighting back even harder. They will do anything and everything to fatten their bank accounts with your tax dollars while increasing access to abortion. The greatest challenges to life are yet to come and we must be prepared for the fight ahead.
So please follow this secure link to make an urgently needed contribution of $50, $100, $250, or more to help us meet our year-end budget and sustain all of our recent pro-life gains. We must raise these necessary funds in order to continue all of our life-saving programs and counter the radical pro-abortion forces in 2012.
We cannot sacrifice our recent pro-life gains – not after we've accomplished so much together in 2011. That's why I'm counting on your immediate donation for life to help us meet this important end-of-year goal.
Yours for Life,
Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.
President & CEO
Americans United for Life
P.S. Thanks directly to your financial support in 2011, AUL saved lives in states around the nation through the passage of 28 pro-life laws – based in part or in whole on AUL model legislation. But now we must prepare to continue the fight in 2012 – we must raise at least $185,000 by December 31st to meet our year-end budget. So please follow this link to make a tax-deductible donation of whatever you can afford to help us sustain all of our life-saving work in 2012. There is no limit to what you can give and what you contribute could be written-off as an itemized charitable contribution for federal tax purposes. – Charmaine
In 2011, Americans United for Life played a critical role in the passage of 28 new life-saving laws in states around the country. We continued our efforts to help states "opt-out" of Obamacare's pro-abortion provisions. And we released a groundbreaking exposè, The Case for Investigating Planned Parenthood, that played a key role in leading to a Congressional investigation of the abortion giant. Thanks to your partnership, AUL is restoring a culture of life in America. But there is so much more work to be done and that's why I'm writing to you today.
To maintain this momentum of life-saving work in 2012 and meet our year-end online budget we must raise at least $185,000 by December 31st. It's that simple. We believe this goal is achievable – but not without your continued support.
Please follow this secure link to make an immediate contribution of $50, $100, $250 or whatever you can afford to help us meet this critical goal. There is no limit to what you can give today and your donation could be written-off as a charitable contribution for federal tax purposes.
Our strategy team has an ambitious plan for building on this year's pro-life gains in 2012. Next year will be a major election year and AUL plans to make life a central focus of the national debate. But as we grow stronger, Planned Parenthood, NARAL and the pro-abortion extremists are fighting back even harder. They will do anything and everything to fatten their bank accounts with your tax dollars while increasing access to abortion. The greatest challenges to life are yet to come and we must be prepared for the fight ahead.
So please follow this secure link to make an urgently needed contribution of $50, $100, $250, or more to help us meet our year-end budget and sustain all of our recent pro-life gains. We must raise these necessary funds in order to continue all of our life-saving programs and counter the radical pro-abortion forces in 2012.
We cannot sacrifice our recent pro-life gains – not after we've accomplished so much together in 2011. That's why I'm counting on your immediate donation for life to help us meet this important end-of-year goal.
Yours for Life,Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.
President & CEO
Americans United for Life
P.S. Thanks directly to your financial support in 2011, AUL saved lives in states around the nation through the passage of 28 pro-life laws – based in part or in whole on AUL model legislation. But now we must prepare to continue the fight in 2012 – we must raise at least $185,000 by December 31st to meet our year-end budget. So please follow this link to make a tax-deductible donation of whatever you can afford to help us sustain all of our life-saving work in 2012. There is no limit to what you can give and what you contribute could be written-off as an itemized charitable contribution for federal tax purposes. – Charmaine
Monday, December 12, 2011
"Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread." --Thomas Jefferson
"In the first month of his presidency, Barack Obama averred that if in three years he hadn't alleviated the nation's economic pain, he'd be a 'one-term proposition.' When three-quarters of Americans think the country is on the 'wrong track' and even Bill Clinton calls the economy 'lousy,' how then to run for a second term? Traveling Tuesday to Osawatomie, Kan., site of a famous 1910 Teddy Roosevelt speech, Obama laid out the case. It seems that he and his policies have nothing to do with the current state of things. ... Responsibility, you see, lies with the rich. ... For Obama, these rich are the ones holding back the 99 percent. ... A country spending twice as much per capita on education as it did in 1970 with zero effect on test scores is not underinvesting in education. It's mis-investing. ... In Kansas, Obama lamented that millions 'are now forced to take their children to food banks.' You have to admire the audacity. That's the kind of damning observation the opposition brings up when you've been in office three years. Yet Obama summoned it to make the case for his reelection! Why? Because, you see, he bears no responsibility for the current economic distress. ... This is populism so crude that it channels not Teddy Roosevelt so much as Hugo Chavez." --columnist Charles Krauthammer
"So what do the Republicans leave out in their rebuttal to the grim Democrats? They leave out that they have an economic model that is proven. It's called supply-side economics. According to the model, one does not raise taxes on anyone, certainly not in times of economic unease. The very rich might be slobs or they might be living saints, but like everyone else, their taxes are not to be raised because they spend their money or invest their money in economic growth. They cannot help themselves. The way they spend or invest is always more efficient than the government. Money spent by the rich (and the middle class) leads to growth. Money spent by the government rarely leads to growth, and the following year the government has to come up with more money again. ... Government is not a reliable source of funds. Ask a citizen of Greece or of Italy." --columnist R. Emmett Tyrrell
"There is just one condition on which men can secure employment and a living, nourishing, profitable wage, for whatever they contribute to the enterprise, be it labor or capital, and that condition is that some one make a profit by it. ... It cannot be done by law, it cannot be done by public ownership, it cannot be done by socialism. When you deny the right to a profit you deny the right of a reward for thrift and industry." --President Calvin Coolidge (1872-1933)
"If we were to eliminate just 5 million barrels of our current daily 9 million barrels of imported petroleum, the annual savings could reach nearly $200 billion per year. Eventually, the new gas and oil could add another 1.6 million new jobs and add up to nearly $1 trillion in federal revenue. ... Of course, there are sizable interests opposed to the new American gas and oil finds -- not all of them foreign governments, but instead reflected in the current Obama administration policy of halting new pipelines, placing moratoriums on offshore drilling, and putting lucrative federal lands off-limits. ... For the American poor and unemployed, how liberal is it, really, to keep energy prices high while stalling millions of high-paying private-sector jobs that would both lower government costs in entitlements and empower the working classes? In the current presidential campaign, three issues dominate: national security, fiscal solvency and high unemployment. Development of America's vast new gas and oil finds addresses all three at once." --historian Victor Davis Hanson
"If a person without health insurance finds himself in need of costly medical care, let's investigate just how might that care be provided. There are not too many of us who'd suggest that we get the money from the tooth fairy or Santa Claus. That being the case, if a medically indigent person receives medical treatment, it must be provided by people. There are several possible methods to deliver the services. One way is for people to make voluntary contributions or for medical practitioners to simply treat medically indigent patients at no charge. I find both methods praiseworthy, laudable and, above all, moral. Another way to provide those services is for Congress to use its power to forcibly use one person to serve the purposes of another. ... I'd personally find such a method of providing medical services offensive and immoral, simply because I find the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another, what amounts to slavery, in violation of all that is decent. ... I share James Madison's vision, articulated when Congress appropriated $15,000 to assist some French refugees in 1794. Madison stood on the floor of the House to object, saying, 'I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents,' adding later that 'charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.' This vision of morality, I'm afraid, is repulsive to most Americans." --economist Walter E. Williams
"Jeffersonian liberty, the bedrock of America's founding, rests on the idea that individuals are means to their own ends, never the ends of others; that individuals should be free to engage in voluntary acts of mutual agreement with each other; and that they deserve that which they produce. Progressivism represents the antithesis of these simple concepts. It's dawning on the American polity during the turn of the nineteenth century brought about structural changes that gave rise to iniquitous lobbying that dominates politics even to this day; to the administrative state that continues to circumvent natural economic forces; and to a fundamentally new and perverted definition of liberty and America's founding philosophy. President Obama has endorsed this Progressivism, and should be held accountable for those ideas." --columnist J. K. Gregg
As of this morning, we have raised about 65 percent of the funds for our 2011 Year-End Campaign. There are only 19 days left in this critical campaign, and we have only $127,000 to raise in order to meet budget.
Our mission and operations budget is a small fraction of other influential conservative organization budgets. (View our expense graphic here.) We are able to do this in large part because our dedicated staff members are motivated by mission, not the modest wages they receive.
Please, if you're able, make a secure online donation today to The Patriot Post's 2011 Year-End Campaign. If you prefer to support us by mail, please use our printable donor form.
Thank you!
Nate Jackson
Managing Editor
"For 30 years, from 1933 to 1964, the Democrats pushed programs designed to help the working class: Social Security and Medicare, FHA home mortgage loans, support for labor unions. But since the middle 1960s, when antipoverty programs took center stage, Democrats in Washington and big cities have pushed welfare programs for the poor and lenient measures against crime. The Democrats' shift produced vote gains in some segments of the electorate. Blacks, who voted 62 percent for John Kennedy, have voted about 90 percent Democratic starting in 1964. ... Obama lost among noncollege whites by a 58 percent to 40 percent margin [in 2008]. And in the 2010 House elections, non-college whites went Republican by 63 percent to 33 percent. So maybe it makes sense for Obama to write off the white working class. Yet he is doing it in an odd way, by enacting New Deal-like programs and expending great energy on raising taxes on high earners. Historically, that was the way to win working class votes. But it plainly isn't doing so now, and it seems poorly calculated to enthuse the top half of the top-and-bottom coalition. Class warfare is a dubious strategy when you've written off the working class." --political analyst Michael Barone
"For most people, marriage is a sacrament with 'rules' firmly established by God and when followed these rules benefit married couples, their children and society. ... Divorce has become widely accepted (though not to the Author of marriage) as a sometimes 'necessary evil,' but adultery remains for most people what it has always been: a betrayal. It's not just a religious concept. Ask a person who is married but does not believe in God how he or she would feel about a cheating spouse and you most likely would get the same response you would receive from one who does believe in a higher power: anger and profound disappointment. ... Ultimately, what voters must decide is this: Does a presidential candidate's personal flaws rise (or fall) to a level that inhibits his ability to do the job of president? Put another way, if you are about to have surgery, do you care if the doctor is a cad, or do you care more whether most of his patients are alive and well? With the multiple challenges Americans face and with the choices presented to us, if the country is to be made well, voters may just have to sacrifice the ideal for the pragmatic." --columnist Cal Thomas
"This spirit of love, as simple as a spoken greeting and as profound as a changed heart, seems so full that it ceaselessly looks for ways to express its power. We respond to it best when we share it with family, friend or stranger -- when we recognize that, under the sheltering evergreen branches of God's love, all are family and no one is a stranger. When we do these things, when we visit the lonely or help those in need, when a family is reconciled, Christmas is real and present, and that is truly what makes it 'the most wonderful time of the year.'" --Ronald Reagan
Re: The Left
"In the first month of his presidency, Barack Obama averred that if in three years he hadn't alleviated the nation's economic pain, he'd be a 'one-term proposition.' When three-quarters of Americans think the country is on the 'wrong track' and even Bill Clinton calls the economy 'lousy,' how then to run for a second term? Traveling Tuesday to Osawatomie, Kan., site of a famous 1910 Teddy Roosevelt speech, Obama laid out the case. It seems that he and his policies have nothing to do with the current state of things. ... Responsibility, you see, lies with the rich. ... For Obama, these rich are the ones holding back the 99 percent. ... A country spending twice as much per capita on education as it did in 1970 with zero effect on test scores is not underinvesting in education. It's mis-investing. ... In Kansas, Obama lamented that millions 'are now forced to take their children to food banks.' You have to admire the audacity. That's the kind of damning observation the opposition brings up when you've been in office three years. Yet Obama summoned it to make the case for his reelection! Why? Because, you see, he bears no responsibility for the current economic distress. ... This is populism so crude that it channels not Teddy Roosevelt so much as Hugo Chavez." --columnist Charles Krauthammer
How do food banks help Obama's re-election effort?
Government
"So what do the Republicans leave out in their rebuttal to the grim Democrats? They leave out that they have an economic model that is proven. It's called supply-side economics. According to the model, one does not raise taxes on anyone, certainly not in times of economic unease. The very rich might be slobs or they might be living saints, but like everyone else, their taxes are not to be raised because they spend their money or invest their money in economic growth. They cannot help themselves. The way they spend or invest is always more efficient than the government. Money spent by the rich (and the middle class) leads to growth. Money spent by the government rarely leads to growth, and the following year the government has to come up with more money again. ... Government is not a reliable source of funds. Ask a citizen of Greece or of Italy." --columnist R. Emmett Tyrrell
Insight
"There is just one condition on which men can secure employment and a living, nourishing, profitable wage, for whatever they contribute to the enterprise, be it labor or capital, and that condition is that some one make a profit by it. ... It cannot be done by law, it cannot be done by public ownership, it cannot be done by socialism. When you deny the right to a profit you deny the right of a reward for thrift and industry." --President Calvin Coolidge (1872-1933)
For the Record
"If we were to eliminate just 5 million barrels of our current daily 9 million barrels of imported petroleum, the annual savings could reach nearly $200 billion per year. Eventually, the new gas and oil could add another 1.6 million new jobs and add up to nearly $1 trillion in federal revenue. ... Of course, there are sizable interests opposed to the new American gas and oil finds -- not all of them foreign governments, but instead reflected in the current Obama administration policy of halting new pipelines, placing moratoriums on offshore drilling, and putting lucrative federal lands off-limits. ... For the American poor and unemployed, how liberal is it, really, to keep energy prices high while stalling millions of high-paying private-sector jobs that would both lower government costs in entitlements and empower the working classes? In the current presidential campaign, three issues dominate: national security, fiscal solvency and high unemployment. Development of America's vast new gas and oil finds addresses all three at once." --historian Victor Davis Hanson
Opinion in Brief
"If a person without health insurance finds himself in need of costly medical care, let's investigate just how might that care be provided. There are not too many of us who'd suggest that we get the money from the tooth fairy or Santa Claus. That being the case, if a medically indigent person receives medical treatment, it must be provided by people. There are several possible methods to deliver the services. One way is for people to make voluntary contributions or for medical practitioners to simply treat medically indigent patients at no charge. I find both methods praiseworthy, laudable and, above all, moral. Another way to provide those services is for Congress to use its power to forcibly use one person to serve the purposes of another. ... I'd personally find such a method of providing medical services offensive and immoral, simply because I find the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another, what amounts to slavery, in violation of all that is decent. ... I share James Madison's vision, articulated when Congress appropriated $15,000 to assist some French refugees in 1794. Madison stood on the floor of the House to object, saying, 'I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents,' adding later that 'charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.' This vision of morality, I'm afraid, is repulsive to most Americans." --economist Walter E. Williams
Essential Liberty
"Jeffersonian liberty, the bedrock of America's founding, rests on the idea that individuals are means to their own ends, never the ends of others; that individuals should be free to engage in voluntary acts of mutual agreement with each other; and that they deserve that which they produce. Progressivism represents the antithesis of these simple concepts. It's dawning on the American polity during the turn of the nineteenth century brought about structural changes that gave rise to iniquitous lobbying that dominates politics even to this day; to the administrative state that continues to circumvent natural economic forces; and to a fundamentally new and perverted definition of liberty and America's founding philosophy. President Obama has endorsed this Progressivism, and should be held accountable for those ideas." --columnist J. K. Gregg
Calling All Patriots
As of this morning, we have raised about 65 percent of the funds for our 2011 Year-End Campaign. There are only 19 days left in this critical campaign, and we have only $127,000 to raise in order to meet budget.
Our mission and operations budget is a small fraction of other influential conservative organization budgets. (View our expense graphic here.) We are able to do this in large part because our dedicated staff members are motivated by mission, not the modest wages they receive.
Please, if you're able, make a secure online donation today to The Patriot Post's 2011 Year-End Campaign. If you prefer to support us by mail, please use our printable donor form.
Thank you!
Nate Jackson
Managing Editor
 |
 |  |  |
 |  |
Political Futures
"For 30 years, from 1933 to 1964, the Democrats pushed programs designed to help the working class: Social Security and Medicare, FHA home mortgage loans, support for labor unions. But since the middle 1960s, when antipoverty programs took center stage, Democrats in Washington and big cities have pushed welfare programs for the poor and lenient measures against crime. The Democrats' shift produced vote gains in some segments of the electorate. Blacks, who voted 62 percent for John Kennedy, have voted about 90 percent Democratic starting in 1964. ... Obama lost among noncollege whites by a 58 percent to 40 percent margin [in 2008]. And in the 2010 House elections, non-college whites went Republican by 63 percent to 33 percent. So maybe it makes sense for Obama to write off the white working class. Yet he is doing it in an odd way, by enacting New Deal-like programs and expending great energy on raising taxes on high earners. Historically, that was the way to win working class votes. But it plainly isn't doing so now, and it seems poorly calculated to enthuse the top half of the top-and-bottom coalition. Class warfare is a dubious strategy when you've written off the working class." --political analyst Michael Barone
Faith & Family
"For most people, marriage is a sacrament with 'rules' firmly established by God and when followed these rules benefit married couples, their children and society. ... Divorce has become widely accepted (though not to the Author of marriage) as a sometimes 'necessary evil,' but adultery remains for most people what it has always been: a betrayal. It's not just a religious concept. Ask a person who is married but does not believe in God how he or she would feel about a cheating spouse and you most likely would get the same response you would receive from one who does believe in a higher power: anger and profound disappointment. ... Ultimately, what voters must decide is this: Does a presidential candidate's personal flaws rise (or fall) to a level that inhibits his ability to do the job of president? Put another way, if you are about to have surgery, do you care if the doctor is a cad, or do you care more whether most of his patients are alive and well? With the multiple challenges Americans face and with the choices presented to us, if the country is to be made well, voters may just have to sacrifice the ideal for the pragmatic." --columnist Cal Thomas
The Gipper
"This spirit of love, as simple as a spoken greeting and as profound as a changed heart, seems so full that it ceaselessly looks for ways to express its power. We respond to it best when we share it with family, friend or stranger -- when we recognize that, under the sheltering evergreen branches of God's love, all are family and no one is a stranger. When we do these things, when we visit the lonely or help those in need, when a family is reconciled, Christmas is real and present, and that is truly what makes it 'the most wonderful time of the year.'" --Ronald Reagan
 |
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
