TELL OBAMA--QUIT MISDIRECTING AMERICA!
Please, click here RIGHT NOW to sign the Stop Misdirecting America Petition
http://action.freedomworks.org/7/3578/misdirecting-america/
Speechless
8 hours ago
Thursday, September 30, 2010
The Hill
Democrats to stuff 20 bills into post-election lame-duck session
By Alexander Bolton - 09/28/10 06:00 AM ET
Democrats are considering cramming as many as 20 pieces of legislation into the lame-duck session they plan to hold after the Nov. 2 election.
The array of bills competing for floor time shows the sense of urgency among Democratic lawmakers to act before the start of the 112th Congress, when Republicans are expected to control more seats in the Senate and House.
Complete Article: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/121223-dems-stuff-lame-duck
By Alexander Bolton - 09/28/10 06:00 AM ET
Democrats are considering cramming as many as 20 pieces of legislation into the lame-duck session they plan to hold after the Nov. 2 election.
The array of bills competing for floor time shows the sense of urgency among Democratic lawmakers to act before the start of the 112th Congress, when Republicans are expected to control more seats in the Senate and House.
Complete Article: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/121223-dems-stuff-lame-duck
Illegal donations to the campaigns of Gov. Beverly Perdue and two state senators.
$100,000 fine levied for illegal donations
RALEIGH -- A businessman paid a $100,000 fine Wednesday for his role in funneling illegal donations to the campaigns of Gov. Beverly Perdue and two state senators.
The attorney for Atlantic Corp. owner Rusty Carter handed over a check immediately after the State Board of Elections approved the penalty.
Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/30/710621/100000-fine-levied-for-illegal.html?story_link=email_msg#ixzz112kJNicw
RALEIGH -- A businessman paid a $100,000 fine Wednesday for his role in funneling illegal donations to the campaigns of Gov. Beverly Perdue and two state senators.
The attorney for Atlantic Corp. owner Rusty Carter handed over a check immediately after the State Board of Elections approved the penalty.
Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/30/710621/100000-fine-levied-for-illegal.html?story_link=email_msg#ixzz112kJNicw
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
Boehner surprise: Dems barely get votes to adjourn after floor speech
By Jordan Fabian - 09/29/10 12:26 PM ET
House Democrats on Wednesday barely won a 210-209 vote to adjourn the House without extending the Bush tax cuts.
Thirty-nine House Democrats voted against adjournment after Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) urged opposition to the motion in a floor speech that said it would be irresponsible for Congress to leave without providing certainty on the tax issue. Dozens of Democrats in tough races voted against adjourning.
"Vote no on this adjournment resolution. Give Congress a chance to vote on extending tax rates," Boehner said.
Boehner's floor speech turned the vote on adjournment into a referendum on the tax cuts, which has divided Democrats for months. President Obama wants to extend tax cuts for families making less than $250,000, while allowing taxes to rise on income above that threshold. Many centrist Democrats have joined Republicans in arguing for extending all of the tax cuts.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters Wednesday that the House would not vote on the expiring George W. Bush-era tax cuts before lawmakers break for the November midterm elections. The House is expected to conclude its work late Wednesday or early Thursday morning.
The House had been seen as unlikely to vote on the tax measure since the Senate decided last week against acting on it before the election, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) did not inform lawmakers of a final decision until Wednesday morning, a House leadership aide said. Hoyer and Pelosi had split on the timing of the vote, but the aide said the two party leaders were ultimately on the same page.
Wednesday's vote, however, made it clear that dozens of Democrats were uncomfortable with leaving Washington without a vote on extending the tax cuts.
The 39 Democrats who voted against adjournment were a mix of centrist Blue Dogs and vulnerable members from Republican-leaning districts. Reps. Jason Altmire (Pa.), Gerry Connolly (Va.), Travis Childers (Miss.), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Steve Driehaus (Ohio), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.), Frank Kratovil (Md.), Walt Minnick (Idaho) and Tom Perriello (Va.) were among the vulnerable Democrats to vote against ending the work period without voting on the tax cuts.
Three House Democrats who are running for Senate, Reps. Brad Ellsworth (Ind.), Charlie Melancon (La.) and Joe Sestak (Pa.) also voted against adjournment.
Members who voted to adjourn were "putting their election above the needs of your constituents," Boehner said in his speech. "Vote no on this adjournment resolution. Give Congress the chance to vote on extending tax rates."
Following the vote, Pelosi's office criticized Boehner's speech, saying it did not contain productive solutions to help aid the economic recovery.
"After listening to House Republican Leader John Boehner’s speech on the House floor today, it is clear that Americans face a choice: keep moving America forward—or return to what Republicans themselves call the 'exact same' agenda of failed ideas that favored corporate special interests, pushed us to the brink of economic disaster and left the middle class and small businesses struggling," a release from her office reads.
The House still has several votes today, including on a measure to keep the federal government operating through Dec. 3, before it adjourns.
Here's the full list of Democrats who voted against adjournment:
Rep. John Adler (N.J.)
Rep. Jason Altmire (Pa.)
Rep. Michael Arcuri (N.Y.)
Rep. Melissa Bean (Ill.)
Rep. Tim Bishop (N.Y.)
Rep. Bobby Bright (Ala.)
Rep. Chris Carney (Pa.)
Rep. Travis Childers (Miss.)
Rep. Gerry Connolly (Va.)
Rep. Joe Donnelly (Ind.)
Rep. Steve Driehaus (Ohio)
Rep. Chet Edwards (Texas)
Rep. Brad Ellsworth (Ind.)
Rep. Bill Foster (Ill.)
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (Ariz.)
Rep. Martin Heinrich (N.M.)
Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.)
Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (Ohio)
Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.)
Rep. Frank Kratovil (Md.)
Rep. Betsy Markey (Colo.)
Rep. Jim Marshall (Ga.)
Rep. Mike McIntyre (N.C.)
Rep. Mike McMahon (N.Y.)
Rep. Jerry McNerney (Calif.)
Rep. Charlie Melancon (La.)
Rep. Mike Michaud (Maine)
Rep. Walt Minnick (Idaho)
Rep. Harry Mitchell (Ariz.)
Rep. Patrick Murphy (Pa.)
Rep. Glenn Nye (Va.)
Rep. Tom Perriello (Va.)
Rep. Gary Peters (Mich.)
Rep. Mark Schauer (Mich.)
Rep. Joe Sestak (Pa.)
Rep. Heath Shuler (N.C.)
Rep. Zack Space (Ohio)
Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.)
Rep. Dina Titus (Nev.)
Ian Swanson and Russell Berman contributed to this post
This story was updated at 2:00 p.m. and at 2:48 p.m.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/121599-boehner-decries-punt-on-tax-cut-vote-
Boehner surprise: Dems barely get votes to adjourn after floor speech - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
By Jordan Fabian - 09/29/10 12:26 PM ET
House Democrats on Wednesday barely won a 210-209 vote to adjourn the House without extending the Bush tax cuts.
Thirty-nine House Democrats voted against adjournment after Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) urged opposition to the motion in a floor speech that said it would be irresponsible for Congress to leave without providing certainty on the tax issue. Dozens of Democrats in tough races voted against adjourning.
"Vote no on this adjournment resolution. Give Congress a chance to vote on extending tax rates," Boehner said.
Boehner's floor speech turned the vote on adjournment into a referendum on the tax cuts, which has divided Democrats for months. President Obama wants to extend tax cuts for families making less than $250,000, while allowing taxes to rise on income above that threshold. Many centrist Democrats have joined Republicans in arguing for extending all of the tax cuts.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters Wednesday that the House would not vote on the expiring George W. Bush-era tax cuts before lawmakers break for the November midterm elections. The House is expected to conclude its work late Wednesday or early Thursday morning.
The House had been seen as unlikely to vote on the tax measure since the Senate decided last week against acting on it before the election, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) did not inform lawmakers of a final decision until Wednesday morning, a House leadership aide said. Hoyer and Pelosi had split on the timing of the vote, but the aide said the two party leaders were ultimately on the same page.
Wednesday's vote, however, made it clear that dozens of Democrats were uncomfortable with leaving Washington without a vote on extending the tax cuts.
The 39 Democrats who voted against adjournment were a mix of centrist Blue Dogs and vulnerable members from Republican-leaning districts. Reps. Jason Altmire (Pa.), Gerry Connolly (Va.), Travis Childers (Miss.), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Steve Driehaus (Ohio), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.), Frank Kratovil (Md.), Walt Minnick (Idaho) and Tom Perriello (Va.) were among the vulnerable Democrats to vote against ending the work period without voting on the tax cuts.
Three House Democrats who are running for Senate, Reps. Brad Ellsworth (Ind.), Charlie Melancon (La.) and Joe Sestak (Pa.) also voted against adjournment.
Members who voted to adjourn were "putting their election above the needs of your constituents," Boehner said in his speech. "Vote no on this adjournment resolution. Give Congress the chance to vote on extending tax rates."
Following the vote, Pelosi's office criticized Boehner's speech, saying it did not contain productive solutions to help aid the economic recovery.
"After listening to House Republican Leader John Boehner’s speech on the House floor today, it is clear that Americans face a choice: keep moving America forward—or return to what Republicans themselves call the 'exact same' agenda of failed ideas that favored corporate special interests, pushed us to the brink of economic disaster and left the middle class and small businesses struggling," a release from her office reads.
The House still has several votes today, including on a measure to keep the federal government operating through Dec. 3, before it adjourns.
Here's the full list of Democrats who voted against adjournment:
Rep. John Adler (N.J.)
Rep. Jason Altmire (Pa.)
Rep. Michael Arcuri (N.Y.)
Rep. Melissa Bean (Ill.)
Rep. Tim Bishop (N.Y.)
Rep. Bobby Bright (Ala.)
Rep. Chris Carney (Pa.)
Rep. Travis Childers (Miss.)
Rep. Gerry Connolly (Va.)
Rep. Joe Donnelly (Ind.)
Rep. Steve Driehaus (Ohio)
Rep. Chet Edwards (Texas)
Rep. Brad Ellsworth (Ind.)
Rep. Bill Foster (Ill.)
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (Ariz.)
Rep. Martin Heinrich (N.M.)
Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.)
Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (Ohio)
Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.)
Rep. Frank Kratovil (Md.)
Rep. Betsy Markey (Colo.)
Rep. Jim Marshall (Ga.)
Rep. Mike McIntyre (N.C.)
Rep. Mike McMahon (N.Y.)
Rep. Jerry McNerney (Calif.)
Rep. Charlie Melancon (La.)
Rep. Mike Michaud (Maine)
Rep. Walt Minnick (Idaho)
Rep. Harry Mitchell (Ariz.)
Rep. Patrick Murphy (Pa.)
Rep. Glenn Nye (Va.)
Rep. Tom Perriello (Va.)
Rep. Gary Peters (Mich.)
Rep. Mark Schauer (Mich.)
Rep. Joe Sestak (Pa.)
Rep. Heath Shuler (N.C.)
Rep. Zack Space (Ohio)
Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.)
Rep. Dina Titus (Nev.)
Ian Swanson and Russell Berman contributed to this post
This story was updated at 2:00 p.m. and at 2:48 p.m.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/121599-boehner-decries-punt-on-tax-cut-vote-
Boehner surprise: Dems barely get votes to adjourn after floor speech - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
American Thinker: Why There's No There There for Obama and Pelosi
September 29, 2010
Why There's No There There for Obama and Pelosi
By Robin of Berkele
A young client, Jenny, came to see me this week in tears. She was outside her house when suddenly, a speeding Prius hit her cat. The driver slowed down, observed Jenny's horrified eyes, and then hightailed it out of there.
There's good news: the cat survived. But Jenny's belief in the goodness of people -- particularly hybrid-drivers -- did not.
I have my own tales to tell from my week in Berkeley. I was walking gingerly through a crosswalk (I have bad knees) when an impatient driver shot me the bird. His car was graced with a Coexist bumper sticker.
One more: I was meeting a friend at a cafe, and we needed another chair. A man, sitting alone and surfing the net, had his legs strewn on an extra chair. When I asked him nicely to borrow it, he refused. The guy was wearing a Free Tibet t-shirt.
I imagine that all of these people consider themselves noble and righteous. They support aggrieved nations, world unity, and a greener world. Apparently, this absolves them from having to actually be nice people. As long as they talk the talk, they don't have to walk the walk.
This phenomenon is not confined to Berkeley; each day we see the same hypocrisy on full display. Nancy Pelosi prays at mass, magnanimously spreads our (not her) wealth around, all the while cavalierly tarring opponents as Nazis. Obama views himself as gifted while he casually disses the Prime Minister of Israel. And most people on the Left suffer from Palin Derangement Syndrome, which allows for hideous, no-holds-barred utterances toward this good-hearted woman.
The examples are endless. Of course, conservatives can be hypocrites, too. But we on the right don't delude ourselves into believing that our voting patterns allow us to be dirty, rotten scoundrels.
Consequently, the Democratic Party is where we see people considering themselves virtuous while treating other living and breathing humans with utter disregard, if not downright abuse. Decades of moral relativism and secular humanism have transformed the Golden Rule for Progressives into this: I demand that you treat me well, and as long as I champion liberal issues, I'll treat you any damn way I want to.
How can people so easily let themselves off the hook? Is it denial? Yes, but that wouldn't fully explain things. Is it delusion, which means not only denying reality, but creating a completely new reality? Hmm...getting warmer here.
Are we seeing dissociation, where a person disconnects from himself and becomes, temporarily, a different personality? This phenomenon occurs only in the most disturbed. But I wouldn't rule this out among some of the more rabid and unglued.
But I think the best explanation for the behavior of Obama, Pelosi, et al. lay in a conversation that I had with an old flame, Peter, many years ago. We'd been dating for a few months when I was ready to have the conversation. I sat him down and told him I cared a lot about him. Did he see a future between us?
He looked at me as though I were from another galaxy. Then he uttered something that I have never forgotten. He said, "A relationship? I'm not capable of a relationship."
At first I shrugged it off to commitment-phobia. After all, Peter was an ardent progressive -- the first in line for any demonstration. He avidly read books by Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn.
But the more I got to know Peter, the more I realized that his self-appraisal was spot-on. While superficially engaging, there was a hollowness about him, a brokenness, even. He was unable to connect to me, to anyone, in a meaningful way. There just was no there there.
That conversation with Peter, though years ago, has always remained front and center in my mind. It has helped me to understand why some people look fully formed from the outside but are vacant inside.
The Peters of the world may not be withholding love or affection or even simple kindness. They may just be incapable of it. They are missing an essential ingredient to being a good and whole human being, and that is empathy, or putting oneself in another person's shoes.
Perhaps the reasons are genetic. Maybe it has to do with copious pot and alcohol use or overuse of prescription drugs. In places like Berkeley, it may be inbreeding. Mental illness, character defects, bad upbringing -- the culprits are endless.
In the realm of romance, the Peters (the Peter Pans?) are simply frustrating and disappointing. But when the empty shells of the world grab the reins of power, that is another story entirely; it can spell catastrophe.
And that's why we have been watching, spellbound, like my client Jenny, as a disaster movie unfolds before our horrified eyes. And this is why we must propel the intact and unbroken among us into office this November.
A frequent American Thinker contributor, Robin is a recovering liberal and a licensed psychotherapist in Berkeley. You can reach her through her website: www.robinofberkeley.com. Information in this article is designed for educational and entertainment purposes, not to offer diagnoses or treatment. Please note that Robin changes the names of persons on all of her articles for privacy purposes.
American Thinker: Why There's No There There for Obama and Pelosi
Why There's No There There for Obama and Pelosi
By Robin of Berkele
A young client, Jenny, came to see me this week in tears. She was outside her house when suddenly, a speeding Prius hit her cat. The driver slowed down, observed Jenny's horrified eyes, and then hightailed it out of there.
There's good news: the cat survived. But Jenny's belief in the goodness of people -- particularly hybrid-drivers -- did not.
I have my own tales to tell from my week in Berkeley. I was walking gingerly through a crosswalk (I have bad knees) when an impatient driver shot me the bird. His car was graced with a Coexist bumper sticker.
One more: I was meeting a friend at a cafe, and we needed another chair. A man, sitting alone and surfing the net, had his legs strewn on an extra chair. When I asked him nicely to borrow it, he refused. The guy was wearing a Free Tibet t-shirt.
I imagine that all of these people consider themselves noble and righteous. They support aggrieved nations, world unity, and a greener world. Apparently, this absolves them from having to actually be nice people. As long as they talk the talk, they don't have to walk the walk.
This phenomenon is not confined to Berkeley; each day we see the same hypocrisy on full display. Nancy Pelosi prays at mass, magnanimously spreads our (not her) wealth around, all the while cavalierly tarring opponents as Nazis. Obama views himself as gifted while he casually disses the Prime Minister of Israel. And most people on the Left suffer from Palin Derangement Syndrome, which allows for hideous, no-holds-barred utterances toward this good-hearted woman.
The examples are endless. Of course, conservatives can be hypocrites, too. But we on the right don't delude ourselves into believing that our voting patterns allow us to be dirty, rotten scoundrels.
Consequently, the Democratic Party is where we see people considering themselves virtuous while treating other living and breathing humans with utter disregard, if not downright abuse. Decades of moral relativism and secular humanism have transformed the Golden Rule for Progressives into this: I demand that you treat me well, and as long as I champion liberal issues, I'll treat you any damn way I want to.
How can people so easily let themselves off the hook? Is it denial? Yes, but that wouldn't fully explain things. Is it delusion, which means not only denying reality, but creating a completely new reality? Hmm...getting warmer here.
Are we seeing dissociation, where a person disconnects from himself and becomes, temporarily, a different personality? This phenomenon occurs only in the most disturbed. But I wouldn't rule this out among some of the more rabid and unglued.
But I think the best explanation for the behavior of Obama, Pelosi, et al. lay in a conversation that I had with an old flame, Peter, many years ago. We'd been dating for a few months when I was ready to have the conversation. I sat him down and told him I cared a lot about him. Did he see a future between us?
He looked at me as though I were from another galaxy. Then he uttered something that I have never forgotten. He said, "A relationship? I'm not capable of a relationship."
At first I shrugged it off to commitment-phobia. After all, Peter was an ardent progressive -- the first in line for any demonstration. He avidly read books by Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn.
But the more I got to know Peter, the more I realized that his self-appraisal was spot-on. While superficially engaging, there was a hollowness about him, a brokenness, even. He was unable to connect to me, to anyone, in a meaningful way. There just was no there there.
That conversation with Peter, though years ago, has always remained front and center in my mind. It has helped me to understand why some people look fully formed from the outside but are vacant inside.
The Peters of the world may not be withholding love or affection or even simple kindness. They may just be incapable of it. They are missing an essential ingredient to being a good and whole human being, and that is empathy, or putting oneself in another person's shoes.
Perhaps the reasons are genetic. Maybe it has to do with copious pot and alcohol use or overuse of prescription drugs. In places like Berkeley, it may be inbreeding. Mental illness, character defects, bad upbringing -- the culprits are endless.
In the realm of romance, the Peters (the Peter Pans?) are simply frustrating and disappointing. But when the empty shells of the world grab the reins of power, that is another story entirely; it can spell catastrophe.
And that's why we have been watching, spellbound, like my client Jenny, as a disaster movie unfolds before our horrified eyes. And this is why we must propel the intact and unbroken among us into office this November.
A frequent American Thinker contributor, Robin is a recovering liberal and a licensed psychotherapist in Berkeley. You can reach her through her website: www.robinofberkeley.com. Information in this article is designed for educational and entertainment purposes, not to offer diagnoses or treatment. Please note that Robin changes the names of persons on all of her articles for privacy purposes.
American Thinker: Why There's No There There for Obama and Pelosi
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
The Surge in Defense Spending
What Did the Pentagon Do With That Extra Trillion Dollars?
September 18, 2010
Winslow T. Wheeler
In 1998, the Pentagon budget was at a twenty-three year low at $361 billion (in constant 2010 dollars). For 2010, the DOD budget was $697 billion (also 2010 dollars, as are all the rest that follow).
According to the analysis of the Project on Defense Alternatives, between 1998 and 2010 Congress appropriated to the Pentagon $2.144 Trillion (with a "T") more than was anticipated by the 1999 "baseline." Of that amount, $1.113 Trillion was spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and $1.031 Trillion was added to "base" (non-war) Pentagon spending. (See p. 3 of PDA's study, "An Undisciplined Defense: Understanding the $2 Trillion Surge in US Defense Spending”. I basically concur with PDA's numbers, which are from DOD and OMB budget data as described on p. 61.)
What did you get for that extra $1 Trillion? Basically, you got a smaller Navy and Air Force and a tiny increase in the size of the Army. As an extra bonus, the hardware those forces use are now older than they were in the Clinton administration in 1998.
How can that be?
Each year the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee publishes the size of the major components of the Army, Navy, and Air Force in its committee report for the Department of Defense Appropriations bills. (Find these data in the early pages of these documents.) The tables the HAC-D publishes are not particularly user-friendly, but—for the most part—they are an apples to apples count of Army brigades, Navy ships, and Air Force squadrons.
In 1998, the Navy had 333 "battleforce" ships. (This count includes both SLBM and attack submarines, all active carriers, surface combatants, amphibious warfare ships, combat logistics ships, mine warfare and support ships, and something called "Mobilization Category A" ships.) In 2010 the Navy lays claim to 287 "battleforce" ships (a decline of 46 ships, or 14 percent).
In 1998, the active duty Air Force, plus the Air National Guard, plus the Air Force Reserve had 108 squadrons of fighter and attack aircraft and long range, heavy bombers. In 2010 it had 72 of the same, a decline of 36 squadrons or 33 percent. (This decline may be a conservative estimate; the count of squadrons does not embrace the thinning out of some squadrons; the count of actual combat aircraft may have declined more than the count of squadrons.)
The Army is an exception, but the amount of increase is rather pathetic. In 1998, the Army tallied 10 divisions plus three independent brigades. I calculate that to amount to 43 brigade combat team equivalents (based on the number of maneuver battalions in classic divisions and in modern brigade combat teams). In 2010, the Army tallied 1 division, plus 42 Heavy, Infantry, and Stryker brigades, making a total of 46 combat brigade equivalents. That's an increase of three brigade combat team equivalents, or 7 percent.
The cost of that Army "expansion" was considerable. Army appropriations in 1998 were $90.5 billion (2010$); in 2010 the non-war (base) Army appropriation request was $140.3 billion (2010$). A 55 percent increase in money produced a 7 percent increase in the force. (Again, this calculation is conservative, Army war funding, not counted here, has included significant amounts for base-Army activities, such as "modularity" [i.e. converting from divisions to brigade combat teams]).
The substantially smaller, much more expensive defense inventory is not—on average—newer and more high tech. It is older (in adition to being smaller). As the Congressional Budget Office has periodically assessed, not only have most parts of our hardware inventory grown older, the officially approved plan is mostly for that negative trend to continue. (See CBO's analysis, The Long-Term Implications of Current Defense Plans: Detailed Update for Fiscal Year 2008.)
Donald Rumsfeld (2001-2006) is generally acknowledged to be the most incompetent secretary of defense since—well—Donald Rumsfeld (1975-1977). Since 2006, his successor has come to seek some terminations in DOD acquisitions—most prominently the F-22—and to transfer $102 billion from overhead (bloat) to "force structure" (hardware). However, the last two DOD Selected Acquisition Reports (available here) show the number of major defense acquisition programs to have increased from 89 to 91 programs, and GAO has measured the cost growth as now larger than even. (See GAO's two reports, "Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs" for 2009 and 2010 [GAO-09-326SP and GAO-10-388SP].) Finally, that $102 billion efficiency drive being pursued by Secretary Gates is over five years. The current Pentagon budget plan is to spend $3.245 Trillion over that period. In other words, the much touted Gates plan would shift from overhead to hardware just 3 percent of the planned spending.
If the soft-spoken Secretary Gate’s is to avoid the derision generally slung at the blustering Secretary Rumsfeld, the former will need to do more—a lot more—to evade a legacy of failure. Gates highly effective soft spoken technique of overpowering Congress when he wants to and his mutually reinforcing relationship with President Obama will be seen by history as wasted assets if the secretary does mobilize them for a far more pervasive program of real reform to help the Pentagon survive, even prosper, in the coming age of scarce money.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winslow T. Wheeler is a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, Director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, and author of the Independent Policy Report, Congress, the Defense Budget, and Pork: A Snout-to-Tail Description of Congress’ Foremost Concern in National Security Legislation.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=2870
September 18, 2010
Winslow T. Wheeler
In 1998, the Pentagon budget was at a twenty-three year low at $361 billion (in constant 2010 dollars). For 2010, the DOD budget was $697 billion (also 2010 dollars, as are all the rest that follow).
According to the analysis of the Project on Defense Alternatives, between 1998 and 2010 Congress appropriated to the Pentagon $2.144 Trillion (with a "T") more than was anticipated by the 1999 "baseline." Of that amount, $1.113 Trillion was spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and $1.031 Trillion was added to "base" (non-war) Pentagon spending. (See p. 3 of PDA's study, "An Undisciplined Defense: Understanding the $2 Trillion Surge in US Defense Spending”. I basically concur with PDA's numbers, which are from DOD and OMB budget data as described on p. 61.)
What did you get for that extra $1 Trillion? Basically, you got a smaller Navy and Air Force and a tiny increase in the size of the Army. As an extra bonus, the hardware those forces use are now older than they were in the Clinton administration in 1998.
How can that be?
Each year the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee publishes the size of the major components of the Army, Navy, and Air Force in its committee report for the Department of Defense Appropriations bills. (Find these data in the early pages of these documents.) The tables the HAC-D publishes are not particularly user-friendly, but—for the most part—they are an apples to apples count of Army brigades, Navy ships, and Air Force squadrons.
In 1998, the Navy had 333 "battleforce" ships. (This count includes both SLBM and attack submarines, all active carriers, surface combatants, amphibious warfare ships, combat logistics ships, mine warfare and support ships, and something called "Mobilization Category A" ships.) In 2010 the Navy lays claim to 287 "battleforce" ships (a decline of 46 ships, or 14 percent).
In 1998, the active duty Air Force, plus the Air National Guard, plus the Air Force Reserve had 108 squadrons of fighter and attack aircraft and long range, heavy bombers. In 2010 it had 72 of the same, a decline of 36 squadrons or 33 percent. (This decline may be a conservative estimate; the count of squadrons does not embrace the thinning out of some squadrons; the count of actual combat aircraft may have declined more than the count of squadrons.)
The Army is an exception, but the amount of increase is rather pathetic. In 1998, the Army tallied 10 divisions plus three independent brigades. I calculate that to amount to 43 brigade combat team equivalents (based on the number of maneuver battalions in classic divisions and in modern brigade combat teams). In 2010, the Army tallied 1 division, plus 42 Heavy, Infantry, and Stryker brigades, making a total of 46 combat brigade equivalents. That's an increase of three brigade combat team equivalents, or 7 percent.
The cost of that Army "expansion" was considerable. Army appropriations in 1998 were $90.5 billion (2010$); in 2010 the non-war (base) Army appropriation request was $140.3 billion (2010$). A 55 percent increase in money produced a 7 percent increase in the force. (Again, this calculation is conservative, Army war funding, not counted here, has included significant amounts for base-Army activities, such as "modularity" [i.e. converting from divisions to brigade combat teams]).
The substantially smaller, much more expensive defense inventory is not—on average—newer and more high tech. It is older (in adition to being smaller). As the Congressional Budget Office has periodically assessed, not only have most parts of our hardware inventory grown older, the officially approved plan is mostly for that negative trend to continue. (See CBO's analysis, The Long-Term Implications of Current Defense Plans: Detailed Update for Fiscal Year 2008.)
Donald Rumsfeld (2001-2006) is generally acknowledged to be the most incompetent secretary of defense since—well—Donald Rumsfeld (1975-1977). Since 2006, his successor has come to seek some terminations in DOD acquisitions—most prominently the F-22—and to transfer $102 billion from overhead (bloat) to "force structure" (hardware). However, the last two DOD Selected Acquisition Reports (available here) show the number of major defense acquisition programs to have increased from 89 to 91 programs, and GAO has measured the cost growth as now larger than even. (See GAO's two reports, "Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs" for 2009 and 2010 [GAO-09-326SP and GAO-10-388SP].) Finally, that $102 billion efficiency drive being pursued by Secretary Gates is over five years. The current Pentagon budget plan is to spend $3.245 Trillion over that period. In other words, the much touted Gates plan would shift from overhead to hardware just 3 percent of the planned spending.
If the soft-spoken Secretary Gate’s is to avoid the derision generally slung at the blustering Secretary Rumsfeld, the former will need to do more—a lot more—to evade a legacy of failure. Gates highly effective soft spoken technique of overpowering Congress when he wants to and his mutually reinforcing relationship with President Obama will be seen by history as wasted assets if the secretary does mobilize them for a far more pervasive program of real reform to help the Pentagon survive, even prosper, in the coming age of scarce money.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winslow T. Wheeler is a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, Director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, and author of the Independent Policy Report, Congress, the Defense Budget, and Pork: A Snout-to-Tail Description of Congress’ Foremost Concern in National Security Legislation.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=2870
Report: US would make Internet wiretaps easier
By LOLITA C. BALDOR (AP) – 19 hours ago
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is pushing to make it easier for the government to tap into internet and e-mail communications. But the plan has already drawn condemnation from privacy groups and communications firms may be wary of its costs and scope.
Frustrated by sophisticated and often encrypted phone and e-mail technologies, U.S. officials say that law enforcement needs to improve its ability to eavesdrop on conversations involving terrorism, crimes or other public safety issues.
Critics worry the changes are an unnecessary invasion of privacy and would only make citizens and businesses more vulnerable to identity theft and espionage.
The new regulations that would be sent to Congress next year would affect American and foreign companies that provide communications services inside the U.S. It would require service providers to make the plain text of encrypted conversations — over the phone, computer or e-mail — readily available to law enforcement, according to federal officials and analysts.
The mandate would likely require companies to add backdoors or other changes to the systems that would allow a wiretap to capture an unscrambled version of a conversation.
Those affected by the changes would include online services and networking sites such as Facebook and Skype, as well as phone systems that deliver encrypted e-mail such as BlackBerry.
"The way we communicate has changed dramatically since 1994, but telecommunications law has not kept up. This gap between reality and the law has created a significant national security and public safety problem," said Valerie E. Caproni, the FBI's General Counsel.
She said the changes would not expand law enforcement authority and would involve legally authorized intercepts on calls or e-mails sent by terrorists or other criminals. The changes would allow companies to respond quickly to wiretap requests from local, state and federal authorities.
The New York Times first reported Monday about White House plans to submit the new bill next year.
Law enforcement is already able to monitor regular telephone conversations.
"In the old days, the technology was simple to wiretap," said cybersecurity expert James Lewis, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "As technologies have gotten better and faster and bigger, it's harder and harder for law enforcement to intercept communications."
Lewis said law enforcement officials have long been pushing for the expanded access. He said the technology is available to make the changes and allow authorities to tap into conversations encrypted by communications companies as they move from one person to another.
Communications companies, he said, may have concerns about the costs of modifying their systems or software to allow the intercepts. The government may have to provide some funding aid.
Companies may also balk if the government tries to tell them how to alter their systems.
But Lewis said many companies are already providing similar capabilities to law enforcement in other countries in Europe and the Middle East.
Wiretapping is vital for law enforcement agencies, said Lewis, because "it provides crucial evidence that wins a lot of their convictions. As technology changes, as the Internet changes, they have to keep up or they'll lose an important tool in their arsenal."
Civil rights and privacy groups were quick to condemn the plan, warning that the administration faces an uphill battle.
"This is a shortsighted and ill-conceived power grab by some in the administration," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The balance has swung radically toward enhanced law enforcement powers. For them to argue that it's still not enough is just unbelievable. It's breathtaking in its hubris."
He said that over the past 15 years — particularly since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks — the standards for warrants have been lowered. And he said law enforcement has many new technologies, ranging from biometric tracking to DNA databases, to enhance its information gathering.
Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that mandating that all communications software be accessible to the government is a "huge privacy invasion."
"Under the guise of a technical fix, the government looks to be taking one more step toward conducting easy dragnet collection of Americans' most private communications," Calabrese said. "This proposal will create even more security risks by mandating that our communications have a 'backdoor' for government use and will make our online interactions even more vulnerable."
Associated Press writer Sagar Meghani contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is pushing to make it easier for the government to tap into internet and e-mail communications. But the plan has already drawn condemnation from privacy groups and communications firms may be wary of its costs and scope.
Frustrated by sophisticated and often encrypted phone and e-mail technologies, U.S. officials say that law enforcement needs to improve its ability to eavesdrop on conversations involving terrorism, crimes or other public safety issues.
Critics worry the changes are an unnecessary invasion of privacy and would only make citizens and businesses more vulnerable to identity theft and espionage.
The new regulations that would be sent to Congress next year would affect American and foreign companies that provide communications services inside the U.S. It would require service providers to make the plain text of encrypted conversations — over the phone, computer or e-mail — readily available to law enforcement, according to federal officials and analysts.
The mandate would likely require companies to add backdoors or other changes to the systems that would allow a wiretap to capture an unscrambled version of a conversation.
Those affected by the changes would include online services and networking sites such as Facebook and Skype, as well as phone systems that deliver encrypted e-mail such as BlackBerry.
"The way we communicate has changed dramatically since 1994, but telecommunications law has not kept up. This gap between reality and the law has created a significant national security and public safety problem," said Valerie E. Caproni, the FBI's General Counsel.
She said the changes would not expand law enforcement authority and would involve legally authorized intercepts on calls or e-mails sent by terrorists or other criminals. The changes would allow companies to respond quickly to wiretap requests from local, state and federal authorities.
The New York Times first reported Monday about White House plans to submit the new bill next year.
Law enforcement is already able to monitor regular telephone conversations.
"In the old days, the technology was simple to wiretap," said cybersecurity expert James Lewis, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "As technologies have gotten better and faster and bigger, it's harder and harder for law enforcement to intercept communications."
Lewis said law enforcement officials have long been pushing for the expanded access. He said the technology is available to make the changes and allow authorities to tap into conversations encrypted by communications companies as they move from one person to another.
Communications companies, he said, may have concerns about the costs of modifying their systems or software to allow the intercepts. The government may have to provide some funding aid.
Companies may also balk if the government tries to tell them how to alter their systems.
But Lewis said many companies are already providing similar capabilities to law enforcement in other countries in Europe and the Middle East.
Wiretapping is vital for law enforcement agencies, said Lewis, because "it provides crucial evidence that wins a lot of their convictions. As technology changes, as the Internet changes, they have to keep up or they'll lose an important tool in their arsenal."
Civil rights and privacy groups were quick to condemn the plan, warning that the administration faces an uphill battle.
"This is a shortsighted and ill-conceived power grab by some in the administration," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The balance has swung radically toward enhanced law enforcement powers. For them to argue that it's still not enough is just unbelievable. It's breathtaking in its hubris."
He said that over the past 15 years — particularly since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks — the standards for warrants have been lowered. And he said law enforcement has many new technologies, ranging from biometric tracking to DNA databases, to enhance its information gathering.
Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that mandating that all communications software be accessible to the government is a "huge privacy invasion."
"Under the guise of a technical fix, the government looks to be taking one more step toward conducting easy dragnet collection of Americans' most private communications," Calabrese said. "This proposal will create even more security risks by mandating that our communications have a 'backdoor' for government use and will make our online interactions even more vulnerable."
Associated Press writer Sagar Meghani contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Still time to come to a Spending Revolt stop near you
Spending Revolt Educates Voters in Districts of General Assembly Leaders
Four-day tour hosts 17 rallies and town halls across North Carolina
The new Spending Revolt coalition – made up of taxpayers, families, business owners, and policy organizations – is working to educate citizens about how mounting federal spending is jeopardizing America’s future, and engage them in taking action against this reckless spending.
The Spending Revolt National Bus Tour is rolling across North Carolina for through Wednesday, Sept. 29th. There's still time to come to one of our stops!
The tour will highlight excessive spending by state legislative leaders by visiting the districts of: State House Majority Leader Hugh Holliman (Lexington), House Speaker Joe Hackney (Chapel Hill), and Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight (Washington) and Vice Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Represenative Jimmy Love. (Sanford)
“Our General Assembly passed billions in new taxes to support their out of control spending habits, and it is important people speak out to stop the spending madness,” said Dallas Woodhouse, North Carolina State Director for Americans for Prosperity. “The high taxes from the out-of-control spending will make it difficult for families to afford to raise children or for entrepreneurs to open businesses in North Carolina.”
This rate of spending is irresponsible and unsustainable. It limits our economic growth and our ability to create new jobs. If we allow our elected officials to continue their spend-first, pay-later habits, we will face higher taxes, a higher cost of living, and a stagnant economy.
The Spending Revolt coalition seeks to permanently transform government spending through individual activism. Families across the country have been forced to make tough economic decisions. It is time for our elected officials to do the same.
“We urge everyone concerned about the loss of jobs and their family's financial well-being to attend this event. It's important that we express our displeasure with what politicians are doing to us,“ Lloyd Jennings, Chairman of AFP--Lee County, said.
WHAT: Spending Revolt National Bus Tour – Rally & Bus Signing Events
WHO: Dallas Woodhouse, state director, Americans for Prosperity – North Carolina
*See below for additional speakers at each location
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
1:30 - 2:30 p.m. — Pittsboro
N. Masonic & East Sts. (US 64 East, one block from Courthouse Cir.), Pittsboro, NC 27312
Speakers: Francis De Luca, President, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
3:30 - 4:30 p.m. — Sanford
K-Mart, 2515 Horner Blvd., Sanford, NC 27332
Speakers: Francis De Luca, President, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
7 - 8:30 p.m. — Raleigh
Kerr Scott Building, NC State Fairgrounds, 1025 Blue Ridge Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607
Speakers: Francis De Luca, President, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
Wednesday, Sept. 29, 2010
6 - 9:20 a.m. — Wilmington
Captain Bill’s Banquet Facility, 4240 Market Street, Wilmington, NC 28403
Speakers: Brian Balfour, Budget and Tax Policy Analyst, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
11 a.m. – 12:15 p.m. — Jacksonville
Marina Café, 110 S. Marine Blvd., Jacksonville, NC 28540
Speakers: Brian Balfour, Budget and Tax Policy Analyst, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
1:30 – 2:30 p.m. — New Bern
Harley-Davidson of New Bern, 1613 Highway 70 East, New Bern, NC 28564
Speakers: Brian Balfour, Budget and Tax Policy Analyst, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
3:30 – 4:30 p.m. — Kinston
1506 W. New Bern Road (Highway 70), Kinston, NC 28504
(Vacant parking lot on the service road beside Stapleford Marine)
Speakers: Brian Balfour, Budget and Tax Policy Analyst, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
6:00 – 7:00 p.m. — Washington
Festival Park, E. Water & S. Bonner Sts. (beside the Estuarium), Washington, NC 27889
Speakers: Brian Balfour, Budget and Tax Policy Analyst, NC Civitas
Jon Sanders, Associate Director of Research, John Locke Foundation
Tracy Walsh, breast cancer survivor and spokesperson for Patients First
Visit Spending Revolt online at http://www.spendingrevolt.com/. Spending Revolt is a broad coalition of taxpayers, families, women, business owners, and policy organizations committed to real and permanent spending reform in Washington. The coalition is composed of organizations such as Americans for Prosperity, The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW), Concerned Women for America, and 60 Plus Association.
Americans for Prosperity® (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual's right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. AFP has more than 1,000,000 members, including members in all 50 states, and 30 state chapters and affiliates. More than 55,000 Americans in all 50 states have made a financial investment in AFP or AFP Foundation. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org
The Daily Caller
SURPRISE, CONSERVATIVES MORE GENEROUS THAN LIBERALS!
http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/23/surprise-conservatives-are-more-generous-than-liberals/
http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/23/surprise-conservatives-are-more-generous-than-liberals/
ORIGINAL WASHINGTON TEA PARTY RALLY ON THE WATERFRONT!
Sponsored by the Beaufort Patriot Tea Party
Press release
September 28, 2010
The Beaufort patriot Tea Party is sponsoring the
ORIGINAL WASHINGTON TEA PARTY RALLY
at Festival Park, 223 Water Street on the Waterfront in Washington North Carolina, Saturday October 2, 2010 from 1:00pm till 5:00pm.
JOIN TEA PARTY GROUPS (INCLUDING COASTAL CAROLINA TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION) FROM ALL OVER EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA WHO WILL BECOMING TOGETHER FOR THIS GREAT EVENT!
There will be great entertainment, booths for non-profits and a list of speakers that will keep you spellbound. The theme for the program is "Get Out The Vote". The Beaufort patriots promote themselves as a Volunteer Community Organization with "No political home".
Famous speakers will include Dr. Ron Baity who was barred from the legislative assembly because he would use the name of Jesus Christ in his payer. Frank Perry, former FBI Special Agent will speak on political corruption in North Carolina. Hal Weatherman on terrorism, Daniel Garner on bank fraud and Jerry Grimes on "A freedom soon known".
Entertainment will include the Rocky Hoc Theater with a tribute to our military and Pam Carson, a professional performer from Beaufort County, with a medley of patriotic songs followed by The Brotherhood of Harmony a group of barbershop quartets that come together for a magnificent presentation.
There will be a "50/50" raffle and a Most Creative Sign contest. The Beaufort Patriot Tea Party will be accepting DVD's to send to our military personnel overseas.
This is a non-partisan event with an open invitation for all families. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians and unaffiliated are invited to participate. The location is next to the Estuarium that will be open for young people from 10am till 4 pm. Bring a blanket or chairs. The weatherman is promising a beautiful day.
Please tell your friends and neighbors about this great event.
Go to http://www.beaufortpatriotteaparty.com/ for detailed information on the rally and to learn more about the Beaufort Patriots Tea Party. Signup there for the newsletter to receive information updates of future meetings and events. The Beaufort Patriot Tea Party seeks to promote: Fiscal responsibility, limited government and the free market.
And remember, early voting begins October 14 and the election is on November 2
Contact: Buzz Cayton 252-943-4538
The Blaze
Obama’s OFA, Churches Join Democratic Socialists for Saturday March in Washington
Posted on September 26, 2010
Attempting to overcome the popularity of Glenn Beck’s 8/28 rally, a group of around 300 liberal and progressive organizations have planned a rally on the National Mall this weekend. According to two new reports, Saturday’s 10/2 march — “One Nation, Working Together” — has also garnered the support of President Obama’s political organizing group as well as multiple churches.
As The Hill reports, the Democratic National Committee’s Organizing for America (OFA), which works to support and build off of Obama’s policies, sent out an e-mail blast supporting the upcoming rally. The message bills the event as “the biggest progressive demonstration in decades.”
A video posted on OFA’s website may offer a glimpse of what the event will look like — an election rally touting Democrats’ success over the last two years while villanizing Republicans:
SEE THE VIDEO AND READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obamas-ofa-churches-join-democratic-socialists-for-saturday-march-in-washington/
Posted on September 26, 2010
Attempting to overcome the popularity of Glenn Beck’s 8/28 rally, a group of around 300 liberal and progressive organizations have planned a rally on the National Mall this weekend. According to two new reports, Saturday’s 10/2 march — “One Nation, Working Together” — has also garnered the support of President Obama’s political organizing group as well as multiple churches.
As The Hill reports, the Democratic National Committee’s Organizing for America (OFA), which works to support and build off of Obama’s policies, sent out an e-mail blast supporting the upcoming rally. The message bills the event as “the biggest progressive demonstration in decades.”
A video posted on OFA’s website may offer a glimpse of what the event will look like — an election rally touting Democrats’ success over the last two years while villanizing Republicans:
SEE THE VIDEO AND READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obamas-ofa-churches-join-democratic-socialists-for-saturday-march-in-washington/
Monday, September 27, 2010
Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Kevin Smith, Michael Steel
September 27, 2010 (202) 220-0202
Noted Economists Praise GOP Pledge to America, Call it “Big Initial Step” to Sounder Fiscal Policy
Posted by Kevin Boland on September 27, 2010
Some of America’s most noted economists are among the voices speaking out in support of the newly-launched GOP Pledge to America, the new governing agenda built through a process of listening to the American people. The Pledge emphasizes the need to aggressively cut federal spending and stop the coming tax hikes in order to help the nation’s economy get back to creating jobs – an approach much different from the path taken in Washington in recent years.
Noted economists Michael J. Boskin, John F. Cogan, Allan H. Meltzer, George P. Shultz, and John B. Taylor have issued an enthusiastic joint statement of support for the Pledge:
"The ‘Pledge to America’ is a big initial step to a sounder, wiser course for fiscal and regulatory policy, including the proposals to stop the tax increases scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2011, to roll back spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, and to require congressional approval of any new federal regulation that has an economically significant cost. The Pledge is a refreshing dose of budgetary sanity and a restoration of proven economic principles and common sense."
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a former chief economist at the U.S. Department of Labor who is now the director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Employment Policy, endorsed the Pledge to America in an op-ed published in the Washington Examiner last week:
"Rather than tax increases in 2011, the Republican plan would make all current tax rates permanent, to reduce uncertainty for consumers and employers. It would cut non-security discretionary spending to 2008 levels. Cuts include ending the Troubled Asset Relief Program; rolling back this year's 5.8 percent increase in Congress' budget; and placing a hiring freeze on all non-security government workers. In addition, Republicans suggest reforming the congressional budget process to make it easier to cut spending. Current rules are rigged to make it easy to spend money unnecessarily, and not so easy to cut spending.
"Many businesses across America would applaud repealing the new health care law, freeing them of the upcoming requirement to pay $2,000 per worker per year beginning in 2014 if they don't offer the right kind of health insurance. Since the rule applies only to businesses of more than 50 workers, every 50-person business is trying to figure out how not to hire any more workers, and every 55-person business is trying to figure out how to lay off five workers. With a 9.6 percent unemployment rate, that's precisely the opposite of what's needed.
"The Republicans would end the new requirement, effective 2012, to file a tax form every time they spend more than $600 per year at any one company, such as an office supply store or a gas station."
Former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, now president of the American Action Forum, has also joined American Action Network president Rob Collins in praising the economic prescriptions put forth in the Pledge:
"[T]he Pledge to America – the result of an innovative social media project by House Republicans called America Speaking Out – accomplishes its goal of being relevant, timely and in-tune with the attitudes of a disappointed but ever-hopeful electorate. We expect a vigorous debate over whether the Pledge contains the 'best' policies, and we look forward to being an advocate for policies that reduce the size of government, encourage freedom and expand opportunity. Regardless of the outcome of that debate, it seems obvious that this new direction dominates the profligate, dangerous leadership shown by President Obama and the Democrats in Congress. Democrats have paid lip service to job creation, but continue to burden small business, hammer large corporations and grow only the government. Unprecedented federal deficits threaten higher interest rates and financial panic, health care reform intends to impose costly mandates and administrative regulations on businesses, and the uncertainty of tax increases at the end of the year reduce any incentive to grow. Led by House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio and Rep. Kevin McCarthy, Boehner’s chief deputy whip, the Pledge includes commitments to growth incentives with extensions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and a small business tax deduction. . .
"The Pledge also addresses economic and regulatory certainty by repealing measures that limit access to credit and the 1099 reporting provision through the health care reform. These policies eliminate the uncertainty facing growing businesses, and signal a dedication to their viability with incentives to invest. The president’s philosophy threatens not only businesses, but the financial future of our country. Over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s Analysis of the President’s Budgetary Proposals, the deficit will never fall below $700 billion. Ten years from now, in 2020, the deficit will be 5.6 percent of the GDP, roughly $1.3 trillion, of which over $900 billion will be devoted to interest on previous borrowing. The problem isn’t that Americans won’t be paying enough taxes – the plan is to raise more than historically average – but rather the excessive spending intended by Obama. The Pledge to America identifies a strategy to reduce crippling deficits by cutting spending through discretionary caps and eliminating wasteful and duplicative programs, starting immediately. Getting the deficit under control is not a choice, it’s an imperative.
"Six months after passage, we are reminded again that [President Obama's health care law] did not accomplish the objective of comprehensive health care reform that delivered quality care at a lower cost and provides options to Americans. But the Pledge is committed to quality health care and includes replacing the reform with cost-savings initiatives and choice. [Americans] dislike the health care bill. They also detest the broken process in Congress epitomized by the health care debate littered with procedural tricks, legislative payoffs, and questionable lawmaking. In our polling, 89 percent favor requiring all legislation be available to the public for at least three days before a final vote. The Pledge to America supports this rule, and also calls for adherence to the Constitution with a citation of Constitutional authority added to every bill.
"Now to be fair, these commitments aren’t the same as action, and action by Republicans does not necessarily guarantee that both parties produce good legislative options. But the people have spoken and their discontent has been heard. The Pledge is a visible acknowledgement of the need for our nation’s leaders to listen and to lead."
September 27, 2010 (202) 220-0202
Noted Economists Praise GOP Pledge to America, Call it “Big Initial Step” to Sounder Fiscal Policy
Posted by Kevin Boland on September 27, 2010
Some of America’s most noted economists are among the voices speaking out in support of the newly-launched GOP Pledge to America, the new governing agenda built through a process of listening to the American people. The Pledge emphasizes the need to aggressively cut federal spending and stop the coming tax hikes in order to help the nation’s economy get back to creating jobs – an approach much different from the path taken in Washington in recent years.
Noted economists Michael J. Boskin, John F. Cogan, Allan H. Meltzer, George P. Shultz, and John B. Taylor have issued an enthusiastic joint statement of support for the Pledge:
"The ‘Pledge to America’ is a big initial step to a sounder, wiser course for fiscal and regulatory policy, including the proposals to stop the tax increases scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2011, to roll back spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, and to require congressional approval of any new federal regulation that has an economically significant cost. The Pledge is a refreshing dose of budgetary sanity and a restoration of proven economic principles and common sense."
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a former chief economist at the U.S. Department of Labor who is now the director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Employment Policy, endorsed the Pledge to America in an op-ed published in the Washington Examiner last week:
"Rather than tax increases in 2011, the Republican plan would make all current tax rates permanent, to reduce uncertainty for consumers and employers. It would cut non-security discretionary spending to 2008 levels. Cuts include ending the Troubled Asset Relief Program; rolling back this year's 5.8 percent increase in Congress' budget; and placing a hiring freeze on all non-security government workers. In addition, Republicans suggest reforming the congressional budget process to make it easier to cut spending. Current rules are rigged to make it easy to spend money unnecessarily, and not so easy to cut spending.
"Many businesses across America would applaud repealing the new health care law, freeing them of the upcoming requirement to pay $2,000 per worker per year beginning in 2014 if they don't offer the right kind of health insurance. Since the rule applies only to businesses of more than 50 workers, every 50-person business is trying to figure out how not to hire any more workers, and every 55-person business is trying to figure out how to lay off five workers. With a 9.6 percent unemployment rate, that's precisely the opposite of what's needed.
"The Republicans would end the new requirement, effective 2012, to file a tax form every time they spend more than $600 per year at any one company, such as an office supply store or a gas station."
Former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, now president of the American Action Forum, has also joined American Action Network president Rob Collins in praising the economic prescriptions put forth in the Pledge:
"[T]he Pledge to America – the result of an innovative social media project by House Republicans called America Speaking Out – accomplishes its goal of being relevant, timely and in-tune with the attitudes of a disappointed but ever-hopeful electorate. We expect a vigorous debate over whether the Pledge contains the 'best' policies, and we look forward to being an advocate for policies that reduce the size of government, encourage freedom and expand opportunity. Regardless of the outcome of that debate, it seems obvious that this new direction dominates the profligate, dangerous leadership shown by President Obama and the Democrats in Congress. Democrats have paid lip service to job creation, but continue to burden small business, hammer large corporations and grow only the government. Unprecedented federal deficits threaten higher interest rates and financial panic, health care reform intends to impose costly mandates and administrative regulations on businesses, and the uncertainty of tax increases at the end of the year reduce any incentive to grow. Led by House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio and Rep. Kevin McCarthy, Boehner’s chief deputy whip, the Pledge includes commitments to growth incentives with extensions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and a small business tax deduction. . .
"The Pledge also addresses economic and regulatory certainty by repealing measures that limit access to credit and the 1099 reporting provision through the health care reform. These policies eliminate the uncertainty facing growing businesses, and signal a dedication to their viability with incentives to invest. The president’s philosophy threatens not only businesses, but the financial future of our country. Over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s Analysis of the President’s Budgetary Proposals, the deficit will never fall below $700 billion. Ten years from now, in 2020, the deficit will be 5.6 percent of the GDP, roughly $1.3 trillion, of which over $900 billion will be devoted to interest on previous borrowing. The problem isn’t that Americans won’t be paying enough taxes – the plan is to raise more than historically average – but rather the excessive spending intended by Obama. The Pledge to America identifies a strategy to reduce crippling deficits by cutting spending through discretionary caps and eliminating wasteful and duplicative programs, starting immediately. Getting the deficit under control is not a choice, it’s an imperative.
"Six months after passage, we are reminded again that [President Obama's health care law] did not accomplish the objective of comprehensive health care reform that delivered quality care at a lower cost and provides options to Americans. But the Pledge is committed to quality health care and includes replacing the reform with cost-savings initiatives and choice. [Americans] dislike the health care bill. They also detest the broken process in Congress epitomized by the health care debate littered with procedural tricks, legislative payoffs, and questionable lawmaking. In our polling, 89 percent favor requiring all legislation be available to the public for at least three days before a final vote. The Pledge to America supports this rule, and also calls for adherence to the Constitution with a citation of Constitutional authority added to every bill.
"Now to be fair, these commitments aren’t the same as action, and action by Republicans does not necessarily guarantee that both parties produce good legislative options. But the people have spoken and their discontent has been heard. The Pledge is a visible acknowledgement of the need for our nation’s leaders to listen and to lead."
###
Paul Stam, Republican Leader, NC House of Representatives
100 Days That Will Change North Carolina
North Carolina's state government must reduce costs and regulation on business, large and small, so that they can create jobs and prosperity.
If the people of North Carolina entrust Republicans with a majority in the General Assembly on November 2, 2010, we commit to govern the State by focusing on these priorities:
Years of overspending by Democrats have given North Carolina the highest tax rates in the Southeast and a budget deficit of at least $3 billion; we will balance the State budget without raising tax rates.
High taxes are killing jobs. We will make our tax rates competitive with other states.
Within the first 100 days you will see us:
Passing The Healthcare Freedom Protection Act, exempting North Carolinians from the job-killing, liberty-restricting mandates of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obama Care).
Fighting to protect jobs by keeping our Right to Work laws.
Reducing the regulatory burden on small business.
Funding education in the classroom, not the bureaucracy.
Eliminating the cap on charter schools.
Passing the Honest Election Act, requiring a valid photo ID to vote.
Passing the Eminent Domain constitutional amendment to protect private property rights.
Ending pay-to-play politics and restore honesty and integrity to state government.
As House Republican Leader, I present to you our plan. If these priorities are your own and these issues represent a North Carolina where you want to live, work and raise a family, then please contribute below to ensure that the first 100 days of the 2011 Legislative Session are spent working for you.
To learn more about how Republicans are working to represent you in the General Assembly visit my website at NCHouseRepublicanLeader.com.~ Paul Stam
North Carolina's state government must reduce costs and regulation on business, large and small, so that they can create jobs and prosperity.
If the people of North Carolina entrust Republicans with a majority in the General Assembly on November 2, 2010, we commit to govern the State by focusing on these priorities:
Years of overspending by Democrats have given North Carolina the highest tax rates in the Southeast and a budget deficit of at least $3 billion; we will balance the State budget without raising tax rates.
High taxes are killing jobs. We will make our tax rates competitive with other states.
Within the first 100 days you will see us:
Passing The Healthcare Freedom Protection Act, exempting North Carolinians from the job-killing, liberty-restricting mandates of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obama Care).
Fighting to protect jobs by keeping our Right to Work laws.
Reducing the regulatory burden on small business.
Funding education in the classroom, not the bureaucracy.
Eliminating the cap on charter schools.
Passing the Honest Election Act, requiring a valid photo ID to vote.
Passing the Eminent Domain constitutional amendment to protect private property rights.
Ending pay-to-play politics and restore honesty and integrity to state government.
As House Republican Leader, I present to you our plan. If these priorities are your own and these issues represent a North Carolina where you want to live, work and raise a family, then please contribute below to ensure that the first 100 days of the 2011 Legislative Session are spent working for you.
To learn more about how Republicans are working to represent you in the General Assembly visit my website at NCHouseRepublicanLeader.com.~ Paul Stam
Townhall Columnist: Terry Paulson
Election Choices Matter
Mon, Sep, 27, 2010
Clarity on the facts and issues that matter to America’s future should be important to every informed voter. This time of dramatic change is ushering in a real choice in the November election. As you’ve noticed, “We the People” are creating havoc in the establishment of both parties. Candidates are surfacing who promise to do more than talk principles; they promise to govern that way. That gives American voters important choices.
Choice #1: Bigger Government or More Empowered Individuals. Do you want big government determining which special interests are rewarded and which companies are “too big to fail,” or do you want limited government where all people can pursue their dreams, succeed, fail and take personal responsibility for inventing their own future? America was built on individual responsibility, caring communities, and free-enterprise opportunity where you earned your own success. The current administration is trying to spend and regulate its way into a recovery and job growth. Since President Obama’s first month in office, the number of private-sector jobs has decreased by nearly 2.7 million, and the number of federal government workers has increased by 379,000. A recent audit revealed that the $111 million of stimulus funds invested by Los Angeles created 55 jobs at a cost to taxpayers of $2 million per job. Big government is so out of control you can watch our deficit explode. It’s the private sector, not big government, that is the economic engine for recovery. With 44 million Americans now in poverty, have you had enough of bigger government?
Choice #2: Government Entitlements or Individual Responsibility and Charity. Government entitlements are relatively new in America, not existing before 1929. If somebody fell on tough times, family, friends, and neighbors helped. Now, sixty percent of Americans get more in public services than they pay in taxes. That isn’t charity; that is government taking money from some citizens by force of law through taxation to provide benefits to other citizens. Since 1929, entitlement benefits have exploded: Social Security (1929), National School Lunch (1946), Medicaid/Medicare (1965), Food Stamps (1974), Home Energy Assistance (1981), Medicare Prescription Drug Plan (2003), Healthcare Plan (2010). No entitlement has cost less than projected. When government makes promises it can’t afford, it either increases taxes, prints more money funded by debt paid by future generations, or drastically cuts promised services. A government creating dependent citizens is no more caring than parents spoiling dependent teenagers. Such programs leave future generations buried under the weight of our government largesse. Entitlements account for more than half of federal spending, and unfunded liabilities, the obligations not covered by payroll taxes, exceed $100 trillion. Are we ready to stop digging the hole deeper?
Choice #3: Punish Success or Incentivize the American Dream. Do you believe that incentives matter? Have you noticed that so-called “rich people who don’t pay their fair share” are being repeatedly tapped to pay the bill? Many economists are saying that the economy is poised to take off, but the private sector is lagging. It’s small business growth that has always fueled economic recoveries and job creation, but why should “the rich” risk capital? Instead of rewarding such risk, the current administration is adding burdensome regulations, increasing taxes on their income, and making it hard for them to survive in today’s competitive global economy. Liberals claim that “the rich” do not pay their fair share of taxes. That is a convenient myth used to justify envy and income redistribution. The richest 5% of our citizens pay 60% of the total federal income tax bill. If you agree that these citizens are not paying their “fair share,” try paying their share and see how it feels.
Choice #4: “The Gingrich Boom” or “The Pelosi Collapse.” Mid-term elections matter. People talk about the “Clinton Boom” and the “Bush Collapse,” but Michael Medved points out that it’s more accurate to contrast two mid-term “triumphs” that strongly impacted the American economy. In “The Gingrich Boom,” ushered in by the 1994 conservative takeover of both houses of Congress, average unemployment went from 6.5% to an average of 4.77%. The federal deficit average went from 3.35% of GDP to an average of less than zero with surpluses from 1998 to 2001. With “The Pelosi Collapse” initiated with the Democratic takeover in 2006, average unemployment went from 5.29% to an average of 6.57%. It’s now 9.6%. Sadly, the federal deficit average went from 1.91% of GDP to 4.74% in the next two years. Now the deficit spending has reached 10.27%.
Had enough? Ready for a change? The choice voters made in 1994 made a difference. Be an informed voter and make your vote count this November.
http://townhall.com/columnists/TerryPaulson/2010/09/27/election_choices_matter
Mon, Sep, 27, 2010
Clarity on the facts and issues that matter to America’s future should be important to every informed voter. This time of dramatic change is ushering in a real choice in the November election. As you’ve noticed, “We the People” are creating havoc in the establishment of both parties. Candidates are surfacing who promise to do more than talk principles; they promise to govern that way. That gives American voters important choices.
Choice #1: Bigger Government or More Empowered Individuals. Do you want big government determining which special interests are rewarded and which companies are “too big to fail,” or do you want limited government where all people can pursue their dreams, succeed, fail and take personal responsibility for inventing their own future? America was built on individual responsibility, caring communities, and free-enterprise opportunity where you earned your own success. The current administration is trying to spend and regulate its way into a recovery and job growth. Since President Obama’s first month in office, the number of private-sector jobs has decreased by nearly 2.7 million, and the number of federal government workers has increased by 379,000. A recent audit revealed that the $111 million of stimulus funds invested by Los Angeles created 55 jobs at a cost to taxpayers of $2 million per job. Big government is so out of control you can watch our deficit explode. It’s the private sector, not big government, that is the economic engine for recovery. With 44 million Americans now in poverty, have you had enough of bigger government?
Choice #2: Government Entitlements or Individual Responsibility and Charity. Government entitlements are relatively new in America, not existing before 1929. If somebody fell on tough times, family, friends, and neighbors helped. Now, sixty percent of Americans get more in public services than they pay in taxes. That isn’t charity; that is government taking money from some citizens by force of law through taxation to provide benefits to other citizens. Since 1929, entitlement benefits have exploded: Social Security (1929), National School Lunch (1946), Medicaid/Medicare (1965), Food Stamps (1974), Home Energy Assistance (1981), Medicare Prescription Drug Plan (2003), Healthcare Plan (2010). No entitlement has cost less than projected. When government makes promises it can’t afford, it either increases taxes, prints more money funded by debt paid by future generations, or drastically cuts promised services. A government creating dependent citizens is no more caring than parents spoiling dependent teenagers. Such programs leave future generations buried under the weight of our government largesse. Entitlements account for more than half of federal spending, and unfunded liabilities, the obligations not covered by payroll taxes, exceed $100 trillion. Are we ready to stop digging the hole deeper?
Choice #3: Punish Success or Incentivize the American Dream. Do you believe that incentives matter? Have you noticed that so-called “rich people who don’t pay their fair share” are being repeatedly tapped to pay the bill? Many economists are saying that the economy is poised to take off, but the private sector is lagging. It’s small business growth that has always fueled economic recoveries and job creation, but why should “the rich” risk capital? Instead of rewarding such risk, the current administration is adding burdensome regulations, increasing taxes on their income, and making it hard for them to survive in today’s competitive global economy. Liberals claim that “the rich” do not pay their fair share of taxes. That is a convenient myth used to justify envy and income redistribution. The richest 5% of our citizens pay 60% of the total federal income tax bill. If you agree that these citizens are not paying their “fair share,” try paying their share and see how it feels.
Choice #4: “The Gingrich Boom” or “The Pelosi Collapse.” Mid-term elections matter. People talk about the “Clinton Boom” and the “Bush Collapse,” but Michael Medved points out that it’s more accurate to contrast two mid-term “triumphs” that strongly impacted the American economy. In “The Gingrich Boom,” ushered in by the 1994 conservative takeover of both houses of Congress, average unemployment went from 6.5% to an average of 4.77%. The federal deficit average went from 3.35% of GDP to an average of less than zero with surpluses from 1998 to 2001. With “The Pelosi Collapse” initiated with the Democratic takeover in 2006, average unemployment went from 5.29% to an average of 6.57%. It’s now 9.6%. Sadly, the federal deficit average went from 1.91% of GDP to 4.74% in the next two years. Now the deficit spending has reached 10.27%.
Had enough? Ready for a change? The choice voters made in 1994 made a difference. Be an informed voter and make your vote count this November.
http://townhall.com/columnists/TerryPaulson/2010/09/27/election_choices_matter
Renew America
Beware: transportation extremists over the top
By Wes Vernon
Transportation issues — like any other debatable causes — can provide fertile ground for those who dash about with propellers atop their heads. This week, we spotlight examples of well-meaning but misguided efforts on both sides.
Case #1 — One extreme
This column takes a back seat to no one when it comes to the idea of providing "walkable [rail transit-friendly] communities" for those who want it. We would not want it forced on anyone. We are speaking of neighborhoods where one can live, shop, dine out, attend theatre, visit the doctor, and in some cases work in the same vicinity without having to drag a car into the mix.
There is nothing wrong with this, provided it is responsive to a level-playing field market. The very reason that living in such environments is hugely expensive is that government-imposed building codes have made it next to impossible to build them (red tape, expensive permits, etc.). Therefore, in response to the private market of supply and demand, walkable communities are "high-rent" districts — i.e., low supply/high demand.
Get rid of the building codes forced from the left by government-diktat (separating where we live from where we work from where we shop), and let's see if the demand rises to the point where abundant availability pulls down the cost of living in urban-style communities.
What this column does not support is government-diktat going to the opposite extreme: i.e., "You vill live een an apartment, Herr Vernon! You vill ride rail transit or inter-city rail, Citizen!"
Orders from on high
Don't laugh. There is such legislation on Capitol Hill that has been passed out of committee.
The Livable Communities Act (SB-1619) has been described by its critics as a measure designed to force you to live in a city whether you want to or not.
The screws will be applied to local governments to make sure they toe the "back to the city" line. Through government control of your hard-earned tax dollars, billions would be showered on local jurisdictions that agree to amend their zoning laws and curb any single-family housing projects planned for suburban or rural areas.
Any town or county refusing to go along can expect the "greenies" to harass its local officials for turning their backs on a "free" federal handout. You know the old line (Play it again, Sam): "If we don't take the money, some other town will. So we'd better get with it. After all, it's our money." Ah! Right! So why didn't the feds just leave it in our pockets and let us decide what to do with it?
Blogger Bob Livingston sees this as a plot to force us to submit to federal domination — to end local control.
Supposedly the bill would force your heating and air conditioning bills to skyrocket, pushing you to give up your suburban or rural home and move to the city. A part of that package would be to raise the cost of gasoline, compelling you out of your car.
I love mass transit, but I don't want others to be forced into using it by some top-down order from Washington.
The sponsor of SB-1619 is Senator Christopher Dodd, the scandal-scarred lame duck who rammed it though his Senate Banking Committee. This is parting revenge?
Case #2 — The other extreme
The push-back against the new plans for rail as a legitimate third leg of our passenger transportation network is revving up full force.
We're hearing old stale arguments about how rail is just too expensive and we can't afford it. Never mind that far more federal dollars have been bestowed on air and highway traffic than on train travel — both inter-city and local transit.
Truth be told, we need all forms of transportation. And those who would deny one of the three its rightful place in the mix are suspect of having some kind of grabby power or moneyed interest.
Critics of rail passenger travel cite an old study done by the Silver Dog (Greyhound) purportedly showing that long-distance travelers who have an aversion to flying should be forced into crowded uncomfortable buses. An old argument promoting that line was backed by the late Russell Long, a shill for the bus companies.
And here is the mirror image of the SB-1619 cited above: You vill obey the building codes imposed by our top-down hierarchy. You vill get into your auto and spend the $10,000 per year required to use and maintain eet. You vill live in der suburban sprawl or rural house, Herr Vernon. And no back talk, Citizen, or ve vill haf to force you to walk for miles.
When one owns a car, that person often will ride quality public rail transit. The minute a well-managed rail route — transit or inter-city — is replaced with a bus schedule, the person with a choice will most likely switch to his private automobile. This has been shown to be the case over and over again in study after study. Those who try to force us to ride a bus either do not have the wherewithal to understand that reality or deliberately ignore it since these studies were not bought and paid for by the Silver Dog.
It has been proposed that public dollars be withdrawn from all public transportation, and encourage jitney services which can use cell phones, computer routers, and GPS systems to pick people up and deliver them precisely where they want to go.
Translation: Let's get more rubber-tire vehicles out on the roads. We don't have enough traffic jams in cities anymore or enough vehicles on the Interstates. We need more, more, more. Pour on the concrete. Import more gasoline from nations that hate us. (Note: This writer favors "Drill here! Drill now!")
The pro-jitney argument was thoroughly discredited back in the seventies, as was Senator Long's ode to long-distance bus travel. But they keep hauling the old aging chestnuts out of the closet. Cell-phones, computers and GPS, which we didn't have in the seventies, are not likely to make much difference on this issue today. They would enable the jitney traffic to increase accordingly, jamming the highways and city streets all the more. Transportation would be a nightmare.
Lest we forget
The legendary Alfred P. Sloan of GM plotted a dummy corporation to buy up most of the streetcar systems in the nation so as to destroy them and replace them with buses, knowing that most who had patronized the trains would drive rather than ride a bus. (GM and others were found guilty in court of anticompetitive practices.)
Meanwhile, cities and other local jurisdictions taxed the streetcar companies to death (literally), while forbidding them to raise fares.
After World War II, President Eisenhower — faced with a recession in 1954 — vowed that — unlike Herbert Hoover, then the last preceding Republican president — there would not be a depression while he was in the White House. Not on his watch by God! The highway lobby — learning of Ike's concerns — said, "Well, Mr. President, have we got a program for you!"
That's how we got the Interstate Highway system. Like most of his successors, Ike concluded that the path to prosperity was to recycle federal dollars in government spending rather than the more logical path of tax cuts. But that's another story.
The result was that we had socialist highways (free marketers, please note). We had socialist subsidized highways competing with free enterprise unsubsidized railroads (free marketers, please note). That was the downfall of private-sector passenger trains. Unlike the railroads, I-95 has never had to navigate a profit-loss spreadsheet.
Oh, but aren't the personnel running the trains "civil servants"? Yup. So too are most highway planners and operators, air traffic controllers, and those who plan and in many cases operate airports and who make you take off your shoes at airports these days.
The only mainline transportation mode in the world that is completely in private hands (albeit regulated) is freight rail.
Bottom line
If you don't like it that passenger rail (inter-city and local) is in the public sector, you can blame the anti-competitive practices that nearly destroyed the railroads and the tax-happy jurisdictions that supplied the highwayman's trough. (No, your gas taxes over time have not covered full costs). But most of all, you can blame the federal government — as usual, seeking ever-more power.
Editor's note: Wes Vernon will be taking off a few weeks from his column. The column will resume toward the end of October.
© Wes Vernon
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/vernon/100927
By Wes Vernon
Transportation issues — like any other debatable causes — can provide fertile ground for those who dash about with propellers atop their heads. This week, we spotlight examples of well-meaning but misguided efforts on both sides.
Case #1 — One extreme
This column takes a back seat to no one when it comes to the idea of providing "walkable [rail transit-friendly] communities" for those who want it. We would not want it forced on anyone. We are speaking of neighborhoods where one can live, shop, dine out, attend theatre, visit the doctor, and in some cases work in the same vicinity without having to drag a car into the mix.
There is nothing wrong with this, provided it is responsive to a level-playing field market. The very reason that living in such environments is hugely expensive is that government-imposed building codes have made it next to impossible to build them (red tape, expensive permits, etc.). Therefore, in response to the private market of supply and demand, walkable communities are "high-rent" districts — i.e., low supply/high demand.
Get rid of the building codes forced from the left by government-diktat (separating where we live from where we work from where we shop), and let's see if the demand rises to the point where abundant availability pulls down the cost of living in urban-style communities.
What this column does not support is government-diktat going to the opposite extreme: i.e., "You vill live een an apartment, Herr Vernon! You vill ride rail transit or inter-city rail, Citizen!"
Orders from on high
Don't laugh. There is such legislation on Capitol Hill that has been passed out of committee.
The Livable Communities Act (SB-1619) has been described by its critics as a measure designed to force you to live in a city whether you want to or not.
The screws will be applied to local governments to make sure they toe the "back to the city" line. Through government control of your hard-earned tax dollars, billions would be showered on local jurisdictions that agree to amend their zoning laws and curb any single-family housing projects planned for suburban or rural areas.
Any town or county refusing to go along can expect the "greenies" to harass its local officials for turning their backs on a "free" federal handout. You know the old line (Play it again, Sam): "If we don't take the money, some other town will. So we'd better get with it. After all, it's our money." Ah! Right! So why didn't the feds just leave it in our pockets and let us decide what to do with it?
Blogger Bob Livingston sees this as a plot to force us to submit to federal domination — to end local control.
Supposedly the bill would force your heating and air conditioning bills to skyrocket, pushing you to give up your suburban or rural home and move to the city. A part of that package would be to raise the cost of gasoline, compelling you out of your car.
I love mass transit, but I don't want others to be forced into using it by some top-down order from Washington.
The sponsor of SB-1619 is Senator Christopher Dodd, the scandal-scarred lame duck who rammed it though his Senate Banking Committee. This is parting revenge?
Case #2 — The other extreme
The push-back against the new plans for rail as a legitimate third leg of our passenger transportation network is revving up full force.
We're hearing old stale arguments about how rail is just too expensive and we can't afford it. Never mind that far more federal dollars have been bestowed on air and highway traffic than on train travel — both inter-city and local transit.
Truth be told, we need all forms of transportation. And those who would deny one of the three its rightful place in the mix are suspect of having some kind of grabby power or moneyed interest.
Critics of rail passenger travel cite an old study done by the Silver Dog (Greyhound) purportedly showing that long-distance travelers who have an aversion to flying should be forced into crowded uncomfortable buses. An old argument promoting that line was backed by the late Russell Long, a shill for the bus companies.
And here is the mirror image of the SB-1619 cited above: You vill obey the building codes imposed by our top-down hierarchy. You vill get into your auto and spend the $10,000 per year required to use and maintain eet. You vill live in der suburban sprawl or rural house, Herr Vernon. And no back talk, Citizen, or ve vill haf to force you to walk for miles.
When one owns a car, that person often will ride quality public rail transit. The minute a well-managed rail route — transit or inter-city — is replaced with a bus schedule, the person with a choice will most likely switch to his private automobile. This has been shown to be the case over and over again in study after study. Those who try to force us to ride a bus either do not have the wherewithal to understand that reality or deliberately ignore it since these studies were not bought and paid for by the Silver Dog.
It has been proposed that public dollars be withdrawn from all public transportation, and encourage jitney services which can use cell phones, computer routers, and GPS systems to pick people up and deliver them precisely where they want to go.
Translation: Let's get more rubber-tire vehicles out on the roads. We don't have enough traffic jams in cities anymore or enough vehicles on the Interstates. We need more, more, more. Pour on the concrete. Import more gasoline from nations that hate us. (Note: This writer favors "Drill here! Drill now!")
The pro-jitney argument was thoroughly discredited back in the seventies, as was Senator Long's ode to long-distance bus travel. But they keep hauling the old aging chestnuts out of the closet. Cell-phones, computers and GPS, which we didn't have in the seventies, are not likely to make much difference on this issue today. They would enable the jitney traffic to increase accordingly, jamming the highways and city streets all the more. Transportation would be a nightmare.
Lest we forget
The legendary Alfred P. Sloan of GM plotted a dummy corporation to buy up most of the streetcar systems in the nation so as to destroy them and replace them with buses, knowing that most who had patronized the trains would drive rather than ride a bus. (GM and others were found guilty in court of anticompetitive practices.)
Meanwhile, cities and other local jurisdictions taxed the streetcar companies to death (literally), while forbidding them to raise fares.
After World War II, President Eisenhower — faced with a recession in 1954 — vowed that — unlike Herbert Hoover, then the last preceding Republican president — there would not be a depression while he was in the White House. Not on his watch by God! The highway lobby — learning of Ike's concerns — said, "Well, Mr. President, have we got a program for you!"
That's how we got the Interstate Highway system. Like most of his successors, Ike concluded that the path to prosperity was to recycle federal dollars in government spending rather than the more logical path of tax cuts. But that's another story.
The result was that we had socialist highways (free marketers, please note). We had socialist subsidized highways competing with free enterprise unsubsidized railroads (free marketers, please note). That was the downfall of private-sector passenger trains. Unlike the railroads, I-95 has never had to navigate a profit-loss spreadsheet.
Oh, but aren't the personnel running the trains "civil servants"? Yup. So too are most highway planners and operators, air traffic controllers, and those who plan and in many cases operate airports and who make you take off your shoes at airports these days.
The only mainline transportation mode in the world that is completely in private hands (albeit regulated) is freight rail.
Bottom line
If you don't like it that passenger rail (inter-city and local) is in the public sector, you can blame the anti-competitive practices that nearly destroyed the railroads and the tax-happy jurisdictions that supplied the highwayman's trough. (No, your gas taxes over time have not covered full costs). But most of all, you can blame the federal government — as usual, seeking ever-more power.
Editor's note: Wes Vernon will be taking off a few weeks from his column. The column will resume toward the end of October.
© Wes Vernon
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/vernon/100927
Small biz, banks may spurn Obama's $30B program
President Barack Obama's $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it's supposed to help don't want it.
Sep 24, 11:05 PM (ET)
By PALLAVI GOGOI
NEW YORK (AP) - President Barack Obama's $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it's supposed to help don't want it.
The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president's signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.
It seems like a simple effort to unclog a credit pipeline that has been blocked since the financial meltdown two years ago. But interviews with seven community bankers, as well as small business owners, show a reluctance to participate.
"People in my constituency can't get credit, and this will get money out to small businesses, who are the engine of job creation for this country," said Republican Sen. George LeMieux of Florida, who co-authored the amendment that created the lending program.
Bank executives say their customers don't want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn't worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight.
"We have taken a strategic decision not to have our primary regulator, the government, also be a partner in our bank," said William Chase Jr., CEO of Triumph Bank in Memphis.
Chase said the bank already has enough capital to meet the paltry demand for loans. "Our business customers are mired in uncertainty and are reluctant to invest in their businesses," Chase said.
Ninety-one percent of small business owners surveyed in August by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) said all their credit needs were met. Only 4 percent cited a lack of financing as their top business problem. Plans for capital spending were at a 35-year low.
Jack Rajala just laughs when asked if he wants to take out a loan today. He's in a fight to save his family's lumber business that has been buffeted by the recession and housing meltdown.
"I've seen many ups and downs; this is unquestionably the toughest," said the 71-year-old Rajala, the third-generation owner of Rajala Companies of Deer River, Minn. Since 2008, his company closed two factories and halved the number of employees to less than 100 as orders plummeted for windows, floors and door frames. Annual revenue is down 50 percent since 2008 to $5 million, and the company is losing money.
Rajala is symbolic of the challenges faced by Obama's small business lending initiative. The $30 billion fund will be run by the Treasury Department, and money will be awarded to banks deemed strong by regulators. Banks that have less than $10 billion in assets are eligible.
"It will provide incentives to invest and create jobs for 4 million small businesses," Obama said at a news conference Sept. 10. "It will more than double the amount some small business owners can borrow to grow their companies."
Obama has to bridge the gulf between money that's available and the needs of businesses. The NFIB survey found businesses don't intend to borrow until they have more customers.
Community banks will have to pay an annual dividend of 5 percent to the U.S. Treasury. However, when banks increase their lending to small businesses, their dividend rate declines on a sliding scale. So, if a bank increases its small-business lending portfolio by 2.5 percent, the dividend payment goes down to 4 percent and so on, said Paul Merski, chief economist at the Independent Community Bankers of America, the lobbying group for small banks.
The dividend payment increases to 7 percent if banks don't lend to small businesses.
"The crucial questions facing business owners are does it make sense to make an investment right now, and will it generate positive returns?" Josh Lerner, professor of finance and entrepreneurial management at Harvard Business School.
Noah Wilcox, CEO of Grand Rapids State Bank, with two branches in Minnesota, said he already has more capital at his $250 million bank than he can lend out.
"Many of our clients, business owners, put their projects on ice in 2008 because their job number one is to see their company through to the other side of this economic crisis," said Wilcox.
And then there's concerns that the government money will have strings attached.
The fears stem from what happened under TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Fund, formed at the height of the financial meltdown to pump money into banks. Banks that accepted TARP money had to later cut dividends to shareholders and limit compensation to top executives. They were also penalized for early repayment.
In this new legislation, the government is taking steps to avoid the tarnish that accompanied TARP. The key part of this effort: Banks can return the money without penalty if rules governing the small business loans change.
But Chase, the bank CEO in Memphis, isn't convinced.
"The rules can be changed any time," said Chase.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100925/D9IEME2G0.html
Sep 24, 11:05 PM (ET)
By PALLAVI GOGOI
NEW YORK (AP) - President Barack Obama's $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it's supposed to help don't want it.
The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president's signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.
It seems like a simple effort to unclog a credit pipeline that has been blocked since the financial meltdown two years ago. But interviews with seven community bankers, as well as small business owners, show a reluctance to participate.
"People in my constituency can't get credit, and this will get money out to small businesses, who are the engine of job creation for this country," said Republican Sen. George LeMieux of Florida, who co-authored the amendment that created the lending program.
Bank executives say their customers don't want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn't worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight.
"We have taken a strategic decision not to have our primary regulator, the government, also be a partner in our bank," said William Chase Jr., CEO of Triumph Bank in Memphis.
Chase said the bank already has enough capital to meet the paltry demand for loans. "Our business customers are mired in uncertainty and are reluctant to invest in their businesses," Chase said.
Ninety-one percent of small business owners surveyed in August by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) said all their credit needs were met. Only 4 percent cited a lack of financing as their top business problem. Plans for capital spending were at a 35-year low.
Jack Rajala just laughs when asked if he wants to take out a loan today. He's in a fight to save his family's lumber business that has been buffeted by the recession and housing meltdown.
"I've seen many ups and downs; this is unquestionably the toughest," said the 71-year-old Rajala, the third-generation owner of Rajala Companies of Deer River, Minn. Since 2008, his company closed two factories and halved the number of employees to less than 100 as orders plummeted for windows, floors and door frames. Annual revenue is down 50 percent since 2008 to $5 million, and the company is losing money.
Rajala is symbolic of the challenges faced by Obama's small business lending initiative. The $30 billion fund will be run by the Treasury Department, and money will be awarded to banks deemed strong by regulators. Banks that have less than $10 billion in assets are eligible.
"It will provide incentives to invest and create jobs for 4 million small businesses," Obama said at a news conference Sept. 10. "It will more than double the amount some small business owners can borrow to grow their companies."
Obama has to bridge the gulf between money that's available and the needs of businesses. The NFIB survey found businesses don't intend to borrow until they have more customers.
Community banks will have to pay an annual dividend of 5 percent to the U.S. Treasury. However, when banks increase their lending to small businesses, their dividend rate declines on a sliding scale. So, if a bank increases its small-business lending portfolio by 2.5 percent, the dividend payment goes down to 4 percent and so on, said Paul Merski, chief economist at the Independent Community Bankers of America, the lobbying group for small banks.
The dividend payment increases to 7 percent if banks don't lend to small businesses.
"The crucial questions facing business owners are does it make sense to make an investment right now, and will it generate positive returns?" Josh Lerner, professor of finance and entrepreneurial management at Harvard Business School.
Noah Wilcox, CEO of Grand Rapids State Bank, with two branches in Minnesota, said he already has more capital at his $250 million bank than he can lend out.
"Many of our clients, business owners, put their projects on ice in 2008 because their job number one is to see their company through to the other side of this economic crisis," said Wilcox.
And then there's concerns that the government money will have strings attached.
The fears stem from what happened under TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Fund, formed at the height of the financial meltdown to pump money into banks. Banks that accepted TARP money had to later cut dividends to shareholders and limit compensation to top executives. They were also penalized for early repayment.
In this new legislation, the government is taking steps to avoid the tarnish that accompanied TARP. The key part of this effort: Banks can return the money without penalty if rules governing the small business loans change.
But Chase, the bank CEO in Memphis, isn't convinced.
"The rules can be changed any time," said Chase.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100925/D9IEME2G0.html
China rises and rises, yet still gets foreign aid
Why the heck are we sending $2.5 billion in foreign aid per year to China?
ASSOCIATED PRESS: China spent tens of billions of dollars on a dazzling 2008 Olympics. It has sent astronauts into space. It recently became the world’s second largest economy. Yet it gets more than $2.5 billion a year in foreign government aid — and taxpayers and lawmakers in donor countries are increasingly asking why.
With the global economic slowdown crimping government budgets, many countries are finding such generosity politically and economically untenable. China says it’s still a developing country in need of aid, while some critics argue that the money should go to poorer countries in Africa and elsewhere.
Germany and Britain have moved in recent months to reduce or phase out aid. Japan, long China’s biggest donor, halted new low-interest loans in 2008.
“People in the U.K. or people in the West see the kind of flawless expenditure on the Olympics and the (Shanghai) Expo and it’s really difficult to get them to think the U.K. should still be giving aid to China,” said Adrian Davis, head of the British government aid agency in Beijing, which plans to wrap up its projects in China by March.
“I don’t think you will have conventional aid to China from anybody, really, after about the next three to five years,” he said.
Read more here: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jakwiNM-7WB2c19UhDcSfl7ypJrQD9IFCBLO0
ASSOCIATED PRESS: China spent tens of billions of dollars on a dazzling 2008 Olympics. It has sent astronauts into space. It recently became the world’s second largest economy. Yet it gets more than $2.5 billion a year in foreign government aid — and taxpayers and lawmakers in donor countries are increasingly asking why.
With the global economic slowdown crimping government budgets, many countries are finding such generosity politically and economically untenable. China says it’s still a developing country in need of aid, while some critics argue that the money should go to poorer countries in Africa and elsewhere.
Germany and Britain have moved in recent months to reduce or phase out aid. Japan, long China’s biggest donor, halted new low-interest loans in 2008.
“People in the U.K. or people in the West see the kind of flawless expenditure on the Olympics and the (Shanghai) Expo and it’s really difficult to get them to think the U.K. should still be giving aid to China,” said Adrian Davis, head of the British government aid agency in Beijing, which plans to wrap up its projects in China by March.
“I don’t think you will have conventional aid to China from anybody, really, after about the next three to five years,” he said.
Read more here: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jakwiNM-7WB2c19UhDcSfl7ypJrQD9IFCBLO0
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Stephen Frank's California Political News and Views
Frank Discussion Not Lecture For Conservatives
http://www.capoliticalnews.com/
Top 10 Failures of ObamaCare After Six Months
September 23, 2010, 07:13 PM
Definitely an article to be passed around to your friends.
San Fran Nan said we would find out what is in the ObamaCare takeover of our health care ONLY when we passed it.
This is what we already know.
1. A few weeks ago drugs that save the lives of breast cancer victims will no longer be allowed--dead women will be the result.
2. Starting today, due to ObamaCare, children will no longer be allowed health insurance policies. That means the children will use Emergency Care at twice the cost, and the bill paid by the taxpayer.
3. " Senior Citizens Suffer from Medicare Cuts: The Medicare Advantage program which covers nearly a quarter of seniors will cut plans from $3-$5,000 per beneficiary. Doctors are refusing to take seniors because Medicare only covers part of their bills." Worse Obama has cut $500 million from Medicare--harming millions of our senior citizens. Yet Democrats complained when the GOP wanted to cut a couple of billion from the program by cutting waste and fraud. They cut half a trillion dollars.
Within the next year the American health care system will collapse under the costs and cuts of Barack Obama and his D.C. friends.
Regime change in November could save our lives and health care. Will you get involved? It is your future.
Read More...http://capoliticalnews.com/blog_post/show/6374
If you enjoy my newsletter, please help my readership grow by passing it around. If some one sent this to you, and you would like your own subscription, you can sign up on my web page at www.capoliticalnews.com
http://www.capoliticalnews.com/
Top 10 Failures of ObamaCare After Six Months
September 23, 2010, 07:13 PM
Definitely an article to be passed around to your friends.
San Fran Nan said we would find out what is in the ObamaCare takeover of our health care ONLY when we passed it.
This is what we already know.
1. A few weeks ago drugs that save the lives of breast cancer victims will no longer be allowed--dead women will be the result.
2. Starting today, due to ObamaCare, children will no longer be allowed health insurance policies. That means the children will use Emergency Care at twice the cost, and the bill paid by the taxpayer.
3. " Senior Citizens Suffer from Medicare Cuts: The Medicare Advantage program which covers nearly a quarter of seniors will cut plans from $3-$5,000 per beneficiary. Doctors are refusing to take seniors because Medicare only covers part of their bills." Worse Obama has cut $500 million from Medicare--harming millions of our senior citizens. Yet Democrats complained when the GOP wanted to cut a couple of billion from the program by cutting waste and fraud. They cut half a trillion dollars.
Within the next year the American health care system will collapse under the costs and cuts of Barack Obama and his D.C. friends.
Regime change in November could save our lives and health care. Will you get involved? It is your future.
Read More...http://capoliticalnews.com/blog_post/show/6374
If you enjoy my newsletter, please help my readership grow by passing it around. If some one sent this to you, and you would like your own subscription, you can sign up on my web page at www.capoliticalnews.com
BORN IN THE USA?
Hawaii Dems button-lipped on Obama eligibility status
Doc missing statement candidate 'qualified' under U.S. Constitution
It long has been documented that when Barack Obama was picked by the Democratic Party to be its 2008 presidential candidate, only one state – Hawaii – was sent a document from Nancy Pelosi certifying that he was qualified under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
Now a series of blogs reports are heating up the issue again, this time revealing documents that showed it apparently was Hawaii's local Democratic Party that refused to include that certification on its paperwork naming Obama as its candidate.
Even today, the Hawaii Democratic Party was staying mum, declining attempts by WND to obtain a comment on why it handled the 2008 presidential race paperwork as it did.
The original report came from a commentator at Canada Free Press who revealed the Democrats failed to certify their candidate's eligibility in 49 of the 50 states.
See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery.
"In most states," writer JB Williams said at the time last year, "it appears that the DNC never certified constitutional eligibility for Barack Hussein Obama, despite their many claims of proper vetting and certification, all of which we now know to be false."
As WND reported, Williams released copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify Obama as their nominee for president. One contains language affirming his constitutional eligibility, filed in Hawaii where state law requires the specific language, and another omits the language, filed in the remaining 49 states.
Now a series of reports, including those from blogger JBJD, the butterdezillion blog, Obama Release Your Records blog and the Fellowshipofminds blog, are revealing the local state party's stance in 2008.
The issue also has been addressed on a YouTube video already:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXFwqUi3zR0&feature=player_embedded
The blog reports cite each other, as well as apparent Democratic Party documents posted online from the 2000, 2004 and 2008 elections.
The images reveal the change in wording that Hawaii Democrats adopted when Obama was their candidate.
In choosing Al Gore and Joe Lieberman in 2000, this was their statement:
"THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national Democratic Parties by balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held March 7, 2000 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 14-17, 2000 in Los Angeles, California."
The wording was almost identical on behalf of John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004:
But in 2008, the words missing include "the provisions of the United States Constitution." It states, "THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008, in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2009, in Denver, Colorado."
At "Fellowship," the blogger explained that each state party must certify that their candidate is constitutionally eligible to be president.
"What the Democratic Party of Hawaii's 2008 Certification of Nomination left out are these words: 'of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and,'" the blogger wrote.
"In other words, by omitting the above words, the Democractic Party of Hawaii (DPH) was signaling the following: 1. DPH is merely certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president by virtue of the ballots of the Democratic Parties of the 50 states. The DPH is not certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution! 2. The DPH is also saying that Obama and Biden are NOT the chosen candidates of the state of Hawaii," he concluded.
The butterdezillion blog noted "the Hawaii Democratic Party actually ignored their protocols in 2008 in order to specifically NOT certify Obama's eligibility as they had done for candidates in the past."
It was Williams who earlier released copies of two documents apparently prepared by national Democrats to certify Obama as their nominee for president.
The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then-candidate for vice president, "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."
The second form obtained by Williams appears identical. They both have the same typographical error in "though," but in this one, the verification of eligibility under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution is gone.
Williams reported that Republicans use a document universally that affirms their candidate's eligibility and that Democrats have used the form that omits the certification language in previous elections. But he nonetheless questions why the DNC certified Obama's eligibility only in Hawaii.
Democratic National Committee officials have declined to comment on the issue of the multiple images. Pelosi and the White House also have declined to respond.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, 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."
Some of the lawsuits over the dispute question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated over $1 million to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest the questions.
WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
See the Documents:
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=207197
Doc missing statement candidate 'qualified' under U.S. Constitution
It long has been documented that when Barack Obama was picked by the Democratic Party to be its 2008 presidential candidate, only one state – Hawaii – was sent a document from Nancy Pelosi certifying that he was qualified under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
Now a series of blogs reports are heating up the issue again, this time revealing documents that showed it apparently was Hawaii's local Democratic Party that refused to include that certification on its paperwork naming Obama as its candidate.
Even today, the Hawaii Democratic Party was staying mum, declining attempts by WND to obtain a comment on why it handled the 2008 presidential race paperwork as it did.
The original report came from a commentator at Canada Free Press who revealed the Democrats failed to certify their candidate's eligibility in 49 of the 50 states.
See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery.
"In most states," writer JB Williams said at the time last year, "it appears that the DNC never certified constitutional eligibility for Barack Hussein Obama, despite their many claims of proper vetting and certification, all of which we now know to be false."
As WND reported, Williams released copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify Obama as their nominee for president. One contains language affirming his constitutional eligibility, filed in Hawaii where state law requires the specific language, and another omits the language, filed in the remaining 49 states.
Now a series of reports, including those from blogger JBJD, the butterdezillion blog, Obama Release Your Records blog and the Fellowshipofminds blog, are revealing the local state party's stance in 2008.
The issue also has been addressed on a YouTube video already:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXFwqUi3zR0&feature=player_embedded
The blog reports cite each other, as well as apparent Democratic Party documents posted online from the 2000, 2004 and 2008 elections.
The images reveal the change in wording that Hawaii Democrats adopted when Obama was their candidate.
In choosing Al Gore and Joe Lieberman in 2000, this was their statement:
"THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national Democratic Parties by balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held March 7, 2000 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 14-17, 2000 in Los Angeles, California."
The wording was almost identical on behalf of John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004:
But in 2008, the words missing include "the provisions of the United States Constitution." It states, "THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008, in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2009, in Denver, Colorado."
At "Fellowship," the blogger explained that each state party must certify that their candidate is constitutionally eligible to be president.
"What the Democratic Party of Hawaii's 2008 Certification of Nomination left out are these words: 'of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and,'" the blogger wrote.
"In other words, by omitting the above words, the Democractic Party of Hawaii (DPH) was signaling the following: 1. DPH is merely certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president by virtue of the ballots of the Democratic Parties of the 50 states. The DPH is not certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution! 2. The DPH is also saying that Obama and Biden are NOT the chosen candidates of the state of Hawaii," he concluded.
The butterdezillion blog noted "the Hawaii Democratic Party actually ignored their protocols in 2008 in order to specifically NOT certify Obama's eligibility as they had done for candidates in the past."
It was Williams who earlier released copies of two documents apparently prepared by national Democrats to certify Obama as their nominee for president.
The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then-candidate for vice president, "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."
The second form obtained by Williams appears identical. They both have the same typographical error in "though," but in this one, the verification of eligibility under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution is gone.
Williams reported that Republicans use a document universally that affirms their candidate's eligibility and that Democrats have used the form that omits the certification language in previous elections. But he nonetheless questions why the DNC certified Obama's eligibility only in Hawaii.
Democratic National Committee officials have declined to comment on the issue of the multiple images. Pelosi and the White House also have declined to respond.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, 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."
Some of the lawsuits over the dispute question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated over $1 million to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest the questions.
WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
See the Documents:
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=207197
Hundreds of people turned out at Concord High School Saturday for the mobile Mexican Consulate.
VIDEO ALERT…Protest at Concord High School of Mexican Consulate Giving Our Passports
http://randysright.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/video-alert-protest-at-concord-high-school-of-mexican-consulate-giving-our-passports/
http://randysright.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/video-alert-protest-at-concord-high-school-of-mexican-consulate-giving-our-passports/
Saturday, September 25, 2010
The Father of the Bill of Rights
American Minute with Bill Federer
September 25
"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Thus it is in the first of the Ten Amendments, or Bill of Rights, which were approved SEPTEMBER 25, 1789.
George Mason, known as "The Father of the Bill of Rights," wrote the Virginia Declaration of Rights from which Jefferson drew to write the Declaration of Independence.
George Mason was one of 55 founders who wrote the U.S. Constitution, but was also one of sixteen who refused to sign it because it did not abolish slavery and did not limit the power of the Federal Government.
George Mason joined with Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams to prevent the Constitution from being ratified, as the abuses of King George III's concentrated power were still fresh.
It was largely through George Mason's insistence that in the first session of Congress ten limitations or amendments were put on the new Federal Government.
George Mason suggested the wording of the First Amendment be:
"All men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that no particular sect or society of Christians ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others."
September 25
"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Thus it is in the first of the Ten Amendments, or Bill of Rights, which were approved SEPTEMBER 25, 1789.
George Mason, known as "The Father of the Bill of Rights," wrote the Virginia Declaration of Rights from which Jefferson drew to write the Declaration of Independence.
George Mason was one of 55 founders who wrote the U.S. Constitution, but was also one of sixteen who refused to sign it because it did not abolish slavery and did not limit the power of the Federal Government.
George Mason joined with Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams to prevent the Constitution from being ratified, as the abuses of King George III's concentrated power were still fresh.
It was largely through George Mason's insistence that in the first session of Congress ten limitations or amendments were put on the new Federal Government.
George Mason suggested the wording of the First Amendment be:
"All men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that no particular sect or society of Christians ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others."
Patriot’s Handbook
Patriot’s Handbook a Practical Guide to Restoring Liberty
by James Simpson
A Country in Crisis
America is a country in crisis. From financial meltdown to economic hardship; from a growing list of hostile foes to grave doubts among our allies; from failures in schools and fractured families to federal government intrusion into virtually every aspect of life, our country faces a profound, multi-dimensional crisis that threatens to destroy our livelihoods, our form of government and our very way of life. It casts a bleak shadow on the future for our children, their children and all future generations.
The events of the Obama administration’s first two years have brought this crisis into sharp focus. Never in recent memory have any President and Congress attempted to move so far, so fast to radically transform our country. They have sought to impose vast new regulatory regimes against our will, and engaged in a budget busting spending spree – robbing a flagging economy of much-needed resources and raising the specter of rampant inflation. And while threatening economic stability at home, the administration pursues a foreign policy of indulging our enemies and undermining national defense.
But this radical leftist administration and Democrat-controlled Congress are only a symptom of a larger systemic problem. The radical Left represents an indescribably destructive system of thinking and philosophy of government that has gradually been “mainstreamed” over the past century. It infests our grade schools and college campuses. It pervades the thinking of most among our media elite, the political class and even the church. It must be expunged from our national psyche if we are ever to rescue ourselves from this crisis.
America has become detached and largely ignorant of the core principles that made this country great. It is critical to our long-term survival that we rediscover and embrace again the key concepts of individual freedom, individual responsibility, limited government and the rule of law.
The founders of this country gave us an incredible set of documents: the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. These documents provide a firm road map to return our country to fiscal and moral responsibility, and are the reason we have been a beacon of hope for the rest of the world for over two centuries.
The Solution
“It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” Samuel Adams
America’s unique spirit of freedom and independence has bred in us a brave, resourceful and innovative nature. In times of past crises, Americans have always risen to the occasion. Now Americans have answered the call once more, as the Tea Party movement, or perhaps it should be called the Liberty Movement, blossomed spontaneously to meet these challenges.
At rallies and town halls over the spring and summer of 2009, the American people expressed a growing chorus of concern. The massive Washington, DC rally on Sept. 12th removed any doubt that there was a nationwide movement afoot. Stunning political reversals in New Jersey and Virginia’s special elections last fall were stern warnings to the liberals, and the January 2010 election of a Republican to fill the seat left by the death of ultra-liberal Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy was, like Concord, Massachusetts, 235 years before, “the shot heard round the world.” Primaries and special elections in 2010, including the first Hawaiian Republican Congressman in 20 years, further confirm this sea change in national outlook.
The April 2010 Battleground Poll, considered to be one of the most accurate political polls, found that 59 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservative. Since 2002, this number has never gone below 58 percent. This is three-fifths of the population!
Polls indicate that a majority of the American people support the Tea Party message. A whopping 58 percent of mainstream voters have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party movement. A recent Rasmussen poll says that 24 percent of all Americans say that they or someone close to them is a Tea Partier. That is one quarter of the population.
While not all tea partiers are conservatives and vice versa, we share a common goal. That is to scale back massive government intrusion into our lives and restore America’s constitutional principles: limited government and the rule of law.
Combined, we represent an overwhelming majority of Americans. “We surround them,” as Glenn Beck says. In fact, about the only people who oppose our message are the radical Left. In other words, we are America!
Our potential political power is vast, but we have a long way to go to realize that potential. The Left is deeply entrenched within our institutions. Vladimir Lenin exhorted his followers: “Organize, organize, organize.” The Left took this lesson to heart and today acts largely as one mass organism – the various groups operating with common goals and coordinated activities. In any policy debate they speak with one voice, and that voice is endlessly echoed in the mass media mouthpiece they control.
We have to take a cue from Lenin and fuse our potential into organized action. We must commit ourselves to working together as one movement to retake the levers of power at all levels of government. Our goal is to scale back government’s massive growth, and rid ourselves of the leftist termites that for decades have been ceaselessly gnawing away at the foundations of our institutions, our culture and our Constitution.
This will not be easy. Not only are we threatening an ideology the Left has spent decades implanting in the American psyche, we are threatening a vast and lucrative power structure that has enriched people willing to promote leftist goals. The Left is its own industry.
This is why we are being ceaselessly attacked and vilified in the press as dangerous, right-wing extremists. The Left recognizes us as a mortal threat to their interests, and in the past their tactics have been very effective in silencing critics.
But there is a difference this time. Instead of singling out one person or a small group – easy targets for the leftist machine, they are attempting to marginalize the entire population of mainstream America! They are the extremists, and we all know it. But the unfortunate fact is that as long as the Left controls the message their intimidation methods can be effective anyway.
There are still many people unaware of what is happening in America, people who are willing to be influenced by the mass media’s carefully crafted propaganda. But the media’s message is a threat to everyone: identifying with the Liberty movement means you are odd. You are an extremist. You are the enemy! And what does a society do with extremists? Monitor them? Arrest them? At best, it marginalizes them. For many people, especially those who are either insecure or not fully cognizant of the danger we face as a nation, these threats will easily defeat reason, because they are implicit threats against both one’s life and place in society.
The Left will continue to do all it can to marginalize, intimidate and discourage us from our task. And these attacks, now apparently including physical attacks, will increase. There are a number of things all Patriots should do to inoculate themselves from these pressures:
1.Join a Tea Party, or conservative political club of your choice. Become a formal part of a party organization.
2.Maintain regular contact with like-minded individuals, hang out together regularly and join in movement activities suggested in this pamphlet as a group.
3.Read, read, read. Educate yourself on the issues to build confidence, help inform others and reinforce your commitment.
4.Remember that we surround them. They are a loud but small minority. They can only win if we let them.
This little pamphlet was written to assist us in our fight, for our greatest weapon is information. With information, we can discover the enemy’s weak points. With information, we can deflect his strategies, and turn them against him. With information, we can educate others to join our cause. With information, we can overcome the mountain of misinformation produced by the Left’s media propagandists.
With information we can win.
What You Can Do Right Now to Save Your Country
Get off the sidelines. Jump in and participate. Fully acknowledge to yourself that this is a battle for the heart, soul and future of our Nation. Accept the lesson Americans of countless past generations have taught: if you want to get something dodne, you have to do it yourself. Commit to taking action.
I. First Things First
Electing the right people this coming November is a critical first step to restoring our liberty. It is up to you as a citizen to play what part you can in every election – local, state and national. Without conservative majorities across the land and especially in the U.S. Congress next year, eventual victory may be out of reach. Here are twenty ways you can get involved:
1. Support conservative candidates at all levels. It is critically important to rebuild a conservative majority from the ground up. There are many local and state offices: town council, county board, sheriff, state assembly, state senate, and a host of other elected positions crying for principled, conservative leadership.
2. Understand the essential role of the local party committee/precinct.
Read:
■The Most Powerful Office in the World IS NOT the President of the United States.
http://www.eagleforum.org/misc/brochures/precinct-committman.shtml
■Visit Precinct Solution.org for a concise and easy-to-follow explanation.
http://www.precinctsolution.org/
3. Join your Party’s formal structure. Attend local Party central committee meetings and become involved. Run or be appointed to a seat on the committee.
4. Help build your precinct: visit, call, e-mail; many areas have no political infrastructure. Focus your efforts: build out from targeted voter lists. Get the list from your local party or registrar of voters. Focus on getting registered voters energized first.
5. Volunteer to become a precinct/block captain. These are challenging jobs but critical to identifying and motivating voters. Block captains are almost always in short supply.
6. Volunteer to be an election judge or poll watcher. Conservatives frequently leave this job to others, with predictable results. Vote fraud is an increasing problem, with much of the leftist infrastructure getting behind the effort. George Soros has even funded something called the Secretary of State project, designed to elect leftists to oversee each state’s vote count.
7. Run for political office. If you feel you can make a contribution this way, consider running. The country needs you, now!
Useful websites:
■The Green Papers blog provides access to comprehensive election information by state.
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/
■Federal Election Commission provides campaign law, filing dates by state and other useful information.
http://www.fec.gov/
■Your state’s Party organizations provide detailed information about each political subdivision within the state, down to the precinct level.
8. Learn to use social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instant Messaging to help promote candidates and the conservative message. Communication is key and these tools greatly facilitate spreading the message.
Get two great free tutorials to learn how: Facebook PDF Guide and Twitter PDF Guide, from American Majority.org.
9. Volunteer to maintain Facebook/Twitter site for candidates.
10. Use personal e-mail accounts to promote candidates and spread the conservative message.
11. Volunteer for candidate sign waving – believe it or not, this simple activity does more for candidate name recognition than many other activities.
12. Volunteer to canvas for candidates.
13. Attend candidate fundraisers.
14. Volunteer for phone banks or just to make calls. With modern technology, you can now call from your home or car. There is often no longer a need to actually go to a phone bank.
15. Get certified from your local Board of Elections to register voters. This is usually an easy step, involving a short trip to the Board of Elections office and swearing in.
16. Volunteer for door knocking.
17. Put up yard/street signs. Use and distribute candidate bumper stickers.
18. Join a political campaign. If you feel strongly about a particular candidate, focus your efforts and volunteer to work to get him/her elected.
19. 72 hour push – Last three days before November elections, volunteer for any activity to help get out the vote for your candidates.
20. On election day, work outside polls with signs, sample ballots and pamphlets, if state campaign law allows.
II. Build Strength in Numbers and Unity
In everything you do, there is strength in numbers. Keep it in the forefront of your mind that you are not alone, that you are part of a nationwide movement to save America.
You will be hearing this a lot: strength in numbers. Organize, organize, organize. Try to do everything as a group. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Any action you take is multiplied in effect when you do it as a group. There is synergy in collective action. Everyone in the group gets a morale boost by being a part of something rather than merely a lone voice in the wilderness. You can also accomplish more: tasks can be delegated to those best suited for them, lessening the time and resource demands on each individual.
On the other hand, one person alone making calls to Congress, writing letters or indeed, taking on some of the tasks suggested in this handbook will quickly become overwhelmed, exhausted and discouraged. Furthermore, the voice of an individual, unless a uniquely influential individual like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh for example, is largely ineffectual and quickly gets lost in the din and roar of all the others.
So suit up and join up. We have to hang together or we will certainly hang separately.
You should begin to meet regularly with a circle of like-minded friends. Join a Tea Party, conservative or other patriotic organization in your area. Attend as many Tea Party rallies/events as you can. These are not merely feel-good exercises. They are opportunities to add your voice to the chorus, to let them know we are out there and we have strength in numbers. It’s also an opportunity to network, get news, find out what other groups are up to and learn new tactics. Most organization websites have event lists and/or search functions. National Journal has a good rundown of the top 12 tea party related organizations. Here is a short list
■Tea Party Patriots (Probably the best known. SEARCH for an TPP group/event near you)
■FreedomWorks (Organizers of the 9-12 Rally. Congressman Dick Armey’s group)
■Tax Day Tea Party (Inspired by Rick Santelli. State-by-state directory online)
■Our Country Deserves Better (Founded by organizer of CA Governor Gray Davis recall; organizers of Tea Party Express bus tours. Hosted 2010 Searchlight, NV rally – home of Democrat Senator Harry Reid)
■Tea Party Nation (this is a for profit group)
Other Tea Party associated groups:
■Americans for Limited Government (Information resource – free signup)
■Americans for Prosperity (Dedicated to limited government/free markets)
■American Majority (Trains conservative political activists/candidates)
■Grassroots America We the People (Feisty East Texas organization, a model for grassroots organizing. Executive Director JoAnn Fleming initiated Justice Foundation’s Project Liberty, a citizen class-action lawsuit against Obamacare)
■Independence Caucus (Started as volunteers to elect Congressman Jason Chaffetz)
■Liberty First PAC (Actively supports conservative candidates)
■912 Project (Glenn Beck’s group)
■Smart Girl Politics (Called the “Founding Sisters of the Tea Party movement” by Michelle Malkin)
Remember, strength in numbers!
III. Familiarize Yourself with the Tactics of the Radical Left
The radical Left seeks to undermine this country and destroy its institutions. As they have no legitimate claim to power, their only real tactics are deception, the smear and outright confrontation. They use lies and misinformation to confuse and mislead. They use the smear to discredit and marginalize opponents. When all else fails, they use street thugs. In everything they do, the intent is to intimidate, polarize and destroy their opponents – Saul Alinsky’s most successful tactic.
In confronting this ugly truth, remember once again, strength in numbers. Their intimidation tactics can work against individuals but not a united front. We are America. It is our cause that has the moral authority. Think of our family, our children and their future – think of the great gift we have been given simply by being born Americans. We have something they never will: a cause worth fighting for! So fight smart:
■Read David Horowitz’s short pamphlets: Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution and The Art of Political Warfare for Tea Parties.
■Read Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and/or Reveille for Radicals. Familiarize yourself with Alinsky’s 13 Rules.
■Apply/defeat Alinsky tactics: Read about the San Francisco’s Tea Party Patriots’ successful use of Alinsky tactics.
■Take a camera or video recorder with you to every rally you attend. Surround tea party “crashers” and phony “rightwing nutcase” plants as soon as you identify them. Take lots of pictures/video and urge the people you are with to do the same.
■When you attend rallies, bring eye-catching signs saying “Infil-Traitor” or “Not With Us” with arrows to point at leftist plants as Tea Partiers in several cities have done. Make this a dedicated task for willing rally participants. Take pictures and video of the phonies. Point at them and laugh.
■Challenge people who disparage our movement and/or make statements about public policy you know to be false.
■Aggressively expose all Astroturf operations.
■Get to know who the leftists are. Utilize KeyWiki, an amazing catalog of the Left by famed researcher, Trevor Loudon.
■Expose the Left for the mean-spirited, self-serving movement it is. Document their abuses and intrusions. Nothing dries up festering boils like sunshine.
IV. Be Heard
It can’t be emphasized enough: strength in numbers. Take heart from the fact that you represent America, what our country stands for, what made it great. Let your voice join the chorus of protest. Make that chorus rise to the heavens. Here are five ways you can be heard:
1. Voting is a precious and essential right to secure and maintain our constitutional republic. Register to vote, vote in all elections you can and actively help others to do the same.
2. Join Heritage Action for America:
■Communicate with Congressmen and Senators on key policy issues.
■Attend virtual town halls using online chat to discuss issues with experts.
3. Attend town council meetings, town halls, communicate with elected leaders.
4. Use the following tools to contact your Representative/Senator, look up pending legislation and track how they vote:
■E-mail your Representative/Senators
■Write/call your Representative (includes mailing labels with Member addresses)
■Write/call your Senators (includes mailing labels with Member addresses)
■These Senate, House and Library of Congress sites allow you to look up pending legislation
■Track your Congressmen’s votes with Congress.org’s Megavote – get weekly e-mail updates on how they are voting, communicate with both federal/state legislators and much more
5. Write and call local print and broadcast media. This is important. The media is largely responsible for the ascendancy of the Left. Without the media defending and promoting them, leftists and leftist ideas could never have gotten out of the cellar. But the media still has to turn a profit (in most cases). Dog them relentlessly in order to:
■Expose media bias
■Air views on key issues
You may contact many local newsmagazines through this site: Newsweekly Directory.
V. Take Civic Action
The Left uses our taxes, our donations, our corporations and even our investments [JKW3] to promote its anti-American agenda. They produce little of value without our unwitting assistance. We have the power in our hands to defang the Left. One last time: we have strength in numbers. Conservatives compose the majority of the American people. Let’s use our overwhelming power in coordinated action to de-fund their movement with 12 Steps to Freedom:
1. Spotlight the Radicals Utilize David Horowitz’s wide-ranging online tool, Discover the Networks to research and identify radical organizations, funders and individuals in politics, non-profits, corporations, finance and the entertainment industry.
2. Lobby Congress to De-Fund the Left Many radical leftist organizations, like National Council of La Raza, the Council on American Islamic Relations, ACORN and the ACLU, receive government grants and appropriations to pursue their radical, destructive activities. Go online and see what ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis said to the Young Democratic Socialists in a short online video to see how she views America. Grassroots conservatives should work with sympathetic members of Congress and state legislators to repeal statutes granting tax dollars to these groups.
3. Boycott Leftist Media National news media serves as the rhetorical sword and shield of the Left, while many TV shows and movie channels subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, promote the leftist message. But they all rely on advertising and/or subscription revenue to survive. Here are very simple steps that you can do from home:
■Discontinue subscriptions to newspapers and magazines with a leftist slant.
■Cease unnecessary patronage of network and cable television stations that show leftwing bias. Stop watching them.
4. Counter Biased Reporting with Phone Calls and Letters Most TV, radio and print media have an ombudsman. Demand their reporting be based on fact and clear thoughts. Ask them to abide by their own ethical standards, requiring reporters to be fair, accurate and unbiased.
See codes of ethics for the Washington Post, or the New York Times, for example. Their standards are in black and white. Do they abide by them?
5. Boycott Hollywood The movie industry is controlled by leftists. They have created a blacklist against non-leftist actors that dwarfs the anti-communist blacklist of the 1950s, virtually shutting out any message except that of the radical left. Read movie reviews and avoid movies that promote leftist propaganda or send a culturally destructive message. They rely completely on our entertainment dollars. Cut ‘em off! Go bowling instead, or take your kids to miniature golf! Support your local small businesses. They are more likely to be conservative, too.
6. Protect Our Children from the Leftist Message The Left has also introduced toxic messages to our children through their control of the media. Review both movies and TV shows for leftist and/or culturally degenerate messages. Spend more time with your kids instead!
7. Stop Donating to Leftist Charities Many think tanks, foundations and charities are controlled by radicals and promote the radical leftist cause. Quit sending them money! Even familiar groups like the Red Cross and United Way fund radical causes. They also use disastrous events like 9-11, the Indonesian Tsunami and the Haitian earthquake as an excuse to raise funds for ongoing activities. Some will use it for nefarious purposes. For example, the money you kind-heartedly donated to the United Way 9-11 fund to assist victims families could have gone to pay legal fees for terrorism suspects. If you intend to donate funds for victims of some tragedy, check to be sure your money is earmarked for that purpose. In many cases, it isn’t. Carefully vet all organizations you intend to donate funds to:
■Read the revealing FrontPage Magazine article, Foundations of Betrayal.
■Examine the charitable giving of corporations you deal with or own stock in. Write, call or attend shareholder meetings to protest.
■See Discover the Networks’ “Funders” page for a wealth of information on the subject.
■Utilize Discover the Networks’ lists of top leftist funders and top conservative funders.
■If you don’t already know who he is, read about George Soros at Discover the Networks.
■See Discover the Networks’ extensive list of Soros funded charities.
■Here are a few of the better-known leftist foundations and non-profits:
■Open Society Institute
■Tides Foundation
■Ford Foundation
■Rockefeller Foundation
■MacArthur Foundation
■Carnegie Endowment
■Packard Foundation
■Pew Charitable Trusts
■Turner Foundation
■Hewlett Foundation
■Public Interest Research Groups
■National Audubon Society
■Defenders of Wildlife
■Sierra Club
■Natural Resources Defense Council
■Greenpeace
■U.S. Peace Council
■Center for Constitutional Rights
■National Lawyers Guild
■American Civil Liberties Union
■Institute for Policy Studies
■Friends of the Earth
■Center for American Progress
■Industrial Areas Foundation
8. Be a Friend of the Earth – De-fund the Environmental Movement Most mainstream environmental groups do not support American free enterprise. Their agendas tend to be about attacking capitalism more than saving the environment. Read the testimonial of Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, who has been vilified by the environmental movement for pointing this out. Because many such groups are run by radical leftists, they also use “saving the environment” as a pretext for supporting other causes. For example, Defenders of Wildlife opposes the Global War on Terror, and along with the Audubon Society and Sierra Club, has sued the government to prevent construction of the border fence.
9. De-fund Leftist Churches and Synagogues Many churches support leftist causes, knowingly or otherwise. Consult Discover the Networks resource “Religious Left Groups.” Gather like-minded individuals in your parish or congregation and discuss this issue. Obtain a list from your church office showing where and how your tithe dollars are spent. Consult the other leftist charity lists mentioned earlier. In many cases you will be horrified. Find out if your church donates to, or is a member of any of the organizations listed below. As a group, demand your church stop funding these and other radical organizations and causes or find another church.
■National Council of Churches (radical leftist promoters of “liberation theology.”) The NCC includes among its members 35 Christian denominations representing 140,000 congregations with over 50 million members. Check the list, if your church is among those denominations, find another church, NOW.
■World Council of Churches (NCC is the domestic subsidiary of the WCC.) The leader of the WCC acknowledged on CBS’s 60 Minutes many years ago that the church’s philosophy was Marxism. There is also an alleged connection to the Soviet KGB.
■Church World Service – Funds leftist causes worldwide.
■American Friends Service Committee – Quaker. Has supported many radical leftist causes around the globe for years.
■Mennonite Central Committee – Strongly anti-Israel. Hosted dinner with Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
■Christian Peacemaker Teams – Anti-war group posed as human shields in Iraq.
■Jews Against the Occupation – Pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli Jewish group.
■Catholic Campaign for Human Development – Supports leftist causes, including Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation.
■Gamaliel Foundation – Supports network of leftist groups and scriptural relativism.
10. Take back our schools The National Education Association is a radical leftist organization and has a virtual vice grip control over public school budgets. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, however, is proving change can happen. Attend PTA meetings, obtain a seat your local PTA or run for seat on Board of Education. Inspect your child’s textbooks. Support candidates and elected officials who favor school vouchers.
11. Take Back Our Universities Before you donate to any private secondary schools or colleges, including your alma mater, or in considering a suitable private school or college for your child, check the institution’s record on speech codes and free speech policies. Have any incidents occurred on their campuses where conservative speakers were harassed, intimidated or denied the opportunity to speak? Have any incidents of classroom bias or intimidation been reported? Utilize the following resources:
■TheFire.org: online resource for researching school speech codes and other evidence of anti-free speech bias. Excellent school search tool.
■David Horowitz Freedom Center’s Student Center: includes many tools for fighting anti-American bias on campus.
■The American Council of Trustees and Alumni: organization dedicated to academic freedom, excellence and accountability.
■National Association of Scholars: The NAS is a watchdog group dedicated to “intellectual integrity in the curriculum, in the classroom, and across the campus.”
■Freedom Forum and First Amendment Center.
12. Take Back Our Borders This is a critical national security issue, but will require a sea-change in thinking on Capitol Hill and in many state legislatures because many lawmakers shamefully see open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants as a vote-getter. All the more reason we must remove the current crop of liberals and replace them with solid conservatives who understand that the border must be secured. There are many things activists can do:
■Support strong conservative candidates and lawmakers at all levels.
■Let federal, state and local lawmakers know every time an immigration issue arises.
■Don’t hire immigrants who cannot prove their legal immigration status.
■Support making English the official language of the United States. The U.S. English website’s Action Center provides updates on this movement at both the state and federal level.
■Read Heritage.org backgrounders on amnesty and immigration. Heritage has a number of solid proposals for resolving the illegal immigration issue:
■Enact E-Verify to enable immediate identification of worker status.
■Enforce immigration and workplace laws.
■Secure the southern border.
■Promote economic development and good governance in Central/South America.
■Improve the temporary worker program.
■Improve efficiency at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
■Strengthen citizenship through language, history and civics education.
■Encourage states to do more. Read about Arizona’s new immigration law, for example.
■Expand Secure Communities program
VI. Reinforce Your Understanding of Constitutional Principles
Conservatives can win countless elections, but unless and until our culture and society return to a full understanding and acceptance of fundamental Constitutional concepts, like limited government, separation of powers, individual rights and responsibilities, we will face this crisis over and over again.
To shore up your understanding of these principles there is no better resource than the Heritage Foundation. This group is an amazing resource for material on virtually any public policy issue, and most of it is available, free. Because of this, we have linked to a lot of Heritage studies and tools in this document. For constitutional issues, utilize the following resources:
■Get the free Heritage Pocket Constitution and Declaration of Independence.
■Download the free PDF book: How to Read the Federalist Papers.
■Use the Heritage website, First Principles as a regular reference. Bookmark the site.
■Get the Heritage Guide to the Constitution, by Reagan AG Edwin Meese.
VII. Arm Yourself with Facts on Key Issues
Communicate to family, friends, neighbors and acquaintances. Discuss/share with fellow activists these ten key issues and resources:
1. Understanding the financial crisis: the direct result of leftist meddling in the mortgage market:
■Familiarize yourself with Cloward & Piven and the Manufactured Crisis Strategy.
■Read A Financial Crisis of Government’s Making.
2. Global leadership, national security and immigration
■See the free online film 33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age.
■Free 1 Pager Missile Defense Brief. Includes 14 embedded links to Heritage foundation studies on aspects of this issue.
■Find out about Secure Communities, a model for immigration enforcement.
■Sign up for free weekly 33 Minutes Missile Defense Update and twice weekly National Security Update e-mails from Heritage.org.
3. Entitlements; our greatest domestic challenge
■See Heritage’s free 12 minute video: A Legacy of Debt.
■How poor are America’s “poor?” See Glenn Beck’s explanation in this short video.
■Access Heritage.org’s free resource page on entitlements, poverty & inequality.
■Sign up for free biweekly Budget Bulletin e-mail
4. The truth about the energy crisis
■Read free report Twelve Principles to Guide U.S. Energy Policy.
■Sign up for free weekly Energy and Environment Update e-mail.
5. The crisis in American education:
■Download Heritage’s free report, A Parents Guide to Education Reform
■See the video, Let Me Rise
■Sign up for free weekly Education Notebook e-mail
6. What to do about healthcare:
■Visit Heritage’s online healthcare resource: http://www.fixhealthcarepolicy.org/
■Sign up for free weekly Fix Healthcare Policy e-mail
7. Daily updates on critical issues: sign up for Heritage’s free Morning Bell and Heritage Hotsheet emails
8. Take advantage of Heritage.org’s countless free resources on virtually any policy issue:
■Policy Experts – access to experts and issues
■Insider Online – free information on virtually any public policy topic
■Insider Online Toolkit – free how-to guides on internet marketing, protocol, event planning and much more
■Conservative Community – portal for access to information and tools of value to movement conservatives, including:
■Research
■Policy Experts
■Lectures, Seminars and Events
9. Use the Government Printing Office’s comprehensive online tool for access to every single document printed by the federal government. Go to: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/
Conclusion
We hope this handbook has given you some ideas and pointers that will prove useful in the battle to take back our country. The battle has been joined. As we engage in this battle, let’s be absolutely clear on one thing: this is not a battle of Republican versus Democrat, though many of the players adopt those Party uniforms. It is not a battle of Conservative versus Liberal, though many of the players identify themselves with those titles. It is not even a battle of Right versus Left, though we speak of it in those terms. It is really a battle of right versus wrong, of good versus evil, of liberty versus tyranny. It is the conflict for our time, and we must prevail, for we are the world’s last hope. And we will prevail, for we are Americans.
©2010 James M. Simpson, All Rights Reserved
http://gulagbound.com/1914-2
by James Simpson
A Country in Crisis
America is a country in crisis. From financial meltdown to economic hardship; from a growing list of hostile foes to grave doubts among our allies; from failures in schools and fractured families to federal government intrusion into virtually every aspect of life, our country faces a profound, multi-dimensional crisis that threatens to destroy our livelihoods, our form of government and our very way of life. It casts a bleak shadow on the future for our children, their children and all future generations.
The events of the Obama administration’s first two years have brought this crisis into sharp focus. Never in recent memory have any President and Congress attempted to move so far, so fast to radically transform our country. They have sought to impose vast new regulatory regimes against our will, and engaged in a budget busting spending spree – robbing a flagging economy of much-needed resources and raising the specter of rampant inflation. And while threatening economic stability at home, the administration pursues a foreign policy of indulging our enemies and undermining national defense.
But this radical leftist administration and Democrat-controlled Congress are only a symptom of a larger systemic problem. The radical Left represents an indescribably destructive system of thinking and philosophy of government that has gradually been “mainstreamed” over the past century. It infests our grade schools and college campuses. It pervades the thinking of most among our media elite, the political class and even the church. It must be expunged from our national psyche if we are ever to rescue ourselves from this crisis.
America has become detached and largely ignorant of the core principles that made this country great. It is critical to our long-term survival that we rediscover and embrace again the key concepts of individual freedom, individual responsibility, limited government and the rule of law.
The founders of this country gave us an incredible set of documents: the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. These documents provide a firm road map to return our country to fiscal and moral responsibility, and are the reason we have been a beacon of hope for the rest of the world for over two centuries.
The Solution
“It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” Samuel Adams
America’s unique spirit of freedom and independence has bred in us a brave, resourceful and innovative nature. In times of past crises, Americans have always risen to the occasion. Now Americans have answered the call once more, as the Tea Party movement, or perhaps it should be called the Liberty Movement, blossomed spontaneously to meet these challenges.
At rallies and town halls over the spring and summer of 2009, the American people expressed a growing chorus of concern. The massive Washington, DC rally on Sept. 12th removed any doubt that there was a nationwide movement afoot. Stunning political reversals in New Jersey and Virginia’s special elections last fall were stern warnings to the liberals, and the January 2010 election of a Republican to fill the seat left by the death of ultra-liberal Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy was, like Concord, Massachusetts, 235 years before, “the shot heard round the world.” Primaries and special elections in 2010, including the first Hawaiian Republican Congressman in 20 years, further confirm this sea change in national outlook.
The April 2010 Battleground Poll, considered to be one of the most accurate political polls, found that 59 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservative. Since 2002, this number has never gone below 58 percent. This is three-fifths of the population!
Polls indicate that a majority of the American people support the Tea Party message. A whopping 58 percent of mainstream voters have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party movement. A recent Rasmussen poll says that 24 percent of all Americans say that they or someone close to them is a Tea Partier. That is one quarter of the population.
While not all tea partiers are conservatives and vice versa, we share a common goal. That is to scale back massive government intrusion into our lives and restore America’s constitutional principles: limited government and the rule of law.
Combined, we represent an overwhelming majority of Americans. “We surround them,” as Glenn Beck says. In fact, about the only people who oppose our message are the radical Left. In other words, we are America!
Our potential political power is vast, but we have a long way to go to realize that potential. The Left is deeply entrenched within our institutions. Vladimir Lenin exhorted his followers: “Organize, organize, organize.” The Left took this lesson to heart and today acts largely as one mass organism – the various groups operating with common goals and coordinated activities. In any policy debate they speak with one voice, and that voice is endlessly echoed in the mass media mouthpiece they control.
We have to take a cue from Lenin and fuse our potential into organized action. We must commit ourselves to working together as one movement to retake the levers of power at all levels of government. Our goal is to scale back government’s massive growth, and rid ourselves of the leftist termites that for decades have been ceaselessly gnawing away at the foundations of our institutions, our culture and our Constitution.
This will not be easy. Not only are we threatening an ideology the Left has spent decades implanting in the American psyche, we are threatening a vast and lucrative power structure that has enriched people willing to promote leftist goals. The Left is its own industry.
This is why we are being ceaselessly attacked and vilified in the press as dangerous, right-wing extremists. The Left recognizes us as a mortal threat to their interests, and in the past their tactics have been very effective in silencing critics.
But there is a difference this time. Instead of singling out one person or a small group – easy targets for the leftist machine, they are attempting to marginalize the entire population of mainstream America! They are the extremists, and we all know it. But the unfortunate fact is that as long as the Left controls the message their intimidation methods can be effective anyway.
There are still many people unaware of what is happening in America, people who are willing to be influenced by the mass media’s carefully crafted propaganda. But the media’s message is a threat to everyone: identifying with the Liberty movement means you are odd. You are an extremist. You are the enemy! And what does a society do with extremists? Monitor them? Arrest them? At best, it marginalizes them. For many people, especially those who are either insecure or not fully cognizant of the danger we face as a nation, these threats will easily defeat reason, because they are implicit threats against both one’s life and place in society.
The Left will continue to do all it can to marginalize, intimidate and discourage us from our task. And these attacks, now apparently including physical attacks, will increase. There are a number of things all Patriots should do to inoculate themselves from these pressures:
1.Join a Tea Party, or conservative political club of your choice. Become a formal part of a party organization.
2.Maintain regular contact with like-minded individuals, hang out together regularly and join in movement activities suggested in this pamphlet as a group.
3.Read, read, read. Educate yourself on the issues to build confidence, help inform others and reinforce your commitment.
4.Remember that we surround them. They are a loud but small minority. They can only win if we let them.
This little pamphlet was written to assist us in our fight, for our greatest weapon is information. With information, we can discover the enemy’s weak points. With information, we can deflect his strategies, and turn them against him. With information, we can educate others to join our cause. With information, we can overcome the mountain of misinformation produced by the Left’s media propagandists.
With information we can win.
What You Can Do Right Now to Save Your Country
Get off the sidelines. Jump in and participate. Fully acknowledge to yourself that this is a battle for the heart, soul and future of our Nation. Accept the lesson Americans of countless past generations have taught: if you want to get something dodne, you have to do it yourself. Commit to taking action.
I. First Things First
Electing the right people this coming November is a critical first step to restoring our liberty. It is up to you as a citizen to play what part you can in every election – local, state and national. Without conservative majorities across the land and especially in the U.S. Congress next year, eventual victory may be out of reach. Here are twenty ways you can get involved:
1. Support conservative candidates at all levels. It is critically important to rebuild a conservative majority from the ground up. There are many local and state offices: town council, county board, sheriff, state assembly, state senate, and a host of other elected positions crying for principled, conservative leadership.
2. Understand the essential role of the local party committee/precinct.
Read:
■The Most Powerful Office in the World IS NOT the President of the United States.
http://www.eagleforum.org/misc/brochures/precinct-committman.shtml
■Visit Precinct Solution.org for a concise and easy-to-follow explanation.
http://www.precinctsolution.org/
3. Join your Party’s formal structure. Attend local Party central committee meetings and become involved. Run or be appointed to a seat on the committee.
4. Help build your precinct: visit, call, e-mail; many areas have no political infrastructure. Focus your efforts: build out from targeted voter lists. Get the list from your local party or registrar of voters. Focus on getting registered voters energized first.
5. Volunteer to become a precinct/block captain. These are challenging jobs but critical to identifying and motivating voters. Block captains are almost always in short supply.
6. Volunteer to be an election judge or poll watcher. Conservatives frequently leave this job to others, with predictable results. Vote fraud is an increasing problem, with much of the leftist infrastructure getting behind the effort. George Soros has even funded something called the Secretary of State project, designed to elect leftists to oversee each state’s vote count.
7. Run for political office. If you feel you can make a contribution this way, consider running. The country needs you, now!
Useful websites:
■The Green Papers blog provides access to comprehensive election information by state.
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/
■Federal Election Commission provides campaign law, filing dates by state and other useful information.
http://www.fec.gov/
■Your state’s Party organizations provide detailed information about each political subdivision within the state, down to the precinct level.
8. Learn to use social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instant Messaging to help promote candidates and the conservative message. Communication is key and these tools greatly facilitate spreading the message.
Get two great free tutorials to learn how: Facebook PDF Guide and Twitter PDF Guide, from American Majority.org.
9. Volunteer to maintain Facebook/Twitter site for candidates.
10. Use personal e-mail accounts to promote candidates and spread the conservative message.
11. Volunteer for candidate sign waving – believe it or not, this simple activity does more for candidate name recognition than many other activities.
12. Volunteer to canvas for candidates.
13. Attend candidate fundraisers.
14. Volunteer for phone banks or just to make calls. With modern technology, you can now call from your home or car. There is often no longer a need to actually go to a phone bank.
15. Get certified from your local Board of Elections to register voters. This is usually an easy step, involving a short trip to the Board of Elections office and swearing in.
16. Volunteer for door knocking.
17. Put up yard/street signs. Use and distribute candidate bumper stickers.
18. Join a political campaign. If you feel strongly about a particular candidate, focus your efforts and volunteer to work to get him/her elected.
19. 72 hour push – Last three days before November elections, volunteer for any activity to help get out the vote for your candidates.
20. On election day, work outside polls with signs, sample ballots and pamphlets, if state campaign law allows.
II. Build Strength in Numbers and Unity
In everything you do, there is strength in numbers. Keep it in the forefront of your mind that you are not alone, that you are part of a nationwide movement to save America.
You will be hearing this a lot: strength in numbers. Organize, organize, organize. Try to do everything as a group. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Any action you take is multiplied in effect when you do it as a group. There is synergy in collective action. Everyone in the group gets a morale boost by being a part of something rather than merely a lone voice in the wilderness. You can also accomplish more: tasks can be delegated to those best suited for them, lessening the time and resource demands on each individual.
On the other hand, one person alone making calls to Congress, writing letters or indeed, taking on some of the tasks suggested in this handbook will quickly become overwhelmed, exhausted and discouraged. Furthermore, the voice of an individual, unless a uniquely influential individual like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh for example, is largely ineffectual and quickly gets lost in the din and roar of all the others.
So suit up and join up. We have to hang together or we will certainly hang separately.
You should begin to meet regularly with a circle of like-minded friends. Join a Tea Party, conservative or other patriotic organization in your area. Attend as many Tea Party rallies/events as you can. These are not merely feel-good exercises. They are opportunities to add your voice to the chorus, to let them know we are out there and we have strength in numbers. It’s also an opportunity to network, get news, find out what other groups are up to and learn new tactics. Most organization websites have event lists and/or search functions. National Journal has a good rundown of the top 12 tea party related organizations. Here is a short list
■Tea Party Patriots (Probably the best known. SEARCH for an TPP group/event near you)
■FreedomWorks (Organizers of the 9-12 Rally. Congressman Dick Armey’s group)
■Tax Day Tea Party (Inspired by Rick Santelli. State-by-state directory online)
■Our Country Deserves Better (Founded by organizer of CA Governor Gray Davis recall; organizers of Tea Party Express bus tours. Hosted 2010 Searchlight, NV rally – home of Democrat Senator Harry Reid)
■Tea Party Nation (this is a for profit group)
Other Tea Party associated groups:
■Americans for Limited Government (Information resource – free signup)
■Americans for Prosperity (Dedicated to limited government/free markets)
■American Majority (Trains conservative political activists/candidates)
■Grassroots America We the People (Feisty East Texas organization, a model for grassroots organizing. Executive Director JoAnn Fleming initiated Justice Foundation’s Project Liberty, a citizen class-action lawsuit against Obamacare)
■Independence Caucus (Started as volunteers to elect Congressman Jason Chaffetz)
■Liberty First PAC (Actively supports conservative candidates)
■912 Project (Glenn Beck’s group)
■Smart Girl Politics (Called the “Founding Sisters of the Tea Party movement” by Michelle Malkin)
Remember, strength in numbers!
III. Familiarize Yourself with the Tactics of the Radical Left
The radical Left seeks to undermine this country and destroy its institutions. As they have no legitimate claim to power, their only real tactics are deception, the smear and outright confrontation. They use lies and misinformation to confuse and mislead. They use the smear to discredit and marginalize opponents. When all else fails, they use street thugs. In everything they do, the intent is to intimidate, polarize and destroy their opponents – Saul Alinsky’s most successful tactic.
In confronting this ugly truth, remember once again, strength in numbers. Their intimidation tactics can work against individuals but not a united front. We are America. It is our cause that has the moral authority. Think of our family, our children and their future – think of the great gift we have been given simply by being born Americans. We have something they never will: a cause worth fighting for! So fight smart:
■Read David Horowitz’s short pamphlets: Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution and The Art of Political Warfare for Tea Parties.
■Read Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and/or Reveille for Radicals. Familiarize yourself with Alinsky’s 13 Rules.
■Apply/defeat Alinsky tactics: Read about the San Francisco’s Tea Party Patriots’ successful use of Alinsky tactics.
■Take a camera or video recorder with you to every rally you attend. Surround tea party “crashers” and phony “rightwing nutcase” plants as soon as you identify them. Take lots of pictures/video and urge the people you are with to do the same.
■When you attend rallies, bring eye-catching signs saying “Infil-Traitor” or “Not With Us” with arrows to point at leftist plants as Tea Partiers in several cities have done. Make this a dedicated task for willing rally participants. Take pictures and video of the phonies. Point at them and laugh.
■Challenge people who disparage our movement and/or make statements about public policy you know to be false.
■Aggressively expose all Astroturf operations.
■Get to know who the leftists are. Utilize KeyWiki, an amazing catalog of the Left by famed researcher, Trevor Loudon.
■Expose the Left for the mean-spirited, self-serving movement it is. Document their abuses and intrusions. Nothing dries up festering boils like sunshine.
IV. Be Heard
It can’t be emphasized enough: strength in numbers. Take heart from the fact that you represent America, what our country stands for, what made it great. Let your voice join the chorus of protest. Make that chorus rise to the heavens. Here are five ways you can be heard:
1. Voting is a precious and essential right to secure and maintain our constitutional republic. Register to vote, vote in all elections you can and actively help others to do the same.
2. Join Heritage Action for America:
■Communicate with Congressmen and Senators on key policy issues.
■Attend virtual town halls using online chat to discuss issues with experts.
3. Attend town council meetings, town halls, communicate with elected leaders.
4. Use the following tools to contact your Representative/Senator, look up pending legislation and track how they vote:
■E-mail your Representative/Senators
■Write/call your Representative (includes mailing labels with Member addresses)
■Write/call your Senators (includes mailing labels with Member addresses)
■These Senate, House and Library of Congress sites allow you to look up pending legislation
■Track your Congressmen’s votes with Congress.org’s Megavote – get weekly e-mail updates on how they are voting, communicate with both federal/state legislators and much more
5. Write and call local print and broadcast media. This is important. The media is largely responsible for the ascendancy of the Left. Without the media defending and promoting them, leftists and leftist ideas could never have gotten out of the cellar. But the media still has to turn a profit (in most cases). Dog them relentlessly in order to:
■Expose media bias
■Air views on key issues
You may contact many local newsmagazines through this site: Newsweekly Directory.
V. Take Civic Action
The Left uses our taxes, our donations, our corporations and even our investments [JKW3] to promote its anti-American agenda. They produce little of value without our unwitting assistance. We have the power in our hands to defang the Left. One last time: we have strength in numbers. Conservatives compose the majority of the American people. Let’s use our overwhelming power in coordinated action to de-fund their movement with 12 Steps to Freedom:
1. Spotlight the Radicals Utilize David Horowitz’s wide-ranging online tool, Discover the Networks to research and identify radical organizations, funders and individuals in politics, non-profits, corporations, finance and the entertainment industry.
2. Lobby Congress to De-Fund the Left Many radical leftist organizations, like National Council of La Raza, the Council on American Islamic Relations, ACORN and the ACLU, receive government grants and appropriations to pursue their radical, destructive activities. Go online and see what ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis said to the Young Democratic Socialists in a short online video to see how she views America. Grassroots conservatives should work with sympathetic members of Congress and state legislators to repeal statutes granting tax dollars to these groups.
3. Boycott Leftist Media National news media serves as the rhetorical sword and shield of the Left, while many TV shows and movie channels subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, promote the leftist message. But they all rely on advertising and/or subscription revenue to survive. Here are very simple steps that you can do from home:
■Discontinue subscriptions to newspapers and magazines with a leftist slant.
■Cease unnecessary patronage of network and cable television stations that show leftwing bias. Stop watching them.
4. Counter Biased Reporting with Phone Calls and Letters Most TV, radio and print media have an ombudsman. Demand their reporting be based on fact and clear thoughts. Ask them to abide by their own ethical standards, requiring reporters to be fair, accurate and unbiased.
See codes of ethics for the Washington Post, or the New York Times, for example. Their standards are in black and white. Do they abide by them?
5. Boycott Hollywood The movie industry is controlled by leftists. They have created a blacklist against non-leftist actors that dwarfs the anti-communist blacklist of the 1950s, virtually shutting out any message except that of the radical left. Read movie reviews and avoid movies that promote leftist propaganda or send a culturally destructive message. They rely completely on our entertainment dollars. Cut ‘em off! Go bowling instead, or take your kids to miniature golf! Support your local small businesses. They are more likely to be conservative, too.
6. Protect Our Children from the Leftist Message The Left has also introduced toxic messages to our children through their control of the media. Review both movies and TV shows for leftist and/or culturally degenerate messages. Spend more time with your kids instead!
7. Stop Donating to Leftist Charities Many think tanks, foundations and charities are controlled by radicals and promote the radical leftist cause. Quit sending them money! Even familiar groups like the Red Cross and United Way fund radical causes. They also use disastrous events like 9-11, the Indonesian Tsunami and the Haitian earthquake as an excuse to raise funds for ongoing activities. Some will use it for nefarious purposes. For example, the money you kind-heartedly donated to the United Way 9-11 fund to assist victims families could have gone to pay legal fees for terrorism suspects. If you intend to donate funds for victims of some tragedy, check to be sure your money is earmarked for that purpose. In many cases, it isn’t. Carefully vet all organizations you intend to donate funds to:
■Read the revealing FrontPage Magazine article, Foundations of Betrayal.
■Examine the charitable giving of corporations you deal with or own stock in. Write, call or attend shareholder meetings to protest.
■See Discover the Networks’ “Funders” page for a wealth of information on the subject.
■Utilize Discover the Networks’ lists of top leftist funders and top conservative funders.
■If you don’t already know who he is, read about George Soros at Discover the Networks.
■See Discover the Networks’ extensive list of Soros funded charities.
■Here are a few of the better-known leftist foundations and non-profits:
■Open Society Institute
■Tides Foundation
■Ford Foundation
■Rockefeller Foundation
■MacArthur Foundation
■Carnegie Endowment
■Packard Foundation
■Pew Charitable Trusts
■Turner Foundation
■Hewlett Foundation
■Public Interest Research Groups
■National Audubon Society
■Defenders of Wildlife
■Sierra Club
■Natural Resources Defense Council
■Greenpeace
■U.S. Peace Council
■Center for Constitutional Rights
■National Lawyers Guild
■American Civil Liberties Union
■Institute for Policy Studies
■Friends of the Earth
■Center for American Progress
■Industrial Areas Foundation
8. Be a Friend of the Earth – De-fund the Environmental Movement Most mainstream environmental groups do not support American free enterprise. Their agendas tend to be about attacking capitalism more than saving the environment. Read the testimonial of Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, who has been vilified by the environmental movement for pointing this out. Because many such groups are run by radical leftists, they also use “saving the environment” as a pretext for supporting other causes. For example, Defenders of Wildlife opposes the Global War on Terror, and along with the Audubon Society and Sierra Club, has sued the government to prevent construction of the border fence.
9. De-fund Leftist Churches and Synagogues Many churches support leftist causes, knowingly or otherwise. Consult Discover the Networks resource “Religious Left Groups.” Gather like-minded individuals in your parish or congregation and discuss this issue. Obtain a list from your church office showing where and how your tithe dollars are spent. Consult the other leftist charity lists mentioned earlier. In many cases you will be horrified. Find out if your church donates to, or is a member of any of the organizations listed below. As a group, demand your church stop funding these and other radical organizations and causes or find another church.
■National Council of Churches (radical leftist promoters of “liberation theology.”) The NCC includes among its members 35 Christian denominations representing 140,000 congregations with over 50 million members. Check the list, if your church is among those denominations, find another church, NOW.
■World Council of Churches (NCC is the domestic subsidiary of the WCC.) The leader of the WCC acknowledged on CBS’s 60 Minutes many years ago that the church’s philosophy was Marxism. There is also an alleged connection to the Soviet KGB.
■Church World Service – Funds leftist causes worldwide.
■American Friends Service Committee – Quaker. Has supported many radical leftist causes around the globe for years.
■Mennonite Central Committee – Strongly anti-Israel. Hosted dinner with Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
■Christian Peacemaker Teams – Anti-war group posed as human shields in Iraq.
■Jews Against the Occupation – Pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli Jewish group.
■Catholic Campaign for Human Development – Supports leftist causes, including Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation.
■Gamaliel Foundation – Supports network of leftist groups and scriptural relativism.
10. Take back our schools The National Education Association is a radical leftist organization and has a virtual vice grip control over public school budgets. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, however, is proving change can happen. Attend PTA meetings, obtain a seat your local PTA or run for seat on Board of Education. Inspect your child’s textbooks. Support candidates and elected officials who favor school vouchers.
11. Take Back Our Universities Before you donate to any private secondary schools or colleges, including your alma mater, or in considering a suitable private school or college for your child, check the institution’s record on speech codes and free speech policies. Have any incidents occurred on their campuses where conservative speakers were harassed, intimidated or denied the opportunity to speak? Have any incidents of classroom bias or intimidation been reported? Utilize the following resources:
■TheFire.org: online resource for researching school speech codes and other evidence of anti-free speech bias. Excellent school search tool.
■David Horowitz Freedom Center’s Student Center: includes many tools for fighting anti-American bias on campus.
■The American Council of Trustees and Alumni: organization dedicated to academic freedom, excellence and accountability.
■National Association of Scholars: The NAS is a watchdog group dedicated to “intellectual integrity in the curriculum, in the classroom, and across the campus.”
■Freedom Forum and First Amendment Center.
12. Take Back Our Borders This is a critical national security issue, but will require a sea-change in thinking on Capitol Hill and in many state legislatures because many lawmakers shamefully see open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants as a vote-getter. All the more reason we must remove the current crop of liberals and replace them with solid conservatives who understand that the border must be secured. There are many things activists can do:
■Support strong conservative candidates and lawmakers at all levels.
■Let federal, state and local lawmakers know every time an immigration issue arises.
■Don’t hire immigrants who cannot prove their legal immigration status.
■Support making English the official language of the United States. The U.S. English website’s Action Center provides updates on this movement at both the state and federal level.
■Read Heritage.org backgrounders on amnesty and immigration. Heritage has a number of solid proposals for resolving the illegal immigration issue:
■Enact E-Verify to enable immediate identification of worker status.
■Enforce immigration and workplace laws.
■Secure the southern border.
■Promote economic development and good governance in Central/South America.
■Improve the temporary worker program.
■Improve efficiency at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
■Strengthen citizenship through language, history and civics education.
■Encourage states to do more. Read about Arizona’s new immigration law, for example.
■Expand Secure Communities program
VI. Reinforce Your Understanding of Constitutional Principles
Conservatives can win countless elections, but unless and until our culture and society return to a full understanding and acceptance of fundamental Constitutional concepts, like limited government, separation of powers, individual rights and responsibilities, we will face this crisis over and over again.
To shore up your understanding of these principles there is no better resource than the Heritage Foundation. This group is an amazing resource for material on virtually any public policy issue, and most of it is available, free. Because of this, we have linked to a lot of Heritage studies and tools in this document. For constitutional issues, utilize the following resources:
■Get the free Heritage Pocket Constitution and Declaration of Independence.
■Download the free PDF book: How to Read the Federalist Papers.
■Use the Heritage website, First Principles as a regular reference. Bookmark the site.
■Get the Heritage Guide to the Constitution, by Reagan AG Edwin Meese.
VII. Arm Yourself with Facts on Key Issues
Communicate to family, friends, neighbors and acquaintances. Discuss/share with fellow activists these ten key issues and resources:
1. Understanding the financial crisis: the direct result of leftist meddling in the mortgage market:
■Familiarize yourself with Cloward & Piven and the Manufactured Crisis Strategy.
■Read A Financial Crisis of Government’s Making.
2. Global leadership, national security and immigration
■See the free online film 33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age.
■Free 1 Pager Missile Defense Brief. Includes 14 embedded links to Heritage foundation studies on aspects of this issue.
■Find out about Secure Communities, a model for immigration enforcement.
■Sign up for free weekly 33 Minutes Missile Defense Update and twice weekly National Security Update e-mails from Heritage.org.
3. Entitlements; our greatest domestic challenge
■See Heritage’s free 12 minute video: A Legacy of Debt.
■How poor are America’s “poor?” See Glenn Beck’s explanation in this short video.
■Access Heritage.org’s free resource page on entitlements, poverty & inequality.
■Sign up for free biweekly Budget Bulletin e-mail
4. The truth about the energy crisis
■Read free report Twelve Principles to Guide U.S. Energy Policy.
■Sign up for free weekly Energy and Environment Update e-mail.
5. The crisis in American education:
■Download Heritage’s free report, A Parents Guide to Education Reform
■See the video, Let Me Rise
■Sign up for free weekly Education Notebook e-mail
6. What to do about healthcare:
■Visit Heritage’s online healthcare resource: http://www.fixhealthcarepolicy.org/
■Sign up for free weekly Fix Healthcare Policy e-mail
7. Daily updates on critical issues: sign up for Heritage’s free Morning Bell and Heritage Hotsheet emails
8. Take advantage of Heritage.org’s countless free resources on virtually any policy issue:
■Policy Experts – access to experts and issues
■Insider Online – free information on virtually any public policy topic
■Insider Online Toolkit – free how-to guides on internet marketing, protocol, event planning and much more
■Conservative Community – portal for access to information and tools of value to movement conservatives, including:
■Research
■Policy Experts
■Lectures, Seminars and Events
9. Use the Government Printing Office’s comprehensive online tool for access to every single document printed by the federal government. Go to: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/
Conclusion
We hope this handbook has given you some ideas and pointers that will prove useful in the battle to take back our country. The battle has been joined. As we engage in this battle, let’s be absolutely clear on one thing: this is not a battle of Republican versus Democrat, though many of the players adopt those Party uniforms. It is not a battle of Conservative versus Liberal, though many of the players identify themselves with those titles. It is not even a battle of Right versus Left, though we speak of it in those terms. It is really a battle of right versus wrong, of good versus evil, of liberty versus tyranny. It is the conflict for our time, and we must prevail, for we are the world’s last hope. And we will prevail, for we are Americans.
©2010 James M. Simpson, All Rights Reserved
http://gulagbound.com/1914-2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
