[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
[NOTE: Well, as I assume you know, the Republicans just concluded their national convention. As the article below discusses, despite what many might say, while these conventions may no longer have the drama of determining what the party's presidential ticket will be (there was a time when even the vice-presidential choice was left to be determined), for the Republicans, it was the formal presentation of that ticket to the nation. Did this just concluded convention present Mitt Romney AND Paul Ryan in a way that swayed enough undecided voters to support them?
Personaly, I am very alarmed that so many of the American people seems to have been swayed as they have by the barrage of media attacks (NOT just the Democratic ads but much of the way the mainstream media presented the Republican candidates). It is tragic to me that the entire convention had to be focused around trying to make the American people "like" their candidate even more than to present their stands on the issues is a shameful commentary on how vicious the character asassinations have been. I only hope millions took the time to listen to the incredible range of testimonials that were given to the decency and character of Mitt Romney that were NOT broadcast by the major networks (though on PBS). - Stan]
by Lee Edwards, August 29, 2012;http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/29/do-political-conventions-matter/
Delegates have known for months (or longer) whom their parties will nominate for President. With such predictability, the national conventions have been taken for granted, and a few myths have arisen.Chief among these myths is that conventions no longer matter. As AP managing editor Michael Oreskes puts it, they’re “the largest, most expensive infomercials in human experience.”
In reality, national political conventions are vital to both the political parties and the American people.The national convention allows each party to frame the election. It’s the occasion for releasing the national party platform, which spells out the central philosophical theme and key policy positions on which the candidates run. Moreover, conventions can make or break a party’s chances on Election Day. For instance, at the 1912 Republican Convention, the party leadership chose the constitutional conservatism of incumbent William Howard Taft over the radical constitutional reform of Teddy Roosevelt. Taft won the nomination but lost the general election to Democrat Woodrow Wilson.
Barry Goldwater’s defiant 1964 acceptance speech, in which he declared that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice,” galvanized the right but allowed liberals to tie the albatross of extremism around conservatives for years.
In 1968, Hubert Humphrey’s warm embrace of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Vietnam policy—combined with the complete mismanagement of the convention’s protests—sealed Richard Nixon’s victory. Humphrey’s last-minute surge, propelled by organized labor, couldn’t dig him out of the hole of the Chicago convention.
Conventions also matter to the average American voters, many of whom are beginning to pay attention to the race for the first time. Conventions present to the American electorate, in prime time, the nominees of each major party. It’s a chance for the candidates to shine or be melted by the spotlight. In 2008, America met Sarah Palin, John McCain’s vice presidential candidate. Palin’s speech electrified the convention, energized the Republican Party, and gave the ticket a bump in the polls. People forget that McCain led Barack Obama by a couple of points just before the financial crisis erupted.
And let’s not forget that the conventions matter to the ratings-starved mass media. Conventions are like the summer Olympics—there’s nothing else to watch but reruns of NCIS and Everybody Loves Raymond. The conventions offer a pre-packaged, easy to follow format in an enclosed space.
Yet the most important speech you’ll hear may not be the one the media hypes. Ronald Reagan’s spontaneous remarks at the 1976 Republican convention, looking forward to America in the year 2076, caused delegates to wonder whether they had nominated the right man in Gerald Ford. Obama’s moving keynote address in 2004 overshadowed John Kerry’s acceptance speech, introduced the state Senator to a national audience, and prepared the way for him to win the presidential nomination four years later.
Political conventions have been a part of the American political process since the 1800s. For die-hard politicos, conventions are “the seventh-inning stretches of presidential politics, a pause to consider the interminable prelude and the coming climax,” as George Will put it. For the rest of America, they are the opening kickoff of the presidential campaign. They offer a chance to meet the candidates and find out the party’s message.
Elections, after all, are about choices. And Americans have a choice to make—none greater than this year, when America is at a crossroads.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Friday, August 31, 2012
Thursday, August 30, 2012
#306 (8/30) - What's Behind Afghan Soldiers Turning On U.S. Trainers?
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
"Afghan Forces Turning Against Their U.S. Trainers" - By Amy Payne On August 22, 2012
American troops in Afghanistan face an increased threat from “insider” attacks in which the Afghan forces they are there to help and train are turning their guns on their American partners, raising serious questions about the viability of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. The attacks, which have killed 40 U.S. and NATO troops so far this year, are also referred to as “green-on-blue attacks,” because the military refers to local forces as “green” and allied forces as “blue.”*
Who are the Afghan security forces? While the Afghan Army leaders are professional and committed to working with their American counterparts, the recruits are mostly rural, illiterate men who can become disgruntled by cultural differences with their American trainers or susceptible to insurgent bribes or intimidation. U.S. military officials attribute only about 10 percent of the insider attacks to Taliban infiltration, despite Taliban claims of responsibility for most of the attacks.
There are about 350,000 Afghan security forces, including the police and army. As of October 1, there will be 68,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. The U.S. strategy in Afghanistan is centered on being able to train the Afghan forces so they can eventually face down the insurgent threat on their own. If the number of insider attacks does not abate, it will be increasingly difficult to justify a large-scale U.S. troop presence in the nation.
Heritage’s Peter Brookes writes [1] in the New York Post:
"Despite efforts by Coalition forces and the Afghan government to combat the violence through better screening, vetting, monitoring and counterintelligence, this isn’t going to be an easy problem to fix. The Taliban, the Haqqanis and al Qaeda will continue to look for willing recruits to do their dirty work, developing “penetrations” of the Afghan army and police force to turn on their mentors and trainers."
The psychological effects of trainees turning their weapons on their trainers is devastating to American troops and the 40 coalition partners in the country. President Obama needs to engage on this issue and seek to raise confidence in his overall Afghanistan strategy. The increase in insider attacks threatens the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, and U.S. officials must work closely with their Afghan counterparts to stop the attacks. President Obama has largely avoided talking about the Afghan war and has focused mainly on troop withdrawal schedules, rather than inspiring confidence in U.S. strategy and showing commitment to U.S. goals in the region.
While President Obama has been drawing down U.S. troops in Afghanistan, he has attempted to negotiate with the Taliban [2]—despite the fact that the Taliban has renounced neither terrorism nor its support for al-Qaeda. If the Taliban is able to regain influence in Afghanistan without breaking ties with international terrorism, al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups could re-establish a haven there.
Heritage’s Lisa Curtis reminds us that the military gains made against the Taliban over the past two years are “still fragile.” “It would be unwise for the U.S. to make major concessions before the Taliban has renounced international terrorism and demonstrated willingness to compromise politically,” Curtis has written [3].
Just a few months ago, the Taliban criticized the Afghan government for moving forward with a Strategic Partnership Agreement with the U.S., saying America’s goal was to prevent the institution of a true Islamic government [4] and to establish an army hostile to Islam that protects Western interests in the region.
Instead of focusing so much energy and attention on trying to negotiate with the Taliban, the U.S. should be empowering and organizing anti-Taliban elements into a cohesive political force. That includes encouraging Pakistan to end its support for the Taliban—and to stop providing safe haven to any terrorist networks.
Curtis says the U.S. can still achieve its goals in Afghanistan as long as it does not rush troop withdrawals [2]:"President Obama’s continued focus on troop withdrawals gives the impression that the U.S. is rushing for the exits, which is creating fear and uncertainty among the Afghans and causing President Karzai to become a less reliable partner. The scope and pace of withdrawals over the next two years should be determined by U.S. military commanders on the ground, not by U.S. electoral politics."
We cannot forget that the Afghanistan mission is to prevent the country from becoming the terrorist training ground it was before 9/11. While troops are focused on establishing security for average Afghans and fostering a democratic society there, the outcome directly affects the U.S. homeland.
*An earlier version incorrectly linked the colors to uniforms.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article printed from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation: http://blog.heritage.org
URL to article: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/22/morning-bell-afghan-forces-turning-against-their-u-s-trainers/
URLs in this post:
[1] writes: https://webmail.heritage.org/owa/redir.aspx?C=6a7dfa2eae654204ad7b55618aace25c&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nypost.com%2fp%2fnews%2fopinion%2fopedcolumnists%2fafghanistan_mission_new_woes_sQNm5SbHbwzlPGqyNOyuVI
[2] negotiate with the Taliban: https://webmail.heritage.org/owa/redir.aspx?C=6a7dfa2eae654204ad7b55618aace25c&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.heritage.org%2fresearch%2freports%2f2012%2f04%2fthe-us-must-move-cautiously-on-taliban-reconciliation
[3] written: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/04/the-us-must-move-cautiously-on-taliban-reconciliation
[4] prevent the institution of a true Islamic government: https://webmail.heritage.org/owa/redir.aspx?C=6a7dfa2eae654204ad7b55618aace25c&URL=http%3a%2f%2fblog.heritage.org%2f2012%2f04%2f23%2fu-s-afghan-strategic-partnership-agreement-marks-breakthrough%2f
Copyright © 2011 The Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved.
"Afghan Forces Turning Against Their U.S. Trainers" - By Amy Payne On August 22, 2012
American troops in Afghanistan face an increased threat from “insider” attacks in which the Afghan forces they are there to help and train are turning their guns on their American partners, raising serious questions about the viability of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. The attacks, which have killed 40 U.S. and NATO troops so far this year, are also referred to as “green-on-blue attacks,” because the military refers to local forces as “green” and allied forces as “blue.”*
Who are the Afghan security forces? While the Afghan Army leaders are professional and committed to working with their American counterparts, the recruits are mostly rural, illiterate men who can become disgruntled by cultural differences with their American trainers or susceptible to insurgent bribes or intimidation. U.S. military officials attribute only about 10 percent of the insider attacks to Taliban infiltration, despite Taliban claims of responsibility for most of the attacks.
There are about 350,000 Afghan security forces, including the police and army. As of October 1, there will be 68,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. The U.S. strategy in Afghanistan is centered on being able to train the Afghan forces so they can eventually face down the insurgent threat on their own. If the number of insider attacks does not abate, it will be increasingly difficult to justify a large-scale U.S. troop presence in the nation.
Heritage’s Peter Brookes writes [1] in the New York Post:
"Despite efforts by Coalition forces and the Afghan government to combat the violence through better screening, vetting, monitoring and counterintelligence, this isn’t going to be an easy problem to fix. The Taliban, the Haqqanis and al Qaeda will continue to look for willing recruits to do their dirty work, developing “penetrations” of the Afghan army and police force to turn on their mentors and trainers."
The psychological effects of trainees turning their weapons on their trainers is devastating to American troops and the 40 coalition partners in the country. President Obama needs to engage on this issue and seek to raise confidence in his overall Afghanistan strategy. The increase in insider attacks threatens the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, and U.S. officials must work closely with their Afghan counterparts to stop the attacks. President Obama has largely avoided talking about the Afghan war and has focused mainly on troop withdrawal schedules, rather than inspiring confidence in U.S. strategy and showing commitment to U.S. goals in the region.
While President Obama has been drawing down U.S. troops in Afghanistan, he has attempted to negotiate with the Taliban [2]—despite the fact that the Taliban has renounced neither terrorism nor its support for al-Qaeda. If the Taliban is able to regain influence in Afghanistan without breaking ties with international terrorism, al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups could re-establish a haven there.
Heritage’s Lisa Curtis reminds us that the military gains made against the Taliban over the past two years are “still fragile.” “It would be unwise for the U.S. to make major concessions before the Taliban has renounced international terrorism and demonstrated willingness to compromise politically,” Curtis has written [3].
Just a few months ago, the Taliban criticized the Afghan government for moving forward with a Strategic Partnership Agreement with the U.S., saying America’s goal was to prevent the institution of a true Islamic government [4] and to establish an army hostile to Islam that protects Western interests in the region.
Instead of focusing so much energy and attention on trying to negotiate with the Taliban, the U.S. should be empowering and organizing anti-Taliban elements into a cohesive political force. That includes encouraging Pakistan to end its support for the Taliban—and to stop providing safe haven to any terrorist networks.
Curtis says the U.S. can still achieve its goals in Afghanistan as long as it does not rush troop withdrawals [2]:"President Obama’s continued focus on troop withdrawals gives the impression that the U.S. is rushing for the exits, which is creating fear and uncertainty among the Afghans and causing President Karzai to become a less reliable partner. The scope and pace of withdrawals over the next two years should be determined by U.S. military commanders on the ground, not by U.S. electoral politics."
We cannot forget that the Afghanistan mission is to prevent the country from becoming the terrorist training ground it was before 9/11. While troops are focused on establishing security for average Afghans and fostering a democratic society there, the outcome directly affects the U.S. homeland.
*An earlier version incorrectly linked the colors to uniforms.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article printed from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation: http://blog.heritage.org
URL to article: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/22/morning-bell-afghan-forces-turning-against-their-u-s-trainers/
URLs in this post:
[1] writes: https://webmail.heritage.org/owa/redir.aspx?C=6a7dfa2eae654204ad7b55618aace25c&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nypost.com%2fp%2fnews%2fopinion%2fopedcolumnists%2fafghanistan_mission_new_woes_sQNm5SbHbwzlPGqyNOyuVI
[2] negotiate with the Taliban: https://webmail.heritage.org/owa/redir.aspx?C=6a7dfa2eae654204ad7b55618aace25c&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.heritage.org%2fresearch%2freports%2f2012%2f04%2fthe-us-must-move-cautiously-on-taliban-reconciliation
[3] written: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/04/the-us-must-move-cautiously-on-taliban-reconciliation
[4] prevent the institution of a true Islamic government: https://webmail.heritage.org/owa/redir.aspx?C=6a7dfa2eae654204ad7b55618aace25c&URL=http%3a%2f%2fblog.heritage.org%2f2012%2f04%2f23%2fu-s-afghan-strategic-partnership-agreement-marks-breakthrough%2f
Copyright © 2011 The Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
#305 (8/29) - When "Fact" Checkers Overlook FACTS
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
[NOTE: As we get inundated with political ads these days, we sometimes see one that claims to have "fact-checked" another candidate's ad. Well, let the following article make you cautious that those who SAY they have checked the facts actually have. Yes, it's frustrating but reminds us to always ask for GOD'S discernment. - Stan]
“Fact Checkers” Promote Obama’s Gutting of Welfare Reform, by Amy Payne,August 24
Since Heritage’s Robert Rector and Kiki Bradley broke the story [1] on July 12 that the Obama Administration had gutted the work requirements from the 1996 welfare reform law, the Administration has denied [2] it. In recent weeks, media “fact checks” have popped up all over declaring The Heritage Foundation’s scoop “False.”
Major media—most recently, CNN [3]—have carried water for President Obama’s defense of rewriting the welfare reform law. Since these supposed government watchdogs are playing the lapdog, Heritage will continue to provide the facts and do the investigative reporting.
Rector has already debunked the Administration’s claims that it did not gut welfare reform [2] and that Republican governors tried to do the same thing [2] in 2005. Now, he is taking apart the Administration’s defense of its new waiver policy piece-by-piece in a new series of papers.
The Claim: New Rules Will Still Increase Work
CNN’s “fact checkers” claim that “In some small way, the waivers might change precisely how work is calculated but the essential goal of pushing welfare recipients to work—something both Democrats and Republicans agreed to in the 1990s—remains the same.”
This is exactly Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s defense: that waiving welfare’s work requirements for states under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program will still require states to get welfare recipients into jobs. She maintains that the states will have to “commit that their proposals will move at least 20 percent more people from welfare to work compared to the state’s past performance.”
The Facts: Bogus Measures of Success
Rector meets this claim head-on in his new paper, “Ending Work for Welfare: Bogus Measures of Success [4].”
This standard is vague, first of all, since states do not actually need to fulfill it but merely “demonstrate clear progress toward that goal no later than one year” after they are exempted from the old TANF work standards. Nonetheless, at first glance, this goal looks fairly impressive.
President Obama’s HHS will exempt states from the federal work requirements if they increase by 20 percent the number of TANF cases that lose eligibility due to increases in earnings, a measure called “employment exits.” There are four reasons why a 20 percent increase in the number of employment exits, although it sounds impressive, is a very weak or counterproductive measure of success in welfare reform.
The four reasons this measure is weak, Rector says:
1. Employment exits will increase automatically when the economy recovers. Virtually every state in the U.S. will experience an increase in its employment exits by 20 percent “compared to the state’s past performance” as the economy moves from recession toward higher employment.\
2. States could meet the target simply with better record keeping. A large number of TANF recipients leave the program each month for unknown or unspecified reasons. It seems likely that many states could meet the 20 percent increase target simply by collecting or reporting more accurate data on their current exits.
3. A 20 percent increase in exits is insignificant. An increase in employment exits of 20 percent is actually a very small change. The average state has a monthly TANF caseload of around 40,000 families and an annual caseload of perhaps 80,000. Each state has around 600 employment exits from TANF each month, or 1.5 percent of monthly caseload. According to Obama’s new welfare system, the state can be fully exempt from the work standards written in the TANF law if it raises its employment exits from 600 per month to 720. Why is it reasonable, fair, or wise to exempt the remaining 39,000 welfare households from workfare participation just because an extra 120 have left the rolls?
4. More employment exits indicate a larger caseload. The number of employment exits generally rises when the size of the welfare caseload rises, and it falls when the caseload falls. This is due to routine caseload turnover.
Rector concludes that “The number of employment exits is thus meaningless as a method for assessing the TANF program. Employment exits is a sham measure of success that creates the impression that welfare dependence is being reduced when, in reality, the number of persons on welfare is constant or rising.”
Under the Administration’s new measurement, the old welfare program would have been deemed a success, while the extremely successful [5] 1996 reforms would have looked like a failure.
With an Administration that routinely creates new laws by executive order—disregarding the people’s elected representatives—accountability is in short supply. Heritage legal experts Todd Gaziano, Robert Alt [6], and Andrew Grossman [7] have detailed why the Administration’s actions are illegal. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has no authority to grant the type of waivers it is creating. Yet the media haven’t done a “legality check” on the Obama Administration.
(Stay tuned for the next installment in Rector’s continuing series next week. Read the first installment: Ending Work for Welfare: Bogus Measures of Success. See[4] below.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article printed from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation: http://blog.heritage.org
URL to article: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/24/morning-bell-media-fact-checkers-promote-obamas-gutting-of-welfare-reform/
URLs in this post:
[1] broke the story: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/12/obama-guts-welfare-reform/
[2] has denied: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/08/morning-bell-obama-denies-gutting-welfare-reform/
[3] CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/politics/fact-check-welfare/index.html
[4] Ending Work for Welfare: Bogus Measures of Success: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2012/08/Ending-Work-for-Welfare-Bogus-Measures-of-Success
[5] extremely successful: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/02/the-continuing-good-news
[6] Todd Gaziano, Robert Alt: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/16/obamas-gutting-of-welfare-reform-is-illegal/
[7] Andrew Grossman: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/08/welfare-reforms-work-requirements-cannot-be-waived
Copyright © 2011 The Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved.
[NOTE: As we get inundated with political ads these days, we sometimes see one that claims to have "fact-checked" another candidate's ad. Well, let the following article make you cautious that those who SAY they have checked the facts actually have. Yes, it's frustrating but reminds us to always ask for GOD'S discernment. - Stan]
“Fact Checkers” Promote Obama’s Gutting of Welfare Reform, by Amy Payne,August 24
Since Heritage’s Robert Rector and Kiki Bradley broke the story [1] on July 12 that the Obama Administration had gutted the work requirements from the 1996 welfare reform law, the Administration has denied [2] it. In recent weeks, media “fact checks” have popped up all over declaring The Heritage Foundation’s scoop “False.”
Major media—most recently, CNN [3]—have carried water for President Obama’s defense of rewriting the welfare reform law. Since these supposed government watchdogs are playing the lapdog, Heritage will continue to provide the facts and do the investigative reporting.
Rector has already debunked the Administration’s claims that it did not gut welfare reform [2] and that Republican governors tried to do the same thing [2] in 2005. Now, he is taking apart the Administration’s defense of its new waiver policy piece-by-piece in a new series of papers.
The Claim: New Rules Will Still Increase Work
CNN’s “fact checkers” claim that “In some small way, the waivers might change precisely how work is calculated but the essential goal of pushing welfare recipients to work—something both Democrats and Republicans agreed to in the 1990s—remains the same.”
This is exactly Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s defense: that waiving welfare’s work requirements for states under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program will still require states to get welfare recipients into jobs. She maintains that the states will have to “commit that their proposals will move at least 20 percent more people from welfare to work compared to the state’s past performance.”
The Facts: Bogus Measures of Success
Rector meets this claim head-on in his new paper, “Ending Work for Welfare: Bogus Measures of Success [4].”
This standard is vague, first of all, since states do not actually need to fulfill it but merely “demonstrate clear progress toward that goal no later than one year” after they are exempted from the old TANF work standards. Nonetheless, at first glance, this goal looks fairly impressive.
President Obama’s HHS will exempt states from the federal work requirements if they increase by 20 percent the number of TANF cases that lose eligibility due to increases in earnings, a measure called “employment exits.” There are four reasons why a 20 percent increase in the number of employment exits, although it sounds impressive, is a very weak or counterproductive measure of success in welfare reform.
The four reasons this measure is weak, Rector says:
1. Employment exits will increase automatically when the economy recovers. Virtually every state in the U.S. will experience an increase in its employment exits by 20 percent “compared to the state’s past performance” as the economy moves from recession toward higher employment.\
2. States could meet the target simply with better record keeping. A large number of TANF recipients leave the program each month for unknown or unspecified reasons. It seems likely that many states could meet the 20 percent increase target simply by collecting or reporting more accurate data on their current exits.
3. A 20 percent increase in exits is insignificant. An increase in employment exits of 20 percent is actually a very small change. The average state has a monthly TANF caseload of around 40,000 families and an annual caseload of perhaps 80,000. Each state has around 600 employment exits from TANF each month, or 1.5 percent of monthly caseload. According to Obama’s new welfare system, the state can be fully exempt from the work standards written in the TANF law if it raises its employment exits from 600 per month to 720. Why is it reasonable, fair, or wise to exempt the remaining 39,000 welfare households from workfare participation just because an extra 120 have left the rolls?
4. More employment exits indicate a larger caseload. The number of employment exits generally rises when the size of the welfare caseload rises, and it falls when the caseload falls. This is due to routine caseload turnover.
Rector concludes that “The number of employment exits is thus meaningless as a method for assessing the TANF program. Employment exits is a sham measure of success that creates the impression that welfare dependence is being reduced when, in reality, the number of persons on welfare is constant or rising.”
Under the Administration’s new measurement, the old welfare program would have been deemed a success, while the extremely successful [5] 1996 reforms would have looked like a failure.
With an Administration that routinely creates new laws by executive order—disregarding the people’s elected representatives—accountability is in short supply. Heritage legal experts Todd Gaziano, Robert Alt [6], and Andrew Grossman [7] have detailed why the Administration’s actions are illegal. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has no authority to grant the type of waivers it is creating. Yet the media haven’t done a “legality check” on the Obama Administration.
(Stay tuned for the next installment in Rector’s continuing series next week. Read the first installment: Ending Work for Welfare: Bogus Measures of Success. See[4] below.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article printed from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation: http://blog.heritage.org
URL to article: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/24/morning-bell-media-fact-checkers-promote-obamas-gutting-of-welfare-reform/
URLs in this post:
[1] broke the story: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/12/obama-guts-welfare-reform/
[2] has denied: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/08/morning-bell-obama-denies-gutting-welfare-reform/
[3] CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/politics/fact-check-welfare/index.html
[4] Ending Work for Welfare: Bogus Measures of Success: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2012/08/Ending-Work-for-Welfare-Bogus-Measures-of-Success
[5] extremely successful: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/02/the-continuing-good-news
[6] Todd Gaziano, Robert Alt: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/16/obamas-gutting-of-welfare-reform-is-illegal/
[7] Andrew Grossman: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/08/welfare-reforms-work-requirements-cannot-be-waived
Copyright © 2011 The Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
#304(8/28) - "Firefighters, Teachers, and Police - Not a Federal Responsibility"
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
- By Brian Darling, June 19, 2012 http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2012/06/firefighters-teachers-and-police-not-a-federal-responsibility?rel=Political Thought
The left wants us to believe that paying for teachers, firefighters and police is a federal responsibility. Not so. Such services have traditionally been the responsibility of state and local governments.
In Federalist 45, James Madison wrote that the powers of the federal government are “few and defined.” Madison argued that state power extends to issues that “concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given the explicit power to supplant the traditional police powers of the states.
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates powers granted to the federal government. Nowhere does it list the power to “bail out the states who come up short in paying for firefighters, police and teachers.” Furthermore, when the feds “give” lesser governments money to pay for local responsibilities, they often attach conditions to funding that may be unconstitutional.
The 10th Amendment states “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The educating of children, the protection of the populace from crime and the suppression of fires are clearly powers reserved to the states.
Last week, the Left hit Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney with the supposedly shaming accusation that he wants to cut funding for these state and local functions. They went into a tizzy when Romney remarked that “teachers and firemen and policemen are hired at the local level and also by states. The federal government doesn’t pay for teachers, firefighters or policemen.”
Michael McAuliff of the Huffington Post pointed out that “the federal government spends huge amounts of money to support all those professions.” This is true, yet the federal government does things frequently that many consider to be outside of the proper scope of the federal powers. You need look no further than the individual mandate contained in ObamaCare to see a law that many argue is an unconstitutional exercise of federal authority.
McAuliff observed that “in the Lyndon Johnson administration, [the feds] started paying out Title 1 education funds, and this year, it is slated to spend $14.5 billion under Title 1. The money is meant to help disadvantaged schools.” Many conservatives argue that the federal government, even when well intentioned, should stay out of state and local education decisions. The Constitution agrees.
Since the Clinton Administration, the federal government has also funded the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) hiring grant program. It funnels billions of federal tax dollars to state and local police departments—as well as park police, college police and other law enforcement agencies.
Unfortunately, exhaustive research by The Heritage Foundation’s David Muhlhausen has demonstrated that COPS is completely "ineffective at reducing crime." President Obama’s “stimulus” program encouraging state and local governments to take on additional temporary police officers is even less intelligently designed. It’s a classic example of squandering federal dollars on functions that are none of DC’s business to begin with.
The federal government, already too large, with spending far above the post World War II norm. On May 31, 2012, Alison Fraser of Heritage testified to the House Budget Committee that “today, federal spending is at about 23 percent of [Gross Domestic Product], and debt held by the public is approximately 70 percent. When compared to the historical, post–World War II average of approximately 20 percent of GDP for federal spending and 44 percent for debt held by the public, this growth alone would be cause for concern.”
James Pethokoukis of AEI estimates that, under President Obama, federal spending totalled 25.2% of GDP in 2009, 24.1% of GDP in 2010, 24.1% of GDP in 2011, and 24.3% (estimates by the White House ) this year. And much of that spending is with borrowed dollars. Our national debt now stands at $15.8 trillion , up from $10.6when Obama took office. The federal government simply does not have the money to bail out profligate states or municipalities.
The Constitution is clear. The states are the repository of police powers. State and local employees should not be supported by federal funds for constitutional as well as fiscal reasons. Yes, federal funds have flowed to state and local governments to hire firefighters, teachers, and police. But that doesn’t make the practice prudent or proper.
Bail out shortfalls in state and local treasuries is not a core function of the federal government. It is but an example of the central government is infringing on the traditional domain of the states.
Brian Darling is a Senior Fellow in Government Studies at the Heritage Foundation.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
- By Brian Darling, June 19, 2012 http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2012/06/firefighters-teachers-and-police-not-a-federal-responsibility?rel=Political Thought
The left wants us to believe that paying for teachers, firefighters and police is a federal responsibility. Not so. Such services have traditionally been the responsibility of state and local governments.
In Federalist 45, James Madison wrote that the powers of the federal government are “few and defined.” Madison argued that state power extends to issues that “concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given the explicit power to supplant the traditional police powers of the states.
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates powers granted to the federal government. Nowhere does it list the power to “bail out the states who come up short in paying for firefighters, police and teachers.” Furthermore, when the feds “give” lesser governments money to pay for local responsibilities, they often attach conditions to funding that may be unconstitutional.
The 10th Amendment states “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The educating of children, the protection of the populace from crime and the suppression of fires are clearly powers reserved to the states.
Last week, the Left hit Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney with the supposedly shaming accusation that he wants to cut funding for these state and local functions. They went into a tizzy when Romney remarked that “teachers and firemen and policemen are hired at the local level and also by states. The federal government doesn’t pay for teachers, firefighters or policemen.”
Michael McAuliff of the Huffington Post pointed out that “the federal government spends huge amounts of money to support all those professions.” This is true, yet the federal government does things frequently that many consider to be outside of the proper scope of the federal powers. You need look no further than the individual mandate contained in ObamaCare to see a law that many argue is an unconstitutional exercise of federal authority.
McAuliff observed that “in the Lyndon Johnson administration, [the feds] started paying out Title 1 education funds, and this year, it is slated to spend $14.5 billion under Title 1. The money is meant to help disadvantaged schools.” Many conservatives argue that the federal government, even when well intentioned, should stay out of state and local education decisions. The Constitution agrees.
Since the Clinton Administration, the federal government has also funded the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) hiring grant program. It funnels billions of federal tax dollars to state and local police departments—as well as park police, college police and other law enforcement agencies.
Unfortunately, exhaustive research by The Heritage Foundation’s David Muhlhausen has demonstrated that COPS is completely "ineffective at reducing crime." President Obama’s “stimulus” program encouraging state and local governments to take on additional temporary police officers is even less intelligently designed. It’s a classic example of squandering federal dollars on functions that are none of DC’s business to begin with.
The federal government, already too large, with spending far above the post World War II norm. On May 31, 2012, Alison Fraser of Heritage testified to the House Budget Committee that “today, federal spending is at about 23 percent of [Gross Domestic Product], and debt held by the public is approximately 70 percent. When compared to the historical, post–World War II average of approximately 20 percent of GDP for federal spending and 44 percent for debt held by the public, this growth alone would be cause for concern.”
James Pethokoukis of AEI estimates that, under President Obama, federal spending totalled 25.2% of GDP in 2009, 24.1% of GDP in 2010, 24.1% of GDP in 2011, and 24.3% (estimates by the White House ) this year. And much of that spending is with borrowed dollars. Our national debt now stands at $15.8 trillion , up from $10.6when Obama took office. The federal government simply does not have the money to bail out profligate states or municipalities.
The Constitution is clear. The states are the repository of police powers. State and local employees should not be supported by federal funds for constitutional as well as fiscal reasons. Yes, federal funds have flowed to state and local governments to hire firefighters, teachers, and police. But that doesn’t make the practice prudent or proper.
Bail out shortfalls in state and local treasuries is not a core function of the federal government. It is but an example of the central government is infringing on the traditional domain of the states.
Brian Darling is a Senior Fellow in Government Studies at the Heritage Foundation.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Monday, August 27, 2012
#303 (8/27) - "Lance Armstrong: Guilty, Even When Proven Innocent"
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
[NOTE: What follows is a side of the recent news about Lance Armstrong that I had not heard. It is a good reminder that there often is another side than what we only hear by the usual media outlets. - Stan]
- By: John Hayward, 8/24/2012; http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/24/lance-armstrong-guilty-even-when-proven-innocent/
Quick, name a pro cyclist other than Lance Armstrong.
If you’re a cycling enthusiast who really could rattle off the names of a few other favorite athletes, then bless your heart, but of course you probably still realize that Armstrong is the only name that comes to most people’s minds. He won the Tour de France an amazing seven times, and survived a battle with testicular cancer that made him an inspirational figure to many fans. He remains a dedicated crusader against cancer, having established the highly successful Livestrong foundation.
Bicycle racing at the Tour de France level is a grueling test of endurance. So is beating cancer. The philosophy of Armstrong’s foundation is based on the link between the two – “We believe in energy: channeled and fierce. We believe in focus: getting smart and living strong,” as the Livestrong manifesto puts it.
But the one thing Armstong’s perseverance couldn’t defeat was an out-of-control quasi-governmental agency with government funding and a single-minded vendetta against him. On Thursday night, Armstrong announced that he would no longer continue his three-year battle against the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which was never able to produce a single conclusive test to prove Armstrong guilty of using performance-enhancing drugs… but relentlessly persecuted him anyway.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office in L.A. investigated Armstrong for two years, without filing any charges, but that didn’t matter to the USADA. Armstrong noted that some of the charges leveled against him by the anti-doping agency far exceeded their 8-year statute of limitations. He also pointed out in his statement on Thursday that various international cycling organizations declared the USADA’s proceedings improper, questioned their authority to conduct the investigation, called upon them to cease and desist, and advised other athletes to refrain from cooperating in the Armstrong persecution.
The USADA’s case rests entirely on hearsay – witnesses claiming to have seen Armstrong doping before races, even though incredibly extensive medical testing found no conclusive evidence. Armstrong alleges that corrupt testimony from these riders was obtained with special deals from the USADA. It’s a classic example of a witch hunt, in which the target must be guilty, even though science says he is innocent, because several other people insist upon his guilt.
“If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and – once and for all – put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance,” Armstrong said in his statement.“But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what [USADA chief] Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?”
And why won’t they stand by it? Why did they work so hard to bypass their own standards, and obtain a “victory” in defiance of clinical procedure? It couldn’t be because the agency would have felt institutionally embarrassed by letting Armstrong walk away after picking a fight with him, could it? Or was personal embarrassment by certain top bureaucrats the issue? Did the agency feel a need to mount a high-profile head above its fireplace, to prove its importance? When does the investigation of this investigation start, and who will conduct it?
The USADA has banned Armstrong from cycling for life, and attempted to strip him of his seven Tour de France titles, but it appears that only the International Cycling Union has the power to take his titles away. You would think the USADA bureaucrats would have known that before issuing a pronouncement they have no power to enforce… but they don’t exactly seem to be sticklers for the rules over there, do they?
“The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced,” said Armstrong. “The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, perverts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex-teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It’s an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It’s just not right.”
People have said plenty of bad things about Armstrong, whose admirable qualities and sporting achievements do not insulate him from personal criticism. In that respect, he’s just like the rest of the human race. But his critics can’t seem to do two things: prove he was cheating, or beat him in a bicycle race.
The Washington Post quotes USDA chief Tygart, who must have been struggling to hold back his tears: “It is a sad day for all of us who love sport and our athletic heroes. This is a heartbreaking example of how the win-at-all-costs culture of sport, if left unchecked, will overtake fair, safe and honest competition.”
He got the “win-at-all-costs culture” part right, but it’s not the sport of cycling we need to be worried about.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
[NOTE: What follows is a side of the recent news about Lance Armstrong that I had not heard. It is a good reminder that there often is another side than what we only hear by the usual media outlets. - Stan]
- By: John Hayward, 8/24/2012; http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/24/lance-armstrong-guilty-even-when-proven-innocent/
Quick, name a pro cyclist other than Lance Armstrong.
If you’re a cycling enthusiast who really could rattle off the names of a few other favorite athletes, then bless your heart, but of course you probably still realize that Armstrong is the only name that comes to most people’s minds. He won the Tour de France an amazing seven times, and survived a battle with testicular cancer that made him an inspirational figure to many fans. He remains a dedicated crusader against cancer, having established the highly successful Livestrong foundation.
Bicycle racing at the Tour de France level is a grueling test of endurance. So is beating cancer. The philosophy of Armstrong’s foundation is based on the link between the two – “We believe in energy: channeled and fierce. We believe in focus: getting smart and living strong,” as the Livestrong manifesto puts it.
But the one thing Armstong’s perseverance couldn’t defeat was an out-of-control quasi-governmental agency with government funding and a single-minded vendetta against him. On Thursday night, Armstrong announced that he would no longer continue his three-year battle against the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which was never able to produce a single conclusive test to prove Armstrong guilty of using performance-enhancing drugs… but relentlessly persecuted him anyway.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office in L.A. investigated Armstrong for two years, without filing any charges, but that didn’t matter to the USADA. Armstrong noted that some of the charges leveled against him by the anti-doping agency far exceeded their 8-year statute of limitations. He also pointed out in his statement on Thursday that various international cycling organizations declared the USADA’s proceedings improper, questioned their authority to conduct the investigation, called upon them to cease and desist, and advised other athletes to refrain from cooperating in the Armstrong persecution.
The USADA’s case rests entirely on hearsay – witnesses claiming to have seen Armstrong doping before races, even though incredibly extensive medical testing found no conclusive evidence. Armstrong alleges that corrupt testimony from these riders was obtained with special deals from the USADA. It’s a classic example of a witch hunt, in which the target must be guilty, even though science says he is innocent, because several other people insist upon his guilt.
“If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and – once and for all – put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance,” Armstrong said in his statement.“But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what [USADA chief] Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?”
And why won’t they stand by it? Why did they work so hard to bypass their own standards, and obtain a “victory” in defiance of clinical procedure? It couldn’t be because the agency would have felt institutionally embarrassed by letting Armstrong walk away after picking a fight with him, could it? Or was personal embarrassment by certain top bureaucrats the issue? Did the agency feel a need to mount a high-profile head above its fireplace, to prove its importance? When does the investigation of this investigation start, and who will conduct it?
The USADA has banned Armstrong from cycling for life, and attempted to strip him of his seven Tour de France titles, but it appears that only the International Cycling Union has the power to take his titles away. You would think the USADA bureaucrats would have known that before issuing a pronouncement they have no power to enforce… but they don’t exactly seem to be sticklers for the rules over there, do they?
“The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced,” said Armstrong. “The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, perverts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex-teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It’s an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It’s just not right.”
People have said plenty of bad things about Armstrong, whose admirable qualities and sporting achievements do not insulate him from personal criticism. In that respect, he’s just like the rest of the human race. But his critics can’t seem to do two things: prove he was cheating, or beat him in a bicycle race.
The Washington Post quotes USDA chief Tygart, who must have been struggling to hold back his tears: “It is a sad day for all of us who love sport and our athletic heroes. This is a heartbreaking example of how the win-at-all-costs culture of sport, if left unchecked, will overtake fair, safe and honest competition.”
He got the “win-at-all-costs culture” part right, but it’s not the sport of cycling we need to be worried about.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Sunday, August 26, 2012
#302 (8/26) - Sunday Special > "Christian Citizenship"
[FYI #1 - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
FYI - As usual on Sundays, please try to catch this week's broadcast of "Truth That Transforms." (In Central Florida, 9-9:30 am, 10-10:30 am, 5-5:30 pm; check your TV listings) or watch it at www.truthinaction.org. This week's very timely message is entitled “Building A Christian Nation" and helps Christians to determine the values they should vote for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
- The following is a commentary by the late D. James Kennedy, posted on August 1, 2012, by Truth In Action Ministries [See the article after the one below to find out how you can REGISTER TO VOTE and PRAY for our country. - Stan]
Jesus Christ declared, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21)
In that verse we can clearly see that there are two spheres in which we are to render our due responsibilities — the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world.
America began with godly men who came to these shores to worship Jesus Christ and advance His Kingdom. God blessed their efforts and America became the greatest nation on earth. But what happened?
Today we live in a land of rampant sexual immorality, abortion, drug use, and violence of every sort. Education, which used to be the pride of this nation, has become a disgrace. Well, what happened along the way from Plymouth Rock until now? Upon whom shall we lay the blame?
Do you remember the story of Dr. Frankenstein and his monster? In the final scene the monster goes berserk, wreaks havoc upon the townspeople, a number of them are killed, and now he attacks Doctor Frankenstein and destroys his home.
A friend of Dr. Frankenstein says to him, “What has happened here?”
Dr. Frankenstein replies: “A monster did this.
“A monster? Where did it come from, Dr. Frankenstein?”
“Well… I made it myself.”
You see, we have to acknowledge that a great deal of the blame must be laid at the doorstep of the church. We failed to obey the Great Commission of leading others to Christ and the Cultural Mandate to be involved in every sphere of activity. We retreated from politics and government and the media and higher education, and we left it to unbelievers. We have failed to fulfill our responsibilities as citizens, and we have failed to obey the command of Christ to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.
The purpose of government is to defend its citizens and restrain evildoers that we may live godly and peaceable lives. But we have had a government that all too often has failed to defend its citizens and has encouraged evildoers rather than restraining them.
Well, how do we render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s? First of all, we should pray regularly, faithfully, and daily, for those who are in power — for our President, the Supreme Court, the Congress, and those who rule locally. Secondly, we should register to vote. Millions of evangelical Christians are not even registered to vote. Do you realize that we could have totally changed every election that has taken place in the last 50 years if we simply voted? Christians have had it in their power to change all of these things that we lament and complain about, and we just haven’t done it. Voting, for non-Christian Americans, is a privilege and a responsibility. But for Christians, it is a DUTY demanded by God that we should fulfill.
Thirdly, we should educate ourselves regarding the important moral issues facing our nation. Also, we need to examine what the candidates themselves stand for, and then vote as God would have you vote.
I wonder what people will say to their grandchildren when they ask, “Granddaddy, What were you doing when America became a godless nation? What did you do to stop that?”
We can stop it and we can change it if we will simply be obedient to what Jesus Christ told us to do and fulfill our responsibilities as Christian citizens. All the blessings this nation has enjoyed have come from Jesus Christ, and it’s up to us to bring Him and His teachings and His Gospel back to this country so that we can once more say, “God bless America, land of the free.”
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Voter Registration Will Be Critical in 2012, Posted on August 1, 2012 by Dr. Karen Gushta, http://www.truthimpact.me/index.php/author/k-gushta/
... About 30 percent of eligible American voters are not registered. The number of unregistered Christian voters is higher. Of the 60 million evangelical Christians in the United States, 40 percent are not registered. This year, two organizations are trying to change this.
Both ChampiontheVote.com and iVoteValues.org offer online voter registration, volunteer mobilization, and church voter registration packets.
This year’s election is crucial. In 2008, nearly 15 million newly-registered voters tipped the election for the winner. As Christian citizens, it is our civic duty to vote. If you’re not registered, please register, and then vote your values in November.
(1) Be sure to be REGISTERED TO VOTE. To get details of doing that in your state, go to > http://www.cbn.com/special/register-to-vote/
(2) For a review of the CRITICAL ISSUES to consider in your voting, please go to > http://www.truthinaction.org/PDF/Final_Voters_Guide.pdf
(3) ALSO, BEGIN PRAYING FOR THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS; Download a free prayer guide at > http://www.prayerconnect.net/resources/prayer-guides/2012-election-prayer-guide
FYI - As usual on Sundays, please try to catch this week's broadcast of "Truth That Transforms." (In Central Florida, 9-9:30 am, 10-10:30 am, 5-5:30 pm; check your TV listings) or watch it at www.truthinaction.org. This week's very timely message is entitled “Building A Christian Nation" and helps Christians to determine the values they should vote for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
- The following is a commentary by the late D. James Kennedy, posted on August 1, 2012, by Truth In Action Ministries [See the article after the one below to find out how you can REGISTER TO VOTE and PRAY for our country. - Stan]
Jesus Christ declared, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21)
In that verse we can clearly see that there are two spheres in which we are to render our due responsibilities — the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world.
America began with godly men who came to these shores to worship Jesus Christ and advance His Kingdom. God blessed their efforts and America became the greatest nation on earth. But what happened?
Today we live in a land of rampant sexual immorality, abortion, drug use, and violence of every sort. Education, which used to be the pride of this nation, has become a disgrace. Well, what happened along the way from Plymouth Rock until now? Upon whom shall we lay the blame?
Do you remember the story of Dr. Frankenstein and his monster? In the final scene the monster goes berserk, wreaks havoc upon the townspeople, a number of them are killed, and now he attacks Doctor Frankenstein and destroys his home.
A friend of Dr. Frankenstein says to him, “What has happened here?”
Dr. Frankenstein replies: “A monster did this.
“A monster? Where did it come from, Dr. Frankenstein?”
“Well… I made it myself.”
You see, we have to acknowledge that a great deal of the blame must be laid at the doorstep of the church. We failed to obey the Great Commission of leading others to Christ and the Cultural Mandate to be involved in every sphere of activity. We retreated from politics and government and the media and higher education, and we left it to unbelievers. We have failed to fulfill our responsibilities as citizens, and we have failed to obey the command of Christ to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.
The purpose of government is to defend its citizens and restrain evildoers that we may live godly and peaceable lives. But we have had a government that all too often has failed to defend its citizens and has encouraged evildoers rather than restraining them.
Well, how do we render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s? First of all, we should pray regularly, faithfully, and daily, for those who are in power — for our President, the Supreme Court, the Congress, and those who rule locally. Secondly, we should register to vote. Millions of evangelical Christians are not even registered to vote. Do you realize that we could have totally changed every election that has taken place in the last 50 years if we simply voted? Christians have had it in their power to change all of these things that we lament and complain about, and we just haven’t done it. Voting, for non-Christian Americans, is a privilege and a responsibility. But for Christians, it is a DUTY demanded by God that we should fulfill.
Thirdly, we should educate ourselves regarding the important moral issues facing our nation. Also, we need to examine what the candidates themselves stand for, and then vote as God would have you vote.
I wonder what people will say to their grandchildren when they ask, “Granddaddy, What were you doing when America became a godless nation? What did you do to stop that?”
We can stop it and we can change it if we will simply be obedient to what Jesus Christ told us to do and fulfill our responsibilities as Christian citizens. All the blessings this nation has enjoyed have come from Jesus Christ, and it’s up to us to bring Him and His teachings and His Gospel back to this country so that we can once more say, “God bless America, land of the free.”
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Voter Registration Will Be Critical in 2012, Posted on August 1, 2012 by Dr. Karen Gushta, http://www.truthimpact.me/index.php/author/k-gushta/
... About 30 percent of eligible American voters are not registered. The number of unregistered Christian voters is higher. Of the 60 million evangelical Christians in the United States, 40 percent are not registered. This year, two organizations are trying to change this.
Both ChampiontheVote.com and iVoteValues.org offer online voter registration, volunteer mobilization, and church voter registration packets.
This year’s election is crucial. In 2008, nearly 15 million newly-registered voters tipped the election for the winner. As Christian citizens, it is our civic duty to vote. If you’re not registered, please register, and then vote your values in November.
(1) Be sure to be REGISTERED TO VOTE. To get details of doing that in your state, go to > http://www.cbn.com/special/register-to-vote/
(2) For a review of the CRITICAL ISSUES to consider in your voting, please go to > http://www.truthinaction.org/PDF/Final_Voters_Guide.pdf
(3) ALSO, BEGIN PRAYING FOR THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS; Download a free prayer guide at > http://www.prayerconnect.net/resources/prayer-guides/2012-election-prayer-guide
Saturday, August 25, 2012
#301 (8/25) - Items for Prayer From the Past Week
[FYI - My GENday is Sept.19th. When is YOURS?]
Hurricane Isaac Threatens to Swamp Republican Convention,, August 22(Source: ABC News, National Weather Service)
Hurricane Isaac, currently a tropical storm brewing southeast of Puerto Rico, is on track to hit Florida the same day that Mitt Romney and 50,000 Republican delegates, journalists, protestors and guests descend on Tampa for the Republican National Convention. While it is too early to accurately predict the storm’s path, ABC meteorologist Max Golembo said it will hit southern Florida. Whether it will skim the east coast near Miami or crash head-on into Tampa, is still up in the air.
As the Lord leads, please pray: •About the path of Hurricane Isaac and the havoc it can create all along its progression.
•For the organizers and attenders of the Republican Convention, their safety, and the logistics of planning an alternate convention time if the need arises.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
Risk of Double-Dip Recession Rises in U.S., August 22
The odds the United States will slip back into recession next year have risen, ratings agency Standard & Poor’s said, citing risks from the European debt crisis and budget tightening at year-end. The US ratings firm raised the chance of the US falling into recession to 25 percent, up from a 20 percent chance estimated in February, as the world’s largest economy struggles to recover from a severe 2008-2009 slump.
It also pointed to the looming possibility of the government being forced by existing law to severely cut spending and increase taxes on January 1, the so-called fiscal cliff that would crunch the economy.
"Economic activity has downshifted sharply from earlier this year," S&P said in a report on North American credit conditions amid global uncertainty, dated August 20.
"At the same time, possible contagion from the European debt crisis, the potential so-called ’fiscal cliff’, and the risk of a hard landing for China’s economy have added greater uncertainty to US economic prospects," it said.(Source: American Foreign Press, Wall Street Journal)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•About the national and international economic downward trends and what can be done to reverse them.
•About the impact on American family budgets if the economy takes another recessionary dip.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two U.S. Special Ops Troops Killed by Afghan Soldier in Training, August 17
Two American soldiers were part of a U.S. special operations team tasked with training local Afghan military and police forces in Farah province in Western Afghanistan, were killed by an Afghan recruit only moments after he had been handed a weapon...Including Friday’s shootings in Farah province, 11 American soldiers have been killed by Afghan forces in what the Pentagon is now calling "insider attacks" over the past two weeks... The Pentagon is planning to ramp up counterintelligence operations to ferret out insurgents or sympathizers who might have infiltrated the ranks of American, NATO and Afghan forces.(Sources: The Hill, New York Times)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•About the need for trust between U.S. and NATO forces and the Afghan nationals being trained to take over security.
•For efforts to ferret out the insurgents and those intent on betrayal.
•For the families of our military men and women being lost to these attacks.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pakistani Christians, Fearing Backlash, Flee Community after Girl Accused of Blasphemy, August 20
Everyone in the teeming, tense community of Muslims and Christians just outside Islamabad seems to have a different story about the young girl and the Koran.
The 12-year-old Christian deliberately burned the Muslim holy book, some say. No, she innocently put pages from a non-sacred teaching text into the trash, say others, and nothing was burned. Still another version holds that an older Muslim boy planted pages of the Koran for the cleaning girl to find, and leveled the accusation of desecration because she had spurned him. Amid the conflicting claims, this much is certain: As many as 600 Christians have fled their colony bordering the capital, fearing for their lives, officials said, after a mob last week called for the child to be burned to death as a blasphemer.
The girl, whom authorities have described as having Down syndrome, now sits in jail in Rawalpindi, charged by police with blasphemy, while her family has been put in federal protective custody.
Under Pakistani law, those found guilty of defaming the Islamic prophet Muhammad face the death penalty, while defiling the Koran can bring a life sentence. The case of the girl is the fourth in recent months to alarm human rights advocates, who say the law is frequently used to persecute Christians and also has been unfairly applied to the mentally ill - including some Muslims.
(Source: Washington Post, Reuters, Associated Press, Fox News)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•For Christians in Pakistan who fear persecution.
•For the young girl in protective custody and her family,that they might be strong in the face of potential mob violence from their Muslim neighbors.
Hurricane Isaac Threatens to Swamp Republican Convention,, August 22(Source: ABC News, National Weather Service)
Hurricane Isaac, currently a tropical storm brewing southeast of Puerto Rico, is on track to hit Florida the same day that Mitt Romney and 50,000 Republican delegates, journalists, protestors and guests descend on Tampa for the Republican National Convention. While it is too early to accurately predict the storm’s path, ABC meteorologist Max Golembo said it will hit southern Florida. Whether it will skim the east coast near Miami or crash head-on into Tampa, is still up in the air.
As the Lord leads, please pray: •About the path of Hurricane Isaac and the havoc it can create all along its progression.
•For the organizers and attenders of the Republican Convention, their safety, and the logistics of planning an alternate convention time if the need arises.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
Risk of Double-Dip Recession Rises in U.S., August 22
The odds the United States will slip back into recession next year have risen, ratings agency Standard & Poor’s said, citing risks from the European debt crisis and budget tightening at year-end. The US ratings firm raised the chance of the US falling into recession to 25 percent, up from a 20 percent chance estimated in February, as the world’s largest economy struggles to recover from a severe 2008-2009 slump.
It also pointed to the looming possibility of the government being forced by existing law to severely cut spending and increase taxes on January 1, the so-called fiscal cliff that would crunch the economy.
"Economic activity has downshifted sharply from earlier this year," S&P said in a report on North American credit conditions amid global uncertainty, dated August 20.
"At the same time, possible contagion from the European debt crisis, the potential so-called ’fiscal cliff’, and the risk of a hard landing for China’s economy have added greater uncertainty to US economic prospects," it said.(Source: American Foreign Press, Wall Street Journal)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•About the national and international economic downward trends and what can be done to reverse them.
•About the impact on American family budgets if the economy takes another recessionary dip.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two U.S. Special Ops Troops Killed by Afghan Soldier in Training, August 17
Two American soldiers were part of a U.S. special operations team tasked with training local Afghan military and police forces in Farah province in Western Afghanistan, were killed by an Afghan recruit only moments after he had been handed a weapon...Including Friday’s shootings in Farah province, 11 American soldiers have been killed by Afghan forces in what the Pentagon is now calling "insider attacks" over the past two weeks... The Pentagon is planning to ramp up counterintelligence operations to ferret out insurgents or sympathizers who might have infiltrated the ranks of American, NATO and Afghan forces.(Sources: The Hill, New York Times)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•About the need for trust between U.S. and NATO forces and the Afghan nationals being trained to take over security.
•For efforts to ferret out the insurgents and those intent on betrayal.
•For the families of our military men and women being lost to these attacks.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pakistani Christians, Fearing Backlash, Flee Community after Girl Accused of Blasphemy, August 20
Everyone in the teeming, tense community of Muslims and Christians just outside Islamabad seems to have a different story about the young girl and the Koran.
The 12-year-old Christian deliberately burned the Muslim holy book, some say. No, she innocently put pages from a non-sacred teaching text into the trash, say others, and nothing was burned. Still another version holds that an older Muslim boy planted pages of the Koran for the cleaning girl to find, and leveled the accusation of desecration because she had spurned him. Amid the conflicting claims, this much is certain: As many as 600 Christians have fled their colony bordering the capital, fearing for their lives, officials said, after a mob last week called for the child to be burned to death as a blasphemer.
The girl, whom authorities have described as having Down syndrome, now sits in jail in Rawalpindi, charged by police with blasphemy, while her family has been put in federal protective custody.
Under Pakistani law, those found guilty of defaming the Islamic prophet Muhammad face the death penalty, while defiling the Koran can bring a life sentence. The case of the girl is the fourth in recent months to alarm human rights advocates, who say the law is frequently used to persecute Christians and also has been unfairly applied to the mentally ill - including some Muslims.
(Source: Washington Post, Reuters, Associated Press, Fox News)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•For Christians in Pakistan who fear persecution.
•For the young girl in protective custody and her family,that they might be strong in the face of potential mob violence from their Muslim neighbors.
Friday, August 24, 2012
#300 (8/24) - "Obama’s Medicare Fear Mongering Will Drown In the Facts"
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
PRAYER REQUEST:Hurricane Isaac Threatens to Swamp Republican Convention,, August 22 (Source: ABC News, National Weather Service)
"Hurricane Isaac, currently a tropical storm brewing southeast of Puerto Rico, is on track to hit Florida the same day that Mitt Romney and 50,000 Republican delegates, journalists, protestors and guests descend on Tampa for the Republican National Convention. While it is too early to accurately predict the storm’s path, ABC meteorologist Max Golembo said it will hit southern Florida. Whether it will skim the east coast near Miami or crash head-on into Tampa, is still up in the air."
As the Lord leads, please pray: •About the path of Hurricane Isaac and the havoc it can create all along its progression.
•For the organizers and attenders of the Republican Convention, their safety, and the logistics of planning an alternate convention time if the need arises.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By: David Limbaugh; 8/17/2012 http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/17/obamas-medicare-fear-mongering-will-drown-in-the-facts/
Analysts may be correct that the presidential election won’t primarily turn on entitlements reform, but by choosing Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney can, contrary to conventional wisdom, make it a winning issue and lay the foundation for a reform mandate when he wins.
Besides, the economy and entitlements are wholly integrated issues: We cannot ultimately fix the economy long term without entitlement reform, and we can’t balance the budget or retire the debt without a growing economy.
Democrats appear jubilant about the Ryan pick, believing his close association with entitlement reform provides an opening for them to scare seniors into thinking they’ll lose Medicare and Social Security benefits. But what they haven’t factored in, or are pretending to deny, is that Ryan’s presence on the ticket ensures that Romney and Ryan will tackle the entitlements issue head on and that Democrats will not have the luxury of merely fear mongering. They’ll have to deal with the substance of these issues, and this is a battle they cannot win, because the facts are their foe.
Let’s examine these facts briefly.
No one can reasonably deny that Medicare is headed for insolvency, and that Medicare’s insolvency, if not rectified, will lead to the federal government’s insolvency. President Obama has admitted that Medicare is on an unsustainable course and that no amount of tax increases can fix it. The Congressional Budget Office tells us that Medicare spending has increased fivefold in the past 42 years, dramatically more than all other categories of federal spending.
Short of severe price controls ordered and enforced by Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board, which common sense and the history of such controls demonstrate will not work to reduce costs absent rationing and radical reductions in access to care, Obama has no plan to restructure entitlements. Only a restructuring of the program can work.
The Ryan-Wyden plan (Sen. Ron Wyden is a Democrat), which Romney has essentially embraced, is a type of hybrid system that includes market reforms while guaranteeing comprehensive coverage for Medicare beneficiaries. That is, the law would provide guaranteed coverage, but the costs for such coverage would not be unilaterally determined by the government and thus open-ended, out of control and manageable only by rationing boards (resulting in reduced access to care), but by a competitive process.
Under the current system (and under Obamacare), the government sets the price (the reimbursement), and the absence of competition guarantees spiraling costs and/or rationing. Under Ryan-Wyden, a bidding process among insurance providers, including a federal insurance provider, would determine the government’s premium-support payment to Medicare beneficiaries and would ensure that their out-of-pocket costs won’t exceed those under the current system unless they choose a more expensive option. This bidding process — competitive by definition — would contain or reduce costs.
Recent studies have shown that such competition works. The Medicare Advantage program, which was far less ambitious than Ryan-Wyden, produced a 9 percent cost reduction. The savings under Ryan-Wyden should be substantially greater.
Team Obama has no plan of its own and no credible rebuttal for the Ryan-Wyden model, so they have begun a vigorous disinformation campaign to distort the Romney-endorsed plan.
They say his plan would end Medicare as we know it. To the contrary, it is the only plan on the table that has a chance of saving Medicare from insolvency. Those now 55 and older would receive Medicare benefits as they currently exist. As for all others, they would receive the same type of comprehensive coverage (though the costs of that coverage would be reduced through market forces), and the older, sicker and poorer would receive preferential treatment.
In fact, it is Obama, not the GOP, who has assaulted Medicare, robbing it of $716 billion to shore up Obamacare. Obama can’t deny that he’s pilfered this money from Medicare, but speciously argues that it is a cut to health care providers, not Medicare beneficiaries. But cuts to health care providers always result in a reduction to access. Indeed, Obama’s own Medicare actuaries have warned that these cuts could result in providers discontinuing their participation in Medicare.
Obama also fraudulently claims that Ryan’s original plan didn’t put Obamacare’s stolen $716 billion back into the Medicare fund, either. But Ryan’s plan never took that money out in the first place because it involved a full repeal of Obamacare. Romney, for his part, clearly doesn’t contemplate robbing the Medicare fund.
Obama doesn’t believe in market reforms and so has no ideas other than to impose top-down cost controls, which cannot work. His re-election guarantees the insolvency of Medicare — and ultimately of the entire federal government.
The Romney-Ryan plan preserves benefits for current and future seniors and would drive costs down through competition, thereby shoring up Medicare’s solvency and averting the principal driver of national insolvency.
This is a debate Obama can’t win on the merits, so expect increasing demagoguery, fear and stridency. But the truth will prevail.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
PRAYER REQUEST:Hurricane Isaac Threatens to Swamp Republican Convention,, August 22 (Source: ABC News, National Weather Service)
"Hurricane Isaac, currently a tropical storm brewing southeast of Puerto Rico, is on track to hit Florida the same day that Mitt Romney and 50,000 Republican delegates, journalists, protestors and guests descend on Tampa for the Republican National Convention. While it is too early to accurately predict the storm’s path, ABC meteorologist Max Golembo said it will hit southern Florida. Whether it will skim the east coast near Miami or crash head-on into Tampa, is still up in the air."
As the Lord leads, please pray: •About the path of Hurricane Isaac and the havoc it can create all along its progression.
•For the organizers and attenders of the Republican Convention, their safety, and the logistics of planning an alternate convention time if the need arises.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By: David Limbaugh; 8/17/2012 http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/17/obamas-medicare-fear-mongering-will-drown-in-the-facts/
Analysts may be correct that the presidential election won’t primarily turn on entitlements reform, but by choosing Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney can, contrary to conventional wisdom, make it a winning issue and lay the foundation for a reform mandate when he wins.
Besides, the economy and entitlements are wholly integrated issues: We cannot ultimately fix the economy long term without entitlement reform, and we can’t balance the budget or retire the debt without a growing economy.
Democrats appear jubilant about the Ryan pick, believing his close association with entitlement reform provides an opening for them to scare seniors into thinking they’ll lose Medicare and Social Security benefits. But what they haven’t factored in, or are pretending to deny, is that Ryan’s presence on the ticket ensures that Romney and Ryan will tackle the entitlements issue head on and that Democrats will not have the luxury of merely fear mongering. They’ll have to deal with the substance of these issues, and this is a battle they cannot win, because the facts are their foe.
Let’s examine these facts briefly.
No one can reasonably deny that Medicare is headed for insolvency, and that Medicare’s insolvency, if not rectified, will lead to the federal government’s insolvency. President Obama has admitted that Medicare is on an unsustainable course and that no amount of tax increases can fix it. The Congressional Budget Office tells us that Medicare spending has increased fivefold in the past 42 years, dramatically more than all other categories of federal spending.
Short of severe price controls ordered and enforced by Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board, which common sense and the history of such controls demonstrate will not work to reduce costs absent rationing and radical reductions in access to care, Obama has no plan to restructure entitlements. Only a restructuring of the program can work.
The Ryan-Wyden plan (Sen. Ron Wyden is a Democrat), which Romney has essentially embraced, is a type of hybrid system that includes market reforms while guaranteeing comprehensive coverage for Medicare beneficiaries. That is, the law would provide guaranteed coverage, but the costs for such coverage would not be unilaterally determined by the government and thus open-ended, out of control and manageable only by rationing boards (resulting in reduced access to care), but by a competitive process.
Under the current system (and under Obamacare), the government sets the price (the reimbursement), and the absence of competition guarantees spiraling costs and/or rationing. Under Ryan-Wyden, a bidding process among insurance providers, including a federal insurance provider, would determine the government’s premium-support payment to Medicare beneficiaries and would ensure that their out-of-pocket costs won’t exceed those under the current system unless they choose a more expensive option. This bidding process — competitive by definition — would contain or reduce costs.
Recent studies have shown that such competition works. The Medicare Advantage program, which was far less ambitious than Ryan-Wyden, produced a 9 percent cost reduction. The savings under Ryan-Wyden should be substantially greater.
Team Obama has no plan of its own and no credible rebuttal for the Ryan-Wyden model, so they have begun a vigorous disinformation campaign to distort the Romney-endorsed plan.
They say his plan would end Medicare as we know it. To the contrary, it is the only plan on the table that has a chance of saving Medicare from insolvency. Those now 55 and older would receive Medicare benefits as they currently exist. As for all others, they would receive the same type of comprehensive coverage (though the costs of that coverage would be reduced through market forces), and the older, sicker and poorer would receive preferential treatment.
In fact, it is Obama, not the GOP, who has assaulted Medicare, robbing it of $716 billion to shore up Obamacare. Obama can’t deny that he’s pilfered this money from Medicare, but speciously argues that it is a cut to health care providers, not Medicare beneficiaries. But cuts to health care providers always result in a reduction to access. Indeed, Obama’s own Medicare actuaries have warned that these cuts could result in providers discontinuing their participation in Medicare.
Obama also fraudulently claims that Ryan’s original plan didn’t put Obamacare’s stolen $716 billion back into the Medicare fund, either. But Ryan’s plan never took that money out in the first place because it involved a full repeal of Obamacare. Romney, for his part, clearly doesn’t contemplate robbing the Medicare fund.
Obama doesn’t believe in market reforms and so has no ideas other than to impose top-down cost controls, which cannot work. His re-election guarantees the insolvency of Medicare — and ultimately of the entire federal government.
The Romney-Ryan plan preserves benefits for current and future seniors and would drive costs down through competition, thereby shoring up Medicare’s solvency and averting the principal driver of national insolvency.
This is a debate Obama can’t win on the merits, so expect increasing demagoguery, fear and stridency. But the truth will prevail.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Thursday, August 23, 2012
#299 (8/23) - "Pentagon Official: Sequestration a Step Toward ‘Hollow’ Military Force"
[FYi - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
- Tray Smith, August 6, 2012; http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/06/pentagon-official-sequestration-a-step-toward-hollow-military-force/
A senior Defense Department official testifying before the House Armed Services Committee last week said implementing sequestration, across-the-board budget cuts set to take effect in January, “would represent a major step toward creation of an unready,‘hollow’ military force.”
Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, the Pentagon’s second-in-command, told House members that sequestration “introduces senseless chaos into the management of more than 2,500 defense investment programs” and “would be devastating to DoD, just as it would to every other affected federal agency.”
The cuts would take almost $55 billion out of the national security budget next year. Among the consequences Carter listed, it would:
•Result in fewer people to fix weapons, including weapons damaged in war.
•Force cuts in base support services, facility maintenance and maintenance of government-owned family housing.
•Delay payments to service providers through the Defense Health Program, which provides health care for retirees and military dependents.
•Indiscriminately reduce more than 2,500 procurement programs, research projects and military construction projects.
•Force military managers to buy fewer weapons, including four fewer F-35 aircraft, one less P-8 aircraft, 12 fewer Stryker vehicles, and 300 fewer Army medium and heavy tactical vehicles compared with the President Obama’s budget for 2013.
•Delay the new CVN-78 carrier,the Littoral Combat Ship program, and the DDG-51 destroyer procurement.
* Outside of the armed forces, Carter said the cuts “would have devastating effects on the intelligence community.”
Several members of the House Armed Services Committee issued similarly dire warnings about sequestration last week at a YG Network Summit on Capitol Hill, moderated by The Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano. “Imagine if there is a day though where we’re involved somewhere, something kicks off, we need a carrier in the region, and there’s just literally no option,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) said at the event. “That’s a potential. That’s nothing we’ve ever imagined but it could happen.”
Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) said that while the cuts would be painful for the military, they wouldn’t make a significant difference in the federal budget deficit.“If we eliminated the whole discretionary budget, everything, take all the spending out of education, research and development, law enforcement, infrastructure, and defense — eliminate it all — we would still be running a deficit of a half a trillion dollars a year,” McKeon said.
The defense sequester would total $492 bill over the coming decade and come on top of $487 billion in cuts the Pentagon will already be forced to absorb under last year’s Budget Control Act. The defense cuts equal half of total spending cuts under the sequester, even though defense spending only makes up 11 percent of total federal outlays.
The cuts would come even as the military faces continued threats abroad and aging military equipment. On average, B-52 bombers are nearly 50 years old, long-range bombers are nearly 35 years old, midair refueling tankers are 49 years old, and fighter aircraft are 22 years old. Carter said he could not even outline a plan that would mitigate the consequences of sequestration.
“The reason for this is that sequester was designed to be an inflexible and mindless policy,” he said. “It was never designed to be implemented. Instead, it was enacted as a prod to Congress to devise a comprehensive package to reduce the federal deficit.”
Tray Smith is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
- Tray Smith, August 6, 2012; http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/06/pentagon-official-sequestration-a-step-toward-hollow-military-force/
A senior Defense Department official testifying before the House Armed Services Committee last week said implementing sequestration, across-the-board budget cuts set to take effect in January, “would represent a major step toward creation of an unready,‘hollow’ military force.”
Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, the Pentagon’s second-in-command, told House members that sequestration “introduces senseless chaos into the management of more than 2,500 defense investment programs” and “would be devastating to DoD, just as it would to every other affected federal agency.”
The cuts would take almost $55 billion out of the national security budget next year. Among the consequences Carter listed, it would:
•Result in fewer people to fix weapons, including weapons damaged in war.
•Force cuts in base support services, facility maintenance and maintenance of government-owned family housing.
•Delay payments to service providers through the Defense Health Program, which provides health care for retirees and military dependents.
•Indiscriminately reduce more than 2,500 procurement programs, research projects and military construction projects.
•Force military managers to buy fewer weapons, including four fewer F-35 aircraft, one less P-8 aircraft, 12 fewer Stryker vehicles, and 300 fewer Army medium and heavy tactical vehicles compared with the President Obama’s budget for 2013.
•Delay the new CVN-78 carrier,the Littoral Combat Ship program, and the DDG-51 destroyer procurement.
* Outside of the armed forces, Carter said the cuts “would have devastating effects on the intelligence community.”
Several members of the House Armed Services Committee issued similarly dire warnings about sequestration last week at a YG Network Summit on Capitol Hill, moderated by The Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano. “Imagine if there is a day though where we’re involved somewhere, something kicks off, we need a carrier in the region, and there’s just literally no option,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) said at the event. “That’s a potential. That’s nothing we’ve ever imagined but it could happen.”
Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) said that while the cuts would be painful for the military, they wouldn’t make a significant difference in the federal budget deficit.“If we eliminated the whole discretionary budget, everything, take all the spending out of education, research and development, law enforcement, infrastructure, and defense — eliminate it all — we would still be running a deficit of a half a trillion dollars a year,” McKeon said.
The defense sequester would total $492 bill over the coming decade and come on top of $487 billion in cuts the Pentagon will already be forced to absorb under last year’s Budget Control Act. The defense cuts equal half of total spending cuts under the sequester, even though defense spending only makes up 11 percent of total federal outlays.
The cuts would come even as the military faces continued threats abroad and aging military equipment. On average, B-52 bombers are nearly 50 years old, long-range bombers are nearly 35 years old, midair refueling tankers are 49 years old, and fighter aircraft are 22 years old. Carter said he could not even outline a plan that would mitigate the consequences of sequestration.
“The reason for this is that sequester was designed to be an inflexible and mindless policy,” he said. “It was never designed to be implemented. Instead, it was enacted as a prod to Congress to devise a comprehensive package to reduce the federal deficit.”
Tray Smith is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
#298(8/22)- Say What! - "Sales Tax Holiday Only A Gimmick ..."
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
- from Newsmax.com; August 12
Sales tax holidays that exempt certain items from state and sometimes local sales taxes will be held in 17 states this year, with supporters continuing to tout their economic benefits. But a new report from the Tax Foundation argues that the holidays are “politically expedient but poor tax policy.”
Tax holidays often exempt back-to-school supplies, clothing, computers, and hurricane preparedness items, and politicians and other backers claim they boost sales, create jobs, and benefit lower-income Americans. But the Tax Foundation report states: “Political gimmicks like sales tax holidays distract policymakers and taxpayers from genuine, permanent tax relief. If a state must offer a ‘holiday’ from its tax system, it is a sign that the state’s tax system is uncompetitive. If policymakers want to save money for consumers, then they should cut the sales tax rate year-round.” The foundation makes several points casting doubt on the economic benefits of sales tax holidays:
* Rather than stimulating new sales, tax holidays simply shift the timing of sales. A 1997 study in New York found that while sales of exempted items rose during the holiday, overall retail sales for the year did not increase, because shoppers waited until the holiday to purchase exempted goods, slowing down sales in the weeks before and following the holiday. Retailers often raise prices during the holiday, reducing consumers’ savings. The more consumers the holidays turn out, the more demand goes up, and the more prices rise, because retailers are not required to keep prices at non-holiday levels.
* Most tax holidays involve politicians picking products and industries to favor with exemptions, “arbitrarily discriminating between products and across time, and distorting consumer decisions,” the report observes. [This is what is called "crony capitalism" where government chooses the winners and losers in the economy.]
* Tax holidays are not an effective way of providing relief to the poor. “To give a small amount of tax savings to low-income individuals, holidays give a large amount to others,” the report also states. Any increase in employment during the holidays will be modest and temporary, and costly for businesses that must hire and train temporary employees. The report concludes: “Sales tax experts and economists widely agree that there is little evidence of increased economic activity as a result of sales tax holidays. Experience shows that the claims of economic stimulus, increased revenue, and consumer savings are greatly exaggerated. The holidays instead represent a costly-to-administer revenue loss for the government.”
Noting that the District of Columbia canceled its sales tax holidays beginning in 2009 after a study found they did not spur enough growth to offset costs, the Foundation adds: “Other states would be wise to follow D.C.’s lead and re-evaluate the costs and benefits of sales tax holidays.”
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
- from Newsmax.com; August 12
Sales tax holidays that exempt certain items from state and sometimes local sales taxes will be held in 17 states this year, with supporters continuing to tout their economic benefits. But a new report from the Tax Foundation argues that the holidays are “politically expedient but poor tax policy.”
Tax holidays often exempt back-to-school supplies, clothing, computers, and hurricane preparedness items, and politicians and other backers claim they boost sales, create jobs, and benefit lower-income Americans. But the Tax Foundation report states: “Political gimmicks like sales tax holidays distract policymakers and taxpayers from genuine, permanent tax relief. If a state must offer a ‘holiday’ from its tax system, it is a sign that the state’s tax system is uncompetitive. If policymakers want to save money for consumers, then they should cut the sales tax rate year-round.” The foundation makes several points casting doubt on the economic benefits of sales tax holidays:
* Rather than stimulating new sales, tax holidays simply shift the timing of sales. A 1997 study in New York found that while sales of exempted items rose during the holiday, overall retail sales for the year did not increase, because shoppers waited until the holiday to purchase exempted goods, slowing down sales in the weeks before and following the holiday. Retailers often raise prices during the holiday, reducing consumers’ savings. The more consumers the holidays turn out, the more demand goes up, and the more prices rise, because retailers are not required to keep prices at non-holiday levels.
* Most tax holidays involve politicians picking products and industries to favor with exemptions, “arbitrarily discriminating between products and across time, and distorting consumer decisions,” the report observes. [This is what is called "crony capitalism" where government chooses the winners and losers in the economy.]
* Tax holidays are not an effective way of providing relief to the poor. “To give a small amount of tax savings to low-income individuals, holidays give a large amount to others,” the report also states. Any increase in employment during the holidays will be modest and temporary, and costly for businesses that must hire and train temporary employees. The report concludes: “Sales tax experts and economists widely agree that there is little evidence of increased economic activity as a result of sales tax holidays. Experience shows that the claims of economic stimulus, increased revenue, and consumer savings are greatly exaggerated. The holidays instead represent a costly-to-administer revenue loss for the government.”
Noting that the District of Columbia canceled its sales tax holidays beginning in 2009 after a study found they did not spur enough growth to offset costs, the Foundation adds: “Other states would be wise to follow D.C.’s lead and re-evaluate the costs and benefits of sales tax holidays.”
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Monday, August 20, 2012
#297 (8/20) - "Two Women, Two Legacies"
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
PRAYER REQUEST: Dallas Steps Up War on West Nile Virus, Friday, August 17
A warm winter and recent rains have helped prompt a surge in cases of West Nile virus nationwide, and the toll is so severe that Dallas officials planned to conduct aerial spraying for the first time in more than four decades to kill mosquitoes that spread the potentially fatal disease.
A total of 693 cases of West Nile virus, with 26 deaths, have been reported nationwide this year to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as of Aug. 14-the highest number of cases since the disease was first detected in the U.S. in 1999. Nearly a quarter of the cases and 10 of the deaths have occurred in Dallas County, making it a hot spot of transmission ..." (Sources: Dallas WFAA-TV News, Wall Street Journal, ABC News)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•That the mosquito population will be controlled by the spraying and the West Nile virus contained.
•For other regions across the nation considering how to deal with the fatal disease.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://online.worldmag.com/2012/08/15/two-women-two-legacies/
by Barbara Curtis, August 15, 2012,
Like many moms who’ve had to navigate the supermarket checkout lines with children in tow, I’ve held a special place of contempt for Cosmopolitan magazine, whose shocking headlines at kids’-eye level have been polluting young minds for more than 40 years—not to mention the damage to a few generations of lost young women.
On becoming editor in 1965, Helen Gurley Brown quickly changed a women’s magazine from one with tips on food and fashion and decorating and diets, to a racy rag preaching a gospel of sex, sex, and more sex. In Brown’s vicious may-the-sexiest-woman-win world, all traditions and conventions were off. So your boss is married? So he has three kids? So what? If you want him, go for it, girl! No guilt, no regrets.
Brown made her final personal headline Monday, dead at the age of 90, wealthy but childless. But what did that matter when—according to the cultural elite—she was personally responsible for liberating young women from the goal of husband, family, and home, and replacing it with a sex and pleasure-driven lifestyle, like the one eventually celebrated in the TV series Sex and the City. She empowered women, they said, overlooking the fact that she had made them sexual slaves, trying to keep happy with uncommitted sex while being unconcerned with the havoc they wreaked in the lives of husbands and fathers and children.
Another woman died Monday: 88-year-old Nellie Gray, a more modest role model whose life was dedicated to saving families, lives, love, and hope. Gray’s service as a corporal in the Women’s Army Corps (WACS) during World War II changed the direction of her life. According to Father Frank Pavone, founder of Priests for Life: “The reality of the Holocaust made a profound impression upon her, as did the Nuremburg Trials, to which she often referred in explaining her pro-life position. At issue for her were not the numbers of people killed, vast and disturbing as those statistics are. “For Nellie, the horror was that a single human life had been intentionally taken. That was the point at which government transgressed its proper authority. That was the evil that had to be stopped.”
In 1974, on the first anniversary of Roe v. Wade decision, Gray organized a March for Life in Washington, D.C., which evolved from a one-time event into a growing coming-together of pro-life groups from across the country, and she had been involved every year since, serving as a voice for unity in the midst of disagreements and infighting among well-intentioned but passionate political players.
Gray was also responsible for bringing to light the terrible toll abortion has had on fathers and other family members—as well as the holocaust within the black community: While only 13 percent of the female population is minority, that group accounts for 36 percent of the abortions.
Two women, two legacies, both with legacies reaching well beyond their lifetimes — a reminder to each of us to look to our own lives and to make the most of what time we have left.
[I've heard a quote by Ms. Brown that went, "Good girls go to Heaven; bad girls go everywhere else." Why is it we can assume Ms. Brown is somewhere else than Heaven? - Stan]
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
PRAYER REQUEST: Dallas Steps Up War on West Nile Virus, Friday, August 17
A warm winter and recent rains have helped prompt a surge in cases of West Nile virus nationwide, and the toll is so severe that Dallas officials planned to conduct aerial spraying for the first time in more than four decades to kill mosquitoes that spread the potentially fatal disease.
A total of 693 cases of West Nile virus, with 26 deaths, have been reported nationwide this year to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as of Aug. 14-the highest number of cases since the disease was first detected in the U.S. in 1999. Nearly a quarter of the cases and 10 of the deaths have occurred in Dallas County, making it a hot spot of transmission ..." (Sources: Dallas WFAA-TV News, Wall Street Journal, ABC News)
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•That the mosquito population will be controlled by the spraying and the West Nile virus contained.
•For other regions across the nation considering how to deal with the fatal disease.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://online.worldmag.com/2012/08/15/two-women-two-legacies/
by Barbara Curtis, August 15, 2012,
Like many moms who’ve had to navigate the supermarket checkout lines with children in tow, I’ve held a special place of contempt for Cosmopolitan magazine, whose shocking headlines at kids’-eye level have been polluting young minds for more than 40 years—not to mention the damage to a few generations of lost young women.
On becoming editor in 1965, Helen Gurley Brown quickly changed a women’s magazine from one with tips on food and fashion and decorating and diets, to a racy rag preaching a gospel of sex, sex, and more sex. In Brown’s vicious may-the-sexiest-woman-win world, all traditions and conventions were off. So your boss is married? So he has three kids? So what? If you want him, go for it, girl! No guilt, no regrets.
Brown made her final personal headline Monday, dead at the age of 90, wealthy but childless. But what did that matter when—according to the cultural elite—she was personally responsible for liberating young women from the goal of husband, family, and home, and replacing it with a sex and pleasure-driven lifestyle, like the one eventually celebrated in the TV series Sex and the City. She empowered women, they said, overlooking the fact that she had made them sexual slaves, trying to keep happy with uncommitted sex while being unconcerned with the havoc they wreaked in the lives of husbands and fathers and children.
Another woman died Monday: 88-year-old Nellie Gray, a more modest role model whose life was dedicated to saving families, lives, love, and hope. Gray’s service as a corporal in the Women’s Army Corps (WACS) during World War II changed the direction of her life. According to Father Frank Pavone, founder of Priests for Life: “The reality of the Holocaust made a profound impression upon her, as did the Nuremburg Trials, to which she often referred in explaining her pro-life position. At issue for her were not the numbers of people killed, vast and disturbing as those statistics are. “For Nellie, the horror was that a single human life had been intentionally taken. That was the point at which government transgressed its proper authority. That was the evil that had to be stopped.”
In 1974, on the first anniversary of Roe v. Wade decision, Gray organized a March for Life in Washington, D.C., which evolved from a one-time event into a growing coming-together of pro-life groups from across the country, and she had been involved every year since, serving as a voice for unity in the midst of disagreements and infighting among well-intentioned but passionate political players.
Gray was also responsible for bringing to light the terrible toll abortion has had on fathers and other family members—as well as the holocaust within the black community: While only 13 percent of the female population is minority, that group accounts for 36 percent of the abortions.
Two women, two legacies, both with legacies reaching well beyond their lifetimes — a reminder to each of us to look to our own lives and to make the most of what time we have left.
[I've heard a quote by Ms. Brown that went, "Good girls go to Heaven; bad girls go everywhere else." Why is it we can assume Ms. Brown is somewhere else than Heaven? - Stan]
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Sunday, August 19, 2012
#296 (8/19) - SUNDAY Special > “Can a Christian Judge AND Love? - All Things Examined” (2)
[FYI #1 - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
[FYI #2 - Be sure to be REGISTERED TO VOTE. To get details in doing that in your state, go to > http://www.cbn.com/special/register-to-vote/ For a review of the critical issues to consider in your voting, please go to > http://www.truthinaction.org/PDF/Final_Voters_Guide.pdf
ALSO, BEGIN PRAYING FOR THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS; Download a free prayer guide at > http://www.prayerconnect.net/resources/prayer-guides/2012-election-prayer-guide]
[NOTE: As usual on Sundays, please try to catch this week's broadcast of "Truth That Transforms" (In Central Florida, 9-9:30 am, 10-10:30 am, 5-5:30 pm; check your TV listings)or watch it at www.truthinaction.org. This week's message is entitled "The Importance of Marriage" and includes a feature entitled "Choosing Godly Leaders." - Stan]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(The following is PART 2; PART 1 is in previous post #295) - By: Regis Nicoll|, Breakpoint.org, July 13 // www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/breakpoint-columns/entry/2/19829
Judging vs. condemning
In the Pharisaical sting operation that nearly led to the stoning of an adulteress, neither the morality of her deed nor the mob’s authority to judge it were at issue. The woman had sinned, plain and simple, a fact acknowledged by Jesus in his parting instruction: “leave your life of sin.” Had the moral police done likewise, pointing the woman to the path to life, this biblical vignette might never have been recorded. Instead, they condemned her to death, and Jesus called into question their license to do so. Their response -- laying down their stones and walking away – was a reluctant acknowledgement that neither they nor anyone has the authority to condemn.
Condemnation requires more than just knowing when a moral standard has been breached; it requires knowing what is in a person’s mind (what did they know about the standard) and heart (what was their intent), places that no one has access to but God. And although those places were open to Jesus, even He didn’t see fit to condemn the sinful woman.
On the other hand, anyone can judge the morality of an act, knowing only the applicable standard. Applying God’s word, acts that are immoral at all times and circumstances include adultery, murder, slander, idolatry, and fornication (which, contrary to the moral lights of Carrie Underwood, includes same-sex couplings, committed or otherwise).
A Facebooker who was pleased with Underwood’s endorsement made a move -- straight from the social liberals’ playbook -- to silence moral objections by associating opposing viewpoints with hypocrisy. After duly lecturing Christians about sin in the camp, he trotted out Matthew 7:3 (“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?”).
While it is all too true that heterosexual sin is a problem in the church, the moral state of the pew and pulpit has no bearing on the morality of homosexualism and the novel institutions it promotes, or of any other practice for that matter.What’s more, contrary to popular proof-texts, Jesus never said that one sinner can’t or shouldn’t judge the actions of another. Instead, in the context of Matthew chapter 7, Jesus teaches that we should be attentive to our own “specks,” so that we can “see clearly” (that is, discern readily and rightly) the specks of others and help with the removal process.
People who decline to do so -- particularly, who-am-I-to-judge Christians -- have much to answer for the moral pathologies of the church that they are quick to, uh, judge.They are like the village physician whose patients are dying off, one by one, for his failure to check for life-threatening conditions he finds too uncomfortable to tell them about or treat. Or the mom whose child has become a tyrant because of momma’s fear that a “no” landing on her budding prodigy’s delicate ears would damage the sense of exceptionalness that she has worked so hard to nurture.
Loving my brother
Love seeks the supreme good for others. Above all, love desires them to become the persons they were created to be: children of God, being transformed in the image of the Son, and enjoying unbroken fellowship with the Son and Father through the presence of the Holy Spirit. Love means that I am my brother’s keeper, with the duty to observe, question, challenge, and, yes, judge his actions -- not to condemn, but to guide, coach and encourage toward life abundant. To do otherwise is not love but indifference or cowardice.
Carrie Underwood was right: “Above all, God wanted us to love others.” However, we love others not by never having to say they’re sinning, but by helping them with their “specks” and allowing them to help us with ours.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Regis Nicoll is a freelance writer and a BreakPoint Centurion. Serving as a men’s ministry leader and worldview teacher in his community, Regis publishes a free weekly commentary to stimulate thought on current issues from a Christian perspective. To be placed on this free e-mail distribution list, e-mail him at centurion51@aol.com.
[FYI #2 - Be sure to be REGISTERED TO VOTE. To get details in doing that in your state, go to > http://www.cbn.com/special/register-to-vote/ For a review of the critical issues to consider in your voting, please go to > http://www.truthinaction.org/PDF/Final_Voters_Guide.pdf
ALSO, BEGIN PRAYING FOR THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS; Download a free prayer guide at > http://www.prayerconnect.net/resources/prayer-guides/2012-election-prayer-guide]
[NOTE: As usual on Sundays, please try to catch this week's broadcast of "Truth That Transforms" (In Central Florida, 9-9:30 am, 10-10:30 am, 5-5:30 pm; check your TV listings)or watch it at www.truthinaction.org. This week's message is entitled "The Importance of Marriage" and includes a feature entitled "Choosing Godly Leaders." - Stan]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(The following is PART 2; PART 1 is in previous post #295) - By: Regis Nicoll|, Breakpoint.org, July 13 // www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/breakpoint-columns/entry/2/19829
Judging vs. condemning
In the Pharisaical sting operation that nearly led to the stoning of an adulteress, neither the morality of her deed nor the mob’s authority to judge it were at issue. The woman had sinned, plain and simple, a fact acknowledged by Jesus in his parting instruction: “leave your life of sin.” Had the moral police done likewise, pointing the woman to the path to life, this biblical vignette might never have been recorded. Instead, they condemned her to death, and Jesus called into question their license to do so. Their response -- laying down their stones and walking away – was a reluctant acknowledgement that neither they nor anyone has the authority to condemn.
Condemnation requires more than just knowing when a moral standard has been breached; it requires knowing what is in a person’s mind (what did they know about the standard) and heart (what was their intent), places that no one has access to but God. And although those places were open to Jesus, even He didn’t see fit to condemn the sinful woman.
On the other hand, anyone can judge the morality of an act, knowing only the applicable standard. Applying God’s word, acts that are immoral at all times and circumstances include adultery, murder, slander, idolatry, and fornication (which, contrary to the moral lights of Carrie Underwood, includes same-sex couplings, committed or otherwise).
A Facebooker who was pleased with Underwood’s endorsement made a move -- straight from the social liberals’ playbook -- to silence moral objections by associating opposing viewpoints with hypocrisy. After duly lecturing Christians about sin in the camp, he trotted out Matthew 7:3 (“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?”).
While it is all too true that heterosexual sin is a problem in the church, the moral state of the pew and pulpit has no bearing on the morality of homosexualism and the novel institutions it promotes, or of any other practice for that matter.What’s more, contrary to popular proof-texts, Jesus never said that one sinner can’t or shouldn’t judge the actions of another. Instead, in the context of Matthew chapter 7, Jesus teaches that we should be attentive to our own “specks,” so that we can “see clearly” (that is, discern readily and rightly) the specks of others and help with the removal process.
People who decline to do so -- particularly, who-am-I-to-judge Christians -- have much to answer for the moral pathologies of the church that they are quick to, uh, judge.They are like the village physician whose patients are dying off, one by one, for his failure to check for life-threatening conditions he finds too uncomfortable to tell them about or treat. Or the mom whose child has become a tyrant because of momma’s fear that a “no” landing on her budding prodigy’s delicate ears would damage the sense of exceptionalness that she has worked so hard to nurture.
Loving my brother
Love seeks the supreme good for others. Above all, love desires them to become the persons they were created to be: children of God, being transformed in the image of the Son, and enjoying unbroken fellowship with the Son and Father through the presence of the Holy Spirit. Love means that I am my brother’s keeper, with the duty to observe, question, challenge, and, yes, judge his actions -- not to condemn, but to guide, coach and encourage toward life abundant. To do otherwise is not love but indifference or cowardice.
Carrie Underwood was right: “Above all, God wanted us to love others.” However, we love others not by never having to say they’re sinning, but by helping them with their “specks” and allowing them to help us with ours.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Regis Nicoll is a freelance writer and a BreakPoint Centurion. Serving as a men’s ministry leader and worldview teacher in his community, Regis publishes a free weekly commentary to stimulate thought on current issues from a Christian perspective. To be placed on this free e-mail distribution list, e-mail him at centurion51@aol.com.
Saturday, August 18, 2012
#295 (8/18) - SATURDAY Special - “Can a Christian Judge AND Love? - All Things Examined” (part 1)
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRAYER ALERT: Hundreds More Flee Massive Wildfires; Guard Joins Battle in Idaho, Thurs. August 16
"The Idaho National Guard is joining the fight against at least nine wildfires burning across the state, including the 68,000-acre Trinity Ridge blaze, one of 60 large U.S. fires being fought in one of the worst U.S. fire seasons. The Idaho National Guard is joining the fight against at least nine wildfires burning across the state, including the 68,000-acre Trinity Ridge blaze, one of 60 large U.S. fires being fought in one of the worst U.S. fire seasons. Most are scorching the dry and hot Western states, including Washington, where the 22,656-acre Taylor Bridge fire five miles outside Cle Elum has destroyed an estimated 60 homes. Thousands of people have been ordered from their homes..." - Source: NBC News, Fox News
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•For the thousands of families who have had to evacuate because of fire danger.
•For the hot shots and other firefighters, including those who pilot the slurry-dropping aircraft.
•About the weather-related incidents across the nation, whether wildfires in Idaho, Washington, Oregon, California and elsewhere, as well as the droughts and extreme temperatures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(PART 2 is inthe next post) - By: Regis Nicoll|, Breakpoint.org, July 13
www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/breakpoint-columns/entry/2/19829
A meme has been circulating in the Christian community for some time now. It’s the curious notion that making judgments about the behaviors and lifestyles of others is unchristian.
Take singer Carrie Underwood, a professed Christian, who came out in support of same-sex “marriage,” crediting her faith for her position. In explanation, the songstress told the British press, "Above all, God wanted us to love others,” adding, “It’s not up to me to judge anybody.” But judge she has, for by her very endorsement of same-sex “marriage,” Underwood made a moral judgment on the practice and its practitioners, as well as a moral insinuation, if not judgment, about its critics.
Regrettably, Carrie Underwood, like most “nonjudgmentalists,” is oblivious to the logical inconsistency. If we are proscribed from judging the wrongness of actions, we are likewise proscribed from judging their rightness. And either way we come down is a judgment on the opposing view.
We can’t not judge
Conformance with the “anti-judgment meme” requires neutrality on all moral matters, but humans are anything but morally neutral. Regardless of our religious or anti-religious sympathies, it is commonly held that a number of things are universally wrong, like cheating, rape, exploitation, and greed, and that a number of others are universally good, such as honesty, fairness, charity, and selflessness.
Furthermore, in a fallen world where virtue and vice exist side-by-side, everyone must judge whom they will trust, what ventures they will pursue, what policies they will support.(You can bet that when Carrie Underwood becomes a parent she will make judgments aplenty, sniffing around for any hint of child abuse, pedophilia, or other behaviors she deems morally questionable in the backgrounds of prospective babysitters.)
The person who can’t or won’t discern truth from falsehood, good from evil, and healthful from harmful is someone destined to be a victim of those who are adept at parading one for the other. Thus, abstaining from moral judgments is not a hallmark of Christian character, but of foolishness.
Rather, the signature of the Spirit-filled life is the ability to make correct judgments to prevent, as St. Paul warns, being taken “captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.” Indeed, Jesus’ advice about “fruit” inspection was to help keep his disciples from falling in with bad teachers and their sophistry.
Specious reasoning
The popular meme persists, in large measure, by isolating what Jesus says a few verses up -- "Do not judge, or you too will be judged" -- from the rest of the chapter and coupling it with the second half of the Great Commandment. The reasoning goes something like this: I know that I would be offended if someone pointed out my moral failings, so loving my neighbor as myself means that I shouldn’t point out his. In that way, I can fulfill God’s commandment, escape His judgment, and relieve myself and my neighbor of any awkward moments, to boot. It has undeniable appeal.
For folks bothered by any lingering notion that anybody is qualified to make a judgment about anybody else, there's Jesus’ piercing challenge to a murderous mob of moralizers: “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Yet, there’s his equally piercing instruction to his disciples, “If your brother sins, rebuke him.” Sounds like Jesus not only expects us to make moral judgments about others but, in fact, has authorized us to do so, as well as to confront them and invoke discipline when necessary.
The apostle Paul had some sharp words for a congregation that failed to do just that.
It had come to Paul’s attention that the Corinthian church was ignoring an occasion of sexual immorality in its midst. Scolding the assembly for its moral complacence, Paul ordered the expulsion of the offender, warning, “Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough?” Paul’s instruction to turn the man “over to Satan” seems overly harsh and cruel – and certainly not loving -- until he explains, “so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.” This is the same Paul who told the Galatian believers, “if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.” As taught by Jesus and practiced by the early church, moral judgment and church discipline are not about condemning people but restoring them, for their spiritual well-being and that of the Body. [end of part 1; part 2 in next post]
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Regis Nicoll is a freelance writer and a BreakPoint Centurion. Serving as a men’s ministry leader and worldview teacher in his community, Regis publishes a free weekly commentary to stimulate thought on current issues from a Christian perspective. To be placed on this free e-mail distribution list, e-mail him at centurion51@aol.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRAYER ALERT: Hundreds More Flee Massive Wildfires; Guard Joins Battle in Idaho, Thurs. August 16
"The Idaho National Guard is joining the fight against at least nine wildfires burning across the state, including the 68,000-acre Trinity Ridge blaze, one of 60 large U.S. fires being fought in one of the worst U.S. fire seasons. The Idaho National Guard is joining the fight against at least nine wildfires burning across the state, including the 68,000-acre Trinity Ridge blaze, one of 60 large U.S. fires being fought in one of the worst U.S. fire seasons. Most are scorching the dry and hot Western states, including Washington, where the 22,656-acre Taylor Bridge fire five miles outside Cle Elum has destroyed an estimated 60 homes. Thousands of people have been ordered from their homes..." - Source: NBC News, Fox News
As the Lord leads, please pray:
•For the thousands of families who have had to evacuate because of fire danger.
•For the hot shots and other firefighters, including those who pilot the slurry-dropping aircraft.
•About the weather-related incidents across the nation, whether wildfires in Idaho, Washington, Oregon, California and elsewhere, as well as the droughts and extreme temperatures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(PART 2 is inthe next post) - By: Regis Nicoll|, Breakpoint.org, July 13
www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/breakpoint-columns/entry/2/19829
A meme has been circulating in the Christian community for some time now. It’s the curious notion that making judgments about the behaviors and lifestyles of others is unchristian.
Take singer Carrie Underwood, a professed Christian, who came out in support of same-sex “marriage,” crediting her faith for her position. In explanation, the songstress told the British press, "Above all, God wanted us to love others,” adding, “It’s not up to me to judge anybody.” But judge she has, for by her very endorsement of same-sex “marriage,” Underwood made a moral judgment on the practice and its practitioners, as well as a moral insinuation, if not judgment, about its critics.
Regrettably, Carrie Underwood, like most “nonjudgmentalists,” is oblivious to the logical inconsistency. If we are proscribed from judging the wrongness of actions, we are likewise proscribed from judging their rightness. And either way we come down is a judgment on the opposing view.
We can’t not judge
Conformance with the “anti-judgment meme” requires neutrality on all moral matters, but humans are anything but morally neutral. Regardless of our religious or anti-religious sympathies, it is commonly held that a number of things are universally wrong, like cheating, rape, exploitation, and greed, and that a number of others are universally good, such as honesty, fairness, charity, and selflessness.
Furthermore, in a fallen world where virtue and vice exist side-by-side, everyone must judge whom they will trust, what ventures they will pursue, what policies they will support.(You can bet that when Carrie Underwood becomes a parent she will make judgments aplenty, sniffing around for any hint of child abuse, pedophilia, or other behaviors she deems morally questionable in the backgrounds of prospective babysitters.)
The person who can’t or won’t discern truth from falsehood, good from evil, and healthful from harmful is someone destined to be a victim of those who are adept at parading one for the other. Thus, abstaining from moral judgments is not a hallmark of Christian character, but of foolishness.
Rather, the signature of the Spirit-filled life is the ability to make correct judgments to prevent, as St. Paul warns, being taken “captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.” Indeed, Jesus’ advice about “fruit” inspection was to help keep his disciples from falling in with bad teachers and their sophistry.
Specious reasoning
The popular meme persists, in large measure, by isolating what Jesus says a few verses up -- "Do not judge, or you too will be judged" -- from the rest of the chapter and coupling it with the second half of the Great Commandment. The reasoning goes something like this: I know that I would be offended if someone pointed out my moral failings, so loving my neighbor as myself means that I shouldn’t point out his. In that way, I can fulfill God’s commandment, escape His judgment, and relieve myself and my neighbor of any awkward moments, to boot. It has undeniable appeal.
For folks bothered by any lingering notion that anybody is qualified to make a judgment about anybody else, there's Jesus’ piercing challenge to a murderous mob of moralizers: “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Yet, there’s his equally piercing instruction to his disciples, “If your brother sins, rebuke him.” Sounds like Jesus not only expects us to make moral judgments about others but, in fact, has authorized us to do so, as well as to confront them and invoke discipline when necessary.
The apostle Paul had some sharp words for a congregation that failed to do just that.
It had come to Paul’s attention that the Corinthian church was ignoring an occasion of sexual immorality in its midst. Scolding the assembly for its moral complacence, Paul ordered the expulsion of the offender, warning, “Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough?” Paul’s instruction to turn the man “over to Satan” seems overly harsh and cruel – and certainly not loving -- until he explains, “so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.” This is the same Paul who told the Galatian believers, “if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.” As taught by Jesus and practiced by the early church, moral judgment and church discipline are not about condemning people but restoring them, for their spiritual well-being and that of the Body. [end of part 1; part 2 in next post]
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Regis Nicoll is a freelance writer and a BreakPoint Centurion. Serving as a men’s ministry leader and worldview teacher in his community, Regis publishes a free weekly commentary to stimulate thought on current issues from a Christian perspective. To be placed on this free e-mail distribution list, e-mail him at centurion51@aol.com.
Friday, August 17, 2012
#294 (8/17) - The Not-That-Radical Ryan Plan; Link to Bio on Paul Ryan
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
[NOTE: Did you notice that the attack by a homosexual activist on Wednesday at the Washington D.C. headquarters of the Christian/conservative Family Research Council, just a day after a major homosexual activist group labeled it a "hate group" received no media follow-up after just one day? Once again, if a Christian/conservative had instead attacked a liberal activist headquarters, the mainstream press would have days of stories to label ALL Christians and conservatives as "violent extremists." The double standard is always so breath-taking. - Stan; http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2012/August/FRC-Suspect-a-Volunteer-at-Gay-Community-Center/; ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If Only Paul Ryan’s Plan Were as Radical as the Democrats Claim"; by Erick Erickson August 13th; http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/08/13/if-only-paul-ryans-plan-were-as-radical-as-the-democrats-claim/
It is mathematically indisputable that should President Barack Obama obtain his legislative desire and increase taxes on those making $250,000.00 a year or more the nation would not close even this year’s budget deficit. Never mind the $16 trillion in national debt, the income brought in through that tax increase would not balance this year’s federal budget.
It is also mathematically indisputable that should the Democrats’ obtain the ultimate fantasy of the grade school marxists routinely populating the ranks of left-wing economists, more commonly referred to as the “Occupy Wall Street” movement — confiscating 100% of income from all those making $250,000.00 a year or more — the nation still would not close this year’s budget deficit. Marxist sounding pablum about the rich paying their fair share and not building their businesses aside, the Democrats’ covetousness of American salaries accomplishes nothing more than temporarily satiating their addiction to spending.
Paul Ryan, as Mitt Romney’s Vice Presidential nominee, has made a career of shining the spotlight on the Democrats’ addiction to spending.
Paul Ryan’s budget plan, called the “Path to Prosperity” has become a necessary lightening rod on the road to fiscal sanity. Because of the President’s spending addiction, the nation has been without a real budget for more than one thousand days. President Obama’s budget plans for the past few years have been too radical even for the most radical Democrats in Congress, failing to pass even the Democrat controlled Senate with a single vote.
Despite the rhetoric from spending addicts on the left, Paul Ryan’s plan is not the radical path conservatives would prefer. The plan does not balance the federal budget for three decades and is premised on the assumption that future congresses will show restraint. Three decades is an extraordinarily long time, but the plan does eventually balance, which is something the President’s own budget never does.
The Democrats will demagogue Paul Ryan’s budget plan. They already have run commercials showing a Paul Ryan look alike shoving a grandmother off a cliff. The hysteria ignores that under Paul Ryan’s plan senior citizens will not see their medicare benefits affected.
Under his slow moving plan, people 55 and younger begin to have choices they can make about their future retirement and healthcare needs. The Ryan plan moves people fully out of the present failing system into more modern options within the control of the taxpayer himself. But it only does so for people more than a decade away from retiring. For taxpayers who increasingly distrust Washington and who think the present system will not be their for them anyway, it gives them control of their future in a way Democrats only talk about about.
Choice for Republicans involves trusting the American people to handle their affairs and retirement. Choice for Democrats involves only the option to kill children, with everything else pre-packaged in one size fits all government bureaucracy. These two visions of choice will be at the heart of the 2012 Presidential campaign season.
Paul Ryan’s plan, sadly, is not nearly as aggressive as it should be or could be. It takes too long to balance the budget. It keeps too many people in the present entitlement system for too long. But it begins, at least, to fix the system and give choices about retirement and healthcare the present system does not.
More importantly, this “Path to Prosperity” tackles issues directly weighing on our economy and future that President Obama has had four years to tackle and chose demagoguery and passing the buck instead. As Ed Morrisey notes over at Hot Air, even Erskine Bowles of the Bowles-Simpson Commission called Paul Ryan’s plan “honest” and “serious” and took issue with President Obama “for dishonestly attempting to evade a true comparison and for back-loading cuts in order to claim $4 trillion in reductions over 12 years.”
Paul Ryan’s plan exists. Barack Obama’s is just three card monty.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a great bio on Paul Ryan, check the following:- "GOP idea man" May 22, 2010 http://www.worldmag.com/articles/16688
[NOTE: Did you notice that the attack by a homosexual activist on Wednesday at the Washington D.C. headquarters of the Christian/conservative Family Research Council, just a day after a major homosexual activist group labeled it a "hate group" received no media follow-up after just one day? Once again, if a Christian/conservative had instead attacked a liberal activist headquarters, the mainstream press would have days of stories to label ALL Christians and conservatives as "violent extremists." The double standard is always so breath-taking. - Stan; http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2012/August/FRC-Suspect-a-Volunteer-at-Gay-Community-Center/; ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If Only Paul Ryan’s Plan Were as Radical as the Democrats Claim"; by Erick Erickson August 13th; http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/08/13/if-only-paul-ryans-plan-were-as-radical-as-the-democrats-claim/
It is mathematically indisputable that should President Barack Obama obtain his legislative desire and increase taxes on those making $250,000.00 a year or more the nation would not close even this year’s budget deficit. Never mind the $16 trillion in national debt, the income brought in through that tax increase would not balance this year’s federal budget.
It is also mathematically indisputable that should the Democrats’ obtain the ultimate fantasy of the grade school marxists routinely populating the ranks of left-wing economists, more commonly referred to as the “Occupy Wall Street” movement — confiscating 100% of income from all those making $250,000.00 a year or more — the nation still would not close this year’s budget deficit. Marxist sounding pablum about the rich paying their fair share and not building their businesses aside, the Democrats’ covetousness of American salaries accomplishes nothing more than temporarily satiating their addiction to spending.
Paul Ryan, as Mitt Romney’s Vice Presidential nominee, has made a career of shining the spotlight on the Democrats’ addiction to spending.
Paul Ryan’s budget plan, called the “Path to Prosperity” has become a necessary lightening rod on the road to fiscal sanity. Because of the President’s spending addiction, the nation has been without a real budget for more than one thousand days. President Obama’s budget plans for the past few years have been too radical even for the most radical Democrats in Congress, failing to pass even the Democrat controlled Senate with a single vote.
Despite the rhetoric from spending addicts on the left, Paul Ryan’s plan is not the radical path conservatives would prefer. The plan does not balance the federal budget for three decades and is premised on the assumption that future congresses will show restraint. Three decades is an extraordinarily long time, but the plan does eventually balance, which is something the President’s own budget never does.
The Democrats will demagogue Paul Ryan’s budget plan. They already have run commercials showing a Paul Ryan look alike shoving a grandmother off a cliff. The hysteria ignores that under Paul Ryan’s plan senior citizens will not see their medicare benefits affected.
Under his slow moving plan, people 55 and younger begin to have choices they can make about their future retirement and healthcare needs. The Ryan plan moves people fully out of the present failing system into more modern options within the control of the taxpayer himself. But it only does so for people more than a decade away from retiring. For taxpayers who increasingly distrust Washington and who think the present system will not be their for them anyway, it gives them control of their future in a way Democrats only talk about about.
Choice for Republicans involves trusting the American people to handle their affairs and retirement. Choice for Democrats involves only the option to kill children, with everything else pre-packaged in one size fits all government bureaucracy. These two visions of choice will be at the heart of the 2012 Presidential campaign season.
Paul Ryan’s plan, sadly, is not nearly as aggressive as it should be or could be. It takes too long to balance the budget. It keeps too many people in the present entitlement system for too long. But it begins, at least, to fix the system and give choices about retirement and healthcare the present system does not.
More importantly, this “Path to Prosperity” tackles issues directly weighing on our economy and future that President Obama has had four years to tackle and chose demagoguery and passing the buck instead. As Ed Morrisey notes over at Hot Air, even Erskine Bowles of the Bowles-Simpson Commission called Paul Ryan’s plan “honest” and “serious” and took issue with President Obama “for dishonestly attempting to evade a true comparison and for back-loading cuts in order to claim $4 trillion in reductions over 12 years.”
Paul Ryan’s plan exists. Barack Obama’s is just three card monty.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a great bio on Paul Ryan, check the following:- "GOP idea man" May 22, 2010 http://www.worldmag.com/articles/16688
Thursday, August 16, 2012
#293 (8/16) - Say What!- Obama Lawsuit Against Military Voting Rights; Chicago Politics
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
Oppose Obama’s Lawsuit Against Military Voting Rights
Sign the American Center for Law and Justivce petition at: http://aclj.org/us-constitution/oppose-obama-lawsuit-against-military-voting-rights
The Obama Re-election campaign has filed a lawsuit to overturn a law that gives members of the military a few extra days to vote early. Men and women in the military sacrifice dearly for our country and they deserve and have the lawful and constitutional right to additional consideration.
Stand with the U.S. military. The ACLJ [American Center for Law and Justice] will file an amicus brief backing the Ohio law - giving our military men and women an opportunity to cast their ballots in a constitutional manner. Add your name to our brief defending the voting rights of the U.S. military today.
This challenge by the Obama Re-election Campaign is not only unconstitutional, but it is also offensive to millions of Americans. Our military heroes deserve to have this lawful courtesy extended to them - not more roadblocks making it even more difficult for them to participate in the election.
[Those in the military are willing to give their lives to protect our right to vote -among other cherished freedoms. And we want to restrict their ability to exercise that same freedom. Unbelieveable!- Stan]
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Chicago Politics At Work - from alert@grassrootsaction.com; Tuesday, August 14
Yesterday in Iowa during a Paul Ryan campaign stop, pro-Obama thugs disrupted his speech and attempted to storm the stage. The hecklers interrupted Ryan throughout his speech and then at one point began to climb the stage. Even liberal commentator Mark Halperin admitted these protesters were likely Democrats "on duty" -- meaning they were dispatched to disrupt the event.[Can you imagine the outcry from the mainstream press if a conservative activist did such a thing?(Of course, I can't recall that ever happeningl.) ALL conservatives would be branded as "violent extremeists" for days. This incident was hardly given mention. Naturally. - Stan]
This is classic Chicago politics. While Obama says nice words about Ryan, dispatched activists make it their goal to use any means to disrupt Romney and Ryan events. The goal is a massive “smear and fear” campaign to frighten senior citizens. It's the same warped mentality that drove the "occupiers" -- disorder and disruption to achieve their goals. And the liberal pundits are piling on. Newsweek’s feminist commentator, Eleanor Clift, wrote that Ryan is a “nightmare for seniors who’ve earned their Medicare benefits.”
Hope and Change of 2008 has become Fear and Intimidation of 2012.
[bold and italics emphasis]
Oppose Obama’s Lawsuit Against Military Voting Rights
Sign the American Center for Law and Justivce petition at: http://aclj.org/us-constitution/oppose-obama-lawsuit-against-military-voting-rights
The Obama Re-election campaign has filed a lawsuit to overturn a law that gives members of the military a few extra days to vote early. Men and women in the military sacrifice dearly for our country and they deserve and have the lawful and constitutional right to additional consideration.
Stand with the U.S. military. The ACLJ [American Center for Law and Justice] will file an amicus brief backing the Ohio law - giving our military men and women an opportunity to cast their ballots in a constitutional manner. Add your name to our brief defending the voting rights of the U.S. military today.
This challenge by the Obama Re-election Campaign is not only unconstitutional, but it is also offensive to millions of Americans. Our military heroes deserve to have this lawful courtesy extended to them - not more roadblocks making it even more difficult for them to participate in the election.
[Those in the military are willing to give their lives to protect our right to vote -among other cherished freedoms. And we want to restrict their ability to exercise that same freedom. Unbelieveable!- Stan]
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Chicago Politics At Work - from alert@grassrootsaction.com; Tuesday, August 14
Yesterday in Iowa during a Paul Ryan campaign stop, pro-Obama thugs disrupted his speech and attempted to storm the stage. The hecklers interrupted Ryan throughout his speech and then at one point began to climb the stage. Even liberal commentator Mark Halperin admitted these protesters were likely Democrats "on duty" -- meaning they were dispatched to disrupt the event.[Can you imagine the outcry from the mainstream press if a conservative activist did such a thing?(Of course, I can't recall that ever happeningl.) ALL conservatives would be branded as "violent extremeists" for days. This incident was hardly given mention. Naturally. - Stan]
This is classic Chicago politics. While Obama says nice words about Ryan, dispatched activists make it their goal to use any means to disrupt Romney and Ryan events. The goal is a massive “smear and fear” campaign to frighten senior citizens. It's the same warped mentality that drove the "occupiers" -- disorder and disruption to achieve their goals. And the liberal pundits are piling on. Newsweek’s feminist commentator, Eleanor Clift, wrote that Ryan is a “nightmare for seniors who’ve earned their Medicare benefits.”
Hope and Change of 2008 has become Fear and Intimidation of 2012.
[bold and italics emphasis]
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
#292 (8/15) - "Civility Watch: The Romney-killed-my-wife Edition"
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
By: David Harsanyi, 8/7/2012, http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/07/harsanyi-civility-watch-obama-super-pac-blames-romney-for-death/
“At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized — at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do — it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” – President Barack Obama
Do you think anyone at the pro-Barack Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action [unless exressly denounced by the candidate himself, do you honestly believe these PAC ads are run WITHOUT the candidate's blessing?]paused and thought about discourse before releasing an ad that personally blames presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney for the death of a steel worker’s wife?
[The ad, entitled]“Understands” takes aim at Bain Capital’s closure of an unproductive, union-heavy GST Steel plant in Kansas City, which, if we follow the logic of Obama’s economic theories, should, like Amtrak, stay in business no matter how much money it loses.
Joe Soptic, a worker that was laid off and lost his health benefits, explains that his wife later was found to have stage-four cancer and “there was nothing they could do.” (UPDATE:GST went under in 2001, two years after Romney made decisions at Bain. Soptic’s wife died in 2006.)
As tragic as this story is, it has little to do with Bain.By 1999 GSI had $53 million in net losses. How long does Mitt Romney owe Joe Soptic health care? And why is Soptic blaming Romney alone? Surely he could also blame unions for injecting tremendous costs into doing business, or blame the international marketplace for existing, or blame innovation in his own industry for making many jobs superfluous.And guess what? When investors reallocated money from a failing project to a productive one (as they occasionally do) a whole bunch of other people — sometimes more people — benefit from health care insurance. Not exactly the stuff of political ad copy.
Now, if you believe that private equity is killing people, you’re probably not voting GOP anyway. And if killing jobs were just like killing people, Obama would be in front of The Hague. But for Democrats, all this nastiness is effective in turning the conversation away from Obama’s historically unmatched failure on the economy. That’s what really matters.
But, it is worth pointing out that a few years back calls for “civility” — which can be loosely translated to mean “shut up, tea party” — was all the rage in Washington. These days, though, the Senate majority leader breezily accuses a presidential candidate of a felony (he’s delighted at the outcome) and the House’s minority leader claims matter-of-factly that Republicans are in the E. coli club. Now, Mitt Romney is not only a liar and a thief, but maybe even guilty of negligent homicide?
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
By: David Harsanyi, 8/7/2012, http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/07/harsanyi-civility-watch-obama-super-pac-blames-romney-for-death/
“At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized — at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do — it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” – President Barack Obama
Do you think anyone at the pro-Barack Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action [unless exressly denounced by the candidate himself, do you honestly believe these PAC ads are run WITHOUT the candidate's blessing?]paused and thought about discourse before releasing an ad that personally blames presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney for the death of a steel worker’s wife?
[The ad, entitled]“Understands” takes aim at Bain Capital’s closure of an unproductive, union-heavy GST Steel plant in Kansas City, which, if we follow the logic of Obama’s economic theories, should, like Amtrak, stay in business no matter how much money it loses.
Joe Soptic, a worker that was laid off and lost his health benefits, explains that his wife later was found to have stage-four cancer and “there was nothing they could do.” (UPDATE:GST went under in 2001, two years after Romney made decisions at Bain. Soptic’s wife died in 2006.)
As tragic as this story is, it has little to do with Bain.By 1999 GSI had $53 million in net losses. How long does Mitt Romney owe Joe Soptic health care? And why is Soptic blaming Romney alone? Surely he could also blame unions for injecting tremendous costs into doing business, or blame the international marketplace for existing, or blame innovation in his own industry for making many jobs superfluous.And guess what? When investors reallocated money from a failing project to a productive one (as they occasionally do) a whole bunch of other people — sometimes more people — benefit from health care insurance. Not exactly the stuff of political ad copy.
Now, if you believe that private equity is killing people, you’re probably not voting GOP anyway. And if killing jobs were just like killing people, Obama would be in front of The Hague. But for Democrats, all this nastiness is effective in turning the conversation away from Obama’s historically unmatched failure on the economy. That’s what really matters.
But, it is worth pointing out that a few years back calls for “civility” — which can be loosely translated to mean “shut up, tea party” — was all the rage in Washington. These days, though, the Senate majority leader breezily accuses a presidential candidate of a felony (he’s delighted at the outcome) and the House’s minority leader claims matter-of-factly that Republicans are in the E. coli club. Now, Mitt Romney is not only a liar and a thief, but maybe even guilty of negligent homicide?
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
#291 (8/14) - The London Olympics - My Observations; Gabby's Faith Attacked
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS?]
AS I SEE IT - 1)PRAISE GOD that there were no terrorist attacks or even minor violent disruptions at the just concluded London Olymics. It would be natural to say that the security police did an admirable job, as I would have thought that especially which such a large Muslim population blended into the city population, terrorists would have made at least some attempt.(Are the police THAT much more effective since the subway bombings several years ago? Jihadists have not stated that they no longer want to attack Great Britan - as well as Israel and the US.) Also, it would be encouraging to think that maybe THEY are not that organized or well-funded but I tend to doubt that.
One thing that the world press will NEVER speculate is what part the SUPERNATURAL had a part in what DID NOT happen. Of course, I'm talking about the countless prayers that I assume were lifted up to God's throne during the Olympics that can only be fully known by God. What part HE might have played in answer to those prayers we will never know this side of Heaven. But intercessary prayer - inviting God into our needs - is such a mysterious thing in how it works that you just have to wonder. At least as believers, WE must be sure to thank God for HIS protection over the London Olympics of 2012.
2)The Opening and Closing Ceremonies. This was the first time that I watched the opening ceremony of any Olympics in many years. I was totally unprepared for the elaborate production that unfolded that night and kept wondering just what it all cost to produce. I was absolutely STUNNED to learn that just those few hours of entertainment cost $42 million!(I assume the CLOSING ceremony was also just as costly. I was so upset at the extravagance I ended up not watching most of that "ceremony.")
How has it come to be that just the OPENING CEREMONY of what is essentially an amateur sports event (granted one involving almost every nation on earth and watched by at least a billion people) involves the host city - which has already spent tens of billions of dollars to put on the Games - spending such an OBSCENE amount of money for a "ceremony?" I did some research and learned that a charity could dig 200 wells for that number of villages and provide clean water for probably more than 200,000 people for just $1 million! I wish that someone would finally say "Enough with trying to impress the world!"
What if the Olympic Committe limited the opening and closing ceremony to a budget of not more than $1 or $2 million each; maybe just decorations, an orchestra, and some fireworks? Let the host country impress the world by then giving an equal amount of money for something more practical,such as having clean water wells dug in several third world countries? Maybe someone could start a website dedicated to getting people to sign a petition urging such action beginning with the winter Olympics in 2014. - Stan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Attacking Gabby Douglas’s Faith? Really?"; August 6, 2012
http://aclj.org/free-speech-2/attacking-gabby-douglas-faith
It’s a sad commentary on modern life when I heard an exuberant 16-year-old thank God for the greatest success she might ever attain and immediately thought, “Someone’s going to attack her.” As surely as the night follows day, here comes Salon.com:
"As a Christian myself (albeit one of those really freaky papist kinds), I’ve often wondered what it is about Christians like Douglas that unnerves me so. The closest I’ve been able to figure it is that Douglas and her ilk seem to espouse a faith based on what is commonly referred to as “The God of Parking Spaces.” It’s the deity that grants wishes to those who ask nicely. Douglas is a girl who has described God as the figure who’s “waking me up every morning and keeping me safe in the gym every day.” She told People Thursday,“I was on the bus and it was raining and I thought, ‘It’s going to be a great day.’My mom used to tell me when I was little, ‘When it rains, it’s God’s manifestation, a big day’s waiting to happen.’ I texted my mom, ‘It’s raining. You know what that means.’[Added comment by writer of this article:]"It means that Russian girl is going down, I guess."
Thank you, Salon, for that oh-so-snarky takedown of a triumphant teenager. What makes it even worse, of course, is that Gabby’s life has hardly been full of sunshine, rainbows, and unicorns before this moment. She’s known more fear and heartbreak than the average teenager. Her father’s an NCO in the Air Force, and her parents are divorcing under the strain of multiple deployments:
The pressure to perform to the best of her abilities without her father by her side was at times too much for ‘The Flying Squirrel.’ While living with her coach in Iowa, Gabby would often wake up with anxiety about her father at war. She would rush to her computer and try to contact him on Skype.‘[I] Just had bad days in the gym, thinking about my dad,’ she said to NBC before the Olympics. ‘I’m just like “Whoa, what if he doesn’t come back (from Iraq)?” I was just horrified. I prayed every night.’
While Gabby gave most Americans a moment of joy last week, her family has been sacrificing in deep and profound ways far, far from the spotlight and far from Salon’s condescending “tolerance.” Had Salon done its homework, it would have seen that Gabby does not in fact simply pray to the “God of Parking Spaces” but instead to the God who watches over a father at war, to a God who provides comfort in the midst of family heartbreak, and yes to a God who gives good gifts to His Children including — very rarely — an Olympic Gold Medal.
If the writers at Salon can’t watch a child thank her Lord and Creator for a great day — maybe even her greatest day — without sniping at her faith, perhaps they are the ones who need to grow up.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
AS I SEE IT - 1)PRAISE GOD that there were no terrorist attacks or even minor violent disruptions at the just concluded London Olymics. It would be natural to say that the security police did an admirable job, as I would have thought that especially which such a large Muslim population blended into the city population, terrorists would have made at least some attempt.(Are the police THAT much more effective since the subway bombings several years ago? Jihadists have not stated that they no longer want to attack Great Britan - as well as Israel and the US.) Also, it would be encouraging to think that maybe THEY are not that organized or well-funded but I tend to doubt that.
One thing that the world press will NEVER speculate is what part the SUPERNATURAL had a part in what DID NOT happen. Of course, I'm talking about the countless prayers that I assume were lifted up to God's throne during the Olympics that can only be fully known by God. What part HE might have played in answer to those prayers we will never know this side of Heaven. But intercessary prayer - inviting God into our needs - is such a mysterious thing in how it works that you just have to wonder. At least as believers, WE must be sure to thank God for HIS protection over the London Olympics of 2012.
2)The Opening and Closing Ceremonies. This was the first time that I watched the opening ceremony of any Olympics in many years. I was totally unprepared for the elaborate production that unfolded that night and kept wondering just what it all cost to produce. I was absolutely STUNNED to learn that just those few hours of entertainment cost $42 million!(I assume the CLOSING ceremony was also just as costly. I was so upset at the extravagance I ended up not watching most of that "ceremony.")
How has it come to be that just the OPENING CEREMONY of what is essentially an amateur sports event (granted one involving almost every nation on earth and watched by at least a billion people) involves the host city - which has already spent tens of billions of dollars to put on the Games - spending such an OBSCENE amount of money for a "ceremony?" I did some research and learned that a charity could dig 200 wells for that number of villages and provide clean water for probably more than 200,000 people for just $1 million! I wish that someone would finally say "Enough with trying to impress the world!"
What if the Olympic Committe limited the opening and closing ceremony to a budget of not more than $1 or $2 million each; maybe just decorations, an orchestra, and some fireworks? Let the host country impress the world by then giving an equal amount of money for something more practical,such as having clean water wells dug in several third world countries? Maybe someone could start a website dedicated to getting people to sign a petition urging such action beginning with the winter Olympics in 2014. - Stan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Attacking Gabby Douglas’s Faith? Really?"; August 6, 2012
http://aclj.org/free-speech-2/attacking-gabby-douglas-faith
It’s a sad commentary on modern life when I heard an exuberant 16-year-old thank God for the greatest success she might ever attain and immediately thought, “Someone’s going to attack her.” As surely as the night follows day, here comes Salon.com:
"As a Christian myself (albeit one of those really freaky papist kinds), I’ve often wondered what it is about Christians like Douglas that unnerves me so. The closest I’ve been able to figure it is that Douglas and her ilk seem to espouse a faith based on what is commonly referred to as “The God of Parking Spaces.” It’s the deity that grants wishes to those who ask nicely. Douglas is a girl who has described God as the figure who’s “waking me up every morning and keeping me safe in the gym every day.” She told People Thursday,“I was on the bus and it was raining and I thought, ‘It’s going to be a great day.’My mom used to tell me when I was little, ‘When it rains, it’s God’s manifestation, a big day’s waiting to happen.’ I texted my mom, ‘It’s raining. You know what that means.’[Added comment by writer of this article:]"It means that Russian girl is going down, I guess."
Thank you, Salon, for that oh-so-snarky takedown of a triumphant teenager. What makes it even worse, of course, is that Gabby’s life has hardly been full of sunshine, rainbows, and unicorns before this moment. She’s known more fear and heartbreak than the average teenager. Her father’s an NCO in the Air Force, and her parents are divorcing under the strain of multiple deployments:
The pressure to perform to the best of her abilities without her father by her side was at times too much for ‘The Flying Squirrel.’ While living with her coach in Iowa, Gabby would often wake up with anxiety about her father at war. She would rush to her computer and try to contact him on Skype.‘[I] Just had bad days in the gym, thinking about my dad,’ she said to NBC before the Olympics. ‘I’m just like “Whoa, what if he doesn’t come back (from Iraq)?” I was just horrified. I prayed every night.’
While Gabby gave most Americans a moment of joy last week, her family has been sacrificing in deep and profound ways far, far from the spotlight and far from Salon’s condescending “tolerance.” Had Salon done its homework, it would have seen that Gabby does not in fact simply pray to the “God of Parking Spaces” but instead to the God who watches over a father at war, to a God who provides comfort in the midst of family heartbreak, and yes to a God who gives good gifts to His Children including — very rarely — an Olympic Gold Medal.
If the writers at Salon can’t watch a child thank her Lord and Creator for a great day — maybe even her greatest day — without sniping at her faith, perhaps they are the ones who need to grow up.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Monday, August 13, 2012
#290 (8/13) - That's Outrageous! (8/12)
[FYI - My GENday is Sept. 19th. When is YOURS]
Iraq to Release Accused Killer of U.S. Troops - Newsmax.com; Sunday August 12, 2012
[NOTE: Because he is himself a Shiite, it has long been feared that the Iraq President would show favor to the Shiite government of Iran. Here may be another evidence of that. It doesn't help that our government has done nothing to prevent such things as this from happening. - Stan
Iraqi authorities have dropped charges against a high-profile Shiite terrorist accused of murdering American troops and are set to release him, as a Republican critic charges the Obama administration with botching the case.
Ali Musa Daqduq, a Lebanese national and one of the most senior Hezbollah figures ever to be in U.S. custody, was allegedly a key link between Hezbollah, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, and violent Shiite groups held responsible by the United States for deadly attacks on American troops.
Daqduq is suspected in the 2007 killings of five American soldiers in Karbala by assailants wearing American-style fatigues. He was in U.S. hands until late last year when he was handed over the Iraqi authorities, CNS News reported.
At the time Republican Sens. John McCain, Mitch McConnell, and Lindsey Graham and independent Sen. Joe Lieberman said they were “deeply concerned that Daqduq will never have to answer for his involvement in killing U.S. citizens, that he could be released from Iraqi custody for political reasons, and that he would then return to the fight against the United States and our friends.”
A U.S. military commission subsequently filed charges against Daqduq, including counts of murder and terrorism, and lodged a formal extradition application. But Iraqi courts dropped charges against him and last week the country’s Central Criminal Court tossed out the extradition request, according to CNS.
In a speech on the Senate floor on Thursday, Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said: “The administration had years to transfer Daqduq to our detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, but because the president seemed to lack the political will to do so — I think because of campaign promises he improvidently made — one of the most dangerous, reprehensible terrorists ever in our custody will likely be allowed to go free.”
Obama as commander-in-chief “has a duty to those magnificent troops who have answered his call to go into harm’s way to execute U.S. policy,” Sessions stated. “Part of that duty is not to give away what they have fought and bled for. That includes not giving up prisoners whom these soldiers have, at great risk and effort, captured.
“With strong action we may be able to ensure that Daqduq is not released, that he is able to be tried for the murders he committed and the American soldiers he killed.”
Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy said: “Baghdad wants to balance its relationships with Iran and Washington, and this case stands at the crux of the two. Accordingly, Washington must make clear at the highest levels of the Iraqi government that there will be tangible consequences to summarily freeing an Iranian proxy with American blood on his hands.”
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
$14 Billion in Jobless Benefits Overpaid in ’11
Newsmax.com; Sunday, August 12
The unemployment insurance system in America suffers the second highest rate for “improper payments” of any federal program, behind the National School Lunch Program, and overpayments topped $14 billion last year alone.
The overpayments accounted for 11 percent of all jobless benefits paid out by the federal government and states in 2011, according to reports from the U.S. Labor Department.
Of the overpaid funds, most end up in the hands of three types of people: those who aren’t actively searching for a job, those who quit voluntarily, and those who continue to collect after returning to work. All are ineligible for benefits.
A small number of cases constitute deliberate fraud of the system, using fake documents or identities, often involving prison inmates, illegal immigrants or even deceased persons, CNN Money reported.
“Unemployment checks are going to graveyards,” Vice President Joe Biden said in September as the federal and state governments launched an effort to stem the overpayments and collect those already made.
The Labor Department estimates that half of its overpayments are recoverable, but historically only about a quarter of the recoverable overpayments have actually been collected.
When the government finds an overpayment, it often sends a letter demanding that the claimant return the funds. Government attorneys can also seek to recoup the money by setting up payment plans, garnishing wages, or deducting money from income tax refunds. Punishment can also include probation, but jail time is rare.
Last year there were about 2,700 convictions for fraud related to unemployment benefits, according to CNN Money.
Among the states, Indiana was the worst offender for overpayments, dishing out more improper payments in 2011 than correct ones.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Iraq to Release Accused Killer of U.S. Troops - Newsmax.com; Sunday August 12, 2012
[NOTE: Because he is himself a Shiite, it has long been feared that the Iraq President would show favor to the Shiite government of Iran. Here may be another evidence of that. It doesn't help that our government has done nothing to prevent such things as this from happening. - Stan
Iraqi authorities have dropped charges against a high-profile Shiite terrorist accused of murdering American troops and are set to release him, as a Republican critic charges the Obama administration with botching the case.
Ali Musa Daqduq, a Lebanese national and one of the most senior Hezbollah figures ever to be in U.S. custody, was allegedly a key link between Hezbollah, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, and violent Shiite groups held responsible by the United States for deadly attacks on American troops.
Daqduq is suspected in the 2007 killings of five American soldiers in Karbala by assailants wearing American-style fatigues. He was in U.S. hands until late last year when he was handed over the Iraqi authorities, CNS News reported.
At the time Republican Sens. John McCain, Mitch McConnell, and Lindsey Graham and independent Sen. Joe Lieberman said they were “deeply concerned that Daqduq will never have to answer for his involvement in killing U.S. citizens, that he could be released from Iraqi custody for political reasons, and that he would then return to the fight against the United States and our friends.”
A U.S. military commission subsequently filed charges against Daqduq, including counts of murder and terrorism, and lodged a formal extradition application. But Iraqi courts dropped charges against him and last week the country’s Central Criminal Court tossed out the extradition request, according to CNS.
In a speech on the Senate floor on Thursday, Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said: “The administration had years to transfer Daqduq to our detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, but because the president seemed to lack the political will to do so — I think because of campaign promises he improvidently made — one of the most dangerous, reprehensible terrorists ever in our custody will likely be allowed to go free.”
Obama as commander-in-chief “has a duty to those magnificent troops who have answered his call to go into harm’s way to execute U.S. policy,” Sessions stated. “Part of that duty is not to give away what they have fought and bled for. That includes not giving up prisoners whom these soldiers have, at great risk and effort, captured.
“With strong action we may be able to ensure that Daqduq is not released, that he is able to be tried for the murders he committed and the American soldiers he killed.”
Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy said: “Baghdad wants to balance its relationships with Iran and Washington, and this case stands at the crux of the two. Accordingly, Washington must make clear at the highest levels of the Iraqi government that there will be tangible consequences to summarily freeing an Iranian proxy with American blood on his hands.”
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
$14 Billion in Jobless Benefits Overpaid in ’11
Newsmax.com; Sunday, August 12
The unemployment insurance system in America suffers the second highest rate for “improper payments” of any federal program, behind the National School Lunch Program, and overpayments topped $14 billion last year alone.
The overpayments accounted for 11 percent of all jobless benefits paid out by the federal government and states in 2011, according to reports from the U.S. Labor Department.
Of the overpaid funds, most end up in the hands of three types of people: those who aren’t actively searching for a job, those who quit voluntarily, and those who continue to collect after returning to work. All are ineligible for benefits.
A small number of cases constitute deliberate fraud of the system, using fake documents or identities, often involving prison inmates, illegal immigrants or even deceased persons, CNN Money reported.
“Unemployment checks are going to graveyards,” Vice President Joe Biden said in September as the federal and state governments launched an effort to stem the overpayments and collect those already made.
The Labor Department estimates that half of its overpayments are recoverable, but historically only about a quarter of the recoverable overpayments have actually been collected.
When the government finds an overpayment, it often sends a letter demanding that the claimant return the funds. Government attorneys can also seek to recoup the money by setting up payment plans, garnishing wages, or deducting money from income tax refunds. Punishment can also include probation, but jail time is rare.
Last year there were about 2,700 convictions for fraud related to unemployment benefits, according to CNN Money.
Among the states, Indiana was the worst offender for overpayments, dishing out more improper payments in 2011 than correct ones.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
