[As always, I encourage you to watch today's broadcast of "Truth That Transforms" (formerly "The Coral Ridge Hour" TODAY - in Orlando, 5 pm, ch. 55.1)]
Sunday Funny (c/o MIkeysFunnies.com) ~ Honk if you love Jesus! Text while driving if you want to meet Him.
Making the Case/Don't Say "The Bible Says So" - Chuck Colson, Breakpoint.com / April 27, 2011
I want to say from the outset that I believe in biblical inerrancy, the sufficiency of scripture, and the doctrine the Reformers called Sola Scriptura. I need to tell you that up front, because you might otherwise get very upset at what I'm about to say.
While we have to be immersed in scripture and understand it fully, we also have to know when and how to use it in public discourse. Let me explain. G. K. Chesterton, the famous British writer, was once invited to a meeting of the leading intellectuals in England. They were asked if they were shipwrecked on an island, what would be the one book they would want to have with them. Everyone expected Chesterton, a prominent Christian, to say "the Bible." When it came his turn to speak, however, Chesterton said that if he were shipwrecked on a desert island, he'd like to have "Thomas's Guide to Practical Shipbuilding."
The point is that oftentimes we need to understand things that are not covered in the Bible. And we need to understand things that help us apply biblical teaching to all of life. This is why I teach biblical worldview.
A man once told Oswald Chambers that he read only the Bible. Here's what Chambers replied: "My strong advice to you is to soak, soak, soak in philosophy and psychology, until you know more of these subjects than ever you need consciously to think. It is ignorance of these subjects on the part of ministers and workers that has brought our evangelical theology to such a sorry plight...The man who reads only the Bible does not, as a rule, know it or human life." And when it comes to making a biblical case on any hot topic -- taxes, the deficit, homosexuality, whatever -- we need to understand the issue and how to make that case in a way that is accessible to believers and non-believers alike.
Brit Hume, Robby George and I have just released a DVD teaching series on ethics called Doing the Right Thing. It's one of the most important projects I've undertaken in my ministry. You can get it at ColsonCenter.org. Every principle we teach on ethics is biblically based. But rarely did we cite the Bible as authority. This is because this ethics course, we believe, will be taught in secular colleges and business schools -- as well as in churches and small groups. So, it's got to be accessible to everybody.
The sad fact is that today, starting a conversation with "the Bible says" will often cause the listener to stop listening. So what you do is make arguments based on what the Reformers called common grace, or what historically has been called natural law. This is what Paul did when he gave his famous sermon at Mars Hill, his first foray into the Greek culture. He quoted Greek poets; he referred to Greek artifacts. He thoroughly engaged their culture. And then he used their beliefs to lead directly into the gospel.
This is why we must study biblical worldview, to compare how the Bible works out in life versus how other systems of thought do. I assure you: You will see that the biblical way is the only way to make sense of the world, to live rationally in the world, and eventually, your friends will see this as well
[bold and italics emphasis MINE]
Friday, October 14, 2011
#138 (10/21) - Behind The Pink Ribbon - The Untold Story of Money Raised By "The Race for the Cure"
Don't forget: (1) This week's broadcast of "Truth That Trasnforms" (Sunday, 5 pm, ch. 55.1 in Orlando; (2) The editorial cartoons at Worldmag.com; and (3) The upcoming Sunday Special.
[If you've watched sports events this month, such as the NFL games, you will note many wearing pink to show support for breast cancer reserach. But did you know that there are ties between the largest breast cancer nonprofit and Planned Parenthood! Before you run that race or give those precious donation dollars, be sure to read the following expose.]
Susan G. Komen's Relationship with Planned Parenthood - http://www.redstate.com/breeanneh/2011/10/13/behind-the-pink-ribbon/ Thursday, October 13th - posted by Breeanne Howe
Every year thousands of women train and prepare to Race for the Cure organized by Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the world’s largest breast cancer nonprofit. During October, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, almost every product on the shelves, from batteries to blenders, turns pink and contributes a portion of their sales to Susan G. Komen for the Cure. One needs not see the name to know who is behind the pink ribbon. Most people, however, do not know what is beyond the ribbon and the name for which it stands.
$731,303. That is the amount donated to Planned Parenthood by Susan G. Komen for the Cure in 2009 alone. The relationship between Planned Parenthood and Susan G. Komen has been documented and objected to for so long that Komen actually has an explanation letter on their website.
“Komen provides funding for local community health programs through our network of more than 120 affiliates across the United States. Each Affiliate is responsible for assessing the breast health service needs—including education, screening, treatment and support—for the residents within its region as well as identifying and providing funding to organizations that can meet those needs. Annually, Komen Affiliates fund programs that provide breast health education and breast screenings for hundreds of thousands of low-income, uninsured, or medically under-served women via nearly 2,000 local organizations, including 19 Planned Parenthood programs."
"The decision to fund any breast health and screening program is based on a thorough assessment of a community’s breast health needs and resources. In some areas of the U.S., our affiliates have determined a Planned Parenthood clinic to be the best or only local place where women can receive breast health care."
"In all cases, Komen funding is used exclusively to provide breast cancer programs, including clinical breast exams conducted by trained medical personnel. When symptoms indicate a need for further screening, patients are provided with a referral to obtain a mammogram. Depending on local resources, that mammogram may be paid for using a Komen grant. It’s important to note that Komen will only make grants to non-profit organizations. As many mammography providers are for-profit entities, we are only to fund mammography services through grants made to local non-profit service providers."
"Twice each year, Komen affiliates conduct a thorough review of their community health grant programs to ensure that funds are being used only for breast health services. Under no circumstances are Komen funds used to fund abortions or other non-breast services, and any service provider shown to violate those rules would be immediately terminated from the Komen grant program."
"During the past five years, Komen Affiliate grants to Planned Parenthood have funded 139,000 clinical breast exams and nearly 5,000 mammograms, enabling the detection of 177 breast cancers. Our mission is to help save lives by increasing screening rates among all populations of women across the U.S. and around the world. As long as there is a need for health care for vulnerable populations, Komen will fund the facilities that can best meet those needs.”
While some have doubted the accuracy of Komen’s statement regarding the lack of facilities available in rural areas for breast cancer services, Texas, unfortunately, serves as a prime example. The rural counties surrounding Dallas are littered with Planned Parenthoods, many of which only have Planned Parenthood to serve their needs. Planned Parenthood of El Paso even managed to receive federal stimulus funds, despite the President requesting Planned Parenthood be removed from the stimulus bill. Instead of contributing money to build clinics in the many underserved areas of rural Texas, which would be more in line with their supposed life-affirming goals, Susan G. Komen curiously chooses to give money to the Planned Parenthood facilities instead. As Komen surely understands, money is fungible, and their contributions to Planned Parenthood allows money that would have been used for breast cancer services to, instead, be used for their more popular and nefarious practices.
One needn’t look further than Live Action’s recent phone calls to 30 different Planned Parenthoods who all admitted they don’t offer mammograms to wonder where Susan G. Komen’s money is going. In fact, as far back as 2003, according to Planned Parenthood’s 2003-2004 Annual Report, abortions increased by 14,000 in 2002-2003, while breast exams decreased by more than 141,000. Yet,in 2003 Planned Parenthood of Dallas, of which Nancy Brinker, founder of the Susan G. Komen Foundation, has served on the advisory board, built a new $5 million dollar facility. In Houston, Planned Parenthood recently opened the largest abortion facility in the world, second only to China, which is 78,000 square feet and has an entire floor dedicated to late-term abortions of up to 25 week old babies. Thankfully, the state of Texas has fought back against those seemingly bent on making Texas the abortion capital. Four Texas Planned Parenthood centers had plans to close after the state took away taxpayer funding.
As if supporting Planned Parenthood wasn’t bad enough because they are the antithesis of life, abortion has long been thought to increase the risk of breast cancer. The first cancer study that included a possible link between abortion and breast cancer was in 1957. While many studies since then have sighted abortion as a key risk factor for developing breast cancer, Susan G. Komen firmly denies even the possibility of a link between the two. In 2002, the Bush administration created a furor when it altered the National Cancer Institute’s official statement concerning abortion and breast cancer on their website to read:
The possible relationship between abortion and breast cancer has been examined in over thirty published studies since 1957. Some studies have reported statistically significant evidence of an increased risk of breast cancer in women who have had abortions, while others have merely suggested an increased risk. Other studies have found no increase in risk among women who have had an interrupted pregnancy.
A New York Times editorial called the statement an “egregious distortion,” and 28 members of Congress complained to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. In response, the National Cancer Institute held a 3 day workshop and concluded not only that there was no link between abortion and breast cancer, but that the issue was resolved. However, in January 2010 the chief organizer of the workshop, Dr. Louise Brinton, reversed her opinion to say abortion does raise a woman’s risk of breast cancer. An April 2009 study found that abortion increases breast cancer risk by 40%, and oral contraceptives can multiply the risk by 4.2 times. Still the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, and Susan G. Komen for the Cure have ignored the findings.
The stated goal of Susan G. Komen for the Cure is to find a cure for cancer. In October of 2005, researchers at the University of Minnesota successfully used human embryonic stem cells to kill cancer cells; a study that surely didn’t go unnoticed by Susan G. Komen. Could it be that Susan G. Komen continues to financially support Planned Parenthood because they may hold the key to a possible cure for cancer? When they aren’t harvesting baby body parts for money, Planned Parenthood has offered women the option of donating tissue from their aborted babies to medical research. In their words, “Most agree that such decisions reflect generosity, courage, and the hope that some humanitarian good may come out of an unintended pregnancy.” Humanitarian good from unnecessarily killing an unborn baby? The truth is that adult stem cells have been treating all kinds of cancers, among many other diseases and conditions, for years. So why use embryonic stem cells instead of adult stem cells? According to the National Institute of Health, Human embryonic stem cells are thought to have much greater developmental potential than adult stem cells. In other words, they want to explore the possibilities because it could lead to something; ethics be damned. Yet, the NIH website also states that adult stem cells have recently been found to be more flexible than previously thought. It would appear that continuing to explore all the uses of adult stem cells might be a little more difficult and embryonic stem cells could be an easier route.
Whatever their reasons for financially supporting Planned Parenthood, Susan G. Komen is thankfully not the only option for those dedicated to life for women with cancer and babies. The National Breast Cancer Foundation also provides funding for free mammograms and cancer research and has no affiliation with Planned Parenthood. The Alliance for Cancer Gene Therapy recently made national news for using HIV to completely eradicate cancer. The Breast Cancer Society focuses on providing help for women currently battling breast cancer. Susan G. Komen for the Cure would like to do everything in their power to end breast cancer forever, an idea with which no one would disagree. However, a strong message should be sent that our greatest ideals don’t have to be realized through compromise.
Life is precious, be it the beautiful, familiar faces of the women we love, or the new faces of the babies we’ve yet to meet.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
[If you've watched sports events this month, such as the NFL games, you will note many wearing pink to show support for breast cancer reserach. But did you know that there are ties between the largest breast cancer nonprofit and Planned Parenthood! Before you run that race or give those precious donation dollars, be sure to read the following expose.]
Susan G. Komen's Relationship with Planned Parenthood - http://www.redstate.com/breeanneh/2011/10/13/behind-the-pink-ribbon/ Thursday, October 13th - posted by Breeanne Howe
Every year thousands of women train and prepare to Race for the Cure organized by Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the world’s largest breast cancer nonprofit. During October, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, almost every product on the shelves, from batteries to blenders, turns pink and contributes a portion of their sales to Susan G. Komen for the Cure. One needs not see the name to know who is behind the pink ribbon. Most people, however, do not know what is beyond the ribbon and the name for which it stands.
$731,303. That is the amount donated to Planned Parenthood by Susan G. Komen for the Cure in 2009 alone. The relationship between Planned Parenthood and Susan G. Komen has been documented and objected to for so long that Komen actually has an explanation letter on their website.
“Komen provides funding for local community health programs through our network of more than 120 affiliates across the United States. Each Affiliate is responsible for assessing the breast health service needs—including education, screening, treatment and support—for the residents within its region as well as identifying and providing funding to organizations that can meet those needs. Annually, Komen Affiliates fund programs that provide breast health education and breast screenings for hundreds of thousands of low-income, uninsured, or medically under-served women via nearly 2,000 local organizations, including 19 Planned Parenthood programs."
"The decision to fund any breast health and screening program is based on a thorough assessment of a community’s breast health needs and resources. In some areas of the U.S., our affiliates have determined a Planned Parenthood clinic to be the best or only local place where women can receive breast health care."
"In all cases, Komen funding is used exclusively to provide breast cancer programs, including clinical breast exams conducted by trained medical personnel. When symptoms indicate a need for further screening, patients are provided with a referral to obtain a mammogram. Depending on local resources, that mammogram may be paid for using a Komen grant. It’s important to note that Komen will only make grants to non-profit organizations. As many mammography providers are for-profit entities, we are only to fund mammography services through grants made to local non-profit service providers."
"Twice each year, Komen affiliates conduct a thorough review of their community health grant programs to ensure that funds are being used only for breast health services. Under no circumstances are Komen funds used to fund abortions or other non-breast services, and any service provider shown to violate those rules would be immediately terminated from the Komen grant program."
"During the past five years, Komen Affiliate grants to Planned Parenthood have funded 139,000 clinical breast exams and nearly 5,000 mammograms, enabling the detection of 177 breast cancers. Our mission is to help save lives by increasing screening rates among all populations of women across the U.S. and around the world. As long as there is a need for health care for vulnerable populations, Komen will fund the facilities that can best meet those needs.”
While some have doubted the accuracy of Komen’s statement regarding the lack of facilities available in rural areas for breast cancer services, Texas, unfortunately, serves as a prime example. The rural counties surrounding Dallas are littered with Planned Parenthoods, many of which only have Planned Parenthood to serve their needs. Planned Parenthood of El Paso even managed to receive federal stimulus funds, despite the President requesting Planned Parenthood be removed from the stimulus bill. Instead of contributing money to build clinics in the many underserved areas of rural Texas, which would be more in line with their supposed life-affirming goals, Susan G. Komen curiously chooses to give money to the Planned Parenthood facilities instead. As Komen surely understands, money is fungible, and their contributions to Planned Parenthood allows money that would have been used for breast cancer services to, instead, be used for their more popular and nefarious practices.
One needn’t look further than Live Action’s recent phone calls to 30 different Planned Parenthoods who all admitted they don’t offer mammograms to wonder where Susan G. Komen’s money is going. In fact, as far back as 2003, according to Planned Parenthood’s 2003-2004 Annual Report, abortions increased by 14,000 in 2002-2003, while breast exams decreased by more than 141,000. Yet,in 2003 Planned Parenthood of Dallas, of which Nancy Brinker, founder of the Susan G. Komen Foundation, has served on the advisory board, built a new $5 million dollar facility. In Houston, Planned Parenthood recently opened the largest abortion facility in the world, second only to China, which is 78,000 square feet and has an entire floor dedicated to late-term abortions of up to 25 week old babies. Thankfully, the state of Texas has fought back against those seemingly bent on making Texas the abortion capital. Four Texas Planned Parenthood centers had plans to close after the state took away taxpayer funding.
As if supporting Planned Parenthood wasn’t bad enough because they are the antithesis of life, abortion has long been thought to increase the risk of breast cancer. The first cancer study that included a possible link between abortion and breast cancer was in 1957. While many studies since then have sighted abortion as a key risk factor for developing breast cancer, Susan G. Komen firmly denies even the possibility of a link between the two. In 2002, the Bush administration created a furor when it altered the National Cancer Institute’s official statement concerning abortion and breast cancer on their website to read:
The possible relationship between abortion and breast cancer has been examined in over thirty published studies since 1957. Some studies have reported statistically significant evidence of an increased risk of breast cancer in women who have had abortions, while others have merely suggested an increased risk. Other studies have found no increase in risk among women who have had an interrupted pregnancy.
A New York Times editorial called the statement an “egregious distortion,” and 28 members of Congress complained to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. In response, the National Cancer Institute held a 3 day workshop and concluded not only that there was no link between abortion and breast cancer, but that the issue was resolved. However, in January 2010 the chief organizer of the workshop, Dr. Louise Brinton, reversed her opinion to say abortion does raise a woman’s risk of breast cancer. An April 2009 study found that abortion increases breast cancer risk by 40%, and oral contraceptives can multiply the risk by 4.2 times. Still the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, and Susan G. Komen for the Cure have ignored the findings.
The stated goal of Susan G. Komen for the Cure is to find a cure for cancer. In October of 2005, researchers at the University of Minnesota successfully used human embryonic stem cells to kill cancer cells; a study that surely didn’t go unnoticed by Susan G. Komen. Could it be that Susan G. Komen continues to financially support Planned Parenthood because they may hold the key to a possible cure for cancer? When they aren’t harvesting baby body parts for money, Planned Parenthood has offered women the option of donating tissue from their aborted babies to medical research. In their words, “Most agree that such decisions reflect generosity, courage, and the hope that some humanitarian good may come out of an unintended pregnancy.” Humanitarian good from unnecessarily killing an unborn baby? The truth is that adult stem cells have been treating all kinds of cancers, among many other diseases and conditions, for years. So why use embryonic stem cells instead of adult stem cells? According to the National Institute of Health, Human embryonic stem cells are thought to have much greater developmental potential than adult stem cells. In other words, they want to explore the possibilities because it could lead to something; ethics be damned. Yet, the NIH website also states that adult stem cells have recently been found to be more flexible than previously thought. It would appear that continuing to explore all the uses of adult stem cells might be a little more difficult and embryonic stem cells could be an easier route.
Whatever their reasons for financially supporting Planned Parenthood, Susan G. Komen is thankfully not the only option for those dedicated to life for women with cancer and babies. The National Breast Cancer Foundation also provides funding for free mammograms and cancer research and has no affiliation with Planned Parenthood. The Alliance for Cancer Gene Therapy recently made national news for using HIV to completely eradicate cancer. The Breast Cancer Society focuses on providing help for women currently battling breast cancer. Susan G. Komen for the Cure would like to do everything in their power to end breast cancer forever, an idea with which no one would disagree. However, a strong message should be sent that our greatest ideals don’t have to be realized through compromise.
Life is precious, be it the beautiful, familiar faces of the women we love, or the new faces of the babies we’ve yet to meet.
[bold and italics emphasis mine]
#134 - ''Obama’s [Continued] Failure to Confront the Iranian Threat''
Don't forget: (1) This week's broadcast of "Truth That Trasnforms" (Sunday, 5 pm, ch. 55.1 in Orlando; (2) The editorial cartoons at Worldmag.com; and (3) The upcoming Sunday Special.
Posted By Mike Brownfield On 10/12/2011- THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION
Yesterday, America learned that Iran conspired to launch a terrorist attack in Washington, D.C., with a planned assassination of the Saudi ambassador and bomb attacks on the Saudi and Israeli embassies. U.S. authorities disrupted the plot and have brought charges against the men who planned to carry out the attack, but the audacity of Iran’s actions highlights a disturbing truth: The Obama Administration has done far too little to deter state-sponsored terrorism, and it has utterly failed to confront the Iranian threat.
Not one month ago, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood before the United Nations General Assembly in New York City and delivered a speech [1] rife with hatred of the United States, September 11 conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism, and Holocaust denials. His diatribe at the U.N. has become an annual ritual, but as we learned yesterday, this year’s performance occurred all while Ahmadinejad’s government was seeking to attack the United States–a fact that President Barack Obama was made aware [2] of in June of this year.
It is being reported [3] that following the charges against Iran, the Obama Administration is seeking to use the development as leverage to “unite the world” against Iran, with Vice President Biden saying, “That’s the surest way to be able to get results.” Meanwhile, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remarked that the plot “crosses a line that Iran needs to be held to account for.” Iran, however, crossed the line long ago, be it the country’s rogue pursuit of nuclear weapons, its calls for the eradication of Israel, its support of terrorism, its meddling in Iraq, or its interference with the movement toward democracy in the Middle East. Even without yesterday’s charges, the Obama Administration has had plenty of reason to take the lead on confronting the Iranian threat, but it has utterly failed to do so.
On June 28, 2011, the White House released its “new” National Strategy for Counterterrorism. The 19-page document makes exactly one reference to Iran. The subject of state-sponsored terrorism is virtually ignored. In August, The Heritage Foundation Counterterrorism Task Force criticized the Administration [4] for failing to address the threat:
"The President’s strategy pays insufficient attention to state-sponsored terrorism, which will increasingly be a major force to be reckoned with. Iran is one of the most prominent and aggressive state sponsors of terror and its proteges–both Hamas and Hezbollah–represent potentially grave threats. In addition, transnational criminal cartels in Mexico are increasingly taking on the character of terrorist networks."
Now we see that those criticisms are well-founded, and the threat of Iran launching a terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland very nearly became a deadly reality. The Heritage task force wrote that it’s a threat that can’t be ignored: "The iron triangle of state-sponsored terrorism–Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah–is potentially as significant a threat to U.S. interests as a reconstituted al-Qaeda. Iran remains the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism. Breaking the triangle apart can only be accomplished by bringing freedom to the people under the tyranny of the leadership in Tehran–change that has to come from within the country."
The Obama Administration, to date, has pursued the Obama Doctrine–a foreign policy that calls for the United States to engage with its enemies instead of confronting the threat of state-sponsored terrorism head on. It’s an attitude and a posture that has been pervasive in President Obama’s rhetoric–abjuring American exceptionalism, passing on the opportunity to speak loudly to promote the spread of democracy in the Middle East, failing to condemn Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless regime, offering weak support to Israel and failing to condemn those who threaten the country’s very existence, and presenting a face of international accommodation and ambivalence. Obama’s strategy invites aggression and leaves the American people less secure as a result.
The Administration must finally change direction. Heritage’s James Carafano writes that it should take strong measures to respond to Iran’s actions, including conducting a proportional military response against suitable, feasible, and acceptable targets (in many ways the situation is similar to military operations conducted against al Qaeda in Pakistan). It should impose and enforce the strongest sanctions, target public diplomacy to expose the regime’s human rights abuses, reduce Iran’s meddling in Iraq, and rescind and rewrite its counterterrorism strategy.
The time for flowery speeches and benevolent engagement with America’s avowed enemies is over. President Obama must wake up to the fact that Iran and countries like it pose a very real threat to America, its friends, and its allies, and it must take proactive action to protect itself from those who seek to do it harm. [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/2011/10/12/morning-bell-obamas-failure-to-confront-the-iranian-threat/
URLs in this post:
[1] delivered a speech: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/22/mahmoud-ahmadinejad-united-nations-speech
[2] was made aware: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/11/us-usa-security-iran-whitehouse-idUSTRE79A5RU20111011
[3] being reported: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/12/national/main20119095.shtml
[4] criticized the Administration: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/08/a-counterterrorism-strategy-for-the-next-wave
opyright © 2011 The Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved.
Posted By Mike Brownfield On 10/12/2011- THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION
Yesterday, America learned that Iran conspired to launch a terrorist attack in Washington, D.C., with a planned assassination of the Saudi ambassador and bomb attacks on the Saudi and Israeli embassies. U.S. authorities disrupted the plot and have brought charges against the men who planned to carry out the attack, but the audacity of Iran’s actions highlights a disturbing truth: The Obama Administration has done far too little to deter state-sponsored terrorism, and it has utterly failed to confront the Iranian threat.
Not one month ago, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood before the United Nations General Assembly in New York City and delivered a speech [1] rife with hatred of the United States, September 11 conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism, and Holocaust denials. His diatribe at the U.N. has become an annual ritual, but as we learned yesterday, this year’s performance occurred all while Ahmadinejad’s government was seeking to attack the United States–a fact that President Barack Obama was made aware [2] of in June of this year.
It is being reported [3] that following the charges against Iran, the Obama Administration is seeking to use the development as leverage to “unite the world” against Iran, with Vice President Biden saying, “That’s the surest way to be able to get results.” Meanwhile, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remarked that the plot “crosses a line that Iran needs to be held to account for.” Iran, however, crossed the line long ago, be it the country’s rogue pursuit of nuclear weapons, its calls for the eradication of Israel, its support of terrorism, its meddling in Iraq, or its interference with the movement toward democracy in the Middle East. Even without yesterday’s charges, the Obama Administration has had plenty of reason to take the lead on confronting the Iranian threat, but it has utterly failed to do so.
On June 28, 2011, the White House released its “new” National Strategy for Counterterrorism. The 19-page document makes exactly one reference to Iran. The subject of state-sponsored terrorism is virtually ignored. In August, The Heritage Foundation Counterterrorism Task Force criticized the Administration [4] for failing to address the threat:
"The President’s strategy pays insufficient attention to state-sponsored terrorism, which will increasingly be a major force to be reckoned with. Iran is one of the most prominent and aggressive state sponsors of terror and its proteges–both Hamas and Hezbollah–represent potentially grave threats. In addition, transnational criminal cartels in Mexico are increasingly taking on the character of terrorist networks."
Now we see that those criticisms are well-founded, and the threat of Iran launching a terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland very nearly became a deadly reality. The Heritage task force wrote that it’s a threat that can’t be ignored: "The iron triangle of state-sponsored terrorism–Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah–is potentially as significant a threat to U.S. interests as a reconstituted al-Qaeda. Iran remains the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism. Breaking the triangle apart can only be accomplished by bringing freedom to the people under the tyranny of the leadership in Tehran–change that has to come from within the country."
The Obama Administration, to date, has pursued the Obama Doctrine–a foreign policy that calls for the United States to engage with its enemies instead of confronting the threat of state-sponsored terrorism head on. It’s an attitude and a posture that has been pervasive in President Obama’s rhetoric–abjuring American exceptionalism, passing on the opportunity to speak loudly to promote the spread of democracy in the Middle East, failing to condemn Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless regime, offering weak support to Israel and failing to condemn those who threaten the country’s very existence, and presenting a face of international accommodation and ambivalence. Obama’s strategy invites aggression and leaves the American people less secure as a result.
The Administration must finally change direction. Heritage’s James Carafano writes that it should take strong measures to respond to Iran’s actions, including conducting a proportional military response against suitable, feasible, and acceptable targets (in many ways the situation is similar to military operations conducted against al Qaeda in Pakistan). It should impose and enforce the strongest sanctions, target public diplomacy to expose the regime’s human rights abuses, reduce Iran’s meddling in Iraq, and rescind and rewrite its counterterrorism strategy.
The time for flowery speeches and benevolent engagement with America’s avowed enemies is over. President Obama must wake up to the fact that Iran and countries like it pose a very real threat to America, its friends, and its allies, and it must take proactive action to protect itself from those who seek to do it harm. [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/2011/10/12/morning-bell-obamas-failure-to-confront-the-iranian-threat/
URLs in this post:
[1] delivered a speech: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/22/mahmoud-ahmadinejad-united-nations-speech
[2] was made aware: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/11/us-usa-security-iran-whitehouse-idUSTRE79A5RU20111011
[3] being reported: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/12/national/main20119095.shtml
[4] criticized the Administration: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/08/a-counterterrorism-strategy-for-the-next-wave
opyright © 2011 The Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
# 133 - Special Prayer/Action Alerts - Pastor in Iran (Latest Update); Coptic Christians in Egypt
[See also today's commentary by Chuck Colson at> http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/18007]
Iran Pastor's Case Referred to Supreme Leader > http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/October/Iran-Pastors-Case-Referred-to-Supreme-Leader/ October 10, 2011
The attorney representing Youcef Nadarkhani, the Iranian pastor facing a death sentence for refusing to recant his faith, says his client's case is being referred to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. Khamenei is the final authority in Iran. According to Agency France Presse, the move suggests the verdict could be delayed....
Meanwhile, a new bipartisan effort is underway in Congress to secure the pastor's freedom.In a letter signed by at least 39 Congressmen, lawmakers called Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to "use all the powers at your disposal" for "swift engagement with the international community to advocate for his release."
The American Center for Law and Justice [ACLJ] is calling on people to join Congress in urging Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to put pressure on Iran to release Pastor Youcef: ■Sign the petition to Secretary Clinton > http://aclj.org/iran/pressure-iran-save-christian-pastor
Contact your congressmen to sign on to the Pitts/Shuler letter > http://congress.aclj.org/5290/call-on-secretary-state-clinton-to-save-christian-pastor-in-iran/
*The American Center for Law and Justice has also sent a letter to the United Nations calling for pressure on Iran to immediately and unconditionally release Pastor Youcef. Read the letter. http://c0391070.cdn2.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/pdf/letter-un-ohchr-regarding-youcef-nadarkhani-death-sentence-apostasy-iran.pdf
*CBN News has started an effort on Twitter to spread the word about Pastor Youcef's case.
■Follow the story at @CBNNews, then retweet the post, "Who is Youcef Nadarkhani? A pastor, husband & father who may be killed in Iran for his faith. RT for religious freedom, http//bit.ly/cbnnews."Christian Solidarity Worldwide is calling for urgent action:
■Voice your concerns now to the Iranian Embassy here. You can also call the Iranian liaison office in the U.S. State Department. The number is 202-647-6575
____________________________________________________
Deadly Attack on Coptic Church Sparks Cairo RiotsBy John Waage, CBN News Sr. EditorMonday, October 10, 2011RSS
The so-called "Arab Spring" took a deadly turn in Cairo over the weekend, as an attack on a Coptic Christian church sparked riots, killing 24 people and wounding at least 200 others.The rioting was worst violence since civilian protests brought about the ouster of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in March.
Police arrested dozens of people in Cairo's Tahrir Square when clashes between Coptic Christians, Muslims, and security forces escalated out of control. Christians had gathered to demonstrate after Muslims partially demolished a church last week. Some of the leaders of both the Christian and Muslim activists said the clashes were not as much related to religion as they were to the army's handling of the situation.
Rioters set cars on fire and burned army vehicles. The army's response was described as brutal by friends of several of the victims, who posted their conditions and video on the Internet. Attacks against Christian churches have increased since Mubarak's ouster. Christians represent just 10 percent of the country's 80 million people. The army has controlled the Egyptian government for the past 40 years.
Egyptian leaders held an emergency cabinet meeting to decide how to respond to charges of brutality among their forces. {Also}The latest violence has sparked new concerns about the upcoming parliament elections, scheduled for late November.
[Subjects in BOLD need prayer; ITALICIZED are points of action you can take]
Iran Pastor's Case Referred to Supreme Leader > http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/October/Iran-Pastors-Case-Referred-to-Supreme-Leader/ October 10, 2011
The attorney representing Youcef Nadarkhani, the Iranian pastor facing a death sentence for refusing to recant his faith, says his client's case is being referred to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. Khamenei is the final authority in Iran. According to Agency France Presse, the move suggests the verdict could be delayed....
Meanwhile, a new bipartisan effort is underway in Congress to secure the pastor's freedom.In a letter signed by at least 39 Congressmen, lawmakers called Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to "use all the powers at your disposal" for "swift engagement with the international community to advocate for his release."
The American Center for Law and Justice [ACLJ] is calling on people to join Congress in urging Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to put pressure on Iran to release Pastor Youcef: ■Sign the petition to Secretary Clinton > http://aclj.org/iran/pressure-iran-save-christian-pastor
Contact your congressmen to sign on to the Pitts/Shuler letter > http://congress.aclj.org/5290/call-on-secretary-state-clinton-to-save-christian-pastor-in-iran/
*The American Center for Law and Justice has also sent a letter to the United Nations calling for pressure on Iran to immediately and unconditionally release Pastor Youcef. Read the letter. http://c0391070.cdn2.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/pdf/letter-un-ohchr-regarding-youcef-nadarkhani-death-sentence-apostasy-iran.pdf
*CBN News has started an effort on Twitter to spread the word about Pastor Youcef's case.
■Follow the story at @CBNNews, then retweet the post, "Who is Youcef Nadarkhani? A pastor, husband & father who may be killed in Iran for his faith. RT for religious freedom, http//bit.ly/cbnnews."Christian Solidarity Worldwide is calling for urgent action:
■Voice your concerns now to the Iranian Embassy here. You can also call the Iranian liaison office in the U.S. State Department. The number is 202-647-6575
____________________________________________________
Deadly Attack on Coptic Church Sparks Cairo RiotsBy John Waage, CBN News Sr. EditorMonday, October 10, 2011RSS
The so-called "Arab Spring" took a deadly turn in Cairo over the weekend, as an attack on a Coptic Christian church sparked riots, killing 24 people and wounding at least 200 others.The rioting was worst violence since civilian protests brought about the ouster of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in March.
Police arrested dozens of people in Cairo's Tahrir Square when clashes between Coptic Christians, Muslims, and security forces escalated out of control. Christians had gathered to demonstrate after Muslims partially demolished a church last week. Some of the leaders of both the Christian and Muslim activists said the clashes were not as much related to religion as they were to the army's handling of the situation.
Rioters set cars on fire and burned army vehicles. The army's response was described as brutal by friends of several of the victims, who posted their conditions and video on the Internet. Attacks against Christian churches have increased since Mubarak's ouster. Christians represent just 10 percent of the country's 80 million people. The army has controlled the Egyptian government for the past 40 years.
Egyptian leaders held an emergency cabinet meeting to decide how to respond to charges of brutality among their forces. {Also}The latest violence has sparked new concerns about the upcoming parliament elections, scheduled for late November.
[Subjects in BOLD need prayer; ITALICIZED are points of action you can take]
Friday, October 7, 2011
#132 - Steve Jobs and American Exceptionalism
[Don't forget: (1) This week's broadcast of "Truth That Trasnforms" (Sunday, 5 pm, ch. 55.1 in Orlando; (2) The editorial cartoons at Worldmag.com; and (3) The upcoming Sunday Special.]
Posted By Ed Feulner On October 6, 2011
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/10/06/morning-bell-remembering-steve-jobs/print/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Steve Jobs, who died yesterday at the too-young age of 56, was a living refutation of all that liberals constantly tell us about our country — that we’re falling behind others and live now in a “post-American world,” as one of Barack Obama’s favorite books puts it in its title. As anyone who’s ever handled an Apple product or had his life improved by the technological innovations our system has produced in just a decade (that means all of us) will tell you, Jobs and innovators like him epitomize that immeasurable quality the left somehow finds most abject — American exceptionalism.
The meme of the left is that drudgery and mediocrity is not just our future but probably also our just deserts–for being too imperialistic, consumerist, wasteful, patriarchal, or what have you.(For an inexhaustible list of all our ills and sins, please check with the mob gathered at the “Occupy Wall Street” protest.) One should compare this deadened vision with the wonders Jobs wrought.
Apple Computer, the company Jobs founded at the age of 21 along with his friend Steve Wozniak, was valued at the close of business yesterday at $350 billion and some change, more than $100 billion ahead of Microsoft. General Electric, another American giant, weighed in at less than half the price, $161 billion. Ford, GM and Volkswagen? Respectively, $40 billion, $35 billion and $42 billion. That should give some idea of where we are in the 21st century. That beauty contest, how much a company is worth, is a result of decisions made by millions of investors voting with people’s savings (that is, for most of us, the sweat of our brow and our hedge against an uncertain future). Investors voted for Jobs’ company because consumers loved its products, and consumers bought Apple products not because they were ordered to do so by central planners but because they saw them as magic.
From computing to music to journalism, Jobs changed the way the world did its business and leisure. Very little of what we do today has not been impacted somehow by Jobs and his company. He certainly changed my life from my first Apple III with floppy discs almost 30 years ago, costing about $6000 and possessing a small fraction of the capabilities of my streamlined new iPad 2, all at less than 10 percent of the cost of that early dinosaur. Macs, with their trademark coloring and sleek design, transformed the way people came to see computers, from gizmos only nerds understood or liked to things almost as organic as the partly bitten apples of the ever-present logos. Creative designing and thinking flowed naturally from a Mac, powering the creativity and productivity that have become the hallmark of the American economy, our present problems notwithstanding. In music, Jobs changed the industry by taking it digital. As for journalism and reading in general, we have now gone back to where we started: the biblical tablet. The elegant slab we take with us wherever we go can do the same for us and take us, no matter where we are, anywhere in the universe our imagination wants to visit.
All this was the result of the happy coincidence of genius in an individual and a system. Jobs was an individual with special DNA, no question. But this half-Arab boy who was given up for adoption at birth and went on to drop out of college was able to transform the lives of individuals across the world because he lived and worked in this country. The genius of the American system is comprised of the rule of law, respect for private property and the freedom of the individual to strive to be better than himself and his neighbor and reap the rewards that come from his innate abilities and effort. All of these and many other liberties are safeguarded in our Constitution. It is all part of what makes us an exceptional country.
This is not to say that we don’t have problems. We are indeed falling behind — not behind other countries but behind our promise and potential. Our government spends too much, tries to tell us how to run our private lives, and ties down in red tape the genius that brought you Apple. The great and sometimes cacophonous debate we are having in our country at the moment results from the fact that Americans have finally woken up to the threat our system confronts and are doing something about it.
This is not what you hear. Daily we are told by our government leaders, the media, and academia that we are as exceptional only in the way that every other country on the U.N. roll, from Albania to Zimbabwe, is exceptional. We are told that we have to manage our decline as a power and that the great debate over ideas that we’re having is evidence that “our politics is broken.” Typically, a columnist from a Manhattan paper has titled his most recent book That Used to Be Us, a line, we’re sad to say, that came straight from a speech by Barack Obama.
This is nonsense. Steve Jobs may have given to liberal causes and politicians throughout his life, but his life proved the existence of the American Dream. As anyone who’s Googled something in her iPad and then Tweeted about it will tell you, Steve Jobs and those like him symbolize American Exceptionalism every day. - Edwin J. Feulner > President, The Heritage Foundation [bold and italics emphasis mine]
Posted By Ed Feulner On October 6, 2011
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/10/06/morning-bell-remembering-steve-jobs/print/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Steve Jobs, who died yesterday at the too-young age of 56, was a living refutation of all that liberals constantly tell us about our country — that we’re falling behind others and live now in a “post-American world,” as one of Barack Obama’s favorite books puts it in its title. As anyone who’s ever handled an Apple product or had his life improved by the technological innovations our system has produced in just a decade (that means all of us) will tell you, Jobs and innovators like him epitomize that immeasurable quality the left somehow finds most abject — American exceptionalism.
The meme of the left is that drudgery and mediocrity is not just our future but probably also our just deserts–for being too imperialistic, consumerist, wasteful, patriarchal, or what have you.(For an inexhaustible list of all our ills and sins, please check with the mob gathered at the “Occupy Wall Street” protest.) One should compare this deadened vision with the wonders Jobs wrought.
Apple Computer, the company Jobs founded at the age of 21 along with his friend Steve Wozniak, was valued at the close of business yesterday at $350 billion and some change, more than $100 billion ahead of Microsoft. General Electric, another American giant, weighed in at less than half the price, $161 billion. Ford, GM and Volkswagen? Respectively, $40 billion, $35 billion and $42 billion. That should give some idea of where we are in the 21st century. That beauty contest, how much a company is worth, is a result of decisions made by millions of investors voting with people’s savings (that is, for most of us, the sweat of our brow and our hedge against an uncertain future). Investors voted for Jobs’ company because consumers loved its products, and consumers bought Apple products not because they were ordered to do so by central planners but because they saw them as magic.
From computing to music to journalism, Jobs changed the way the world did its business and leisure. Very little of what we do today has not been impacted somehow by Jobs and his company. He certainly changed my life from my first Apple III with floppy discs almost 30 years ago, costing about $6000 and possessing a small fraction of the capabilities of my streamlined new iPad 2, all at less than 10 percent of the cost of that early dinosaur. Macs, with their trademark coloring and sleek design, transformed the way people came to see computers, from gizmos only nerds understood or liked to things almost as organic as the partly bitten apples of the ever-present logos. Creative designing and thinking flowed naturally from a Mac, powering the creativity and productivity that have become the hallmark of the American economy, our present problems notwithstanding. In music, Jobs changed the industry by taking it digital. As for journalism and reading in general, we have now gone back to where we started: the biblical tablet. The elegant slab we take with us wherever we go can do the same for us and take us, no matter where we are, anywhere in the universe our imagination wants to visit.
All this was the result of the happy coincidence of genius in an individual and a system. Jobs was an individual with special DNA, no question. But this half-Arab boy who was given up for adoption at birth and went on to drop out of college was able to transform the lives of individuals across the world because he lived and worked in this country. The genius of the American system is comprised of the rule of law, respect for private property and the freedom of the individual to strive to be better than himself and his neighbor and reap the rewards that come from his innate abilities and effort. All of these and many other liberties are safeguarded in our Constitution. It is all part of what makes us an exceptional country.
This is not to say that we don’t have problems. We are indeed falling behind — not behind other countries but behind our promise and potential. Our government spends too much, tries to tell us how to run our private lives, and ties down in red tape the genius that brought you Apple. The great and sometimes cacophonous debate we are having in our country at the moment results from the fact that Americans have finally woken up to the threat our system confronts and are doing something about it.
This is not what you hear. Daily we are told by our government leaders, the media, and academia that we are as exceptional only in the way that every other country on the U.N. roll, from Albania to Zimbabwe, is exceptional. We are told that we have to manage our decline as a power and that the great debate over ideas that we’re having is evidence that “our politics is broken.” Typically, a columnist from a Manhattan paper has titled his most recent book That Used to Be Us, a line, we’re sad to say, that came straight from a speech by Barack Obama.
This is nonsense. Steve Jobs may have given to liberal causes and politicians throughout his life, but his life proved the existence of the American Dream. As anyone who’s Googled something in her iPad and then Tweeted about it will tell you, Steve Jobs and those like him symbolize American Exceptionalism every day. - Edwin J. Feulner > President, The Heritage Foundation [bold and italics emphasis mine]
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
#131 - Before You Blame the Banks for Increased Fees ...
[Note: Like you, I'm upset to have to the possibility of new fees being imposed by the banks. But before you join the finger pointing at the banks, consider that the banks are only responding to the recent new regulations signed into law that restrict other ways banks can seek profits. When the government acts in such ways, they fail to inform us that a natural result of doing so will always be companies passing the costs to them on to consumers; it's just the natural course of things. And of course, this is another case where you don't hear the full story from the mainstream media. Below are a list of regulations for which we can be sure we'll end up paying.]
Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations - by Human Events http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44874 07/16/2011
The government in the United States, both federal and local, has enacted laws and regulations that drag down the economy and restrict individual liberty. Some regulations are so broad that they govern entire segments of the economy, while others tell us what we can and cannot do in our own homes. As President Reagan? once said, “Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem.” Here are the Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations:
1. ObamaCare overkill: If you think the 2,000-plus-page ObamaCare law is a travesty, wait until you see the regulations it spawned. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is beginning to release regulations based on the health care legislation passed last year. One section on Medicare took up six pages in the original law, yet HHS turned that into 429 pages of new regulations. At that rate, there will be more than a hundred thousand pages of regulations in place for doctors to consider before seeing a patient. [Any reason why we shouldn't expect fewer doctors as many get frustrated by it all.]
2. EPA’s carbon dioxide fixation: Talk about job-killing regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to regulate carbon dioxide emissions in order to combat “climate change” will raise the cost of energy. Forget about creating jobs. The EPA’s regulations will add a new burden on business, increase the cost of material for the construction industry, and hit consumer in the pocketbook, dampening the outlook for economic growth.
3. Lightbulb ban: Unless Congress overturns a 2007 law, the incandescent lightbulb will be phased out in 2012, and fluorescent bulbs will be the only choice for consumers. Instead of being able to buy a 39-cent bulb, Americans will be forced to pay $6 for the energy-efficient alternative, with its harsh bright light. Do we really need Washington nanny-state legislators to decide what is “best” for us, right down to how we light our own homes?
4. TSA abuse: Whoever is writing the regulations for the Transportation Security Administration needs to lighten up. TSA officials think they are making the skies safe by patting down infants and grandmothers in wheelchairs, while giving travelers the option of being subjected to harmful radiation or on the receiving end of sexual abuse. There are plenty of other ways to ensure safety, like profiling young to middle-age male travelers from the Middle East.
5. Union favors: As payback to his Big Labor support, President Obama? signed an executive order in February 2009 that tells federal agencies to require “Project Labor Agreements” on federal construction projects, meaning higher labor costs as contractors are forced to use union workers. Now the National Labor Relations Board is seeking to prevent Boeing from building a plant in South Carolina because it is a right-to-work state. By “protecting” workers, fewer jobs are created. Is that what we want?
6. Food crackdown: Federal regulators are tightening regulations on food manufacturers in order to combat childhood obesity. But as usual, the regulators are going overboard, cracking down on breakfast cereal, Girl Scout cookies, and all kinds of snack foods, including nuts, bagels and fruit juice. According to HUMAN EVENTS' Audrey Hudson, the food industry says the government is imposing “multibillions of dollars” of changes, with no evidence it will do anything to help kids stay healthy.
7. Outside smoking ban: The city of New York has made it illegal to smoke in all parks, on beaches, and in pedestrian plazas. This includes, you're hearing right, a smoke-free Times Square. That will be 1,700 parks and 14 miles of public beaches that city officials will have to monitor in case someone lights up. Don’t New York's Finest have anything better to do?
8. Trash violations: Beware of what you put in the trash, at least in New York City. The city’s Sanitation Department is enforcing a rule that says trash from households or businesses cannot be thrown in receptacles on the street meant for pedestrians. But do the workers really need to ticket elderly residents and fine them $100 for throwing their used newspapers into the trash cans?
9. Illegal garden: Julie Bass decided to grow some vegetables in her front yard because the price of organic food was on the rise. Now, she has been hit with a misdemeanor charge and is facing three months in jail, because Oak Park, Mich., says her garden violated the city code, which requires that front yards consist of “suitable, live, plant material.” The city says vegetables aren’t “suitable” for a front yard and are going to court to prove their point. Now that’s a great use of taxpayer resources.
10. Multicultural doll mandate: The Colorado Department of Human Services is proposing new rules to require all day care centers in the state to have dolls available that represent the three different races. The guideline is part of a 98-page document that sets new rules for child care that include what kids can drink, how long they can watch TV, and mandates for field trips and sunscreen use. One wonders how the state, which has been working on the measure since 2006, will go about enforcing the law.
[HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom.]
______________________________________________________
The Regulatory Tsunami - According to a new report by the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee, the number and scope of federal regulations, along with the costs of those regulations and the number of federal regulators, are all growing. This has occurred despite an executive order from President Obama that was touted as a measure to curb regulation that would "stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive," says the Washington Examiner.
The following data suggests a troubling reality of growing regulation:
The Obama administration has imposed 75 new major regulations costing more than $380 billion over 10 years. There are 219 more economically significant regulations in the works that will cost businesses $100 million or more each year -- for a minimum cost of $21 billion over 10 years. The number of pages in the Federal Register (where such regulations are recorded) regarding final rules rose by 20 percent between 2009 and 2010, and proposed rules have increased from 2,044 in 2009 to 2,439 in 2010. Personal anecdotes from business owners as they confront various regulations demonstrate that the consequences of overregulation are very real and damage the ability of American businesses to compete.
Source>http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama September 16, 2011 [Byron York, "New Report Cites 'Regulatory Tsunami' Under Obama," Washington Examiner, Sept. 13, 2011.]
Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations - by Human Events http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44874 07/16/2011
The government in the United States, both federal and local, has enacted laws and regulations that drag down the economy and restrict individual liberty. Some regulations are so broad that they govern entire segments of the economy, while others tell us what we can and cannot do in our own homes. As President Reagan? once said, “Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem.” Here are the Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations:
1. ObamaCare overkill: If you think the 2,000-plus-page ObamaCare law is a travesty, wait until you see the regulations it spawned. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is beginning to release regulations based on the health care legislation passed last year. One section on Medicare took up six pages in the original law, yet HHS turned that into 429 pages of new regulations. At that rate, there will be more than a hundred thousand pages of regulations in place for doctors to consider before seeing a patient. [Any reason why we shouldn't expect fewer doctors as many get frustrated by it all.]
2. EPA’s carbon dioxide fixation: Talk about job-killing regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to regulate carbon dioxide emissions in order to combat “climate change” will raise the cost of energy. Forget about creating jobs. The EPA’s regulations will add a new burden on business, increase the cost of material for the construction industry, and hit consumer in the pocketbook, dampening the outlook for economic growth.
3. Lightbulb ban: Unless Congress overturns a 2007 law, the incandescent lightbulb will be phased out in 2012, and fluorescent bulbs will be the only choice for consumers. Instead of being able to buy a 39-cent bulb, Americans will be forced to pay $6 for the energy-efficient alternative, with its harsh bright light. Do we really need Washington nanny-state legislators to decide what is “best” for us, right down to how we light our own homes?
4. TSA abuse: Whoever is writing the regulations for the Transportation Security Administration needs to lighten up. TSA officials think they are making the skies safe by patting down infants and grandmothers in wheelchairs, while giving travelers the option of being subjected to harmful radiation or on the receiving end of sexual abuse. There are plenty of other ways to ensure safety, like profiling young to middle-age male travelers from the Middle East.
5. Union favors: As payback to his Big Labor support, President Obama? signed an executive order in February 2009 that tells federal agencies to require “Project Labor Agreements” on federal construction projects, meaning higher labor costs as contractors are forced to use union workers. Now the National Labor Relations Board is seeking to prevent Boeing from building a plant in South Carolina because it is a right-to-work state. By “protecting” workers, fewer jobs are created. Is that what we want?
6. Food crackdown: Federal regulators are tightening regulations on food manufacturers in order to combat childhood obesity. But as usual, the regulators are going overboard, cracking down on breakfast cereal, Girl Scout cookies, and all kinds of snack foods, including nuts, bagels and fruit juice. According to HUMAN EVENTS' Audrey Hudson, the food industry says the government is imposing “multibillions of dollars” of changes, with no evidence it will do anything to help kids stay healthy.
7. Outside smoking ban: The city of New York has made it illegal to smoke in all parks, on beaches, and in pedestrian plazas. This includes, you're hearing right, a smoke-free Times Square. That will be 1,700 parks and 14 miles of public beaches that city officials will have to monitor in case someone lights up. Don’t New York's Finest have anything better to do?
8. Trash violations: Beware of what you put in the trash, at least in New York City. The city’s Sanitation Department is enforcing a rule that says trash from households or businesses cannot be thrown in receptacles on the street meant for pedestrians. But do the workers really need to ticket elderly residents and fine them $100 for throwing their used newspapers into the trash cans?
9. Illegal garden: Julie Bass decided to grow some vegetables in her front yard because the price of organic food was on the rise. Now, she has been hit with a misdemeanor charge and is facing three months in jail, because Oak Park, Mich., says her garden violated the city code, which requires that front yards consist of “suitable, live, plant material.” The city says vegetables aren’t “suitable” for a front yard and are going to court to prove their point. Now that’s a great use of taxpayer resources.
10. Multicultural doll mandate: The Colorado Department of Human Services is proposing new rules to require all day care centers in the state to have dolls available that represent the three different races. The guideline is part of a 98-page document that sets new rules for child care that include what kids can drink, how long they can watch TV, and mandates for field trips and sunscreen use. One wonders how the state, which has been working on the measure since 2006, will go about enforcing the law.
[HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom.]
______________________________________________________
The Regulatory Tsunami - According to a new report by the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee, the number and scope of federal regulations, along with the costs of those regulations and the number of federal regulators, are all growing. This has occurred despite an executive order from President Obama that was touted as a measure to curb regulation that would "stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive," says the Washington Examiner.
The following data suggests a troubling reality of growing regulation:
The Obama administration has imposed 75 new major regulations costing more than $380 billion over 10 years. There are 219 more economically significant regulations in the works that will cost businesses $100 million or more each year -- for a minimum cost of $21 billion over 10 years. The number of pages in the Federal Register (where such regulations are recorded) regarding final rules rose by 20 percent between 2009 and 2010, and proposed rules have increased from 2,044 in 2009 to 2,439 in 2010. Personal anecdotes from business owners as they confront various regulations demonstrate that the consequences of overregulation are very real and damage the ability of American businesses to compete.
Source>http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama September 16, 2011 [Byron York, "New Report Cites 'Regulatory Tsunami' Under Obama," Washington Examiner, Sept. 13, 2011.]
Sunday, October 2, 2011
#130 (10/3) - Solar Energy School Propaganda 101
by Michelle Malkin 09/30/2011 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46537
[This article shares some of what the public schools are teaching our children in an attempt to affect public policy today and for future generations. For a fuller discussion of this subject, check out the newly released book, "Don't Let Your Kids Drink the Kool-Aid."]
The Obama administration's crony green subsidy scandal is erupting like a solar flare in Washington. But do you know what your kids are learning in their environmental education classes about this red-hot taxpayer eco-scam? Chances are: not much. Instead, the U.S. Department of Energy and the Democratic apparatchiks at the National Education Association are disseminating solar power propaganda masquerading as math and science curricula.
Titled "Solar Power and Me: The Inherent Advantages," the lesson plan for middle-school and high-school students directs them to "take note of how solar energy is incorporated into the infrastructure of various cities nationwide and write a short essay about how they would encourage solar energy use in their own town." A worksheet labeled "All About Solar!" makes the blanket assertion that solar technologies are "a sound economical choice as they can reduce or eliminate exposure to rising electricity rates, or even eliminate one's need to pay an electrical bill! In addition, solar panels can be a smart long-term investment, with many solar vendors offering 20-30 year warranties on their products." The only warranties worth anything from bankrupt, half-billion-dollar solar company Solyndra Inc. are the warranties on the Disney whistling robots and saunas that adorned its Taj Mahal headquarters. But I digress.
Another worksheet cheerleads the "financial savings" of "solar power and me" and coaches students to "imagine you live in amazing and sunny Anaheim, CA, where the combination of local and federal rebates covers 74 percent of your total cost of a solar panel system!" The exercise then entices the student to take out a 20-year loan on a new solar panel system to produce even greater illusory savings. Yet another question-and-answer key reads: "How would switching to solar energy affect energy use at your home and school?" Answer: "In general, switching to solar energy would lower your home's electrical costs and reduce your emissions, thus saving money and improving the environment."
But as Brian McGraw of the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute points out: "There might be a small niche market, but solar energy is still largely incapable of producing reliable electricity at rates that are even in the ballpark of cost competitiveness compared to coal or natural gas." Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the force behind billions of dollars' worth of rushed green energy loans overseen by deep-pocketed Obama bundlers, himself acknowledged that solar tech will need to improve five-fold before it even begins to have a cost-competitive shot. After examining decades' worth of failed subsidized solar efforts at home and around the world, the Institute for Energy Research concludes: "Although stand-alone solar power has a certain free-market niche and does not need government favor, using solar power for grid electricity has been and will be an economic loser for ratepayers and a burden to taxpayers."
The DOE/NEA curriculum encourages students to pressure politicians to pour more money into supposedly underfunded green energy schemes. But the House Budget Committee reported last week: "The president's stimulus law alone included tens of billions in new government subsidies for politically favored renewable-energy interests: $6 billion in loan guarantees for renewable energy investments; $17 billion for the Department of Energy's energy efficiency and renewable energy programs; $2 billion for energy-efficient battery manufacturing; and billions more on other 'clean-energy' programs for a total of $80 billion. Two years later, the president's promise of millions of jobs stands in stark contrast with reality."
A more useful homework assignment would be to have these future taxpayers calculate how much their moms and dads are spending to prop up Obama's green jobs industry and its elite Democratic campaign finance donors/investors. The White House projected 65,000 new jobs from nearly $40 billion in green job stimulus spending. Instead, fewer than 3,600 jobs were created. Get out your calculators, kids: That's $4.85 million per job. Investor's Business Daily crunches the numbers further on the taxpayers' return on its DOE green loan guarantee "investments" and finds that the program will cost a whopping $23 million per job.
A separate NEA solar energy lesson plan marketed with Dow Corning teaches 5th- through 8th-graders "how solar panels work." A more apt, real-world lesson would teach them how they don't work. The myth that this alternative energy source "pays for itself" is busted with just a cursory glance at the Denver Museum of Science and Nature. President Obama staged a photo-op on the facility's solar panel roof in 2009 when he signed the green jobs goodie-stuffed stimulus law. The museum refused to disclose electric bills before and after installation of the solar array. But after digging into the lavishly taxpayer-funded project, the Colorado-based Independence Institute discovered that the panels -- which only last 25 years -- wouldn't "pay for themselves" until the year 2118, more than a century from now.
It's elementary. The government shouldn't be in the business of picking any eco-winners or losers. "Too Green To Fail" redistributes wealth from viable private projects to pipe dreams, forces higher taxes and energy costs on everyone, and rewards partisan funders at public expense. Teach your children well. They're inheriting the bill.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Malkin is author of Unhinged (Regnery) and "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2009).
[This article shares some of what the public schools are teaching our children in an attempt to affect public policy today and for future generations. For a fuller discussion of this subject, check out the newly released book, "Don't Let Your Kids Drink the Kool-Aid."]
The Obama administration's crony green subsidy scandal is erupting like a solar flare in Washington. But do you know what your kids are learning in their environmental education classes about this red-hot taxpayer eco-scam? Chances are: not much. Instead, the U.S. Department of Energy and the Democratic apparatchiks at the National Education Association are disseminating solar power propaganda masquerading as math and science curricula.
Titled "Solar Power and Me: The Inherent Advantages," the lesson plan for middle-school and high-school students directs them to "take note of how solar energy is incorporated into the infrastructure of various cities nationwide and write a short essay about how they would encourage solar energy use in their own town." A worksheet labeled "All About Solar!" makes the blanket assertion that solar technologies are "a sound economical choice as they can reduce or eliminate exposure to rising electricity rates, or even eliminate one's need to pay an electrical bill! In addition, solar panels can be a smart long-term investment, with many solar vendors offering 20-30 year warranties on their products." The only warranties worth anything from bankrupt, half-billion-dollar solar company Solyndra Inc. are the warranties on the Disney whistling robots and saunas that adorned its Taj Mahal headquarters. But I digress.
Another worksheet cheerleads the "financial savings" of "solar power and me" and coaches students to "imagine you live in amazing and sunny Anaheim, CA, where the combination of local and federal rebates covers 74 percent of your total cost of a solar panel system!" The exercise then entices the student to take out a 20-year loan on a new solar panel system to produce even greater illusory savings. Yet another question-and-answer key reads: "How would switching to solar energy affect energy use at your home and school?" Answer: "In general, switching to solar energy would lower your home's electrical costs and reduce your emissions, thus saving money and improving the environment."
But as Brian McGraw of the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute points out: "There might be a small niche market, but solar energy is still largely incapable of producing reliable electricity at rates that are even in the ballpark of cost competitiveness compared to coal or natural gas." Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the force behind billions of dollars' worth of rushed green energy loans overseen by deep-pocketed Obama bundlers, himself acknowledged that solar tech will need to improve five-fold before it even begins to have a cost-competitive shot. After examining decades' worth of failed subsidized solar efforts at home and around the world, the Institute for Energy Research concludes: "Although stand-alone solar power has a certain free-market niche and does not need government favor, using solar power for grid electricity has been and will be an economic loser for ratepayers and a burden to taxpayers."
The DOE/NEA curriculum encourages students to pressure politicians to pour more money into supposedly underfunded green energy schemes. But the House Budget Committee reported last week: "The president's stimulus law alone included tens of billions in new government subsidies for politically favored renewable-energy interests: $6 billion in loan guarantees for renewable energy investments; $17 billion for the Department of Energy's energy efficiency and renewable energy programs; $2 billion for energy-efficient battery manufacturing; and billions more on other 'clean-energy' programs for a total of $80 billion. Two years later, the president's promise of millions of jobs stands in stark contrast with reality."
A more useful homework assignment would be to have these future taxpayers calculate how much their moms and dads are spending to prop up Obama's green jobs industry and its elite Democratic campaign finance donors/investors. The White House projected 65,000 new jobs from nearly $40 billion in green job stimulus spending. Instead, fewer than 3,600 jobs were created. Get out your calculators, kids: That's $4.85 million per job. Investor's Business Daily crunches the numbers further on the taxpayers' return on its DOE green loan guarantee "investments" and finds that the program will cost a whopping $23 million per job.
A separate NEA solar energy lesson plan marketed with Dow Corning teaches 5th- through 8th-graders "how solar panels work." A more apt, real-world lesson would teach them how they don't work. The myth that this alternative energy source "pays for itself" is busted with just a cursory glance at the Denver Museum of Science and Nature. President Obama staged a photo-op on the facility's solar panel roof in 2009 when he signed the green jobs goodie-stuffed stimulus law. The museum refused to disclose electric bills before and after installation of the solar array. But after digging into the lavishly taxpayer-funded project, the Colorado-based Independence Institute discovered that the panels -- which only last 25 years -- wouldn't "pay for themselves" until the year 2118, more than a century from now.
It's elementary. The government shouldn't be in the business of picking any eco-winners or losers. "Too Green To Fail" redistributes wealth from viable private projects to pipe dreams, forces higher taxes and energy costs on everyone, and rewards partisan funders at public expense. Teach your children well. They're inheriting the bill.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Malkin is author of Unhinged (Regnery) and "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2009).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
