This story from the Dailymail is a shining example of the fallacy that abortion is not being used as a means of birth control. Note that the woman in question, who decided what she had done was noteworthy enough to write a book about, has regrets that she "let the woman's movement down." That's right, she did. She chose to carry two of her pregnancies to term. What a disappointment. Just when you think you have heard it all. However, the fact is that the number of women who have multiple abortions is increasing, though nowhere near the horror that this woman has produced.
A woman has admitted to being 'an abortion addict' after having 15 terminations over 17 years. Irene Vilar said she had the abortions not from poverty or fear but as an extraordinary act of rebellion against her 'controlling' husband who did not want children. The 40-year-old's confession has unleashed a torrent of attacks from anti-abortion activists on the internet, including death threats and demands for her to be jailed.
The cycle of pregnancies and abortions, which began when she was 16 and ended when she was 33, was also punctuated by several suicide attempts. Now a successful literary agent with two young daughters, Loretta, five, and Lolita, three, Mrs Vilar has written about her experiences in a memoir, called Impossible Motherhood: Testimony of an Abortion Addict.
The book, which was published yesterday, has shocked many Americans, who remain bitterly divided over the issue, and has angered campaigners on both sides of the abortion divide. Charmaine Yoest, president of pro-life pressure group Americans United for Life, said: 'It really underscores everything we always say in the pro-life movement - that abortion is part of a very sad story for women.'
However, pro-choice campaigners said Mrs Vilar's book raises uncomfortable questions about abortion as a form of birth control.
Mrs Vilar said of the book's reception: 'I am worried about my safety and the hate mail. I just imagine the "baby killer" stuff and I could be a poster child for that kind of fundamentalism.' My note: No, you could be a poster child for someone who used abortion as a means of contraception. That's what you are.
The attractive one-time academic prodigy attended a boarding school in New Hampshire and was accepted into a New York university when she was only 15. A year later, she fell in love and married a 50-year-old Latin American literature professor, who she says was opposed to having children. She claims he bragged that his relationships never lasted more than five years and told that having children killed sexual desire. In response, Mrs Vilar said she rebelled by 'forgetting' to take her birth control pills. My Note: Is this just a tad disingenuous?
'In the beginning I was taking pills and I'd skip a day or two or give up one month,' she said in a television interview. 'I'd think I'll be better next time. My note: Still no mention of the word responsibility. Well, we all know what an enormous hassle taking a pill a day is.
'But slowly, my days took on a balancing act and there was a specific high. I would get my period and be sad, then discover I was pregnant, being afraid, yet also so excited.' My note: Excited about what, having a living human being dissected piecemeal from your womb. Yeah, I can see how that would excite someone like YOU!
She claimed she had the abortions so her husband wouldn't leave her although she failed to reveal whether he knew of the terminations. My note: My head is going to explode.
'Of course, this did not mean I wanted to do it again and again,' she said. 'A druggie also wants to stop every time. My comment: I have no words.
'Women have written memoirs about their anorexia or their bulimia, and they explain the best that they can what motivated their addiction or their behaviour. I try to do the same in this book.' My note: Comparing anorexia or bulimia to multiple abortions is like comparing Hitler to Mother Teresa.
Although she said she did not see herself as a victim, she admitted she felt she had let the women's movement down. Now re-married, she is raising their two daughters and two teenage stepchildren in Denver, Colorado. My note: She is right, she is not a victim. Her 15 dead children are!
'Motherhood has made me feel accountable,' she said. 'It hasn't made me less pro-choice. My note: Accountable to what exactly you stupid cow! How about being RESPONSIBLE. There's a word that doesn't ever seem to appear in the "prochoice" crowd.
'It's just that I understand and feel the weight of the privilege we have in exercising our right to choose.' My note: Oh My GOD, could you possibly be any more facetious. You understand the weight of the privilege in exercising your right to choose!! This woman has no soul. 15 abortions have certainly been weighty for her.
The entire article can be viewed here
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
Tim Tebow's Superbowl Prolife Ad
Tim Tebow's Superbowl prolife ad has certainly raised the hackles of the pro-abortion crowd! Tim's mother was advised to abort Tim when she became ill in the Philippines while carrying him. She chose LIFE and Tim is an example of the fine men and women abortion has deprived of life. However, Tim is not the first athlete to speak out against abortion. In 1987, Wellington Mara, co-owner of the New York Giants, produced a 9 minute video featuring members of this Superbowl team. George Martin, an African American defensive end, compares Roe v. Wade, which said "unborn babies have no rights," to the "shameful Dred Scott decision that said that black people have no rights." This ties in with an earlier post today. This is that video. (Many thanks to the Washington Post for the video and the information about the video.)
Here's another great pro-life ad, rejected by the major networks.
Here's another great pro-life ad, rejected by the major networks.
Modern Day Black Genocide - Margaret Sanger - Racist
Yesterday, while driving through town, I passed Planned Parenthood. There are usually a few hardy and brave Pro-Life protestors standing outside and that day was no exception. When I can, I roll down my window and give them the thumbs up or honk and say God Bless. This day, they were holding a protest sign I had not seen them use before. It said simply, in large black bold letters, BLACK GENOCIDE.
There can be no doubt that Margaret Sanger was a racist of the highest degree. Her legacy, in her own words and deeds, cannot be denied. Margaret Sanger spoke of sterilizing those she designated as "unfit," a plan she said would be the "salvation of American civilization. She also talked about those who were "irresponsible and reckless," among whom she included those "whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers." She further contended that "there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped." That many Americans of African origin constituted a segment of Sanger considered "unfit" cannot be easily refuted.
The eugenic theme figured prominently in the Birth Control Review, which Sanger founded in 1917. She published such articles as "Some Moral Aspects of Eugenics" (June 1920), "The Eugenic Conscience" (February 1921), "The purpose of Eugenics" (December 1924), "Birth Control and Positive Eugenics" (July 1925), "Birth Control: The True Eugenics" (August 1928), and many others.
The following are just a few of Margaret Sanger's statements regarding eugenics and what she considered to be inferior races, including blacks and Jews.
"We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with
social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most
successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal.
We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro
population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if
it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."
-- Margaret Sanger's December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255
Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith
Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in
Linda Gordon's Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth
Control in America . New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.
"Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying
... demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism ...
[Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the
world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of
others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead
weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the
stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world,
it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant ... We are paying
for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing,
unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born
at all."
-- Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization , 1922. Chapter on "The
Cruelty of Charity," pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library
edition.
"Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most
adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and
social problems.
"I think you must agree ... that the campaign for birth control is not
merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims
of eugenics ... Birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the
eugenic educator.
"As an advocate of birth control I wish ... to point out that the
unbalance between the birth rate of the 'unfit' and the 'fit,' admittedly
the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the
inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this
matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feebleminded,
the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be
held up for emulation.
"On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and
discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective."
-- Margaret Sanger. "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda."
Birth Control Review , October 1921, page 5.
"Give dysgenic groups [people with 'bad genes'] in our population
their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization."
-- Margaret Sanger, April 1932 Birth Control Review .
"The third group [of society] are those irresponsible and reckless
ones having little regard for the consequences of their acts, or whose
religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers.
Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper
element dependent upon the normal and fit members of society for their
support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the
procreation of this group should be stopped."
-- Margaret Sanger. Speech quoted in Birth Control: What It Is, How It
Works, What It Will Do. The Proceedings of the First American Birth
Control Conference . Held at the Hotel Plaza, New York City, November 11-
12, 1921. Published by the Birth Control Review , Gothic Press, pages 172
and 174.
"In passing, we should here recognize the difficulties presented by the
idea of 'fit' and 'unfit.' Who is to decide this question? The grosser,
the more obvious, the undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be
discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind. But among the
writings of the representative Eugenists [sic], one cannot ignore the
distinct middle-class bias that prevails."
-- Margaret Sanger, quoted in Charles Valenza. "Was Margaret Sanger a
Racist?" Family Planning Perspectives , January-February 1985, page 44.
"Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race."
-- Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control . New York: New
York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.
"There is only one reply to a request for a higher birthrate among the
intelligent, and that is to ask the government to first take the burden of
the insane and feeble-minded from your back. [Mandatory] sterilization for
these is the answer."
-- Margaret Sanger, October 1926 Birth Control Review .
"[Slavs, Latin, and Hebrew immigrants are] human weeds ... a
deadweight of human waste ... [Blacks, soldiers, and Jews are a] menace to
the race."
"Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need ... We must prevent
Multiplication of this bad stock."
-- Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review .
"[Our objective is] unlimited sexual gratification without the burden
of unwanted children ... [Women must have the right] to live ... to love
... to be lazy ... to be an unmarried mother ... to create ... to destroy
... The marriage bed is the most degenerative influence in the social order
... The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members
is to kill it."
-- Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel , Volume I, Number 1.
Reprinted in Woman and the New Race . New York: Brentanos Publishers,
1922.
The above quotes were compiled by the American Life League
It is no mistake that the majority of Planned Parenthood offices are located in low income, oftentimes predominantly black areas. 36% of abortions occur within the black community.
Recently, many in the black community have started to take notice of this trend and to delve further into the true motive of Margaret Sanger. In her lifetime, Ms. Sanger received many rewards. One must then wonder what reward she received upon her death. The death of millions and millions of innocent victims and the ruination of the lives of many of women who had the abortions. Those women are starting to speak out as well. Abortion does not just affect women. The fathers of these unborn children and the families are all affected. Silent No More offers powerful testimony that abortion is very often not the right "solution." The fact is, it is not a right at all and should be abolished. What began as a guise and ruse for a racist, has now turned into a multi-million dollar industry performing abortion on demand as a means of birth control. I personally know several women who have had multiple abortions. There simply can be no excuse for this.
If you live your life as if there is no God, you have better be right.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Republican Senator Judd Gregg Reacts to MSNBC Host
I went back and listened to her question several times to see if her wide eyed innocence, "just asking a question" was indeed true. It isn't. She was obviously loading a question in the worst possible way, with malice and bias. Good for you, Senator Gregg. Republicans have finally found their backbones. It's about time! This woman obviously watches Keith Olbermann way too much. I am just sayin'. Hattip Newsbusters
Congressional Reform Act of 2010
I got this in my e-mail from my cousin, Joe, who got it from a friend, who has a friend who wrote it. It's GREAT!
Congressional Reform Act of 2010
1. Term Limits: 12 years only, one of the possible options below.
A. Two Six year Senate terms
B. Six Two year House terms
C. One Six year Senate term and three Two Year House terms
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
2. No Tenure / No Pension:
A congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security:
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund moves to the Social Security system immediately.
All future funds flow into the Social Security system, Congress participates with the American people.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, server your term(s), then go home and back to work.
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan just as all Americans.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
6. Congress looses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
8. All contracts with past and present congressmen are void effective 1/1/2011. The American people did not make this contract with congressmen, congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
Congressional Reform Act of 2010
1. Term Limits: 12 years only, one of the possible options below.
A. Two Six year Senate terms
B. Six Two year House terms
C. One Six year Senate term and three Two Year House terms
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
2. No Tenure / No Pension:
A congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security:
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund moves to the Social Security system immediately.
All future funds flow into the Social Security system, Congress participates with the American people.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, server your term(s), then go home and back to work.
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan just as all Americans.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
6. Congress looses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
8. All contracts with past and present congressmen are void effective 1/1/2011. The American people did not make this contract with congressmen, congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
Jack Cafferty "Pelosi's Arrogance is Absolutely Breathitaking."
Again, I ask myself,who are these people who keep electing San Fran Nan? Do they really not care about this sort of behavior. For all the left's blather about conservatives having all the money, it seems those who elect this joke and keep electing her have no problem with her throwing our money around.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Memorial to My Father, Verl Glen Coons
My father died in January of 1990, now 20 years ago. It's hard to believe he has been gone so long. Years ago, I did a memorial video of him, which I posted on You Tube to share with my friends and family. Unfortunately, the video was 13 minutes long and You Tube would only allow me 10 minutes length, so the end is truncated and many of the pictures are missing. However, it's still quite a video of a remarkable man who accomplished heroic feats in his lifetime.
Libera - Going Home
My friend, Helen, sent this video to me. This just happens to be my favorite song and one of the songs I used for the memorial video I did of my father. It's also the song I wish played at my funeral. It's simply beautiful as done by these sweet young boys. Take a moment and enjoy.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
Jon Stewart Slams Keith Olbermann
This is just priceless. Granted, I am not a Jon Stewart fan, but I have noticed that he rises to the occasion when he sees something like Olbermann's rant against Scott Brown as just plain wrong, which it was, and is. Baseless accusations by a man who I believe is totally unhinged.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Special Comment - Keith Olbermann's Name-Calling | ||||
| ||||
Unborn Babies, Mothers Wounded from Abortion Deserve Compassion Too (CNS News)
CNSNews.com
Unborn Babies, Mothers ‘Wounded’ from Abortion Deserve Compassion Too, Republicans Say
Friday, January 22, 2010
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer
Tens of thousands of people gathered at the National Mall on Friday to march to the Supreme Court building where the landmark Roe v. Wade decision was made 37 years ago legalizing abortion. A rally, including gospel songs by singers from Liberty College, was held before the march. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
(CNSNews.com) – Republican legislators joined tens of thousands of people on the National Mall on Friday to commemorate the 37th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.
And as the nation and the world reach out to help the children and adults who survived the deadly earthquake in Haiti, Republicans said Americans should not forget the more than 50 million unborn children whose lives were ended by abortion.
“I think about that all the time,” Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) told CNSNews.com. “The hypocrisy that’s involved with how concerned they are after children are born and how little concern they have for children before they are born.”
“I believe that the compassion and generosity of the American people is in high relief in Haiti, but frankly I think it’s also in high relief in the pro-life movement,” Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) told CNSNews.com.
He credited the spread of the non-profit pregnancy resource centers, which help women find alternatives to abortion, as one of the cornerstones of the expanding pro-life movement.
Marchers carried signs, including one that used children's author Dr. Seuss to make a point about the value of all life. Since 1973, more than 50 million unborn children have been killed by abortion. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
“One of the great advances in the pro-life movement in the last 20 years has been the emergence of pregnancy crisis centers,” Pence said. “I think one of the reasons why a clear majority in most polls support the right to life is because the American people know that this is not an argument over austere legal questions.
“This is a deeply compassionate argument that has the interest of the unborn and the interest of women at the very center of it,” Pence said.
“There has been almost a schizophrenic view when it comes to regarding the unborn child as expendable and throwaways,” Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) told CNSNews.com. “We have greatly and – thankfully – passionately stepped up to the plate to help people who are suffering from catastrophes like the Haitian earthquake.
“But I would hope that the same moral imperative and the same compassion we reach out to the people who have been buried in buildings – and many people in my own district have loved ones and relatives who have been buried and killed – our hearts go out to them,” he said.
“But our hearts should go out in a like manner to the unborn and to the wounded mothers from abortion,” Smith said. “So there is a double standard.”
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said the earthquake in Haiti and abortion are both human tragedies that should make people value every human life.
“On this day we come to celebrate life and plead with the hard hearts that remain here in Washington to overturn Roe versus Wade and bring us back to the sanctity of life,” King said. “I feel badly for the people in Haiti – it’s the worst natural tragedy in the history of this hemisphere.
“And I think that if the people in this country could hear the cries of the unborn, who are so brutally treated, they would have the same compassion for unborn Americans that they have for the tragedy in Haiti,” King said.
One sign in the crowd referenced the health care legislation supported by the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress that would have allowed federal funds to be used to pay for abortion. (CNSNew.com/Penny Starr)
On stage, representatives from pro-life and pro-family groups told the crowd that they were responsible for making sure the goals of the pro-life movement succeed, from overturning Roe v. Wade to making sure women who carry their babies to term have the support they need.
People of all ages and from across the country attended the event, including 41 students from Dominican High School in Whitefish Bay, Wis.
“I support that women have other choices than to kill their innocent child,” 15-year-old Genevieve Hoang told CNSNews.com. “And euthanasia I don’t support either.”
Susan Diiorio of Newberry, N.J., said she has a personal reason for being a pro-life activist.
“Being handicapped myself, I’m very concerned over the issue, because we have a president who said life is a matter of convenience,” Diiorio said. “During his campaign speech he said that he would not want his daughters to suffer with a child because she made a mistake.
Men and women who are part of the Silent No More Campaign shared stories about how abortion has hurt them. They carried signs that said "I regret my abortion." Others carried signs mourning the loss of fatherhood from abortion. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
“That causes me great concern, because if he would take the life of his own grandchild, what would he or those who support him do for someone like me,” Diiorio said. “So I’m here not only for the babies, but for those of us that are handicapped, who have disabilities.”
One of the most touching moments came when Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) took the stage with her two-year-old son.
“I’m the proud mother of my two-year-old son, who happens to have Down syndrome,” McMorris Rodgers said, adding that she is “heartbroken” by the fact that 90 percent of babies diagnosed with the genetic disorder in utero are aborted.
“We can show them a better way,” she said. “A way that protects life.”
“Thanks for coming today,” McMorris Rodgers said. “You are standing up for your children. You are standing up for my son, Cole Rodgers. You’re standing up for the future of America.”
View full article at CNSNews
The Anniversary of a Travesty Roe vs Wade
March for Life held their grand rally today in Washington. However, Rick Sanchez from CNN just could not seem to figure out what was going on. I guess the "March for Life" threw him. I am so proud of those who could and did go. One day, I will be there with them. I was certainly there in spirit. I remember 37 years ago when Roe vs Wade passed. I was living in Norman, Oklahoma, had just had my second child, a daughter. My oldest daughter was nearly 4. I had stopped at a drive in to get some drinks for us and was just putting my baby in her car seat when it was announced on the radio that Roe vs Wade had passed through legislation. It was one of those moments forever frozen in my mind. Like where I was when Kennedy was killed (study hall in school), or when 9/11 occurred (optometrist's office). I feel the same way today that I felt then, a sense of complete and utter dismay that something like this could have ever happened HERE. I am as vehemently opposed to it now as I was then and I always will be. Scroll down my side bar on the left of my blog and you will see many pro-life placards. I like to quote Ronald Reagan when he said that everyone for abortion had already been born. A simple quote, a simple truth. If we do not speak for the unborn, who will? Here are some words from the great Ronald Reagan:
Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation (1983)
ISBN 0964112531
We must all educate ourselves to the reality of the horrors taking place.
* Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court's result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right.
* The decision by the seven-man majority in Roe v. Wade has so far been made to stick. But the Court's decision has by no means settled the debate. Instead, Roe v. Wade has become a continuing prod to the conscience of the nation.
* We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life — the unborn — without diminishing the value of all human life.
* If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn.
* The real question today is not when human life begins, but, What is the value of human life?
* The abortionist who reassembles the arms and legs of a tiny baby to make sure all its parts have been torn from its mother's body can hardly doubt whether it is a human being.
* Regrettably, we live at a time when some persons do not value all human life. They want to pick and choose which individuals have value.
* As a nation, we must choose between the sanctity of life ethic and the "quality of life" ethic. I have no trouble identifying the answer our nation has always given to this basic question, and the answer that I hope and pray it will give in the future.
* As a nation today, we have not rejected the sanctity of human life. The American people have not had an opportunity to express their view on the sanctity of human life in the unborn. I am convinced that Americans do not want to play God with the value of human life. It is not for us to decide who is worthy to live and who is not. Even the Supreme Court's opinion in Roe v. Wade did not explicitly reject the traditional American idea of intrinsic worth and value in all human life; it simply dodged this issue.
* We must all educate ourselves to the reality of the horrors taking place. Doctors today know that unborn children can feel a touch within the womb and that they respond to pain.
* Late-term abortions, especially when the baby survives, but is then killed by starvation, neglect, or suffocation, show once again the link between abortion and infanticide. The time to stop both is now.
* It is possible that the Supreme Court itself may overturn its abortion rulings. We need only recall that in Brown v. Board of Education the court reversed its own earlier "separate-but-equal" decision.
* As we continue to work to overturn Roe v. Wade, we must also continue to lay the groundwork for a society in which abortion is not the accepted answer to unwanted pregnancy. Pro-life people have already taken heroic steps, often at great personal sacrifice, to provide for unwed mothers.
* We will never recognize the true value of our own lives until we affirm the value in the life of others.
* We cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning.
Before moving on to another story, Sanchez did read a tweet from Sarah Palin on the march: “She tweets at this moment, and I will share it to with you: ‘Affirming dignity & worth of every innocent human life & defending the defenseless are fundamental American values, so march peacefully & hopefully.’ That’s from Sarah Palin’s camp.”
Hat tip Newsbusters for the video and the Sarah Palin comment. "Before moving on to another story, Sanchez did read a tweet from Sarah Palin on the march: “She tweets at this moment, and I will share it to with you: ‘Affirming dignity & worth of every innocent human life & defending the defenseless are fundamental American values, so march peacefully & hopefully.’ That’s from Sarah Palin’s camp.”
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2010/01/22/cnn-s-rick-sanchez-not-sure-who-s-protesting-annual-pro-life-march-d-c#ixzz0dOLrv3Sh
Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation (1983)
ISBN 0964112531
We must all educate ourselves to the reality of the horrors taking place.
* Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court's result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right.
* The decision by the seven-man majority in Roe v. Wade has so far been made to stick. But the Court's decision has by no means settled the debate. Instead, Roe v. Wade has become a continuing prod to the conscience of the nation.
* We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life — the unborn — without diminishing the value of all human life.
* If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn.
* The real question today is not when human life begins, but, What is the value of human life?
* The abortionist who reassembles the arms and legs of a tiny baby to make sure all its parts have been torn from its mother's body can hardly doubt whether it is a human being.
* Regrettably, we live at a time when some persons do not value all human life. They want to pick and choose which individuals have value.
* As a nation, we must choose between the sanctity of life ethic and the "quality of life" ethic. I have no trouble identifying the answer our nation has always given to this basic question, and the answer that I hope and pray it will give in the future.
* As a nation today, we have not rejected the sanctity of human life. The American people have not had an opportunity to express their view on the sanctity of human life in the unborn. I am convinced that Americans do not want to play God with the value of human life. It is not for us to decide who is worthy to live and who is not. Even the Supreme Court's opinion in Roe v. Wade did not explicitly reject the traditional American idea of intrinsic worth and value in all human life; it simply dodged this issue.
* We must all educate ourselves to the reality of the horrors taking place. Doctors today know that unborn children can feel a touch within the womb and that they respond to pain.
* Late-term abortions, especially when the baby survives, but is then killed by starvation, neglect, or suffocation, show once again the link between abortion and infanticide. The time to stop both is now.
* It is possible that the Supreme Court itself may overturn its abortion rulings. We need only recall that in Brown v. Board of Education the court reversed its own earlier "separate-but-equal" decision.
* As we continue to work to overturn Roe v. Wade, we must also continue to lay the groundwork for a society in which abortion is not the accepted answer to unwanted pregnancy. Pro-life people have already taken heroic steps, often at great personal sacrifice, to provide for unwed mothers.
* We will never recognize the true value of our own lives until we affirm the value in the life of others.
* We cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning.
Before moving on to another story, Sanchez did read a tweet from Sarah Palin on the march: “She tweets at this moment, and I will share it to with you: ‘Affirming dignity & worth of every innocent human life & defending the defenseless are fundamental American values, so march peacefully & hopefully.’ That’s from Sarah Palin’s camp.”
Hat tip Newsbusters for the video and the Sarah Palin comment. "Before moving on to another story, Sanchez did read a tweet from Sarah Palin on the march: “She tweets at this moment, and I will share it to with you: ‘Affirming dignity & worth of every innocent human life & defending the defenseless are fundamental American values, so march peacefully & hopefully.’ That’s from Sarah Palin’s camp.”
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2010/01/22/cnn-s-rick-sanchez-not-sure-who-s-protesting-annual-pro-life-march-d-c#ixzz0dOLrv3Sh
An Insult to Democracy
Thanks to my friend, Sam, for sending this. At first when I watched this, I thought it was a joke. Well, of course, Murtha is a joke, a sad pathetic joke, but then I realized he was entirely serious. How in the world does he get elected!! What is wrong with people!
The Lies of Obama, John Ellis, Frontpage Magazine
When politicians are caught out in lies, their supporters often resort to the old cliché: all politicians lie. But that is itself a lie: most don’t. Even among those who do, there are enormous differences in the importance and frequency of the lies. And it is surely now clear that this nation has a far from routine problem in the scale and regularity of President Obama’s lying.
When politicians lie they are usually trying to avoid political damage, or to make themselves look good. Bill Clinton lied (and got himself impeached) to save himself from embarrassment about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Hillary Clinton lied about being under fire in Bosnia to enhance her non-existent foreign affairs profile. Richard Nixon was forced from office because he lied to cover up his involvement in a political dirty trick. John Kerry lied about his Vietnam combat experience to blunt his anti-military reputation. But Barack Obama’s lies are far more corrosive and destructive, because they go the heart of legislation and governance, and so seriously undermine trust in government. His lies generally take a specific form: they attempt to persuade people to vote for him or his policies by categorically assuring them that they need not have the anxieties that they have been expressing. The lies say, essentially: trust me, support what I want, and I promise that what you fear will never happen. But in every case it soon becomes clear either that he knew perfectly well that what the public feared would in fact happen, or that he was giving a firm assurance that he was in no position to give, or that he had no intention of following through on his promise.
The accumulated weight of Obama’s deceit is overwhelming:
* During his campaign for the presidency and since, Obama repeatedly assured us that he would protect Medicare against cuts; but he now presses for passage of bills that include savage cuts in Medicare.
* To obtain passage of his first stimulus bill, Obama assured us that 90% of the jobs created would be in the private sector; but as he well knew, most of them were to be in the public sector.
* Early in the health care debate, Obama assured us that he had not said that he favored a single payer system; but he was on record as having said exactly that.
* Obama gave primary voters a firm assurance that if he became the nominee of the Democratic party he would (unlike Hillary Clinton) abide by the campaign finance limits of public funding; but as soon as he became the party’s nominee, he reneged on that pledge.
* During the presidential campaign Obama criticized the presence of former lobbyists in the Bush administration and solemnly assured us that he would appoint no lobbyists to his administration; but once elected he proceeded to appoint even more lobbyists than his predecessors.
* Obama criticized the size of George Bush’s deficit and promised to stop deficit spending if elected; but he has already quadrupled the size of the deficit he objected to and recklessly continues new federal spending in the trillions.
* When campaigning Obama criticized bills before the congress that were too long for anyone to be able to read and promised to stop that; but the bills he has been backing throughout his first year are infinitely longer (2000+ pages) than the ones he criticized.
* Candidate Obama promised an end to the corruption of earmarks and pork, but in the bills he has supported this year there have been more and bigger earmarks than ever before.
* Candidate Obama promised us that CIA personnel involved in the interrogation of terrorists would not be prosecuted; but his administration is now doing exactly that.
* Obama assured a joint session of Congress that the health bill he supported (pre-Stupak) would not provide public funding for abortions; but bitter resistance on the part of House Democrats to inclusion of language to that effect soon proved that it did.
* Candidate Obama promised that he would make sure that there was always enough time for the public to read legislation before it was enacted; but he has done exactly the opposite, repeatedly pressing for even faster passage of even longer bills.
* Candidate Obama met fears that he would be a tax and spend liberal by promising, emphatically and repeatedly, that those earning under $200,000 would see no increase in their taxes of any kind; but he now urges passage of a healthcare bill that breaks that pledge in many different ways, and his unrestrained increase in federal spending makes more tax increases inevitable.
* Candidate Obama promised bipartisanship and an end to partisan bickering; but in a display of especially ruthless partisanship his allies have shut Republicans out of all key meetings on his health care initiative, with the unprecedented result that domestic legislation of historic importance garnered not a single Republican vote in the Senate.
* Candidate Obama criticized his opponent’s plan to tax employer paid healthcare benefits, and promised he would not tax them; but the bill he now backs will do just that.
* Obama had promised that he would not sign a healthcare bill that would add one dime to the federal deficit; but the bill he now backs adds trillions in new federal spending, offset only by new sources of revenue that are both uncertain and more properly seen as offsetting the already existing deficit.
* Obama coerced congress into passing his stimulus bill by promising that if it were passed unemployment could go no higher then 8%; but unemployment is now at 10%, and he could not possibly have had good reason to exclude that possibility.
* Obama promised that his cap and trade legislation will create jobs; but its massive tax increases will certainly hobble the economy and destroy jobs, while green jobs in significant numbers can at best be hoped for, but never promised.
* Obama has repeatedly assured the American people that if they like their current health plan they can keep it; but the House bill which he supported created huge incentives for employers to drop their coverage and shift their members to a public option.
* Obama has just as often assured the public that under his health plan everyone will be able to keep their current doctor; but many are certain to lose their doctors when ObamaCare’s large cuts in Medicare funding induce more doctors to withdraw from Medicare coverage, as they also would were employers to transfer patients to a public option to save money.
* Obama assured a joint session of Congress that his health plan would not fund illegal aliens; but his allies had been busy voting down amendments to that effect. (This was the point of Joe Wilson’s outburst.)
* Obama claimed that Caterpillar’s CEO had told him that Caterpillar would begin hiring again as a result of the stimulus bill; but that individual immediately announced that he had said no such thing, and that Caterpillar would in fact be laying off more workers.
* Candidate Obama promised that Guantanamo would be closed by January 1, 2010; but it is still open.
* Candidate Obama promised that his administration (unlike his predecessor’s) would be so transparent that TV cameras (C-Span) would be there for key deliberations; but an unprecedented level of secrecy prevails as the final stages of Obamacare are negotiated behind closed doors and kept so secret that even the Senate majority whip admitted that he had no idea what was going on. Requests for Obama to honor the promise of C-Span cameras are being ignored.
* To gain traction for his attempt to return a would-be socialist dictator in Honduras to power, Obama claimed that he had been overthrown in an illegal coup; but the congressional research service pointed out correctly that ex-President Zelaya had been removed for constitutionally sufficient cause by legal and constitutional means.
* Obama claims that he wants a public option only to increase choice and competition; but the House bill would clearly reduce choice both by squeezing unsubsidized private health plans out of the market, and by setting rigid conditions on acceptable plans that would narrow available options.
* Candidate Obama claimed that violent radical Bill Ayers was just another guy in his neighborhood; but the record shows that the two had worked closely together.
* Obama assured us that his stimulus bill would create or save a million jobs; but he was claiming as fact what could never have been more than a wild (and highly improbable) guess, and his more recent attempts to justify that guess have been fraudulent.
* Obama assured us that his health plan would never ration care, or “pull the plug” on grandma; but the legislation he backs sets up panels to make crucial decisions on when to withhold care, and it makes such deep cuts in Medicare that rationing is inevitable.
* Obama now assures us that health insurance premiums will not go up if ObamaCare becomes law, insisting indignantly that people who say this have not read the bill; but the legislation forces insurers to cover preexisting conditions, which will compel them to raise premiums substantially.
This is an extraordinary record of serial mendacity. One or two instances might charitably be regarded as rash promises later regretted, or as the wishful thinking of someone who had not thought through the implications of what he was saying. But when it happens again and again—and my 30 instances are by no means exhaustive—only one judgment seems possible: this is the record of a habitual, shameless liar, a man who will say anything to get what he wants. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, goes the old saying. But scores of times? How shameful is that for our society when this disgraceful record is never the subject of a reproachful editorial in the New York Times, the Washington Post, or CBS news? Richard Nixon was removed from office, and Bill Clinton impeached for a single lie. Who could look at Obama’s record without concluding that his lying is in a completely different league to theirs?
President Obama evidently believes that he can solve any problem with a speech. But he really does not care whether what he says is true or not, nor does he feel any responsibility to honor the assurances and promises he makes. As a result, this nation is now in a position where it cannot believe a word that he says, and that amounts to an unprecedented crisis of confidence in the Presidency. Democratic government will atrophy if we allow lying on this scale to count as the business as usual of politics. When will the press and the Congress hold him accountable?
Read the entire article here
When politicians lie they are usually trying to avoid political damage, or to make themselves look good. Bill Clinton lied (and got himself impeached) to save himself from embarrassment about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Hillary Clinton lied about being under fire in Bosnia to enhance her non-existent foreign affairs profile. Richard Nixon was forced from office because he lied to cover up his involvement in a political dirty trick. John Kerry lied about his Vietnam combat experience to blunt his anti-military reputation. But Barack Obama’s lies are far more corrosive and destructive, because they go the heart of legislation and governance, and so seriously undermine trust in government. His lies generally take a specific form: they attempt to persuade people to vote for him or his policies by categorically assuring them that they need not have the anxieties that they have been expressing. The lies say, essentially: trust me, support what I want, and I promise that what you fear will never happen. But in every case it soon becomes clear either that he knew perfectly well that what the public feared would in fact happen, or that he was giving a firm assurance that he was in no position to give, or that he had no intention of following through on his promise.
The accumulated weight of Obama’s deceit is overwhelming:
* During his campaign for the presidency and since, Obama repeatedly assured us that he would protect Medicare against cuts; but he now presses for passage of bills that include savage cuts in Medicare.
* To obtain passage of his first stimulus bill, Obama assured us that 90% of the jobs created would be in the private sector; but as he well knew, most of them were to be in the public sector.
* Early in the health care debate, Obama assured us that he had not said that he favored a single payer system; but he was on record as having said exactly that.
* Obama gave primary voters a firm assurance that if he became the nominee of the Democratic party he would (unlike Hillary Clinton) abide by the campaign finance limits of public funding; but as soon as he became the party’s nominee, he reneged on that pledge.
* During the presidential campaign Obama criticized the presence of former lobbyists in the Bush administration and solemnly assured us that he would appoint no lobbyists to his administration; but once elected he proceeded to appoint even more lobbyists than his predecessors.
* Obama criticized the size of George Bush’s deficit and promised to stop deficit spending if elected; but he has already quadrupled the size of the deficit he objected to and recklessly continues new federal spending in the trillions.
* When campaigning Obama criticized bills before the congress that were too long for anyone to be able to read and promised to stop that; but the bills he has been backing throughout his first year are infinitely longer (2000+ pages) than the ones he criticized.
* Candidate Obama promised an end to the corruption of earmarks and pork, but in the bills he has supported this year there have been more and bigger earmarks than ever before.
* Candidate Obama promised us that CIA personnel involved in the interrogation of terrorists would not be prosecuted; but his administration is now doing exactly that.
* Obama assured a joint session of Congress that the health bill he supported (pre-Stupak) would not provide public funding for abortions; but bitter resistance on the part of House Democrats to inclusion of language to that effect soon proved that it did.
* Candidate Obama promised that he would make sure that there was always enough time for the public to read legislation before it was enacted; but he has done exactly the opposite, repeatedly pressing for even faster passage of even longer bills.
* Candidate Obama met fears that he would be a tax and spend liberal by promising, emphatically and repeatedly, that those earning under $200,000 would see no increase in their taxes of any kind; but he now urges passage of a healthcare bill that breaks that pledge in many different ways, and his unrestrained increase in federal spending makes more tax increases inevitable.
* Candidate Obama promised bipartisanship and an end to partisan bickering; but in a display of especially ruthless partisanship his allies have shut Republicans out of all key meetings on his health care initiative, with the unprecedented result that domestic legislation of historic importance garnered not a single Republican vote in the Senate.
* Candidate Obama criticized his opponent’s plan to tax employer paid healthcare benefits, and promised he would not tax them; but the bill he now backs will do just that.
* Obama had promised that he would not sign a healthcare bill that would add one dime to the federal deficit; but the bill he now backs adds trillions in new federal spending, offset only by new sources of revenue that are both uncertain and more properly seen as offsetting the already existing deficit.
* Obama coerced congress into passing his stimulus bill by promising that if it were passed unemployment could go no higher then 8%; but unemployment is now at 10%, and he could not possibly have had good reason to exclude that possibility.
* Obama promised that his cap and trade legislation will create jobs; but its massive tax increases will certainly hobble the economy and destroy jobs, while green jobs in significant numbers can at best be hoped for, but never promised.
* Obama has repeatedly assured the American people that if they like their current health plan they can keep it; but the House bill which he supported created huge incentives for employers to drop their coverage and shift their members to a public option.
* Obama has just as often assured the public that under his health plan everyone will be able to keep their current doctor; but many are certain to lose their doctors when ObamaCare’s large cuts in Medicare funding induce more doctors to withdraw from Medicare coverage, as they also would were employers to transfer patients to a public option to save money.
* Obama assured a joint session of Congress that his health plan would not fund illegal aliens; but his allies had been busy voting down amendments to that effect. (This was the point of Joe Wilson’s outburst.)
* Obama claimed that Caterpillar’s CEO had told him that Caterpillar would begin hiring again as a result of the stimulus bill; but that individual immediately announced that he had said no such thing, and that Caterpillar would in fact be laying off more workers.
* Candidate Obama promised that Guantanamo would be closed by January 1, 2010; but it is still open.
* Candidate Obama promised that his administration (unlike his predecessor’s) would be so transparent that TV cameras (C-Span) would be there for key deliberations; but an unprecedented level of secrecy prevails as the final stages of Obamacare are negotiated behind closed doors and kept so secret that even the Senate majority whip admitted that he had no idea what was going on. Requests for Obama to honor the promise of C-Span cameras are being ignored.
* To gain traction for his attempt to return a would-be socialist dictator in Honduras to power, Obama claimed that he had been overthrown in an illegal coup; but the congressional research service pointed out correctly that ex-President Zelaya had been removed for constitutionally sufficient cause by legal and constitutional means.
* Obama claims that he wants a public option only to increase choice and competition; but the House bill would clearly reduce choice both by squeezing unsubsidized private health plans out of the market, and by setting rigid conditions on acceptable plans that would narrow available options.
* Candidate Obama claimed that violent radical Bill Ayers was just another guy in his neighborhood; but the record shows that the two had worked closely together.
* Obama assured us that his stimulus bill would create or save a million jobs; but he was claiming as fact what could never have been more than a wild (and highly improbable) guess, and his more recent attempts to justify that guess have been fraudulent.
* Obama assured us that his health plan would never ration care, or “pull the plug” on grandma; but the legislation he backs sets up panels to make crucial decisions on when to withhold care, and it makes such deep cuts in Medicare that rationing is inevitable.
* Obama now assures us that health insurance premiums will not go up if ObamaCare becomes law, insisting indignantly that people who say this have not read the bill; but the legislation forces insurers to cover preexisting conditions, which will compel them to raise premiums substantially.
This is an extraordinary record of serial mendacity. One or two instances might charitably be regarded as rash promises later regretted, or as the wishful thinking of someone who had not thought through the implications of what he was saying. But when it happens again and again—and my 30 instances are by no means exhaustive—only one judgment seems possible: this is the record of a habitual, shameless liar, a man who will say anything to get what he wants. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, goes the old saying. But scores of times? How shameful is that for our society when this disgraceful record is never the subject of a reproachful editorial in the New York Times, the Washington Post, or CBS news? Richard Nixon was removed from office, and Bill Clinton impeached for a single lie. Who could look at Obama’s record without concluding that his lying is in a completely different league to theirs?
President Obama evidently believes that he can solve any problem with a speech. But he really does not care whether what he says is true or not, nor does he feel any responsibility to honor the assurances and promises he makes. As a result, this nation is now in a position where it cannot believe a word that he says, and that amounts to an unprecedented crisis of confidence in the Presidency. Democratic government will atrophy if we allow lying on this scale to count as the business as usual of politics. When will the press and the Congress hold him accountable?
Read the entire article here
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Thanks, Mr. President, for the Hope and Change.
Sign posted in Hutchinson, Kansas.
Obama, on the other hand, has said he is quite "comfortable" being a one-term president. Personally, I would like to end his term before it's over, however, it's good to know he feels that way.
Obama ‘Quite Comfortable’ As One-Term President, White House Spokesman Says
Friday, August 21, 2009
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
President Barack Obama White House (CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama is “quite comfortable” with the prospect of being a one-term president in order to address the issues he is concerned about, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Friday.
The comment came on the same day the president’s approval reached a new low, with only a 45 percent approval rating in the Zogby International poll released Friday. The poll said that 51 percent disapprove of the president’s job performance. The Real Clear Politics average of all polls puts the president approval rating at 52.2 percent.
Gibbs was addressing a question about a comment made by Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa), who said the president told him he is willing to risk a second term to get a health care overhaul bill approved.
Gibbs said that would be true of most issues.
“I don’t know that I’ve specifically heard him on health care,” said Gibbs, “but I have heard the president say that if making tough decisions in getting important things done that Washington has failed to do for decades means that he only lives in this house and makes those decisions for four years, he’s quite comfortable,” Gibbs told reporters at the White House press briefing.
Read the rest of the article here
NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE REJECTS IN-STATE TUITION FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
N.J. legislature denies in-state tuition for illegal immigrants
By Jonathan Tamari
Inquirer Trenton Bureau
TRENTON - A proposal to let illegal immigrants pay in-state tuition at state colleges and universities failed to get enough support in the Legislature last night, ending its chance of becoming law in the near future.
Sen. Ronald Rice (D., Essex), a sponsor, said he believed the plan was five votes short in the Democratic-controlled Senate. The measure was discussed in closed-door meetings, but was not put up for a vote in either the Senate or Assembly on the final day of the legislative session.
With that, the measure lost its last chance to be voted on before Gov.-elect Christopher J. Christie takes office next Tuesday. He opposes the plan.
Advocates said the measure would help the children of illegal immigrants who attend high school in New Jersey afford college and give them the chance to become more productive members of society. They said children brought to New Jersey by their parents should not be punished for that decision.
Supporters now must regroup after an eight-year push to see the measure approved. Some hope for national immigration reform. Rice said he hoped to discuss the measure with Christie to see if a compromise could be worked out.
Opponents balked at voting for a measure that would provide benefits to illegal immigrants during a time of economic turbulence and angst. Democrats control both houses, but were unable to muster the votes needed in the Senate, where they hold a 22-17 edge with one seat vacant. Republicans had promised uniform opposition.
"There are legal immigrants and U.S. citizens who are struggling today to provide for their children in the highest-taxed state in the country, and they're going to find that they have fewer seats [at public colleges] for their children" if the bill were to be approved, Assemblyman Scott Rudder (R., Burlington) said.
Daniel Santo Pietro, executive director of the Hispanic Directors' Association, an umbrella group for Latino nonprofits, said the difficulty securing votes showed that "the tone" in the public debate was unfavorable for the proposal.
"We just have to overcome the concept, the knee-jerk reaction, to immigration being a problem," Santo Pietro said.
In-state tuition at some schools, including Rutgers, is half as much as out-of-state rates.
Opponents argued that the lower rates were subsidized by legal residents who paid taxes here. Rudder said that if the bill were approved, a Delaware resident who lives in the country legally would pay more to attend Rutgers than an illegal immigrant.
While supporters said they hoped for national changes, the tide on the issue appears to be against them. Ten states allow illegal immigrants to pay in-state rates at public colleges.
But since 2006, at least four states have barred the practice and at least one, South Carolina, has blocked illegal immigrants from enrolling in public colleges.
Under the New Jersey bill, illegal immigrants could have qualified for in-state tuition if they attended a high school in the state for at least three years, graduated or received the equivalent of a diploma from a New Jersey school, and submitted an affidavit that they had applied to legalize their immigration status.
Monmouth University Polling Institute director Patrick Murray said the showdown carried more lasting political implications than the same-sex marriage vote last week. In bad economic times, he said, blame often falls on immigration.
"There is a public anger out there about benefits to illegal immigrants that could come back to bite some of these legislators in two years when they're running for reelection," Murray said.
After emerging from a closed discussion on the bill in which Democrats realized they did not have enough support, Sen. Raymond Lesniak (D., Union) said it was "a shame" the measure would not pass.
"People were afraid politically that they would be considered to be helping illegal aliens," Lesniak said.
Read entire story here
By Jonathan Tamari
Inquirer Trenton Bureau
TRENTON - A proposal to let illegal immigrants pay in-state tuition at state colleges and universities failed to get enough support in the Legislature last night, ending its chance of becoming law in the near future.
Sen. Ronald Rice (D., Essex), a sponsor, said he believed the plan was five votes short in the Democratic-controlled Senate. The measure was discussed in closed-door meetings, but was not put up for a vote in either the Senate or Assembly on the final day of the legislative session.
With that, the measure lost its last chance to be voted on before Gov.-elect Christopher J. Christie takes office next Tuesday. He opposes the plan.
Advocates said the measure would help the children of illegal immigrants who attend high school in New Jersey afford college and give them the chance to become more productive members of society. They said children brought to New Jersey by their parents should not be punished for that decision.
Supporters now must regroup after an eight-year push to see the measure approved. Some hope for national immigration reform. Rice said he hoped to discuss the measure with Christie to see if a compromise could be worked out.
Opponents balked at voting for a measure that would provide benefits to illegal immigrants during a time of economic turbulence and angst. Democrats control both houses, but were unable to muster the votes needed in the Senate, where they hold a 22-17 edge with one seat vacant. Republicans had promised uniform opposition.
"There are legal immigrants and U.S. citizens who are struggling today to provide for their children in the highest-taxed state in the country, and they're going to find that they have fewer seats [at public colleges] for their children" if the bill were to be approved, Assemblyman Scott Rudder (R., Burlington) said.
Daniel Santo Pietro, executive director of the Hispanic Directors' Association, an umbrella group for Latino nonprofits, said the difficulty securing votes showed that "the tone" in the public debate was unfavorable for the proposal.
"We just have to overcome the concept, the knee-jerk reaction, to immigration being a problem," Santo Pietro said.
In-state tuition at some schools, including Rutgers, is half as much as out-of-state rates.
Opponents argued that the lower rates were subsidized by legal residents who paid taxes here. Rudder said that if the bill were approved, a Delaware resident who lives in the country legally would pay more to attend Rutgers than an illegal immigrant.
While supporters said they hoped for national changes, the tide on the issue appears to be against them. Ten states allow illegal immigrants to pay in-state rates at public colleges.
But since 2006, at least four states have barred the practice and at least one, South Carolina, has blocked illegal immigrants from enrolling in public colleges.
Under the New Jersey bill, illegal immigrants could have qualified for in-state tuition if they attended a high school in the state for at least three years, graduated or received the equivalent of a diploma from a New Jersey school, and submitted an affidavit that they had applied to legalize their immigration status.
Monmouth University Polling Institute director Patrick Murray said the showdown carried more lasting political implications than the same-sex marriage vote last week. In bad economic times, he said, blame often falls on immigration.
"There is a public anger out there about benefits to illegal immigrants that could come back to bite some of these legislators in two years when they're running for reelection," Murray said.
After emerging from a closed discussion on the bill in which Democrats realized they did not have enough support, Sen. Raymond Lesniak (D., Union) said it was "a shame" the measure would not pass.
"People were afraid politically that they would be considered to be helping illegal aliens," Lesniak said.
Read entire story here
Bitter Harpy, Joyless Behar, Belittles Palin for Bringing Son Trig to Rallies
When you think she can't get any worse, besides the sarcasm about "choosing life," she always seems to get lower than low. Joy Behar, bitter aging woman with a stone for a heart.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
We Have to Make People Understand that He's Not Real...
Picture courtesy of The People's Cube
The Once-Appealing Barack Obama
Peter Wehner - 01.18.2010 - 8:46 AM
Wednesday marks the one-year anniversary of Barack Obama’s inauguration. It has been, by almost any measure, a difficult and disappointing year for him and his party.
Mr. Obama now has the highest disapproval rating in Gallup’s history for a president entering his second year in office. According to a new Washington Post–ABC News poll, among independents, only 49 percent approve — the lowest of any of his recent predecessors at this point in their presidencies. (Obama has lost a stunning 18 points among independents in just a year’s time.) In November, Democrats suffered crushing defeats in the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial campaigns — and if Republican Scott Brown prevails in his race against Martha Coakley in tomorrow’s Senate election in Massachusetts, it will rank among the most important non-presidential elections in our lifetime.
It has been a staggering collapse by a president who entered office with enormous support and an unprecedented amount of goodwill.
The reasons for this slide include unemployment rates that are much higher than the Obama administration predicted, job growth that never materialized despite the president’s promises, a record-setting spending binge, a massive and hugely unpopular health-care proposal, and an agenda that is far too liberal for most Americans.
But there is another, and I think quite important, explanation that was reinforced to me while reading John Heilemann and Mark Halperin’s book, Game Change, which is a fascinating (and very well-written) account of the 2008 presidential campaign.
One is reminded once again of how the core of Obama’s popularity was an appeal not to policy or to a governing agenda; instead it was an appeal to thematics and narrative. “Obama cast himself as a figure uncorrupted and unco-opted by evil Washington,” the authors write. He was the candidate who “promised to be a unifier and not a polarizer; someone nondogmatic and uncontaminated by the special-interest cesspool that Washington had become.” Obama’s appeal was romantic and aesthetic, built on the rhetoric of hope and change, on his “freshness and sense of promise.” A cult of personality built up around Obama — not because of what he had achieved but because of what he seemed to embody. (”Maybe one day he’ll do something to merit all this attention,” Michelle Obama dryly told a reporter.)
“We have something very special here,” Obama’s top political aide Axelrod is quoted as saying. “I feel like I’ve been handed a porcelain baby.” Axelrod tells Obama — dubbed by his aides as the “Black Jesus” — that voters were looking for “a president who can bring the country together, who can reach beyond partisanship, and who’ll be tough on special interests.”
That was what we were promised. What we got instead is a president who increased the divisions in our nation, the most partisan and polarizing figure in the history of polling, one who is dogmatic and has been as generous to special interests as any we have seen. The efforts to buy votes in pursuit of the Obama agenda has added sewage to the cesspool.
This would hurt any president under any circumstances; for Barack Obama, whose allure was based almost entirely on his ability to convince the public that he embodied a “new politics,” it has been doubly damaging. It was Hillary Clinton of all people who understood Obama best when she said during the campaign, “We have to make people understand that he’s not real.”
Not real indeed. Obama’s stirring call for Americans to reject the “politics of cynicism” was itself deeply cynical. Perhaps none of this should come as a surprise. After all, Heilemann and Halperin write, Axelrod was “a master of the dark arts of negative campaigning.” The first major profile of him, more than 20 years ago, was titled, “Hatchet Man: The Rise of David Axelrod.”
Obama and Axelrod might have been able to get away with this if Obama’s presidency had been viewed as successful and skilled. But it’s not. And when combined with the growing realization that Obama is not up to the task of governing, that he is pursuing policies that exacerbate our problems and takes us down a wrong and even perilous path, it is poison. The toxicity is such that what was once unthinkable now seems more likely than not: Democrats losing the Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy for almost half a century. And even if they don’t, 2010 is shaping up to be a perfectly awful year for Democrats. It’s a safe bet that in response they and their allies will lash out in rage, angry at the perceived injustice of it all, furious at the fate that has befallen them. They will blame Obama’s predecessor, Republicans in Congress, the conservative movement, angry white males, Fox News, Sarah Palin’s tweets, and the wrong alignment of the stars. It won’t work.
Having created a myth, they must now live with its unmasking.
Full article can be viewed here
SCOTT BROWN WINS MASSACHUSETTS
Coakley has conceded. As of this moment, with 93% of precincts reporting, Brown leads by 5. AP has called it for Brown. Obama has called Brown to congratulate him. Ladies and gentlemen, the fat lady has sung and oh what a glorious sound it is. Congratulations, Senator Brown. For the first time in 6 decades, a conservative holds this seat. Fasten your seat belts, it's gonna be a bumpy ride. I would be remiss if I did not also thank the fine people of Massachusetts for making this happen. My hat is off to you. You have made a difference!
The Truth About Obamacare, for those who hadn't the time to read this elephant of a bill.
It's worse than I thought. WAY worse. Thanks to my friend, Samanta, for passing this along to me. If you don't watch this, you're an ostrich. I'm sorry, but that's the way I feel.
Coakley Alleges Voter Irregularity in Memo Released Today, dated YESTERDAY!!!
I guess they thought no one would notice. I guess they thought since the Democratic senate seat had belonged so very long to a man who got there on his name and stayed there on it (Edward Kennedy), despite having killed a woman, they really didn't have to bother with being totally correct on anything. The thing is, people are noticing and it appears that the voters of Massachusetts are setting what may be an historic precedent. Throw da bums out, Massachusetts!!! I hope this is the first in a huge tidal wave of revolt by the American People, not just against Democrats but against all politicians who do not vote in favor of what the American people want.
Voter Fraud Caught on Tape in Massachusetts. H/T Gateway Pundit
Not long after the Coakley camp issues a memo alleging voter irregularity (which, incidentally was dated YESTERDAY), a woman in Lawrence, MA, is carrying around blank absentee ballots in Spanish today. She explains to the bloggers who took the video how she’s telling people to mark Martha Coakley’s name. The woman handing out the ballots identifies herself as “Isabel Melendez” and says she has a talk show in which she promoted Coakley’s candidacy. The deadline for absentee ballots was Friday. My question is, when are they arresting her? Talk show host? Oh my. Ms. Melendez identifies herself as a "community activitist."
Nancy Pelosi "I Haven't Paid a Whole Lot of Attention Because I Have Been Busy Traveling..."
Does she look bad in this video or what! Usually together and much botoxed Nancy looks like she hasn't slept in awhile. This is going to be a very stressful day for the Democrats with the special election in Massachusetts. If all predictions are correct, Brown has it in the bag. In the meantime, Pelosi is simply frightening and I don't mean just her appearance. She lies so effortlessly. Who are the people who keep electing her? I can't imagine.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Obama siilenced by Pro-Life Heckler at rally for Coakley.
One would think "The One" would have learned how to handle hecklers by now. George Bush was a master at it and he never lost a beat. But this one Pro-Lifer shut him down. Holding a sign that says "JESUS LOVES ALL BABIES," this brave man entered the lion's den. Some say heckling should not be allowed. I say, he speaks truth and the truth should always have a voice. I would have been there with him if I could. Someone must speak for those innocents who have no voice. I don't care what the venue.
Friday, January 15, 2010
I Am A Terrorist!!!
Obama’s TSA Nominee Characterized Groups That Were Domestic Security Threats as ‘Anti-Abortion’ and Having ‘Christian Identity’
Thursday, January 14, 2010
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) - Erroll Southers, who President Barack Obama has nominated to head the Transportation Security Administration, described groups that were a domestic security threat as being "anti-abortion" and “Christian-identity oriented."
The TSA, an element of the Department of Homeland Security, is responsible for the security of the nation's transportation systems, including commercial air travel. Southers made the remarks in question in a 2008 video interview with the Videojug.com Web site.
Read more about why the Obama Administration defines terrorists as Christians and anti-abortionists here
I am not a white supremist but I most certainly am a Christian and I vehemently oppose abortion. So I am a terrorist.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) - Erroll Southers, who President Barack Obama has nominated to head the Transportation Security Administration, described groups that were a domestic security threat as being "anti-abortion" and “Christian-identity oriented."
The TSA, an element of the Department of Homeland Security, is responsible for the security of the nation's transportation systems, including commercial air travel. Southers made the remarks in question in a 2008 video interview with the Videojug.com Web site.
Read more about why the Obama Administration defines terrorists as Christians and anti-abortionists here
I am not a white supremist but I most certainly am a Christian and I vehemently oppose abortion. So I am a terrorist.
Do We Really Want Our Children Taught This!!! Sean Hannity and Michelle Malkin discuss
I know the picture is hard to see, but if you click on it, you can read it very well.
Obama's Safe School Czar, Kevin Jennings, appears to have no problem with what these books say. How about you?
With the revelations that President Obama's choice for Safe Schools Czar, Kevin Jennings, failed to inform anyone about a charge of pedophilia by an under-aged student along with his history of promoting homosexuality in schools, his demonstrated contempt for religion and past drug use, many people and pundits are asking -- "Where is the Vetting"? With Richardson, Daschle, Geitner and Jones all having issues that were easily search-able using this revolutionary top-secrete technology called Google... I have a different take, I think these people were vetted and they are exactly the folks that Obama and his team wanted in these positions!
Any talk of vetting mistakes or mistakenly overlooking potions of their life and history is completely bunk and should call attention to a total breakdown and fundamental incompetency of this administration.
Which brings us to Kevin Jennings, Obama's choice for Safe Schools Czar, with his checkered past and connection too and admiration for a constant defender of the North American Association for Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), Harry Hay
Quote:
Hay had strong opinions and never pandered to popular opinion when he voiced them — whether he was attacking national gay organizations for what he saw as their increasingly conservative political positions ("The assimilationist movement is running us into the ground," he told the San Francisco Chronicle in July 2000) or when he condemned the national gay press — in particular, the Advocate — for its emphasis on consumerism. He was, at times, a serious political embarrassment, as when he consistently advocated the inclusion of the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) in gay-pride parades.
Mark Tapscott repoted in the Washington Examiner today:
Quote:
...Lori Roman of Regular Folks United points to statements by Jennings a decade or more ago when he praised Harry Hay of the North American Association for Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), which promotes the legalization of sexual abuse of young boys by older men.
Roman provides damning details and links here. She also notes that Jennings wrote the forward "to a book called Queering Elementary Education. And another fellow you may have heard of wrote one of the endorsements on the book jacket—Bill Ayers." Ayers, of course, is the Weather Underground bomber from the 1960s who is just an "acquaintance" of Obama.
UPDATE: Who was Harry Hay?
Folks at Media Matters are agitated by the above post and others pointing out Jennings' praise of Harry Hay and the latter's link to NAMBLA. Hay was not an employee or official of NAMBLA, but was during his later years, according to his entry on Wikipedia, a frequent defender of the group, including this 1983 statement: "[I]f the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen-, fourteen-, and fifteen-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world."
MM has a point - Jennings praise of Hay was not specifically in the context of the latter's support of NAMBLA. Readers will decide for themselves whether it is appropriate for an individual who publicly praised an advocate of pedophilia to be appointed Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education for Safe and Drug-Free Schools.
Roman’s link on Harry Hay and NAMBLA:
Quote:
“One of the people that’s always inspired me is Harry Hay, who started the first ongoing gay rights groups in America. In 1948, he tried to get people to join the Mattachine Society [the first American homosexual “rights” group]. It took him two years to find one other person who would join. Well, [in] 1993, Harry Hay marched with a million people in Washington, who thought he had a good idea 40 years before. Everybody thought Harry Hay was crazy in 1948, and they knew something about him which he apparently did not—they were right, he was crazy. You are all crazy. We are all crazy. All of us who are thinking this way are crazy, because you know what? Sane people keep the world the same [sh*tty] old way it is now. It’s the people who think, ‘No, I can envision a day when straight people say, ‘So what if you’re promoting homosexuality?’ Or straight kids say, ‘Hey, why don’t you and your boyfriend come over before you go to the prom and try on your tuxes on at my house?’ That if we believe that can happen, we can make it happen. The only thing that will stop us is our lack of faith that we can make it happen. That is our mission from this day forward. To not lose our faith, to not lose our belief that the world can, indeed, be a different place. And think how much can change in one lifetime if in Harry Hay’s one very short life, he saw change from not even one person willing to join him to a million people willing to travel to Washington to join him. You can see the same changed happen in your lifetime if you believe you can.”
Barack Obama said, during the primary, "judge me by the people I surround myself with" Well you be the judge...
Read more about this here
George Lopez and Joy Behar - Todd Palin is a bum
Isn't it cute to sit and watch these rich liberals talk about there is no liberal elite. I am willing to bet Joy Behar pays more EACH DAY to have her hair done than I make in a month. And what a lackluster and dull interview. Lopez, instead of being grateful for what this nation has given him, chooses instead to diss a woman whose gratitude for being an American knows no bounds. It just goes to show you, the old addage is true. You cannot buy class. But just to show you how ignorant they really really are, Palin was a union member belonging to the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union (United Steelworkers).
For eighteen years, he worked for BP in the North Slope oil fields of Alaska. In 2007, in order to avoid a conflict of interest relating to his wife's position as governor, he took a leave from his job as production supervisor when his employer became involved in natural gas pipeline negotiations with his wife's administration. Seven months later, because the family needed more income, Todd returned to BP. In order to avoid potential conflict of interest, this time he accepted a non-management position as a production operator. He resigned from his job on September 18, 2009, with the stated reason of spending more time with his family.
He is also a commercial salmon fisherman at Bristol Bay on the Nushugak River. Financial statements filed in 2007 show that Palin earned $92,790 from BP and fishing.
Joy is jealous because she will never be beautiful and certainly never in the same category of beauty as Sarah Palin. So she makes up stuff. She just makes it up. She is a sad sad little woman. I feel sorry for her.
For eighteen years, he worked for BP in the North Slope oil fields of Alaska. In 2007, in order to avoid a conflict of interest relating to his wife's position as governor, he took a leave from his job as production supervisor when his employer became involved in natural gas pipeline negotiations with his wife's administration. Seven months later, because the family needed more income, Todd returned to BP. In order to avoid potential conflict of interest, this time he accepted a non-management position as a production operator. He resigned from his job on September 18, 2009, with the stated reason of spending more time with his family.
He is also a commercial salmon fisherman at Bristol Bay on the Nushugak River. Financial statements filed in 2007 show that Palin earned $92,790 from BP and fishing.
Joy is jealous because she will never be beautiful and certainly never in the same category of beauty as Sarah Palin. So she makes up stuff. She just makes it up. She is a sad sad little woman. I feel sorry for her.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Joy Behar and Sandra Bernhardt On Sarah Palin - Her Base Doesn't Even Read
If ever two more foul harpies existed on the face of the earth who got to "celebrity" status on absolutely no talent whatsoever, well, I just don't know any other worse than these two. I am not commenting on the two men. I don't know them or of them.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Jack Cafferty "Pelosi is a Horrible Woman."
moar funny pictures
Wow, what's up with Jack? This is the second video I have seen this week where he takes to task Obama and his administration. He must have missed all the articles widely circulated (at least in conservative circles) about how much Pelosi spends to fly home to California every weekend, via military transport. The numbers are pretty staggering by the way, but up until now, no one on the left seemed to care. Could it be that the left has finally awakened from their hibernation of denial to see what is going on. I would like to believe so, but I am not so sure. But Jack sure seems to have noticed. And he isn't afraid to tell anyone who will listen. Pelosi is a horrible woman. She has always been a horrible woman. She is the very embodiment of all that is wrong with politics and politicians and I am speaking of both sides, but she seems to be worse than most.
A Most Remarkable Story
I started to head this A Most Remarkable Young Man, but it isn't just this young man who is remarkable. It is his family, most especially his father, who has dedicated his life to seeing that his son lives to his full potential. I could not help but think that a great many would have chosen to abort this young man. Others would have put him away somewhere, in a home or in the dark. And yes, it still happens. God placed this child with the right family and they rose to the occasion with all of God's Glory. A Most Remarkable Story.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Martha Coakley Wrong on Terror
Martha Coakley Is Not Just Wrong on Terror War – She’s Dangerous
Tuesday, January 12, 2010, 6:22 AM
Jim Hoft
On Wednesday December 30 Jordanian doctor and Al-Qaeda blogger Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi killed 7 CIA officers in a suicide bomb attack at an outpost in southeastern Afghanistan. Before he murdered the Americans in Afghanistan he recorded a tape with the local Taliban leader. The Taliban released the tape after his death.
On Monday Senate Candidate Martha Coakley told Massachusetts voters that it was time to pull out of Afghanistan. Coakley said she was not sure there was a way to succeed.
“I think we have done what we are going to be able to do in Afghanistan. I think that we should plan an exit strategy. Yes. I’m not sure there is a way to succeed. If the goal was and the mission in Afghanistan was to go in because we believed that the Taliban was giving harbor to terrorists. We supported that. I supported that. They’re gone. They’re not there anymore.”
She’s not just wrong- She’s dangerous.
In his “martyrdom” tape Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi warned that the Al-Qaeda attacks would spread outside of the Pakistan-Afghanistan borders.
And Martha Coakley says, “I’m not sure there is a way to succeed.”
Meanwhile, Scott Brown, the Republican candidate running against Coakley, raised $1,000,000 in one day for his campaign. I Love It.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010, 6:22 AM
Jim Hoft
On Wednesday December 30 Jordanian doctor and Al-Qaeda blogger Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi killed 7 CIA officers in a suicide bomb attack at an outpost in southeastern Afghanistan. Before he murdered the Americans in Afghanistan he recorded a tape with the local Taliban leader. The Taliban released the tape after his death.
On Monday Senate Candidate Martha Coakley told Massachusetts voters that it was time to pull out of Afghanistan. Coakley said she was not sure there was a way to succeed.
“I think we have done what we are going to be able to do in Afghanistan. I think that we should plan an exit strategy. Yes. I’m not sure there is a way to succeed. If the goal was and the mission in Afghanistan was to go in because we believed that the Taliban was giving harbor to terrorists. We supported that. I supported that. They’re gone. They’re not there anymore.”
She’s not just wrong- She’s dangerous.
In his “martyrdom” tape Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi warned that the Al-Qaeda attacks would spread outside of the Pakistan-Afghanistan borders.
And Martha Coakley says, “I’m not sure there is a way to succeed.”
Meanwhile, Scott Brown, the Republican candidate running against Coakley, raised $1,000,000 in one day for his campaign. I Love It.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Following Cafferty, Jon Stewart also calls Obama a Liar!
Could it possibly be that some on the left really are paying attention? Is the halo tarnished, the bloom off the rose! Will all the references Obama made to being on CSPAN ever come to pass. TOO LATE! Everything he promised to talk about before he did it is already being done and still no appearance on CSPAN. Wasn't there a kid's story about this, something about a king and no clothes or something...I vaguely remember it.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Stealth Care Reform | ||||
| ||||
Colt McCoy gives God the Glory.
In a post game interview, quarterback for the Texas Longhorns gives an emotional interview. If you look up class act in the dictationary, this fine young man's picture is there. This isn't the first time McCoy publicly expressed his faith in God. He participated last year in the I Am Second movement, a ministry that is based on the principle of keeping Jesus the primary focus in people's lives, and reminding people that God still loves them even when they make mistakes.
"I want people to know that having a personal relationship with Christ is probably the biggest decision that any of us will make. It goes deeper than going to church, than just acting like a Christian," McCoy wrote for the group's Web site. "It goes with really deeply knowing and coming to know Jesus and having a personal relationship with Him."
McCoy holds the NCAA records for highest career completion percentage and most wins for a starting quarterback.
Read more at Newsbusters here
"I want people to know that having a personal relationship with Christ is probably the biggest decision that any of us will make. It goes deeper than going to church, than just acting like a Christian," McCoy wrote for the group's Web site. "It goes with really deeply knowing and coming to know Jesus and having a personal relationship with Him."
McCoy holds the NCAA records for highest career completion percentage and most wins for a starting quarterback.
Read more at Newsbusters here
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Hell Freezes Over, Jack Cafferty Calls Obama a Liar!
Before and after the election, this guy was so in the tank for Obama it was pathetic. Could it be that there actually are those on the left who see Obama for the Hollow Man he really is? It appears so. I would like to feel sorry for them but I am too busy being angry that they helped him and this congress and senate elected.
The Consequences of Obama, Terrorism is Back - Dick Morris
The Consequences of Obama: Terrorism is Back – by Dick Morris
Article may be viewed here
Rev. Jeremiah Wright said that the “chickens came home to roost” on 9-11. He was wrong. But they have now, indeed, come home to roost as we witness the results of the unilateral disarmament President Obama has practiced in the war on terror. Beset once more by terrorism on our soil and in our airspace, we find ourselves suddenly overmatched by those who the Bush Administration kept away from our shores for seven years.
This new onset of terrorism is not the product of any change in the international environment or some new “systemic” flaw in our intelligence operations. It is due to the policy of President Obama in letting down our guard and inhibiting those charged with our protection.
Under Obama, the hunters have become the hunted as America inverted her priorities. Those who have been working to keep us safe have, themselves, come under scrutiny for profiling, harsh interrogation techniques, and a failure to give terrorists constitutional rights they don’t have.
The result is predictable: Timidity and caution have become the order of the day in our intelligence community. In a world where hunch, guesswork, and a willingness to leap to conclusions by imagining the worst are vital to success, a cover your butt mentality has taken over. If you come to the wrong conclusion, if you profile without adequate justification, if you accuse incorrectly, you are finished. Your career and your pension will be gone. Guess right and you are accorded anonymity. Guess wrong and you’re through.
The failure of the intelligence operatives to pass along the information about the Ft. Hood shooter or the airline bomber did not flow from a blind spot or a lack of co-ordination, they stemmed from terrorism of a different sort — the terror of making a mistake and falling on the harsh mercies of Eric Holder.
Now Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutall sits, lawyered up, in a federal prison. His interrogation will proceed, if at all, under the watchful eye of his counsel. He will not finger other operatives nor warn us of other impending attacks. He will receive the full panoply of constitutional rights, none of which he is entitled to.
Barack Obama does not seem to understand that these terrorists come here to use our laws and our system, not to protect us, not even to shelter themselves, but to destroy us.
Abdulmutall should be interrogated by the military, without benefit of counsel. The evidence we obtain should not be admissible in a court of law nor used as the basis for his sentencing. But it must be used to ward off future threats and attacks.
But Obama is a true believer. His persistence in downgrading the war on terror to a criminal investigation will continue. And we will experience more and more attacks. Because pessimism is the bodyguard of liberalism, he will explain to us that the world has become more threatening and that he is doing all he can to keep us safe. But the truth will be that it will have been his policies and priorities that are leaving us exposed.
And the attacks will continue.
Article may be viewed here
Rev. Jeremiah Wright said that the “chickens came home to roost” on 9-11. He was wrong. But they have now, indeed, come home to roost as we witness the results of the unilateral disarmament President Obama has practiced in the war on terror. Beset once more by terrorism on our soil and in our airspace, we find ourselves suddenly overmatched by those who the Bush Administration kept away from our shores for seven years.
This new onset of terrorism is not the product of any change in the international environment or some new “systemic” flaw in our intelligence operations. It is due to the policy of President Obama in letting down our guard and inhibiting those charged with our protection.
Under Obama, the hunters have become the hunted as America inverted her priorities. Those who have been working to keep us safe have, themselves, come under scrutiny for profiling, harsh interrogation techniques, and a failure to give terrorists constitutional rights they don’t have.
The result is predictable: Timidity and caution have become the order of the day in our intelligence community. In a world where hunch, guesswork, and a willingness to leap to conclusions by imagining the worst are vital to success, a cover your butt mentality has taken over. If you come to the wrong conclusion, if you profile without adequate justification, if you accuse incorrectly, you are finished. Your career and your pension will be gone. Guess right and you are accorded anonymity. Guess wrong and you’re through.
The failure of the intelligence operatives to pass along the information about the Ft. Hood shooter or the airline bomber did not flow from a blind spot or a lack of co-ordination, they stemmed from terrorism of a different sort — the terror of making a mistake and falling on the harsh mercies of Eric Holder.
Now Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutall sits, lawyered up, in a federal prison. His interrogation will proceed, if at all, under the watchful eye of his counsel. He will not finger other operatives nor warn us of other impending attacks. He will receive the full panoply of constitutional rights, none of which he is entitled to.
Barack Obama does not seem to understand that these terrorists come here to use our laws and our system, not to protect us, not even to shelter themselves, but to destroy us.
Abdulmutall should be interrogated by the military, without benefit of counsel. The evidence we obtain should not be admissible in a court of law nor used as the basis for his sentencing. But it must be used to ward off future threats and attacks.
But Obama is a true believer. His persistence in downgrading the war on terror to a criminal investigation will continue. And we will experience more and more attacks. Because pessimism is the bodyguard of liberalism, he will explain to us that the world has become more threatening and that he is doing all he can to keep us safe. But the truth will be that it will have been his policies and priorities that are leaving us exposed.
And the attacks will continue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)