Recently, I was shocked to learn about how hundreds or perhaps thousands of Illinois homeowners are using a strategy called "strategic default" to walk away from their current mortgage obligations. Literally thousands of homeowners in Illinois and across the country find themselves "upside down" or ""underwater" regarding the homes they currently live in. The terms "upside down" and "underwater" refer to homeowners who owe more money on their homes than they are currently worth.
It is widely believed the Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac debacle has led to the current economic crisis and deep recession facing America today. However, no one can say Americans are not resourceful and, at times, not in good ways. In the case of "strategic default," which is also known as voluntary foreclosure, participating homeowners may not be ethical, but they have certainly found a way to beat the system. Read more...
The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology ("ACOG") is well-known in pro-life circles to be radically proabortion.
For instance, ACOG supports the most heinous of all abortion practices, partial-birth abortion. When in 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the partial-birth abortion ban of 2003, ACOG released an indignant statement, which read, in part:
"Today's decision ... is shameful and incomprehensible to those of us who have dedicated our lives to caring for women," said Douglas W. Laube, M.D., M.Ed., ACOG president. "It leaves no doubt that women's health in America is perceived as being of little consequence.
"... The Supreme Court's action today, though stunning, in many ways isn't surprising given the current culture in which scientific knowledge frequently takes a back seat to subjective opinion," he added.
How admirable of ACOG to stand on the principle of "scientific knowledge" in the face of "subjective opinion," which overwhelmingly thought sucking out the brains and collapsing the skulls of almost-delivered late-term babies was gross.
But as it turns out, ACOG is the grandest of frauds.
"We're a nation of laws, and a nation of immigrants..." ~ Barack Obama
Those words define clearly the fine line Congress will need to consider in any attempt to correct our nation's crisis concerning immigration. America is facing unprecedented confusion as to what should be done to correct our deteriorating situation. Our nation of laws and immigrants has become frustrated with unenforced law and inefficient bureaucracies.
We're in this situation because no lawmakers since the Reagan days have had the will or the fortitude to tackle the emotionally-charged and politically-potent topic of immigration.
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee is holding hearings on President Obama's nominee to the United States Supreme Court, current Solicitor General Elana Kagan.
She is a judicial activist, who agrees with former Justice Thurgood Marshall that the Constitution given to us by the Framers was "defective" and that it contained "outdated notions of liberty, justice and equality."
Her "judicial hero" is former Israeli justice Aharon Barak, who said a judge "may give a statute a new meaning...[t]he statute remains as it was, but its meaning changes, because the court has given it a new meaning that suits new social needs."
She is anti-military and pro-homosexual. While dean of the Harvard Law School, she kicked military recruiters off campus, in defiance of a federal law which had been upheld by the Supreme Court on a unanimous vote. She said she "abhorred" the military's ban on allowing open practicing homosexuals to serve, and called it a "moral injustice of the first order."
U.S. Senate hearings on President Barack Obama's choice of Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court are scheduled to begin next Monday. It is clear that Kagan is hostile towards traditional family values, the military and the original intent of the U.S. Constitution. As such, she should not be confirmed to sit on the nation's highest court.
Judge Robert Bork, William Saunders and Professor Gerard Bradley urged the U.S. Senate to reject her confirmation to the high court because of the radical political positions she has taken in her career and because of the people she has extolled as her heroes -- Aharon Barak, the retired president of the Supreme Court of Israel.
This week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report showing that over the past eight years, nearly $1 billion has been given to "family planning organizations" (read abortion providers).
Planned Parenthood Federation of America received $657.1 million in taxpayer dollars from Fiscal Year 2002 to Fiscal Year 2009. While Planned Parenthood says that none of the money it received has been used for abortion, the money still encourages abortion providers to continue their work killing the unborn. So far, over 30 Republican lawmakers are working to shut down this outrageous spending of taxpayer money to abortion providers. We'll keep you updated on this issue.
With the public focused on the calamity of the Gulf oil spill, another disaster that could affect millions of lives is in the making. The federal Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability is holding meetings on June 10 and June 11 to consider lifting the ban on gay blood. Cliff Kincaid, president of the public policy group, America's Survival, Inc. (ASI), is scheduled to testify in favor of the ban.
If the ban is lifted, Kincaid argues, the five million Americans a year who receive blood transfusions could be exposed to the AIDS virus or other infections in the diseased blood of sexually active homosexuals. Kincaid's testimony, available at www.usasurvival.org, consists of the expert views of Dale O'Leary, a writer who has followed the AIDS epidemic since the beginning and written extensively on the subject of sexually transmitted diseases.
While the banking and mortgage industries imploded, attorneys at the Securities and Exchanges commission, tasked with oversight, indulged themselves on the job with hours of pornography. While the BP oil rig off the coast of Louisiana was badly in need of inspection, the federal agency charged with doing that waived the scrutiny and engaged in illegal drugs, sex and bribery.
Our national debt is soaring, our borders are being invaded by illegals and intruders, the unemployment rate is climbing, home foreclosures are rising, our coastal shorelines are in peril with two wars waging, while our President has issued a proclamation demonstrating what really garners his attention: homosexual rights.
Burris' bill will result in the killing of unborn children on military bases and will turn our military hospitals around the whole world into abortion mills.
A U.S. Senate Committee has voted to authorize abortions to be performed at medical facilities on U.S. military bases. The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee voted 15-12 to allow abortions at both domestic and overseas American military facilities. U.S. Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) joined the Republicans who all voted against this legislation. Every other Democratic on the committee voted in favor of it.
The amendment was offered by Illinois' U.S. Senator Roland Burris (D) to the 2011 Defense Department appropriations bill.
Current federal law adopted in 1996 prohibits medical facilities operated by the Department of Defense from committing abortions except to save the life of the mother or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. The law also forbids the use of federal funds or Department of Defense medical personnel for abortions.
You probably haven't noticed it. It is subtle, yet powerful. It's a tool that changes the way Americans process the news they receive via television, print and radio. What am I talking about? The style book. Ever heard of it? Every newspaper and magazine has one; every journalist practically knows what it says by heart and, subsequently, it is akin to a politically correct language guide for the establishment press.
If you haven't heard of the style book before now, don't feel bad. I wasn't aware such a thing existed until a few years ago when I wrote a column about how the Chicago Tribune changed the word pro-life to anti-abortion every time a pro-life leader used the word in a published letter to the editor. I requested and received a quote from a Tribune editorial page editor who acknowledged the existence of this bible of political correctness.
Late Thursday night, federal lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives voted 234 to 194 to pass an amendment to a defense policy bill (H.R. 5136) which will repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the controversial policy barring open homosexual behavior in the military.
The Illinois Congressional Delegation voted 11-8 in favor of this bill. Below is a Roll Call, listing how Illinois' House Congressional members voted on this amendment to H.R. 5136. Voting to support this bill were 229 Democrats and 5 Republicans -- including Illinois' U.S. Rep. Judy Biggert. Voting against the bill were 168 Republicans and 26 Democrats -- including Illinois' U.S. Reps. Dan Lipinski and Jerry Costello.
The U.S. Constitution has become a popular document to read thanks in part to the rise of the Tea Party movement. The pocket edition, which also includes the Declaration of Independence, shot up to 10th in March among top sellers at the Government Printing Office. Public sales of the pocket edition have climbed to over 8,700 since September 2009.
"We have experienced a large increase in constituent requests for the Pocket Constitution," House Administration Committee Chairman Robert Brady, D-Pa., wrote in a recent letter to his colleagues.
"In the last year or so, the Constitution has become a much more favorite article of discussion," said Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., who founded the Congressional Constitution Caucus in 2005.
5/20/2010 6:18:00 PM By J. Matt Barber
-WorldNetDaily
I don't see how liberal media-types can write, what with those uncalloused, milky-soft little digits all bundled in bulky kid gloves and all. Oh, when the target of their "reporting" is a conservative politico, or even Tea Party Joe, off come the gloves. But when it's one of their own, when circumstances require that a fellow liberal undergo a modicum of journalistic scrutiny, it's simpatico most sublime. Out with the inquiry; in with the Huggies and tushie powder.
Media, here's your question: "Solicitor Kagan, do you identify as a lesbian?" Ms. Kagan, your answer is simpler still: "Yes" or "no."
One of the nation's leading pro-life organizations is voicing strong opposition to President Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court. The President selected Kagan to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
Americans United for Life says that Kagan, who currently serves as U.S. Solicitor General, is a "radical abortion rights activist." The group is urging the U.S. Senate to refuse to confirm Kagan for the High Court.
"President Obama has chosen another activist who seeks to reshape the traditional understanding of the Constitution to suit her personal views," says Charmaine Yoest, President of AUL. "Kagan has been open in her admiration of activist judges who rewrite the law to suit themselves and has advocated that judges 'advance' social policy rather than faithfully applying the law."
President Barack Obama has nominated current Solicitor General, Elena Kagan, former Harvard Law School dean, to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by Justice John Paul Stevens. Court watchers suggest Obama's primary reason for choosing Kagan is the belief that she's has the intellectual gravitas to serve as a counterweight to Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia. Kagan is unique since she has never served as a judge, and since she's only 50 Kagan expected to serve for many years.
Also, the ObamaCare "age 26" rule goes into effect this week, allowing young adults up to age 26 to stay on their parent's health insurance policy. The federal Health and Human Services department is expected to publish updates rules governing the process, though it should be noted that these "children" in most cases won't be able to get on their parent's plan until 2014 if they had an opportunity for coverage from their employer. More important, conservatives have pointed out that many young adults simply do not want health insurance, which may prove troublesome when the individual mandate is fully implemented.
Fourteen national pro-decency organizations urged President Barack Obama to nominate a replacement for retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens "who will support the right of the government to maintain a decent society and to protect children from indecent and other media content that is harmful to them."
In a letter to the president, the group said, "There are currently four cases pending in the lower federal courts in which the major broadcast TV networks are challenging FCC indecency rulings and the broadcast indecency law itself. What the networks ultimately want is an unrestricted 'right' to curse as much as they want and to depict as much nudity and sex as they want (presumably, short of obscenity), regardless of the impact of this programming on children, on unwilling adults who are assaulted by it in the privacy of their homes, and on the moral fabric of society."
Washington, D.C. - Phyllis Schlafly, president and founder of the conservative grassroots public policy organization Eagle Forum, made the following remarks to address why a national effort for a second constitutional convention (Con Con) is the wrong way to try to fight President Obama's new government-run health care law:
"There has been some discussion about the most effective strategy to fight the new government-run Obamacare law, and I agree that it must be stopped, but spearheading a national effort for a second constitutional convention is not the way to go."
"A new Con Con would be extremely risky. It would be impossible to restrict the agenda to only one issue. There are no rules in the Constitution or in any law to limit a Con Con's purpose, procedures, agenda or election of delegates."
Georgetown University lesbian law professor Chai Feldblum believes that when same-sex is marriage is legalized, which she argues is both necessary and inevitable, conservative people of faith will lose religious rights. She is also one of the authors of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would provide special protections for those who choose to base their identity on their same-sex attraction or their disordered desire to do the impossible: change their sex.
And this is the same Chai Feldblum whom President Obama in yet another arrogant move has appointed to serve on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). He used the legal but divisive mechanism of recess appointments, which allow him to appoint people to serve in important government roles without being confirmed by the Senate. According to the homosexual newspaper, Windy City Times, "Feldblum, as part of the commission, will have considerable influence in the writing of federal regulations to enforce" the deeply troubling ENDA if it's passed.
Like many Americans across the nation, I watched intensely as Congress debated and ultimately passed the onerous health care "reform" bill Sunday evening. One main point of contention is the idea -- affirmed by some radically "progressive" lawmakers -- that health care is a "right." This is nothing short of socialistic propaganda. The implicit claim in the assertion that health care is a "right" is that it is a constitutionally protected right. All experts agree that health care is neither a constitutional nor a legal right. In America we understand that our rights to the free exercise of religion, to speak freely, to bear arms and to be secure from unwarranted search and seizure come from God.
To see the difference in government-mandated health care and real rights, look at how they are exercised. Historically, American citizens have been free to exercise their real, constitutionally protected rights -- or not -- as they see fit. The government does not compel citizens to attend church in the name of religious freedom. The government does not compel citizens to own a gun in the name of the Second Amendment. And the government does not force citizens to engage in the political process in the name of free speech. In contrast, our radically "progressive" friends are eager to compel every American using the heavy hand of government to exercise their so-called right to health care. Should we celebrate the passage of a bill that in the service of non-existent rights actually diminishes our liberty?
One of the most conservative members of the United States Congress has filed a bill to revoke what he is calling "Obamacare."
Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa) knows it will be a long and hard fight to repeal the newly enacted $938-billion healthcare overhaul pushed through Sunday by Democrats without a single Republican vote. The battle on the judicial front has already begun, with several lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the far-reaching measure. Meanwhile, King has launched another front.
Late Sunday night, federal lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives voted 219-212 to pass a bill (H.R. 3590) which will cost taxpayers $940 billion, impose new taxes and require every citizen to purchase health insurance or face a $695 annual fine. The bill passed without a single "Yea" vote from Republican lawmakers. Thirty-four Democrats join the Republicans in voting "Nay" -- including Illinois' U.S. Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D-Chicago). President Barack Obama is expected to sign this bill into law this week.
IFI thanks the 8 Illinois members of the House who voted against the government takeover of healthcare.
U.S. Representatives in Illinois need to hear from you! The current Democratic strategy on healthcare is to force the U.S. House of Representatives to pass the U.S. Senate bill as it is, with no changes. The U.S. House is scheduled to vote on this version of the bill on Thursday, March 18. This bill includes abortion funding and must not pass.
Take ACTION: Send an email or a fax to your U.S. Representative now by clicking HERE. Ask him or her to vote against the healthcare "reform" bill! Contact your U.S. Representative and tell him/her you oppose government run healthcare! Tell them you will be watching how they vote. Furthermore, tell them that you oppose any healthcare bill that would use your tax dollars to pay for abortions. Healthcare should be about saving lives, not destroying them.
A coalition of conservative pro-family and national defense organizations is calling on Congress to ask one question of those pushing for repeal of the ban on homosexual military service: How would doing so improve military readiness?
During his State of the Union address last month, President Obama urged Congress to rescind the 1993 law known as Section 654, Title 10, which says homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military. "...I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are," the President stated.
In the days following, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee: "We have received our orders from the Commander-In-Chief and are moving out accordingly."
Take ACTION: Click HERE to send an email to Congress. Ask them to stop this social experimentation on our military!
For years, Don't Ask, Don't Tell has been a part of military guidelines, requiring the dismissal of any open homosexuals serving in the military. Repealing the policy would likely decrease morale & cohesiveness at a crucial time for our military serving at home & overseas.
In December of 1992, even before he began his first term as President, Bill Clinton announced a controversial policy related to the service of homosexuals in the military called, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT). At the time, the Clinton administration was seriously lobbying Congress to change federal law which prevented openly homosexual individuals from serving in the United States Armed Forces.
Clinton's plan was met by furious criticism from political conservatives as well as military members who said such tampering with federal law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) would negatively impact the nation's ability to defend itself. Clinton moderated and subsequently introduced the aforementioned "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy which is still in force today.
On January 27th, 2010, during his first State of the Union address, President Barack Obama said he would seek to overturn DADT in order to allow homosexual men and women to openly serve in the U.S. military. By the way, Obama pledged to do just this during his presidential campaign.
The premise behind DADT is simple, but it has resulted in more confusion, according to many military personnel. Under DADT, openly homosexual individuals are still prohibited from serving in the armed forces. But recruiters and officers are instructed not to ask questions regarding an individual's sexual orientation and members of the military are supposed to keep their personal sexual habits private.
A group of pastors and Christian activists in Michigan filed a civil rights lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder over the 2009 "Hate Crimes" law alleging that it violates their civil rights. The complaint filed by the Thomas Moore Law Center states that Christians could now become the target of federal investigations, grand juries and even criminal charges for nothing more than opposing the political agenda of homosexual activists who want to block any criticism of their choices or actions.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include individuals who already have faced accusations by homosexual advocates that they bear responsibility for the actions of others for no other reason than their agreement with a biblical view of homosexuality.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that she lacks the votes to quickly move the Senate's sweeping health overhaul bill through the House, a potentially devastating blow to President Barack Obama's signature issue.
Pelosi, D-Calif., made the comment to reporters after House Democrats held a closed-door meeting at which participants vented frustration with the Senate's massive version of the legislation.
Her concession meant there was little hope for a White House-backed plan to quickly push the Senate-approved health bill through the House, followed by a separate measure making changes sought by House members, such as easing the Senate's tax on higher-cost health plans. Such an approach would be "problematic," she said.
U.S. Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) and our own U.S. Senator Dick Durbin forced a vote on their version of a nationalized healthcare plan just before Christmas. Since the U.S. House has already passed a healthcare "reform" bill, the next step is to go to a conference committee to address the differences in the bills, and then the conference bill requires another vote in the House and Senate.
However, key Democrats are pushing to hammer out a compromise behind closed doors, much like the way they crafted the legislation in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. Earlier this week, C-SPAN encouraged President Obama to keep his word when he, as a presidential nominee, repeatedly promised to broadcast such important meetings and to televise the healthcare discussions currently taking place. As of yet, the discussions WILL NOT be televised -- and the American public remains shut out.
Take ACTION: We still have a chance to make a difference to stop this bad bill. Click HERE to contact your U.S. Representative now to ask him/her to stand strong against so-called healthcare "reform" that funds abortions, unfairly penalizes marriage, gives no protection for medical professionals' conscience rights, and stages a government takeover of 1/6 of the U.S. economy. Do it now, do it often, and get your friends and family involved!
President Barack Obama made history on New Year's Eve when he appointed the former Mitchell Simpson, who now identifies himself as a female named Amanda, to a position as a senior adviser in the Commerce Department.
Simpson apparently is the first transgendered individual to become a presidential appointee to the federal government, and Simpson was quoted as saying that he hopes "I will soon be one of hundreds." Gay activists are celebrating his appointment as a milestone in their crusade for special rights, recognition and approval for homosexual, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered behavior.
According to WorldNetDaily, Simpson, a former test pilot and father of a 15-year-old son, has spent $70,000 on a total of six sex-change operations and now presents himself as a woman.
Amanda Simpson, who has served on NCTE's Board of Directors for the past 3 years, has been appointed by the Obama Administration as a Senior Technical Advisor to the Department of Commerce. She'll be working in the Bureau of Industry and Security.
"I'm truly honored to have received this appointment and am eager and excited about this opportunity that is before me. And at the same time, as one of the first transgender presidential appointees to the federal government, I hope that I will soon be one of hundreds, and that this appointment opens future opportunities for many others."
Simpson brings considerable professional credentials to her new job. For thirty years, she has worked in the aerospace and defense industry, most recently serving as Deputy Director in Advanced Technology Development at Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, Arizona. She holds degrees in physics, engineering, and business administration along with an extensive flight background. She is a certified flight instructor and test pilot with 20 years of experience.
We've been hearing a great deal about federal health care "reform" over the last few months. Certainly one of the most troubling parts of this big-government bill is that the U.S. Senate version would allow the use of federal taxpayer dollars to subsidize abortions.
But, in addition to containing many economically damaging provisions, to say nothing of the moral outrage of federally funding abortions (and possibly sex change operations), this health care "reform" push by the liberal leaders in Congress may very well be unconstitutional.
The Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank, recently published an article drawing attention to a few major constitutional issues with this legislation. The crux of the problem is the bill's "individual mandate," not the notorious "public option."
Late last week, Illinois' senior U.S. Senator Dick Durbin and Senate Majority Whip for the Democrats admitted that he is "in the dark" about the national health care "reform" bill.
During debate on this issue, U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) asked Durbin, "Should we not at least be informed as to what the proposal is that the Senate Majority Leader is going to propose to the entire Senate?"
Durbin's answer: "I would say to the senator from Arizona that I am in the dark almost as much as he is, and I am in the leadership." [Emhasis added]
A U.S. Senate committee recently approved the nomination of openly gay law professor Chai Feldblum to serve as a member of the US EEOC.
Feldblum was the primary author of the Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would prohibit both public and private employers from making employment decisions based on an employee's actual or "perceived" sexual behavior, ambiguously defined by ENDA as "sexual orientation".
Click HERE to watch some video clips of Ms. Feldblum at a 2008 panel discussion at FRC.
Georgetown University lesbian law professor Chai Feldblum believes that when same-sex is marriage is legalized, which she argues is both necessary and inevitable, conservative people of faith will lose religious rights. This is the same Chai Feldblum who has been nominated to serve on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
Feldblum, speaking at a Becket Fund Symposium in December 2005 stated the following:
[L]et us postulate, for the moment, that in some number of years an overwhelming majority of jurisdictions in this country will have changed their laws so that LGBT people will have full equality in society, including access to civil marriage. Or, indeed, let us postulate that the entire country is governed--as a matter of federal statutory and constitutional law--on the basis of full equality for LGBT people....
Assume for the moment that these beliefs ultimately translate into the passage of laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and that provide same-sex couples the same societal supports currently available to opposite-sex couples, including access to civil marriage....[G]ranting this justified liberty and equality to gay people will likely put a burden on those religious people who believe acting on one's same-sex sexual orientation is a sin and who may feel they are aiding and abetting sin if they rent an apartment to a gay couple, allow a gay couple to eat at their restaurant, or provide health benefits to a same-sex spouse....
Let me be very clear...in almost all the situations...I believe the burden on religious people that will be caused by granting gay people full equality will be justified....
That is because I believe granting liberty to gay people advances a compelling government interest, that such an interest cannot be adequately advanced if "pockets of resistance" to a societal statement of equality are permitted to flourish, and hence that a law that permits no individual exceptions based on religious beliefs will be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal of liberty for gay people...
Not surprisingly, following her nomination to the EEOC, Feldblum requested that her name be removed from the subversive document she signed in 2006 entitled "Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families and Relationships," which begins with this troubling statement:
In a late night session this past Saturday, the U.S. House passed a Democratic-written health care bill by a narrow vote of 220-215. The overall vote broke mostly along political party lines. It consisted of 219 Democrats, and one new Louisiana Republican in a heavily Democrat district in New Orleans voting for U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's measure. Those voting against the massive bill consisted of 176 Republicans and 39 Democrats.
This battle is far from over, and there is some good news. In order to get the legislation through on a narrow vote, an amendment had to be adopted which prevents the use of taxpayer funds for abortion. (Read more HERE.)
The 1,900+ page health care "reform" legislation containing nearly 730 billion dollars in tax increases and over 100 new federal bureaucracies will now go to the US Senate where our U.S. Senators -- including Dick Durbin and Roland Burris will debate and vote on the issue.
The 16,000-member Christian Medical Association, the nation's largest faith-based association of physicians, today said that the 2,000- page healthcare overhaul bill (HR 3962) introduced in the House of Representatives last week far exceeds the need for targeted reforms, instead injecting massive government intervention that threatens the patient-physician relationship.
CMA CEO Dr. David Stevens said, "This legislation is an overdose. With this massive legislation, we are getting much more than is actually needed to fix our healthcare system. What we need is a targeted reformation of areas needing reform, but this legislation is an attempt to totally transform our healthcare system into a government-run system that dictates what healthcare treatment each patient will receive.
"The legislation introduced last week is coming to a vote way too fast. We have one chance to get this right, and leaders in Congress are trying to push a bill through in a few days that will impact one-sixth of our economy. It is bitter medicine that most people don't want, and taking it fast will not change that.
President Barack Obama signed a Defense Authorization bill earlier this week which includes a broad expansion of hate crimes legislation that has many free speech and religious liberty advocates worried for a variety of reasons.
Craig Parshall, chief legal counsel for National Religious Broadcasters (NRB), discounts a statement in the legislation allegedly protecting religious speech, pointing out that such laws in other countries have been used to silence people of faith. He believes the law approved by Congress is potentially dangerous as it relates to comments made about homosexuality or another religion. "Under the criminal law of incitement, if something is said in a broadcast that another person uses as a motivation to go out and commit an act of what they call 'bodily injury' in the statute, then a broadcaster could be held criminally liable," he explains.
Attacks on people based on their sexual orientation will join the list of federal hate crimes in an expansion of the law Congress approved Thursday and sent to President Barack Obama.
At the urging of Republicans, the bill was changed to assure that a religious leader or any other person cannot be prosecuted on the basis of his or her speech, beliefs, or association. But South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint worried that it would still "serve as a warning to people not to speak out too loudly about their religious views."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, called the measure "part of a radical social agenda that could ultimately silence Christians and use the force of government to marginalize anyone whose faith is at odds with homosexuality."
On Thursday, U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Roland Buirris voted for hate crimes legislation as attached to H.R. 2647, the Defense Authorization Bill. The legislation has already been approved by the U.S. House, so the bill now goes to President Barack Obama. The President is widely expected to sign the legislation.
Hate crimes laws and eventually hate speech laws have been passed in other countries and the results have been dire. A Swedish pastor was sentenced to one month in jail for preaching about homosexuality from his pulpit. At least one Canadian bishop and a Canadian priest have been investigated by the Canadian government for alleged human rights violations for speaking a Biblical view of homosexuality.
There is every reason to expect that expansion of current hate crimes laws at national and state levels would pave the way to similar results in the United States.
Remember when health-care reform was supposed to make life better for the middle class? That dream began to unravel this past summer when Congress proposed a bill that failed to include any competition-based reforms that would actually bend the curve of health-care costs. It fell apart completely when Democrats began papering over the gaping holes their plan would rip in the federal budget.
As it now stands, the plan proposed by Democrats and the Obama administration would not only fail to reduce the cost burden on middle-class families, it would make that burden significantly worse.
Consider the bill put forward by the Senate Finance Committee. From a budgetary perspective, it is straightforward. The bill creates a new health entitlement program that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates will grow over the longer term at a rate of 8% annually, which is much faster than the growth rate of the economy or tax revenues. This is the same growth rate as the House bill that Sen. Kent Conrad (D., N.D.) deep-sixed by asking the CBO to tell the truth about its impact on health-care costs.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate Finance Committee voted to approve the suggested healthcare "compromise" from U.S. Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), which, as it stands, would not immediately create a public option (government-run system), but would force most Americans to purchase health insurance.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has said that proposed plans are likely to increase healthcare costs, and that those costs would be passed to consumers, drastically raising the cost of healthcare for individuals and their families. The CBO estimated the cost of the bill to be an additional $829 billion, though the Senate Budget Committee estimated the cost to be closer to $1.8 trillion.
In yet another dramatic show of force, Congress voted 281-146 (mostly along party lines) to pass an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill. Fifteen Democrats and 131 Republicans took a very difficult, but principled, stand against the $680 Billion defense measure. Was their opposition because of the war or because of the Administration's foreign policy? No. They opposed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's effort to normalize homosexuality by expanding the "hate crimes" definition to include special protections based on their sexual preference, their gender preference or a disability.
Of Illinois' 19 U.S. Representatives, only 6 voted against 'THOUGHT CRIMES.' Thrirteen Illinois Congressmen joined forces with House activists to advance this unconventional policy into mainstream America. Republicans Mark Kirk and Judy Biggert joined Illinois Democrats who all voted for this bill. We've also indicated in the list below, the Congressmen who co-sponsored this bill.
Bishop E.W. Jackson Sr., Founder and President of STAND - Staying True to America's National Destiny, formed to call America back to its Judeo-Christian values, has sent a letter to President Obama demanding the firing of Kevin Jennings, head of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. Jennings is founder of the Gay Lesbian & Straight Education Network ("GLSEN"), and - according to Bishop Jackson - is a "radical homosexual activist." The letter is posted on the STAND website blog.
The basis of the demand that Mr. Jennings be fired is his admitted involvement in facilitating the relationship of a 15 year old boy ("Brewster") with an adult homosexual male he met at a bus stop. Kevin Jennings admitted to instructing the student as follows:
"I said, 'What were you doing in Boston on a school night, Brewster?' He got very quiet, and he finally looked at me and said, 'Well I met someone in the bus station bathroom and I went home with him.' I looked at Brewster and said, 'You know, I hope you knew to use a condom.'"
Yesterday the Senate Financial Services Committee rejected Senator Orrin Hatch's amendment to keep abortion out of Senator Max Baucus's "America's Health Future Act of 2009." The Committee also rejected Senator Hatch's amendment to codify current conscience protections in the Baucus health bill.
The Baucus legislation explicitly includes elective abortion and would subsidize health plans that cover all elective abortions. It would also undermine current conscience protections by not protecting health plans from being forced to cover elective abortions.
Responding, Tony Perkins said:
"By defeating Senator Orin Hatch's amendment on abortion funding we once again see Democrat leaders determined to create massive new government subsidies for plans that include abortion on demand. Without the Hatch amendment, the Baucus bill creates a back-door way around the Hyde Amendment by subsidizing plans that cover abortion. Moreover, by rejecting Senator Hatch's conscience protection amendment, the Baucus bill would undermine current protections in the annual Hyde/Weldon appropriations provision that provide protections for health plans that refuse to cover abortion.
The issue of President Barack Obama's proposal that would reform America's health care system has certainly received a great deal of attention. However, sometimes, it's what the liberal press doesn't reveal that is most telling.
When Obama recently addressed a joint session of Congress, he said illegal immigrants would not be covered under any health care plan he would sign into law. If we split hairs, the President's statement was accurate. It would be political suicide for both Democrats and Republicans to sign any bill that would provide taxpayer funds for those who are in America unlawfully. Well, technically, the language in one of the health care reform proposals tries to have it both ways.
U.S. Representative Jarrold Nader (D-NY) introduced a bill (H.R. 3567) to Congress that would repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The federal DOMA is the only thing that prevents homosexual "marriage" from becoming legal across the country. This bill would repeal DOMA in its entirety. It would force Illinois to recognize same-sex couples, married in another state, just like a marriage between husband and wife.
Signing on as co-sponsors for this bill are four U.S. Congressmen from Illinois. They are Luis Gutierrez (D-Chicago), Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Chicago), Mike Quigley (D-Oak Park), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Chicago).
Below you will find their email and phone number. Please email and call their office telling them: "As a Illinois citizen, I ask that you remove your name from the list of co-sponsors that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act."
The president of a Southern Baptist seminary says every Christian should be concerned about the proposed healthcare reform being pushed by the current presidential administration.
Dr. Albert Mohler is president of the Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. He says while there is no doubt that there is a need for healthcare reform, Christians must closely examine the current package proposed by President Barack Obama's administration.
He says there are deeper issues than the economics of the package.
"When you're talking about medicine, talking about health, you're talking about human dignity; you can't talk about anything of importance with medicine without getting to the most basic questions of human rights and human dignity," Mohler contends. "We as Christians have to come to a controversy like this, a big legislative debate, and try to think seriously and intelligently about the kind of concerns that really ought to frame the debate for us."
Homosexual activists are again pushing radical legislation known as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) -- H.R. 2981 & S. 1584. It has already been introduced in both the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate and is currently in committee. President Barack Obama is on record supporting ENDA.
Take ACTION: Please click HERE to contact your Congressman and ask him/her to vote NO on ENDA. You can also call your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators at (202) 225-3121 and provide your zip code to be connected to your House member's office.
Co-sponsors from Illinois are U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D), Roland Burris (D) and U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-10th).
Illinois Family Institute joins the Family Research Council and the American Family Business Foundation in releasing a new report analyzing the effects of the estate tax ("death tax") on jobs, government revenues, and economic growth.
The report, "Repealing Death Tax Will Create Jobs and Boost Economy," combines two recent analyses of the death tax by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former Congressional Budget Office director, and Stephen J. Entin, president and executive director of the Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation (IRET).
Considering that Congress will have to act on the estate tax this fall, given its scheduled elimination in 2010 and reversion to the high tax rate and low exemption of 2001 in 2011, this report detailing the economic effects of the estate tax is critical. Among its findings:
This is worth every MINUTE (only 4) to watch this! U.S. Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI) hits it out of the ballpark while addressing the other members of Congress. Video was taken from the floor of our national legislature...
Take ACTION:Click HERE send an email or a fax to President Obama, Senators Durbin and Burris and your U.S. Representative. Ask them to vote against government healthcare "reform." Say 'NO' to socialized medicine.
Pro-life leaders from all across America are uniting to defeat the dangerous federal government healthcare takeover. The bill not only encourages euthanasia, it will provide for abortion funding. A new web site, www.StoptheAbortionMandate.com, produced a two- minute video featuring "the largest pro-life coalition ever assembled to fight against the abortion mandate in the current nationalized health care legislation."
In Illinois, IFI has worked with other pro-life groups in the fight against state-mandated euthanasia and abortion funding. Now, the federal government may obviate are state rights and impose these deplorable practices on all citizens. We must stand up for the sanctity of life, the right of conscience and the frivolous use of taxpayer's money and before it's too late.
The Obama administration is sending mixed messages on his health care "reform" proposal. Over the weekend, the administration seemed willing to back off its stance on a single-payer (government-run) healthcare system, though recent comments from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius affirm the "public option" plan.
Even if the administration does back off of the public option healthcare plan, we must remain vigilant to make sure that any proposed changes do not put a price tag on our freedoms. We cannot afford to lessen the pressure on our elected officials. If you haven't already contacted your Representative or Senator, call now!
Take ACTION:Click HERE to contact your U.S. Representative, our Illinois U.S. Senators now. Please remember be respectful and polite in telling them to vote against expanding government control into our health care. Don't forget to ask for details on upcoming town-hall meetings and to remind them of your stance against freedom-stealing healthcare "reform."
While the Department of Justice (DOJ) defends the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in another case, President Barack Obama's administration filed a legal challenge to DOMA on Monday, August 17, claiming the federal statute is, get this, discriminatory. Yes, you read that right, natural marriage -- which celebrates the diversity of a man and a woman, and unites them -- discriminates.
DOMA protects the federal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman (for purposes of the tax code, federal benefits, etc.), and protects states from being forced to recognize same-sex "marriages" from other states. The president's revelation comes on the heels of the Human Rights Campaign's (HRC) bold announcement that they're lobbying U.S. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) to head a legislative effort to overturn DOMA.
When asked by Senator Orin Hatch (R-UT) whether President Obama's proposed socialized healthcare plan will mandate taxpayer funded abortion, Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) admitted that it will require "any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate." It now appears that the plan's "medically appropriate" umbrella is far more expansive than most Americans could have imagined.
In addition to abortion on demand, the weight of the evidence indicates that cosmetic "gender reassignment" surgeries for both U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants who suffer from APA recognized "Gender Identity Disorder" (GID) may also be provided - free of charge - courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. The current price tag for such a procedure can exceed $50,000.
In Washington, it seems history always repeats itself. That's what's happening now with health-care reform. This is an unfortunate turn of events for Americans who are legitimately concerned about the skyrocketing cost of a basic human need.
In 1993 and 1994, Hillary Clinton's health-care reform proposal failed because it was concocted in secret without the guiding hand of public consensus-building, and because it was a philosophical over-reach. Today President Barack Obama is repeating these mistakes.
The reason is plain: The left in Washington has concluded that honesty will not yield its desired policy result. So it resorts to a fundamentally dishonest approach to reform. I say this because the marketing of the Democrats' plans as presented in the House of Representatives and endorsed heartily by President Obama rests on three falsehoods.
All violent crimes are "hate crimes" and should be punished to the full extent of the law. Creating special classes and special penalties is unnecessary.
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) used deceptive tactics to push the so-called Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act through the US Senate late last week.
The cloture vote passed 63-28.
U.S. Senators from Illinois, Dick Durbin and Roland Burris both voted for the amendment.
Every Democrat voted for the amendment, except U.S. Senators Robert Byrd (WV) and Ted Kennedy (MA), who were not present.
Click HERE to see how all of the U.S. Senators voted.
7/16/2009 4:52:00 PM By Warren Cole Smith, Rusty Leonard
-WORLD Magazine
President Obama says he's looking for creative, "outside-the-box" thinking on health care. But the reform plans that have the greatest likelihood of passing put at risk a Christian alternative to insurance that is now being used by more than 100,000 people in the United States.
James Lansberry is vice president of Samaritan Ministries, the largest of the "health care sharing ministries" whose members pay for each other's health care costs. His organization's members pay for about $3 million in expenses a month. Payments vary, but a three- (or more) member family pays $285 per month directly to another family with a current need. Samaritan Ministries keeps track of who's paying and who needs to be paid, and the ministry receives $170 per year from each family for serving as the clearinghouse.
Requiring employers to provide health insurance for their employees will hurt small businesses, says James Lansberry, vice president of Samaritan Ministries International.
Several health care proposals being considered in Congress include such a mandate. But, Lansberry says, forcing businesses to provide health insurance will have a negative effect on the economy.
"An employer mandate will mean jobs lost, and those jobs will be lost in small, local businesses that we need to see thrive," Lansberry says. "Small businesses are the strength of our economy, especially in the local area. About half of all workers, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce, are employed by small businesses. And a mandate for employers means more cost of doing business, which hurts the smallest members of the business community the most.
"If Congress is serious about preventing unemployment rates from rising higher, it needs to pay careful attention to the crippling costs of adding regulations like an employer mandate and how that will affect small businesses."
7/15/2009 5:18:00 PM By Jim Brown and Jody Brown
-OneNewsNow
A healthcare expert is skeptical of hospitals' claims that they are going to save the government billions of dollars over the next ten years.
Vice President Joe Biden announced Wednesday that hospital executives have agreed give up $155 billion in future Medicare and Medicaid payments to help defray the cost of President Obama's government-run healthcare plan. The White House also says healthcare providers have promised $2 trillion in savings over the next decade.
James Lansberry is vice president of Samaritan Ministries International. Lansberry, a supporter of patient-centered healthcare reform, says the Obama administration is going to be working overtime to get some of the stakeholders back to the table.
He points out that while the American Hospital Association has not yet weighed in "vehemently" against the new plan, the American Medical Association has. "And the insurance companies are talking about...being against the new government option that's coming out," he adds.
The state of Massachusetts is challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the law that defines marriage as a union of one man and one woman and protects individual states from the marriage laws of other states. The lawsuit, being championed by Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, says that Congress intruded into a matter that should have been left to individual states.
"Unsatisfied with having unleashed marriage redefinition on an unwilling state population by judicial fiat and legislative inaction; unsatisfied with exporting same-sex "marriage" to other states with the repeal of the 1913 law; our ever-wise state government has decided to attack the one federal law protecting the definition of marriage for the United States of America," said Massachusetts Family Institute President Kris Mineau. "Martha Coakley has overstepped her bounds. She is beholden to the homosexual special interest groups, who have steadfastly supported her political career."
During a special event hosted at the White House last week to celebrate the launch of the gay-rights movement, President Barack Obama announced his plans to urge Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The Act legislatively defines marriage as the union of a man and woman.
The President's call to repeal DOMA isn't a surprise, as he promised to do so on the campaign trail. Nevertheless, it very disturbing to learn that he plans to follow through with that campaign promise. DOMA received strong bi-partisan support and was signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 by a vote of 342-67 in the U.S. House and by a vote of 85-14 in the U.S. Senate.
While the Senate hammers through two unpopular health care bills, House leaders jumped into the fray on Friday with their own version of "reform." At 852 pages, this draft is the longest and most radical yet. Unlike Sen. Ted Kennedy's (D-Mass.) plan, this bill--the brainchild of Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.), Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.)--includes almost everything on President Obama's wish list.
For the first time in either chamber, pro-lifers are faced with the "family planning" nightmare FRC has been warning about: government funding for abortionists. For weeks, key players in the abortion movement have been working with the Obama administration to guarantee that they would profit from any health care overhaul. That lobbying could pay off--quite literally--in the House. The Miller-Waxman-Rangel bill is a dream come true for groups like Planned Parenthood. Under this proposal, funding for "family planning" would be mandatory, meaning that organizations like Planned Parenthood (which already counts on taxpayers for a third of its budget) would stand to make even more under the guise of "reform." Read more...
A conservative Christian pastor and political activist is welcoming the fight that's likely to ensue if Senate Democrats attempt to pass hate-crimes legislation as an amendment to another bill this summer.
The Human Rights Campaign tells the Washington Blade that Democratic leaders in the Senate want to bypass the committee process and offer the hate-crimes bill as an amendment rather than as a stand-alone measure. In 2007, Senate Democrats unsuccessfully attempted to attach a hate-crimes provision to the defense authorization bill.
Dr. Rick Scarborough, founder and president of Vision America, says because conservative activists are united and mobilized against the hate-crimes measure, he hopes Democrats will try to attach it to a larger bill before the August recess.
Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action issued the following statement last week on news that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the military's prohibition against homosexual conduct within the ranks of the armed forces. The high court refused an appeal from former Army Captain James Pietrangelo II, who was discharged after his superiors learned that he self-identified as "gay":
"This is a military victory of a different sort," said Barber. "Today our armed forces triumphed over the enemy of moral relativism; an enemy that seeks to replace military wisdom with San Francisco vice. This is a victory for our fighting young men and women and for the nation.
"The military is no place for such radical social experimentation; especially during a time of war. As polls continue to prove, the vast majority of military leaders and personnel agree. It has long been established that to enlist those who define themselves as 'gay' or 'lesbian' would both disrupt unit cohesion and harm troop morale.
Under the leadership of Chairman Kevin Martin, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took an unprecedented stand for families by vigorously enforcing existing broadcast decency laws.
Three seats on the five-member commission are soon to be filled: The President's pick for Chairman, Julius Genachowski -- about whom we know very little, especially regarding his intent to enforce decency standards -- will almost certainly be confirmed by the Senate before the August recess. Senate Republicans will decide who will fill the remaining two seats.
Take ACTION: 1.) Download this half-sheet flyer and distribute it to everyone you know in Illinois, including your church. 2.) Click HERE to send an email or a fax to our U.S. Senators, Dick Durbin and Roland Burris.
Homosexual writer Andrew Sullivan posted this comment on his blog about the proposed Federal "Hate Crimes" bill that's moved to the Senate for consideration:
The real reason for hate crime laws is not the defense of human beings from crime. There are already laws against that -- and Matthew Shepard's murderers were successfully prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law in a state with no hate crimes law at the time. The real reason for the invention of hate crimes was a hard-left critique of conventional liberal justice and the emergence of special interest groups which need boutique legislation to raise funds for their large staffs and luxurious buildings. Just imagine how many direct mail pieces have gone out explaining that without more money for HRC, more gay human beings will be crucified on fences. It's very, very powerful as a money-making tool - which may explain why the largely symbolic federal bill still hasn't passed.
Bill would 'enforce orthodoxy of political correctness,' stifle free speech
Alliance Defense Fund attorneys warn that the U.S. Senate should not pass H.R. 1913, the so-called 'hate crimes' bill. If it becomes law, ADF attorneys say the bill could severely impede Americans' constitutional rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression while creating additional legal protections for those engaged in homosexual behavior that are not available to everyone else.
"All violent crimes are hate crimes, and all crime victims deserve equal justice," said ADF Senior Counsel Kevin Theriot. "So-called 'hate crime' laws actually serve only one purpose: The criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and emotions they have that are not considered to be 'politically correct.' No one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about greater justice for Americans."
Lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives voted 249-173 to pass a bill (H.R. 1913) which, would allow the federal government to declare a harsher punishment on a crime that "is motivated by prejudice" against a list of protected characteristics which include changeable behaviors such as "sexual orientation" and "gender identity." In other words, 2 identical crimes would get punished differently if one of the victims was a homosexual or cross dresser.
This bill is rightly termed 'THOUGHT CRIMES' legislation because it dictates that you can no longer have an opinion on this issue and will dangerously limit your right to an opinion on the issue of homosexuality!
Of Illinois' 19 U.S. Representatives, only 5 voted against 'THOUGHT CRIMES', 14 voted to support the pro-homosexual bill. Republicans Mark Kirk and Judy Biggert joined Illinois Democrats who all voted for this bill. We've also indicated in the list below, the Congressmen who co-sponsored this bill.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins released the following statement after approval by the House Judiciary Committee of a proposed federal "hate crimes" bill, H.R. 1913.
This measure would allow the federal government, for the first time ever, to prosecute any violent crime anywhere in the country that "is motivated by prejudice" against a number of protected characteristics, including "sexual orientation" and "gender identity."
Following is Perkins' statement:
"Congress should protect all Americans equally and not provide special protections to a few politically favored groups. A vote in favor of so-called 'hate crimes' legislation today is a direct violation of the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Congress needs to remember that preserving the meaning of equal justice under the law is more important than catering to the whims of political fashion.
U.S. Rep. Judy Biggert is a co-sponsor of "Hate Crimes" legislation.
Hate crime laws are actually "thought crime" laws that violate the right to freedom of speech, of religion and of conscience. Such laws subject individuals to scrutiny of their beliefs rather than focusing on a person's criminal actions. Unfortunately, Congressman Biggert is a co-sponsor of this dangerous and un-American legislation.
Take ACTION: Please help us spread the word about this anti-family bill. Can you distribute this flyer to your like-minded neighbors and friends in the 13th Congressional District?
PAC Letter Shows Another Failure to Disclose Money Connections to George Tiller
Family Research Council (FRC) has obtained a copy of a 2002 fundraising letter from late-term abortionist George R. Tiller in which he claims that he personally contributed $200,000 to ProKanDo, a political action committee (PAC) dedicated to defeating Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius's pro-life opponent. Dr. Tiller's PAC receives funding not only from his own clinic but from other late-term abortionists from across the nation.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins released the following statement responding to this latest revelation, which follows an admission of tax problems by the nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services and a failure to report more than $23,000 in direct campaign contributions from Dr. Tiller.
As you well know, in 1773, colonists gathered to dump imported tea into the Boston Harbor to protest the British government's oppressive tax system that allowed for no direct representation. At the Boston Tea Party, determined colonists stood against the expanding British authority and said no more!
Expanding government authority... sound familiar? Are you tired of bailouts, stimulus packages, endless national debt and increasing subsidization? Do you practice financial responsibility and watch those who do not get rewarded by the government? Along with many other Americans, are you frustrated by our government reaching its hand out to take far more than it needs?
If so, join thousands of Americans on Tax Day, April 15th, at your local Tax Day Tea Party to express your frustration over our out of control government and its redistributive economic policies. Whether you are Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal, all are welcome in this stand against unrestrained government. This true grassroots movement is spreading with Tea Parties planned across the nation.
3/27/2009 10:41:00 AM By Jim Brown and Jody Brown
-OneNewsNow
Critics of President Obama's new civil service bill warn that it denies funding to certain faith-based groups while increasing funding for liberal advocacy groups.
Last week, the House passed the "Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act" -- the GIVE Act -- which would expand the national service program, the AmeriCorps, from 75,000 to 250,000 participants. That includes not just young adults, but ages 17 to 100. (The Senate version of the bill is known as the Serve America Act.)
The legislation, which would cost an estimated $6 billion over five years, would also create additional "corps" to expand the reach of volunteerism into new sectors, including a "Clean Energy Corps."
Linda Harvey proposes a federal bureaucracy to regulate celebrity incomes
Is Nicole Kidman worth $15-$20 million a picture? How about George Clooney, Matt Damon, Reese Witherspoon or Angelina Jolie? If we're capping Wall Street salaries, we need to be socially just and review the West Coast as well.
Are there people who could be substituted for Cameron Diaz, who'd be willing to work for, say, $5 million a film? Or even a paltry million? Shouldn't we share that wealth? Maybe she'd become nicer or at least well-informed at a lower rate of compensation.
Sidney Poitier said recently that Hollywood CEOs should earn no more than $500,000, and I'm with him. The same should apply to the stars. I know it's a hard-knock life, but people have been known to live on money like that.
Yesterday, US District Judge Edward R. Korman ordered the FDA to make the morning after pill available to 17-year-old minor girls without a physician's visit or prescription and without parental consent. Judge Korman also asked the FDA to consider making the drug available to girls and women regardless of age.
Chris Gacek, Family Research Council's Senior Fellow for Regulatory Affairs, released the following statement:
"This ruling jeopardizes girls' health and the ability of parents to care for their daughters' physical and emotional well-being. Judge Korman has accepted lock, stock, and barrel all of the claims of a political ideology promoting sexual license for teens.
"Now some minor girls will be able to obtain this drug without any guidance from a doctor or and without any parental supervision. We lack scientific studies on the long-term effects of Plan B with respect to high dosage and repeated use in both women and adolescents. Also, research from Scotland in the 1990s indicated that the increased use of the morning-after-pill did not decrease abortion rates.
"There is a real danger that Plan B may be given to women, especially sexually abused women and minors, under coercion or without their consent. Interaction with medical professionals is a major screening and defense mechanism for victims of sexual abuse. The availability of Plan B over-the-counter also bypasses the routine medical care of sexually active girls and women, which is important to allow screening for other health conditions, including sexually transmitted diseases."
Please submit your comments to President Obama before the April 9 deadline!
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is actively working to rescind conscience protections for pro-life medical professionals. The Bush Administration implemented them in December but the Obama Administration already is pushing for their repeal. There are only a couple of weeks left for the public comment period -- so please take action today!
Take ACTION:Click HERE to send a message to the White House about this important issue.
You can also make a quick phone call. The Whitehouse Comment Line is 202-456-1111.
David W. Ogden, was confirmed as Deputy Attorney General by the U.S. Senate yesterday by a vote of 65-28. Pro-family groups across the nation, including IFI, opposed the Ogden nomination because of his record of defending pornographers, and fighting pro-life laws in court.
Unfortunately, even Senator John McCain vote FOR Ogden despite the fact that he is the chief sponsor of the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA), designed to keep porn of public library computers. Ogden volunteered his time in a court case to try to get CIPA declared unconstitutional. Only one democrat voted against Ogden, Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.
In its big January 2004 issue, a Playboy headline proclaimed, "We Won!" and drew their flag as displacing our Stars and Stripes over the U.S. Capitol. What did Playboy "win" in Washington, D.C.? In this "We Won" issue, publisher Hugh Hefner outlined how he operated "behind the scenes" to bring U.S. laws in line with Playboy morality. In fact, David Ogden, a Playboy legal hit man with allegiance to the bunny flag may soon be the United States deputy attorney general.
Who are President Obama's closet handlers? Why did he tap the publicly venal Ogden to head his U.S. Justice Department transition team? Ogden must hire lawyers with fealty to the Big Porno conglomerate, symbolized by this image in which Playboy vaporized the American flag and all it stands for. Harvard lawyer President O would never expect justice for blacks from lawyers whose income derived from wealthy Klansmen - nor could he expect justice for women and children from lawyers whose income is derived from wealthy pornographers. No Ogden team lawyer has ever defended a single woman, man or child alleging victimization by Big Pornography.
2/11/2009 10:46:00 AM By Charlie Butts
-OneNewsNow
The U.S. Senate has taken action that could mean a legal battle royale over the stimulus bill.
The Senate rejected an amendment offered by Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) that would have stripped language from the stimulus bill that would force colleges and universities to throw religious clubs off campus if the schools receive federal funds. (See earlier article)
Governor Sebelius' radical stance on abortion makes her too extreme to oversee America's health, medical and social services.
With her close ties to late-term abortionist George Tiller and her veto of a Kansas bill that would have reduced late-term and coerced abortions, the Kansas Governor has shown she is outside of the mainstream concerning abortion.
Her views on abortion are so extreme that Kansas City Catholic Archbishop, Joseph Naumann, called on her not to receive communion at her church.
"President Obama has made a major mistake and put America's families at risk by selecting David Ogden to become Deputy Attorney General.... David Ogden ... can't run from his long record of opposing common sense laws protecting families, women, and children. .... Ogden's record is nothing short of obscene. .... He has opposed filters on library computers protecting children from Internet smut.... David Ogden has collected checks from Playboy and Penthouse to fight any attempts to establish filters on federally-funded public libraries.... At a time when America's families are under increasing assault, Mr. Ogden is a dangerous choice for a position whose responsibilities include the enforcement of our nation's laws."
The U.S. Senate is considering President Obama's economic stimulus package. The Heritage Foundation did an analysis of the bill which pointed out the following:
The current "stimulus bill" will be the LARGEST SPENDING BILL ever enacted by Congress, making the "New Deal" look small.
If all families were asked to equally shoulder the buden of $825 billion, this debt would be equivalent to what they roughly spend on food, clothing, and health care in an entire year.
Specifically, the $825 billion is equivalent to borrowing $10,520 from every family in America. This money MUST be paid back.
Only 12 percent of the stimulus bill is actually stimulus related. Read more HERE.
If you would like to read the entire stimulus plan for yourself, click HERE.
Take ACTION:Click HERE to contact Illinois Senators Dick Durbin and Roland Burris about this outrageous so-called stimulus bill. It's your money and its your government!
Following President Barack Obama's warning against listening to Rush Limbaugh, rumors regarding the Fairness Doctrine have become even more common.
The Fairness Doctrine is a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule that was implemented in 1949, and was designed to ensure fair and equal coverage of controversial issues on television and radio. However, the rule quickly morphed into one that allowed government officials to force radio and TV stations to agree with the President's messages.
In 1969, The Supreme Court said that the Fairness Doctrine is legal as long as it does not hamper the on-air coverage of important issues. Just five years later, The Supreme Court found that the government's involvement in the media makes the debate on issues less colorful and decreases the variety of information one could get through the radio or television. The rule was removed in 1987, and several attempts to revive the Fairness Doctrine have been unsuccessful.
1/21/2009 11:31:00 AM By Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs
-Liberty Counsel
Literally within minutes after President Obama took the oath of office yesterday, the official White House webpage was updated - under the heading of "The Agenda: Civil Rights" - to detail Obama's wholesale "support for the LGBT (homosexual activist) community." His stated plans include the following:
Defeating all state and federal constitutional efforts to defend the millennia-old definition of natural marriage;
Repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton - the only line of defense keeping all 50 states from being forced to recognize so-called "same-sex marriages" from extremely liberal states like Massachusetts and Connecticut;
Repealing the military's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy;
Passing constitutionally dubious and discriminatory "hate crimes" legislation, granting homosexuals and cross dressers special rights - denied other Americans - based on changeable sexual behaviors;
Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would force business owners (religious and otherwise) to abandon traditional values relative to sexual morality under penalty of law; and,
Creating intentionally motherless and fatherless homes and sexually confusing untold thousands of children by expanding "gay adoption."
1/21/2009 10:52:00 AM By Chad Groening and Allie Martin
-OneNewsNow
A Republican senator is co-sponsoring a bill aimed at preventing reinstatement of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" -- and a prominent member of the National Religious Broadcasters hopes the senator is successful.
Mississippi's Roger Wicker serves on the Senate Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over telecommunications. He is co-sponsoring the Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2009, a measure designed to prevent the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, which he believes is the opposite of fair.
"The Fairness Doctrine is a misnomer. It is anything but fair," Wicker contends. "And when it was allowed to go out of existence, then talk radio actually flourished and we had much more of an opportunity for all viewpoints to be taught on the air."
The American Library Association [ALA] is suddenly silent as the nascent Barack Obama administration "expects" to adopt the outgoing Bush administration's position on the USA PATRIOT Act. Yet again, the ALA exposes just why it should not be considered authoritative.
The ALA is known to be one of the major opponents of the USA PATRIOT Act. The ALA frequently attacked the Bush administration for supporting Section 215 of the Act. For example, one prominent ALA member writing in the ALA's American Libraries called the Act "treason pure and simple."
At Barack Obama's request, tomorrow in the Lincoln Memorial, Gene Robinson, the first openly non-celibate homosexual bishop in the Episcopal Church, will deliver the invocation for the inauguration kick-off.
This is tragic not mainly because Obama is willing to hold up the legitimacy of homosexual intercourse, but because he is willing to get behind the church endorsement of sexual intercourse between men.
It is one thing to say: Two men may legally have sex. It is another to say: The Christian church acted acceptably in blessing Robinson's sex with men.
Pastor Rick Warren, in a misguided burst of political correctness, has applauded President-elect Barack Obama's choice of divisive homosexual clergyman V. Gene Robinson to give a prayer at an inaugural ceremony. According to the Chicago Tribune, earlier this week Warren complimented Obama's decision to invite Robinson, saying that "Obama has again demonstrated his genuine commitment to bringing all Americans of goodwill together in search of common ground. I applaud his desire to be the president of every citizen."
But Warren's statement may be construed as implicit endorsement of the acceptability of homosexual behavior as well as implicit endorsement of the violation of biblical qualifications for church leadership that Robinson's leadership role in the Episcopalian church represents (would Warren similarly compliment Obama's inclusivity had Obama invited an advocate of polyamory to give a prayer at an inaugural event?).
The election of President-Elect Barack Obama and Democratic control on Congress bring a critical moment of truth in Washington, D.C. for the cause of life.
Obama has pledged to Planned Parenthood that the first thing he will sign as president is the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). The FOCA will establish a fundamental right to abortion, like the right to free speech, and will strike down every restriction on abortion nationwide, on both the state and national level.
The horrendous partial-birth abortion procedure -- which has been outlawed -- will once again be legal. Late term abortions would be allowed, non-physicians will be allowed to provide abortions, all parental consent and waiting periods would be removed, and conscience objections would likely be undermined, lifting the protections for pro-life health care providers.
Thank you. Thank you, my friends. Thank you for coming here on this beautiful Arizona evening.
My friends, we have come to the end of a long journey. The American people have spoken, and they have spoken clearly.
A little while ago, I had the honor of calling Senator Barack Obama to congratulate him.
To congratulate him on being elected the next president of the country that we both love.
In a contest as long and difficult as this campaign has been, his success alone commands my respect for his ability and perseverance. But that he managed to do so by inspiring the hopes of so many millions of Americans who had once wrongly believed that they had little at stake or little influence in the election of an American president is something I deeply admire and commend him for achieving.
Many of us are deeply disappointed with and anxious about the outcome of the presidential election.
We are concerned about the character and judgment of a man who would affiliate with people like Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, and Kevin Jennings and organizations like Planned Parenthood and ACORN.
We're concerned about his eager willingness to redistribute the earnings of people, including taking the earnings of some to give to those who have paid nothing to the government.
We're concerned that his solution to the problem of the uninsured is socialized medicine.
We're concerned about his commitment to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, which reveals he has little understanding of or respect for the essential place of the natural family in a healthy society.
Here is an outstanding, non-partisan 501(c)(3) compliant video that can be sent to your pastor to show in your church on Sunday morning, November 2nd, or e-mailed to your friends regarding the impact Faithful Voters can make in the coming election. It clearly identifies the most critical moral issues at stake in this election. We encourage you to view this video and pass it on to friends, family, and your pastor:
Democrat leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives have scheduled a hearing this Thursday on discrimination against "transgendered" individuals in the workplace.
"Homosexuals and their transgender activist allies hope to use this hearing as a way of forcing the imposition of gender confusion upon all Americans," said Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) Executive Director Regina Griggs today. "Instead of treating transsexualism and cross-dressing behaviors as Gender Identity Disorders (GID) as defined by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Democrats seem determined to make these behaviors into federally-protected minorities."
Despite the fact that attorneys general from 10 states asked the California Supreme Court to delay implementation of the court's May 15 decision on marriage until after the people vote in November on a state constitutional amendment, the Court refused.
The Alliance Defense Fund and these 10 attorneys general made the legal appeal to the top California Court because California law allows out-of-state residents to obtain marriage licenses. Starting June 17, homosexual partners from Illinois and every other state in the Union will be able to go to California and get marriage licenses.
The question will then become whether Illinois has to recognize those California marriage licenses. We can quickly expect to see legal challenges to Illinois law. Examples of legal cases that could arise from an Illinois homosexual partners having a California marriage license include: divorce petitions, child custody disputes, adoptions, use of a church's facilities for a celebration ceremony, and the list goes on.
Presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Monday that "we have to get used to the idea that we can't keep our houses at 72, drive our SUVs, and eat all we want." Arthur B. Robinson, president and professor of chemistry at the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, has a different response.
"I don't want to give up eating all I want because of a failed hypothesis," said Robinson at the National Press Club here on May 19. Robinson said global warming is not a threat to America. He said that the global temperature increased by just .5 degrees in the last century.
Robinson spoke about his petition signed by 31,000 U.S. scientists who reject the claims that "human release of greenhouse gases is damaging our climate." Read more...
The Illinois chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP), along with State Rep. Mike Tryon and three other citizen organizations, today called for Senate President Emil Jones to schedule budget transparency legislation for an immediate up-or-down vote. At a Capitol news conference, AFP unveiled a 17-group coalition letter supporting Rep. Tryon's bill (HB 4765) to create an online, searchable database of state spending that would essentially allow citizens to "Google" their tax dollars. HB 4765 was passed unanimously by the House on Tuesday and must now be approved by the Senate. CLICK HERE TO VIEW COALITION LETTER.
4/1/2008 2:14:00 PM By Monisha Bansal, Senior Staff Writer
-CNSNews.com
Budget experts from across the political spectrum gathered in Washington, D.C., on Monday to address the looming financial "crisis" that entitlement programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security pose if they are not reformed in the near future.
Alice Rivlin, a senior fellow at the liberal Brookings Institution, said the groups came together out of "sheer panic."
"This group of budget folks sees a collision coming that the politicians aren't focusing on," she said at a press conference. "If current policies are not changed, we simply can't afford to keep these promises." Read more...
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS), a longtime pro-lifer leader, has proposed a $5 million bill aimed at reducing the number of abortions tied to genetic disorders.
Sen. Brownback has found a cosponsor for the legislation that would shock most pro-life activists: U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), a fervent pro-abortion supporter. The bill would create a national registry of families willing to adopt children with pre- or post-natal diagnosed conditions, such as Down syndrome. Furthermore, families that receive a diagnosis of Down syndrome or any other genetic condition would be referred to support services that would give information on how to cope. Read more...
The U.S. Senate passed an amendment on Tuesday that is vital to preventing any federal funding of abortions under the Indian Health Services Program.
The Vitter Amendment (3896) passed by a vote of 52 to 42, with opposition stemming from only six Democratic nays -- including our own Senator Dick Durbin. Illinois' junior U.S. Senator, Barack Obama was not present for the vote. Click HERE to see the full Roll Call vote. Read more...
2/26/2008 12:00:00 PM By Susan Jones, Senior Editor
-CNSNews.com
(CNSNews.com) - The Bush administration is keeping the pressure on House Democrats to pass a bill that will update and modernize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Specifically, the administration wants the House to act on a bill passed by the Senate earlier this month. But instead of taking up that bill, the House recessed on Feb. 15 for more than a week, leaving the nation less protected, the Bush administration insists.
John Piper Pastor, Minneapolis Because God Almighty, whom we serve above all men, made human governments his way of running the world. "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God" Rom. 13:1. In a democratic republic like ours that means at least: VOTE.
Chuck Colson Prison Fellowship ... God has entrusted us as free citizens to be His agents. That's why we have such a sacred responsibility to vote: not to is disobedience to God.... Chose men and women of integrity whose ideas come closest to conforming to a biblical worldview. Be wise and discerning, voting not for selfish interest, but for God's good purposes.
Noah Webster Founding Father If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws
