The Right Lane update 3.07.13

The pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free markets and individual liberty

"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

"The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working under ground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric. They are construing our constitution from a co-ordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone." --Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Ritchie, 1820

~~~~~~

The National Debt in Perspective

The level of contempt the governing class has for the average citizen in understanding the fiscal mess our country is in is mind-blowing.  So, here in terms that anyone can understand is a short video explaining the  unexplainable.  Should you run across anyone that has bought into the fact "this is too complicated for you to understand....."  Send this video

~~~~~~

Email: Obama Regime To Make Sequester As Painful As Promised…

The Obama administration denied an appeal for flexibility in lessening the sequesters effects, with an email this week appearing to show officials in Washington that because they already had promised the cuts would be devastating, they now have to follow through on that. In the email sent Monday by Charles Brown, an official with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service office in Raleigh, N.C., Mr. Brown asked “if there was any latitude” in how to spread the sequester cuts across the region to lessen the impacts on fish inspections. He said he was discouraged by officials in Washington, who gave him this reply: “We have gone on record with a notification to Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide funding to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be.”  So, can you really trust this regime?  They make Hugo Chavez look like Mary Poppins!

~~~~~~

58% Worry That Government Spending Won’t Be Cut Enough

As Congress and President Obama struggle over ways to reduce the federal budget deficit, most Americans worry that they will raise taxes too much and won’t cut spending enough. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62% of Likely U.S. Voters are worried most that Congress and the president will raise taxes too much rather than that they won’t raise taxes enough. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are most worried that Congress and the president won’t raise taxes enough.

~~~~~~~

50% Favor Everyone Paying Same Share of Income in Taxes

Americans continue to feel the middle class pays more in taxes percentagewise than the wealthy do but are less enthusiastic about everyone paying the same percentage of their income in taxes.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 60% of Adults believe middle-class Americans pay a larger share of their income in taxes than the wealthy do. Only 28% disagree and think wealthy Americans pay a bigger share of their income in taxes. Twelve percent (12%) are not sure.

~~~~~~

Voters continue to believe it's better to cut taxes and spending than to raise them.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 27% of Likely U.S. Voters think increases in government spending help the economy. Nearly twice as many (50%) believe spending increases hurt the economy. Nine percent (9%) feel they have no impact, while 13% are not sure.

~~~~~~

Congressman: No golf trips for Obama until White House tours resume

Republican Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert introduced an amendment to the Continuing Resolution that would not provide the White House with any taxpayer funds to transport President Barack Obama to and from any golf course until they resume White House public tours. In a House floor speech, Gohmert said he filed the amendment with the House Rules Committee. “None of the funds made available by a division of this act may be used to transport the president to or from a golf course until public tours of the White House resume,” the amendment reads.

~~~~~~

Hilarious new NRA ad calls for “Biden control”

Watch out, Joe! While President Obama goes after Americans’ guns, the National Rifle Association is going after Vice President Joe Biden, calling for “Biden control.” In a hilarious new ad, the NRA highlights Biden’s continued push for Americans to buy shotguns and use them for self-defense. During an interview with Field and Stream, the Vice President instructed Americans to “fire the shotgun through the door” when trying to keep people away from their houses, as the NRA ad mentions. “Just fire the shotgun through the door?” the ad narrator says. “Whoa, Joe! Hope your neighbors call first before coming over.”

Watch here

~~~~~~

$36 Billion of Military Hardware Could Be Destroyed in Afghan Pullout By: Todd Beamon

The Obama White House is cutting $65 billion in the sequester, but it could easily leave or torch 750,000 pieces of major military hardware — worth $36 billion — in Afghanistan after U.S. troops pull out by the end of next year. Here are the options, according to Face the Facts USA of the George Washington University: Leave the equipment — or destroy it — in Afghanistan; move it to other U.S. military outposts; or transfer it to another U.S. agency or to another country. The estimated cost for the latter two options: $5.7 billion. The equipment includes trucks, aircraft, and armored vehicles — most of which are controlled by the Army. Because the Afghanistan terrain is mountainous and landlocked, transport would be difficult. But leaving it behind intact could put the equipment in the wrong hands.  So, is it best to torch $36 billion in U.S. military assets?  The math will prove to be difficult math for this administration!

~~~~~~

Janet Napolitano’s Sequestration Lies by Frank Camp

Michael Crichton said: “Social control is best managed through fear.” The Obama administration is a consummate pro at the dissemination of fear. Every time the Democrats need something done their way, they invoke our greatest fears so that we may bow to the pressure and acquiesce to their desires. It happens every election cycle. A new tax hike proposal is unpopular, so the Democrats invoke “the children,” and “the cops and firefighters,” so we can all feel bad, and vote in favor of the hike. Fear is a brilliant method of manipulation, and the Obama administration has cornered the market.

The Obama administration–not satisfied that their scare tactics didn’t work prior to the sequester–has sent out Janet Napolitano to try and gin up some scares at the expense of frequent travelers.

According to The Telegraph:

“Ms. Napolitano said today that major airports were seeing lines ’150 to 200 per cent as long as we would normally expect’ as result of the federal spending cuts that went into force on Friday…However, when contacted by The Daily Telegraph, spokespeople for both O’Hare and LAX, as well as representatives from the travel industry, denied that airports had been hit by delays. ‘We haven’t had any slowdowns at all,’ said Marshall Lowe, a spokesman for LAX. Mr. Lowe said that he had been on duty over the weekend and received no reports of unusual security delays.”

It is now March 4th; the sequestration has begun to go into effect, and the world isn’t coming to an end. What an incredible turn of events! By the grim tone of Obama and his acolytes, you would have thought there would be rivers of fire, and swarms of locusts tearing the very fabric of our world apart if we didn’t raise taxes on the rich to offset sequestration. Alas, we are in a good place. The Obama administration did not expect the Republicans to stand strong; they expected the Republicans–as happened during the fiscal cliff deal–to cave. Their scare tactics failed miserably to have any effect on the American people, let alone Conservatives in the House and Senate. In response to this failure, they are scrambling to find some dark lining around the silver cloud. They sent out Janet Napolitano–a person far enough away from Obama so that he may have deniability–to lie about the oh so disastrous effects of the sequestration cuts. Unfortunately for Janet, travel officials aren’t quite as stupid as she had hoped, reporting no abnormal delays. This may mark a turning point in the fight against Obama’s lies, and fear mongering. A lie is only as strong as the person telling it; and this lie fell apart rather quickly. It seems that Obama and his minions may be losing the strength they once had in spades

~~~~~~

Sequester Scare: Two Thirds of News Stories Devoted to Hyping Budget Hysteria By Geoffrey Dickens

“Deadline day. Hours, now, until massive government cuts go into effect that could impact every American. Jobs vaporizing. Flights delayed. Even criminals walking free.” That’s the call to panic with which ABC’s Josh Elliot greeted viewers on the March 1 Good Morning America. Elliot’s frenzied tone, on the day sequestration was going into effect, was typical of the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) network coverage of Washington’s most recent fiscal debate. MRC analysts reviewed all of the 88 sequestration stories, from when coverage began on February 14 through March 1 when the “cuts” took effect, and found 58 (66 percent) of them advanced the most horrific Obama administration talking points. Another 10 offered the same scary forecasts but at least included the skeptical view that the sequestration reductions weren’t that big and their effects were being overhyped. For over two weeks, since Barack Obama’s State of the Union Address, the networks have filled their evening and morning news shows with “dire” predictions of kids going without vaccinations and meat shortages due to the “deep” and “massive” spending cuts. This despite the fact that the proposed “cuts” are  relatively small. As the Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner wrote, “This year, the sequester would slow the growth in federal spending by just $85 billion, from an expected, pre-sequester budget of $3.64 trillion -- less than a 2.3% reduction. To put that in perspective, the federal government borrows $85 billion every 28 days.”

~~~~~~

Killing the Obamacare Zombie: Hope Lives!  by J. Matt Barber

“But Republican governors are folding like cheap lawn chairs,” you say. “And political eunuchs in the GOP establishment are bowing to Obama like he bows to foreign dictators. Any hope of repeal is long dead, and besides, Chief Justice John Roberts put the final nail in the judicial coffin last summer, didn’t he? Any chance of killing the Obamacare zombie is gone, right?”
Wrong.

Not surprisingly, the mainstream media paid it little attention, but back in November the U.S. Supreme Court shocked many in the legal community by granting Liberty Counsel’s motion for a rehearing on its multi-pronged challenge to Obamacare. The high court ordered the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear arguments. This is extremely rare and means, almost certainly, that Chief Justice Roberts will get another bite at the rotten apple – this time, with a whole new quiver of legal arrows.

Following the Supreme Court’s directive, Liberty Counsel recently filed its brief in the case of Liberty University v. Geithner. The Christian civil rights firm represents Liberty University and two private individuals in this case. While there are other legal challenges to the employer contraceptive/abortifacient mandate, Liberty Counsel’s is the most comprehensive case pending in the country. The lawsuit challenges 1) the employer mandate for all employers; 2) the abortion mandate for religious employers; 3) the abortion mandate for individuals; and 4) the entire law because tax bills must originate in the House and Obamacare originated in the Senate.

This case is the only one in the country that challenges the entire employer mandate for all employers. Like other pending cases, Liberty Counsel’s also challenges the so-called “Preventative coverage” mandate, which requires employers to provide free contraceptives, sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs and IUDs, of which the latter two cause abortion. Additionally, Obamacare compels individual citizens to violate their conscience by making them directly fund abortion homicide – both surgical and chemical – under penalty of law. It forces all employees who are part of a plan that offers abortion coverage to pay $1 per month directly to a “free” abortion fund. There is no opt-out provision, and information relative to which plans offer abortion is intentionally covered-up. This too is part of the case, so don’t let anyone tell you that Obamacare doesn’t require you to fund abortion on demand. If they do, they’re simply lying through their triple-grande-four-pump-hazelnut-mocha-stained teeth.

Finally, Liberty Counsel’s brief argues that Obamacare is invalid because, since it’s a tax – as the Supreme Court already ruled in June – it violates the Constitution’s Origination Clause. To pass constitutional muster, tax bills must originate in the House, not the Senate. Before the Democrat-led Senate rammed it through in the dead of night, Christmas Eve 2009 – Senate President Harry Reid used a House bill unrelated to Obamacare, struck all the language and the title so that only the former HR number remained, and then inserted a new title and over 2,000 pages of job-killing, economy-crushing, health-care-rationing compost. Sneaky? Yes. Typical? No doubt. Unconstitutional? Absolutely. It’s like dropping a Ford Pinto engine into a totaled Ferrari body, patching it up and then selling it to some unsuspecting dupe as a “brand new Ferrari.” Unfortunately, America was that unsuspecting dupe. Well, the jig’s up. The Constitution is unambiguous on this matter: “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.” Const. art. I §7, cl. 1.
As Liberty Counsel’s brief notes, “Though denominated with a House bill number, the Act actually originated in the Senate, and therefore violates the Origination Clause. The entire law is invalid because tax bills must originate in the House, and Obamacare originated in the Senate.”

~~~~~~

The Biblical View of Self-Defense. (Please Forward to Christian Pacifists)

This study examines the Biblical view of self-defense. We’re looking at questions such as, Is it right to employ lethal force to protect the life of yourself and others? Is it right to take measures that might kill an attacker who is wrongfully threatening your life or the life of another?

Self-defense here is defined as “protecting oneself from injury at the hand of others.” Self-defense is not about taking vengeance. Self-defense is not about punishing criminals. Self-defense involves preserving one’s own health and life when it is threatened by the actions of others. When we speak about using potentially lethal force in self-defense, we’re talking about using weapons to protect ourselves and others, even if the weapons used could kill the attacker. Now why in the world would we take time to look at this subject? First, as Christians, we want to know how to apply the Bible to current issues in society. We live in a country with approximately 250 million guns and approximately 300 million people. Furthermore, in our country, it is estimated that law abiding citizens defend themselves using guns approximately one million to two million times a year. What does the Bible have to say about that many guns actively being used for self-protection?

We live in a time where the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, current possibilities of economic and societal collapse, and crime have people buying guns and ammunition in large quantities for self protection. What does the Bible say about that? What does the Bible say about so-called “assault weapons”? As always, we want our hearts and minds to be ruled and informed by Scripture–not by our emotions, not by our experiences, and certainly not by the World. And because the Scriptures have much to say about this topic, it is relevant and worth examining in the Church. The focus of this study is specific. I am not dealing with whether lethal force can legitimately be used in wartime. I am not dealing with capital punishment. I am not dealing with Biblical principles involved in the American Revolution or the War Between the States. This study is organized in five sections. First, we will look at the Biblical obligation to preserve life. Secondly, we will look at the Biblical view of bloodshed. Thirdly, we will look at passages dealing with the application of lethal force in self-defense. Fourth, we will look at what the Bible says about possession of weapons and skill in using weapons. Finally, we look at limitations and warnings about self-defense.

Click Here to Read The Study

John Adams on the loss of Liberty

"Cities may be rebuilt, and a people, reduced to poverty, may acquire fresh property. But a constitution of government, once changed from freedom, can never be re stored. Liberty once lost, is lost forever. When the people once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their right of defending the limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every encroachment upon them, they can never regain it."

John Adams - Letter to Abigail Adams (excerpt); Philadelphia, July 7th, 1775. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~