The Right Lane update 3.27.13

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

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Colleges are Turning Your Children into Moral Radicals

Many young people lose their religious faith and their conservative beliefs to moral radicalism when they get to college. There is a relentless and sustained attack on their values as soon as they enter their dorm room. Some kids can handle the attacks but many can’t. They fall for the moral relativism lie, except, of course, when it comes to people who do not believe in moral relativism. It’s the supporters of moral absolutes who are characterized as the perpetrators of real moral radicalism.  When students at Florida Atlantic University were told to stomp on a sheet of paper that had JESUS written on it, only one student refused. Were there Christians in the class who refused to do what the teacher told them to do? Reports are that only one student refused to participate. Surely this wasn’t the first time this directive had been given. The author of the manual that includes the “stomp on Jesus” exercise wrote the following about the exercise: “This exercise is a bit sensitive, but really drives home the point that even though symbols are arbitrary, they take on very strong and emotional meanings. He goes on to say that “most will hesitate.” The ultimate goal is to get the students to go against their belief system, to break down their moral barriers in order to soften them up for later radicalization. Liberals are patient. They won’t get every student, but they’ll get enough of them so that their agenda will continue to the next generation.

The above is one example in one school.  However, there are numerous reports from students that lead us to believe this is wide spread.  Some behaviors by teachers are more subtle, therefore creating confusion for the student and preparing them for further radicalization.

~~~~~~

Voters Think U.S. Public Schools Should Provide World-Class Education

Most voters agree that American schools should provide their students with a world-class education and teach them the values of Western civilization, but few think they're doing a good job.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 67% of Likely U.S. Voters agree that “a world-class education is the single most important factor in determining whether our kids can compete for the best jobs and whether America can outcompete countries around the world.”  Only 19% disagree, while another 14% are not sure.  Voters don’t think much of the skills acquired by high school graduates attempting to go to college or enter the work force.  The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 18% of Likely U.S. Voters believe most high school graduates have the skills needed for college. Sixty-one percent (61%) don't agree. Twenty-one percent (21%) are not sure.

~~~~~~

A Healthier Alternative to ObamaCare--National Review
"In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws: its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any." --James Madison

"[T]he Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is no more popular now than when it was passed, as Americans have come to realize that it will neither protect patients nor provide for affordable care. While full repeal of the law is not within the realm of short-term political reality ... repeal should nonetheless remain the end goal, either one piece at a time for now or root and branch. The price tag for Obamacare has gone from shocking to preposterous. In March 2010, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the ten-year cost of the law at $898 billion; by February 2013, that number had climbed to $1.6 trillion, and it is likely that further revisions will be in the upward direction. ... As mind-boggling as its price tag is, expense is not the main reason to repeal Obamacare. What is not sufficiently understood is that Obamacare does not reform or regulate health insurance: It effectively abolishes health insurance. ... In short, the system created by this ill-advised law would prevent the emergence of normally functioning markets in medical services and health insurance. Instead, it establishes a top-down system of price controls and subsidies that will discourage healthy people from buying insurance in the first place, reward those who exploit the system's defects, and discourage doctors and other health-care providers from extending their care to those who most need it. ... Republicans made a critical error during the debate over Obamacare when they left the impression that they approved of the U.S. health-care system. In truth, that system was deeply defective before Obamacare was passed.... With a functioning market in place, offering assistance through tax benefits or direct subsidies becomes a much simpler set of challenges, as does enacting targeted, narrow regulation to curb the abusive practices toward which the health-insurance industry is occasionally inclined. ... Republicans can and should begin taking it apart and building something better on the ruins."

~~~~~~

Insightful

"Nothing just happens in politics. If something happens you can be sure it was planned that way." --President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882 - 1945)

"There should be a tax on every man that wanted to get a government appointment, or be elected to office. In two years that tax alone would pay our national debt.'" --humorist Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

~~~~~~

Leftist Propaganda

"We're talking about millions of kids dying -- being shot down by assault weapons. This is not just a political issue, it's a moral issue." --Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) (Fact is, of the 12,664 murders in 2011, the most recent year for complete FBI statistics, there were 323 homicides committed with a rifle of any type, and likely fewer than 50 children (those under age 18) killed with rifles. By comparison, there were 496 murders committed with hammers in the same year.) Yes and some people that heard this simply accepted it without thinking.

~~~~~~

45% Say Sequester Didn’t Cut Government Spending Enough

Just over three weeks after the sequester cuts in the growth of federal spending kicked in, voters feel a bit more strongly that they didn’t cut deep enough.  A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 22% of Likely U.S. Voters still think the sequester cut the projected growth in spending too much. But twice as many (45%) disagree and think it didn’t cut enough. Fourteen percent (14%) feel the amount cut was about right. Nineteen percent (19%) are not sure.

~~~~~~

Scalia on Gay Marriage: ‘No Scientific Answer’ About Effects on Children  By Penny Starr

During oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Tuesday over the constitutionality of a California law that reserves marriage as a union between one man and one woman, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the effects on children who are raised by same-sex couples is not confirmed by experts or science. “There's considerable disagreement among – among sociologists as to what the consequences of raising a child in a – in a single-sex family, whether that is harmful to the child or not,” Scalia said during the exchange between the justices and Charles Cooper, the attorney representing the petitioner in Hollingsworth v. Perry. “I don't think we know the answer to that,” Scalia said. “Do you know the answer to that, whether it – whether it harms or helps the child?”  “No, your honor,” Cooper said.

[ It is interesting to say the least how the Left goes all ga ga when it comes to children on a range of issues.  However, when it comes to the above the answer is only three words!]

~~~~~~

Mark Levin: It's Not a Matter of Equal Protection, So Why Should Courts Intervene? By Susan Jones

The same-sex marriage case argued before the Supreme Court on Tuesday has no business being there, says conservative talk show host Mark Levin. "Where there's not a clear federal constitutional issue...then why should the federal courts intervene? Why should the Supreme Court intervene? The equal protection clause doesn't say the 'liberal promotion clause' or the 'radical egalitarianism clause,' where people can pour their economic, social and cultural agendas into the Constitution for the courts to decide."  The 14th Amendment, which contains the equal protection clause (see text below), does not mean "everybody is the same, everything is uniform," Levin said. It's not a "grab bag for every egalitarian dream on the face of the earth."

Looking at the amendment's history, Levin explained that it was passed as an "exclamation mark after the Civil War to make it clear once and for all that blacks are Americans, too, and they're to be treated as Americans in every state of the country. It had nothing to do with socialism," Levin continued. "It had nothing to do with same-sex marriage; it had nothing to do with equal pay."

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment reads: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

~~~~~~

What Good is Health Insurance if You Lose the Freedom to Live Your Life as You Choose?

One of the many reasons conservatives dislike government overreach is because government is so often wrong about so much. And what’s worse, regardless of the magnitude of the government’s failures, citizens are stuck with the consequences of those policies, in most cases forever. This is not a new phenomenon. This has been going on for decades. Upon its establishment in 1965 the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the cost of Medicare would rise to $12 billion by 1990. Unfortunately for American taxpayers that prediction was off by a power of nine, coming in at $110 billion. And things haven’t gotten any better since then. By 2011 Medicare costs ballooned to over $550 billion, having grown by 8.3% in a year when inflation was 3.2%. But of course Medicare is but one example. Medicaid had a similar experience. The same House committee estimated that Medicaid’s first-year costs would be $238 million. Instead it came in more like $1 billion. It was projected to cost $9 billion by 1990 and, surprise, it came in at $67 billion. By 2011 the federal share of the program tipped the scales at $299 billion!  Tellingly, before government set its claws into healthcare it tracked very close to overall inflation. Since 1965 however, healthcare costs have increased by 2.3 times the rate of general inflation. To put that in perspective, inflation would have made something that cost $100 dollars in 1965 cost $718 dollars in 2012. That’s a pretty big jump, but if that $100 dollar item had increased at the rate of healthcare inflation since government got involved it would cost 2.3 times as much, or $1,651. At the same time, healthcare costs went from 5.1% of GDP in 1960 to approximately 18% today. At the end of the day, Obamacare may very well be the last stake in the coffin of individual liberty and American prosperity. Think of it this way… through the tax code the government already exercises a tremendous amount of influence on your life by deciding how much of your money you can keep. It’s pretty personal, but it’s largely financial, even if it impacts much of the rest of your life.

~~~~~~

Millions to Be Priced Out of Obamacare

Millions of Americans will be priced out of health insurance under President Barack Obama’s healthcare overhaul because of a glitch in the law that adversely affects people with modest incomes who cannot afford family coverage offered by their employers, a leading healthcare advocacy group said on Tuesday. Tax credits are a key component of the law and the White House has said the credits, averaging about $4,000 apiece, will help about 18 million individuals and families pay for health insurance once the Affordable Care Act takes full effect, beginning in January 2014. The tax credits are geared toward low and middle-income Americans who do not have access to affordable health insurance coverage through an employer. The law specifies that employer-sponsored insurance is affordable so long as a worker’s share of the premium does not exceed 9.5 percent of the worker’s household income. In its rule making, or final interpretation of the law, the IRS said affordability should be based strictly on individual coverage costs, however. That means that, even if family coverage through an employer-based plan far exceeds the 9.5 percent cutoff, workers would not be eligible for the tax credits to help buy insurance for children or non-working dependents. “It’s an issue. It needs to be fixed,” Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, an influential healthcare advocacy group said on Tuesday, referring to what he called “the family glitch problem.”  Passing laws will always be the tip of the iceberg.  The bureaucrats that write the rules are the "unelected" idiots that screw things up!

~~~~~~

The Constitution: A Blueprint for Destruction. by Jay Yount

Let me begin by saying that I believe that the United States Constitution is one of the greatest governing documents ever written. So, why would I say it is a blueprint for destruction? To answer that, we must first understand what the Constitution does not say. The Constitution does not say that for it to be an effective governing document, the nation which adopts it must be populated by bible-believing Christians. The Constitution does not say this, but John Adams did. He said:

 “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

The historical context of Adams’ statement can only mean he was talking about people who were committed to the Bible as the only infallible rule of faith and practice. The Constitution in the hands of anyone but Christians who believed the Bible is destined to become a handbook for tyranny and oppression.  The Constitution was written by men who could not conceive of an America that would reject Christianity.  This assumption is becoming our founding document’s greatest liability. 

The Constitution offers no guarantee it will not become a document which enables tyrannical rule. All that is necessary for this to happen is for the people it governs to ignore God and his law. What better reason can there be to point your family to the necessity of Jesus Christ and his gospel. Our nation has relegated the living God of the Bible to democratic parity in which all religions are considered equal. After all, this is now considered the American way. Christianity has given way to post-modern spirituality. Spirituality means that religion is whatever you want to make it to be. No one shall say that One God is better than another. This is now deemed to be unconstitutional!  We have become like Israel in the time of the Judges. Each one does what is right in his own eyes. This is what our children are taught. This is now the American way. This is the mantra of our media. This is what is changing the Constitution into a blueprint for destruction. If this is unsettling to you, pray for our leaders. Pray for new leaders of biblical character to emerge. But most importantly, speak to your children about God each moment of each day. Tell them  about who he is, what he has done, and what he has commanded. Do it when you rise up, when you walk along the way, when you eat and when you lie down. Be a faithful shepherd to the hearts of your children. Beware when you hear politicians say " We are no longer JUST a Christian Nation!"

~~~~~~

Stop the Liberal Media Madness!

It's absolutely maddening how the liberal media pick and choose their headlines and stories depending on whether or not they will advance their liberal agenda.

• Last month, Robin Roberts of Good Morning America featured an interview with Michelle Obama in which Robin asked her about a young girl who had been shot and killed in Chicago. When Mrs. Obama erroneously blamed the shooting on an "assault weapon" to advance her anti-gun agenda, ABC conveniently edited out her ludicrous claim. Then when asked about the selective editing, ABC disingenuously blamed it on time constraints—despite the fact that none of the remaining interview was touched.
• Consider the recent sequester. President Obama is on record as having proposed the automatic spending cuts. But beginning in October 2012, the White House fabricated the story that the sequester was the Republicans' idea. The liberal lapdogs in the media were happy to oblige Obama and began regurgitating his false narrative, which they continue to this day.
• Remember when President George W. Bush was in office how every news outlet opened their evening news program featuring the increased cost of gas and its impact on the American family? Since 2008 when Obama became president, not a word about gas prices has been uttered by the liberal media, despite the fact that prices have gone up 96 percent in the past 4 years!

From scandals like Benghazi and "Fast and Furious" to economic news and gun control, the examples of lies, distortions, and censorship by the liberal media are endless.

They have abandoned all journalistic responsibility, sacrificing their integrity at the altar of Barack Obama and his socialist agenda. E-mail, write or call them out!!  Your silent grumbling will do nothing!

~~~~~~

Evolution: Why Do Scientists Trust Flawed Methods?  by Brian Thomas, M.S.

Last month, the Creation Q & A column briefly answered the following question: Does radioisotope dating prove that the earth is millions of years old? We offered four reasons why radioisotope dating does not work.  Whenever this information is presented to a live audience, someone usually asks the next question.

Q: If radiodating can be scientifically falsified, then why do most scientists continue to trust these flawed methods?

A: Often, those who ask this question assume that scientists objectively weigh all evidence as though they have no biases. But people cannot do science without some set of beliefs about origins, destiny, and meaning. Scientists choose research questions that conform to their pre-existing beliefs, introducing bias at the outset. All experimental results are likewise interpreted according to beliefs, adding more bias to an investigator’s conclusion. Secular scientists trust the million-year time ranges that faulty radiodating methods present for at least four reasons. First, long ages fit their belief that natural processes, not God, generated man, life, the earth, and the universe. Aligning their results with their belief system can be more important than validating the reliability of radiodating. Peter foresaw that nature-only heresies like these would infect the church.  He warned believers to refute scoffers who “willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water.”  In addition, many scientists are “men, who hold [down] the truth in unrighteousness.”  They may be familiar with the scientific and logical evidence against radiodating, but they suppress this knowledge. In a way, they lie to themselves to ease their pretension that the Bible’s history is wrong or that the holy Creator either does not exist or is distant and unconcerned—views that help justify immorality. Some scientists accept faulty radiodating methods in order to make their sinful lifestyles feel less shameful. Another reason scientists might cling to faulty dating methods is to retain their secular jobs. The film Expelled and the book Slaughter of the Dissidents documented credentialed scientists who found their names blacklisted within the scientific community after they dared to question Darwinian dogma. Sadly, this world may never know what fruitful contributions they could have made. Outcasts serve as examples for their peers, demonstrating the consequences of open dissent from status quo doctrines such as dating the earth in millions of years. Finally, many scientists have never encountered a reason to distrust radiodating. Geology textbooks do not explain its shortcomings, so scientists are not taught to question the results of radiodating. Often after ICR events, scientists will express surprise that they had achieved advanced degrees without ever hearing the specific, legitimate reasons to distrust radiodating. Those who trust incorrect radiodating age estimates may purposefully limit their knowledge to concepts consistent with their secularized beliefs or sinful choices. Some fear job loss, while others have never heard or fathomed an alternative.

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