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
To subscribe, see note
below
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
God Is
To the chagrin of many non-believers, their non-belief
does not matter. God is. As we observe
their behavior, their writings and their legal shenanigans one could conclude
they think they are winning some kind of
battle that can/will be won. They can
attempt to drive God out of schools, most public places and in our government
symbolically. However, those efforts do
not overcome God. Believers show up
every day in the very places they claim a victory; with
God! Using a Biblical term, they are "fools". Liberals and non-believers (as they seldom
do) consider the true existential risk.
They are destined to discover an outcome from which they will never
recover. God
save their soul.
For
those that are attempting to deconstruct "Christian" from our
heritage. You have an enemy — and it’s
not who you think it is. It isn’t the group in your community who are taking biblical
positions against you. Your enemy isn’t flesh and blood at all.
“For our struggle is not against flesh and
blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of
this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly
realms” (Ephesians 6:12 NIV).
Your battle is with Satan for your soul not Christians!
~~~~~~
Being Led By A Pathological Liar
President Barack Obama and his blind following of liberal progressives
claim that we must have all of the restrictive gun control laws to prevent
violent crime. Like most
pathological liars, Obama tries to convince us that he believes in the Second
Amendment and wants to defend it, but 100% of his actions say that he intends
on destroying the Second Amendment and stripping us of our guns.
Pathological
Liar: an individual who habitually tells lies so exaggerated or bizarre that
they are suggestive of mental disorder. Pay close attention to what
Obama and his ilk say. They speak it
with such conviction, one must say they believe it. However, in fact, it is simply not true and
has been convincingly proven so. Then, watch and listen to what they say and do
later. Hmmm?
~~~~~~
Landmark Study Shatters Liberal Health Care Claims
During the health care debate, liberals argued that government had to a
moral duty to enact legislation that expanded health insurance among
lower-income individuals. But a
landmark study published in the New England Journal of Medicine dramatically
undermines this assumption and shatters the rationale behind the law’s Medicaid
expansion. In 2008, Oregon expanded its Medicaid program, but because
the state could not cover everybody, lawmakers opened up a lottery that
randomly drew 30,000 names from a waiting list of almost 90,000 and allowed
them to apply for the program. This created a unique opportunity for health
researchers, ultimately allowing them to compare the health outcomes of 6,387
low-income adults who were able to enroll in the program with 5,842 who were
not selected.
Contrary to liberal assumptions, researchers found that
those who enrolled in Medicaid spent a lot more on medical care than those who
weren’t able to enroll, but didn’t significantly improve their health outcomes. Specifically,
researchers found that those who received Medicaid increased their annual
health care spending by $1,172, or 35 percent more than those who did not
receive Medicaid. Those with Medicaid were more likely to be screened
for diabetes and use diabetes medication and to make use of other preventive
care measures. The study also examined health metrics including blood pressure
and cholesterol. Ultimately, the
authors concluded that, “This randomized, controlled study showed that Medicaid
coverage generated no significant improvements in measured health outcomes in
the first two years, but it did increase use of health services, raise rates of
diabetes detection and management, lower rates of depression, and reduce
financial strain.”
~~~~~~
Whistleblower: We Know Who Was Behind Benghazi Attack
All three network newscasts on Monday and
Tuesday ignored the shocking assertions made by a whistleblower who told Fox
News that special forces could have responded to the 2012 terrorist attack on
Benghazi. He also claimed that the United States knows who perpetrated last
year’s assault on the U.S. embassy. Fox News’s Adam Housley interviewed a man
he described as a “special ops member who watched as the deadly attack on the
U.S. Consulate in Benghazi unfolded.” On Tuesday’s Special Report, Housley
claimed, “However, multiple sources tell Fox News that the U.S. has identified
the mastermind of the Benghazi attack who was still in Libya and walks free.” The
whistleblower insisted the reason the Obama administration hasn’t acted is
because “we basically don’t want to upset anybody.” The operative flat-out
declared, “We have all the capability, all the training, all the capacity to
kill and capture that only terrorist involved with the specific events of 9/11
and Ambassador Stevens’ death.” Yet, ABC, CBS and NBC have, thus far, ignored
the story. Watch
~~~~~~
ESPN Apologizes for Commentator's Christian Worldview on
Homosexuality
While the left lectures Americans about the historic breakthrough made by
NBA free agent Jason Collins in announcing his sexuality and calls for well-deserved tolerance,
they are on full-out attack
against ESPN commentator Chris Broussard for expressing his Christian views.
And now ESPN has been forced to
apologize. It all started when Broussard appeared on Outside the Lines to talk about
Collins. Appearing with ESPN senior writer LZ Granderson, who is openly gay,
Broussard was asked by the host, “How ready is the NBA and the locker rooms for
having an openly gay teammate?” Broussard
answered, “The climate in society is very set for this thing to happen …. A lot
of people feel like if you come out and say you don’t agree with homosexuality,
you are viewed as a bigot, you are viewed as intolerant. So I think the climate
is right for somebody to come out and say they are gay. I’ve been texting with
players, GMs, coaches,
agents throughout the day … and it’s been overwhelmingly supportive of Jason,
from former teammates to guys who have played against him.” Broussard
acknowledged that a few players said they might be uncomfortable with a gay
player in the showers, but that “I don’t think you’ll see somebody come out and
be against this, whether because of their true feelings or because of political
correctness.” Later in the conversation, Granderson said, “If we really want to
move toward progress and toward full acceptance, we have to have this
conversation and this process. Broussard then seconded that motion, and gave an
example of that conversation and how it could be productive:
I’d like to second what LZ said. “I’m
a Christian. I don’t agree with homosexuality. I think it’s a sin, as I think
all sex outside of marriage
between a man and a woman is. [ESPN's] L.Z. [Granderson] knows that. He and I
have played on basketball teams together for several years. We’ve gone out, had
lunch together, we’ve had good conversations, good laughs together. He knows
where I stand and I know where he stands. I don’t criticize him, he doesn’t
criticize me, and call me a bigot, call me ignorant, call me intolerant.
No Collins won't, but the liberal left
will. They need enemies like fish need
water!!
~~~~~~
CBS: Illegals Entering US Triple With Talk of Immigration
Reform
Arrests of illegal
immigrants crossing into the United States have nearly tripled in recent months
in anticipation of Congressional efforts to enact comprehensive immigration
legislation, border patrol agents told CBS News Wednesday. “Once the first group gets across, they call their family, they call
their friends and let them know, ‘Hey the time is right, come on over,’” Border
Patrol agent and union representative Chris Cabrera told CBS News. In March, 7,500 illegals were arrested in the Rio Grande Valley of South
Texas, which includes McAllen, Cabrera told CBS News. That’s up from 2,800 in
January. In February, nearly 4,800 illegals were arrested in the Rio Grande,
the local news website The Monitor.com
reports.
~~~~~~
Same-Sex Marriage as a Civil Right — Are Wrongs Rights?
By Dr. R.
Albert Mohler, Jr.
We should have seen it coming. Back in 1989 two young activists pushing
for the normalization of homosexuality coauthored a book intended to serve as a
political strategy manual and public relations guide for their movement.
In After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays
in the 90s, authors Marshall Kirk
and Hunter Madsen argued that efforts to normalize homosexuality and homosexual
relationships would fail unless their movement shifted its argument to a demand
for civil rights, rather than for moral acceptance. Kirk and Madsen
argued that homosexual activists and their allies should avoid talking about sex and sexuality. Instead, “the imagery of
sex per se should be downplayed, and the issue of gay rights reduced, as far as
possible, to an abstract social question.” Beyond Kirk and Madsen and
their public relations strategy, an even more effective legal strategy was
developed along the same lines. Legal
theorists and litigators began to argue that homosexuals were a class of
citizens denied basic civil liberties, and that the courts should declare them
to be a protected class, using civil rights precedents to force a moral and
legal revolution. That revolution has happened, and it has been stunningly
successful. The advocates for the normalization of homosexuality and
the legalization of same-sex marriage have used legal arguments developed from the civil rights era
to their advantage. Arguments used to end the scourge of racial
segregation were deployed to normalize homosexuality and homosexual
relationships. Over the years, these arguments have led to such major
developments as the decriminalization of homosexual behaviors, the inclusion of
homosexuals within the United States military, and the legalization of same-sex
marriage in some states. We
are living in an era of moral revolution and seismic cultural change.
Christians must remember that our ultimate authority is the Word of God. We are
thankful for the recognition of civil rights, but we also understand that these
rights will be confused in a sinful world. We must understand that the claim
that same-sex marriage is a civil right reveals more than constitutional
confusion—it reveals the need of every human being for nothing less than the
forgiveness, healing, and redemption that can come only through faith in the
Lord Jesus Christ. At the end of the day, the argument over same-sex marriage
is never just about same-sex marriage, and debates about civil rights are never
just about civil rights. Deeper truths and worldview implications are
always at stake, and it is our responsibility to make certain that we know what
those are and stand humbly and compassionately for those truths, regardless of
the cost.
~~~~~~~
IRS Decides Obamacare Is Too Small; Unilaterally Expands
It by Mark Horne Filed
under
Yesterday, CNSnews.com reported that a group of business owners and
others in six states are suing the IRS to get it to restrict itself to the law
of the land. You would think that trying to make the government enforce
Obamacare would be bad news for conservatives. But that would only be the case
if the IRS were not trying to do something worse than Obamacare. “‘Agencies are
bound by the laws enacted by Congress,’ said Sam Kazman, general counsel of the
Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), which is coordinating the lawsuit. ‘Obamacare is already an incredibly massive
program. For the IRS to expand it even more, without congressional
authorization and in a manner aimed at undercutting state choice, is flagrantly
illegal.’” As written, Obamacare is supposed to encourage states to set
up voluntary exchanges. It does so by offering the residents of states that
have set up exchanges refundable tax credits to subsidize the cost of their
premiums (which would drive up the price of premiums even more—that that is a
topic for another day). The plan is
not working. As of right now, thirty-three states have refused to set up such
exchanges. According to the actual content of the misnamed Affordable
Care Act, this means that the residents of those thirty three states cannot be
granted tax refunds to help them buy premiums. In response, the Internal Revenue Service has disregarded the law,
which mandates no subsidies for those in the states without health insurance
exchanges, and is giving them the tax refund anyway.
“But the IRS rule says
lower-income people living in those states will get federal subsidies to help
them pay for their insurance premiums – even though the Affordable Care Act’s
statutory language limits those subsidies to exchanges established by the
states. The lawsuit says because of the IRS rule that illegally expands federal
subsidies to all states, the plaintiffs ‘will be forced to either purchase or
sponsor specific insurance that they otherwise would not purchase or sponsor,
or expose themselves to financial penalties.’ Bottom line: The plaintiffs want
nothing to do with Obamacare, and they say the availability of federal
subsidies will force them into it – or penalize them for avoiding it.” The
unauthorized action by the IRS will also mean that more people are required to
submit to the individual mandate. So the agency is illegally causing financial
harm to individuals by unilaterally changing the law in this way. Businesses
will also be hurt. “That’s because the Affordable Care Act fines certain
businesses ($2,000 per employee) if their full-time workers use federal
subsidies to purchase coverage on an exchange instead of getting it through the
company. ‘Thus, the IRS Rule also has the effect of triggering the employer
mandate payment for businesses in states that declined to establish their own
Exchanges.’” If the report is at all
accurate, this action is more dangerous than even the Affordable Care Act
itself. We have here an agency of the government acting as an independent
legislature.
~~~~~~
Anti-Christian Bigot Mikey Weinstein would Hate What FDR
Said by Gary DeMar
Michael “Mikey” Weinstein is an anti-Christian bigot. He heads up the Military
Religious Freedom Foundation. I don’t have a problem with someone criticizing
the way religion is used. I do it myself. I’m just as disturbed with copies of
a Left Behind video being passed around to military personnel. But I would
never use the language Weinstein does to criticize it. My biggest complaint
about religion in the military is that too many Christians blindly support
almost every military action of our government. Weinstein is a bully masquerading as a civil rights champion. He
describes evangelical Christian groups that don’t support his leftist social
agenda as “monsters” and “hate groups,” “fundamentalist Christian creatures”
and “bandits.” Weinstein’s rhetoric obscures any legitimate criticisms
he might have. Ken Klukowski writes:
“[Weinstein] says Christians —
including chaplains — sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ in the military are
guilty of ‘treason,’ and of committing an act of ‘spiritual rape’ as serious a
crime as ‘sexual assault.’ He also asserted that Christians sharing their faith
in the military are ‘enemies of the Constitution.’”
I wonder what Weinstein would say about comments made by Franklin Delano
Roosevelt during his tenure as president and Commander-in-chief of the armed
forces. Weinstein would have had real problems with FDR’s views of Christianity
that are very similar to what he criticizes today. Was FDR committing “spiritual
rape”?
In an address given on October 6, 1935, FDR said:
“We cannot read the history of our rise and
development as a nation, without reckoning with the place the Bible has occupied in
shaping the advances of the Republic. Its teaching, as has been wisely
suggested, is ploughed into the very heart of the race. Where we have been truest and most
consistent in obeying its precepts we have attained the greatest measure of
contentment and prosperity; where it has been to us as the words of
a book that is sealed, we have faltered in our way, lost our range finders and
found our progress checked.”
~~~~~~
Military surrenders in war on Christian evangelism'Department
makes reasonable accommodations for all religions' Bob Unruh
The Pentagon announced today that military members who want to talk about
their faith with other members have every right to do so, backtracking on a
previous warning against “proselytizing,” which it said could be subject to
court-martial. The statement from Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen said the
Department of Defense “never and will never single out a particular religious
group for persecution or prosecution.”
The Pentagon walked back its statement earlier this week
after the Alliance Defending Freedom filed a Freedom of Information Act request
for records relating to Pentagon statements on the issue.
“Members of our military should not be denied the very freedoms they
fight to defend. Freedom of religion and speech are paramount among those
freedoms,” said ADF Legal Counsel Joseph La Rue. “We appreciate the Pentagon’s
clarification, but little or no evidence exists of coercive proselytization in
the military, so we are still troubled over what motivated the original
comments. We
are many and we are strong with God.
~~~~~~
Voters Don't Like Political Class Bossing Them Around A
Commentary By Scott Rasmussen
There are many ways to describe the enormous gap between the American people and their elected politicians.
Most in official Washington tend to
think that their elite community is smarter and better than the rest of us. Many hold a condescending view of voters and
suggest that the general public is too ignorant to be treated seriously. Only 5
percent of the nation's voters, however, believe that Congress and its staff
members represent the nation's best and brightest. Gavin Newsom, the former mayor of San
Francisco and now California's Democratic lieutenant governor, recognized the
disconnect and wrote a book on it, "Citizenville." Unlike most
politicians, Newsom doesn't just blame the voters. "It wasn't just that
people weren't engaging with their government," he writes. "Elected
officials weren't bothering to engage with the people, either -- that is, of
course, until election time."
However, Newsom adds, "We have to disenthrall ourselves, as Abraham Lincoln used to say, of the notion that politicians and government institutions will solve our problems." The data suggests that the American people have already gotten over that notion. In terms of being a good citizen, 67 percent of voters believe it is more important to do volunteer work for church and community organizations than it is to get involved in politics and political campaigns. Only 16 percent disagree and put political involvement first. That is perhaps the biggest gap between the American people and the Political Class. Those in politics take the self-serving view that they are uniquely qualified to solve the nation's problems. Those in the general public have a much firmer grasp on reality.
Most recognize that we're better off when individuals make the decisions that affect their own lives. A one-size-fits-all solution will never work in a nation as diverse and vibrant as the United States. This can be seen on an issue like Social Security. Voters strongly reject congressional tampering with the promise made by the government to American workers. But two-out-of-three believe individuals should have the right to select their own Social Security retirement age. Those who want to retire earlier could pay more in taxes. Those who want to retire later would pay less.
On health care issues, three out of four voters believe everyone should have a choice between more expensive insurance policies that cover just about everything and less expensive plans that cover only major medical expenses. They don't want government, insurance companies or their employer making medical care decisions on their behalf. Americans want the power to make their own choices. We see the same desire for choice in education. Seventy-four percent of voters think parents should have a choice of whether to send their children to schools that allow prayer and those that don't. Sixty-eight percent believe parents should have the choice between a traditional school calendar and one that has classes 12 months a year.
It's important to note that a solid majority favors giving parents a choice about year-round schools, even though most oppose the concept. It's about choice, not policy. Americans recognize that they have more power acting as consumers than they do when acting as voters. That's why they want choice. Politicians prefer a top-down approach where they write the rules. That's the source of the disconnect.
However, Newsom adds, "We have to disenthrall ourselves, as Abraham Lincoln used to say, of the notion that politicians and government institutions will solve our problems." The data suggests that the American people have already gotten over that notion. In terms of being a good citizen, 67 percent of voters believe it is more important to do volunteer work for church and community organizations than it is to get involved in politics and political campaigns. Only 16 percent disagree and put political involvement first. That is perhaps the biggest gap between the American people and the Political Class. Those in politics take the self-serving view that they are uniquely qualified to solve the nation's problems. Those in the general public have a much firmer grasp on reality.
Most recognize that we're better off when individuals make the decisions that affect their own lives. A one-size-fits-all solution will never work in a nation as diverse and vibrant as the United States. This can be seen on an issue like Social Security. Voters strongly reject congressional tampering with the promise made by the government to American workers. But two-out-of-three believe individuals should have the right to select their own Social Security retirement age. Those who want to retire earlier could pay more in taxes. Those who want to retire later would pay less.
On health care issues, three out of four voters believe everyone should have a choice between more expensive insurance policies that cover just about everything and less expensive plans that cover only major medical expenses. They don't want government, insurance companies or their employer making medical care decisions on their behalf. Americans want the power to make their own choices. We see the same desire for choice in education. Seventy-four percent of voters think parents should have a choice of whether to send their children to schools that allow prayer and those that don't. Sixty-eight percent believe parents should have the choice between a traditional school calendar and one that has classes 12 months a year.
It's important to note that a solid majority favors giving parents a choice about year-round schools, even though most oppose the concept. It's about choice, not policy. Americans recognize that they have more power acting as consumers than they do when acting as voters. That's why they want choice. Politicians prefer a top-down approach where they write the rules. That's the source of the disconnect.
~~~~~~
Obama Spends 350K to Study Transgenders in India
The federal government is spending $355,825 in taxpayer dollars to
develop a “culturally relevant stigma-reducing intervention” program for the
transgender population in India. The National Institutes of Health issued a
two-phase grant to the Ohio-based Baldwin-Wallace College to conduct the study.
The first phase cost $173,221. The second phase cost $182,604. The reason given
for the study is “HIV prevalence is disproportionately high among
Male-to-female transgenders (Hijra) in India.” “Stigma among health care providers
limits HIV testing, treatment and care and creates a barrier to HIV protective
behavior,” the project summary says. “Stigmatization of transgender by healthcare
providers has been documented, and is identified as a significant barrier to
effective HIV prevention responses among this marginalized, at-risk population
in India. However, evidence based interventions to reduce stigma and
discrimination among health care providers are seriously lacking.” The title of
the study is “Project Shakti: Stigma Reduction, Health Care Provider Awareness
and Knowledge.” Debt? What Debt?
~~~~~~
Newsmax Exclusive: US Hired al-Qaida-Linked Group to
Defend Benghazi Mission By John
Rosenthal
The Libyan militia group that the State Department hired to defend its
embattled diplomatic mission in Benghazi had
clear al-Qaida sympathies, and had prominently displayed the al-Qaida flag on a
Facebook page for some months before the deadly attack. That
organization, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, was paid by the U.S.
government to provide security at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi,
Libya. But there is no indication the Martyrs Brigade fulfilled its commitment
to defend the mission on Sept. 11, when it came under attack. The assault
claimed the lives of four Americans: Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens,
information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen
Doherty. Stevens was the first U.S. ambassador killed in the line of duty since
1979.
Several entries on the militia’s Facebook page openly profess sympathy for Ansar al-Sharia, the hardline Islamist extremist group widely blamed for the deadly attack on the mission. The State Department did not respond to a Newsmax request for an explanation as to why the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was hired to protect the mission. On April 23, House Republicans released an interim progress report on their investigation into the Benghazi killings. It cited “numerous reports” that “the Brigade had extremist connections, and it had been implicated in the kidnapping of American citizens as well as in the threats against U.S. military assets.” The report also stated that just a few days before Stevens arrived in Benghazi, the Martyrs Brigade informed State Department officials they no longer would provide security as members of the mission, including Stevens, traveled through the city. Yet despite those threats, repeated requests for additional security from the mission went unheeded by the State Department, for reasons that remain unclear. Perhaps the biggest question is why the State Department would hire a group that openly displayed its admiration for al-Qaida, and ask it to participate in the defense of its diplomatic mission.
Several entries on the militia’s Facebook page openly profess sympathy for Ansar al-Sharia, the hardline Islamist extremist group widely blamed for the deadly attack on the mission. The State Department did not respond to a Newsmax request for an explanation as to why the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was hired to protect the mission. On April 23, House Republicans released an interim progress report on their investigation into the Benghazi killings. It cited “numerous reports” that “the Brigade had extremist connections, and it had been implicated in the kidnapping of American citizens as well as in the threats against U.S. military assets.” The report also stated that just a few days before Stevens arrived in Benghazi, the Martyrs Brigade informed State Department officials they no longer would provide security as members of the mission, including Stevens, traveled through the city. Yet despite those threats, repeated requests for additional security from the mission went unheeded by the State Department, for reasons that remain unclear. Perhaps the biggest question is why the State Department would hire a group that openly displayed its admiration for al-Qaida, and ask it to participate in the defense of its diplomatic mission.
No comments:
Post a Comment