The Right Lane update 6.21.13

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

To subscribe, see note below

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Where Does America’s Energy Come From?  by KEN BRAUN

If you listen to politicians and much of the media talk of America’s energy future, you may be getting a false idea about just how relevant certain politically popular experimental forms of energy are to keeping the lights on, factories running and cars moving. First, consider how much energy Americans use for everything: transportation, heating, electricity, industry … all of it. In 2011, the Department of Energy says that was 97.5 quadrillion Btu (British thermal units.)

Here’s where it all of our energy came from in 2011:

36% – Petroleum

25% – Natural Gas

20% – Coal

8% – Nuclear

3.15% – Hydro-electric dams

1.98% – Wood

1.89% – Biofuels (ethanol, biodiesel, etc…)

1.17% – Wind

0.45% – Biomass Waste

0.18% – Geothermal

0.09% – Solar

The most frequently championed and subsidized alternative energy sources in the political arena – wind and solar – still comprise just a tiny portion of our total energy use: Just a few ticks over one percent in 2011. This is despite many years of subsidies and development. Burning wood as a fuel dates back to mankind discovering fire, and it still remains nearly twice as common a fuel source as wind and solar combined. The most frequent use for wind and solar is in the generation of our electricity. But here as well, these experimental sources still comprise a small amount of the total. When you think about "plug in electric cars" think of the following.

Here is where Americans got their electricity from in 2011:

42% – Coal

25% – Natural Gas

19% – Nuclear

8% – Hydro-electric dams

3% – Wind

1% – “Biomass” (burning wood, paper and food scraps, etc…)

<1% – Geothermal

<1% – Solar

The first electricity-producing windmill is believed to have been built in 1887. More than 100 years later, it is producing about 3 percent of our electricity. The first experimental nuclear power plant was built in 1951. Just six years later, a large-scale commercial nuclear plant was delivering power to customers in Pennsylvania. By 1973, about 5 percent of our electricity came from nuclear power. This jumped to 9 percent two years later, and hit the current total of about 20 percent by 1988. Energy in the U.S. has been politicized by the Environmentalists and the Left WITHOUT regard to reality and the U.S. citizens are footing the bill - for no return.

~~~~~~

Whistleblower: Obama used NSA for politics

Was there ever any doubt? This is why it was a big deal. It all comes down to trust. The IRS may have utilized surveillance data collected by the National Security Agency to harass political opponents of the Obama administration, including the tea party, charged NSA whistleblower William Binney in a radio interview. After working in the intelligence community for more than 30 years, Binney retired from the NSA in 2001. He co-founded a unit on automating NSA signals intelligence and served as technical leader for NSA intelligence in 2001. Binney is credited with helping to modernize the NSA’s worldwide eavesdropping network. Asked on Aaron Klein’s WABC radio show Sunday whether he believes data collected on millions of Americans was used by the government against political enemies, Binney replied in the affirmative. “That’s exactly the danger about letting the government have all this kind of information about its citizens,” the ex-NSA official stated.

~~~~~~

National DEATH SPIRAL?

http://api.ning.com/files/LAS*pniJklqzwl5o4NgZgmocqMIj85byvYwdumYYswPjIgRxs9gjdNy56fOF3z4Yi8naUpxPd6tWjGyP26PQeKTxfFwmpbEU/image001.png
These 11 States now have More People on Welfare than they do Employed! Last month, the Senate Budget Committee reports that in fiscal year 2011, between food stamps, housing support, child care, Medicaid and other benefits, the average U.S. household below the poverty line received $168.00 a day in government support. What’s the problem with that much support? Well, the median household income in America is just over $50,000, which averages out to $137.13 a day. To put it another way, being on welfare now pays the equivalent of $30.00 an hour for a 40-hour week, while the average job pays $20.00 an hour.

~~~~~~

Breaking: Senate Agreement to Bolster Border Security

Can it be? I somehow doubt it. But we will see what they propose. An agreement to strengthen border security is expected to be announced today around 11:00 am with broader Senate support, including from the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” senators who drafted the original legislation. ABC News has confirmed that the Senate “Gang of Eight” and other members have reached an agreement to strengthen border security provisions in their bill that they hope will deliver the 70 crucial votes needed for the measure. According to a high-ranking Senate aide, a formal announcement is expected to be introduced on the Senate floor this morning, but no immediate vote is expected. As of now, no news conference on the deal is scheduled either. A second Capitol Hill source tells ABC News the agreement will include a major border build up, with a key change being a nearly doubling of border agents, completion of 700 miles of fence, and a specific plan for border security, which must all be fully implemented before green cards are available to undocumented immigrants. Attaching the amendment could bring the larger piece of legislation closer to the goal of 70 votes that some members of the Gang of Eight have envisioned.

~~~~~~

55% Disagree With Obama’s Decision to Arm Syrian Rebels

Rasmussen Reports most voters oppose President Obama’s decision to arm the Syrian rebels and think those weapons are likely to end up in the hands of America’s enemies. Confidence in the administration’s handling of the Syrian situation has fallen to a new low.

~~~~~~

Obama offends Catholics in the UK, says religious schools are divisive   by Cheryl Carpenter Klimek

The Catholic media is up in arms over comments President Obama made during a speech while in Northern Ireland for the G8 summit. Obama made what is described as “an alarming call for an end to Catholic education,” in spite of the fact that it is considered “a critical component of the Church.” In front of an audience of about 2,000 young people, including many Catholics, Obama claimed that Catholic education divides people and blocks peace, according to the Scottish Catholic Observer. “If towns remain divided—if Catholics have their schools and buildings and Protestants have theirs, if we can’t see ourselves in one another and fear or resentment are allowed to harden—that too encourages division and discourages cooperation,” Obama said.

~~~~~~

Local Governments Reeling Under ObamaCare Costs By JOHN MERLINE

When Regal Entertainment Group (RGC) in April blamed ObamaCare for the fact that it was cutting some of its workers' hours, backers of the law mounted a furious backlash against the theater chain, among other things filling its Facebook page with boycott threats. "Greed and selfishness make me sick," one of them said.  Darden Restaurants (DRI) felt this intense heat last year after suggesting it might shift to more part-time work to minimize the cost of the law's mandate that companies offer coverage to all their full-time workers. CEO Clarence Otis even blamed its lowered outlook for 2013 in part on "recent negative media coverage" over "how we might accommodate health care reform." Yet while private companies are getting all this unwelcome and hostile attention, local governments across the country have been quietly doing exactly the same thing — cutting part-time hours specifically so they can skirt ObamaCare's costly employer mandate, while complaining about the law in some of the harshest terms anyone has uttered in public. The result is that part-time government workers — many of them low-income — face pay cuts that can top $3,000 a year, and yet will still be left without employer-provided benefits.  Here is just a small sampling of local news reports about what local government officials are saying about ObamaCare, and the steps they're taking to avoid or minimize its costs.

Phillipsburg, Kan.: "School administrators here say they are alarmed and confounded by the looming new costs they face with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act," according to the Kaiser Health Institute News Service. Chris Hipp, director of a Kansas special education cooperative, warned that ObamaCare's costs "could put us all out of business or change significantly how we do business," adding that "we are not built to pay full health benefits for noncertified folks who work a little more than 1,000 hours a year."

Dearborn, Mich.: "If we had to provide health care and other benefits to all of our employees, the burden on the city would be tremendous," said Mayor John O'Reilly, explaining why the city is cutting its more than 700 part-time and seasonal workers down to 28 hours a week. "The city is like any private or public employer having to adjust to changes in the law."

Indiana: "What I'm seeing across the state is school districts, unfortunately, having to reduce the hours that they are having some of their folks work, primarily so they don't have to worry about the (ObamaCare) penalties, or they don't have to provide them health insurance, which would be very, very costly," said Dennis Costerison, executive director of the Indiana Association of School Business Officials. Ft. Wayne Community Schools, for example, are cutting yours for nearly three-quarters of its part-time aides. The Left, that denies the power of the markets, are seeing the impact of ignoring this market driven behavior!

~~~~~~

Democrat Contradiction: Gun Control Fine But Pro-Life Bill Unconstitutional  by Philip Hodges

Congress(wo)man Diana DeGette is the Colorado Democrat who voted for a federal ban on high-capacity magazines but had no idea what magazines or clips were. Remember when she said this to justify her support for infringing on people’s 2^nd Amendment liberties:

 “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high-capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”

Her absolutely baffling “argument” shows she had no idea what she was talking about, except that she was in favor of regulating guns in violation of the 2^nd Amendment. Her spokes(wo)man Juliet Johnson didn’t make matters any better when she “clarified” what DeGette actually meant:

“The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism. Quite frankly, this is just another example of opponents of common-sense gun violence prevention trying to manipulate the facts to distract from the critical issue of keeping our children safe and keeping killing machines out of the hands of disturbed individuals. It’s more political gamesmanship that stands in the way of responsible solutions.”

So, her spokes(wo)man doesn’t have any idea what magazines or clips are either. But it didn’t matter that neither of them knew anything about the subject that they purported to be so passionate about. All that mattered was that they were trying to “keep our children safe.” Those are the magic words. They cared so much for children’s safety that they would fight for unconstitutional legislation that would make people more and more defenseless. Even if it only saved one life.

That was what the Obama administration was saying during their gun control tour. Everybody should be in favor of more restrictions on gun ownership, because even if such measures saved only one life, that should be reason enough to enact more gun control. Not enacting more gun control means effectively allowing tens of thousands of people, including children, to die in a year’s time.

When these words and arguments were used against Diana DeGette at a press conference where she was voicing her opposition to the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, she didn’t want to answer to her abject hypocrisy. Here was CNS News’ question to DeGette:

 “Many Democrats said…even if [more gun control laws] save one life it will be worth doing. Why not support this bill then, if it undoubtedly will save lives of babies that have been carried throughout 5 months of pregnancy?”

Here was DeGette’s baffling response:

 “Well, this is, this is. … We already have laws in many states of this country. This bill is blatantly unconstitutional. And, and if you look at the perceived—if you look at the stated reason of doing this legislation, the Kermit Gosnell case, that gentleman was convicted of murder and sentenced to life. Any other questions?”

The CNS News reporter tried to press her for an actual answer, but DeGette interrupted, “No, excuse me. Any other questions?”  So, liberals are in favor of violating the Constitution as long as that violation saves lives. Even if it’s only one life. Unless it’s abortion we’re talking about, in which case 54 million babies can be slaughtered, and any attempt to curtail those deaths is seen as an “unconstitutional” violation of a woman’s “right to choose.” Makes perfect sense.

~~~~~~

Can you be a lady without being modest?   by Chelsea

I saw a girl over my lunch break the other day that was wearing a teeny-tiny little dress.  It was a strapless dress that she kept tugging to stay up, and it barely covered her bottom when she sat down.  With summer upon us, I think it is an excellent time to talk about modesty.  Last summer I was at a baseball game on the 4th of July in Kansas City and it was HOT.  It was so hot and humid and miserable that I wanted to strip down to my underwear and run through a sprinkler.  But I do know even though it is difficult and takes effort, it is possible to dress modestly even on the hottest days.

“But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” - Matthew 5:28

I didn’t use to really think anything of this verse, as it seems to only address guys.  But do you notice that it says he has committed adultery with her?  Would you commit adultery with that grandpa you pass on the street, or the teenage boy who bags your groceries?  I didn’t think so.  So why do we as women think it is ok for us to dress in a way that invites them go there with us in their minds? Because we have such a deep desire to be seen as beautiful we are often willing to sacrifice the purity of the men around us on the altar of our own beauty.  Women will flippantly say that it’s the guys problem not theirs, all the while selfishly enjoying the attention their clothing choices gain them.  But it’s not just the guy’s purity we are compromising when we ignore God’s way in the area of modesty, it is our own. Teach your children well.....

~~~~~~

Homosexuality Isn’t About Love By Jacob Rauch

Growing up in neighborhoods, you can be sure small boys will be playing war. Pointing tree branches at each other under cover of bushes, making high-pitched ‘PEW’ sounds, and hitting each other with fictitious bullets and letting out groans–falling dead like they do in Western Cowboy films. Your lawn can go from ten miniature soldiers, to a graveyard full of future war novel aficionados in seconds, complete with the closed eyes and stuck out tongues. Of course, until they want to play again. But once boys realize that war isn’t something you can get up from, and that artillery looks less like splendid fireworks and more like the forefronts of hell, war becomes something no one wants. Especially when there are no real winners. You look across the lines and see people who look just like you, just as scared, pale as milk. And they suffer and die for reasons they don’t understand completely, just like us. Eventually those boys just want to go home. War wasn’t all they dreamed it would be. Those boys probably made a fire out of those tree-branch guns.

Same goes for homosexuality. We never hear about what goes on in those bedrooms. All we hear about is how we’re hindering love on someone, and how it doesn’t really matter, and they’re only looking for equality and to be like everyone else. If you go google images of a Gay Pride parade (don’t), it’s perverse. There’s no love, or equality, it’s all about being the 1% and the perversion of what God created for marriage. Mind you, they’re called Gay Pride parades. They’re not only rallying, but they’re proud of their perversion. If straight people had a Heterosexuality Pride parade and just started fornicating in public in reveling clothes, they would be justifiably incarcerated. If it was about love and equality, they would look like us, gather peacefully like us, and in a decent way. Like rallying for a cause is supposed to be done.

Do you actually support the lifestyle of someone who practices homosexuality? Have you really seen what that looks like? Is what you’re exposing your children to as normal the same thing that goes on in Gay Pride parades? We can talk about how war is about bravery and patriotism. But many still have to die atrociously in the name of this concept of what every brave boy should want to play. We’re starting to burn our tree-branch guns, maybe we should include our tolerance in the blaze. I have lived and worked among homosexual men.  I've listened to their very explicit conversations about their relationships.  There was no LOVE talk, but a whole lot about PERVERTED behavior with howls of laughter.  Never once did I hear any conversation about a "loving relationship" - ever.

~~~~~~

Serious Question: How Does Obama Still Have Any Supporters? by Patrick Kane
No, but really … how the hell does President Obama still have any supporters? I’m not using this as a rhetorical device or as an excuse to tie in my commentary, or at least not entirely. I am honestly curious as to how any of the people who voted for a charming and promisingly liberal Candidate Obama in 2008, have anything but contempt and scorn for his 2013 doppelganger.  When I first came up with the idea to write an article asking this question, Edward Snowden had not yet released his nauseating report on the NSA’s theft of America’s private online information. Even before such an evilly unprecedented revelation, with the Fast and Furious, AP, IRS, and Benghazi scandals alone, I still couldn’t wrap my head around how he had any supporters. Now with knowledge of the NSA’s PRISM spy program, my question has shifted to, how is the entire country not baying for his impeachment?

It is impossible to simultaneously support both the 2008 and 2013 Obama, given the irreconcilable differences in what the President claimed to believe then, versus what he does now. While it is understandable that as people grow and age, they change their opinions on certain things, Obama hasn’t simply adjusted a few esoteric points in his philosophy. Obama has made a macabre metamorphosis into something that a Candidate Obama would have mocked and scorned, and his followers would have protested against. Given Obama’s harrowing use and support of the NSA’s Orwellian surveillance program, and his damnation of such programs and actions in his 2008 candidacy, we can determine that 2008 Obama wouldn’t support 2013 Obama. Given this, it seems to be nothing short of a sycophantic miracle that any of Obama’s 2008 supporters should still be his supporters. The comparison of Nixon’s 1972 Watergate to modern American political scandals has been frivolously overused since. So much so, that the term has ostensibly lost all meaning. I like many commentators think that comparing the IRS, AP, Benghazi, or NSA scandals to Watergate isn’t an appropriate comparison to make. However, unlike many commentators, I think that comparing Obama’s recent scandals to Watergate isn’t appropriate because the Watergate scandal does not compare in wretchedness to the recent crimes of the Obama administration. Surely if the wiretapping and theft of private information of a few people in a Washington D.C. hotel room is abhorrent, than the theft of millions of citizens private information on a regular basis is exponentially worse.

~~~~~~

House Votes to Cut Food Stamps by $2 Billion

The House voted on Wednesday to cut food stamps by $2 billion a year as part of a wide-ranging farm bill. The chamber rejected 234-188 a Democratic amendment to the five-year, half-trillion-dollar farm legislation that would have maintained current spending on food stamps, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. The overall bill cuts the $80 billion-a-year program by about 3 percent and makes it harder for some people to qualify. The food stamp cuts have complicated passage of the bill and its farm-state supporters were working to secure votes Wednesday. Many conservatives have said the food stamp cuts do not go far enough since the program has doubled in cost in the last five years and now feeds 1 in 7 Americans. Liberals have argued against any reductions, contending the House plan could take as many as 2 million needy recipients off the rolls. The White House has threatened a veto over the food stamp cuts. The amendment by Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., and other Democrats would have eliminated the SNAP cuts and taken the money from farm subsidies instead. “It’s too big, it’s too harsh and it’s going to hurt so many people,” McGovern said of the food aid cuts. [food stamps make up 80% of the total farm bill]

~~~~~~

"The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education, and family. The opinion advanced in the Notes on Virginia is undoubtedly correct, that foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity; and to its particular customs and manners. They will also entertain opinions on government congenial with those under which they have lived; or if they should be led hither from a preference to ours, how extremely unlikely is it that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism?" --Alexander Hamilton, From the New York Evening Post: an Examination of the President's Message, Continued, No. VIII, 1802

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent, or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press." --Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Cartwright, 1824

Top of Form

† † † † † † † † † † †