Justin's Fortress of Solitude

Hail to the King! Obama’s latest power grab

2012-01-05T16:20:00.003-07:00

Is Obama a dictator? Some of his recent statements certainly indicate that he intends to act like one, at least in the strictest sense of the term.

On radio this morning, Glenn played audio of the President giving a speech declaring his intentions to operate without Congress as much as possible. He said that those he disagreed with were blocking any movement, and he would work without the Legislative Branch wherever he could if they were not in step with his agenda.

“Does anybody think that the reason that we got in such a financial mess, the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, the worst economic crisis in a generation, that the reason was because of too much oversight of the financial industry?”

(Every sane person ever would yell: YES!!!!)

Obama continued, “Of course not. We shouldn’t be weakening oversight, we shouldn’t be weakening accountability. We should be strengthening it, especially when it comes to living up to families like yours.”

“ And I refuse to take no for an answer,” he said.

“ It’s not your choice whether you get to take no for an answer or not. That’s not your role,” Stu chided.

“He’s king now. He’s King Obama,” Pat joked. “As president of the United States, you don’t have the power not to take no for an answer. If congress tells you no, the answer is no.”

“You are a servant, not a dictator,” Glenn said.

“He said it before. He said it all before. He’s tired of waiting around and he’ll go around congress any way,” Glenn said.

“It’s exactly what we said on one of our first shows over at Fox. Two and a half years ago. Congress is going to be irrelevant. Well, they’re irrelevant,” Glenn explained.

Obama said that while he would continue to work with Congress where he could, he said “when Congress refuses to act, and as a result, hurts our economy and puts our people at risk, then I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them.”

“I’m not going to stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people that we were elected to serve,” he added.

“Americans, hear what your president is saying,” Glenn warned. “I’ll work within the system but if they won’t move, then I will dictate.”

“Yeah. He says I will give Republicans every opportunity to agree with me,” Stu said. “And when they do not agree with me, I’ll do what I want.”

“There are those that want to destroy our republic and our Constitution and they are in our own government. These people that swore to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic, some of them are enemies of our Constitution” Glenn warned.

“Here’s the President going around the Constitution.”

(Glenn Beck)

Now, a look back at 2008 with this audio from Glenn. I'm surprise our President hasn't change our National Anthem to this yet.

Glenn Beck announces “Restoring Love”, a three day “Celebration of Service” in Dallas, TX

2011-12-13T18:20:00.004-07:00

Glenn made not one but two major announcements on radio this morning! First, he announced that Mercury One, the non-profit he announced in June, was now up and running with a website and ready to start fundraising and putting donations and volunteer into action. The second announcement, however, was much more surprising in it’s scope and ambition – Glenn would be holding another “Restoring” event, this time in his new home of Dallas, TX. But unlike previous events in Washington, D.C. and Jerusalem, Israel, this event would see people take action like never before!

Glenn is calling the event “Restoring Love”, and it will see thousands of people across the country come to the Dallas/Ft. Worth area over three days to unite and perform acts of service across the area. Mercury One will administrate the event, but the non-profit will not be organizing specific service projects. Instead, Mercury One and Glenn Beck will be reaching out to individual organizations, churches, and more across the area and ask them the question: “If you had unlimited manpower for one day – what would you do?”

“I have said enough words. It’s time for me to help hold up the arms of community and faith leaders and serve those who are doing the heavy lifting on healing our nation,” Glenn said.

“It is not enough to talk about the problems, vote and expect others to do the work. When the world is in trouble the American people have always been the first to help. This time it is the America that is trouble but the good news is help is already here. We must set aside our differences and serve each other. With Love for even those who may despise or hate us we must renew our commitment to what Franklin called ‘the American religion’. The axiom ‘America is great because America is good’ is only true because of Franklin’s understanding that ‘there is a God, he will judge us, we should serve Him and the best way to serve Him is to serve our fellow man.’”
Advertisement

The events will take place from July 26th-July 28th. Volunteers will arrive to the Dallas area on July 26th to register, meet one another, and receive their assignments. July 27th will be a day of service across the Dallas/Ft. Worth area. July 28th will be an evening of inspiration with a special event held at Cowboys stadium.

Glenn will be holding a celebration of service on July 28th to cap off the three day “Restoring Love” event .The July 28th event will gather together people from across the country to recognize their labors of love and to reflect on the values that unite them. Speakers, music and a fireworks display are all in the works!

While participation at “Restoring Love” will be free on the 26th and 27th, a ticket will be required for the July 28th event at Cowboys Stadium. Those tickets will be available in February as well as all the information you’ll need to decide what ticket option works best for you. You can visit mercuryone.org for information and to pre-register for the event.

In 2010, Glenn brought hundreds of thousands of people to Washington, DC for “Restoring Honor”, an event which called for Americans to look to one another and to God for solutions rather than government. In 2011, Glenn and thousands of others went to Jerusalem, Israel for “Restoring Courage”, where Glenn and prominent faith leaders stood in solidarity with the nation of Israel. “Restoring Courage” was broadcast over GBTV, one of the world’s largest streaming video networks with more than 230,000 subscribers.

Glenn said, “It is time to deemphasize the political solution and first demand real change in ourselves. When we restore honor, courage and Love we will lead our nation away from fear, anger and hatred and ‘finish the hard work ahead to heal our nation with malice toward none and charity for all.’”

Glenn Beck

Thoughts from Benjamin Franklin

2011-12-13T17:57:00.004-07:00

"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."

This is the blessing of Capitalism and the curse of Socialism or Communism. Those Occupiers will never understand the truth what made this country so great. What the American Experiment meant to so many people though out the world and now they are disgusted on how much change has happen since out Founding. Never forget the truth.

Daylight Savings Time: How it Started & Why Some States Don’t Participate

2011-11-03T00:54:00.003-06:00

Show of hands: who’s excited to “fall back” this Sunday? Some think the illusion of an extra hour of sleep is completely worth it. While others bemoan the fact that it starts getting dark at 4:30 p.m.

Daylight sayings time has a contentious 227 year old history that didn’t begin in the U.S. and has many theories as to why it exists. How many of you said it exists for the farmers or for school kids?

According to Congressional Research, daylight savings was originally put in place to give people more daylight hours to work and do other activities. Conceived by Benjamin Franklin in 1784 at the time when he was Minister to France, Franklin felt it was only natural that when it was dark outside, more people would be sleeping and that extending daytime hours according to season would increase productivity.

William Willet proposed that daylight savings time be adopted in British Parliament because doing work and other activities in daylight hours would reduce demand on artificial light. Germany began observing daylight savings to conserve fuel during World War I.

The U.S. went through a lot of back-and-forth regarding daylight savings. The practice was adopted in 1918, abolished for unpopularity after WWI and reinstated during WWII — at this time it was called War Time and took place year round. Several states maintained daylight savings after this ended but it caused much angst to the transportation industry that pushed for uniformed timezones. After the Uniform Time Act of 1966 was passed, states could choose to participate in daylight savings, but the whole state had to adhere to the decision, but now states can split if they are also split according to time zone.

Aside from fuel and energy savings, safety of children headed to school, better operating hours for farmers and the fact that people just like long summer days have been used as popular reasons for daylight savings. Although it seems to have all these positive effects, a 2009 Michigan State University study correlated the time change in favor of summer hours with an increase in workplace injuries. The study found that workers slept about 40 minutes less per night during daylight swings.

Arizona, Hawaii, American Samoa, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands don’t participate in daylight savings. Indiana used to be split, but opted for daylight savings in 2005. Arizona, for example, doesn’t observe daylight savings due to its extreme heat, which would negate any energy savings by lengthening an already hot day.

(Liz Klimas, The Blaze)

Remember 9/11

2011-09-10T23:01:00.003-06:00

(Photo: REUTER_SSTR New)

(Photo: Spencer Platt_Getty Images)

(Photo: STRReuters_ Landov)

(Photo: Mario Tama_Getty Images)

(Photo: AP Photo_ Richard Drew)

(Photo: AP Photo_NYPD, Det. Greg Semendinger)

(Photo: STAN HONDAAFP_Getty Images)

(Photo: SHANNON STAPLETON_Reuters Landov)

(Photo: Getty Images)

(Photo: DOUG KANTERAFP_Getty Images)

(Photo: 2001 The Record (Bergen County, N.J.) Thomas E. Franklin)

A Message from Glenn Beck

A Message from our Prophet, President Thomas S. Monson

The calamity of September 11th, 2001 has cast a long shadow. Ten years later, many of us are still haunted by its terrible tragedy of lost lives and broken hearts. It is an episode of anguish that has become a defining moment in the history of the American nation and the world. This week, the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, along with Tom Brokaw, will pay its own homage to the unforgettable events of September 11, 2001.

There was, as many have noted, a remarkable surge of faith following the tragedy. People across the United States rediscovered the need for God and turned to Him for solace and understanding. Comfortable times were shattered. We felt the great unsteadiness of life and reached for the great steadiness of our Father in Heaven. And, as ever, we found it. Americans of all faiths came together in a remarkable way.

Sadly, it seems that much of that renewal of faith has waned in the years that have followed. Healing has come with time, but so has indifference. We forget how vulnerable and sorrowful we felt. Our sorrow moved us to remember the deep purposes of our lives. The darkness of our despair brought us a moment of enlightenment. But we are forgetful. When the depth of grief has passed, its lessons often pass from our minds and hearts as well.

Our Father’s commitment to us, His children, is unwavering. Indeed He softens the winters of our lives, but He also brightens our summers. Whether it is the best of times or the worst, He is with us. He has promised us that this will never change.

But we are less faithful than He is. By nature we are vain, frail, and foolish. We sometimes neglect God. Sometimes we fail to keep the commandments that He gives us to make us happy. Sometimes we fail to commune with Him in prayer. Sometimes we forget to succor the poor and the downtrodden who are also His children. And our forgetfulness is very much to our detriment.

If there is a spiritual lesson to be learned from our experience of that fateful day, it may be that we owe to God the same faithfulness that He gives to us. We should strive for steadiness, and for a commitment to God that does not ebb and flow with the years or the crises of our lives. It should not require tragedy for us to remember Him, and we should not be compelled to humility before giving Him our faith and trust. We too should be with Him in every season.

The way to be with God in every season is to strive to be near Him every week and each day. We truly “need Him every hour,” not just in hours of devastation. We must speak to Him, listen to Him, and serve Him. If we wish to serve Him, we should serve our fellow men. We will mourn the lives we lose, but we should also fix the lives that can be mended and heal the hearts that may yet be healed.

It is constancy that God would have from us. Tragedies are not merely opportunities to give Him a fleeting thought, or for momentary insight to His plan for our happiness. Destruction allows us to rebuild our lives in the way He teaches us, and to become something different than we were. We can make Him the center of our thoughts and His Son, Jesus Christ, the pattern for our behavior. We may not only find faith in God in our sorrow. We may also become faithful to Him in times of calm.

-Thomas S. Monson

(http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/09/09/glenn-remembers-911-chilling-audio-of-a-tragic-day-in-american-history/)
(http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=17167046&nid=1016)
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/911-destruction-allowed-us-to-spiritually-rebuild/2011/09/08/gIQAbkjKCK_blog.html)

A Declaration of Rights and Responsibilities

2011-09-05T01:12:00.003-06:00

As the American Declaration of Independence clearly states, when in the course of human events it becomes necessary for people to band together and collectively declare their rights and responsibilities to which the laws of nature and nature’s God entitle and bind them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should disclose the causes which impel them to such.

Therefore let us declare that we still hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But with those rights come responsibilities.
In order to continually experience life, liberty and happiness as promised, nature’s God demands obedience to His law to protect those rights. This is where we have fallen short and therefore, in order not to lose the blessings of freedom, the people of the world must turn from the sole focus on rights, and recognize the inherent and required responsibilities that we have.

Among the responsibilities to which we must adhere to maintain our God given rights are honor, courage and vigilance.
Over time, we believe that these basic human responsibilities have been trampled, and replaced with degradation, fear and apathy.

But when a long train of abuses of the people and conscience by the media and by other segments of society, pursuing the same path of reducing them to ridicule, scorn and even sub-human status, it is their right, it is their DUTY, to peacefully, but vehemently take a stand.

Men want to be king, and the more we concentrate on our rights and the more we are told not to worry about our responsibilities, the more we lose our rights.

Just as physics show, for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction. The time has come to declare that at least for the western world human rights are generally accepted and moving in the right direction however a new movement is required a movement of human responsibility.

The media, politicians and large institutions both academic and political have been lying to us, and we must demand the truth be told.

With that demand, comes the responsibility that we tell the truth first, in ourselves. Too many of us delegate our responsibility to the media…and too many believe there is no personal responsibility at all.

Political correctness has polluted our language and clouds our every discussion.

What was once accepted as good and right, is now considered bad and evil, and that which was bad and evil is now presented to the world as good and decent.

Opposing thoughts or opinions are referred to as crazy, insane, non-factual and utterly without merit. Furthermore, we are told, they should not even be heard.

Now, the time has come to take a stand by exhibiting the traits – honor, courage and vigilance.

What is honor? It is being honest in all of our dealings. It is showing loyalty and fairness, and being a beacon of integrity in all our beliefs and actions. It is showing respect for others.

Ruth honored Naomi when she told her that she would not leave her. That she would go wherever Naomi went, that she would live where Naomi lived and die where Naomi died. Her God would be Naomi’s God.

Courage is the ability to face danger, criticism or scorn – not without fear, but while overcoming fear to deal with that which comes our way.

When no one else in the Kingdom wanted to face the mighty giant, Goliath, young David was willing. David must have felt fear at the sight of his foe, but overcame it, and courageously vanquished his enemy.

Vigilance is being watchful for all forms of treachery and tyranny, lies and deceit. The person in the watchtower, waiting all night, suddenly sounding the alarm that the enemy is coming. The careful observer of the markets and economies who proclaims to the world, all is not well, there is trouble ahead and the outspoken critic of the powerful, going against societies’ grain, warning that all is not as we’re being told. These are the vigilant.

We implore all people to stand with these characteristics – honor, courage and vigilance.

To that end, we must restore honor in our own lives. Seek after the truth. Declare right now, that no longer will we simply accept what is told us by the media or anyone else.

The media has the responsibility to tell the truth, we have the responsibility to learn it.

Stand with courage, even if it means the end of our jobs, the end of our positions in life…or even the end of our very lives.
We must have the courage to be peaceful, while recognizing the courage to defend and respond to threats and/or attacks when necessary.

Turn the other cheek when possible.

We must be vigilant. We must think the unthinkable. The holocaust occurred because no one could imagine it, but evil never sleeps, and neither must we.

As Edmund Burke said, “all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” We must DO something. Stand watch. Speak up. Become involved.

Thus, we the people do hereby declare not only our rights, but do now establish this bill of responsibilities.

1. Because I have the right to choose, I recognize that I am accountable to God and have the responsibility to keep the 10 commandments in my own life.

2. Because I have the right to worship as I choose, I have the responsibility to honor the right of others to worship as they see fit.

3. Because I have freedom of speech, I have the responsibility to defend the speech of others, even if I strongly disagree with what they’re saying.

4. Because I have the right to pursue happiness, I have the responsibility to show humility and express gratitude for all the blessings I enjoy and the rights I’ve been given.

5. Because I have the right to honest and good government I will seek out honest and just representatives when possible. If I cannot find one then I accept the responsibility to take that place.

6. Because I have the God given right to liberty, I have the personal responsibility to have the courage to defend others to be secure in their persons, lives and property.

7. Because I have the right to equal justice, I will stand for those who are wrongly accused or unjustly blamed.

8. Because I have the right to knowledge, I will be accountable for myself and my children’s education…to live our lives in such a way that insures the continuation of truth.

9. Because I have the right to pursue my dreams and keep the fruits of my labor, I have the responsibility to feed, protect and shelter my family, the less fortunate, the fatherless, the old and infirm.

10. Because I have a right to the truth, I will not bear false witness nor will I stand idly by as others do.

Unconditionally, while maintaining my responsibility to compassionately yet fiercely stand against those things that decay the natural rights of all men. And for the support of this declaration, and with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence we mutually pledge to each other our lives, fortunes and sacred honor.

-Glenn Beck

(http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/08/24/declaration-of-rights-responsibilities)

Restoring Courage: Stand with Israel!

2011-08-24T18:07:00.002-06:00

Last year, hundreds of thousands of Americans gathered at the Lincoln Memorial for an event called Restoring Honor.
Some of you were there. It may have changed you. I know it changed me.
In August, I challenged Americans to live a life of honesty and integrity. This year I have a new challenge.
Today, I ask you turn your eyes to Israel and restore courage.
I have been asked: What can you teach Israel about Courage? My answer is simple. Nothing.
Then they ask: Why are you coming to Israel? Because, I say: In Israel, you see courage.

In Israel, there is more courage in one square mile than in all of Europe. In Israel, there is more courage in one soldier than in the combined and cold hearts of every bureaucrat at the United Nations. In Israel, you can find people who will stand against incredible odds… against the entire tide of global opinion, for what is right and good and true. Israel is not a perfect country. No country is perfect. But it tries… and it is courageous.
Today, the world needs courage more than ever.
We need it because whether you live here in Jerusalem, or in London, or in Athens, or in Washington, D.C., you know – we all know — the world is changing, the world is burning, and whatever we have known… whatever we’ve thought would never change… whatever we’ve grown to think is solid and strong and durable … is under siege.
You don’t have to be a prophet to know that things are not going well in the world. The threats are mounting. Darkness is falling.
Far too many politicians are willing to look away. The shape shifters are at work. They have turned day into night, good into evil. They have changed the very meaning of words.
In New York, the so-called leaders of the world talk about abuses of human rights. But what they will do is abuse the very meaning of the phrase “human rights.”
“Human rights,” they say. But who will they focus on? Libya? Syria? North Korea? No.
They will condemn Israel. Tiny Israel. Democratic Israel. Free Israel. Israel, which values life above all other things.
Israel, as usual, is the exception.

——-
The world is adrift. The world is confused.
In Europe, the great nations of the past – Greece, Italy, Spain, Britain – are falling into chaos and violence.
We have raised up a generation who cannot tell the difference between what they owe society and what society owes them.
They interviewed the rioters in England. Why, they were asked, are you stealing shoes or televisions. “Because,” the rioters said in response, “because we deserve them.”
We may think: Oh, how different are today’s youth! But the young merely imitate their parents. They have seen how the world reacts to evil – with indifference. They watch, they learn, they imitate. What one generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace.
When the Fogel family was killed in their sleep the world barely took note. The grand councils of earth condemn Israel. Across the border, Syria slaughters its own citizens. The grand councils are silent. It’s no wonder children light their streets on fire.
These international councils, these panels of so-called diplomats, condemn Israel not because they believe Israel needs to be corrected. They do so because it is convenient.
Everyone does it. In some countries, it’s a crime not to.
The diplomats are afraid, and so they submit. They surrender to falsehood. The truth matters not. To the keepers of conventional wisdom, a sacrifice of the truth is a small price to pay. What difference does it make if we beat up on little Israel? These are the actions of the fearful and cowards.
But I stand here to tell you this: Fear is the pathway to surrender. And to overcome fear, we must have courage.

This is hard to do. Especially here. Especially now.
The plotters plot. The schemers scheme. And it is easy to tremble with doubt.
Even Israelis – the most courageous people on earth – doubt themselves. “Did we do something to deserve this? Perhaps if we just do something else, it will all go away!”
My Israeli friends, I have a message: You must not lose hope. You must not lose confidence. You must have courage.
And you must draw courage from the knowledge that you were led to this land by God.And in the affairs of mankind, God is not a stranger to the children of Abraham.

He promised that Israel would rise again. For two thousand years the Jewish people held on to this promise. We have seen the promise fulfilled.
Israel, we have witnessed the dawn of your redemption.
We live in an age of manmade, technological miracles. But these are the days of divine miracles.
Not by the hand of any man, whether his name is Balfour or Truman, does Israel exist. Israel is here because the God of Abraham keeps His covenants.
In synagogues just over a week ago, they read the words of the prophet Isaiah:
“Comfort, oh comfort My people,
Says your God.
Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
And declare to her
Her term of hard service is over . . .”
And look at us! Here we are – in Jerusalem united. Jerusalem rebuilt.
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not neutral in the affairs of mankind. God is not indifferent to Israel. He will not forsake you nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant he made with your forefathers.
—–
In the 40 years of wandering in the desert, the ancient Hebrews were led through the dark of night by a pillar of fire.
Courage is the act of walking into the darkness, and knowing that each step would be guided and protected by the pillar of fire, if we follow it. God is with us.
I will admit, I did not know this, until very recently.
For the first half of my life I did very little. I was the stereotypical American that believed two oceans would forever shelter me.
As a radio and TV commentator, my job was little more than pointing out the problems. And I did. I saw what I thought were obvious things, and I made obvious observations.
I saw the interviews of Osama bin Laden, and so in 1999, I said he will attack New York again. He did.
I saw the unreal expectations of ordinary Americans in 2006, and so I said – there will be a crash in the housing market. It can’t keep going up. And it crashed.
I saw the global financial markets ready to seize up in 2007… I saw the coming unrest and riots in Europe in 2008.
It didn’t take a prophet to see these things – all you had to do was recognize that evil exists and evil was going unopposed.
And so this year, when I saw Tunisia’s and Egypt’s rulers crack and fall and the world called it the Arab Spring, I said: Where could this be going? And behind these revolutions was a familiar force, a force that will place those nations under a new pharaoh. And that force, I said, would come up to the borders of Israel. And so it has.
We are not at the mercy of these events. We can alter the course of history. We can stand against the dangerous arc of this story.
But we need people who are willing to speak truth. We need inspiration. We need a model to follow.
The last century was a century of genocide. A century where evil rose up again and again… swallowing up the lives of millions.
But evil met its match. Goodness eventually prevailed. People like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King Jr. and Lech Walesa and Mother Theresa and Henrietta Szold awoke the world.
They gave their lives to the pursuit of human rights. They took the side of justice against injustice, they held aloft the torch of freedom to push out the darkness of hate.
These men and women lived difficult lives. They often lived shortened lives. They were often born to relative privilege, but willing to take on suffering. They did want not to martyr themselves. They would have happily lived to the end of their natural lives in comfort… but to the righteous, there is no comfort when evil has taken root.
But the cause of human rights has been taken over by organizations who share little with the individuals who led the movement. Human rights was once a cry for justice. Now it used as a threat.
These organizations have become bullies and grotesque parodies of the principles they pretend to represent. They criticize free nations and spare the unfree. They denounce nations like Israel and America, who have high standards for freedom, and leave alone nations that have no freedom at all. They are nearly comical in their double-standards. Whatever moral force they once had is spent. Their time is up. And so, we dismiss them.
Today, we take back the phrase “human rights” and place it where it belongs, as the first half of God’s plan for humanity. The second half is responsibility.

If we want to be endowed with rights – real human rights, we have to act with responsibility. We must not be comfortable with rights. We must be comfortable with responsibility. We cannot use our few short years on this planet enjoying our rights… we must do everything we can living by our responsibilities to our fellow man. Rights and responsibilities. The two go hand-in-hand, arm-in-arm, together.
Nowhere in the Torah or the Christian Scriptures do you see the phrase words “human rights.” But there is a lot in there about responsibilities.
Everything we know about human rights and civilization came from this place. Whether you live by 613 commandments or 10 or just one golden rule, they all came from here. This throne of the Lord.
When the world turns its back on Israel and the Jewish people, the world turns its back on the source of all human rights. Without the Jewish people, humanity would not know that every individual life has dignity, that every life is sacred, that God names every star and knows every soul. That was God’s message to Abraham and Moses. It is the message of the Jewish people to the world, and by their very existence they teach it to us.
Today I propose a new path. I propose a path led by you – the individual, linked in arms with other individuals. A path where governments and so-called human rights organizations get out of the way and people come together to solve our problems. As God intended.
Some may ask: Why not leave this work up to others – the well-connected and well-educated and well-heeled, our political leaders or the media?
Well, I ask you: Whom do you trust to do this sacred work?
Who will protect your rights better? A king, president or you?
Who will protect the truth? A reporter, producer or you?
Who will protect and teach your children to seek truth? A textbook committee, an education bureaucrat, or you?
Did a commission of wise men stop the Holocaust? Did a committee of Congress end Jim Crow?
No. In each case, the work was done by individuals who would not abide convenient lies. They saw injustice and they called it out. They saw their nation wage war against a single group and they said “Not in My Name.” They didn’t wait for the conventions of society to catch up to God’s laws. They pushed. They pressed. And they were victorious.
This spirit lives within us. I believe that you will link arms with others and stand with courage, and walk behind the pillar of fire.
—–
You see evil rear its head in our time. You see the signs again. The swastikas are on display in the street marches. This week they’re holding up signs in Cairo that say: We’re building the gas chambers. They dress their children in suicide belts. They are given the choice, and they choose death.

Let us have the courage to choose life. No more incitement. No more threats. No more terror. No more talk of genocide. No more hate. No fear. No more lies.
We can read their signs, listen to their speeches. So we know that they say what they mean and mean what they say.
Well: So do we.
And I know we will be victorious. Because while their conviction is rooted in hate, our conviction is rooted in love. And love always wins.
When Naomi and her daughters in law lost their husbands, Naomi knew that their future would be far brighter if they went back to their families, to start over. But her daughter in law Ruth would have none of it. She said,
“Entreat me not to leave thee,
or to return from following after thee:
for whither thou goest, I will go;
and where thou lodgest, I will lodge:
thy people shall be my people,
and thy God my God:
Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried.”
And so I say that if the world decides it must know who will stand with Israel, who will stand with the Jewish people, so they know exactly who to condemn, who to target, let them know this.
Condemn me. Target me. I will stand with Israel. I will stand with the Jewish people. And if they want to round us up again, I will proudly raise my hand and say “Take me first.”
—–
There is courage in our time. It is here in this space. It is found everywhere God resides in the hearts of man. It is found in Joplin Missouri. Joplin was devastated by a tornado a mile wide. They lost their hospital and their school. Joplin looked more like a moonscape than the pleasant town it was.
But this is a town not looking to take help but to offer it. They began to gather early this morning. Many are taking the day off from work to show their dedication and love of the Jewish people and the state of Israel.
Our problems demand more than checkbook courage. It’s easy to write a check. But we can’t outsource love and truth and courage. We must do it ourselves. We must roll up our sleeves to make a lasting difference.
We will find hope. We will renew ourselves. We will be the first to regain what many of us have lost … Our faith. Together, we will begin to change the world.
We won’t find the answers in some global body halfway around the world…but in ourselves. We won’t find purpose in the drumbeat of destruction and disobedience we hear in the West, but in a mission of building and honor and courage.
In people like Rami Levi. In people like Tamar Fogel. In the owners, one a Jew the other an Arab, who built and reopened the Maxim restaurant after it was bombed. Each made a decision on their own to build.
The prophets and sages promise us, that by small and simple things do great things come to pass… and small means will confound the wise. Let us confound the world.
This will be a movement of honor…. courage… and responsibility.
God has made man in His image and after His likeness. He has endowed us with great privileges and rights. And He has given us purpose on this earth. His blessings are our rights. His purpose is our responsibility.
Because we have a right to worship freely, let us declare: We have a responsibility to fight for the rights of others to worship freely.
Because we have a right to pursue happiness, we have a responsibility to be thankful for our blessings and to comfort the needy.
Because we have a right to knowledge and truth, we have a responsibility to pursue it, and to fight falsehood.
These declarations of responsibility, and others, are being posted at www.glennbeck.com. In the coming days, I want each of you to print them, read them, carry them, and make them a part of your lives. Share them with your family and friends. Remember all that God has done for you, teach these lessons to your children, and obey God’s word. And join me on a historic march towards human responsibility.
Evil is counting on us to do nothing. Evil is counting on us to be afraid. But evil has misjudged us.
Evil has misjudged us as it has misjudged the Jewish people. The last line of a Jewish prayer is…
Adonai li, v’lo ira
God is with me, I fear not.
Those two lines have been uttered for centuries. Through crusades. Through progroms. Through the gas chambers. At the hands of butchers.
In every generation, they rise up to kill Jews. And in every generation, the answer is the same.
LO IRA. I fear not.
I will wait for someone else to rise no more. This time, we are the ones who say – LO IRA.
—–
Let us begin here: some people call Israel an apartheid state. I reject that. And so immediately following this program I will fly to South Africa, which is where apartheid actually existed. I will broadcast from Cape Town tomorrow morning to remind the world what the evil of apartheid really looked like.
And I will learn from the people who conquered the hatred, ignorance and bigotry and who chartered a peaceful course for a new South Africa.
Then on Friday I will fly to South America to plead the case of human responsibility to a group of nearly 5,000 local leaders from all over the continent and ask them to join me in standing in defense of Israel, the Jewish people and responsibility.
Finally on Sunday, I will speak to 5,000 Americans in Dallas, Texas. I have chosen to end my week in the town where I will headquarter the charitable division of my company, Mercury One. Dedicated to the idea that one man, inspired by one God, makes a difference. This trip will end where a global moment begins.
This won’t be easy for me, and it won’t be easy for you.
Others will say, “come with us, over the horizon.” But that horizon is a cliff. And when you don’t go along, you will stand out. You will be mocked and in some cases your life may be in danger.
So you must remember to say: LO IRA. I fear not.
No one wants to be on the point, the person that sticks out. My first death threat came in 2002 after my first visit to Israel and my declaration of support of the Jewish people and state. My latest death threat was today.
And so I say: LO IRA. I fear not.
Many of us may fall along the way. Some will have their reputation destroyed or business or career ended and others still may pay the ultimate price.
But let us link arms and make the journey together and if one shall fall, let 10 join our ranks.
You were not born so someone else could rule over you. God did not create you, endow you with rights so you could remain silent while injustice and evil grow. You have a purpose and it is rooted in love, compassion and responsibility.
There are many reasons to hear my words, leave here and do nothing. We all have been trained to believe that we are not strong enough, smart enough or powerful enough.
Abraham was old, Moses was slow of speech, Ruth was a widow, David was a little boy, Joseph was in prison, and Lazarus was dead. What is your excuse?
You were born for a time such as this. Begin by declaring that this is why you were placed on this earth. It doesn’t matter how you’ve spent your years on this planet. What matters is what you do now from here.
I cannot promise you safety, prosperity or comfort.
But I can promise you this. One day, your children and grandchildren will ask you: “What did you do when the world was on the edge again? What did you say when the West, Israel and the Jews were blamed again?”
You will look them in the eye and say: I had courage. And on the 24th of Av, I committed to stand with courage… to walk… to march… arm in arm… behind God’s pillar of fire.
Adonai li v’Lo Ira.
God is with me, I fear not.

My You Tube Videos

2011-01-23T21:44:00.004-07:00

I know it has been too long since my last post. It has probably been awhile since anyone has looked at my You Tube videos. It has been a little over three years now since I posted these videos on You Tube, and several thousand people have watch them. It brings back good memories from my mission, collecting hundreds of pictures I cut out from Ensigns and Liahonas. Then when I got back, putting them all through a scanner to be downloaded on my computer. Then one day I thought, with all these pictures I could easily put them in a sideshow, with music, and make a nice movie. So instead of playing video games that day, I made these. It is cool to see that I put a little computer and editing skills to work. :)

Music and pictures overtake our two most used senses, seeing & hearing. The body takes so much in, that it reaches our soul. Probably the reason why the Spirit can touch our souls with ease, with the right music and right pictures of course. Even though there has been thousands of people that have viewed my videos, if it was only one person, that would give me sufficient joy. I invite all of you to watch these videos again and share them to as many people as you can. Love you all, Enjoy! :)

Chris Christie take MSNBC to school!

2010-07-31T00:54:00.003-06:00

Sorry I've slowed down on my post lately, but after I saw this clip, I had to share it with everyone. This is Chris Cristie, Governor of New Jersey, and he is being asked questions on MSNBC. If you don't know me to be very conservative by now than I don't think you read my blog at all. Just when these reporters thought they got Chris in a corner and hoping that he breaks, he comes back fighting so strong they are shut down. We need more public servants like Cristie, ones that have a spine, says things how they are, and won't hold back to say the truth. Enjoy!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

How did Communism become Cool?

2010-06-27T00:46:00.002-06:00

Glenn aired this last Thursday, but I felt I should share it with everyone. Very good, Enjoy!

Jon Voight's letter to President Obama

2010-06-23T18:33:00.003-06:00

Here is a Great American, and Actor! Jon Voight is one of the few conservative actors that still survive in Hollywood, and he has never be shy to speak out his views.

Mr. Voight gives a serious letter to our President with words that need to be said and are greatly needed to be know at this time. We need more people like Mr. Voight to speak the truth to our President. This is a MUST READ! Read it here, in the Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/22/dear-mr-president-jon-voight/

May we all continue to wake up and understand the seriousness of what this President is doing in the Fundamental Transformation of our Country.

(picture by the Associated Press)

Congressman Bob Etheridge (D-NC) assaults a Student

2010-06-14T23:57:00.002-06:00

I hope your local congressman isn't this guy, but unfortunately there are some of this scum in Washington. I was very disturb by this congressman's actions.

Clarke and Dawe: Lending merry-go-round

2010-06-07T18:09:00.003-06:00

Her is a funny video to help you understand how mess up the economy's of several European countries are, enjoy! :)

8: The Mormon Proposition, The latest anti-mormon film.

2010-06-05T20:15:00.003-06:00

I think all of us can remember when Proposition 8 was brought to the people of California to decided whether they want the right for Gay Marriage to be legal in California and to be put in their state constitution. The proposition specifically defined marriage to be between a man and a woman. The results of the vote ended up showing the people of California decided as a majority, to uphold the constitutional statement of marriage is between a man and a woman.

During the time period leading up to the vote there was many protests going on, especially those opposing the Church for promoting the people to vote yes to Prop. 8. I remember as well all of the violence, both verbal and physical, towards members as they left the L.A. Temple and other California Temples. I also remember the discussions I participated with other classmates in one of my Institute classes. Basically, we discussed how crucial it was that people said yes to Prop. 8, and how the rights to Gays and Lesbians would conflict with the sacred ordinances down in our Temples. But we also looked at how uninformed the people opposing Prop. 8 were and how stirred up they were toward the Church while not be able to truly understand the reason why we believe marriage is suppose to be between a man and a woman, and that marriage is a sacred ordinance that was brought to God's Children since Adam & Eve.

Now after Prop. 8 was uphold, and the definition of marriage to be between a man and a woman would remain part of California's Constitution, everything kind died down in the news and on TV, until now. There is a documentary movie coming out on June 18th, that is titled 8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION. When I first looked at the trailer of this movie, I could not believe my eyes in what I was seeing and how far away from the truth it was. The spirit just hit like a spear piercing straight through my chest, telling me how far from the truth it was. Nonetheless, I felt it was important to share with you guys this video, for I thought it would be important for everyone to come to a better understanding where these people are coming from. But most importantly, to testify that in these latter-days, Satan is pulling all of his hidden tricks to do everything possible to stop the work to go forth.

Just remember this, from the famous words of Elder Bruce R. McConkie from October General Conference of 1984, when he said,

"The Church is like a great caravan—organized, prepared, following an appointed course, with its captains of tens and captains of hundreds all in place. What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heels of the weary travelers? Or that predators claim those few who fall by the way? The caravan moves on.

Is there a ravine to cross, a miry mud hole to pull through, a steep grade to climb? So be it. The oxen are strong and the teamsters wise. The caravan moves on.

Are there storms that rage along the way, floods that wash away the bridges, deserts to cross, and rivers to ford? Such is life in this fallen sphere. The caravan moves on.

Ahead is the celestial city, the eternal Zion of our God, where all who maintain their position in the caravan shall find food and drink and rest. Thank God that the caravan moves on!

In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, amen."

Bruce R. McConkie, “The Caravan Moves On,” Ensign, Nov 1984, 82

Here is the trailer for your viewing.

Founders Fridays: Benjamin Franklin

2010-06-05T02:31:00.000-06:00

A Memorial Day Message

2010-05-31T16:37:00.012-06:00

While I was on my way to work this morning and listening to talk radio, as always, I was hearing them talked about how far away many of us have gone from how we should celebrate Memorial Day. Many see today as the official kick off to summer. Many have the day off from work, so they take that opportunity to maybe do some late spring cleaning, getting the house ready for summer. Many people use this day to get their boats and swim gear out and head out to the local lake or to the ocean. For others, it is a great day to go to the local park and have their first big picnic of the summer. Also, it could be the day you can finally get out your old BBQ, clean it up from being dormant over the winter, and invite your family and friends over to have a good old fashion grilling of burgers, hot dogs, bratwurst, steaks, etc.... But I think many of us don't take enough time on this day to recognize its real purpose.
From the moment settlers came to this nation, and when this nation was born, they and their children and their children's children and so forth, have left their homes and family, took upon themselves their arms, and went forth with so much bravery and dedication to protect this nation. They fought for the freedoms that were written by an iron pen, upon that great document we call our Constitution. And many of them gave their lives in the process. The lives they gave, gave us the ability and freedom to have that boat to go to the lake with, to have a local park for our picnics, and to have a good old fashion BBQ grilling feast with family and friends. Thank you, the men and woman that gave their lives to protect our great nation and the freedoms that make it so great!When I got to work today, I notice the American Flag we have on a post in the middle of the mall I work at. I paused for a few minutes, and decided to bring the flag down at half staff. As I was doing this I pondered over the meaning of our flag and it name, The Star Spangled Banner.
It was the morning of September 13, 1814. We were at war with the British. They just finished taking control of Washington, D.C, and just arrived at the shores of Baltimore. British ships continued throughout the day and the long rainy night, hurling bombs toward Fort McHenry. Then there was a lawyer, from Washington, D.C., named Francis Scott Key, who was there that day. He went to a British ship to help secure the release of a doctor from Maryland, who was previously captured by the British as they left the capitol to Baltimore. He was successful in having him released, but he had to wait with the doctor on a boat, that was not involved in the battle, about eight miles away from Fort McHenry.

Throughout the night, Mr. Key heard the gun fire from the ships and the occasional return fire from the fort. By dawn, the gun fire had faded away, and made Mr. Key wondered if the fort had be captured. He got out his telescope, focused it towards the fort's flag pole, and there he saw the morning breeze blow right through a large garrison flag. With great excitement and relief to see the sight of that flag, showing him that the fort had not fallen and been captured, Mr. Key immediately began writing some words in a poem on a piece of paper he had in his pocket.

The British gave up and left, it was safe for Mr. Key and the doctor to return to Baltimore. Mr. Key went to a local hotel and completed that poem. The poem soon was put to music, and the song and the flag became known as The Star Spangled Banner. Some of us have a hard time remembering the one verse of the poem we sing as our nation's anthem, but take some time to read the whole poem from Francis Scott Key. May you come to a better understand more about our flag, The Star Spangled Banner. After reading the poem, I started to wish for us to sing the whole poem as our National Anthem.

Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars thru the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more!
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved home and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

-Francis Scott Key, 1814

In God we trust that our Star Spangled Banner shall always wave, for we are the land of the free and the home of the brave!
I also want to share a letter, from Glenn Beck, giving a message for America this day, enjoy!

Throughout the year, there are plenty of holidays you might like to celebrate more than once. Kids would probably like a couple extra days of Christmas presents and Halloween candy…two Valentine’s Days for your wife…and I would give plenty of thanks for an extra day of pie, turkey, stuffing and…well, more pie. But more than any of those, the one day I say deserves as much repeating, reverence and recognition as it can get is today—Memorial Day. Unlike most holidays, the sentiment behind Memorial Day isn’t abstract—it’s as concrete and immediate as today’s headlines.

Officially speaking, Memorial Day is a United States federal holiday observed on the last Monday of May. Formerly known as Decoration Day, it commemorates U.S. men and women who died while in the military service. Now, you don’t need a history lesson to understand the sacrifice made by those who wear an American flag on their arm and put themselves in harm’s way—just watch tonight’s news.
We didn’t start celebrating Memorial Day until after the Civil War, but it was during that conflict, November of 1863, that President Abraham Lincoln gave his historic Gettysburg Address and eloquently laid out the simple yet profound idea that lies at the heart of this day:

It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us - that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion - that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain - that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

“The last full measure of devotion”—a beautiful phrase describing a tragic consequence. And while the fight has moved from within our own country to conflicts overseas, the giving of your life in service to your country remains a uniquely sacred act. American soldiers are fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the sad reality is those are not the last two wars that will ever need fighting. On this Memorial Day and all the days before and after it, we must remember those in our military who bravely served and never made it home.

As a way of keeping the spirit of Memorial Day alive the whole year through, I hope you’ll join me for my Restoring Honor Rally at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. on August 28, 2010. For this event I’ve partnered with the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, a non-profit organization that provides immediate financial assistance to severely wounded special operations personnel and their families, as well as full scholarship grants and family counseling to the surviving children of special operations personnel who die in operational or training missions. You can find out more about their incredible work HERE and more about the Restoring Honor Rally HERE.

Just as we aren’t just Christians on Christmas or patriots on the 4th of July, we owe more to the fallen than just remembering them on Memorial Day. Let today mark the beginning of your year-round remembrance, and never forget that the price of living free to celebrate this day with your family was paid by those who wore a uniform, carried a gun, and gave “the last full measure of their devotion.”

God bless you, your family, and the United States of America.

Revisionist History

2010-05-23T23:24:00.003-06:00

There is many things I learned back in the day when I first taught about American History and the people that were involved, but over the last couple years I have been learning a lot from Glenn and from my own personal research, and I have been amazed of what had been put in our history books. It is amazing to find how much had been left out and how much has gone so far away from the Truth. I have never accepted everything that comes out of Glenn's mouth to be truth, in fact Glenn has for a long time tell everyone not to accept everything that comes out of his mouth. What he does ask is that we take in the facts, do our own research, and make the decision through our own intellect.

Here is a video segment from Glenn's TV show talking about what facts have been left our of American History. Enjoy!

George Washington, The Indispensable Man

2010-05-10T21:24:00.006-06:00

George Washington was called the indispensable man. I didn't even know why until — until — I mean, I've read a lot of books on George Washington. This is the best book ever written on George Washington, "The Real George Washington." It's the first in a series. And I love it because it's mainly his words and you get to know who he was.

I didn't really know why he was called the indispensable man.

Sorry, I like George Washington an awful lot. And he's the kind of guy that I've been looking for. And I think we all have — we've been looking for a guy who is just honest and doesn't want to serve, you know?

People who say — all the time — "Well, I want to be president." You do? Why exactly? I can't imagine a worse job. I can't imagine — especially now, the next guy who serves, even this president, what's left of our country? How do you knit this all back together?

Well, quite honestly, it wasn't much different back when George Washington was around. Things were a mess. And he was the indispensable man because nobody trusted anybody. All the states were arguing with each other. Nobody — you couldn't sell anything across the border. The whole thing was falling apart.

Here is George Washington, a man who at 16 was out surveying land for his country, which was then Great Britain. All he wanted to do was go to Mount Vernon and be a farmer. His countries, Britain and then the United States of America, had him serving for year after year after year after year.

After he won the Revolutionary War, he went back to be that farmer in Mount Vernon. And things started to fall apart. And they came knocking at his door and said, George, we need you, because the whole thing is falling apart. I'm paraphrasing, but I think it was pretty close to — "Have I not yet done enough for my country?" No.

He went back and he didn't say very much during the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention. He didn't say much. He didn't have to.

He was a revered figure. He was — that's my favorite painting of him. He was a revered figure. He was a guy — this was actually a painting done on the, just on the words of one of the — I think it was a farmer if I'm not mistaken. A farmer came into the field one day, and heard some noise and heard him standing there, in the field and he just watched him as he got down in Valley Forge on one knee and he prayed all by himself.

He's a guy that in the end could have been made king. He could have been made a ruler. He's a guy who could have been really upset at Congress. Boy, oh, boy.

Valley Forge — I mean, when you think of Valley Forge and how many times, it wasn't just one year they were cold and didn't have shoes. They didn't have pants. And it was year after year after year. I used to live near Valley Forge. It's not that far from Philadelphia.

And yet, Congress just — they wouldn't even — they just wouldn't help our troops. And he stuck with them. In the end, they weren't going to pay the troops.

And — you know, I think my most telling moment of George Washington's power, the soldiers were going to a revolt. They had just won against the most powerful army on the planet, Great Britain. And then they found out the United States of America, what a surprise, weasely Congress wasn't going to take care of the troops, wasn't going to pay them.

Well, they went nuts. They went nuts.

And they said, you're in the going to pay us? We've just defeated Great Britain! We're afraid of you?

And they made a plan and they knew Washington wouldn't go it with. And they made a plan to go and kill everybody in Congress. Washington heard about it. He said let's not replace one tyrant with another.

They didn't listen to him. They had a secret meeting. He wasn't invited to it.

He knew what was going on. He went to Congress and he got a letter from a member of Congress that said, OK, guys. I'll do my best. Please, give me more time. I'll do my best.

He found out about this meeting and he walked in, in the middle of it. All heads turned and it became silent. They didn't know what to say. He said — again, paraphrasing — "Gentlemen, I know what you're doing. Don't do it. Don't do it. We didn't work this hard."

He said, "I have a letter in my pocket," and he reached into his pocket. And he opened up the letter and he was going to read it. But he needed his glasses.

This is a guy who used to sit on top of a white horse in the middle of a battle and he never got shot. They thought this guy was god. And when he put his glasses on, he said, "I am sorry. But I have grown old and gray in the service of my country."

Nobody had ever seen him with his glasses on. It seems like such a silly story, but it goes to the power of George Washington. He took his glasses off, folded the paper up. Never read it and walked out.

They decided not to storm Congress. But they were mad at George Washington. In the end, a lot of his troops didn't — weren't real happy with him, didn't want to stand with him.

I think what I like about George Washington is most of the choices he made, he didn't want to make. Most of the things he did, he didn't want to do. He was revered for it. He was revered.

And I think it's because they knew that in the end, he didn't matter to him. It was just doing the right thing. That's what mattered.

(http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/40426)

Founders' Fridays: Samuel Adams

2010-05-01T02:13:00.006-06:00

Glenn Beck has started this week to dedicate every Friday to talk about a founding father. This Friday was Samuel Adams. A great man and the one that started the founding. Here is a portion of it, enjoy!

Our Founding Fathers were once revered in this country as divinely inspired, courageous visionaries. But now, after the past 100 years of "enlightenment," we've come to realize that they were nothing but old, white, racist, heathens. The "myth" of our Christian founding has been obliterated and, at best, we now know that they were no more than "deists" at best.

That's what the progressives have had to do to the memory of those great men. Men who — while not perfect, certainly, men with flaws — were in fact, mostly Christian and nearly all believers.

In order to restore the country, we have to restore the men who founded it on certain principles to the rightful place in our national psyche.

I want to start with the man known at the time as "the father of the American Revolution," but now has become all but forgotten.

We start with Samuel Adams. I want to tell you a story about him with the help of a man named Stephen McDowell, a historian from the Providence Foundation.

In the first two years of the War for Independence, the Americans had seen a few successes but many more defeats. If you ever get frustrated or down in your life, remember that George Washington lost every single battle he fought for over a year during the opening stages of the war.

By 1777, prospects were grim with little hope of overall victory in the war. By September, the army had been driven out of New York and New Jersey and had lost the strategic Fort Ticonderoga in upstate New York.

On September 11, Washington was defeated at the Battle of Brandywine in Delaware; Americans had 200 soldiers killed, 500 wounded and 400 captured. Keep in mind that Washington only had about 14,000 troops. With the defeat, his troops deserted and numbers fell to only 6,000.

Ten days later in Pennsylvania, another 300 soldiers were killed or wounded and 100 captured at the Paoli Massacre.

By now, only 20 members of the Continental Congress even remained together and they met to decide whether they should even continue the struggle for liberty or if it was now a lost cause.

One of those present was Samuel Adams, a delegate from Massachusetts who had been involved in the cause of independence from the beginning. In fact, he had earned the title, "Father of the American Revolution" for his leadership since even before the Stamp Act in 1765.

King George was well aware of Adams' leadership in the rebellion, placing a bounty on his head and sending troops to capture him and kill him. In fact here is what the British order said as reported by the British officer in charge: "Our business was to seize a quantity of military stores and the bodies of Messrs. Hancock and Adams."

Samuel Adams suffered greatly for the cause. The British virtually destroyed his home; he had to leave his family for long periods of time and he was in continual danger of capture and death.

But Adams' faith in God and the cause of liberty were greatly needed that day in late September 1777. He spoke to his fellow congressmen, telling them "Gentlemen," he said, "your spirits appear oppressed with the weight of the public calamities."

He then told them that they could not show it to the American public. He told Congress: "Our affairs, it is said, are desperate! If this be our language, they are indeed. If we wear long faces, long faces will become fashionable. The eyes of the people are upon us."

Sam Adams knew that if Congress openly showed their fear to the people, the cause of liberty would be over. He also told them, "We have proclaimed to the world our determination 'to die freemen, rather than to live slaves' ... we have appealed to heaven for the justice of our cause, and in heaven have we placed our trust. Numerous have been the manifestations of God's providence in sustaining us."

Then he said, "In the gloomy period of adversity, we have had 'our cloud by day and pillar of fire by night.' We have been reduced to distress, and the arm of omnipotence has raised us up... Let us still rely in humble confidence on him who is mighty to save. Good tidings will soon arrive."

His confidence and faith in God convinced them.

Adams' statement also turned out to be prophetic, as it wasn't long after this that one of the most significant battles in history took place — one of the seven most important battles of all time happened after that. British General John Burgoyne was defeated by colonial forces under the command of Horatio Gates at Saratoga, New York. General Washington called it a "signal stroke of Providence. The arm of Omnipotence" was evident in the victory.

Afterward, Congress approved a resolution, which included Adams' call for a national day of "Thanksgiving." But Sam Adams did not intend the day to be set aside for eating turkey and pie while watching football and parades. Instead, it was set aside for "solemn thanksgiving and praise."

Here's the way he described that praise: "With one heart and one voice the good people may express the grateful feelings of their hearts and consecrate themselves to the service of their Divine Benefactor ... and that together with their sincere acknowledgments of kind offerings they may join the penitent confession of their manifold sins, whereby they had forfeited every favor, and their humble and earnest supplication that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance; that it may please him graciously to afford his blessing on the Governments of these States respectively, and prosper the public councils of the whole; to inspire our commanders both by land and sea, and all under them, with that wisdom and fortitude which may render them fit instruments, under the Providence of Almighty God, to secure for these United States the greatest of all blessings: independence and peace; that it may please him to prosper the trade and manufactures of the people and the labor of the husbandman, that our land may yield its increase; to take schools and seminaries of education, so necessary for cultivating the principles of true liberty, virtue and piety, under His nurturing hand, and to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consists in righteousness, peace, and joy in the holy Ghost."

Oh my goodness, call the ACLU. Where were the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State? The PSCS? Or the NSA, the FBI or the CIA? They were nowhere at our founding. That twisted, perverted, nonsense came over 100 years later. Check the Constitution, you'll find no mention of it — zero.

What you will find is protection from the state for religion. Look up the Constitution of Massachusetts — a constitution that Sam Adams helped write. It is the world's oldest constitution, still in use. Take a look at how perverted our thinking has become on this issue.

Samuel Adams was there at the beginning. There's a reason this man is only known now for beer.

by Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck is on Time's Top 100 World's Most Influential People

2010-04-29T17:38:00.002-06:00

Glenn by was chosen to be on Time's 100 World's Most Influential People. He is under the list of LEADERS. Here is the article, written by Sarah Palin.

Who'd have thought a history buff with a quirky sense of humor and a chalkboard could make for such riveting television? Glenn's like the high school government teacher so many wish they'd had, charting and connecting ideas with chalk-dusted fingers — kicking it old school — instead of becoming just another talking-heads show host. Self-taught, he's become America's professor of common sense, sharing earnestly sought knowledge with an audience hungry for truth. Glenn, 46, tackles topics other news shows would regard as arcane. Consider his desire to teach Americans about the history of the progressive movement: he's doing to progressive what Ronald Reagan did to liberal — explaining that it's a damaged brand.

His love of the Founding Fathers inspires others to learn and respect our nation's history. Best of all, Glenn delights in driving the self-proclaimed powers-that-be crazy. (The whole country awaits the red phone ringing!) Even his critics (whom he annihilates in ratings) have to admire his amazing ability to galvanize everyday Americans to better themselves and peacefully engage their government. Though he sometimes dismisses himself as an aw-shucks guy or just a "rodeo clown," he's really an inspiring patriot who was once at the bottom but now makes a much needed difference from the very, very top.

Palin, a former governor of Alaska, was the Republican candidate for Vice President in 2008

In Basketball, its not over until it is 00.00, no matter what country you play it in!

2010-04-27T20:00:00.003-06:00

I know probably no one understands Slovakian, but either way it is pretty cool to watch this. Like I said in the title, just remember, its not over until it says 00.00 on that game clock, and it is never too late to make a buzzer beater for a win. Enjoy!

10 Reasons for Glenn Beck to be President

2010-04-20T23:36:00.005-06:00

Here is a quick clip from Glenn Beck radio program with a call from a woman who is very passionate in showing why Glenn should be President. Well, I know, from listen to Glenn for a long time, that he has explained several reasons why he couldn't be President. But it is interesting to listen to the words of this woman and her true understanding of the qualities we need in someone to be our President of the Great Nation. Enjoy! :)

Our President's biggest coverup to the American People. Watch, read, and decide yourselves if our President is a Socialist.

2010-04-08T00:16:00.008-06:00

The claim: No proof Barack Obama is a socialist.

The response:

Barack Obama Sr. (Dad)

*Communist who saw nothing wrong with government 'taxing 100%' so long as the people got benefits...
- Obama Sr. on socialism (Link)
- Overview of the paper (Link)
*Harvard educated economist
*Nairobi bureaucrat who advised government to 'redistribute' income through higher taxes
*Demonized corporations
*Abandoned Barack Obama Jr. when he was 2 years old to continue at Harvard (teaching son that ideology is more important than family)

Stanley Ann Dunham (Mom)

*Communist sympathizer
*Practiced 'critical theory' (aka Marxism)
*Influenced by Nietzsche and Freud
*Left Hawaii for Indonesia, Pakistan
*Attended a leftist church nicknamed the 'little red church' because of its Communist sympathies
*Left Barack Obama Jr.

Mentor

*Barack's grandparents introduced Barack Obama Jr. to poet and communist Frank Marshall Davis (Link)
*Davis becomes a mentor as young Barack struggled with abandonment by parents

College & Church

*Admittedly sought out 'Marxist' professors (Link)
*Admittedly attended 'socialist conferences' (Link)
*Began attending a Marxist church - led by pastor Jeremiah Wright (attended for 20 years) (Link)

Career

*Tragedy of the Warren Court: No redistributive change (Link)
*Voted for TARP (Link)
*$787 billion stimulus redistribution bill
*Healthcare bill admittedly about 'redistributing the wealth'
*Single Payer Healthcare proponent (Link)
*President Obama now also President of GM & Chrysler
*President Obama seizes control of insurance giant AIG
*President Obama is leading America to single payer healthcare
*President Obama seized control of Student Loan industry in order to 'cut out middle man'
*President Obama seizes control in massive land grabs
*Repeatedly vilifies 'the rich'
*Obama believes race problems can be solved through redistribution of wealth... he said "race is still an enormous factor in our society. But economics can overcome a lot of racial division."
*Trying to regulate the Internet via FCC
*Forces mortgage co's to cover people who aren't paying mortgage (Link)
*Extends unemployment benefits to 99 weeks (Link)
*Told Joe the plumber 'it's better when you spread things around' (Link)

Family, Friends, Advisors & Administration

*Wife Michelle Obama said “The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”
*Jim Wallis, Obama's spiritual advisor & forced redistribution of wealth advocate
*Van Jones, disgraced Green Jobs Czar & Communist
*Ron Bloom, Manufacturing Czar & anti-free market
*John Holdren, pro-redistribution of wealth
*Andy Stern, SEIU President & redistribution of wealth fan
*Anita Dunn, fan of Chairman Mao
*Mark Lloyd, FCC 'Diversity Czar'
*Carol Browner, socialist
*Robert Creamer, socialist

(You can watch Glenn debunk Obama's claim HERE)

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/38844/

A typical Congressman in Washington

2010-04-07T00:25:00.004-06:00

Here is a good look of the kind of people that are in Washington D.C. representing you. These people were sworn into their offices to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States of America. Apparently we have many that don't care about what they swore to protect. Here is a great example of who these people are. This is Congressman Phil Hare from the 17th District of Illinois. Beware Mom and Dad, he is just north of you in St. Louis! After you watch this video, you all may want to research more in detail the men and women that are supposed to protect the Constitution and truly represent what you believe in. He's lucky he isn't in my District or he would be gone in a heartbeat. Wake up 17th District of Illinois, how in the world did you elect this pinhead!

Doomed to Repeat

2010-03-31T11:50:00.004-06:00

This is a new Documentary by Glenn Beck

We must learn from history so we don't repeat the same mistakes that were done before.

Enjoy! :)

(provided by glennbeck.com)

Christopher Nolan will reboot Superman!

2010-03-17T11:34:00.005-06:00

The topic at the Batcave on Monday night was the future of that other superhero — you know, the one from Metropolis. “It’s very exciting; we have a fantastic story,” Christopher Nolan said while sipping tea in the sleek editing suite that fills the converted garage next to his Hollywood home. “And we feel we can do it right. We know the milieu, if you will, we know the genre and how to get it done right.”

Nolan was standing next to his wife, producer Emma Thomas, his partner in all of his films — including “Batman Begins” and “The Dark Knight,” the grim franchise that pulled in more than $1.3 billion at theaters worldwide — and he was explaining their plan to take on a challenge that has frustrated Hollywood for two decades: getting another Superman film franchise off the ground.

Nolan, speaking about the Superman project for the first time, is pleased with the excitement stirred but, like the magicians in his 2006 film “The Prestige,” sees no value in revealing all of his tricks before the curtain goes up. Still, he wanted to answer some of the early questions about his plans for Superman — as well as his third visit to Gotham City.

There was a spasm of fan excitement when word leaked last month that Nolan, who is now viewed as the Hitchcock of superhero cinema after his two Batman films, would be the “godfather” for a reboot of the Man of Steel, acting as producer and mentor to an as-yet-unnamed-director who will be making a movie based on a story by Nolan and frequent collaborator David S. Goyer.

The Internet flurry included reports that, according to Thomas, might be better described as fan fiction. The dispatches revealing that the film will be called “Man of Steel”? And feature Lex Luthor and Brainiac? Or the one about it being a period piece with something like a low-fi version of the hero?

“I don’t know where this stuff comes from,” Thomas said with a chuckle, although, as with any good poker player, it’s hard to say where the bluff starts and ends.

This much is certain: The couple are completely focused on the movie-of-the-moment, which is “Inception,” which opens July 16 and stars Leonardo DiCaprio as a dream thief of sorts in what may be Hollywood’s first metaphysical heist film. The movie is the most complicated undertaking of Nolan’s career — it was shot in six countries and tells a tale that flips between reality and three levels of dream-time — and, well, all things considered, he’d rather Superman stay in his Fortress of Solitude and off the front page for a while longer since that project is a matter for 2012 or 2013 at best.

But of course Superman, first superhero of them all, is an American pop culture icon on a par with Mickey Mouse and Elvis. But after the close of the Christopher Reeve era with “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace” in 1987, the property became one of the most frustrating in Hollywood. A dozen different reboots were started through the years with names attached such as Nicolas Cage, Kevin Smith, J.J. Abrams, McG and Brett Ratner, and plans were trotted out to kill Superman, strip him of his powers or pit him in battle against Batman.

Finally, director Bryan Singer, who had earned credibility with comic book fans with his two “X-Men” films for Fox, delivered with “Superman Returns” in 2006 starring Brandon Routh. But the finished product was viewed as oddly lifeless by many critics. The $200-million film finished its theatrical run with a respectable $391 million worldwide but it wasn’t heroic enough to earn a sequel.

Nolan said that he admired Singer’s film, especially the way it connected to director Richard Donner’s version of Superman and the first two movies starring Reeve. Nolan added, though, that this new movie will stand on its own.

“A lot of people have approached Superman in a lot of different ways. I only know the way that has worked for us that’s what I know how to do,” Nolan said, emphasizing the idea that Batman exists in a world where he is the only superhero and a similar approach to the Man of Steel would assure the integrity needed for the film. “Each serves to the internal logic of the story. They have nothing to do with each other.”

Still, it was a frustrating moment in the Batman franchise that led to this new Superman revival. Nolan and Goyer, a key collaborator on both Batman films, were at a story impasse on the third Batman film (which is now picking up steam as well) when, as a distraction, Goyer gave the filmmaker a daydream version of how he would tackle a story about the last son of Krypton.

“He basically told me, ‘I have this thought about how you would approach Superman,’” Nolan recalled. “I immediately got it, loved it and thought: That is a way of approaching the story I’ve never seen before that makes it incredibly exciting. I wanted to get Emma and I involved in shepherding the project right away and getting it to the studio and getting it going in an exciting way.”

Goyer is now writing the screenplay and Nolan is keeping it close to the vest.

It’s interesting where inspirations originate. Nolan put together an especially deep cast for his Batman films — the first one, for instance, featured Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman and Tom Wilkinson in supporting roles. That, he said, was an idea imported from Metropolis.

“I went to the studio with the analogy of ‘I want to cast the way they did in 1978 with 'Superman,”’ where they had [Marlon] Brando and Glenn Ford and Ned Beatty and all these fantastic actors in even small parts, which was an exotic idea for a superhero movie at the time. It really paid off too. As a kid watching ‘Superman,’ it seemed enormous and I realized later by looking at it that a lot of that was actually the casting, just having these incredibly talented people and these characterizations. And Marlon Brando is the first guy up playing Superman’s dad. It’s incredible.”

Superman, created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, was an instant success when he arrived on the publishing scene in June 1938 and he more or less created the American comic book and its signature concept, the superhero. Superman made the leap to radio in 1940 and then to the silver screen in 1948 when Kirk Alyn became the first of many actors to wear the cape. George Reeves was the face of Superman on television for 104 episodes in the 1950s while Reeve and his work in the 1970s and 1980s may be the definitive version of the hero for most fans. But the youngest fans have a view of the hero shaped more by the award-winning animated series in recent years and “Smallville,” the CW series that just got re-upped for a 10th season, making star Tom Welling the Clark Kent with the longest tenure.

Nolan, for the record, also won’t confirm that he is actually directing the third Batman film, but, well, of course he is -- however “Inception” isn’t in the can yet and it’s against his code. He can’t be easily tricked, either. Asked if Superman as a franchise has to overcome a deficiency of truly great villains, unlike, say, Spider-Man and Batman, he won’t bite. “That’s a very sly way of asking a question I’m not going to answer.”

Nolan says he has no idea who will direct the Superman film (there has been conjecture that it may be his brother and frequent collaborator, Jonathan Nolan) but his role appears to be comparable to Peter Jackson with “District 9,” which was directed by newcomer Neill Blomkamp but benefited greatly from imprimatur of “The Lord of the Rings” auteur. Jackson is also stepping into a similar role in Middle-earth as Guillermo del Toro takes over as director for “The Hobbit” films.

Nolan established himself as a bold and cerebral filmmaker in 2000 with “Memento,” has made a specialty of rooting stories of the fantastic in a gritty reality with psychological undertones and an emphasis on using practical effects and stunt work as opposed to the magical paintbrushes of the CG era. All of that made him an ideal filmmaker for fight-time in the brutal gutters of Gotham but it doesn’t make the filmmaker the first obvious choice for flight-time amid the gleaming citadels of Metropolis. Warner Bros. executives seem confident that he is -- and they need him to be the right man with the "Harry Potter" franchise -- and perhaps Batman -- nearing an expiration date.

Sitting in his edit bay, which is decorated with posters of Ledger as the Joker and has a skylight that rolls shut with mechanical screeching that adds to the Batcave ambiance, Nolan said he knows about storytelling and it’s difficult to dissect his work beyond that.

“We’re approaching it in a not dissimilar way in terms of trying to find an incredible story in a way that audiences can engage with it the way they engage with contemporary action films,” Nolan continued. “I think David’s approach is a very good way of doing just that.”

And that third Batman film? Jonathan Nolan is “now doing the hard work” of writing the script based on the story by his sibling and Goyer. “My brother is writing a script for me and we’ll wait to see how it turns out.... He’s struggling to put it together into the epic story that you want it to be.”

“Batman Begins” was the origin and back story of the hero, while “The Dark Knight” found the hero reeling as his Manichean, good vs. evil worldview was upended by a new villain, the Joker, who was a wild-card agent of chaos going up against order, be it a police department or the mob. The second film ends, literally, with Batman on the run, a fugitive.

So what happens next?

“Without getting into specifics, the key thing that makes the third film a great possibility for us is that we want to finish our story,” he said. “And in viewing it as the finishing of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story.”

Nolan said the key surviving characters from the two first films and the actors who play them will be back. “We have a great ensemble, that’s one of the attractions of doing another film, since we’ve been having a great time for years.”

Perhaps. But the great challenge is to find a villain (or villains) who can not only match up with the Caped Crusader but also with Heath Ledger’s Academy Award-winning portrayal of the scabby, demented Joker. Fans have churned up the rumor mill for months now (Johnny Depp as the Riddler? Angelina Jolie as Catwoman? Philip Seymour Hoffman as the Penguin? Ben Kingsley as Hugo Strange?). But Nolan, no fan of letting cats out of the bag, declined to play along.

His villain choices to date have steered clear of strongly supernatural or super-science characters (no Man-Bat, Mr. Freeze or Poison Ivy, for instance) but he shook his head when asked if that was a trajectory he would continue. He did however concede one tidbit: “It won’t be," he said, "Mr. Freeze.”

Batman has been throwing punches in the pages of DC Comics since 1939 and as the decades passed, much of the core of the character stayed the same even as Bruce Wayne’s sideburns or the profile of the Batmobile changed. Not so with film.

“I’m very excited about the end of the film, the conclusion, and what we’ve done with the characters,” Nolan said.“My brother has come up with some pretty exciting stuff. Unlike the comics, these things don’t go on forever in film and viewing it as a story with an end is useful. Viewing it as an ending, that sets you very much on the right track about the appropriate conclusion and the essence of what tale we’re telling. And it harkens back to that priority of trying to find the reality in these fantastic stories. That’s what we do.”

-- Geoff Boucher

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2010/03/christopher-nolan-takes-flight-with-superman-we-have-a-fantastic-story-1.html

How President Obama is Fundamentally Transforming America

2010-03-17T10:59:00.003-06:00

This will show you how our President has been using too much power, that our congress has given him, to push his agenda to fundamentally transform America. This is clearly unconstitutional! I will let you decided for yourselves.

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/37991/

The C-SPAN Lie? See Eight Clips of Obama Promising Televised Healthcare Negotiations

2010-01-07T17:31:00.005-07:00

Where is the Transparency our President Promised us?

This is what Progressives do, they show how desparate they are by doing everything they can to Stop the Debate, Keep their work a Secret, and then Create a Crisis. They Push the Health Care through so fast, no one would have time to read it or debate it; Stop the Debate? They have their secret closed door meetings, so no one would know exactly what they were planning; Keep it Secret? And lastly, they push to the American People the great importance of passing this bill because if we don't, people will die because they don't have health insurance; Creating a Crisis? You can use these three tactics for any of the Progressives Ideas, for example use them with The Stimulus Package, Global Warming, etc...

American Progressivism: In a Nutshell

2010-01-07T17:15:00.004-07:00

Sorry about the delay from my last post. Here is an continuation of the segment I started with American progressivism. I know this may be a lot of info for one to take in, but it is important to understand what has been happening to our country since the beginning of the 20th century.

III. How the Progressives Originated the Modern Presidency

As I explained in my last piece, the Progressives wanted to disregard the Constitution in order to enlarge vastly the scope of government. As a practical matter, how was this to be done? It happened in a variety of ways, but principal among them was a fundamental change in the American presidency.

Under the system of our founders, government was to have sufficient strength and energy to accomplish its ends, but those ends were strictly limited by the Constitution. The principal way in which the Constitution keeps the government within its boundaries is through the separation of powers. As readers of The Federalist and of Thomas Jefferson know, the point of separation of powers is to keep any one set of hands from wielding all of the power in national government.

The Progressives, especially Woodrow Wilson, hated the separation of powers for precisely this reason: it made government inefficient, and made it difficult, if not impossible, to expand the power of government so that it could take on all of the new tasks that Progressives had in mind. So they looked to the presidency as a way of getting around this obstacle.

Under the original system, the president was merely leader of a single branch, or part, of the government, and thus could not provide leadership of the government as a whole. In his book Constitutional Government, Wilson urged that “leadership and control must be lodged somewhere.” The president, Wilson pointed out, was the only politician who could claim to speak for the people as a whole, and thus he called upon the president to rise above the separation of powers – to consider himself not merely as chief of a single branch of government, but as the popular leader of the whole of national politics. Wilson even contrasted the “constitutional aspect” of the presidency – its constitutionally defined role as chief of one of the three co-equal branches of government – to the “political” function of the president, where he could use his connection to public opinion as a tool for moving all of the branches of government in the direction called for by the people.

It was in this way that Wilson believed the original intention of the separation of powers system could be circumvented, and the enhanced presidency could be a means energizing the kind of active national government that the progressive agenda required.

V. Progressivism and Socialism

Since the Progressives had such a limitless view of state power, and since they wanted to downplay the founders’ emphasis on individual rights, it is only natural to ask if they subscribed to socialism. There are several things to consider in answering this question.

First, when considering the relationship of progressivism to socialism, we must be clear that we are talking about the similarity in the philosophy of government; we are not suggesting that America’s progressives were the kind of moral monsters that we see in the history of some socialist or fascist regimes (although it is the case that their racial views – particularly those of Woodrow Wilson – were indeed morally reprehensible).

Second, we must also bear in mind that there was an actual socialist movement during the Progressive Era, and prominent progressives such as Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt were critics of it. In fact, Wilson and Roosevelt both ran against a socialist candidate in the 1912 election (Eugene Debs). The progressives were ambivalent about the socialist movement of their day not so much because they disagreed with it in principle, but because the American socialist movement was a movement of the lower classes. The progressives were elitists; they looked down their noses at the socialists, considering them a kind of rabble.

Keeping these points in mind, it is, nonetheless, the case that the progressive conception of government closely coincided with the socialist conception. Both progressivism and socialism champion the prerogatives of the state over the prerogatives of the individual. Wilson himself made this connection very plain in a revealing essay he wrote in 1887 called “Socialism and Democracy.” Wilson’s begins this essay by defining socialism, explaining that it stands for unfettered state power, which trumps any notion of individual rights. It “proposes that all idea of a limitation of public authority by individual rights be put out of view,” Wilson wrote, and “that no line can be drawn between private and public affairs which the State may not cross at will.” After laying out this definition of socialism, Wilson explains that he finds nothing wrong with it in principle, since it was merely the logical extension of genuine democratic theory. It gives all power to the people, in their collective capacity, to carry out their will through the exercise of governmental power, unlimited by any undemocratic idea like individual rights. He elaborated:

“In fundamental theory socialism and democracy are almost if not quite one and the same. They both rest at bottom upon the absolute right of the community to determine its own destiny and that of its members. Limits of wisdom and convenience to the public control there may be: limits of principle there are, upon strict analysis, none.”

Roosevelt, too, argued for a new conception of government, where individual natural rights would no longer serve as a principled boundary that the state was prohibited from crossing. He called in his New Nationalism program for the state to take an active role in effecting economic equality by way of superintending the use of private property. Private property rights, which had been serving as a brake on the more aggressive progressive policy proposals, were to be respected, Roosevelt argued, only insofar as the government approved of the property’s social usefulness. He wrote:

“We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used. It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community. This, I know, implies a policy of a far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had, but I think we have got to face the fact that such an increase in governmental control is now necessary.”

V. Progressivism and the Current Crisis

There are important connections between America’s original Progressive Era and the crisis we are facing today, and it is useful to consider these connections on two levels.

The first connection is at a general level, and concerns our abandonment of the Constitution. The present crisis did not appear out of nowhere, and didn’t simply begin with the election of Barack Obama. Politicians of both parties spent the better part of the 20^th century disregarding the Constitution, as they looked to have government step up to solve every conceivable human problem. Thus it ought to be no surprise that the Constitution’s limits on government aren’t even part of the conversation today as our politicians debate the new interventions in our economy and society that seem to come daily.

Such a state of things would have greatly pleased America’s original progressives. As I’ve endeavored to explain in these pieces for the newsletter, progressives believed that the role of government should be determined not by our Constitution, but by whatever the needs of the day happened to be. This is why they sought to eradicate talk of the Constitution from our political discourse; today, that goal seems to have been realized.

The second connection between the original Progressive Era and our situation today has to do with policy. The progressives knew that our original system of government was not capable of handling all of the new tasks that they had in mind for it. So they envisioned creating a vast set of bureaucratic agencies. They argued that Congress should enact very broad and vague laws for supervising more and more facets of the American economy and society, and then delegate to the bureaucratic agencies the power and discretion to enact specific policies. Both Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt conceived of government in this way.

The New Deal certainly went a long way toward implementing this progressive vision, and what we have seen in our own situation with TARP and the various other interventions is simply greater steps toward the progressive plan. Our Congress has simply said to the Treasury agencies: here’s a trillion dollars, here’s all the legal authority you need, now go out, determine what is in the public interest, and spend and regulate accordingly. That is the progressive vision of government, in a nutshell. (R.J. Pestritto Shipley, Professor of the American Constitution at Hillsdale College)

American Progressivism, The Very Little Known Evil Force

2009-12-18T19:57:00.011-07:00

I've been learning more and more about our Founding Fathers, and the Principles and Values they used to create this Great Nation of Ours. As I continue to learn about this, I have began to learn more about another movement, a movement that has been slowly progressing over the last century. This movement came to my attention within the last couple years, as I have realize more and more corruption in politics and the men and women that so call represent us as American People in our Nation's Capitol. This movement is the Progressive Movement. To help teach you all more about this movement and who are the Progressives, I will be share parts from a Book I have been reading lately called, "American Progressivism," edited by Ronald J. Pestritto and William J. Atto.

To Began, I will like to explain who were the Progressives, why they are important, and their Attack on our American Founding?

Many on the left today call themselves “progressive,” and they do so not just because it’s a nicer way of saying “liberal,” but also because they very much intend to revive the political principles of America’s original Progressives, from the Progressive Era of the 1880s through World War I. Why would leftist politicians, like Mrs. Clinton, purposely identify themselves with this Progressive movement?

The reason is that America’s original Progressives were also its original, big-government liberals. Most people point to the New Deal era as the source of big government and the welfare state that we have today. While this is perfectly accurate, it is important to understand that the principles of the New Deal did not originate in the New Deal; rather, they came from the Progressives, who had dominated American politics and intellectual cultural a generation prior to the New Deal.

We have no less an authority on this connection than Franklin Roosevelt himself. When FDR campaigned in 1932, he pointed to the Progressives – and in particular to Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson – as the source of his ideas about government.

In terms of the personalities who made up the Progressive movement, some are familiar to us and others are less so. The movement was comprised of well known politicians like Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt; but it was also comprised of intellectuals and writers who are less well known but who have been very influential in America. There were folks like John Dewey, who was America’s public philosopher for much of the early 20^th century. Even less well known was Herbert Croly, but Croly was highly influential, since he founded and was the first editor of The New Republic – which became the main organ of Progressive opinion in the United States, and is still one of the most important journals on the Left today. I should add here that Woodrow Wilson actually fell into both of these categories – he was both a well known politician and president, but also was, for decades prior to his entry into politics, a prominent intellectual (a college professor and president of Princeton) who wrote many books and influential articles.

America’s Progressives aimed for a thorough transformation in America’s principles of government. While our founders understood that our national government must have the capacity to be strong and vigorous (this is why the Articles of Confederation were failing), they also were very clear that this strength must always be confined to very limited ends or areas of responsibility; government, in other words, while not weak or tiny, was to be strictly limited.

The Progressive conception of government, on the other hand, was quite the opposite; Progressives had an “evolving” or a “living” notion of government (yes, we get the term “living constitution” from the Progressives), and thus wanted government to take on whatever role and scope the times demanded. The Progressives reasoned that people of the founding era may have wanted a limited government, given their particular experience with George III, but they argued that people of their own time wanted a much more activist government, and that we should adjust accordingly.

Quite simply, the Progressives detested the bedrock principles of American government. They detested the Declaration of Independence, which enshrines the protection of individual natural rights (like property) as the unchangeable purpose of government; and they detested the Constitution, which places permanent limits on the scope of government and is structured in a way that makes the extension of national power beyond its original purpose very difficult. “Progressivism” was, for them, all about progressing, or moving beyond, the principles of our founders.

This is why the Progressives were the first generation of Americans to denounce openly our founding documents. Woodrow Wilson, for example, once warned that “if you want to understand the real Declaration of Independence, do not repeat the preface” – i.e. that part of the Declaration which talks about securing individual natural rights as the only legitimate purpose of government. And Theodore Roosevelt, when using the federal government to take over private businesses during the 1902 coal strike, is reported to have remarked, “To hell with the Constitution when people want coal!” This remark may be apocryphal, but it is a fair representation of how TR viewed these matters. (To be Continued...)

(R.J. Pestritto, Shipley Professor of the American Constitution at Hillsdale College)

New Omnibus Bill! More corrupt spending in D.C.

2009-12-11T20:15:00.005-07:00

Our Government keeps spending and spending, and we never know if it will every stop. Today on the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn was talking with Congressman Chaffetz of Utah, one of the very few in Washington that is not a snake and are dedicating themselves to run out the corruption in the Capitol, no matter what party its coming from. In this conversation Congressman Chaffetz gives a explanation of the new Omnibus Bill that is in the process of being passed in D.C.

Disclaimer: Warning make sure you have duck near by. Reading this may cause your head might explode!

GLENN: Let's go to Congressman Chaffetz from Utah. Hello, Congressman.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Hey, Glenn.

GLENN: How are things?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Hey, I'm fired up.

GLENN: Ready to go?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Ready to go.

GLENN: Nothing better. Fired up? Ready to go! Fired up! Ready to go! Thank you for that, Barack Obama. Do you know what the supertax is? We're not talking they are not talking about one in congress yet, are they?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: We're taxing every moment we can possibly do it.

GLENN: I'm you know what? I'm doing a segment on television tonight. If you made $60,000 a year and you lived in New York, you made $60,000 a year, I'm going to show you what you were paying last year in taxes and fees and what you are paying now, this year. And it's pretty, pretty staggering. Haven't seen all of the numbers yet but from what I have seen, pretty staggering on what you super people down in Washington have been working on.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Well, I can tell you here in D.C. we're spending it faster than we're evening taxing it. So

GLENN: You called me two days ago because you and I are actually working on a special project. I'm looked at Joe. Can I say? I'm not going to announce it, but can I say? I'm working on a special project because I've been looking for people that just, I don't care if I agree or disagree with you. Just clean up the corruption. And hopefully we'll be able to talk about that openly on something that I'm working with you on here in the coming days and weeks. But you called me the other day and you said, "Glenn, they're spending a big they're sending a big omnibus bill our way; we're supposed to vote on it, and I can't get a copy of it." Can you tell this story?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Yeah. I mean, it's I don't know how to put enough descriptors about how insane this process is, but they took six agencies, their appropriations, meshed them into one big, bad omnibus bill, I mean, this is seriously this is bad government at its worst. When the bill was originated, it was 1,088 pages, and it has to go to the rules committee before we as members of congress in the rank and file here can actually see it. It ended up being more than 2500 pages, and we voted on it roughly 24 hours after we got it. It represents half of the entire discretionary budget for the entire federal government, $446 billion, 2500 pages. There are 5,000 earmarks and at its baseline represents a 12% increase in spending for their base budgets, not counting the stimulus and all the other crap, a 12% increase over the base budget from just last year.

GLENN: Well, that's because business is so good. I mean, who doesn't expand at a point like this? Give me your fave well, first of all out of the 2400 pages, what was your favorite page?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: They don't even number these pages. It's hard to do. I'll give you a couple that are just absolutely out of control. I've sponsored a bill to get rid of what's called the international fund for Ireland. This was started by Tip O'Neill because we somehow as a country had to help Ireland. There is nobody, but nobody in the congress and I've been working on this for literally ten months that will take responsibility and say, oh, yeah, that's my project and this is good. In fact, we called over to the ambassador from Ireland and said, what is this? And he said, oh, with well, we're working to phase that out in 2010. Well, they got it increased. Instead of paying $15 million of American people's money, we now in this omnibus bill are going to pay them $17 million.

GLENN: Do we get good coffee out of the deal?

PAT: Why do you hate the Irish so much, congressman?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: It is just a check to the government of Ireland to say, here are $17 million.

GLENN: You know what it is, Chaffetz? You know what it is with you, Chaffetz? You are from Utah. What's the state just directly north of Utah? Idaho! Why do you hate potatoes from overseas so much!

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: I mean, it's just $3 million for bike racks in Washington D.C.? I'm reading here, I pulled one up because I thought at random I'm going to take a page. I take Page 24 of the appropriations bill regarding transportation. We're going to spend $600,000 for Sunset Boulevard streetscape beautification in California. We know how great Sunset Boulevard is. We have the Elvis Presley Boulevard improvement in Tennessee is going to get $500,000.

GLENN: Excuse me. Excuse me.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: And $1,948,000 is going to go to the Fish Lake Trail completion in the State of Washington.

GLENN: Hold on just a second. First of all, you've never been to Fish Lake, have you?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: I can't tell you where it is.

GLENN: It's in Washington. I can't go any deeper than that. So listen. Congressman, these are the, these are just the road and infrastructure improvements that the president has been talking about. That's all these are. These are the shovel ready projects.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: This is insane. We're $12 trillion in debt. Next week they tell us we get to vote on a $1.8 trillion increase to the debt limit. And you still have people look in the camera and say we're serious about cutting the deficit, we're serious about this. No, we're not. We're not making any hard choices.

GLENN: Are you saying the Fish Lake Trail shouldn't happen?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: I'm saying we've got enough Fish Lake trails. We need the American people need their money back.

GLENN: Okay. So first of all, you couldn't get the tell me the process of, okay, here's the insane omnibus bill that's coming in.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Right.

GLENN: You have to vote on it 24 hours later, right?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Yeah.

GLENN: You're trying to get a copy of it. What happens?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: You couldn't, you couldn't get it. I mean, until it comes out of the rules committee you physically cannot get it. What happens, the House passes the bills, the Senate passes the bills, they go to conference. Well, that's a closed door meeting. Guys like me can't get in there. I'm just a member of congress. And so then they send it over to the rules committee and then it starts to get debated and then the bill goes from 1,088 pages to 2500 pages with 5,000 earmarks.

GLENN: Is that a reduction? Because we've been

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: And we vote on it the next day.

GLENN: I know that we were promised by both the Republicans and the Democrats that earmarks were disgusting and they were going to decrease them or stop them. Is that a decrease in earmarks?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Shockingly 5,000 earmarks is a decrease but, you know, they have what are called airdropped earmarks. These are the most egregious of all of them because they didn't go through any sort of committee process, there was no openness, transparency. They literally showed up for the first time in this report. And so I can't tell you, I still can't tell you which ones are the air dropped earmarks that literally have never seen the light of day. And that's the thing. The thing that's a shame about this bill, the reason you do an omnibus bill is to hide stuff. And you drop it in right before Christmas when nobody's paying attention and we've got all these other, you know, crises and things going on. That's why they do these bills. That's the dirty secret here that I've come to learn about how they throw in all the crap.

GLENN: So we have an average of 10% increase in domestic spending.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: 12. 12.

GLENN: 12. We have

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: And by the way, the year before that, Glenn, was another 12%. So we did 12% and then this year we'll be doing another 12%.

GLENN: We have 5200 bipartisan earmarks at a cost of almost $4 billion.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: 400 well, I'm sorry. Of the earmarks? You are right. The entire bill is $446 billion. But you are right, the earmarks are nearly $4 billion.

GLENN: Now, there's something else that is bothering you. And when you told me, I think my I mean, my head exploded because I believe, I believe this is the new American prison program. And a lot of people say, well, that's a nice prison to be in. But it is prison, and make no mistake. It is prison. It is a prison where you are paid $150,000 a year. You want to explain the new jobs program for the United States government, what's going on with the pay scale there?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Yeah, USA Today has got a good I think it's on the cover here today. I've been working with this reporter. He did a great job. This is you know, you just shudder when you say it out loud. The number of employees, federal employees that are earning more than $150,000 a year...

GLENN: Listen to this.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Over the last 18 months has more than doubled. So if you are a federal employee, I mean, I can name maybe a couple of dozen jobs that would justify over $150,000 a year. There are now 66,000 federal jobs that pay more than $150,000 a year. And that's in it was 30,000 just back in December of 07.

GLENN: Now, is it possible that there were just a lot of people that were making $149,900 18 months ago?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Yes, but still that's ridiculous. Here's the other analysis. People earning over $100,000 a year. In December of '07 that was roughly 263,000 people. Now, just 18 months later based on the numbers of June '09, 382,758 people are making more than $100,000 as a federal employee. And if you look at the numbers of who's earning over $170,000, that has gone from 11,000 plus people to over 22,000 people earning that much money. I just, there is no way to justify those numbers. It's just absolutely shocking.

GLENN: Any idea what the reason is?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Well, you know, there were some across the board pay levels. One of the arguments that you hear is that, oh, well, we've got to pay market rates and we've got to do this and all that.

GLENN: Let the market... I'm sorry, congressman. Let the market pay market rates.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Exactly. But what you what I think you see is an aging workforce, and they continue to say, "Oh, we're not paid, we're not paid, we're not compensated." We have the very low turnover rate in the federal government. That to me as a business person indicates that we're paying too much! We should have a much higher turnover rate. If we had a higher turnover rate, that means that you're probably not paying maybe as much as you could if you wanted to increase that. But at the federal government I don't want to do that. I don't want to do that. So we're paying so much, people don't leave these jobs. They don't

GLENN: I will tell you this. I think it is this is why I say it's slavery. If you are working at a job where you are making $100,000 a year and it's a bureaucracy, I mean, you are not really expected to do anything, you are not really expected, there's no real "Hold your feet to the fire," you are not going to lose your job because, I mean, you can't get fired. You are not going to lose your job because the government's not going to go out of business, or so you'll think. All of these things are happening. Why not? This is why the Soviet Union was the Soviet Union. Only the people that would leave that job would be the people that would like to have a little bit of self respect. If you can't lose your job, if you are not expected to perform and you make an awful lot of money that you can't replace in the private sector, who leaves that job? And you become more and more enslaved to the system. You work forever at that job and you don't leave because you don't have any self respect anymore. You're not required to compete. You're not required to do anything. You punch in, you punch out, you become a DMV worker. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, but this system is absolutely, this is going to lead us to the economic glories of the Soviet Union. It's going to.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: It's absolutely shocking. We're adding, the federal government is adding about 10,000 new jobs a month to our payroll.

GLENN: Of course they are. They have to create new jobs. All right. Congressman Chaffetz, let me ask you one last question.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Sure.

GLENN: Nancy Pelosi said, "I really like this whole Medicare option now." I think this has been the plan from the beginning because they can say, okay, there's no public option. But help me out on this one. Two questions: One, how do you make sure that it's not going to cost the American people a trillion dollars by cutting Medicare and finding the fraud in Medicare but then instead of the public option, you expand Medicare? How, how does that work exactly?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: That's the insanity that is Washington, D.C. You take a failing program and want to double it up and just allow more I mean, it is the ultimate in the one payer system. It is the ultimate bad healthcare program. I mean, I do wonder if maybe that was the end game from the very beginning.

GLENN: I think it was. How what are the odds? I think this thing's going to pass while everybody's on Christmas vacation.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: You know, that's they come right down here to the finish line and people are distracted with all the other holiday stuff.

GLENN: Yep.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: You know, they keep us late in the night voting on this stuff and then nobody's paying attention. That's

GLENN: Do you think it's going to pass? Do you think it's going to pass? Will we come back next year and have this thing done?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: I pray that it doesn't.

GLENN: I do, too, but that wasn't the question. Do you think it's going to happen?

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: I'm afraid it might. I really am. They have got numbers, and until the members of congress in the House and the Senate, until they are afraid of their constituents more than they are afraid of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, this will continue to be a problem.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: It won't change until that fundamentally, they are if they know that their people in their districts are paying attention.

GLENN: Congressman Chaffetz, thank you so much. We'll talk again.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: Thanks, Glenn.

GLENN: You bet, bye bye. I want you to know I don't endorse any candidate, I don't endorse any congressman, any senator. I don't trust any of them. But I decided I'm not going to go to I'm going to go to the barrel. I'm not going to keep going. I'm going to go to the tree; I'm not going to go to the barrel. I've stopped looking for people who have been there for a long time. Name the person that has gone to Washington and come back years later as a better person. I can't. So I'm going to go to the freshmen, while they still have an ounce of their soul left, and Chaffetz is one of them. And he really does want to get in there and expose the corruption, and he really doesn't care which side it's on. You wait. We're working on some things. But pay attention, America. Buckle up. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

George Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation

2009-11-26T15:59:00.003-07:00

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor -- and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me "to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness."

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be -- That we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks -- for His kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation -- for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of His Providence which we experienced in the tranquility [sic], union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed -- for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One [capital O] now lately instituted -- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which He hath been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions -- to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually -- to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed -- to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn [sic] kindness onto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord -- To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease [sic] of science among them and us -- and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York
the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789
George Washington

The Real Story of Thanksgiving

2009-11-26T15:47:00.004-07:00

"After eleven years, about forty of them agreed to make a perilous journey to the New World, where they would certainly face hardships, but could live and worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences. On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower set sail. It carried a total of 102 passengers, including forty Pilgrims led by William Bradford. On the journey, Bradford set up an agreement, a contract, that established just and equal laws for all members of the new community, irrespective of their religious beliefs. Where did the revolutionary ideas expressed in the Mayflower Compact come from? From the Bible. The Pilgrims were a people completely steeped in the lessons of the Old and New Testaments. They looked to the ancient Israelites for their example.

"And, because of the biblical precedents set forth in Scripture, they never doubted that their experiment would work. But this was no pleasure cruise, friends. The journey to the New World was a long and arduous one. And when the Pilgrims landed in New England in November, they found, according to Bradford's detailed journal, a cold, barren, desolate wilderness. There were no friends to greet them, he wrote. There were no houses to shelter them. There were no inns where they could refresh themselves. And the sacrifice they had made for freedom was just beginning. During the first winter, half the Pilgrims – including Bradford's own wife – died of either starvation, sickness or exposure. When spring finally came, Indians taught the settlers how to plant corn, fish for cod and skin beavers for coats.

"Life improved for the Pilgrims, but they did not yet prosper! This is important to understand because this is where modern American history lessons often end. Thanksgiving is actually explained in some textbooks as a holiday for which the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Indians for saving their lives, rather than as a devout expression of gratitude grounded in the tradition of both the Old and New Testaments. Here is the part that has been omitted: The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well. They were going to distribute it equally. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well.

"Nobody owned anything. They just had a share in it. It was a commune, folks. It was the forerunner to the communes we saw in the '60s and '70s out in California – and it was complete with organic vegetables, by the way. Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives. He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus turning loose the power of the marketplace. That's right. Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism. And what happened? It didn't work!"

"It never has worked! "What Bradford and his community found was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personal motivation! But while most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years – trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it – the Pilgrims decided early on to scrap it permanently. What Bradford wrote about this social experiment should be in every schoolchild's history lesson. If it were, we might prevent much needless suffering in the future. 'The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years...that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing – as if they were wiser than God,' Bradford wrote.

"'For this community [so far as it was] was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense ... that was thought injustice.' Why should you work for other people when you can't work for yourself? What's the point? Do you hear what he was saying, ladies and gentlemen? The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive. So what did Bradford's community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property.

"Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result? 'This had very good success,' wrote Bradford, 'for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.' Bradford doesn't sound like much of a Clintonite" I wrote then "does he? Is it possible that supply-side economics could have existed before the 1980s? Yes. Read the story of Joseph and Pharaoh in Genesis 41. Following Joseph's suggestion (Gen 41:34), Pharaoh reduced the tax on Egyptians to 20% during the 'seven years of plenty' and the 'Earth brought forth in heaps.' (Gen. 41:47) In no time, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat themselves.

"Now, this is where it gets really good, folks, if you're laboring under the misconception that I was, as I was taught in school. So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians. The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London. And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the 'Great Puritan Migration.'" But this story stops when the Indians taught the newly arrived suffering in socialism Pilgrims how to plant corn and fish for cod. That's where the story stops, and the story basically doesn't even begin there. The real story of Thanksgiving is William Bradford giving thanks to God for the guidance and the inspiration to set up a thriving colony. The bounty was shared with the Indians. They did sit down and they had dinner, and I think they had a turkey, but it was not the Indians who saved the day. It was capitalism and Scripture which saved the day." (Rush Limbaugh)

Glenn Beck reveals the Plan, A Must Read!

2009-11-22T00:57:00.004-07:00

Friends,

What an amazing few days on the road this has been. Your spirits have been high, your faith strong and your spine unbendable. I ended my multiday book tour at The Villages with what had been billed as a rally but could be better described as a candid citizen-to-citizen chat.

Today, I have stopped looking for a leader to show us the way out because I have come to realize that the only one who can truly save our country...is us. To change America's course we need to change ourselves, our expectations and our willingness to accept the unacceptable. When we refuse to allow our children to receive a trophy for participation, we are on the road to restoring the meaning of merit in our Republic. When we insist that no one is too big to fail, we will be able to learn from our mistakes, and when we demand that we are self-reliant, we will ensure that others can rely on us, not the government.

There is much to do, much to learn and time is of the essence. While I will be explaining the entire Plan over the coming weeks and months, I did want to give you a preview of some of the highlights:

- Education is key, and not just for our children. To that end, we will be conducting a series of conventions. These will be full-day experiences where you will be immersed in learning about topics ranging from self-reliance, community organizing, the economy and how to be a political force in your own neighborhood and country. The first one will be in Orlando at UCF Arena on March 27th. You will also be able to vote to have a convention in your region by clicking here.

- I have begun meeting with some of the best minds in the country that believe in limited government, maximum freedom and the values of our Founders. I am developing a 100 year plan. I know that the bipartisan corruption in Washington that has brought us to this brink and it will not be defeated easily. It will require unconventional thinking and a radical plan to restore our nation to the maximum freedoms we were supposed to have been protecting, using only the battlefield of ideas.

- All of the above will culminate in The Plan, a book that will provide specific policies, principles and, most importantly, action steps that each of us can take to play a role in this Refounding.

- On August 28, 2010, I ask you, your family and neighbors to join me at the feet of Abraham Lincoln on the National Mall for the unveiling of The Plan and the birthday of a new national movement to restore our great country.

In or Out for Congress in 2010

2009-11-22T00:50:00.004-07:00

Unless your congressman, congresswoman, or senator can't claim these 5 Pledges they are not worthy to represent you. Vote them out in 2010!

The Status of our Country

2009-11-19T19:13:00.013-07:00

It took only 17 pages, from The U.S. Constitution, to create this great country of ours, and now it will be over 2,000 pages, from the New Health Care Bill in the Senate, to destroy it. Our President and many politicians in Washington D.C. want to create a fundamental transformation of America, that our Founding fathers fear the worse would happen. Our founding fathers created the U.S. Constitution to protect the people from the government. They originally created the Articles of Confederation, which had no centralized government with power. They created this first because of what they feared would happen when a government would have power over the people. Since the Articles of Confederation was to far as an anarchy, it fail. So then came the U.S. Constitution, which created a centralized government, but also included amendments that would stopped the government from taking away power from the people, and the people's power is freedom. With the New Health Care Bill being processed in the Senate right now and being pushed to be passed very soon, there is several things put in this bill that contradict what was put in our Constitution. Many of these politicians, including our President, were sworn into their positions by stating they would protect the Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. It is clear now they have no clue in what that means, they don't care what the Constitution says. Many of them would say it was written for the people back then, and today things need to be changed. There is so much corruption in Washington right now, if our founding fathers were alive they would be sick to their stomachs when they know what is happening to the nation they created.

I want to make something very clear. When they tell you of the importants of having health care for those who are not insured, that is their selling point. They say it is a right for the people to have health care; when you find that right in the U.S. Constitution let me know.

To help you understand better of why these people in Washington D.C. are pushing this Health Care Bill, you must first understand the mine of a Progressive. Most people when they hear someone is a progressive, it means they are a liberal, or a democrat, but they are not the same thing. Progressivism is not a party, it deals with the individual that seeks to redefine, reshape, and rebuild America. They what a country where individual liberties and personal property mean nothing. They want GOD out of the government and country, and want you to think they are your god.

The progressive movement began in the beginning of the 20th century. The core philosophy started as the role of government to be a Nanny State, where they believe all people are stupid and don't know what is best for them. The progressives then decided how you should live your life. The first waves came when they decided that we are drinking too much (they brought Prohibition), then they thought we were not praying enough taxes (they created the progressive income tax), and then they thought we were spending money on the wrong things (they produced redistribution through the tax code). I hope a lot of this is coming to light to you. They also hid themselves within both major parties, democrats and republicans. It is the reason when election time comes around, and you are left in deciding candidate A and candidate B. Most cases, you think to yourself you have to decide the lessor of two evils. For an example, this last election in 2008. You had Barack Obama, a radical left progressive, and then you had John McCain. John McCain was considered the "conservative" candidate, but he said that Theodore Roosevelt (one of the original progressives) was one of his favorite presidents. These two candidates may have appeared to come from two different political parties, but their philosophy of the role of government all came from the same corrupt place.

I will explain more about Progressivism in later posts to help you understand the battle we are embarked in now. But First, YOU must decided now, do you want freedom or bondage. Do you want the ability to fail and succeed, or do you want to be dependent on the government to decide for you. Do you want GOD to be a huge part in how you live your life, or do you want men and women in Washington D.C. be your gods.

I will conclude with some words from Benjamin Franklin and Samuel Adams. Franklin said, "only a virtuous people are capable of freedom." Samuel Adams said, "It is the greatest absurdity to suppose it would be in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defense of those very rights; the principal of which...are life, liberty, and property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave."

P.S. Do you want to know what new taxes are in this bill? Just download this link: WARNING!! MAKE SURE YOU HAVE DUCK TAPE TO WRAP YOUR HEAD, BECAUSE THIS INFORMATION MAY CAUSE YOUR HEAD TO EXPLODE! READ WITH CAUTION! http://www.atr.org/userfiles/111809pr-comptaxreid%282%29.pdf

Health Care to Die for!

2009-11-15T01:39:00.002-07:00

Today's fact of the day is a fitting one for Friday the 13^th, since H.R. 3962 promises to deliver the grim reaper to any patient signed up for the government health plan. Under Section 240 of the bill, insurance companies are required to provide information on "end-of-life planning" to people who are looking to enroll in coverage offered by the health insurance exchange. In the final bill, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) decided to strip the broader protective language that was adopted in the Energy and Commerce Committee, which means that H.R. 3962 will mandate the distribution of end-of-life materials about assisted suicide options in Oregon and Washington. At the request of Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), the pro-euthanasia organization Compassion and Choices also added "advance care planning consultations" as a new optional Medicare-covered benefit. This would open the door for Medicare to pay for end-of-life consultations that include assisted suicide options in states where it is legal. Both provisions include language that claims these sections don't encourage the promotion of "suicide or assisted suicide." But in crafting their state laws, Oregon and Washington redefined the act of assisting in a suicide as "death with dignity," explicitly stating that such action is not legally considered assisted suicide-even though by medical definition that is exactly what it is. Think such rationing of care could never happen? It already has in Oregon, where patients were told their state provided insurance would not cover treatment but would gladly pick up the cost if they went the assisted suicide route. Just don't call them death panels...(FRC.org)

No Insurance? Go to Jail, Do Not Pass Go

2009-11-15T01:35:00.002-07:00

Today's fact of the day on the recently passed health care bill, H.R. 3962 is don't have insurance? Pay a fine or go directly to jail. Under the House legislation "Americans who do not maintain acceptable health insurance coverage and who choose not to pay the bill's new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years." This is according to the non-partisan Congressional Joint Tax Committee, which also defines the penalties as a "tax." This applies to all American citizens, thus further breaking the President's promise of "[u]nder my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase." Additionally businesses could be fined up to 8 percent of their payroll if they fail to comply with the government mandate. There are also further penalties, or taxes, for underpayment or for "taking a frivolous position" on the government mandate. (FRC)

D.C. Tells Catholic Church: Comply or Bye Bye

2009-11-15T01:31:00.002-07:00

The D.C. City Council took one step closer to allowing same sex "marriages" in the District of Columbia on Tuesday when they voted the legislation out of the Committee on Public Safety & Judiciary. The panel refused to include protections for religious organizations--putting at risk the numerous churches in the region that provide goods and services to the needy who would have to decide between their faith or compliance with the city's commands. One of the largest area provider of relief services, the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, took a stand yesterday, just as their counterparts in Massachusetts's had done in that state, and refused to back down to the D.C. Council's bullying tactics. The Catholic Church provides a wide range of direct services for those in need in our nation's capitol, including physical and mental health care, legal care, immigration, employment services, counseling, shelter, education, adoption, foster care and services for the developmentally disabled. During the committee proceedings many of the council members were openly mocking religious concerns and one councilman, David Catania, told those gathered that if people of faith refuse to comply with his demands, the city will find someone else to take over everything they do. That will be very difficult for the city to do for they will quickly find, without faith there is little good works. It is very telling of the priorities of these politicians who would put the desires of the homosexual community over the needs of the poor. (FRC)

Common Sense 101

2009-11-13T21:40:00.004-07:00

It's Not the Money, It's the Rule of Law

The Progressive movement (which created the modern income tax under President Wilson) saw America as a democracy rather than what it really is: a Republic. The distinction is not subtle and our Founders were clear in the belief that a democracy always led to mob rule. But the Progressives (both Republican and Democrat) felt that democracy and socialism are twins since both ultimately had their power stem from the people. If the people felt that someone or some group made too much, they could level the playing field for the good of all.

The tax code has never really been about raising revenue as much as it is about punishing opponents, helping friends, or as President Obama says, instituting a system of "fairness." Government bailouts are similar. Did all of those companies really need that money, or was it in the government's interest to force it down their throats so they'd have some control over them?

Consider these examples of the Government seeking control:

The U.S. House of Representatives used its power to target a group of AIG insurance executives who collected a bonus they were contractually and legally allowed to receive, by passing a bill that would have imposed a 90% retroactive tax on their bonus money.
New York state attorney general Andrew Cuomo threatened to reveal the names of AIG employees who were paid a contractual bonus and wouldn't voluntarily return that money.
GM was required to fire its CEO as a prerequisite to receiving any additional federal bailout money even though the CEO didn't engage in any criminal or corporate malfeasance.
Banking executives were threatened to accept government bailout funds or risk increased scrutiny and audits.
Government officials are seeking authority to seize any company that could pose---in their sole opinion---a "systemic" economic risk.
The sacrosanct "secret ballot" is under assault by union leaders who feel it's more important to get new members than protect free elections.
The government has suggested it will force states to accept federal stimulus money eve if they don't want it.
The state of Connecticut has considered legislation that would retroactively raise the state income tax on high-wage earners.
The rich are being vilified and targeted because they are rich. (Class warfare is always politically popular, but common sense tells us that people won't work if they can't keep what they earn. It also tells us that what starts as government taking on the "rich" always trickles down---remember, in 1913 the income tax was applied to only the wealthiest 1%).
Executives at AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac are all on the federal dole and have received billions in corporate welfare. Executives at all companies received bonuses, but while AIG executives were targeted by Congress and unions, executives at Fannie and Freddie received scant attention due to their ties to government.

Is any of this in accordance with the rule of law? These abuses must stop!

While our current president and political leaders repeatedly assure us that giving government more power is the only answer, George Washington calls out from the past to remind us that government itself is usually the problem: "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

But an increasing number of Americans don't see it that way. A recent poll revealed that a slim 53% of Americans believe that "capitalism" is a better system than "socialism." A full 1/5 of Americans think that socialism is the better system and an embarrassing 27% are "not sure."

Wake up, America! You have bought into the lie that Capitalism is only about money, corporations, greedy businessmen, and corrupt politicians who cut backroom deals. Capitalism isn't about money, it's about Freedom---the freedom to try and fail that made the United States the richest industrial nation in the world by 1905 and the freedom that has kept us there ever since. (Glenn Beck, Common Sense) (photo: http://www.instantcreditapproval.com)

The Apprehension of a Shoplifter

2009-10-30T21:52:00.005-06:00

I would like to share with you the story of me stopping a Shoplifter recently here at my work site, Sugar House Center. For several months now, I have been working as a Security Officer at a shopping center here in Salt Lake City, Utah. On a typical day, I patrol the shopping center throughout my shift. During those patrols I regularly deal with the homeless people migrating through the shopping center trying to beg customers for money, food, cigarettes, etc...aka panhandling, stopping teens on their skateboards, and then get rid of drunks and if necessary have the police come and take them away for public intoxication. But every once in a while, I get to chase down a shoplifter. First of all, I am technically not supposed to go after shoplifters, because of liability issues, but this time I took action. One of the many businesses at my work site is Toys"R"Us. They have had several cases of shoplifting in the past, and they were not able to do anything about it. Since our company have been here, we have been making in store patrols in order to show presence and deter anyone that may be thinking about shoplifting. This has decreased their shoplifting cases dramatically, but every once in a while they still will have a shoplifter. In those cases, I was only able to get to the area only in time to identify their vehicle and sometimes even their license plate #, but pretty much we never see them again.

A few Saturdays ago, I received a call of a man running out of their store with several items in his hands. As I was running towards Toys"R"Us, they told me that he was hiding on the back side corner of the building. As I got to the Toys"R"Us Parking Lot, one of the employees pointed out to me where the man was. I then approached the man from a distance and told him he needed to come with me. Immediately at that moment, he ran over to the fence and concrete wall, behind Toys"R"Us, and jumped over it. It was about a 20 foot drop into thick bushes. I then immediately called the police, as I ran around the wall. I wasn't going to put my body in danger, besides I knew I could catch up to him by going around. Once I got the SLCPD dispatch on the phone, I told them the details of the situation, and that I was tracking him down. Once I ran around the wall and down the road that was behind the building, I regained visual of the shoplifter. He was walking away into the North Parking Lot of my site. Since I had him in sight and he wasn't running away, I decided to keep my distance and keep him in view as I updated the Police of his location. A few minutes later, the shoplifter noticed I was behind him, and then I told him to STOP! He immediately ran across the street over to the other shopping center. He then ran down some stairs that went to a underground garage. I then decided this guy is going to get away for good if I don't run after him and stop him physically. After updating the Police, I ran across the street and down the stairs to the underground garage. My adrenaline was definitely pushing me now. When I got down to the underground garage, I cautiously entered the area and search for this man, since I didn't know if this guy had any weapons on him. Soon after, I spotted him walking up the ramp entrance to the garage from a distance, and then immediately ran after him. Once back on top, I found him next to Petco. I then grabbed his left upper arm in order to stop and detain him. He resisted for a while then got away. Since I had my phone, with SLCPD online, I only had one free hand. I couldn't hold him with just one hand, so I continued to follow him and repeated to command him to stop. Soon after, the security officer at this shopping center came by, and I gave him my phone to continue to update the police of our location, and so I would have both my hands free. I then was able to catch up to this guy just behind Men's Wearhouse, near by main road, Highland Dr. Once I caught up to him I grabbed him with both hands and told him to stay where he was. A few things were going in my head at that time. Making a decision on the spot on what action to take. After holding him and realizing he wasn't going to be very violent and had no signs of carrying any weapons, I decided to not handcuff him and just held him, so he wouldn't get away. He continued to resist me. Basically, for a good while, if was like we were opposite linemen in a football game, trying to out block the other, but it was going on for several minutes. Eventually the man gave up when I repeated to tell him I didn't need to hold him if he wasn't trying to get away, so he stopped and I moved him to the side by a wall. About 5 minutes after this, the police finally showed up, approximately 50 minutes from the point I initiated the phone call to the Police. This is SLCPD for you. Sometimes they are good on getting to the site pretty fast, but most of the time, unless it is a life threatening situation, they take forever to show up. This is why I took action to detain this guy, because I knew right away, the Police would get there long after this guy had got away. Anyways, once the Police got there, it was a female officer first and then a male officer pulled up a minute later. They then got my statement and search the guy. They found he had Ten X-Box 360 video games, still in the plastic cases, in his backpack. After searching him thoroughly, the male officer handcuffed and put him in his patrol car. I then ran back over to Toys"R"Us to meet the police up there. I got up there about the same time the police got up there. They then had the employees that witness this man steal the video games come out to identify him. The female officer then went inside to give the games back and get a total value on the games. The total came to just under $600. Since it was over $300, it was a second degree felony which is at least 1 year to no more than 15 years in jail. I hope this guy will learn his lesson. Overall, I received a lot of gratitude from the employees, especially the managers of Toys"R"Us, and continue to receive it today. Also, my manager was pleased, even though he told me I should have just let him go. My boss knows what goes on, and knows that when your in the situation, you naturally have the mentality to do the right thing or be the hero. But it is important to understand the difference between a security office and a police officer, because a lot of people don't understand clearly the difference.

As a Security Officer, I am still a citizen. The only type of arrest I can make is a citizen arrest, which can be done by anyone else as well. I can make a citizen arrest when I witness the act of a felony, like in this case Robbery. But since I didn't actually witness with my own eyes the act of theft, I technically couldn't make the arrest. There is a misunderstood line between law enforcement and security officers. For example, in this case, since I touched the shoplifter, he could, legally, file a suit against me. But it is really hard to make the case, since I did not injure him in anyway. Plus he was clearly guilty of the crime. And the having statements from witnesses of the situation, and having the Police support me, it was very, very unlikely I would hear from this guy again. But, just by chance I did, I wouldn't have the State to back me up, like with Law Enforcement who have authority. So, basically the responsibility of the Security Officer is to Deter, Detect, Observe and Report. Overall, the best part about this situation is that I felt good to apprehend a criminal, knowing that one of our clients, Toys"R"Us, feels more safe, and that I can get another bad guy off the streets. The other good part about this situation is that the word gets out pretty good on the streets here, and decrease the likely hood someone will try to do the same as this man did. So, as to quote Bruce Wayne, "I seek the means to fight injustice, to turn fear against those who prey on the fearful."

After 45 Years, Ronald Reagan is still remembered as the Father of Modern Day Conservatism

2009-10-28T18:34:00.005-06:00

Televised Campaign Address for Goldwater Presidential Campaign - 10/27/64
Oh to have Ronald Reagan with us today. Take some time and absorb the great words of wisdom coming from this Great Man!

Common Sense 101

2009-10-28T15:38:00.004-06:00

The Reshaping and Redefining of America

We did not vote to change the Republic, we voted to change Washington. We wanted the lies, corruption, and childish "but they started it" games to end. Instead we now see that things have only gotten worse and that the "change" the political elite think we wanted was the transition to a system based on entitlements and handouts. It is insult upon injury and a testament to just how out of touch with the common man our two parties have become.

Most Americans remain convinced that the country is on the wrong track. They know that SOMETHING JUST DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT but they don't know how to describe it or, more importantly, how to stop it. But just because you may not know exactly what your gut is saying, doesn't mean what you're feeling is wrong. It's not. Something hasn't been right for a very long time.

Is common sense completely dead in America today? Did intellectual honesty have a moonlight clause? We don't have a shortage of capital or liquidity in this country; we have a shortage of honesty and trust. Where are the Americans who will stop talking about the president or the parties and instead start talking about right and wrong? Where are those who will stand up and say, "Common sense still lives at my house and it's about time it is applied again in Washington!"?

If you understand the threat to the Republic, it is your duty to wake up your neighbors by asking them to consider some simple questions:

Do you trust those in power to always tell you the hard truth---especially if it would hurt them at election time?
How is it possible that every president since Jimmy Carter has promised to lower our dependence on foreign oil, but now we import more oil than ever from countries that do us harm?
Are we to honestly believe that the country that took the idea of a man walking on the moon and turned it into a reality within eight years, or the country that built a transcontinental railroad in seven years (without power tools or machines) doesn't have the ability to completely build the 670-mile fence along our southern border that was promised to us in 2005?
Why are the same politicians who insist America is a "melting pot" the first ones to insist that different races, nationalities, and ethnicities retain their distinct languages, identities, and practices?
Why are those who respectfully question the science behind global warming mocked and condemned?
Do you believe that you elected representative view themselves as truly being "public servants" who place your well-being above their own?
Do you believe that those in Washington see your face when they make decisions or, instead, the faces of those who richly contribute to their campaigns?
Do you believe that our "public servants" have your best interests at heart and will defend your life, liberty, and property?

You know where you stand on these issues. You believe in the promise and future of America. You must heed the call of generations past and commit yourself to becoming part of America's solution. This will not be an easy or popular journey, but by now we've seen that the allure of the "easy" journey is wrong since it often means having to take an even more treacherous road home.

I am convinced that the source of our collective silence in the face of growing tyranny is not a failure to appreciate the importance of the fight or the threat we're facing. It's not a result of laziness or lack of patriotism, either. Our silence is due to our failure to see any problem or solution beyond partisan politics.

No longer! The light of common sense belongs to all of us, from every party---let us use it to uncover the challenges, treachery, and truth. (Common Sense, Glenn Beck)

Coming soon! Principles of Freedom 101

2009-10-23T23:20:00.006-06:00

I will give some excerpts from the best book how our Country was created, and the principles and values that inspired our Founding Fathers in the process of creating This Great Nation we call America!

"Discover the 28 Principles of Freedom our Founding Fathers said must be understood and perpetuated by every people who desire peace, prosperity, and freedom. Learn how adherence to these beliefs during the past 200 years has brought about more progress than was made in the previous 5,000 years."

The 5,000 Year Leap

A Miracle That Changed The World

by W. Cleon Skousen

photo:Howard Chandler Christy's Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States

Common Sense 101

2009-10-23T22:40:00.002-06:00

At the beginning of the Summer I began to pick up some personal reading. With all of the radical changes happening in Washington DC, I wanted to arm myself with knowledge in order to understand exactly what is happening right now, and what has happen since our founding fathers created this Country in order to destroy our liberties in which our founding fathers feared would happen. I started with Glenn Beck's Common Sense. What an a amazing book. Very easy read, just over 100 pages. I wanted to began a series of sharing with you some parts of this book. The great part about Glenn Beck's Common Sense is that it also includes Thomas Pain's Common Sense as well. It is interesting to experience the difference between the two, by seeing how one speaks back in the day. Glenn Beck's Common Sense gives us a case against an out-of-control government. I will start with some words from Glenn Beck as he start's his book.

"I think I know who you are.
After September 11, 2001, you thought our country had changed for the better. But the months that followed proved otherwise. We began to divide ourselves and the partisan bickering that had been absent from blood donor lines and church services started all over again.
You try to do the right thing every day. You work hard, you always try to do your best, and you play by the rules.
You turn on the television at the end of a long, tiring day and watch as endless analysts in left/right boxes argue about things done by bankers that, in retrospect, now seem implausible. You're worried about what's happening to our economy, but you're more worried about what it means for your family---and you're not sure what to do.
You don't think it's right that while you worked hard, lived prudently, and spent wisely, those who did the opposite are now being bailed out at your expense. You realize now that self-serving politicians and bankers built our financial system on a house of cards that, despite the cheery promises and rosy forecasts, is now collapsing.
Every night it seems you are faced with a choice: Do you unplug or do you speak out? Both of those options make you uncomfortable so you do neither...and you frustration continues to grow.
The fastest way to be branded a danger, a militia member, or just plain crazy is to quote the words of our Founding Fathers. I imagine that this is because words have consequences and the words and ideas that those men shared were revolutionary:

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

It is not time to dissolve the bands that connect us to one another, but it is time to dissolve the "political" bands that separate us from on another. Even if we disagree on politics, the phrase "I am an American" is not just a collection of words, it is the embodiment of an idea, one that has power only because "We the People" give it power. But somewhere along the way we've forgotten that, so we feel small and helpless as our country drifts away.
Perhaps what we need is a reminder. A reminder of who we are, who is really in control, and, most important, a reminder of how we got to a place that bears less and less resemblance to the America we remember from our childhoods. Let us start by doing what we've been trained for so long not to: let us declare the causes that unite us."

Words of Wisdom from President Ronald Wilson Reagan

2009-10-22T17:58:00.004-06:00

As our President, and all of the Radical people that surround him in the White House continue this transformation of our America, I feel I want to share some facts to help all of you understand what is happening to our Country. I have been reading some great books lately that have given me a base to understand how our Country was truly founded and how far we have changed from what our founding fathers intended for this Country to be. To begin this series, I want to share with you some words of wisdom from a Great President, the Best President of my Lifetime, President Ronald Wilson Reagan. The latest task on President Obama's agenda of Transforming America is Universal Healthcare. Here Ronald Reagan explains to us his thoughts on Universal Healthcare and its means towards Socialism (Government having control over you). I think a lot of us have forgotten the time during the Reagan years, dealing with and experiencing the falling of the Soviet Union. What we can learn from Reagan's words will help us be more prepared so we don't wake up one day and say, "Where has the Country I grew up in gone?"

"Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.

There are many ways in which our government has invaded the precincts of private citizens, the method of earning a living. But at the moment I'd like to talk about another way because this trip is with us and at the moment is more imminent.

One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it.

Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We had an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.

So with the American people on record as not wanting socialized medicine, Congressman Ferrand said, if we can only break through and get our foot inside the door, they can we can expand the program after that. Well, let's see what the socialists themselves had to say about it. They say once the Ferrand bill is passed, this nation will be provided with a mechanism for socialized medicine capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population. Well, we can't say we haven't been warned.

James Madison in 1788, speaking to the Virginia Convention said: “Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations.”

Now in our country under our free enterprise system, we have seen medicine reach the greatest heights that it has in any country in the world. Today, the relationship between patient and doctor in this country is something to be envied any place. The privacy, the care that is given to a person, the right to chose a doctor, the right to go from one doctor to the other.

But let’s also look from the other side, at the freedom the doctor loses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I am only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms; it’s like telling a lie, and one leads to another. First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then the doctors aren’t equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him you can’t live in that town, they already have enough doctors. You have to go someplace else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go.

This is a freedom that I wonder whether any of us have the right to take from any human being.

In this country of ours, took place the greatest revolution that has ever taken place in world’s history. The only true revolution. Every other revolution simply exchanged one set of rulers for another. But here for the first time in all the thousands of years of man’s relation to man, a little group of the men, the founding fathers for the first time – established the idea that you and I had within ourselves the God given right and ability to determine our own destiny.

This freedom was built into our government with safeguards. We talk democracy today. And strangely we let democracy begin to assume the aspect of majority rule is all that is needed. Well, majority rule is a fine aspect of democracy, provided there are guarantees written in to our government concerning the rights of the individual and of the minorities.

What can we do about this? Well, you and I can do a great deal. We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms and that you demand the continuation of our traditional free enterprise system. You and I can do this. The only way we can do it is by writing to our congressmen, even if we believe that he's on our side to begin with, write to strengthen his hand. Write those letters now. Call your friends and tell them to write. If you don't, this program, I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow. And behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country... until one day as Norman Thomas said, we will awake to find that we have socialism. And if you don't do this and if I don't do it, one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it once was like in America when men were free."

Getting back in the groove

2009-10-21T23:03:00.004-06:00

First of all, I want to apologize for not posting anything for the last couple of months. I just had other things going on, specifically spending some final moments with Tahsha before she left on her Mission to Melbourne, Australia. Plus, I kind of misplace my blogging grove. So, I'm getting back in the groove now. A lot has happen in our world since I last posted anything. First of all, I would love to give some wonderful news about Papa. There is a miracle in SLC, UT. Back in the early spring, Papa was struggling to recover from his fall he had recently after his back surgery. He ended up pinching some nerves in his lower back. This cause him to loose a lot of his feeling and strength of his legs. The Doctors stated that he would most likely not walk again, just because of how difficult it is for nerves to heal. Plus if he didn't show any improvement after 6 months, then it is very likely he will not have any improvement at all. I remember, even though there was a bad news from the Doctors and Nana feeling very stressed with the fact that Papa could never walk again, Papa never showed any pessimism of any kind. Shortly after, Papa received a blessing from his Bishop. In that blessing, the Bishop not only blessed Papa to be able to walk again, he stated that there will be miracles being shown through his family. Not much time after that blessing, Uncle Rob had a Heart Attack. This was definitely a miracle. By having friends near by to take him to the hospital, and to have one out of two of the only Doctors at that hospital who new the exact procedure in order to save his life, this was a miracle. Not far after Papa received that blessing from his Bishop, Elder Holland (who lives in the same condo as Nana & Papa) found out about Papa's condition. He came and gave Papa a blessing. And in that powerful blessing, Elder Holland said he would walk again. After those blessings, Papa began a daily routine, except on Sundays, of going in his swimming pool at the condo, and doing several exercises in the water in order to get his leg strength back. I would assist him every morning for several months in helping him get to and from the swimming pool and also in and out of the swimming pool. Month after month, I was blessed to witness a miracle in the works. Noticing his improvements that no one really witness in person. The biggest improvements has happen in the last couple of months. He began to get in and out of the pool all by himself, and finally getting his power chair which has done a lot of good. It was just a few weeks ago when Papa took his first few steps on his own without any assists of any kind. Just over the last weekend, Nana & Papa had their Bishop and wife come over. They haven't seen him walk yet. When they came inside, Papa came out, surprised them as he walked several steps in order to come to the Bishop and give him a hug. There was tears coming down all over in that room. Just recently as well, Papa was walking back from swimming with his roller walker, and meet up with Elder Holland by the elevator. Once Papa showed Elder Holland him walking all by himself without assistants Elder Holland got emotional, and told Papa he was his hero. It isn't often when you receive a blessing from an Apostle, and then be told by him that you are his Hero. I know miracles are happening in our day, even more often during the time when the savior was on earth.

Steven's Blessing

2009-08-04T20:54:00.000-06:00

Townhall or Townbrawl?

2009-08-04T20:27:00.003-06:00

Being home is no picnic for the Democrats in charge, as one blogger makes abundantly clear in a home video taken during a recent townhall meeting on health care. In a packed gymnasium, Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Penn.) and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius were booed so loudly that you can barely hear their answers to some basic questions. The comments that were audible only managed to cause more outrage.

One audience member asked how Americans can be confident in Congress to reform the health care system when members won't even read the legislation. Sebelius's response? "I'm not a member of Congress," which apparently absolves her from understanding the $1 trillion plan her Department will be tasked with implementing. That answer is still better than Sen. Specter's explanation, which was, "...[W]e have to make judgments very fast, and every bill is... understood by me before I vote." Sebelius tried to interrupt the hissing crowd but her defense of Senate Democrats was almost impossible to hear amid the jeering.

Of course, the mainstream press would have us believe through carefully choreographed broadcasts that Americans are perplexed but receptive to the White House plan. Producers have been wary to air anything but footage of the President in a controlled townhall environment, where he answers softball questions from a handpicked crowd. The media may show the grassroots as an agreeable bunch on the President's proposal, but as you'll see from the video on Panzramic, these public forums are turning into a public relations nightmare for the liberals in power.

In "Townhalls gone wild," Politico chronicles another side of the debate that includes "screaming constituents, protestors dragged out by the cops, [and, sad to say] congressmen fearful for their safety." More Democrats are canceling meetings, concerned about "angry, sign-carrying mobs" that greeted a long list of their colleagues including: Reps. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.), Thomas Perriello (D-Va.), Allen Boyd (D-Fla.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), Bruce Braley (D-Iowa), and Russ Carnahan (D-Mo.). Bishop, who was escorted away by police after his meeting got out of hand, said, "I have no problem with someone disagreeing with positions I hold. But I also believe no one is served if you can't talk through your differences."

Unfortunately, Americans are talking. The leadership just refuses to listen. Until it does, House and Senate Democrats can expect a long, uncomfortable August where the temperatures outside are nothing compared to the heat they're feeling inside their District offices. FRC has posted a schedule of townhall meetings across the country and sample questions you can ask. Please make a point of going to the forums near you and share--in a respectable manner--your thoughts with your congressman. While you're at it, why not bring your video camera?

Fun with My Nephews

2009-07-18T13:01:00.010-06:00

Great Fun with Family in Coeur d'Alene, ID

2009-07-17T15:24:00.001-06:00

Remembering our Founding Fathers

2009-07-05T23:19:00.003-06:00

I know this is a little delayed, but I wanted to post this on the 4th of July, Independence Day. Here is a email I got from Glenn Beck, and I wanted to share with everyone.

Hello America,

Here it is, another Fourth of July. Traditionally, this is a day to gather with friends, maybe fire up the barbeque and play with kids until the sun sets and the fireworks start. But in thinking back on the meaning behind this day, we must never forget that our nation was baptized in the blaze of a very different kind of "fireworks." Yes, this is a day of rest and relaxation, as well it should be, but this year…I'd like to ask you a favor. At some point during the day, I hope you'll take time to think and reflect on what it is we're truly celebrating on the 4^th of July -- our Independence Day. Of course the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4^th, 1776 but it's so much more than that. On this day, 233 short years ago, a small group of men dedicated themselves to a higher purpose, an ideal they believed in so greatly, they signed their name to its expression and in doing so put their very lives at risk.

Never has a simple act of signing one's name carried such weight, such a profound commitment. By signing the Declaration of Independence, 56 men stood in direct defiance of the British government. They became marked men, and willingly so. As I was doing some research on the significance of July 4^th, I came across some interesting facts about these men. Today as we all enjoy the freedom our forefathers guaranteed us, join me in honoring the extraordinary sacrifice of 56 extraordinary Americans.

Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence:

Five were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes burned to the ground. Two lost sons serving in the Revolutionary Army, and two more had sons captured. Nine fought and died in the Revolutionary War.

If you ever feel like your lone voice can never be heard, that the political system isn't set up for "regular" Americans to change the course of history, remember: The signers were flesh and blood, mortal men with a divinely-inspired aim.

Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists, eleven were merchants, and nine were farmers and large plantation owners. They were well educated, smart enough to know that by signing the Declaration of Independence, they were signing their own death warrants. They did it anyway, and God bless them for it.

As we enjoy our liberty on this 4^th of July, or any day of any month, we must never take that liberty for granted. Too many have given too much. In the words of the Signers themselves, "For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."

Their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor -- I think that's a price paid worth a few minutes of reflection, don't you? But let's not be solemn in that reflection. I say rejoice and share this information with your friends and family, especially your kids. The Signers asked for nothing in return for their pledge, but I say that we show our thanks with a pledge of our own: To remember, to be grateful, and to carry on in their spirit. America is the greatest country this world has ever and will ever know, and it will stay that way so long as "we the people" remember that just like in 1776.

It's US that surrounds them, and we'll never back down.

Happy Independence Day, and God bless America.

Glenn

May we also remember that Independence Day is significant for when we were getting away from a centralized government, Britain. May we not become a Dependent Nation, a nation that falls into the same way of life we fought a war to become free from. I hope we remain a Independent Nation, not a Nation that has become Dependent. Dependent on our Government to run our lives. I Love my Country, and I know it was created with direct inspiration from God.

Justin

Common Sense to Climate Change

2009-06-30T15:50:00.003-06:00

First, I want to apologize for the previous posts I made about Global Warming facts. I pretty sure most of you didn't understand hardly anything of it. I want to make some sense and help you understand the true facts of Climate Change, and so called Global Warming. The Government move to promote Global Warming and programs to prevent it, is....well, bottom line, to have more power, control, and money. To start, here is a recent news headline that came out today.

A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming.

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

The controversy comes after the House of Representatives passed a landmark bill to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, one that Inhofe said will be "dead on arrival" in the Senate despite President Obama's energy adviser voicing confidence in the measure.

According to internal e-mails that have been made public by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Carlin's boss told him in March that his material would not be incorporated into a broader EPA finding and ordered Carlin to stop working on the climate change issue. The draft EPA finding released in April lists six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, that the EPA says threaten public health and welfare.

An EPA official told FOXNews.com on Monday that Carlin, who is an economist -- not a scientist -- included "no original research" in his report. The official said that Carlin "has not been muzzled in the agency at all," but stressed that his report was entirely "unsolicited."

"It was something that he did on his own," the official said. "Though he was not qualified, his manager indulged him and allowed him on agency time to draft up ... a set of comments."

Despite the EPA official's remarks, Carlin told FOXNews.com on Monday that his boss, National Center for Environmental Economics Director Al McGartland, appeared to be pressured into reassigning him.

Carlin said he doesn't know whether the White House intervened to suppress his report but claimed it's clear "they would not be happy about it if they knew about it," and that McGartland seemed to be feeling pressure from somewhere up the chain of command.

Carlin said McGartland told him he had to pull him off the climate change issue.

"It was reassigning you or losing my job, and I didn't want to lose my job," Carlin said, paraphrasing what he claimed were McGartland's comments to him. "My inference (was) that he was receiving some sort of higher-level pressure."

Carlin said he personally does not think there is a need to regulate carbon dioxide, since "global temperatures are going down." He said his report expressed a "good bit of doubt" on the connection between the two.

Specifically, the report noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend over the past 11 years, that scientists do not necessarily believe that storms will become more frequent or more intense due to global warming, and that the theory that temperatures will cause Greenland ice to rapidly melt has been "greatly diminished."

Carlin, in a March 16 e-mail, argued that his comments are "valid, significant" and would be critical to the EPA finding.

McGartland, though, wrote back the next day saying he had decided not to forward his comments.

"The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision," he wrote, according to the e-mails released by CEI. "I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."

He later wrote an e-mail urging Carlin to "move on to other issues and subjects."

"I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research, etc., at least until we see what EPA is going to do with climate," McGartland wrote.

The EPA said in a written statement that Carlin's opinions were in fact considered, and that he was not even part of the working group dealing with climate change in the first place.

"Claims that this individual's opinions were not considered or studied are entirely false. This administration and this EPA administrator are fully committed to openness, transparency and science-based decision making," the statement said. "The individual in question is not a scientist and was not part of the working group dealing with this issue. Nevertheless the document he submitted was reviewed by his peers and agency scientists, and information from that report was submitted by his manager to those responsible for developing the proposed endangerment finding. In fact, some ideas from that document are included and addressed in the endangerment finding."

The e-mail exchanges and suggestions of political interference sparked a backlash from Republicans in Congress.

Reps. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Darrell Issa, R-Calif., also wrote a letter last week to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging the agency to reopen its comment period on the finding. The EPA has since denied the request.

Citing the internal e-mails, the Republican congressmen wrote that the EPA was exhibiting an "agency culture set in a predetermined course."

"It documents at least one instance in which the public was denied access to significant scientific literature and raises substantial questions about what additional evidence may have been suppressed," they wrote.

In a written statement, Issa said the administration is "actively seeking to withhold new data in order to justify a political conclusion."

"I'm sure it was very inconvenient for the EPA to consider a study that contradicted the findings it wanted to reach," Sensenbrenner said in a statement, adding that the "repression" of Carlin's report casts doubt on the entire finding.

Carlin said he's concerned that he's seeing "science being decided at the presidential level."

"Now Mr. Obama is in effect directly or indirectly saying that CO2 causes global temperatures to rise and that we have to do something about it. ... That's normally a scientific judgment and he's in effect judging what the science says," he said. "We need to look at it harder."

The controversy is similar to one under the Bush administration -- only the administration was taking the opposite stance. In that case, scientist James Hansen claimed the administration was trying to keep him from speaking out and calling for reductions in greenhouse gases.

By Judson Berger

FOXNews.com

On Sotomayor, Objections Sustained

2009-06-30T15:43:00.002-06:00

In a ruling that could have as much impact on the future of Sonia Sotomayor as of affirmative action, the U.S. Supreme Court released its verdict on Ricci v. DeStefano today. The 5-4 decision, which overturns a previous ruling by Sotomayor, should be a devastating blow to the President's first pick for the high court. Five justices sided with the group of 18 Connecticut firefighters, who were denied promotions because of their race.

To determine who was eligible for advancement in New Haven, the city asked its firefighters to take a test. When not enough African-Americans passed it, officials threw out the results--effectively refusing a promotion to the white and Hispanic firefighters who qualified for one. Not surprisingly, the group who was snubbed for advancement sued, arguing that they were victims of reverse discrimination.

On appeal, Judge Sotomayor ruled that the city was justified in tossing the test result. Legal experts were stunned--not only by her panel's verdict, but by how Sotomayor arrived at her conclusion. Using a tiny loophole in the 1964 Civil Rights Act, she "seized on a relatively small part of Title VII and read it in a way that swallows the anti-discrimination focus of the overwhelming bulk of the [statute]," writes Roger Clegg, President of the Center for Equal Opportunity.

The President's nominee not only turned her back on the Civil Rights Act but also on the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law. To many, this case confirms Sotomayor's penchant for judicial activism. Since her appeals ruling, there has been widespread concern over how she handled the case. Even the Obama Justice Department called on the Court to reverse her panel's decision. Today, the justices did just that, writing in the majority opinion that "[f]ear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions."

In the weeks since her nomination, Sotomayor has proven to be "deeply immersed in identity politics," as Clegg calls it. A judge who distorts the law to fit her own personal prejudices has no place on the nation's highest court. I shudder to think where her politically correct tendencies would lead on matters of abortion or religious freedom. Let's just say that if this case was a test of Sotomayor's eligibility for promotion, she failed.

Cap and Trade

2009-06-30T15:19:00.003-06:00

This last Friday, the House of Representatives passed a bill for Cap and Trade. If you don't know what Cap and Trade is, and want to know what this bill will do, here is an explaination given by Glenn Beck last Friday.

It's Friday! What are your plans? Dinner? Blockbuster movie? Hey, you could always read the 1,500-page cap-and-trade bill — that's 1,200 plus 300 in amendments.

Here's the one thing tonight: While America enjoys a Friday watching "Transformers," the country is being transformed behind our backs.

The House is sneaking in a vote on the mammoth 1,500 page Waxman-Markey climate change bill.

Why are they burying this vote on a Friday?

It could be because earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001 — despite an increase in CO2 emissions (that's an inconvenient stat), helping to swell the number of skeptical scientists to over 700 — or 13 times the scientists who wrote the supposed consensus.

It could be because more Americans are figuring out that this energy policy is just an energy tax and guaranteed to do only one thing: Raise energy prices for consumers.

But don't take my word on that claim, take it from President Obama:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA: You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Why, in the middle of a global economic crisis, would we even consider a bill that the Wall Street Journal says would be "the biggest tax in American history"?

Because it's not about saving the cute, fuzzy, man-eating polar bears, the spotted owl, the cumulus clouds or the caribou. The science is not settled on this at all — not even close.

This is about power, money and control.

But America is caught up with "Hey, did you hear? Michael Jackson is dead!"

Concentrate on things that are important, like those who are pushing this energy bill stand to gain the most from it:

• Nancy Pelosi has $50,000 to $100,000 in Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

• Rep. Edward Markey — hmm, why does that name sound familiar? — has investments between $51,000 and $115,000 in the Firsthand Technology Value Fund (which as three solar-energy manufacturers)

• Al Gore — Mr. "Inconvenient Truth" himself — his venture capital firm is heavily invested in a new software company that's making software to help companies track their carbon footprint. He, and companies like his, will make a fortune.

Not only will this bill make politicians rich, it will increase their power as well. The government will control what you can and cannot do.

Want an SUV? Oh, sorry. Gas mileage isn't good enough.

How about incandescent light bulbs? They use too much energy.

Quarter-pounder with cheese? Meat is even more harmful than the SUV!

This bill is a gateway; it will be used as justification to regulate every industry or product the government can get their grimy little fingers on.

Politicians get rich. Government gets more power and control. Businesses just pass on the cost — so there is only one loser: you, the consumer.

The worst part is, we aren't breaking new ground here. While we're busy marching towards more socialism, the rest of the world is running away from it because they've tried it.

Australia is killing their carbon tax proposals and it's already a complete failure in Spain, where it's resulted in an 18.1 percent unemployment rate (more than double Europe's average) and they are losing 2.2 jobs per every one "green job" created.

I think The New York Times quote on the European Union's cap-and-trade program (that started in 2005) says it all: "Their plan unleashed a lobbying free-for-all that led politicians to dole out favors to various industries, undermining the environmental goals. Four years later, it is becoming clear that system has so far produced little noticeable benefit to the climate, but generated a multi-billion dollar windfall for some of the continent's biggest polluters."

Enjoying Every Moment of Summer

2009-06-30T12:13:00.006-06:00

Forward: I first want to apologize for not updating my blog for a long time.

Over this Summer I have been able to spend one of my days off from work, Mondays, to go visit Tahsha and her family. Yesterday and the Previous Monday I have been having great fun in the enjoyment of summer weather. Over the last couple months it has been raining a lot, more than average here in Utah. Thus, delaying perfect summer weather, sun and very warm temperatures.

Last Monday, I took Tahsha on a special date. The week before last Monday, I went to Downata, Hot Springs, (where Tahsha works) to visit Tahsha and play with her younger siblings. After that day, I happen to forget my Cardinals Baseball Cap at the hot springs. Instead of Tahsha telling me she will give it to me when I return the following Monday, she gave me a challenge I would have to accomplish in order to retrieve my hat back. The challenge was to take her on a wonderful evening date. Plus this date had to be something we haven't down before. I greatly excepted the challenge, for one, I would want to have my Cardinals Hat back, and most importantly, I loved the idea of trying something new.

As the week went by, there was a few ideas that circled around in my head, but never got to a final decision. Later in the week, I was texting Tahsha, as I usually do as I check on here during work, she asked me if I wanted any help on ideas. I was happily willing to receive her ideas. Of the ideas she gave me, I came to a final decision. When that Monday arrived, I got up that day, latter in the afternoon, and after finishing Nana's Daily tasks, I left to Malad. I arrived at her parents house, and her younger siblings were very exited to see me, thinking I was taking them swimming to the hot springs again. I then told them I was actually taking Tahsha out on a date, just for us two. They were disappointed, but got over it. After I got Tahsha in the car, I told her my plan and we began the date. I took her to a little lake, call the twin lakes, which is located exactly east of Malad, over the mountains, near a small town named Clifton.

I previously viewed the directions to the lake on google maps before I left that day. On a side note, I am generally good when it comes to visualizing and remembering directions when I see it on a map. As we got to Clifton, I knew the lake was just east of Clifton. As I was driving through the town I was looking for a sign that might lead us to the road that will lead us to the lake. Well, we ended up going several miles past Clifton, and I was constantly looking east, trying to find the lake, but was unsuccessful. I eventually realized it was very possible I passed the road to the lake. We than made a U-turn, and headed back to Clifton.

Once we got to Clifton, I noticed some body of water to the east. Speaking out, I knew there had to be a road to that body of water. We eventually found a road, which we happen to miss the first run through. Once on that road, and making our way to the lake, we happen to miss another road to the lake. When I visualized the direction to the lake, I just remembered the general direction. I guess I should had printed the road map. The good part is we could had been more lost than we appeared to be.

Once we got the right road, we finally made it to the lake. It was a very pretty small lake, surrounded by hill and mountain sides. They had a payment fee for entering the lake area. It was privately own. I payed the fee in a envelope that you put in a slot right by the entrance. We drove around the lake, looking for the perfect spot to park and have our picnic. We eventually got to the other side of the lake, and realizing we got to the end of the road. We than turned around and headed back. Not that far from there we found a camp ground spot right by the lake front, and unanimously, we felt it was a good spot.

There I started a fire in order to cook some hot dogs. I had prepared hot dogs, potato salad, and blue corn chips for dinner. It was a wonderful evening, as we roasted our hot dogs, we looked out at the amazing landscape of the mountains, the lake, and the blue sky. After dinner, we went into the water to get our feet wet. The water was pretty cold, but it felt very nice with the warm temperature outside. After we cooled our feet, we sat down on a nice edge side, cuddled up, and just enjoyed the moment together. Soon after, we started to roast some marshmallows for making smores. After the smores we stayed there to enjoy a wonderful sunset. I thought I did pretty good to make it personal and romantic, and I think Tahsha agrees. Soon after the sun setted over the mountains, we headed back to her parents house, ended the night watching a movie with her family. Overall, this was a great time for both of us to feel free from our work, she getting away from her siblings, myself a break from Nana, and most importantly to spend quality time together. :-)

Global Warming Scam Part 7

2009-05-06T09:54:00.004-06:00

2.1.11. TEMPERATURE OSCILLATION
The IPCC (Solomon et al. 2008) does not seem to envisage that global temperatures might fluctuate or oscillate, perhaps accompanied by oscillating energy “imbalances” something Hansen et al. (2005) cannot believe in either. Schlesinger and Ramankutty (1994) applied a statistical technique called “singular spectrum analysis” to four global-mean surface temperature records which had been de-trended by means of a simple climate/ocean model based on the supposed radiative forcing due the increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration.

Three global-mean surface temperature records (Jones, Hansen, Vinnikov 1992) de-trended by a simple climate/ocean model were compared with singular spectrum analysis of the same data. The mean length of the oscillation identified was estimated as 65, 66, 70 and 69 years for the four temperature records studied. They also applied the technique to 11 geographical subsets of the data of Jones et al. (1991). Similar results were obtained for all regions, with the best agreement shown by North Atlantic, North America, and Eurasia.

In a later paper Andronova and Schlesinger (2000) removed the modelled effects of the supposed anthropogenic warming, volcanoes and the sun from the updated record of Jones (1999) and confirmed the presence and further progress of the previously identified oscillation shown in Figure 1.5 to 1999. Klyashtorin and Lyubishin (2003) have recently independently confirmed this “quasi-cyclic fluctuation” with about a 60 year period in the surface record of Jones et al. (2001) and they have demonstrated the existence of a variation of 50-60 years interval in reconstructed temperatures for the past 1000 years. The oscillation identified by Schlesinger and Ramankutty (1994) can be seen in a range of temperature records, global, regional and local. In many of these the postulated anthropogenic contribution is not evident. The steady temperature increase supposedly due to anthropogenic causes seems to have ceased since 2002.

The mean global surface temperature anomaly record shows a temperature increase imposed on the oscillation, which is not present in most other records, such as those shown below, so it is an artefact of the methods used in the collection and processing of the surface temperature data rather than an indication of warming from increases in anthropogenic greenhouse gases. The oscillatory behaviour often appears to be discontinuous. For example, Trenberth (1990) identified a “climate shift” in the Northern Hemisphere between 1976 and 1977. Karl et al. (2000) found climate shifts in 1912, 1945 as well as the 1976 shift.

2.1.12. OCEAN OSCILLATIONS
Schlesinger and Ramankutty (1994) and Andronova and Schlesinger (2000) ignored the important climatic effects of the various ocean oscillations. Trenberth et al. (2000) focused on the most important one, the El Niño Southern Oscillation of the Pacific and derived a linear equation which was used to remove El Niño from the surface record. This corrected record removed most of the oscillation, but not the very large El Niño of 1998 or for subsequent years. Tsonis et al. (2007) have shown that synchronous behaviour of the various ocean oscillations can provide an explanation for this 65-70 year global and local oscillation in temperature. The various climate shifts can be related to particular changes in the he El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the North Pacific Oscillation (NPO).

The El Niño ocean oscillation event of 1998 shows little temperature change from its inception in 1979. The period since then appears to correspond with the expected final peak of the oscillation. There was a “climate shift” in 2001 after which steady temperatures have persisted until the present. Again, this record shows no evidence of a long-term upwards temperature trend which could be attributed to anthropogenic greenhouse gas forcing. (Vincent Gray)

New England Patriots or Pushovers?

2009-05-06T08:53:00.002-06:00

Earlier this year a Boston-based homosexual group, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), announced its drive for "6-by-12," an effort to secure homosexual marriage in all six New England states by the year 2012. With the pump primed by judicial fiats, Massachusetts, Vermont and Connecticut now have counterfeit marriage laws in place. Today, with the mantle of responsibility resting on two governors, Maine and New Hampshire face having same-sex marriage laws adopted without prior judicial decree. The reason: New England Democrats are lining up for homosexuality now as the national party has done for abortion--making it a litmus test for party loyalty and a future within the party. That is why all eyes are on two Democratic governors, John Lynch (N.H.) and John Baldacci (Maine), who both made promises to oppose homosexual marriage.

Pro-homosexual bills will likely go to the governors later this week. Will the governors live up to their promises to the people, or will they kowtow to the far left of their own party? Keeping one's promises to the electorate (consider U.S. Senator Arlen Specter jumping the GOP ship last week) seems pass? these days, but promises still matter. Lynch and Baldacci can comfortably veto these bills and ask the people to make their feelings known in the next state assembly election cycle. Residents of the two states should insist they do so.

Global Warming Scam Part 6

2009-05-03T11:30:00.007-06:00

2.1.6. QUALITY CONTROL

There is no quality control on meteorological stations. Nobody knows how many sites are close to towns, buildings, central heating pipes; what instruments are used, who measures, how often.
Some years ago the Australians published pictures of their weather stations. They were withdrawn hurriedly as most could be seen to be subject to bias.. They have re-emerged recently with a new set of photos (BOM 2008), all of which look satisfactory, although the Melbourne station, in a busy city intersection, still seems to be used. Detailed information about the location of weather stations is not readily available. A recent “Google” search for photographs of weather stations provided very few outside the USA or Canada and very few appeared to be free from urban effects, or were from official sources. An exception was the Oklahoma Climatological Survey, which gave a wide range of pictures of its sites, from each compass direction. They supplied a paper (Martinez et al. 2007) which lists all the information they record regularly for each site. It should be obvious that this information cannot be obtained from a remote office and it cannot be extrapolated into the past. There seems to be an improvement taking place as a result of the publicity that is being given to unsuitable stations such as those by Davey et al. (2005) and Pielke et al. (2007) who showed that many of the US Global Historic Climatology Network (GHCN) are unsuitable. Perhaps these improvements are partially responsible for the fact that the surface and satellite records now show a measure of agreement, and both show no recent warming.

2.1.8. CORRECTION OF UNCERTAINTIES

The principles which have guided the correction of the Hadley climate data are given in Brohan et al. (2006). They say under "Uncertainties": "A definitive assessment of uncertainties is impossible because it is always possible that some unknown error has contaminated the data and no quantitative allowance can be made for such unknowns. There are, however, several known limitations in the data and estimates of the likely effects of these limitations can be made” (Defense secretary Rumsfeld, press conference June 6, 2002, London) It is touching that the famous poem of Donald Rumsfeld is now inspiring climate scientists. It is worth quoting.

"THE UNKNOWN
As we know
There are known knowns
There are the things we know we know
We also know
There are known unknowns
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know
But there are also unknown unknowns
The ones we don't know
We don't know".

Runnalls and Oke (2006) showed that the recorded temperature in meteorological stations can be influenced by "changes in vegetation, development (buildings, paving), irrigation, cropping and even the maintenance of the site and its instruments".

2.1.10. SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE

An average global temperature anomaly needs to include the 71% of the earth’s surface that is ocean. There are many temperature measurements made from ships, but the quality control is much worse than on the land and even then whole regions have no figures. Folland and Parker (1995) have claimed to have found a way of incorporating the data. One difficulty is that many early measurements were from buckets drawn from the sea and it is sometimes uncertain whether the buckets were metal or wood. During the first World War measurements could not be made on deck. Also some measurements are from a weather station on board, often beneath the funnel.

Both American temperature compilers, the Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) and The Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) have never accepted the use of the sea surface measurements for a global average and they have to resort to a whole host of dubious devices to claim that their figures are “global”. They use recent satellite measurements for the ocean (Reynolds et al. 2002) and extrapolate them into the past. It is very suspicious that incorporating the sea surface measurements seems to make little difference.

Although only 29% of the earth’s surface is land, it is remarkable that, the peak number of 5ºx 5º grid-boxes from land-based weather stations was 880 in 1980, which includes 34% of the earth’s surface. This has been achieved because there are many stations on small islands surrounded by ocean where the land temperature is assumed to be typical of the surrounding ocean. Also a proportion of sea surface measurements is from fixed buoys and weather ships. These and the land stations measure above the surface, whereas current sea surface measurements are made from ship’s engine intake, which is below the surface.

The Brawl's in Obama's Court

2009-05-03T11:21:00.002-06:00

In the speech that catapulted Barack Obama to fame in 2004, the young Democrat said, "There is not a liberal America or a conservative America. There is a United States of America." Five years later, the same man will face his biggest test to prove it: the nomination of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. Since the election, Washington has been prepared for a vacancy on the high court, most likely from the aging, Left-leaning justices. Yesterday, reports confirmed that Justice David Souter, 69, will be the first to exit, giving the new President his first crack at reshaping the Supreme Court. Will he plow ahead with a pro-abortion, anti-faith radical (as he did with 7^th Circuit Court nominee David Hamilton) this early in his presidency--or will he bide his time on a full-blown congressional war and nominate a judge that both sides can agree on?

As a candidate, Barack Obama prided himself on his ability to work with conservatives. His first 100 days, however, have been a case study in unilateralism. When asked why he moved away from bipartisanship, the President dodged the question and said, "Whether we're Democrats or Republicans, surely there's got to be some capacity for us to work together, not agree on everything, but at least set aside small differences to get things done."

On Wednesday, President Obama decided his best way to "get things done" was to use congressional rules to block any meaningful participation by Republicans on controversial policies like health care reform and education. While those decisions can be overturned, lifetime appointments cannot. As both sides are painfully aware, nothing in this administration's legacy will withstand the test of time like President Obama's judicial nominees.

To that point, the White House would be wise to take into account the growing public consensus on the sanctity of human life. While some people are pointing at social conservatives as the cause of the Republicans' woes, a new poll suggests that the GOP's platform on life may be its biggest appeal. According to the most recent Pew Research Center poll, American support for abortion is experiencing its steepest decline in at least a decade. Since last August, the proportion of people who believe that abortion should be legal in most or all cases has dropped from a small majority--54%--to 46%. The drop is particularly noticeable in the youngest generation (18-29) whose support for abortion dropped by five points (from 52% to 47%) in just nine months. The conservative trend is even affecting women. Fifty-four percent said abortion should be legal in most or all cases last summer, while less than half (49%) feel that way today.(frc.org)

Obama Taxes America's Patience

2009-05-03T11:19:00.002-06:00

While you would never know it from the mainstream media, President Obama's approval ratings are the second worst for any President after 100 days in forty years. Only Bill Clinton's numbers were worse--and by one percentage point! That outlook is unlikely to improve once taxpayers realize the impact of this week's budget resolution. Not only are they on the hook for the President's $3.5 trillion plan, but their middle-income tax cuts--a signature promise of Obama's candidacy--were dropped from the budget package to make room for the administration's radical social policies.

Now that the President has committed Americans to roughly $10 trillion of government spending, he has quietly decided not to extend the middle-income tax relief beyond this year. In February, the stimulus package included a tax credit that provided $400 to individuals and $800 to married couples. Now it appears this "relief" will be a one-time affair. Faced with the decision to keep his word to 95% of Americans or scrap it in favor of his aggressive social agenda, President Obama (much like Bill Clinton after 1992) chose the latter.

Why is the middle class not being allowed to keep its modest tax break? To paraphrase Willie Sutton, who was asked why he robbed banks, it's because "that's where the money is." The middle-class tax cut mirage is fading quickly as we approach Obama's first summer in office.(frc.org)

Global Warming Scam Part 5

2009-05-01T13:05:00.006-06:00

2.1.4. THE TIME OF OBSERVATION BIAS
The “Mean Daily Temperature" which is obtained by one reading per day of the maximum and minimum temperature for the past 24 hours is taken to be the average of these two figures. However, the actual 24 hours for which it applies is the previous 24 hours of the time of measurement, not the actual daily 24 hours. The measurement of Max and Min is made at different times in different places and It also changes over time and from one place and one country to another. This bias in "mean daily temperature" is called the "Time of Observation Bias" (TOB) by the Americans and together with all the other inaccuracies in their measurements, they make a gallant effort to try and "correct" for it. These efforts are described by Vose et al. (2003). There is some very interesting information in this paper. We learn, for example, that "the majority of the US Cooperative observing Network is staffed by volunteers". I wonder what their qualifications are, or who checks up on them and what situations apply in other countries?. They also say "When the observation day differs from the calendar day a "carry over" bias of up to 2.0ºC is introduced into monthly mean temperatures. Also “Non-calendar day observations also result in a "drift" bias of up to 1.5ºC in monthly mean" because there is a carry over from the previous month. If the day is different, then so are the month and the year. They state that there has been a systematic change in the preferred observation time in the US, requiring a large correction they recorded near sunset before the 1940s and switched to mornings after that, giving a "slight" warm bias to the later readings. A diagram showing the distribution of time of observation now for the USHCN (United States Historical Climatology Network) stations shows a wide level of variability. They make a "correction" for the US, which may not apply elsewhere. It is doubtful whether knowledge of conditions 100 years ago is very reliable.

2.1.5. URBAN HEATING AND LAND USE CHANGE
The unrepresentative meteorological temperatures are often measured in places of increasing population, more buildings, more concrete, growing vegetation, more cars, more heating and therefore subject to a positive bias. The evidence that this is happening is overwhelming. It is the only authenticated “anthropogenic” effect on the climate (Gray 2000, McKitrick and Michaels 2004, 2008).

The IPCC have repeatedly quoted the paper by Jones et al. (1991) as evidence that urban heating is negligible. These authors examined an “extensive” set of rural station temperature data for three regions of the world - European parts of the Soviet Union, Western Australia and Eastern China. When combined with similar analyses for the contiguous United States, the results are claimed to be representative of 20% of the land area of the Northern Hemisphere and 10% of the Southern Hemisphere. They worked out the linear slope of temperature anomalies for the rural series in each case and compared it with the same slope for several gridded series. For the Western USSR, it covered the period 1901-1987 and 1930-1987, for Eastern Australia it was 1930-1988 compared with 1930-1997, for Eastern China it was 1954-1983 and for the contiguous United States it was 1901-1984. The differences between urban and rural slopes were only significant at the 5% level for Eastern Australia and for one set of Eastern China. They concluded “It is unlikely that the remaining unsampled areas of the developing countries in tropical climates, or other highly populated parts of Europe, could significantly increase the overall urban bias above 0.05ºC during the twentieth century”

It is unclear whether this small correction has been made for the most recent version of the Jones et al. global temperature series. There are several things wrong with the Jones et al. (1991) paper.

• The quality of the data is even worse than usual. They admit “It is unfortunate that separate maximum and minimum temperature data are not more widely available.”

• The qualification for a “rural” site is a population below 10,000 for Western Soviet Union, below 35,000 for Eastern Australia, and below 100,000 for Eastern China. There is ample evidence (Gray 2000) that urban effects exist in such places.

• They have chosen countries with a continuous record of effective scientific supervision. These are not representative of the rest of the world, where changes of country and adequate supervision are far less common.

Even these countries raise doubts. Russia had a tyrannical regime where statistics were frequently manipulated for political purposes. China had a major famine from the “Great Leap Forward” between 1958 and 1959 and also a manipulation of statistics.

Two of the countries, the contiguous USA and China have such reliable records that, when corrected, they show no global warming, or residual urban influence (see Figures 3 and 4), but these two well monitored countries cannot be regarded as “typical” of the rest of the world. In the very same year there appeared in Geophysical Research Letters another paper which included two of the authors of the previous paper, Wang and Karl (Wang et al. 1991). The abstract of this paper reads “We used 1954-1983 surface temperature from 42 Chinese urban (average population 1.7 million) and rural (average population 150,000) station pairs to study the urban heat island effects. Despite the fact that the rural stations are not true rural stations, the magnitude of the heat islands was calculated to average 0.23ºC over the thirty year period, with a minimum value (0.19ºC) during the 1964-1973 decade and maximum (0.28ºC) during the most recent decades.”

This study appears to have used the same stations that were claimed to have no urban bias in the first paper and now there is an urban bias even if “rural” now includes places with population as high as 150,000. The early paper (Jones et al. 1991) states, of Eastern China, “The stations were selected on the basis of station history: We chose those with few, if any, changes in instrumentation, location or observation times”.

Wang et al. (1991) says “They were chosen based on station histories. We chose those without any changes in instrumentation, location, or observation times”. Both papers were written at the same time and different conclusions made from the same data. Recently, Keenan (2007) has shown that many of the Chinese stations moved several times over the period in question, in one case 15 km and he accuses Wang of outright fraud, as he must have known this at the time.
Confirmation of continuing urban warming in China has been documented by Ren et al (2008) who, from 282 weateher stations in Northern China from 1960 to 2000, that there was an urban bias of 0.16ºC per decade for cities over 500,000 population, down to 0.07ºC per decade for small cities (100,000 to 300,000). The National bias was estimated t 0,11ºC per decade, However, these were all by comparison with “rural” measurements, which were assumed to be immune from urban heating. Another paper used by the IPCC (Solomon et al. 2007) as evidence that urban warming is negligible is by Peterson (2000) "Assessment of Urban Versus Rural In-Situ Surface Temperatures in the Contiguous United States: No Difference Found". This paper supplies much more information on the observation process and its snags than has appeared before.

The IPCC has chosen to consider the phrase "No Difference Found” as implying that it is evidence that no difference exists. The text shows that this untrue. Peterson merely found that his sample size was insufficient to obtain a statistically significant figure.

He studied only three years of data, 1989-91, so he was unable to study "trends". His excuse is rather startling. "A longer period would increase the problem of missing data". The problem of missing data is not otherwise mentioned, but it must be important if it has an influence after only three years in the USA. The data are not given and the problem must be even worse outside the USA. He chose for study 40 clusters of stations, well distributed over the country; a total of 289 stations, 85 "rural", 191 "urban" and 13 "suburban. It was surprising to learn that in the Unites States there are several different types of instrument and shelter. There were 106.9 maximum and minimum liquid-in-glass thermometers in a Cotton Region Shield (CRS, resembles a Stevenson Screen), 142.8 thermistor based instruments in a MMTS shield, 35 hygro-thermometers in an HO-83 housing and 2.3 hygro-thermographs. (The fractions are from changes during the three years). There are photographs of these three types. If the Americans have several different instruments what kinds are used elsewhere? Corrections had to be made for urban/rural location, elevation, Time of Observation Bias, instrumentation and siting. The total remaining overall urban/rural bias before the others were applied was +0.31ºC. This is half the amount claimed to be caused by greenhouse gases since 1900. However, when the other corrections were applied, together with their inaccuracy levels, the urban/rural bias was reduced to +0.04ºC.

The Time of Observation Bias was the largest, accounting for a correction of -0.17ºC. This was because rural stations had a higher proportion of morning readers. Differences in elevation accounted for a correction of -0.11ºC because rural stations in the USA are usually higher up than the cities. Differences in instrumentation accounted for a bias of 0.05ºC because rural stations had a higher proportion of hygro-thermometers that had a warm bias over the period and latitude changes gave a negative bias, -0.06ºC, as urban stations tended to be a little further north than the rural stations.

The fully adjusted urban/rural bias of +0.04ºC was regarded by Peterson as equivalent to zero because it was not significant at the 90% level. But this does not mean that the bias does not exist, as assumed by the IPCC. It merely means that Peterson’s sample size was not large enough to give a result with a higher level of significance. It is simply not true to claim “No Difference Found.”

In most other countries the complex correction procedures carried out by Peterson are impossible as they do not possess the numbers of sites for comparison, or the supervision or the scientific expertise. Corrections for Time of Observation Bias, Elevation, and Instrument Change may be impossible, so the first, unadjusted result of Peterson's, an urban/rural bias of +0.31 ºC, could be the best estimate. Two recent papers by Parker (2004, 2006) seek to show that urban warming does not happen. He argues that because daily mean, Maximum or Minimum Temperatures are not influenced by windy conditions, therefore urban heating is negligible. But the "day" that gives average wind conditions is usually a different "day" from that used for the daily mean, the Maximum and Minimum. In the second paper he seems to have realised this after he wrote the paper, so he puts the problem in Appendix A, where some "private communications" helped him out, but he does not list the ones which did not.

The idea that urban heating should be influenced only by the strength of the wind and not its direction, and that there are no other factors involved, is simply a gross oversimplification of a complex issue.

The only other country that has attempted a similar correction exercise is China and they also show no evidence of greenhouse warming. Jin et al. (2005) used measurements with a MODIS spectrometer on NASA satellites to measure the urbanisation effect globally and over several selected cities. In July 2001, for night time and daytime temperatures, urban areas between 30 and 60 degrees north are eight degrees Celsius above a surrounding forest by day and two degrees above at night. These are much greater than the "corrections" that are made to the surface record. There were also large differences between urban surfaces and cropland and for selected cities.

They make the following comment, which is relevant to the Peterson paper and to the IPCC approach "Urban areas have generally been determined from satellite data from the night time lighting. Such a measure is more an index of electricity use than of urban features that are significant for climate study”. McKitrick and Michaels (2004, 2008) showed that the surface anomalies for 1979 to 2000 were significantly biased by rises in population, energy usage, sample defects and GDP. Removal of these effects reduced the average temperature trend by about half. Pepin and Lundquist (2008) chose temperature records from high altitude weather stations and plotted the average trend over recent years, which is slightly downwards, as are the general trends. Only a few urban stations show a rise. So the glaciers are unlikely to be receding because of "warming" after all.

The Price of Change?

2009-05-01T11:24:00.004-06:00

Democrats delivered another gift on the President's 100th day: their approval for his gigantic $3.4 trillion budget plan. Republicans, on the other hand, were not in a giving mood. Every last one of them voted against the resolution in the House (233-193) and Senate (53-43). Interestingly, four Democratic senators (Arlen Specter, Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, and Robert Bryd) and 17 Democratic congressmen joined the GOP in opposition. Adopting the budget in its current form means that the statutory limit on the national debt automatically spikes by $925 billion to a whopping $13.0 trillion. Congressional Quarterly also makes the point that "debt subject to the statutory limit will grow to $17.0 trillion by fiscal 2014." As of yesterday, the national debt stood at $11.2 trillion. Apart from the price tag, the most troubling aspect of the resolution is that the majority party used the reconciliation process to silence future debate on major overhauls to health care and education. These rules allow the leadership to ramrod policies through Congress by a simple majority instead of 60 votes. So much for the White House's promise of "transparency... as the touchtone of this presidency." (frc.org)

100 Days of Change for the Family

2009-04-30T10:22:00.001-06:00

Most Important F-Word Is Family, Court Rules

2009-04-30T01:30:00.004-06:00

Since Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" and Bono's mouth malfunction, networks have argued that they shouldn't be liable for indecency if it's "unscripted." Millions of viewers--and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)--disagreed. After an avalanche of complaints, the FCC modified its policy in 2004 and decided to punish even a single profane word on live television. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that policy in an overwhelming victory for American families. By a 5-4 decision, the justices overturned a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court ruling and empowered the FCC to fine networks that violate the rules. The court stopped short of deciding whether the FCC's policy is constitutional, but Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that it was "neither arbitrary nor capricious." In his opinion, he talked about the power of profanity to insult and said, "fleeting expletives constitute harmful first blows to children; it suffices to know that children mimic behavior they observe."

Global Warming Scam Part 4

2009-04-30T00:51:00.003-06:00

2.1.2. UNREPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES
Weather stations are not distributed uniformly and representatively over the earth’s surface. You cannot obtain a plausible average unless you start with a representative sample (see Wunsch et al 2008). Those conducting public opinion polls know very well that their results are meaningless unless they have a sample which covers the whole population in a random and representative fashion. Similarly, the television authorities need to have some way of setting rates for advertisers. Unless they do so the rates will be unfair and they lose money. They go to a lot of trouble in finding a representative sample population upon whose TV sets they can put their set boxes which determine their rates. The whole point of these examples is that their mistakes are soon apparent. Climate “projections” and even “predictions” are always so far ahead that nobody can check on them, so they can never be checked for validity. Weather stations cannot supply a representative sample. They are nearly all near cities or airports and do not include most of the earth’s surface. There are no measurements from farms, pastures, forests, deserts, glaciers, or icecaps. 71% of the earth’s surface is ocean but measurements there are even less representative, with very poor quality control.

2.1.3. NO LOCAL AVERAGE
If you want a “global average anomaly” you must surely start with a “local average anomaly” derived from a local average. No actual measurement of a local average temperature are ever made or at least published. Since temperatures are irregular, it is not even clear what the term “average” may mean. Since there is no sunlight at night, the distribution is skewed, so it cannot be modelled by a symmetrical function. Even if it is possible to find an acceptable mathematical model, there would be several possible alternative “averages”, such as mean, median, geometric, harmonic etc.

At most weather stations there is only one temperature measurement a day. If there is a maximum and minimum thermometer a daily maximum and a daily minimum can be recorded. It seems to be assumed that the mean of these quantities represents some sort of average, but Hansen (2008a) denies its value. Gray (2007a) showed that if you compare this average with the average of the 24 hourly readings from one midnight to another, you get a large bias, which for the average of 24 New Zealand weather stations was +0.5ºC for a typical summer day with a range of +2.6ºC to -0.4ºC and an average of +0.9ºC with a range of +1.9ºC to -0.9ºC for a typical winter day. The positive bias of the max/min average over the mean hourly value can thus be larger than the claimed effects of greenhouse warming. Yet this unsatisfactory “average” is used to derive a “mean global average temperature anomaly.”

Then there is the question of how do they calculate each “anomaly”? The following explanation appears on the NCDC website (2008):
"NOTE: From February 2006 through April 14, 2006, the anomalies provided from the links below were inadvertently provided as departures from the 1961-1990 average. Anomalies are now provided as departures from the 20th century average (1901-2000)."

Now, maybe they were able to calculate an average for the year 2000 from 1,600 stations and 500 gridboxes available and in the year 1901 they had 1,600 stations and 300 gridboxes. It sounds comparable; but the world was a very different place in the year1901 from the year 2000. The total number of possible 5ºx5º gridboxes is 2592, so, even today, they only cover 20% of the earth, and mostly near cities. It was actually better in the year 1985 when there were 6000 stations and nearly 900 gridboxes. Many have been closed down since then, mostly in rural areas where the results are less contaminated by urban heating.

In the year 1901, Antarctica, Central Africa and South America, and most of Siberia had no weather stations. Figures for the oceans were minimal and most of the stations were in the Northern Hemisphere. It might be mentioned that there have never been readings near the North Pole because the Arctic is an ocean. yet they keep telling us it is getting warmer without supporting observations. In 1901 thermometers were graduated in intervals of one degree Fahrenheit and the standards of the equipment, shelters and supervision were very different from today.

Global Warming Scam Part 3

2009-04-24T10:56:00.004-06:00

2. AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE

2.1. THE MEAN GLOBAL SURFACE TEMPERATURE ANOMALY

2.1.1. HANSEN’S SOLUTION
In an address to the US Congress on June 23rd 1988 James Hansen of the Goddard Institute of Space Studies in New York suggested a solution to the global average temperature problem which made use of temperature measurements from weather stations. The history of this suggestion has been reviewed by the IPCC (Solomon et al. 2007). The world would be divided into latitude/longitude squares. The average monthly temperature would be obtained from qualifying stations in each square and compared with the average for a reference period. The difference would be a monthly, and then annual temperature anomaly, which appeared from his calculations to be increasing. The increase was very small (less than one degree Celsius per century), was intermittent, highly irregular, largely took place at night and mainly happened before significant increases in greenhouse gas emissions had taken place, but it was considered enough to assist the environmentalist campaign to blame the increase on carbon dioxide emissions.

Hansen, (2008a) has, however, clearly expressed his doubts on the reliability of such weather-station temperature measurements, as follows:

“GISS Surface Temperature Analysis
The Elusive Absolute Surface Air Temperature (SAT)

Q. What exactly do you mean by SAT?

A. I doubt that there is a general agreement how to answer this question. Even at the same location, the temperature near the ground may be very different from the temperature 5 ft above the ground and different again from 10ft or 50ft above the ground. Particularly in the presence of vegetation (say in a rain forest) the temperature above the vegetation may be very different from the temperature below the top of the vegetation. A reasonable suggestion might be to use the average temperature of the first 50ft of air either above ground or on top of the vegetation. To measure SAT we have to agree on what it is and, as far as I know, no such standard has been adopted. I cannot imagine that a weather station would build a 50ft stack of thermometers to be able to find the true SAT at its location.

Q. What do we mean by daily SAT?

A. Again, there is no universally accepted correct answer. Should we note the temperature every 6 hours and report the mean, should we do it every two hours, hourly, have a machine record it every second, or simply take the average of the highest and lowest temperature of the day? On some days the various methods may lead to drastically different results.

Q. What SAT do the local media report?

A. The media report the reading of one particular thermometer of a nearby weather station. This temperature may be very different from the true SAT even at that location and has certainly nothing to do with the true regional SAT. To measure the true regional SAT we would have to use many 50ft stacks of thermometers distributed evenly over the whole region, an obvious practical impossibility.” Having stated that there is no agreed way to measure the surface air temperature, he talks about the “true” value which nobody agrees to; Essex et al (2007) argue that “there is no physically meaningful global temperature”. There are theoretical reasons why the average temperature of the earth’s surface cannot be measured. Because of the fact that the sun does not shine for half the time, its variability is non linear. It is impossible to simulate it with any of the mathematical functions used by statisticians and even if this were possible there is a variety of possible averages, such as the arithmetic mean, geometric mean, or the harmonic mean.

Hansen (2008a) goes on to say that even when you cannot agree on how to measure SAT you can measure the “anomalies” by using models and guesswork! He even attempts to “guess” the average temperature of the earth as “anywhere between 55º and 58ºF” (12.8ºC to 14.4ºC) for which he gives an unconvincing “global mean” of “roughly 14ºC”, apparently emanating from models. He has no actual evidence.

Erring on the Unsafe Side

2009-04-24T10:54:00.004-06:00

Without so much as a whimper, it seems the Obama administration will acquiesce to a U.S. District Court ruling as an excuse to allow 17-year-olds to buy the morning-after pill without a prescription or their parents' consent. An official with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) told reporters that an announcement on the subject was forthcoming but that the decision had been made to overturn the current policy, which dates back to the Bush administration. As we reported last month, Judge Edward Korman ordered FDA officials to make Plan B available over-the-counter to minors as young as 17. As our own Chris Gacek points out, the Department of Justice should be called in to defend the FDA guidelines on Plan B. In this case, however, the Obama administration has decided to roll over and accept the court decision without a single appeal. Essentially, the President is allowing a lone federal district judge to make a scientific decision that affects the health and safety of women across America. For the young administration, it shows an incredible disinclination to fight for good policy. Considering the risks that Plan B poses to women and its unproven track record after repeated use, there seems to be no rational basis for the President's decision--except political ideology. Officials in the Bush administration understood the deep concerns over the morning-after pill and were not convinced by data that teens could use Plan B safely. After all, regular-dose birth control pills aren't sold without a doctor's supervision. There seems to be no such solicitude for young girls in Obama's FDA, which has proven more than content to put politics ahead of sound medical care.(frc.org)

Global Warming Scam Part 2

2009-04-23T11:47:00.006-06:00

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. THE ENVIRONMENTAL RELIGION
The global warming scam is the result of the widespread belief in a new religion, based on the deification of anebulous entity, “The Environment”. "The Environment" is an extension of the concept of “Nature* which was held sacred by the Romantics, but it is a much more demanding deity, requiring constant and increasing sacrifices from humans. Environmentalism is just the latest attempt to find a substitute for the theory of evolution and it is paradoxical that it can be so widespread when next year (2009) is the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin and the 150th anniversary of the publication of his major work “The Origin of Species as the Result of Natural Selection”. All of the basic beliefs of Environmentalism are in direct conflict with contemporary understanding of the principles of Darwinism. Despite this fact, many scientists are supporters of Environmentalist dogmas and some are prepared to claim that they are compatible with Darwinism.

1.2. HUMANS ARE DESTROYING THE PLANET
The religious belief (from Genesis Chapter 1, verse 20) that humans have “dominion” over the earth is now extended so that humans take over the function of God and are responsible for all other creatures. Human influence is purely negative and destructive. The other creatures would be better off without us. We are destroying the planet. As this proposition is absurd, desperate attempts must be made to find evidence to support it. Campaigns have been conducted against the human use of chemical pesticides (“Silent Spring”), of “Depletion” of “Resources” (“Club of Rome”), and against the “Population Bomb” (Ehrlich) and even against plastic bags and baby’s bottles. The latest and most successful campaign is the claim that the earth is being dangerously warmed by human emissions of greenhouse gases. The widespread restrictions on “emissions” that have followed have led to the collapse of the world energy industry, with soaring prices of oil and electric power and deliberate promotion of world poverty by the use of agriculture to produce “biofuels” instead of food.

1.3. THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT
A greenhouse enables higher temperatures within it because it prevents release of the rising warmer air caused by solar radiation. This is quite different from the claimed “greenhouse effect”; the absorption of infra red radiation from the earth by some of the components of the earth’s atmosphere, called “greenhouse gases”. This absorption heats the atmosphere and causes “global warming”. The whole question is, by how much, and does it matter? The claim that human emissions of greenhouse gases are dangerously warming the earth was first made by the
Swedish chemist Arrhenius (1865 and see Wikipedia 2008). The claim was criticised at the time, and as global temperatures fell for the subsequent 15 years, followed by the First World War and an economic crisis, the claim lost urgency. It was, however, revived in 1938 by Callendar who selected atmospheric carbon dioxide results to suit his theory from the many available. He suffered a similar fate to Arrhenius, since global temperatures fell for the following 38 years. During this period confident predictions were made of the coming ice age, some by the same
scientists (such as Rasool and Schneider 1971) now predicting future warming.

1.4. RECENT REVIVAL
Since temperatures seemed to be rising once again, the claim that human-emitted greenhouse gases are warming the earth was taken up by the environmental movement in the late 1970s as yet another example of their belief that humans are harming the earth. In order to prove this proposition they were faced with three insoluble problems.

• It is not possible to measure the average temperature of the earth’s surface. To do so would involve placing thermometers or other measuring equipment in a random and representative fashion over all parts of the surface, including the 71% that is ocean. Since this is currently impossible, it is equally impossible to find if the average temperature is increasing.

• It is not possible to measure the average greenhouse gas concentration over all parts of the earth’s atmosphere by placing measuring equipment randomly throughout.

• Since weather cannot be predicted reliably more than a week or so ahead, it is impossible to provide reliable forecasts any further ahead than this.

None of these problems has been solved, but environmentalists have succeeded in persuading many people that they have provided scientifically acceptable solutions. This paper examines the “evidence” that has been presented so far, and shows that all of it is scientifically unsound. (Vincent Gray)

No Strings Attached?

2009-04-23T11:43:00.003-06:00

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner surprised everyone yesterday when he announced that the banks receiving government bailout money would not be allowed to pay off the loans early. For firms like J.P. Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, the administration's "gotcha" moment came in the form of Tuesday's press conference, when Geithner said it was up to the government to decide when and how the banks repaid their TARP debts.

Anxious to get out from under Washington's thumb, some had asked to be released from their bailouts. Not so fast, said Geithner, who indicated that the banks were at the mercy of the "system as a whole" and its ability to rebound collectively. For the firms frustrated by the President's constant meddling, the news is a crushing blow. But for Uncle Sam, who delights in this new role as the federal loan shark, the ability to dictate everything from executive salaries to internal purchases is simply too much power to walk away from.

As Larry Kudlow points out on NRO, "If a bank has the money to pay the taxpayers back, they should be allowed to do so. Is ... Obama... simply trying to maintain control over the banks?" Or worse, nationalize them for good? This example of payday loan politics should serve as a warning to any companies seeking government handouts that Washington will hold their autonomy as collateral. After Geithner informed the banks of this small print, the markets took a predictable dive. (frc.com)

A Tribute to our World's Greatest Hero

2009-04-21T16:42:00.008-06:00

Its been awhile since I've posted anything about Superman, so I thought I put a little segment of my favorite video tributes to our World's Greatest Hero, Superman.

#6

#5

#4

#3

#2

#1

Global Warming Scam Part 1

2009-04-21T14:22:00.008-06:00

Over the last decade there has been a lot of speculation going around throughout the media and the world on Global Warming. It is one of those issues, that has caused some people to become advocates for it, or they are one of those that keep on changing their views of it and can't decide if it is true, half true, or completely bogus. A couple of years ago I took a course for my Depth Physical Science credit at Utah State. The class was Climate Change. The reason I wanted to take this class was primary of my interest in weather, and that I had previous took the prerequisite course Introduction to Weather as a General Breath credit in Physical Science. I never thought it would become a course to promote Global Warming. From what I can remember from this class we discussed the changes our climate goes through as a normal process, but with all of the hype of Global Warming being big in the media, the showing of Al Gore's Doc. "An Inconvenient Truth," and the publishing of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change) report, it was more of a course on Global Warming, not Climate Change. I remember my professor was so excited to show us Al Gore's movie and wanting us to believe in Global Warming. I had my issues from the beginning with my professor, but I mostly kept my opinion to myself throughout the course. Since then I have taken some time, did some research, and found more evidence to prove my knowledge that Global Warming has been brought to us way out of proportion. This is why I am beginning a series of posts to share with you information that I hope will bring a more clearer understanding to The Global Warming Phenomenon. I hope you enjoy it.

To Begin I want to take parts from a project made by Vincent Gray, a Climate Consultant from New Zealand. Here are some of his words:

The Global Warming Scam has been perpetrated in order to support the Environmentalist belief that the earth is being harmed by the emission of greenhouse gases from the combustion of fossil fuels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was set up to provide evidence for this belief. They have published four major Reports which are widely considered to have proved it to be true. This paper examines the evidence in detail and shows that none of the evidence presented confirms a relationship between emissions of greenhouse gases and any harmful effect on the climate. It is the result of 18 years of scrutiny and comment on IPCC Reports and of a study of the scientific literature associated with it.

In order to establish a relationship between human emissions of greenhouse gases and any influence on the climate, it is necessary to solve three problems:

- To determine the average temperature of the earth and show that it is increasing
- To measure the concentrations of greenhouse gases everywhere in the atmosphere
- To reliably predict changes in future climate

None of these problems has been solved

It is impossible to measure the average surface temperature of the earth, yet the IPCC scientists try to claim that it is possible to measure “anomalies” of this unknown quantity. An assessment of all the temperature data available, largely ignored by the IPCC, shows no evidence for overall warming, but the existence of cyclic behaviour. Recent warming was last recorded around 1950. An absence of warming for 10 years and a current downturn suggest that the cool part of the cycle is imminent. The chief greenhouse gas, water vapour, is irregularly distributed, with most of it over the tropics and very little over the poles. Yet the IPCC tries to pretend it is uniformly distributed, so that its “anomalies” can be treated as “feedback” to the global temperature models. Carbon dioxide is only measured in extremely restricted circumstances in order to pretend that it is “well-mixed”. No general measurements are reported and 90,000 early measurements which show great variability have been suppressed. Methane is mostly recycled plant material, unrelated to fossil fuels, yet it is used to penalised farmers for animal recycling, when the larger emissions from wetlands are exempt.

Although weather cannot be predicted more than a week or so ahead, the claim is made that “climate” can be predicted 100 years ahead. The claim is based on the development of computer models based on the “flat earth” theory of the climate which assumes it is possible to model the climate from “balanced” average energy quantities. This assumption is absurd since all the quantities have skewed distributions with no acceptable average. No resulting model has ever been tested for its ability to predict the future. This is even admitted as the model outputs are mere “projections”. Since the projections are far into the future, nobody living is able to check their validity. Since no model has been validated, they are “evaluated” based on “simulations”, which are mere correlations, often obtained by adjusting the many poorly characterized parameters to give a “fudged fit”. Several such attempts fail to agree with observations. Future “projections”, which combine the untested models and exaggerated “scenarios” are graded for their “likelihood” from the unsupported opinion of those paid to produce the models. A spurious “probability” attached to these opinions is without mathematical or scientific justification. Humans affect climate by changes in urban development and land use, but there is no evidence that greenhouse gas emissions are involved, except in enhancing plant growth.

To be Continued.....

Financial Sense Volume 1 Issue 2

2009-04-21T13:41:00.005-06:00

More Myths and Truths of Personal Finance

Debt Reduction

Myth: Only the rich can be debt free.
Truth: Anyone can be debt free. True debt reduction is plain common sense and hard work

Are you willing to get another job and work a few 80-hour weeks? If you are in financial stress because of something you've done, you need to get yourself out of the mess by working. If you think that it is too hard, you will never get out of the debt that you brought upon yourself. Laziness is a sickness, and it will get you absolutely nowhere in life. We all make mistakes (including myself), but the question is whether you are willing to take responsibility for your mistakes? You need to learn from your mistakes or you and your children will be doomed to repeat the cycle. How badly do you want to be out of debt? Then there are lazy people who look for a quick fix, such as debt consolidation or debt management. Real debt help is not quick or easy. Laziness is a character flaw. You need to be willing to work and sacrifice in order to fix the situations that you created with your own irresponsibility. If you are not willing, then you cannot be helped.

Life Insurance

Myth: Cash value life insurance, like whole life, will help me retire wealthy
Truth: Cash value life insurance is on of the worst financial products available.

Sadly, over 70% of the life insurance policies sold today are cash value policies. A cash value policy is an insurance product that packages insurance and savings together. DO NOT INVEST MONEY IN LIFE INSURANCE; they have Horrible returns! Your insurance agent will probably show you wonderful projections, but none of these policies have perform as projected. Here is an example to help you understand: If a 30 year old man has $100 per month to spend on life insurance and shops the top 5 cash value companies, he will find he can purchase an average of $125,000 in insurance for his family. The pitch is to get a policy that will build up savings for retirement, which is what a cash value policy does. However, if this same guy purchases 20 year level term insurance with coverage of $125,000, the cost will be only $7 per month, not $100. Just think, if he goes with the cash value option that $93 per month should be going into a savings, right? Nope, all of the $93 would disappear in commissions and expenses for the first 3 years. According to Consumer Federation of America, Kiplinger's Personal Finance, and Fortune magazines, the return would average 2.6% per year for whole life, 4.2% for universal life, and just 7.4% for the new and improved variable life policy that includes mutual funds. The problem is that you can invest in mutual funds outside of these policies that average 12% per year.
Here is another hidden catch. With whole life and universal life, the savings you finally build up after being ripped off for years actually doesn't go your family upon your death as you might think. The only benefit paid to your family is the face value of the policy, the $125,000. The truth is that you would be better off to get the $7 term policy and put that extra $93 in a cookie jar! At least after 3 years you would have $3,000, and when you died your family would get your savings. So when you are decided on life insurance for your family, just think of this simple line, Buy term and invest the difference.

Money and Relationships

Myth: My spouse and I shouldn't talk about money because it only leads to fights.
Truth: You can't have a great relationship until you can communicate and agree about money.

Larry Burkett, financial author, says, "Money is either the best or the worse area of communication in our marriages." Statistics show the #1 cause of divorce in our nation is money. When it comes to money, men tend to take more risks and don't save for emergencies. Men use money as a scorecard and can struggle with self-esteem when there are in financial problems. Women tend to see money more of a means of security, so they will gravitate toward the rainy-day fund. Because of their need for security, ladies can have a level of fear or even terror when there are financial problems. Men and women are different in how they view money, and it is largely because they process problems and opportunities from different vantage points. On top of the fact that men and women are different, opposites attract. Chances are, if you're married, one of you is good at working numbers, the nerd, and the other one isn't good at working numbers ,the free spirit. That isn't the real problem. The problem is when the nerd neglects the input of the free spirit or when the free spirit avoids participating in the financial dealings altogether. For in Matt. 19:5, its says, "...For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?" Just as a husband and wife should be one with each other, the same they should be one with their finances. One bank account for both, knowing together what transactions are being made, and more importantly making big financial decisions together.

Financial Sense Volume 1 Issue 1

2009-04-15T11:03:00.005-06:00

Hi everyone, I've decided to begin a series of financial advice post to share with you. Now, first of all, the reason I am doing this because this is the subject of my greatest interest. Second, even though I am in a financial restart for myself, I feel I can help give financial sense to people. In today's Economy, things appear to be in chaos and in a downward spiral. What we see in the economy and what is found in the majority of Americans, we must remember the importance to have our own houses in order. I hope the things I will be sharing with you will make good sense and make finances a little easier. Enjoy.

Here are some general Myths and Truths of Personal Finance:

Debt

Myth: Debt is a tool and should be used to help create prosperity
Truth: Debt isn't used by wealthy people nearly as much as we are led to believe

Advice:
Debt is dumb. Most normal people are just plain broke because they are in debt up to their eyeballs with no hope of help. To my opinion, there should only be one thing is acceptable to go in debt with, that is a home. Cars and any other recreational vehicles depreciate the moment you buy it. They should be paid in cash, and if you don't have the cash, you can't afford it. But it should not be burden on you. Your monthly mortgage payment should not be more than half of your take-home pay. If it is, don't buy it, you can't afford it. If you're in debt, then you're a slave because you do not have the freedom to use your money to help change your family tree. It takes a lot of will, discipline, courage and help to slay the debt monster, but it is possible. Just think, how much wealth you can build toward retirement if you didn't have a stupid car payment? If you have wondered how the wealthy got where they are, they didn't do it by being in debt. Our nation has become the worshipers of the Holy FICO score. It has become a routine for people to be proud in how high their FICO score is. For a lot of people, they feel that it is the only way of living. Being debt free is the way of feeling rich, without actually being an millionaire and earning an average income in an America. If you are in debt, get out of it! I will probably give other posts that will give detail on debt reduction, but here are some simple advice. You should pay off the smallest debt first, not necessary the one with the highest interest rate. The math appears to make more sense to pay the ones with higher interest rates first, but personal finance is 20% knowledge and 80% behavior. By paying the smallest debt first, it gives you the momentum towards debt freedom.

Credit Card Debt

Myth: Aren't there positive uses of a credit card?
Truth: To the majority of America, responsible use of a credit card doesn't exist. Credit Card debt is a major problem in America.

Advice:
There are probably several different opinions for the use of credit cards. If you can't control your spending, credit cards should not exist in your life. You will spend more if you use credit cards. When you pay cash, you can actually see and feel the money leaving your hand. You can't feel that with a credit card. A lot of times it feels like invisible money being used. On average, you will spend 12-18% more on purchases if you use a credit card instead of cash. Just think if that money was put into savings instead. If you absolutely need to use "plastic," use a debit card. When you use a debit card it is a direct use of your money in a bank account, not a charge now, pay later scenario. On a side note, when you use a debit card to make a purchase and you are given the question, debit or credit, what do you chose? When ever you have this option, use debit. This is a direct withdrawal from your account. When you use credit, the credit card company charges fines to the company you are using your check card to purchase with. Interest rates in credit cards are also the worst in the world. Plus they have the ability to change them at anytime. Just remember you can't build wealth and financial freedom through credit cards. For those very few in an America that use credit cards responsibly, I'm sure they never use them for a certain amount of money that doesn't exist in their bank account. They would also always pay them off every month, as well.

Sebelius's PAC of Lies

2009-04-15T10:53:00.003-06:00

In a special AP report, new details have emerged about the relationship between late-term abortionist George Tiller and the President's choice for Secretary of Health and Human Services. According to documents, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kans.) failed to disclose the total contribution by Tiller to the Governor's political action committee, which was three times the amount that she indicated to members of the Senate Finance Committee. Although the Governor wrote that she received $12,450 during 1994-2001, she conveniently ignored the $23,000 that Tiller gave between 2000-2002 to a PAC that Sebelius created.

This is the second time that the Kansas Governor has come under fire for failing to disclose relevant financial information; the first was for her failure to pay thousands in back taxes. The most recent omission, however, is far more deadly. Not only did she lowball the money connection with Tiller, but she hid the fact that these campaign dollars came from the actual abortion clinics Tiller ran. Despite direct questions from Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) in her hearing, those facts were not disclosed to the Senate Finance Committee until they were uncovered this week.

Of course, it's no coincidence that shortly after Tiller funneled abortion tainted money to her PAC, Sebelius vetoed a measure that would have imposed minimal health standards on Kansas abortion clinics. As it stands, most of these clinics operate with less oversight than veterinary clinics. This latest revelation of Sebelius's cozy relationship with the worst of the worst in the abortion industry should cause senators, especially Senate Republicans, to oppose giving her oversight of America's health care. (AP)

Obama Nominates Pro-Abort Radical to Run America's Health and Human Services

2009-03-24T21:39:00.002-06:00

President Barack Obama campaigned on the noble promise of bringing the country together and uniting citizens around common goals. Yet, with just two months in office under his belt, he has made some radical decisions. The most prominent of his extreme choices are those surrounding the issue of abortion, personified by his recent selection of Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius to be Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The liberals in Congress are praising this nomination and are hoping to confirm her quickly and without fuss. Sadly, it seems that some pro-life Republicans are unconcerned about placing a strident pro-abortion activist in charge of the federal government's largest department.

Sometimes in the political realm, compromise is necessary and, as many a cynical voter will note, politicians like to make their deals. Yet no politician should compromise his core beliefs and oppose what a significant majority of Americans believe with the speed that Senate Republicans did recently. What I see taking place in the nation's capitol is congressmen putting short-sighted political goals over long-term and very grave policy decisions.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is the largest department in the Cabinet and receives the most funding. It contains numerous agencies, offices and programs that regulate and promote issues, both foreign and domestic. As secretary of HHS, Gov. Sebelius would have control of such bodies as the President's Council on Bioethics and the Food and Drug Administration. The Office of International Health Affairs would fall under the governor's care as would the Office of the Surgeon General.

All of these and many other HHS organizations have a direct bearing on decisions related to domestic and international family planning, abortion services, embryonic stem cell research and contraception. .

Supporters of Gov. Sebelius' nomination point to bills she signed into law in Kansas that supposedly display her support for pregnant women and their families. The most prominent of these bills being Alexa's Law, which recognized the murder of an unborn child as a crime. The law arose from a horrific case in which a pregnant teenager was murdered at the hands of her boyfriend. The case resulted in a public outcry and, under pressure from a Republican-controlled legislature, Gov. Sebelius was forced to sign it into law.

Unfortunately, such safeguards will not be in place if she is confirmed as HHS secretary. There will be a Democratic administration and Congress to encourage her efforts. She will be able to craft health care regulations and budget priorities that reflect her pro-abortion rights convictions, with little oversight as to their implementation.

There will be no pro-life Congress to hold a Secretary Sebelius in check. Much of the minutiae policy-making that takes place in Washington, D.C. attracts virtually no public scrutiny. A Sec. Sebelius would be able to advance her radical pro-abortion agenda with little accountability and largely behind the scenes.

This nomination shows that President Obama's comments on finding common ground on abortion are disingenuous at best. The claim that abortion rates dropped during Kathleen Sebelius' tenure as governor is disputed by statistics from the Kansas Department of Health. It is only through pro-life representatives in the Kansas legislature that life-saving measures have been passed. In fact, when she was a representative in the Kansas State house, she consistently voted against pro-life measures, such as parental notification and waiting measures.

Putting a pro-abortion advocate in charge of this nation's healthcare system is unjustifiable. Governor Sebelius' loyalty to the abortion industry has been rewarded by Planned Parenthood, which has endorsed her and put its powerful fundraising machine to work for her. President Obama has also rewarded her campaign support for him and for his pro-abortion agenda with this promotion to the national stage.

It would be a great shame if our congressional leaders also went to work on her behalf. If the president wants to reunite America, he will withdraw Kathleen Sebelius's name. (frc.org)

Eminent DOMAin?

2009-03-16T21:03:00.002-06:00

In 2004, a younger Barack Obama sat down with a reporter from the Windy City Times and made no secret of his disgust over laws that protect traditional marriage. "When Members of Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, they were not interested in strengthening family values or protecting civil liberties. They were only interested in perpetuating division... Despite my own feelings about an abhorrent law, the realities of modern politics persist."

If the latest reports are any indication, those "realities" are about to face their biggest test yet. Two federal appeals court judges in California have launched a fierce strike on DOMA, ordering the federal government in two separate cases to disregard its own law and provide health benefits for the same-sex partners of federal employees. The rulings, which smack of judicial activism, are a direct challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act which defines the word "spouse" as a person of the opposite sex. Initially, Uncle Sam's HR department--the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM)--fired back, directing insurers not to comply with the court orders because they violate federal law. Now, the decision to act may have fallen in President Obama's lap, leaving him to choose between ignoring the court and implementing his extreme social policy.

Although the President's tone may have drastically changed since 2004, his agenda has not. Even the White House website hints at where the administration will lean. "Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status..."

With John Berry, the first openly homosexual Director of OPM, on one side and dipping approval ratings on the other, Obama will have to decide if he's willing to make such a high-stakes gamble with the public's goodwill. Of course, there are plenty of reasons not to tamper with DOMA. Apart from being morally challenged, the idea is bad on economic grounds. Estimates put the cost of federal same-sex partner benefits at roughly $670 million over the next decade.

If the President wants to avoid a messy political battle and steer clear of violating the grassroots' trust, the White House has plenty of precedent to lean on in refusing the order. In 2007, the Department of Labor withstood a similar assault and won the right to refuse these same benefits on the grounds that DOMA bars the government from recognizing same-sex "marriage." At its heart, the debate over what constitutes marriage should be a matter of congressional and voter review-not judicial fiat. Laws like DOMA cannot be subject to the whims of two liberal judges, else--like marriage--those laws would soon hold no meaning.

To voice your concerns, call the White House switchboard at 202-456-1111 and ask President Obama to respect the values of mainstream America. (frc.org)

More on Stem Cells

2009-03-16T21:00:00.001-06:00

Where President Obama would not draw ethical lines, some states have not hesitated. In the wake of the executive order to approve federal funds for embryonic stem cell (ESC) research, three states are refusing to have their convictions steamrolled. Georgia, Mississippi, and Oklahoma are all staging their own protest of the President's decision by passing bills that either ban the funding of ESC or promote real progress through adult stem cells.

In response to Monday's White House ceremony, the Georgia Senate rallied to ban ESC research by a 34-22 vote. Down in Mississippi, State Rep. Tommy Reynolds pushed for a ban on research that destroys the lives of human embryos in the latest budget bill and passed it through the House. Just yesterday, nearby Oklahoma passed a bill 99-0 that would direct more than $1 million toward the real progress of adult stem cells.

This week's good news was multiplied by the announcement of the miraculous spinal cord treatment out in California at DaVinci Biosciences where researchers successfully treated patients with their own bone marrow stem cells. "It is important to note that all of our patients with acute injuries improved significantly with no signs of deterioration..." said team leader Dr. Francisco Silva. Those results should make the administration's investment in expensive embryonic failures all the more scandalous. As Charles Krauthammer points out in today's Washington Post, even he, as a supporter of ESC research, couldn't stomach the President's "morally unserious" explanation.

Obama's address was... populated, as his didactic discourses always are, with a forest of straw men. Such as his admonition that we must resist the 'false choice between sound science and moral values.'... Is he so obtuse as not to see that he had just made a choice of ethics over science? ...Obama did not even pretend to make the case why some practices are morally permissible and others are not. This is not just intellectual laziness. It is...moral arrogance. ...Dr. James Thompson, the pioneer of embryonic stem cells, said 'if human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough.' Obama clearly has not. (frc.org)