McCain Ads: 2013 & Leadership

McCain Ad - 2013

McCain Ad - Leading

Thompson Returns As Voice of Conservatism on Townhall

by Fred Thompson - The Place to Discuss Our Fundamental Principles Spending some time on the campaign trail has confirmed a couple of thoughts I’ve had before I entered the Republican primary race. First, conservatism is alive and well in America; don’t let anyone tell you differently. And by conservatism, I don’t mean the warmed-over “raise your hand if you believe …” kind of conservatism we see blooming every election cycle. No, I’m speaking of the conservatism grounded in principles based upon enduring truths: an understanding of the importance of human nature in the affairs of individuals and nations. Respect for the lessons of history, the importance of faith and tradition. The understanding that while man is prone to err, he is capable of great things when not subjugated by a too-powerful government. These are the principles that inspired our Founding Fathers, and resulted in a Constitution that delineated the powers of the central government, established checks and balances among the branches of government and further diffused governmental power by a system of Federalism.

Second . . . Our nation has some serious issues to work through for today … and for the next generation. Now isn’t the time for conservatives to be looking for a tailored message or a politically expedient route to victory if the end result is going to be the inevitable slide toward the liberalization and secularization of America, and the growth of government and loss of freedom that inevitably ensues. For us conservatives it must be about principles and policies that are grounded in freedom, free markets and the rule of law. That’s what I’ve been talking and writing about for the past few years, and that’s what I want to talk write about here on Townhall and in the new Townhall Magazine. . . . issues based on these principles -- smaller government, individual liberty, standing for common values that have become all too uncommon, a strong national defense and, most of all, an optimism and belief in America. . . . [Read More]

Video Portrait Of Barack Hussein Obama

Lorne Baxter explores the life of Barack Hussein Obama, Jeremiah Wright and the theology behind it. Produced by Illuminati Pictures. Music by Intelligentzia.

Amnesty Bill Is Worse Than Expected

Reference prior post: Alert! Giant Illegal Alien Amnesty Attached to War Bill.
Update from Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA:
INCREDIBLE INGREDIENTS OF THE SENATE'S PROPOSED AMNESTY:

Grant a three-year work visa followed by a permanent greencard to all illegal aliens who have been working as shepherds, goat herders and dairy herders.

Grant a five-year work visa to the estimated 1.3 million illegal aliens working in other agricultural jobs -- plus all of their families. There is no instruction on what happens after the five years.

Grant a tripling of the maximum number of H-2B visas for lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers.

Grant industries an extra 218,000 additional permanent green cards for skilled foreign workers.

RIDICULOUS CLAIMS ABOUT RUNNING OUT OF FOOD WITHOUT AN AMNESTY
Senators Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Larry Craig (R-ID) and Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) led the way to protect our economy from having to figure out ways to hire some of the 14 million-plus American workers who are trying to find a job but can't. Especially interesting is their claim that we will fail to harvest crops and feed the world this year without an amnesty for illegal aliens. They made the same claim in each of the last four years. Each time that we beat back the amnesty, the harvests still happened! How many times does Feinstein have to cry wolf (or rotting crops) before people stop paying attention?

Of course, the outlaw businesses that scream for illegal aliens do have more to fear this year because various enforcement policies (federal, state and local) are beginning to drive more and more illegal aliens home. What we have to constantly remind everybody, though, is that each of these outlaw growers at any time can come clean, go straight and become a legal, patriotic member of the business community by importing any needed foreign ag workers through the H-2A temporary worker program. There is no limit on how many they can import as long as they pay them decently and ensure that they go home. The North Carolina Growers Association has used the H-2A visa program for years and opposes all efforts at amnesty for illegal alien ag workers. If the program works fine for North Carolina farmers, why do farmers in other part of the country insist that only illegal aliens will fit the bill?

THE VERY LOW CRITERIA FOR QUALIFYING FOR A FEINSTEIN/CRAIG AG AMNESTY:
You only have to meet ONE of the following three criteria to get the amnesty:

Earned $7,000 working in agriculture during the 2004-2007 period.

Or worked 863 hours in agriculture during the 2004-2007 period.

Or worked at least a little bit in agriculture on 150 different days during the 2004-2007 period.

That amounts to an average of $1,750 per year ... or 216 hours per year (the equivalent of 4 hours per week) ... or parts of 37 days per year.

DO THEY THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE STUPID AND THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY ACCEPT THAT ILLEGAL ALIENS WORKING THAT LITTLE IN AGRICULTURE ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE SURVIVAL OF AGRI-BUSINESS IN AMERICA!! The answer is that they really hope we are that stupid or just incredibly unfocused. Again, Contact Your Senators! Also, Although polls show that most Americans agree with the positions of NumbersUSA, many people have not heard of them. To receive your own up-to-date info on immigration issues and to have an easy way to fax your congressman and sneators, check out NumbersUSA.

H2&O2&H2O - It's Marriage

CitizenLink: What would happen if a court decided H2O no longer has the exclusive right to be water? In his Stoplight video commentary, Stuart Shepard considers where that might lead.

Alert! Giant Illegal Alien Amnesty Attached to War Bill

Update: Because the House of Representatives unexpectedly delayed the Iraq supplemental spending bill late Thursday, the full Senate woasn't allowed to vote today on the amnesty bill that the Senate Appropriations Committee unexpectedly took up and approved Thursday. It now looks like the full Senate won't be allowed to vote on the amnesty for around 1.3 million illegal alien ag workers (plus their families) until next Wednesday. That gives us some time to beat this atrocity. BUT don't wait until Wednesday - act as soon a possible. Share this info with friends. The Amnesty Bill is far worse than first thought. See the new post addressing this situation.

The pro-amnesty coalition is once again attempting to force another illegal alien amnesty onto America. The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday added by a vote of 17-12 to add to the Iraq War Supplemental bill a controversial provision to help pave the way for amnesty for undocumented agriculture workers. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and "bathroom foot-loose" Larry Craig (R-ID) sponsored the so-called Ag-Jobs amendment to grant a 5-year amnesty for up to 3 million illegal aliens and their families.

A broader comprehensive immigration overhaul, with a path for citizenship for the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, failed in a divisive Senate vote last year. "No matter how one characterizes it, this enormous amendment still amounts to amnesty," said Chairman Robert Byrd (D-WV). "I oppose amnesty. All these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."

There is absolutely no need for any sort of amnesty, and particularly not one for agricultural workers. Farmers, orchardists, and other agribusiness-owners can take advantage of the H-2A program to attain seasonal help. The Senate Appropriations Committee's vote only helps the renegade businessmen who would rather hire illegal workers at the expense of Americans just to make a quick profit. Also, this amnesty bill also contains provisions to allow even more H-2B workers? We have more than enough foreign workers already especially when one considers the number of unemployed American workers!

A vote in favor of amnesty would be a vote against our brave men and women fighting in Iraq. Knowing that the war funding bill is desperately needed to support our troops in battle overseas, the amnesty plan was attached covertly in attempts that no one would notice. The open-borders champions hope that the longer illegal aliens stay the more difficult it will ever be to deny them U.S. citizenship. If it passes, this would open the door for even larger waves of illegal immigration in the future!

What are some Senators doing sneaking Amnesty legislation through an Iraq War funding bill? This is not only inappropriate it is unconscionable. Our brave servicemen and women risking their lives for our freedom deserve better than to be used in this manner. Contact your Senators and ask them to either have the amnesty and foreign-worker provisions stripped from the Iraq supplemental funding bill or vote the entire bill down.

California Court Voids Gay Marriage Ban

Today, the California voters watched in horror this afternoon as judicial activism returned with a vengeance in one of the most egregious rulings in American jurisprudence. It took just four activist judges to overturn the historical definition of marriage, not to mention the vote of more than four and a half million Californians, as the state supreme court issued a much-anticipated ruling on the question of same-sex "marriage." By a 4-3 margin, the justices struck down a law, adopted by 61 percent of voters in 2000, which defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman. By imposing same-sex "marriage" on voters, the California Supreme Court knowingly usurped the right of the people to effect change in public policy.

Tony Perkins, DIrector of the Family Research Council said, "These justices trampled on the legislature and created same-sex marriage by judicial fiat. This is nothing more than a judicial shotgun wedding that forces a redefinition of marriage on the people of California and potentially the rest of the nation. We trust that the voters of California will act in November to correct this exercise in judicial activism and to permanently enshrine the traditional definition of marriage in the state constitution. Clearly, this decision highlights the need for a federal amendment defining marriage in the U.S. Constitution. Only then will this campaign to shatter the family's foundation be ended once and for all."

Kiss of Death

Tony Perkins, FRC Action: Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the most pro-abortion of them all? According to NARAL Pro-Choice America, the winner of this dubious distinction is Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). The Illinois senator scored a major coup yesterday when NARAL endorsed him as its choice for President. The decision surprised the abortion faithful because it signals a major break between NARAL and their ally Emily's List, which has supported Clinton since the early days of her campaign. The two groups went toe-to-toe in this morning's press, sparring over which candidate is the most radical on their issue. "I think it is tremendously disrespectful to Sen. Clinton," said Emily's List President Ellen Malcolm. "[She helped force] approval of Plan B and... spoke so eloquently during the Supreme Court nomination about the importance of protecting Roe v. Wade..." Both Clinton and Obama scored a 100% on the voting scorecard of abortion interest groups. Both have voted against a partial-birth abortion ban. But only one has the ability to win, and NARAL's money will literally be on Obama. To pundits, this is yet another indication that the sun is setting on Clinton's candidacy. To us, it confirms that no matter who prevails, the Democratic nominee will be the most radical pro-abortion candidate this country has ever seen. See Also: NARAL Pro-Choice America Endorses Sen. Obama

Hundreds of Illegal Aliens Arrested in Iowa

by Debbie Pelly, Arkansas Watch: At least 300 people (some articles say 390) were arrested on Monday, May 12, by U.S. immigration agents as a result of an ongoing investigation into identity theft, fraudulent use of Socical Security numbers, and for illegal immigrants. Reports agree that it is the largest operation of this type ever in Iowa and that agents from federal, state, and local agencies are involved and that the investigation was led by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unit. . . . One article reports: "According to an affidavit, based on information thus far developed in the investigation, it appears, based on 2007 fourth quarter payroll reports, that approximately 76 percent of the 968 employees of Agriprocessors (the meat packing company in Northeast Iowa where the arrests took place)were using false or fraudulent social security numbers in connection with their employment.” Another account reports: "All 833 employees were found to have either used invalid Social Security numbers or numbers not their own, said an application ICE agents submitted to secure a search warrant of the facility." . . . [Read More]

Democrat Led Congress in the Toilet - Let's Flush!

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: Congress' Approval Rating Tied the Lowest in Gallup Records. In layman's terms, it's time for voters to flush the congressional toilet! According to the new Gallup poll released yesterday:

Approval of Congress has dipped below 20% for only the fourth time in the 34 years. Gallup has asked Americans to rate the job Congress is doing. Today's 18% score, based on a May 8-11 Gallup Poll, matches the record lows Gallup recorded in August 2007 and March 1992. Congressional approval started off the year at a depressed 23%, then dipped to 21% in March and 20% in April, before reaching the current record-tying low. The 76% currently disapproving of Congress is just shy of the record-high 78% in March 1992.

Democrats Not Backing Congress One reason Congress is doing so poorly in the court of public opinion is that rank-and-file Democrats are providing no support cushion for the Democratic-controlled institution. In fact, Democrats are about as likely to approve of Congress as are Republicans: 20% of Republicans approve, versus 16% of Democrats.

Not only is that true today, but it has been the pattern in Gallup's monthly approval ratings of Congress since December 2007. Prior to that -- for the first 10 months of the new Democratic majority in Congress -- Democrats tended to express slightly higher approval than Republicans, averaging seven points higher. However, by contrast, during most of the Republican-led Congress from 2000 to 2006, Republicans' approval of Congress was substantially higher than Democrats'.

The ratings of the Democrats is in the toilet (18% is only 18 points from ZERO and 82 points from 100%). By all known reporting system, this is a progressive failing grade and a grade of F isn't even low enough. Expulsion is the only answer!

Unbelievably, voters this week elected more Democrats the Congress. Some argued that they were voting for "conservative southern democrats" and expected that these people will somehow help fix the problem. In the past, the Republicans had their time in the toilet and they were flushed. But, for some reason people are at present being easier on the Democrats. The Democrat leadership problem is not going to change if voters keep sending more democrats to Congress.

The proof is in the recent actions by Blue Dog Democrats (alleged fiscal conservatives or national security conservatives). In the last two weeks these "conservative democrats" sold out the American public and supported their fellow democrats in return for either pork or in return for a promised tax increase on small business to cover the increased congressional pork. It is getting very noisy and smelly at the congressional feed trough right now. And, it isn't the Republicans feeding. It's the Democrat porkers who can't get enough of your or your neighbor's money. The porkers need your money for their their personal interests (like farm subsidies, buildings named after them, pet projects, etc) or to "buy your future vote." The present Democrat Congressional leadership sees the American voters as a easily bought with Federal tax funded grants for local projects and interests, with expanding tax funded subsidies to more people, with promises to penalize the both rich and greedy businesses, and with lots of" pie in the sky" rhetoric.

Imagine if the Democrats are proved right and American voters allow the Democrats to secure control of all three branches of government. The Congressional Porkers will bankrupt American for their own personal interests. And with regard to that expected help from newly elected blue dog democrats, don't hold your breath, The Democrat leadership will tear apart any uncooperative blue dog democrats and will ignore the others until they come willingly begging for a favor or support. The only solution -- it is time again for voters to flush the Congressional toilet!

Today in Washington D. C. - May 15, 2008

In the Senate: Yesterday, Senate Democrats did little to help their image when they voted down an amendment offered by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to modernize veterans’ educational benefits without harming retention rates. Democrats have their own bill they are touting, which Pentagon fears will hurt retention.

Today, the Senate will resume consideration of the farm bill conference report (H.R. 2419).
Later in the day, the Senate is expected to appoint conferees on the fiscal 2009 budget resolution (S Con Res 70, H Con Res 312). A number of votes on motions to instruct conferees from both sides dealing with issues from taxes to energy are expected. Up to 10 hours of debate are available on the budget motions. At 2 PM, the Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to begin its markup of the supplemental war funding bill.

Senate MJL Harry Reid said he may take up a resolution being offered by Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) on media ownership which would overturn a December decision by the Federal Communications Commission that eases limits on cross-ownership of media outlets in major U.S. news markets. Once the resolution is brought to the floor, it cannot be amended and action cannot be interrupted for other business.

In the next two days the Senate could also vote on cloture on a bill (H.R. 980) that would allow first responders to unionize in any municipality with a population over 5,000, a federal mandate that is troublesome to many state and local governments.

The House: Yesterday, the House passed the farm bill loaded with pork farm subsidies and agreed to name conferees on the budget resolution.

One bit of positive news is that after weeks upon weeks of negotiations, the House will finally vote on funding for our troops today in the war supplemental appropriations bill. Unfortunately, Democrats have insisted on loading the bill up with domestic spending and adding their veterans’ benefits bill, daring Republicans to vote against it. Upset that none of the spending was to be paid for, Blue Dogs forced House Democrats to include a tax increase in the bill, which would fall on the shoulders of small businesses. Unfortunately, the voting will also go through Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s convoluted three-amendment scheme to allow anti-war Democrats to vote for language withdrawing troops from Iraq, other Democrats to vote for billions in domestic spending, and other Democrats to vote to fund the troops.

From Senate & News Sources: With respect to the House war supplement al bill, the AP reports that the Senate Democrats seem to be unenthused with the tax increase and are planning on leaving it out of the Senate version of the supplemental bill. The Senate is expected to take up the bill next week, but in part because the bill has gone through such a contentious and convoluted process, which Sens. Thad Cochran (R-MS) and Judd Gregg (R-NH) lament in The Washington Times today, it is unlikely to be ready to be signed by Memorial Day. Admiral Michael Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, recently said, “We need [the supplemental appropriations bill] very badly before the Memorial Day recess.” As continually noted, funding difficulties for the Pentagon are just another consequence of the Democrats’ continued mismanagement of Congress.

As evidenced by the new Gallup's Congressional approval poll, Americans are not happy with Democrats’ mismanagement and their failure to address critical issues like gas prices and terrorist surveillance. Tthe Democrat-controlled Congress approval rating is at 18% tied for the lowest approval rating the poll has ever recorded. And only 16% of Democrats approve of the way Congress is handling its job.

Reasons to Work To Pass the Save Arkansas Ballot Initiative

Bob Hester, State Director, Arkansas Family Coalition addressed the Secure Arkansas ballot initiative titled: An Act To Prevent Persons Unlawfully Present in the United States From Receiving Certain Public Benefits, Hester said the AR Family Coalition would be helping the Secure Arkansas volunteers to get the initiative passed. Secure Arkansas has until July 7 to get at least 61974 Arkansas registered voters' signatures in order to qualify the proposed initiative for the ballot in November.

Hester called for help and donations to cover necessities during this short time period. Secure Arkansas, the sponsor of the initiative, is a volunteers group and they are NOT paid. Send contributions to Secure Arkansas, P.O. Box 21096, Little Rock, AR 72221 Hester shared the following reasons to get this initiative passed:

1. It will prevent illegal aliens from receiving certain public benefits. Some benefits like emergency treatment are required by federal law so the initiative can't prevent those.

2. Passing this initiative will help alleviate the problem with Arkansas being a magnet for illegal aliens. In Arkansas, there was a 437 percent increase of Hispanics from 1990 to 2003, the first or second in the nation. Some surrounding states (Oklahoma, Tennessee, Missouri, and Arizona) have passed tough immigration bills that are causing many aliens to leave their state and head for Arkansas. Tens of thousands of Hispanics have left the Tulsa area because of a tough law passed there. It is reported that "Most illegal immigrants are ending up in either Kansas or Arkansas." As many have maintained - they won't have to be deported if our officials will just make and enforce the right laws. They will leave on their own accord!

3. Legislators will be far more apt to pass other laws as other states have if this initiative passes with good support. Many legislators want to pass tough immigration laws and tried to do so in the last legislative session; but their efforts have been resisted by the same groups that are fighting this initiative, including the ACLU. Many other legislators will come on board if they see this initiative passed.

4. This initiative will require agencies to keep records on costs of benefits to illegal aliens. Legislators held committee meetings a few months to determine these costs and found that most agencies have not even tried to determine if benefits are going to illegal aliens or not.

5. This initiative requires state and local governments in Arkansas to verify citizenship or legal residency of most people applying for public benefits. "One state agency that would have to change its procedures if the proposal passes is the Arkansas Department of Health. The department doesn’t require any identification or proof of legal residency for receipt of services."

6. A business license will be denied to anyone who is not a lawful citizen of the United States.

7. The initiative requires a person registering a vehicle to present a valid Arkansas driver’s license or state identification card.

8. An individual who is not lawfully present in the US shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within the state for any post secondary education benefit, including without limitation scholarships or financial aid; and resident tuition. In 2005, Rep. Joyce Elliott fought hard for a bill to provide instate tuition and scholarships for illegal aliens, which would have given illegal aliens advantages over our own citizens. Her bill (which the AG ruled could be illegal) was barely defeated by those who fought back just as hard. The bill was introduced again in the 2007 legislative session and failed again. This initiative would keep that bill from coming up again.

Click to obtain the petition. You must read the rules before obtaining petition signatures. The rules also identify the address where to send the signed and notarized petitions. Most banks have a notary public to notarize your signatures free of charge. Volunteers are needed to work as precinct captains; county directors are also needed; and people are needed to work the day of the primary next Tuesday, May 20, to gather signatures. If you can help, please call us at 870-932-5065 or call Secure Arkansas 501 - 765-3325.

Vote for Hillary or Else

H/T to Stix We better vote for Hillary

Today in Washington D. C. - May 14, 2008

On The Floor: The Senate resumed consideration of a bill (H.R. 980) that would allow first responders to unionize in any municipality with a population over 5,000. The bill would override a number of state laws. Yesterday, Democrats voted down the Republican energy package to increase domestic energy supplies. Senators subsequently agreed to a proposal to suspend purchasing oil to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and then passed the flood insurance bill (H.R. 3121).

The House: Is expected to consider the conference report for the farm bill (H.R. 2419) and appoint conferees on the budget today. Tomorrow, it is expected to take up the supplemental bill, which will likely be in the Senate next week.

From Senate & News Sources: Domestic Energy: Senate Democrats continued their disappointing refusal to support increasing domestic energy production after rejecting Republicans’ energy proposal. Democrats continue to shown that they prefer to demonize and punish oil companies rather than support anything that would actually produce energy. They’ve also done an admirable job of trying to shift the blame for high gas prices to OPEC while leaving domestic energy production to languish. Ironically, Democrats sent a letter to President Bush Monday complaining that “OPEC has voted three times in the last year against raising production,” yet their vote yesterday marks the fourth time in the last year Democrats have voted against raising production in the United States.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) held a press conference yesterday calling to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia unless the Saudis agree to produce one million more barrels of oil per day. However, Politico reports that Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joe Biden (D-DE) threw cold water on the idea, saying, “[A]rbitrarily cutting off arms sales is not the right answer. ... It’s a move that could do long-term damage to our relationships and our own security, with no guarantee that it would actually bring down prices at the pump.” Similarly, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) has expressed his displeasure with the “arbitrary” nature of Democrats’ plans for a windfall profits tax on oil companies.

Confirmation of Circuit Judge Nominees: Democrats have not made much progress. Only 7 nominees have been confirmed so far in this Congress, far short of the 15 President Clinton got during his last 2 years. Reid pledged to approve three nominees by Memorial Day, it’s possible he will not be able to fulfill his promise if the glacial pace of the Judiciary Committee continues. All the while eminently qualified nominees such as Judge Robert Conrad languish.

Military Funding: In the House, Blue Dogs and Democrat leadership have reached a deal to move ahead on the supplemental. Instead of removing the $52 billion in entitlements from the war funding bill that Blue Dogs were concerned about, it appears Democrats have instead to decided to simply raise taxes to pay for the extra spending. This will certainly make the bill’s path more difficult when it arrives in the Senate next week. Most of this maneuvering was unnecessary, since Democrats could have just advanced a clean war funding bill. Unsurprisingly, though, Democrats again preferred to play politics with funds for the troops, leaving it uncertain whether the money will be available by Memorial Day.

Huckabee Rumored Top of McCain's Veep List

James Pethokoukis, US News, claims Mike Huckabee is currently at the top of John McCain's short list for a running mate. According to Pethokoukis:

The word from a top McCain fundraiser and longtime Republican moneyman who has spoken to McCain's inner circle. The fundraiser is less than thrilled with the idea of Huckabee as the vice presidential nominee, and many economic conservatives—turned off by the populist tone of Huckabee's campaign and his tax record as governor—are likely to share that marked lack of enthusiasm. But here is the logic of picking Huckabee:

1) He is a great campaigner and communicator who could both shore up support in the South among social conservatives (Huckabee is a former Baptist minister) and appeal to working-class voters in the critical "Big 10" states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio.

2) As any pollster knows, voters search for candidates who "care about people like me," and Huckabee would probably score a lot higher on that quality than millionaire investor Mitt Romney. Plus, given all the turmoil on Wall Street, 2008 would seem to be a bad year to pick a former investment banker for veep.

3) Economic conservatives and supply-siders may balk, but the threat of four years of Obamanomics and higher investment, income, and corporate taxes might be enough to keep them on board.

Let me add that a top Republican political strategist told me about a month ago that he also believed Huckabee to be the leading veep contender.

Secure Arkansas holds press conference in Jonesboro

(Little Rock – May 13, 2008) Secure Arkansas' Chair, Jeannie Burlsworth, is holding a press conference on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. on the Craighead County courthouse lawn in Jonesboro to update Arkansans on the status of Secure Arkansas' Ballot Initiative and the ongoing petition drive. She will be available answer media questions about the initiative and its potential impact on Arkansas, especially the residents of the northeast Arkansas area. (In case of bad weather, the press conference will be held in the courthouse conference room.)

"I feel very confident that we will have more than enough signatures to get this on the ballot," said Burlsworth. The initiative would require the state and local government to verify the lawful presence in the United States of any person 14 years or older who applies for a federal, state, or local public benefit. Benefits that would require proof of legal presence include; applications for welfare, assisted housing, vehicle license plates & registrations, in-state college tuition and scholarships, and business licenses.

Burlsworth explained, "People all across the state have called me, voicing their concern about their tax dollars going to provide benefits for illegal aliens." She went on to say, "Individuals are lining up, not just to sign the petition, but to help gather signatures. The response has been nothing more than amazing!"

Secure Arkansas received notification last Wednesday that their ballot initiative regarding the limitation of public benefits for illegal aliens was certified by the Attorney General. On Friday, May 9, Burlsworth submitted the petition regarding this initiative to the Secretary of State's office in Little Rock. Supporters of the ballot initiative have already began collecting the 61,974 signatures that are required by law to put the initiative on the ballot in November.
Go to the SecureArkansas.com to sign up to volunteer to help with petitions.

Kansans Asking For More Democracy

by Phyllis Schlafly: Kansas will have a proposition on the ballot in November that could send shock waves into the tenure of state court judges. The voters in Johnson County, Kansas (suburban Kansas City) will vote on the right to elect their 10th judicial district court judges instead of having them chosen by the lawyers. We hear a lot in the media about bringing democracy to the world. Kansans are asking for more democracy in the middle of the United States. . . .

Kansas gives its licensed lawyers an unusually powerful role in the selection of state supreme court justices. Some voters are beginning to see a connection between that extraordinary control and the judges' widely criticized decision to order the state legislature to appropriate hundreds of millions of dollars of additional taxpayers' money to the public schools. The appropriation of taxpayer funds, and the raising of taxes that this necessarily requires, should absolutely be legislative, not judicial functions. The grabbing of spending and taxing powers by the courts is a major reason why we call these judges supremacists.

Under the Kansas procedure, when there is a vacancy on the Kansas supreme court, a Nominating Commission (on which the attorneys enjoy a 5-to-4 majority) secretly chooses its three favorites, and the Governor must pick one of those three. That's the whole process: no checking, no appeal, no oversight, no second opinion. This plan is supposed to result in the "non-partisan" and "merit" selection of judges, but scholars who have studied the process have concluded that the commission selects judges based on the socio-economic interests of the attorneys and their clients.

Attorneys are a special-interest group just like any other group that aggressively lobbies for the interests of its members. In Kansas, the commission has had no shame about selecting judges who make political contributions to Democratic candidates. Kansans are asking, why should the lawyers have such extraordinary control over the selection of judges who will then rule on cases brought by the lawyers who gave them their jobs? . . . 41 states either give the lawyers no power in the initial selection of supreme court justices or balance the lawyers' role with commissioners chosen by democratically elected public officials.

We hear a lot of talk today about the need for an "independent" judiciary. We do need a state judiciary that is independent of the attorneys and their special interests, especially the trial lawyers. Kansans in Johnson County have discovered they have the right to change their procedure and elect their judges. To put this proposition on the ballot, they enthusiastically collected 14,000 signatures, twice the number required. . . .

Many important issues face state court judges in addition to school funding. Same-sex marriage was decided by only one vote in the highest court of five states. It's unlikely that any judge elected by the people would declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, as some life-tenured federal judges have done and may do again. We've got a better chance of sticking with the will of the American people if state judges are elected rather than appointed by lawyers who have an interest in winning big-verdict cases before those very judges. . . . [Read More]

Canada Pushes the Envelope with Mail Censorship

Tony Perkins, FRC: In Canada, the government is having a similar debate over free speech after EGALE (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere) started lobbying the country to censor mail that may be "homophobic." In a letter to the president and CEO of Canada Post, EGALE implies that the postal system is helping to spread a message of hate by delivering materials that may be anti-homosexual. However, even past members of the organization are coming forward to say that EGALE is overstepping its bounds by asking the government to enter an unprecedented era of postal censorship. Gilles Marchildon, a former executive director, says, "... I'm personally not comfortable with [the idea]... The danger, of course, is that once you advocate in favor of curbing freedom of expression, where does it stop and who's going to decide where the line gets drawn?" It would also constitute an incredible invasion of privacy by a government agency. If Canadians empower the government to screen their mail, they have surrendered their most fundamental liberty. Yet this is how far the "thought police" are willing to go to suppress the opinions of anyone who opposes the homosexual lifestyle. Also Read: Even the Leaders Think the Homosexual Activist Movement in Canada is Going Too Far

Bob Barr Effect on GOP Presidential Race

Bob Barr was a two-term Republican US Congressman from Georgia. He was a leader in the effort to impeach President Bill Clinton. In 2006, Barr joined the Libertarian Party. Bob Barr has announced a candidate for the presidency under the Libertarian Party. DC Republican offers his views how Bob Barr could pose a problem (the "Bob Barr effect") for the GOP come November . . . [Read Article]

Gary Bauer provided the following comments today: It is difficult to assess how much of a threat Barr’s candidacy will be. Conventional wisdom suggests he will siphon votes from Senator McCain. But I’m not so sure. Since leaving Congress, Barr has shifted to the left. He has worked for the ACLU, opposed the marriage protection amendment, opposed several of President Bush’s anti-terrorism initiatives and, like Barack Obama, he promises to withdraw from Iraq.

I think it’s safe to say that Bob Barr will not be president of the United States next year. After all, at the height of the anti-Washington, “reform” movement, billionaire Ross Perot, who didn’t need the Libertarian Party, bankrolled his own White House bid and got only 19% of the vote. Frustrated voters prevented George Bush, Sr., from being reelected, but they failed miserably to elect their own candidate and, in the process, punished the country with eight years of Bill and Hillary Clinton. But in a close election, the one or two percent of the vote that Barr might get could tip the balance, just like Ralph Nader denied Florida to Al Gore. So the real question is: How many disaffected voters really want Barack Obama to be president? If someone really can’t vote for John McCain, they should at least be willing to accept responsibility for their actions and cast their vote for Barack. Voting for Bob Barr is like voting for Obama anyway.

Economics 101

The Foundry, Morning Bell: “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” John McCain famously admitted to the Boston Globe late last year. And yesterday in Portland, Ore., McCain proved it by outlining a cap-and-trade plan designed to reduce U.S. carbon emissions by 60% by 2050. The plan McCain outlined is only slightly better than the current cap-and-trade bill in the Senate, which reduces emissions by 70% by 2050. . . . The distinction McCain tries to draw here between a cap-and-trade system and a new tax on energy is completely erroneous.

If a cap-and-trade system works perfectly (and that is a huge assumption considering the high transaction and compliance costs, not to mention the rent-seeking from special-interest groups that is guaranteed to affect the policy’s implementation), then it functions in exactly the same way as an energy tax does. A 2008 Congressional Budget Office analysis of the Lieberman-Warner bill stated that the legislation would increase overall federal revenues by $1.21 trillion between 2009 and 2018. In other words: McCain wants to raise your taxes by $1.21 trillion dollars over the next decade.

But the damage does not end there. When you tax something, you get less of it. And in this case, that “it” is energy, a necessary component of every business in the United States. The Heritage Foundation released a study yesterday estimating the impact of Lieberman-Warner on the U.S. economy and found that even under the most generous assumptions, the bill would inflict a cumulative loss in gross domestic product of at least $1.7 trillion. . . .

One telling difference between McCain’s speech as delivered yesterday in Portland and the prepared remarks e-mailed to reporters on Sunday was a call for punitive tariffs against countries that do not limit carbon emissions like India and China. These tariffs are a key part of the Warner-Lieberman bill. Under Lieberman-Warner, all goods entering the U.S. would have to include a written declaration identifying carbon reduction allowances acquired. For example, if the production of a product generates two tons of CO2, importers of the product would need to buy two tons of allowances from the world market. Negotiating and verifying these tariffs and allowances would kill free trade as we know it.

Trillions in new taxes, trillions lost in GDP, and a huge global trade war. These are the costs of a Lieberman-Warner cap-and-trade style approach to global warming. And for what? Even if the U.S. meets Kyoto’s ambitious goals, the Earth’s surface temperature would be reduced by an imperceptible 0.14°F per 50 years. You don’t need an economist to tell you this is a bad deal for the United States. . . . [Read More]