News Blog for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. Content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this "Blog" - no paid ads - no payments for articles.Fair Use Doctrine is posted & used. Blogger/Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Contact: editor@arranewsservice.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home PageFollow @arra
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
(429-347 BC)
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
More Voters See Taxes As Very Important Issue
by Rasmussen Reports: A new survey finds that 64% of voters see taxation as very important; it’s highest level in nearly two years. Last month, 61% said taxes were very important to them. Prior to that survey, that number never rose above 60%. Another 26% now see taxes as a somewhat important issue, while only 8% say taxes are not very or not at all important in terms of how they will vote.
Nationwide 81% of voters say it is important to keep the promised middle class tax cuts in President Obama’s budget; 75% of Republicans see taxes as very important, compared to 58% of Democrats and 62% of unaffiliated voters. The economy remains at the top of the list of voter concerns; 85% consider them very important with 86% a month ago. The number who consider national security a very important issue rose from 60% to 64%. Health care is a very important issue to 62%, its highest level since last February. But only 24% say health care reform is the goal the president is most likely to achieve. . . . [View supporting data and other polled issue results] Tags:capital gains taxes, economy, health care, Issues, national security, Rasmussen Poll, Rasmussen Reports, United StatesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
There's a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money.by Stuart Varney, Opinion Journal: I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?
My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.
It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road. If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.
Here's a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.
Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.
Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can't a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can't special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit -- until now.
Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I'm an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration's goal of controlling the financial system.
After 35 years in America, I never thought I would see this. I still can't quite believe we will sit by as this crisis is used to hand control of our economy over to government. But here we are, on the brink. Clearly, I have been naive.
----------------- Stuart Varney is a host on the Fox Business Network. Tags:banking, banks, class warfare, government control, Pay for Performance Act, socialism, Stuart Varney, TARP
ALERT: Health & Human Services Wants to Rescind Doctors' & Nurses' Rights!
ALERT: The Obama Administration via the Department of Health and Human Services is moving quickly to overturn important federal regulations that protect health care professionals who act according to their deeply held personal convictions. The 2008 regulation implements and enforces three federal laws protecting the conscience rights of health care providers, especially those at risk of being discriminated against because of their moral or religious objection to abortion.
Thus the current regulations make sure doctors, nurses, and pharmacists can uphold their personal beliefs while practicing medicine—without facing discrimination or retribution in the workplace. This problem is a serious one, as real health care providers have been fired and denied opportunities because of their desire to not participate in procedures, such as abortions, that violate their consciences. No matter how you feel about specific medical procedures, we can all agree that the freedom to work in accord with one's conscience must be protected.
As they did when the conscience regulation was first proposed, pro-abortion groups are again trying to flood HHS with comments attacking conscience rights. Their chief message: Rescind the regulation because conscience clauses (which they call “refusal” or “denial” clauses) interfere with women’s “access” to health care. These groups want to force doctors, nurses and hospitals to violate their consciences or leave the profession.
Although the rescission proposal was published in theFederal Register on March 10, most of the general public outside of the health care profession did not notice this was being proposed. The public only has until close of business on April 9 (two more days) to submit comments!
URGENT: Send your comment to HHS in one of the following ways & Share this with your friends and family: - Online through A Doctor's Right.
- Online through Regulations.gov(check “Select to find documents” and then enter “Rescission Proposal”).
- E-mail to proposedrescission@hhs.gov (not necessarily the best option)
Suggested Message: “Please retain the conscience regulation, and enforce the laws protecting the right of health care providers to serve patients without violating their moral and religious convictions. The government has a special responsibility to ensure that the conscience rights of health care providers are fully protected.”
Some other general points to consider besides the facts above:
- Religious liberty and freedom of conscience have been building blocks of our society since its founding. We respect conscientious objection for those opposed to war, physicians opposed to taking part in capital punishment, and others who object to involvement in the taking of life. We can do no less in the context of abortion.
- Conscience protection does not threaten access to health care. Allowing health care providers to serve the public without violating their consciences protects and enhances access to health care, by ensuring continued participation by some of our most dedicated health professionals. Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran and other faith-based providers are specially called to serve the poorest and most vulnerable, from the inner city to remote rural areas – if they are driven away, who will replace them?
Sen. Blanche Lincoln Against Employee Free Choice Act
Bill Smith, ARRA News: After months of joining others in calling for a clear position from Sen. Blanche Lincoln on "Card Check" and asking her to stand with her Arkansas constituents who overwhelmingly oppose the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), she has responded. The EFCA also called "Card Check" would have taken away union employees right to a secret ballot and would have forced binding Federal arbitration on businesses. Steve Forbes said today on a conference call that EFCA should really be called the Employee "Forced" Choice Act. Sen Mitch McConnell (R-KY) last month, "To put it simply, the Employee ‘No Choice’ Act is undemocratic. To approve it would be to subvert the right to bargain freely over working terms and conditions. It would also strip members of a newly recognized union of their right to accept or reject a contract."
Yesterday, Lincoln speaking before a Little Rock group said that she will oppose the Employee Free Choice Act. Lincoln released a statement which said: " While I may not have been clear about my position in the past, I am stating today that I cannot support Employee Free Choice Act in its current form and I can’t support efforts to bring it to Senate consideration in its current form." Interesting what one will do when a primary is pending in the future. However, she did hedge her response by stating "I will consider alternatives that have the support of both business and labor but my pledge today is to focus my full attention on the priorities I have mentioned that affect every working family in Arkansas."
According to the Arkansas Business, Ricky Belk, secretary-treasurer of the Arkansas AFL-CIO, the The Employee Free Choice Act would allow power to shift from corporations to workers, a shift that is needed considering the current economy. His comment makes it clear that unions are seeking to take control of corporations owned by investors. Wow, it is the unions actions at the "Big 3" automotive manufacturers in Detroit which have aided in that industries failures. The AFL-CIO's agenda is fairly clear. Theft of the control of decision making; replacing the rights of owners and investors of businesses to not be the determiners of the fate of their businesses. It is also clear that the unions were not interested in the workers rights as much as the power the unions would accumulate. If they were for workers rights, they would not be pressuring for the elimination of the rights of employees (workers) to have a secret ballot with respect to organizing a union.
Unions under socialism have been used as an arm of abuse by the government. Based on large union political donations, principally to democrats, it has been evident for some time that the union's management seeks to gain more control of private property. It is also interesting that Sen. Lincoln, while failing previously to respond on this issue and waffling now by leaving the door open to this egregious bill in any form, took time to inform the union of her decision early Monday before she made her position public.
Politico speculates that Lincoln's announcement could be a “death blow” for card check after Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) also said he would oppose this bill. It’s likely too early to declare such a thing, given that this is the top priority for deep-pocketed unions. Still, it is a positive sign that senators on both sides of the aisle seem to agree that it’s a bad idea to eliminate the secret ballot in labor negotiations. Tags:Arkansas, Blanche Lincoln, business, Card Check, corporations, EFCA, Employee Free Choice Act, labor unions, Senator, unions, voting rightsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: Below are two presentations which help explain the difficult position in which President Obama and others have placed the United States and the European countries. One presentation is today's comments by Gary Bauer, Director of Americans for Working Families, and the other is an article by Martel Sobieskey who has 36 years research experience in the field of religious conditioning and its relationship to warfare.
Obama claims that Islam is a religion just like any other religion. This is a false premise that true believers in both Islam or Christianity know to be untrue. This false premise is leading to the growth and expansion of the religion of Islam and Muslims in Europe, the United States, and eventually remaining North America. In considering Obama's recent comments and actions, one has to wonders if he has a conflicted psychic. He was born Barack Hussein Obama and in his early childhood raised in a Muslim country to follow Islam and thus to be a Muslim. Then in his later elementary years, after being transferred to his white grandparents in the U.S., he is reintegrated into the American culture with his white grandparents and eventually cast off his former identity, as explained in his own biography. Eventually he does the unthinkable in the Muslim world. He rejected Islam and adopted the Christian religion.
With this background and his current statements, President Obama is confused or misleading regarding the goal of Islam. Whether confused or not, he is sending a confused message to both the countries ruled by Muslims and to our citizens and allies. He claims that Christianity and Islam are just both equivalent religions and rejects that the United States is or has been a Christian nation. His previous exercise of this belief has lead his Administration to force our National Defense and Homeland Security to deny that the United States is in a war against Islamic lead terrorism.
by Gary Bauer, comments titled America’s Muslim Heritage?: President Obama is wrapping up his eight-day European tour with a stop in Turkey. A Muslim nation and member of NATO, Turkey is a geographic, economic and cultural bridge between Europe and the Middle East. Speaking in Turkey today, President Obama once again “reached out” to the Muslim world. His speech was broadcast live throughout the Middle East by Al Jazeera and Al Arabiyia. Here is an excerpt: “Let me say this as clearly as I can. The United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. …America’s relationship with the Muslim world cannot and will not be based on opposition to Al Qaeda. We seek broad engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect. …We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country. The United States has been enriched by Muslim Americans. Many other Americans have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim-majority country -- I know, because I am one of them.”
There was a lot in his remarks about what America will do and little in the way of the president’s expectations of the Muslim world. The president clearly placed the burden of reform on the United States, not the world’s Islamic states. Does this president have “mutual respect” for regimes that seek a second Holocaust and which persecute religious and other minorities? How many Muslim nations allow women to vote and hold public office? It’s ludicrous to suggest that our only problem with Islam is Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is a big problem, but isn’t the only problem. Has the president heard of Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad? Is the president aware of the madrasses and mosques all over the world that preach the jihadist philosophy telling Muslims that their duty to Allah requires them to kill the infidel?
I assume the president is familiar with the 2007 Pew Global Survey of Muslim attitudes, which found significant levels of support of homicide bombings among Muslims throughout the world – 70% in the Palestinian territories (Why create another terrorist state?), 23% in Jordan (a supposedly moderate Muslim nation), 16% in Turkey and 10% in Indonesia (the world’s most populous Muslim nation). The common denominator is radical Islam.
Thankfully, not every Muslim is a terrorist. But virtually every terrorist that the United States has to worry about today is a Muslim. For the president to downplay that is not only irresponsible, it confuses our own citizens and makes it more likely that there will be another 9/11 in our future.
President Obama also told his Muslim audience, “We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.” That’s odd. For a politician who claims to speak for the “common man” he doesn’t seem to know much about the common man. According to a recent Newsweek poll, 62% of the nation does consider America a Christian nation. I suspect the average viewer watching on Al Jazeera was thoroughly unimpressed by the president’s tolerance as he spoke to a nation that is 99.8% Muslim.
More broadly speaking, America is a Judeo-Christian nation, built upon the values in the Ten Commandments. If you asked Americans, “Do you consider America to be a Judeo-Christian nation,” I believe the percentage of folks agreeing with statement would skyrocket. If you asked, “Is America a Judeo-Christian-Muslim nation,” I suspect the number of affirmative responses would plummet. Because, with all due respect to moderate Muslims, Islam has contributed very little to the history of the United States. The last time I checked, the pilgrims who landed at Plymouth Rock were Christians, not Muslims. Our Founding Fathers were inspired by the Bible, not the Koran.
And here’s a historical footnote worth remembering: The first time America sent troops into combat overseas was when Thomas Jefferson ordered the Navy and the Marines to Libya to fight the Barbary Pirates. Still in its infancy, America was forced to confront militant Islam. Our Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves. President Obama literally bowed to a Muslim king, downplayed America’s sovereignty and denied its religious and cultural heritage. President Obama’s apologies for America and his attempts to be inoffensive to our Islamofascist enemies should offend millions of Americans.
Martel Sobieskey, article Demoting Islam’s Religion Status: One thing is certain, Islam is not a religion by anything Americans believe one to be - not even close. In fact, Islam is the antithesis of what we deem to be religious. Above all, Islam is a totalitarian political machine of blood thirsty conquest which zealously advocates the downfall of the U.S. government. Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world…” because he was 100% non-political. In extreme contrast, Mohammed and the Koran bellicosely command your kingdom is my kingdom, surrender or die! Let’s be to the point. It is sheer madness, exceedingly irresponsible, criminally negligent, and strategically suicidal to continue granting religion status to an absolutely aggressive and implacable ideology that demands the destruction of our government and all other religions.
It is well past time, the truthful facts be told about Islam. Our leadership and intelligence community have lied and lied again, referring to Islam as a religion of peace. If Islam is to be categorized as a religion - then it must be called what it truthfully is - a religion of war. Unfortunately our leadership has become so inept, they have chosen to be in denial of this obvious fact, and entertain fanciful notions - that by calling a “blood thirsty tiger” a “bunny rabbit” it will magically transform into one.
The purpose of this article is to introduce that Islam’s religion status is undeserving, that it should never have been granted in the first place, and that its religion status should be immediately rescinded.
Why? Because Islam whether you call it moderate, militant, main stream, traditional or radical is a relentless foe inherently programmed to conqueror its host nation. Fail to understand this point and Islam will continue “trashing” civil liberties, shedding bloody pandemonium, wreaking havoc, litigating as warfare, demanding special privileges, and instigating anarchy until its host country suffers irreparable harm if not outright defeat. Such is the virulent modus operandi being used by Islam in England, Spain, India, France, Thailand, Holland, Bali, Lebanon, Denmark, Sweden, Philippines, Russia, America and elsewhere.
Perhaps, this is why Dr. Paul Williams author of “The Dunes of Doomsday” so truthfully and valiantly states in Chapter 1 “Refusing to Identify the Enemy”: “The enemy is Islam. Not a fringe group within the body of believers...Not radical Islam as if a faction can be separated from the “mainstream” Islam. But Islam itself, as expressed by the life and teachings of Muhammad...”
An Imposter Religion: To put it bluntly Islam’s religion status should be rescinded because it is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a Trojan horse, an imposter religion that has arrived on our shore with malicious intent, deathly determined to replace our constitution with the Koran, and turn America into an Islamic nation controlled by Sharia law. Robert Spencer in his excellent book, “Stealth Jihad” (How Radical Islam Is Subverting America Without Guns or Bombs), explains how so-called moderate Islam is having greater success at invading America than its counterpart militant Islam. Shockingly, one may rightly conclude that America is now being conquered without Islam even having to fire a shot. Have we really become that docile, self complacent and pathetic? The answer is Yes!
The Sham of Moderate Islam: Does this mean that even so-called moderate Muslims are hostile to America? It certainly does. Moderate Muslims support the conquest of America with fervor equal to that of the militant Muslims. They cunningly play the role of the “good cop” in their good cop, bad cop charade deceiving we gullible Americans. In fact, the “two hands” of Islam aspire to choke the life out of America. One hand is called militant Muslims; the other hand is called moderate Muslims. These “two hands” work together, in their Koranically mandated asphyxiation pogrom, of strangling America into submission. This point cannot be overemphasized.
In 1974 Algerian President Boumendienne made a prophetic statement to the United Nations General Assembly: “One day millions of men will leave the southern hemisphere of this planet to burst into the northern one. But not as friends. Because they will burst in to conquer, and they will conquer by populating it with their children. Victory will come to us from the wombs of our women.”
How accurately prophetic he was. Today, one can see no assimilation by Muslims in their host nations and they frequently exhibit open hostility turning entire cities into Moslem enclaves which the police are reluctant to enter. In addition, their birthrate is four times the European average creating a large cash deficient within the social welfare system. It is hardly an exaggeration to say, the Moslem immigration is like a “swarm of invading locusts” devouring everything in their path.
Dutch Politician Geert Wilders, having suffered firsthand the “devouring” of his nation by so-called moderate Islam, unflinchingly states in his article, “The Islamization of Europe”…“There is no Moderate Islam”. The United States, like all besieged western democracies, must heed Geert Wilders warning if they wish to protect themselves. Clearly, the safe harbor of religion status enables the “two hands” of Islam to launch clandestine raids upon their host nation, sapping at its vitals from within.
A Road to Hell: The severity of the moderate Islam invasion is thoroughly understood by Islamic experts like Amil Amani. In his article, “A Bridge to ‘Moderate’ Islam Is In Fact a Road to Hell.” He emphatically warns there is no such thing as moderate Islam and to call it so is an oxymoron, a contradiction. Specifically he states: “Since moderate Islam is oxymoronic, any moderacy in Islam is in fact incompatible and in conflict with essential Islam, its power structure and its controlling proponents...Islam is not personally or spiritually relevant. It is political, which is why it may never separate itself from government. Adherence is not a matter of voluntary devotion, but of the law, and violators are severely punished, including capital punishment...”
Another enlightened expert who has personally witnessed that moderate Islam is a road to hell is Brigitte Gabriel. In her book, “Because They Hate” she gives a clarion call describing how the ruse of moderate Islam turned her home country of Lebanon into a “living nightmare.” She states: “We were renowned for our hospitality, good heartedness, and generosity, just as America is known for the same qualities today. Sadly, those same qualities were the cause of our destruction...We did not realize that the intolerant Islamic side of our culture was gaining strength on the back of our western openness and pride in diversity.”
Most likely, Brigitte Gabriel would agree that providing religion status to Islam, believing main stream Islam to be moderate, was a major contributor to the destruction of Lebanon. The key point is that so-called moderate Muslims are as fiercely intolerant as militant Muslims, but are more skillful at concealing their agenda and deceiving their host nation until the time is right for them to strike. Brigitte Gabriel tells how usually peaceful Muslim neighbors who had befriended them for decades all of a sudden rose up to kill non-Muslims.
Murderous Intolerance: Such murderous intolerance is fully entrenched within Islam. The so-called moderates fully support these murderous attacks in their “hidden hearts”, rarely paying even lip service to the contrary. Their silence has been “deafening.” Why? Because they dare not challenge the inviolate precedents set by their prophet which would be a capital offense. For example, in 623 A.D. Mohammed was infuriated with the female poet Asma Bint Marwan for criticizing him, and sent his henchman to kill her and her five children. They ripped the infant from her breast and hacked it to pieces before her very eyes. They then made her watch the murder of her other four children, before raping and stabbing her repeatedly to death. After the butchery Mohammed told his henchman, “You have done a service to Allah and his Messenger.”
The killing of persons who criticize Islam has never abated and perhaps is even more alive today than in the 7th century. A few years ago in the U.S. an Egyptian Christian, his wife and two children had their throats cut for challenging Islam, mistakenly believing our free speech laws would protect them. Nearly every day one hears of some gruesome murder, decapitation, or other violent crime committed by contemporary Muslims who are emulating the example of their prophet.
The Heart War: 99.9% of all Muslims have a deeply held secret agenda (wish) that Islam will conquer their host country and turn it into an Islamic nation such is their indelible religious conditioning. This obvious fact has been completely neglected, ignored, avoided and shunned by the leadership of western democracies to their great detriment, including America.
Fortunately we have one Islamic expert who is trying to awaken our leadership and his sleeping counterparts in the defense department and intelligence community. He is truly a “shinning star” and a person of insightful wisdom who should be promoted to the highest positions. Major Stephen Collins Coughlin has written a 333 page thesis entitled, “To Our Great Detriment”. On pages 171-175 he provides a quote that reveals the concealed heart of so-called moderate Muslims. The Caliph (Pope) of the Ottoman empire spelled out what has always been the irrefutable law for all Muslims without exception: “The heart war - and that is the lowest form of the war. And it is that the Muslim should believe in his heart that the infidels are enemies to him and to his religion, and that he should desire their disappearance and the destruction of their power, And no Muslim can be imagined who is not under obligation to this degree of war. Verily, all the people of the faith are under obligation to this amount without any question whatever, in whatever place they may be...”
Prediction: Permit me to make a grim prediction: Any country that continues to provide religion status to Islam believing that moderate Muslims will save the day has been “sucker punched” and is guaranteed to suffer great havoc and disruptive chaos. The proof is undeniable, look at the mayhem Islam has inflicted upon all western democracies over the past 20 years. The self destructive formula is simple: provide religion status to the sham of moderate Islam and your country will suffer great devastation.
Never before in human history has a nation’s leadership and intelligence community been so easily duped, confounded, played for fools, infiltrated and manipulated by enemy propagandists and apologists. Our leadership has become so pusillanimous in the face of Islamic bullying and brow beating, they have become their lackeys, aiding and abetting the invasion of the very nation they are suppose to protect. The situation is critical. The demoting of Islam’s religion status will turn the tide and send a clear-cut message to Islam that the dust of Allah is no longer befogging our vision enabling them to conqueror us. Tags:Barack Obama, Christianity, Europe, Gary Bauer, Islam, Martel Sobieskey, National Defense, terrorism, United StatesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
While President Obama globe trots (today in Turkey and facing protests), many Senators and Representatives have returned home. Congress will reconvene on April 20th. Washington D.C. is experiencing some relative peace with their absences. After weeks of wrangling over the $3.55 trillion budget, many members are back in their states either avoiding their constituents or discuss the budget and its consequences for future generations. On April 15, many of them have the opportunity to either avoid, observe or to join in a TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party in their local area. It is doubtful, that any Democrats who voted for the budget plan to appear.
There are a couple good stories looking back at lessons learned. Yesterday, The Washington Post returned to the subject of gimmickry in the House and Senate budgets that make them look only slightly less debt-ridden than the original Obama proposal. “The president's original framework, even relying on some budgetary sleights of hand, added $9 trillion to the debt over 10 years. Rather than change policy to brighten the fiscal picture, the House and Senate chose to add more gimmicks and dishonesty. They jettisoned the $250 billion placeholder the administration responsibly included to provide the banking system with more capital, and they skimped (in the House version) and outright ignored (in the Senate's) the White House plan to better prepare for budget emergencies and natural disasters. They also assume that the president's Making Work Pay tax credit will expire after 2010 (House) or 2012 (Senate).” The Post also notes that the Congressional budgets assume the return of the alternative minimum tax, all to try to mask the fact that the Democrats’ budget plans double the debt in five years and nearly triple it in ten.
Today, The Post discussesthe attempt by the successor to the Obama campaign, Organizing for America, to engage activists around the country to pressure Congress to pass the Obama budget. However, The Post finds that “in its first big test, the group dubbed Organizing for America (OFA) had little obvious impact on the debate over President Obama's budget . . . . The capstone of the campaign was the delivery of 214,000 signatures to Capitol Hill, which swayed few, if any, members of Congress, according to legislative aides from both parties.” And “Kristen Hawn, a press aide to Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La.) who acts as a spokeswoman for the Blue Dogs, said the OFA campaign had little impact on lawmakers' decisions on how to vote.”
The following excerpt from The WS Journal shows that Dirbin, Duncan and Obama are more concerned about yeilding to unions and supporting failing schools than in helping poor children have access to a quality education. H/T to Derrell Bradford at E3for calling this to our attention. Review & Outlook, The Wall Street Journal: Education Secretary Arne Duncan did a public service last week when he visited New York City and spoke up for charter schools and mayoral control of education. That was the reformer talking. The status quo Mr. Duncan was on display last month when he let Congress kill a District of Columbia voucher program even as he was sitting on evidence of its success.
In New York City with its 1.1 million students, mayoral control has resulted in better test scores and graduation rates, while expanding charter schools, which means more and better education choices for low-income families. But mayoral control expires in June unless state lawmakers renew it, and the United Federation of Teachers is working with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver to weaken or kill it.
President Obama's stimulus is sending some $100 billion to the nation's school districts. What will he demand in return? The state budget passed by the New York legislature last week freezes funding for charters but increases it by more that $400 million for other public schools. Perhaps a visit to a charter school in Harlem would help Mr. Obama honor his reform pledge. "I'm looking at the data here in front of me," Mr. Duncan told the New York Post. "Graduation rates are up. Test scores are up. Teacher salaries are up. Social promotion was eliminated. Dramatically increasing parental choice. That's real progress."
Mr. Duncan's help in New York is in stark contrast to his department's decision to sit on a performance review of the D.C. voucher program while Congress debated its future in March. The latest annual evaluation was finally released Friday, and it shows measurable academic gains. . . . It's bad enough that Democrats are killing a program that parents love and is closing the achievement gap between poor minorities and whites. But as scandalous is that the Education Department almost certainly knew the results of this evaluation for months. . . . Since Education officials are intimately involved in this process, they had to know what was in this evaluation even as Democrats passed (and Mr. Obama signed) language that ends the program after next year. . . . While running for President last year, Mr. Obama told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that if he saw more proof that they were successful, he would "not allow my predisposition to stand in the way of making sure that our kids can learn . . . You do what works for the kids." Except, apparently, when what works is opposed by unions.
Mr. Duncan's office spurned our repeated calls and emails asking what and when he and his aides knew about these results. We do know the Administration prohibited anyone involved with the evaluation from discussing it publicly. . . . A reasonable conclusion is that Mr. Duncan's department didn't want proof of voucher success to interfere with Senator Dick Durbin's campaign to kill vouchers at the behest of the teachers unions.
The decision to let 1,700 poor kids get tossed from private schools is a moral disgrace. It also exposes the ugly politics that lies beneath union and liberal efforts across the country to undermine mayoral control, charter schools, vouchers or any reform that threatens their monopoly over public education dollars and jobs. The Sheldon Silver-Dick Durbin Democrats aren't worried that school choice doesn't work. They're worried that it does . . . . [Full Story] Tags:Arne Duncan, Barack Obama, Dick Durbin, education, government transparency, New York City, public education, school choice, school vouchers, transparency, Washington D.C.To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
As April 15 approaches for the deadline to pay income taxes, consider the Obama Plan: Tags:Barack Obama, capital gains taxes, Obama planTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Update: Rep. Garner related to ARRA News that he had met 5 times with the Governor's Office and that they have been very open to talk about this. Governor Beebe had indicated that he agrees that the capital gains tax is a barrier to recruiting new businesses to Arkansas. The primary holdup is the projection of tax revenue to be lost as estimated by the Department of Finance and Administration. Garner hopes that business leaders will contact the Gov. and Senate Tax Committee members and will encourage the Governor to sign this bill.
-------------
On Friday, the House passed HB1947, to Create the Arkansas Capital Gains Reduction Act of 2009, with strong bipartisan support (56-14). The bill authored by Rep. Ed Garner (R- Dist 41) is now going to the Senate Committee on Revenue and Tax. This act would eliminate Capital Gains Tax on in-state Arkansas investments made after July 1, 2009 and owned by the taxpayer for more than one year prior to the sale. State finance officials say the state can’t afford the bill’s cut in state revenues -- $42.8 million in fiscal 2011 and $65.9 million in fiscal 2012. However, the state’s estimates don’t take in account the investments businesses would make because of the tax cut.
The other taxes this will generate will more than make up for what Capital Gains Taxes we might lose and this bill has the potential to be the biggest job creating bill of the session as it would eliminate a major barrier to company's locating their headquarters here in Arkansas and provide for more of Arkansan's investment monies to remain in our state. Arkansas has a 4.9% Capital Gains Tax. Tennessee and Texas have no income taxes and therefore no Capital Gains Tax. Oklahoma and Mississippi have eliminated their in-state Capital Gains Taxes. Arkansas Capital Gains Tax is a bad tax which hurts economic development more than sales or income taxes. Arkansas needs to end this to be competitive and allow our other incentives for job growth to have full effect.
Rep, Garner will present the bill to Senate Committee on Revenue and Tax on Monday afternoon or Tuesday. Arkansas citizens need to contact the Governor's office and the Senators who sit on the Revenue and Tax Committee right away to encourage them to adopt this bill: - Governor Mike Beebe (501) 682-2345Email info.
Senate Revenue and Tax Committee:
- Sen. Denny Altes 479-646-8981 Email
- Sen. John Paul Capps 501-268-8117 Email - Sen. Steve Faris 501-337-7307 No Email
- Sen. Bobby Glover 870-552-7150 Email
- Sen. Paul Miller 870-368-7329 No email - Sen. Terry Smith 501-321-0066 Email - Sen. Larry Teague8 70-845-5303 Email
- Sen. Sharon Trusty 479-880-9576 Email
Tags:Arkansas, business, Capital Gains Tax, Ed Garner, House, Representative, SenateTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Rep. Dan Greenberg: I didn’t have much hope for the final bill that I introduced this legislative session before our tax committee. It tried to solve a big problem – and my experience in the legislature is that the larger the problem you try to solve, the smaller the chance that your bill will pass.
My bill tried to accomplish two things. One wasn’t controversial. Was the other controversial? Well, maybe a little bit. The uncontroversial goal was to require our state’s tax bureaucracy to calculate how much revenue was lost through income tax exemptions, credits, and incentives aimed at benefiting particular groups. I’d like to know how much that comes to, and the information isn’t readily obtainable.
The more controversial goal was that the bill would eliminate every single one of those special tax privileges about eight years from the date of passage – and in exchange for their elimination, everyone’s tax rates would drop proportionally. In short, the bill wouldn’t cost anything; it would just shift lower taxes from the favored few to everyone else.
Why do this? Well, we all know that every time the legislature approves a special tax privilege for one group, we’re shrinking the tax base. In my opinion, we ought to work towards lower tax rates for everyone, as opposed to having a higher tax rate for the general public with special privileges for a few.
Furthermore, things go so fast during the legislative session that it’s hard for us to set aside time to go over every single credit, exemption, and incentive and see whether we still need it. It is simple human nature to pay more attention to immediate and urgent needs, even if we ignore the important job of an overall review of our tax system. If we have a deadline, it will force a review.
We all know that there are plenty of worthwhile tax adjustments that are worthwhile and that would have universal support. We also know that if we actually passed something that forced elimination of special tax privileges with a deadline far in the future, the first thing that would happen is that we’d move to protect and preserve about half the measures that we’d otherwise strike away eight years from now. That’s fine with me: what that means is that we’d look at the other half later on and see if we still needed them.
Most importantly, here’s the upside of what would happen if we actually passed this. Most people’s income taxes would drop. That’s good not just for obvious reasons, but also for reasons of interstate business competitiveness. When Texas, Tennessee, and Florida have no income tax at all, we need to be as competitive as we can in order to attract new business investment. Furthermore, every time we got rid of some special tax privilege, everyone’s income tax would drop more, and lawmakers would have an additional incentive to pay attention to the cost of salting special-interest privileges into the tax code.
Some members of the tax committee thought this was a great idea. The first question I got was from Rep. Allen Maxwell, who asked me why I hadn’t included sales tax privileges in the bill along with income taxes. I answered back: “Are you suggesting that this bill isn’t ambitious enough? That it does too little?” This provoked guffaws from several committee members, who clearly thought that an 8-year deadline for tax privileges was a dangerous and radical idea that shouldn’t receive serious consideration. Rep. Maxwell was kind enough to make a motion to send the bill to the full House. The vote was anticlimactic: the NOs were a little louder than the YEAs, and the chairman ruled that the bill had failed to pass the committee. (In committee, the chairman typically decides whether a bill passes or fails depending on what I call “voice volume.” As you can imagine, this provides some opportunities for gamesmanship.)
If the voters send me back to the legislature again, I will try again to achieve the lower taxes that this bill would deliver. I think it is the only way we will ever have a broad review of whether our array of special tax privileges for special interest groups are all worthwhile.
---------------- Dan Greenberg is an Attorney-at-Law and State Representative (District 31), Arkansas General Assembly. Although he directly represents northern Saline County, he also represents all Arkansans with public stands for limited, transparent and responsible government. Tags:Arkansas, Dan Greenberg, House, legislatureTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Dr. Pat Briney: A culture is defined by the lifestyle of its members. And that lifestyle is manifested by the way a group of people choose to think and behave. [There are] many attributes that distinguish one culture from another from clothing to food to entertainment. Churches produce a culture. They instruct their members how to think and to live. Values, doctrines, and practices are spelled out; and there is expectation for members to conform. The result: a culture.
God gave the nation of Israel instruction on how to build their culture. He gave them detailed instructions of what to teach and how to teach. Deut 6:1—12, “. . . Hear therefore, . . . The LORD our God is one LORD (how to think): And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might (what to do). And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house (how to do it), and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates. And it shall be, when the LORD thy God shall have brought thee into the land which he sware unto thy fathers . . . to give thee great and goodly cities (promise and expectation), which thou buildedst not, And houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantedst not; when thou shalt have eaten and be full; Then beware lest thou forget the LORD, which brought thee forth out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. "
We see here instruction to teach and practice. It is very intense. But the influence and example all around them by other nations was very intense. Israel was counter culture. And if they were going to succeed in sustaining and even more so increase their culture, it was imperative that they, at the very least, match the intensity if not exceed the intensity of the surrounding influences.
Likewise, Hebrews 10:24-25 exhorts us as churches to continue the intensity of preserving our culture by saying, “And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.”
Romans 1:25-32 elaborates on describing cultures that reject God saying that those who reject God "changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, that, "their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature," that the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another," and that "they did not like to retain God in their knowledge." Further description of this passage written 2,ooo years ago sounds like a description of so many in today's American culture.
I sum this passage in a paragraph to describe our ‘new’ American culture, which is not really a new culture: The new American culture of America is dominated by self absorbed tree huggers wanting to save the planet from the human plaque, control its evolution because there is no God to do it for us, and extolling a culture of unbridled lust, sodomy, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, envy, murder, debate, backbiting, hate for God, arrogance, disobedience to authority, and unfaithfulness.
In contrast, the church culture is described in Titus 2:11-14, which says, “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. "
Our national culture is predictably moving away from its Christian roots. Humanity is depraved and is offended by Christ. It is a miracle that the spiritual revolution and awakening continued this long. Barna reports that, the percentage of Americans claiming no religion has increased to 15%. That is an additional 4.7 million "Nones." Vermont has 34% claiming no religion. The percentage of Christians in America has declined 76%. This trend is and will accelerate exponentially resulting in an intensifying culture that is contrary and hostile to Christianity.
Recently, Joseph Farrah’s Worldnetdaily announced that the online Webster dictionary has broadened the definition of marriage to include same sex unions.
And . . . Jamie Ensley, president of the Georgia "Log Cabin Republicans" contacted Steele's office to call a Christian group, the Illinois-based Americans for Truth, "terrorists" and liken them to Germany's Nazi party. Further they urged Steele to endorse "civil unions" or homosexual marriage. He wrote Mr. Steele saying, "Most Americans and people of medical science believe that people do not choose their sexual orientation. Groups like Americans for Truth simply want to divide Americans, and truthfully their group would be more welcome as a mainstream Nazi Germany organization, than an organization which provides any value at all in 21st Century America. . . . I hope you will continue to support the Log Cabin Republicans, and not listen to the radical Christian extremist domestic terrorist groups such as Americans for Truth."
To his credit, Michael Steele responded emphatically, "No, no no. Why would we backslide on a core, founding value of this country? I mean this isn’t something that you just kind of like, 'Oh well, today I feel, you know, loosey-goosey on marriage.'" He continued saying, "I mean this is a foundational principle of this country. This is a foundational principle of organized society.
Shockingly, the current President of the United States of America is publishing on Whitehouse.gov, the following:
- President Obama and Vice President Biden will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice's Criminal Section.
- They proudly declare that in 2004, ... President Obama cosponsored legislation that would expand federal jurisdiction to include violent hate crimes perpetrated because of … sexual orientation, and gender identity.
- Further, the web site states that President Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples, and believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.
Adding insult to injury, Obama declared that America is not a Christian nation and then resorted to smug blasphemy and mockery of the Bible and Christians. [See YouTube clip] With the smirk of an arrogant fool, shaking his head in unbelief that anyone could possibly believe the Bible if only they would read it, Mr. Obama serves us notice that he is no friend to Christianity. His ridicule of Christianity is a declaration that he despises it and holds no regard for those who follow Christ’s teachings. So much for promoting unity and good will among all groups in a pluralistic society. His personal attack on Christianity is a declaration of hostility toward Christ and His followers. He has revealed his antagonistic attitude toward the American-Christian population, and he is using his position as commander in chief to single out and attack this significant and noble segment of the American population; a significant population that represents America’s heritage and to whom America owes its foundation and greatness. Mr. Obama is using his position to intensify division in the American population by poisoning the minds of others against Christian-Americans and against Christ. He is attempting to discredit its contribution to society and its relevance to public policy.
I will not and cannot follow his lead in this blasphemy. I repudiate his leadership as President. This may sound harsh and rebellious, but it is not, and it is not my doing. This is his doing. He is the one who mocks my King, my allegiance to Christ, and my belief in the Holy Bible. In the words of Peter, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). And Romans 13 tells us to obey the higher powers of which none are greater than God, and to none other do I have greater allegiance. I am not angry or hateful about Obama’s insults, and I am not surprised by his malicious attack on me and my fellow Christian-Americans. Christ explained that we should expect hatred and attack warning us in John 15:18, “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.” However, I am resolved to oppose, without disrespect to God’s institutional design of authority, law, and social order, Mr. Obama’s 'obamanations’ against Christ and my faith. As president of the United States, Mr. Obama owes the American-Christian community a sincere apology for his crass mockery of Christian-American citizens. He should seek immediate sensitivity/diversity training, and he should meet with both of the Christian-American citizens he singled out by name to offer them a personal apology.
I will not and cannot follow his lead in this blasphemy. I repudiate his leadership as President. This may sound harsh and rebellious, but it is not, and it is not my doing. This is his doing. He is the one who mocks my King, my allegiance to Christ, and my belief in the Holy Bible. In the words of Peter, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). And Romans 13 tells us to obey the higher powers of which none are greater than God, and to none other do I have greater allegiance. I am not angry or hateful about Obama’s insults. Christ explained that we should expect hatred and attack. However, I am resolved to oppose, without disrespect to God’s institutional design of authority, law, and social order, Mr. Obama’s 'obamanations’ against Christ and my faith. As president of the United States, Mr. Obama owes the American-Christian community a sincere apology for his crass mockery of Christian-American citizens. He should seek immediate sensitivity/diversity training.
Mr. Obama needs a Bible study to correct his ignorance of its teachings. What sane and decent person would ridicule a culture that advocates the virtues of Christ’s beatitudes for its citizens? What kind of a person would call the beatitudes of Christ radical? If Mr. Obama is looking for guidance on government beatitudes, he needs to read Romans 13, which will tell him that a public official of government is supposed to be a minister of God for good; is not supposed to be a terror to good works, but to the evil; and that it is government’s responsibility to protect its citizens from evil rather than rely on vigilantism. A good leader would not confuse the personal beatitudes taught in Matthew with the government responsibilities referred to in the book of Romans. Mr. Obama needs to do more than read his Bible. He needs to understand his Bible. I want to reassure Mr. Obama, that I like many of my fellow Christian-Americans, read my Bible every day, and it tells me that living for Christ promotes peace, personal responsibility, compassion, honesty, love, and goodness.
The fact is that our Biblical Christian culture is and will become increasingly odd and offensive to the main-stream antichrist culture. And as it does, the intensity to blend in, compromise, or at least to not offend will increase. Thus, the cultural distinctives of outreach and discipleship will diminish first. As the liberty to publically proclaim Christ becomes less tolerable, exacerbated by a President who mocks Biblical teaching and its believers, most churches will resort to more convenient and less confrontational practices such as sitting in the pews, singing inside the church, and talking among themselves about how the lost need Christ. Taking the message to the public will decrease. This is the future of most churches who are not already engaged in a comfortable church culture.
I leave you with this sobering thought. The culture of Christianity in a hostile land is not for the faint of heart. Unlike today, tomorrow promises to be one of great persecution and sorrow. As churches, we must resolve to counter the main stream liberal culture and accept the consequences or to conform to the mainstream culture to gain its temporary rewards.
------------------ Pat Briney, Ph.D. is the Chaplain for the National Federation of Republican AssembliesandPresident of the Arkansas Republican Assembly. He is also a pastor and teacher and presented this speech at Mission Blvd. Baptist Church Discipleship Conference in Fayetteville, AR, March 2009. Listen to the message at Cultural Discipleship is a Lifestyle.[Some parts were edited to reduce the length or to transition from the text of a speech to an article.] Tags:Barack Obama, Bible, Christians, culture, discipleship, Patrick BrineyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Republican Hispanics Chapter Organizing in Arkansas
An Arkansas chapter of theRepublican National Hispanic Assembly (RNHA)is being organized.Membership is open to all U.S. Citizens and legal residents, regardless race or ethnicity, who are registered voters and support themission and objectives of the RNHA. The Republican National Hispanic Assembly (RNHA) was established in July 1972. In 1974, the Republican National Committee (RNC) chartered the RNHA as an Allied Organization. Since that time, RNHA has been the only Hispanic Republican organization granted a charter as an allied organization of the RNC.
One of the organizers, John Eves, said "that in the last presidential election, the Republican Party did not do very well in reaching out to Hispanics in Arkansas." The number of U.S. citizens who are either Hispanic, married to Hispanic or have a relative comprise a significant percentage in America. The three organizers for this event firmly believe that Hispanic values are Republican values and vice versa. Core principles such as family, faith, freedom and future opportunities are concepts that bind us together. Individual responsibility, strong national security, limited government, a free market economy and traditional family values are all basic beliefs of Republicanism that are also core to most Hispanics. It is for this reason that Hispanics will find a home within Republicanism.
Organizational meeting for a RNHA Chapter in Arkansas Saturday, April 11, 2009 at 5 pm
Western Sizzlin Restaurant
Springdale, Arkansas
Questions and RSVP: Contact one of the following:
John Eves - 479-366-1237 Email
Alex Martinez - 479-544-2769 Email
Duane Neal - 479-903-5690.Email
If you cannot attend the organizational meeting, you may join by going to the RNHA website. Regular Membership is just $30.00 for two years. When you join you will be an Arkansas RNHA member-at-large until a chapter is chartered in your county. Tags:Arkansas, hispanic, Republicans, RNC, RNHA, SpringdaleTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
ICYMI: Netanyahu sworn in as Israel's prime minister
CBNNews - JERUSALEM -- Nearly thirteen years after he first took office, Benjamin Netanyahu is once again the prime minister of Israel. His government was installed on Wednesday, April 1st, but Netanyahu had little time for celebrations. Netanyahu took the oath of office Tuesday night, asking the Israeli people for their trust in a time of crisis. His government was approved by a margin of 69 to 45, giving him the broad coalition he had sought for many weeks. . . . Israel's Two Greatest Challenges: The new prime minister told the Knesset that Israel's two great challenges are the economy and security, especially Iran's nuclear weapons threat. . . . [Full Story]See also: New Israeli PM says "extremist Islam" trying to destroy his country and New Israeli leader hints at Iran attack Tags:Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel, Prime MinisterTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Dave Cribbin: It took Ford's CEO Alan Mulally two trips to Washington to figure out that the bailout money the government was dangling in front of him was really a pact with the Devil, fraught with peril. But figure it out he did, and so he and Ford survive to live another day. GM and Chrysler, however, weren't as lucky. They couldn't or wouldn't see the handwriting on the wall, and thus, they have been “weighed in the balance and found wanting,” and sealed their own fate.
Chrysler's CEO Robert Nardelli is now forced to negotiate a do-or-die deal with Fiat, as his partner, the Beelzebub of the Potomac, holds a gun to his head and whispers in his ear "cut a deal in 30 days or you my friend are toast". Rick Wagoner, GM's CEO, has been shown the door, and GM has been given 60 days of operating capital to conclude its restructuring. All we can say is good luck... you are going to need it!
Is it possible that GM will be able to do in 60 days what it hasn't been able to do in the last 20 years? No! It can't. And it won't. If GM wants to survive as a company and not as the host organism for the parasitic UAW, it should make the long overdo announcement that it will be seeking bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 in order to reorganize its business. If it doesn't, it may exist for a brief period of time as a scaled down post office type operation, making tiny eco- friendly cars that won't take you very far, while providing jobs with above market compensation and benefits for a small number of politically connected autoworkers. But its days will be numbered, and when the operating losses become too great -- and they will -- for the UAW's Democratic allies to continue to provide the necessary political cover, they too will cease descend to perdition.
How is it that GM got things so wrong? They seemed to be under the false impression that because the Democratic Party was beholden to the UAW's campaign contributions afforded by its forced dues paying members, that somehow it was safe to sleep with the enemy. I hope they know now what they should have known then: it is never safe to sleep with your enemy! They failed to realize that they were never going to get a fair shake in the political arena. Without the protection of the bankruptcy laws and the threat of a court imposed settlement, the company will continue to be stuck between a rock and a hard place in its negotiations with a recalcitrant union that won't budge and bondholders who don't want to be sacrificed to placate the UAW.
There is a lesson here in dealing with a government that disdains the rule of law and thirsts for ever more power. And it is a simple one: When you shake hands with the devil, you better count your fingers! Dave Cribbin is a Contributing Writer for ALG News Bureau. Tags:ALG, Americans for Limited Government, bailouts, Chrysler, Devil, Ford Motor Company, GM, UAWTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
CitizenLink: Seven judges in Iowa have changed the definition of marriage for the entire state by voting unanimously to ignore the state’s Defense of Marriage Act. Six homosexual couples had sued in December 2005, demanding marriage licenses. The court agreed today, thus ignoring the Legislature and a majority of Iowans.
“The Iowa marriage law was simple, settled and overwhelmingly supported by Iowans," said Douglas Napier, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. "There was simply no legitimate reason for the court to redefine marriage."
Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst at Focus on the Family Action, said the ruling took his breath away. "The justices brazenly asserted that their role was not only to redefine marriage, but also to legislate whatever new social agenda they favored, 'free from the influences' of a society resistant to such change," he said. "Such an admission is breathtaking in its arrogance and scope."
Tony Perkins, president of FRC Action, called on Iowa to join the 30 states that have amended their constitutions to protect marriage. "We need to remember that the marriage-amendment movement has been many times more successful than the same-sex 'marriage' movement," he said. "We urge Iowans to contact their legislators and urge them to move quickly to pass a constitutional amendment protecting marriage. . . . [Read More] Tags:CitizenLink, Defense of Marriage, Iowa, judicial activism, judicial supremacy, marriageTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The House is scheduled to return Monday, but the Senate is in recess until April 20th. When the Senate reconvenes, it will take up the motion to proceed to financial fraud legislation, S. 386. The Senate is also expected to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination of Christopher Hill to be ambassador to Iraq.
Last night, the Senate voted 55-43 to pass the $3.5 trillion budget proposal, S. Con. Res. 13. No Republican voted for the budget and Democrat Sens. Evan Bayh and Ben Nelson voted against it. Yesterday the House also passed the budget by a vote of 233-196. No Republican voted for the budget; also 20 Democrats voted no.
In the Senate, 26 votes on amendments were taken yesterday. Importantly, the Senate approved by a vote of 51-48 an amendment from Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) to increase the estate tax exemption and reduce the rate to 35% when it goes up in 2011. The amendment was passed over the strong objections of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Also approved, by a94-3 vote, was an amendment by Sen. John Thune (R-SD) to require 60 votes to pass any legislation that would not allow the full charitable giving tax deduction.
Among other notable amendments, the Senate rejected
- a substitute budget from Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) that would have extended the Bush tax cuts and would have reduced spending
- an amendment from Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) to means test the Medicare prescription drug benefit
- an amendment from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to prevent the AMT from affecting taxpayers over the next 5 years
- an amendment from Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) to require 60 votes to pass legislation that has not been made available to the public online for five days.
Both House and Senate Republicans joined together to unanimously reject Democrats’ $3.5 trillion budget proposal that spends too much, taxes too much, and borrows too much. In fact, the opposition was bipartisan, considering that a number of responsible Democrats, two in the Senate and twenty in the House, also voted against the budget. This was not an easy vote for these Democrats; Karl Rove’s op-ed in The Wall Street Journal yesterday pointed out that Preisdent Obama and liberal interest groups are “keeping score” with Democrats.
As The Wall Street Journal discusses today, 26 Democrats joined with all 41 Senate Republicans to reject the use of reconciliation to pass cap-and-trade energy tax. The Journal points out that “it’s a signal that California and East Coast Democrats won’t be able to sock it to coal and manufacturing-heavy Midwestern states without a fight.” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, “The strong bipartisan vote on this issue should serve as a clear warning to those involved in crafting the final budget: Americans vehemently oppose a new national energy tax that would hit them every time they flip on a light switch, watch TV, or drive the family car.”
Despite the apparent rejection of reconciliation on an energy tax plan, Politico notes that Democrats want to produce a budget conference report that allows reconciliation for health care reform legislation, protecting it from any Senate filibuster: “The House’s resolution takes a major step in this direction by instructing committees to produce health care reform legislation by late September and triggering ‘reconciliation’ budget rules that require only a simple majority for passage in the Senate.”
As evidenced by the AIG bonus controversy, what happens behind closed doors in conference committee is often more important than what happens on the Senate floor. Therefore, it’s worth keeping an eye on the budget conference to see if they return a document that includes partisan reconciliation instructions and puts the U.S. on the same fiscally unsustainable course the House and Senate budgets laid out.Tags:AIG, bonus controversy, Christopher Hill, nominee, ambassador Iraq, trillions, federal budget, US Congress, US House, US Senate, Washington D.C.To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The budget passed the Senate tonight by a vote of 55-43. No Republican voted for it, while two Democrats, Sens. Evan Bayh, and Ben Nelson, voted against it. Earlier today in the House, the budget passed by a vote of 233-196. No Republican voted for the budget, while 20 Democrats voted no.
At least this time there is no "blood on the hands of Republicans" and some Democrats even saw the pending damage to our country. Our only hope now is to return sanity to the Congress by 2010. The people need to continue to speak out and to get involved both in the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Parties and involved in activism supporting the building of a coalition to elect strong conservative to replace the liberal Democrat who are advancing sending our country into a deficit so big that its exceeds the sum total of adding the individual debt for each of the last 220 years of our county.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement Thursday in regards to the Senate passage of the budget resolution:
“Over bipartisan opposition, Democrats in Congress passed a budget that clears the way for massive amounts of spending, for the biggest tax hike in history and a doubling of our already crippling national debt. It is a budget that puts the economy on an unsustainable course.
“Although Democrats rejected several efforts to control spending, create jobs and cut the debt, Senate Republicans were able to slam the door on using the fast track process to jam through a new national energy tax. The strong bipartisan vote on this issue should serve as a clear warning to those involved in crafting the final budget: Americans vehemently oppose a new national energy tax that would hit them every time they flip on a light switch, watch TV, or drive the family car.”
Tags:Democrats, federal budget, Republicans, US Congress, US House, US Senate, Washington D.C.To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown
Thanks to conservatives in Canada we are able to see this Fox News Channel video.Pass this posted story on to everyone you know! This video shows that George Bush tried to warn Congress in 2002 that this economic crisis was coming, if something was not done. Democrats including Charles Schumer and Barney Franks resisted and kept to their party line, extending loans to people who couldn't afford them -- just like you would expect of socialists. This video says it all. Everyone in the United States needs to see this![Note for future viewers, if the video does not display, the truth has again been removed.]
Tags:Barney Frank, Charles Schumer, conservatives, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, George Bush, housing crisis, John McCain, videoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) said he intends to approach Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) on the Senate floor this week to see if there’s another way to come at the labor issue, also known as the Employee Free Choice Act. Specter, whom many view as the decisive vote on the issue, announced last week on the Senate floor that he could not support moving to a debate on the legislation in its current form. Specter strongly opposed a key aspect of the bill that would deny businesses the right to insist on a secret-ballot election before a union is certified. Instead, workers could organize if a majority sign petition cards."
Pryor said that he had been talking with Specter and other Democrats about finding another direction prior to Specter’s announcement, and that he intends to seek him out during the budget votes and see if there’s an opportunity to try again. “I see this time now as really an opportunity for compromise or for a new approach on addressing some of the issues that revolve around that issue,” Pryor said. “I’m not sure it is over yet. It may be. I’m going to talk to Sen. Specter this week and see where he wants to go.”
When told that Pryor was interested in discussing a possible alternative bill, Specter only said, “Well, he hasn’t done it yet.”
Why would Sen Pryor from a right to work state in anyway promote Card Check and actions that could ruin one or more of Arkansas major employers (e.g, Wal-mart Corp) or support taking away worker's rights to a secret ballot? Also what deal (bribe or pork project) is Pryor so confident about that he would say he would seek out Specter "during the budget votes and see if there’s an opportunity to try again"?
As identified by the Workforce Fairness Institute:
A secret ballot is a sacred American tradition. It protects workers from being intimidated into voting for a union they don't want. And workers shouldn't be stuck with a union contract written by government bureaucrats that employees can't vote up or down.
The fact that Congressional leaders are even debating this proposal during this economic crisis is just crazy, and it reminds us how out of touch they really are.
Mark Prior is now willing to 1) work to advance "card check" and 2) support a budget that will in debt our Nation and our children's children with more debt than than was accumulated in 220 prior years added together, Arkansas will look back with regret on the day we trusted Mark Pryor with another six years. We all need to tell Sen. Mark Pryor to stop trying to make compromises concerning Card Check and to vote NO. Card Check is a bad deal. If there is something that Pryor really believes needs to be reformed in labor law and the National Labor Relations Board, then he can address that later and stop dabbling with the workers right to a secret vote. Pryor is a senator not a congressman. He is supposed to be seeking to be a statesman who stands up for the people of Arkansas and stops excessive Federal government expansions and encroachment on Arkansas through big government spending programs. But that is not happening.
Pryor may believe he "won" his congressional race, but the fact is he was handed an uncontested race except for a Green Party candidate. His party's presidential candidate Barrack Obama received less than 40% of the votes in Arkansas. Even conservatives and independents were fooled into believing that Mark Pryor was a "blue dog" and would stand up against Sen. Harry Reid and whichever candidate became President. We did not envisioned, that Pryor would climb into bed on the socialistic programs advanced by Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
Arkansans were obviously fooled. Now we have a growing number of TEA Parties. The number one question asked by everyone attending these rallies (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans) is who are the Republicans going to run against Sen. Blanche Lincoln? Good question! The followup question, especially by independents, is why didn't the Republicans run someone against Mark Pryor? At first, Republicans hung their heads. They had rationalized that Sen. Pryor had in the last two years leading up to the election, a "middle of the road" approach and sometimes a right of center position on family issue. He was allowed a lot of leeway from his fellow Senators who knew he had a race in 2008. However, since reelection and the election of Barack Obama, Pryor has moved from center to left in a few short months supporting enormous tax and spend programs. Now the Arkansas Republicans Party leadership knows it was wrong in not running a candidate and forfeiting another six-years to Pryor.
Sen. Pryor now seems to do the bidding of Sen Harry Reid with respect to the federal budget and federal spending. Can we even trust that Pryor would be attempting to broker a deal with Specter, an outgoing RINO, without the prior approval of Reid, the administration and the Washington Union bosses? Pryor needs to support the majority of his Arkansas constituents and oppose "Card Check" and to stand up for the Arkansas working families by opposing the expansionism of socialism via big tax and spend programs. Tags:Arkansas, Arlen Specter, Card Check, Harry Reid, Mark PryorTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru - @arra
#Christian Conservative; Retired USAF & Grad Professor. Constitution NRA ProLife schoolchoice fairtax - Editor ARRA NEWS SERVICE. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!
To Exchange Links - Email: editor@arranewsservice.com!
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting principles & beleifs beliefs of other organizations, this blog/site is soley controlled and supported by the editor. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
by Rasmussen Reports: A new survey finds that 64% of voters see taxation as very important; it’s highest level in nearly two years. Last month, 61% said taxes were very important to them. Prior to that survey, that number never rose above 60%. Another 26% now see taxes as a somewhat important issue, while only 8% say taxes are not very or not at all important in terms of how they will vote.
