News 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 government, free markets, liberty & individual freedom. All 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 this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles. Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru] - firstname.lastname@example.org (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home Page
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Being a Conservative Is Not For The Faint Of Heart
Dr. Bill: Fishing For Truth!
Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service: The other day I was sharing about standing strong and warning that being a conservative is not for the faint of heart. As it turns out an article was written 9 months ago addressing this very point. I was unaware of the article until after my remarks. But, I have learned over the years, there is "nothing new under the sun." (which is also written over 2000 years ago). Good ideas are eternal and bad ideas are doomed to be repeated until someone again finds the truth.
As we face the upcoming election with the necessity to be constantly involved while also finding ourselves and our families bruised, battered, and stressed out by the constant attacks from Big Government and its mouth pieces, it is critical for us to face the truth of our situations so we can complete the mission. A beginning point folks, is to accept that there is no near term "final solutions" on the horizon. Yes, we hopefully will have interim victories. Also, while it is fact is that our government is driving us off a cliff or just rolling some down a ever steepening hill, it is also a fact that it took considerable time to get us up the hill or to the cliff. It was during this lengthy period of time that many failed to be involved. Yes, while life appeared good, it was easy to fail to focus on the truth of our situation.
Presently, we have are experienced a re-emergence of involvement, of activist groups, of TEA parties, of cries for accountability and transparency, of fear of enemies, etc. And now, we are sprinting to November, 2010. We have hope for success: fresh faces elected to Congress who oppose socialism and elitism and bring conservative values to bear in Washington, D.C. Lord, may it be so!
However, even if there was maximum success in November in getting elected people with conservative core values to Congress, to State offices, to county offices and to local government, this will not turn everything around and would not put things back in good order. Which means, we will not be able to return to a state of indifferent concern. The "battle" for our ideals does not stop with any measured success on November 2010. While we can gain a reset point, the job will not be done for conservatives. Conservatives will need to continue to be vigilant in holding elected people to their promises, in demanding that the influence of government in our lives be rolled back, and in preparing for the next election with even greater involvement by the people.
And while we are doing this, we cannot ignore an ongoing threat. While "We the People" have awakened, the majority of children and grandchildren are still being educated by a liberal system of education. Therefore, we will also bear the responsibility as parents, grandparents, and friends to educate or re-educate our children and grandchildren. It will be critical to offer safe haven of truth verses the pablum of false teachings by liberal progressive elitists.
It will be necessary to focus on becoming abolitionist for those enslaved by big government. American citizens, regardless of social status, relationship stratus, racial or gender classification must be freed from the controlled tyranny of government interfering with almost all avenues of people's lives. We will not agree on everything but we must all be freed of government overreach so that we may continue to be free to openly disagree, to associate and disassociate in our lives with each other, and to live our own lives in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness as we see fit based on our own merits and not the largess of others or the control of government. Remember, when someone from the Government says, "We are here to help you." Run for your lives.
Faced with the difficult road ahead, conservatives must not be faint of heart. Yes, in the interim until November, 2010, we work hard. We hope to win a lot of elections; if so, we give each other some high fives, go to bed, wake up the next day. Then, we continue on!
The following article was alluded to previously. It was written by Salena Owens in November 2009. I do not know Salena. But, I hope we meet along the way for she has got it right with respect to the fact that "Conservatism is not for the faint of heart. Never has been." While Owens' writes from the perspective of a traditional values Christian, her words are also appropriate in principle for those who do not share her faith or beliefs. And, for those that do share her faith and beliefs and have not joined the battle to reclaim America from Big Government - please Wake Up; we need you and all other conservatives!
By Salena Owens: To be sure, Conservatism is the very heart and soul of America’s principles and values. At the inception of this great country, fearless men and women heartily espoused moral truths and courageously established a land that celebrated not only liberty and freedom, but one that also ingrained a moral compass in the hearts and mind of it citizenry more commonly referred to as Conservatism.
America was not established on a song and a dance; thousands of men forfeited their lives on General Washington’s bloody battlefield. Amid horrific conditions and the scarcity of supplies to the point of our revolutionary soldiers boiling leather boots for food, these men fought with a passion for a free and moral land, and women sacrificially lived their lives apart from their husbands, fathers and brothers. Together, they persevered against innumerable and unrealistic odds to ensure a life of independence for themselves, and a legacy of liberty for future generations. The battle was indeed, hard and long, yet, in the end, Conservatism won.
America is not yet 250 years old, however, government domination and moral depravity is rearing its ugly head in the land of the free and home of the brave. As a society, we often find ourselves entangled in civil, social, moral, and governmental issues on an almost constant basis that unabashedly mock our conservative roots. Battles rage on every front: in the schools, at the marriage altars, inside abortion clinics, and in the White House. Provoked and prodded by a government agenda that reeks of socialism, we must elect to rise to the occasion and proliferate Conservatism in every sector of life. There is, quite simply, no other answer for those who desire to build on the conservative foundation of their revolutionary forefathers and mothers. It is time to engage.
Simply put, we cannot afford to be faint of heart at this critical time. America stands at a pivotal point in her young life. The blood of soldiers and tears of women and children both past and present are deserving of our courage to once again fight forward—in addition to fighting back—to preserve the ideals that we know work. Our children, as well as future generations depend on us to pervade truth and liberty wherever deceit and bondage seek to have a foothold. Make no mistake—this battle will require courage and boldness on the part of the average citizen who believes in the defense of conservative values. Without a doubt, we should be conservative in lifestyle, but in defense of our freedoms and liberties, ultimate bravado is what’s called for in this hour.
It is on this premise that I want to encourage conservatives to stand for their beliefs with the strength that God provides. Certainly, any battle that we find ourselves engaged in, any stance for liberty and freedom that we undertake, and each core American value that we know is fundamentally correct and beneficial for society at large, can only be upheld by our decision to always be courageous, which is made possible by the truth of God’s word.
Naturally, there will be battles that we will have to face, however, if we place our hope and trust in God, we will not faint. His word assures us:
Isaiah 40:31- “But those who hope in the LORD will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint.”
I am encouraged by these words: “Soar on wings like eagles; … run and not grow weary, … walk and not be faint.”
From each viewpoint, whether soaring, running or walking, the promise given us by God is that we will not be defeated. This guarantee serves as a great source of hope and encouragement not only to obtain victory, but more importantly, to withstand the battle and be assured that we will not grow weary and faint. In other words, we will not give up because we have hope.
Conservatism is not for the faint of heart.
Never has been.
Thus, our confidence must be substantiated on the promise of Scripture for those who hope in God. This is the assurance we have that we will not be faint of heart.
Tags:conservative, conservatism, Conservative values, conservative principles, faint of heart, big government, enslavement, Salena Owns, Bill SmithTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
If you’ve got an opinion about the N.Y. mosque controversy, better keep it to yourself or you could end up under investigation in the House Star Chamber. Pelosi says she wants to know how opposition to the mosque is being “ginned up.” She wants to know who’s funding this anger. She wants to know what the hell is wrong with the 61 percent of Americans who evidently disagree with her views. (Her disingenuous view being that this is a “zoning issue” only and all the national controversy is much ado about politics.) Ah, if only she could threaten to take away a prized committee from the average Joe out there, the independent bastards, then things would run so much more smoothly.
Don’t get her wrong. Speaker of the House J. Edgar Hoover is perfectly willing to look into the finances and god knows what else of those who are behind the mosque, too. She has gone berserk with prosecutorial tics.
In a statement issued by her staff “clarifying” her first statement, the speaker wants us to know she was simply calling for an openness of debate. Transparency is the word of the day, according to her staff. Another one might be intimidation.
Pelosi’s efforts to walk back her provocative call for an investigation were about as clumsy as the president’s I-voted-for-it-before-I-voted-against-it statement about the mosque--one day he was for it, until he met an immediate political backlash, and the next day he was against it.
Pelosi--safe in her politically surreal balloon that is San Francisco--is not nearly so malleable as President Obama. She’d still like to gavel somebody in a courtroom and get to the bottom of this “concerted effort to make this a political issue by some.” For the sake of fairness, she’ll gavel everybody. Quick, somebody find the FBI’s old cointelpro files. We can toss Joe the Plumber’s file in there alongside Martin Luther King’s and John Lennon’s.
Pelosi’s comments are appallingly reminiscent of her views during the heated town halls of the healthcare debate. The ones that gave birth to a movement fully formed, angry that its government would force a liberal version of healthcare reform down its throat despite all national polls showing the public’s opposition.
This was not legitimate protest, Pelosi and the White House claimed at the time. It was, they asserted, a concerted effort to make this (healthcare) a political issue by some. Sound familiar? It wasn’t that the public could possibly have been upset with the healthcare bill; it had to be a case of evil genius Republican operators “ginning up” false controversy.
One wonders when Nancy Pelosi last had to run a real campaign for reelection. Having managed some myself, I remember simply trying to gin up a good crowd for a fish fry or watermelon festival. Couple hundred people turning out for a member of Congress was excellent. A couple thousand? You take note of that--something way beyond a political machine is at work here.
This, however, is Pelosi’s way: You’re either with us, un-American, or a Republican-manufactured mob. Evidently, Pelosi’s nightmare mob reared its ugly manufactured head again. Unfortunately for her--and more so for vulnerable Democrats on the campaign trail--the “mob” is, once again, the American people--sometimes known as voters. The ignorant, malleable clods.
As for me, now that I have dared speak about that which shall not be named, I plan to watch my back. Pelosi’s people could be anywhere. Keep your blinds closed and your voice down.
-------------- Chris Battle is partner at Adfero Group, a public relations firm in Washington, DC. He submitted this article to the ARRA News Service Editor which also appears in US NewsHe is also the editor of Security Debrief, a blog focused on homeland and national security issues. Previously, Battle served as chief of staff at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and director of congressional and public affairs for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. Tags:Nancy Pelosi, Ground Zero, Mosque, New York, shut up, America, Chris BattleTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Poll: Is It Appropriate ... Election abuse - You decide
Is it be appropriate for a Secretary of State, who is in charge of elections, to campaign for President Obama? A one question and no required personal information to cast your vote. Vote here:
True that this poll originates out of a campaign in one state but the question begs the addition question: are we alert to people in power, at all levels, influencing elections and abusing their positions during the the elections cycles? We need to be alert for all types of influence and abuses this year.
Please leave your comments your comments on this topic. Tags:poll, election abuse, county clerk, Secretary of State, ArkansasTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV):“Mr. President, One Of The Major Goals Of The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Is To Lower Federal Health Care Costs And Reduce The Deficit. Our Bill Does That.”(Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.11985, 11/30/09)
SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-WA): Health Bill “Will Lower Costs… Will Reduce Costs.” “It would inject competition into the insurance market, it will lower costs, and it will give families, such as Katerina’s, more choices. ... Our plan will increase options, enhance security and stability, and it will reduce costs for people such as Katerina by providing credits and premium assistance.” (Sen. Murray, Congressional Record, S.13750, 12/22/09)
SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO): “Health Care Reform Will Rein In Skyrocketing Health Care Costs and achieve close to $2 trillion of savings through the entire health care system-savings that will result in real economic gains to families and businesses.” (Sen. Bennet, Congressional Record, S.11575, 11/19/09)
SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-MT):“Health Reform Will Ensure Both The Federal Government And The American People Spend Less On Health Care Than If This Bill Doesn’t Pass.”(Sen. Baucus, “Memorandum To Reporters And Editors RE: CMS Actuary Report On Health Reform,” 12/11/09)
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): “Bringing Down Costs Of Health Insurance And Making It More Affordable Is Job One For This Health Care Reform.”(Sen. Dick Durbin, Floor Remarks, 12/18/09)
Reality: Today A North Carolina Insurer Announces “Sharp Rate Increases” As A Result Of “The Health Overhaul”
“The State's Largest Health Insurer Plans To Hit Some Members With Sharp Rate Increases Again Next Year, Blaming Changes From The Health Overhaul And Rising Medical Costs. … Rates For Some Children, Men And Older Members Will Increase 30 Percent Or More.”(“Insurer Seeks Steeper Rates,” The News & Observer, 8/20/10)
Administration’s Own Actuary At CMS Says That The Healthcare Law Will “Increase” Health Spending
“The Overhaul Will Increase National Health Care Spending By $311 Billion From 2010-2019.” “The report found that the president's law missed the mark, although not by much. The overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010-2019. . .” (ibid) Tags:false claims, lies, democrats, government healthcare, obamacare, costs, CMS, no cost saving, insurance companies, rate increases, cost more, realityTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Yesterday, the ARRA News Service reported about on Ben Smith on Politicol braking an important story about Democrats’ messaging on their massive, unpopular health care bill. Smith reported, “Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and deficit and instead stressing a promise to ‘improve it.’ The messaging shift was circulated this afternoon on a conference call and PowerPoint presentation organized by Families USA — one of the central groups in the push for the initial legislation. The call was led by a staffer for the Herndon Alliance, which includes leading labor groups and other health care allies. It was based on polling from three top Democratic pollsters: John Anzalone, Celinda Lake and Stan Greenberg.” But Smith continues, “The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House’s first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed. ‘Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy,’ says one slide. The presentation’s final page of ‘Don’ts’ counsels against claiming ‘the law will reduce costs and deficit.’”
From the very beginning Democrats were claiming that their $2.5 trillion health care takeover would reduce health care costs. In his speech to a Joint Session of Congress demanding passage of his health care plan almost a year ago, President Obama said, “The plan I’m announcing tonight … will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government.” Later in the month, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said on the floor, “What does this bill do? The basics are obvious. First,—and this is all backed up by the Congressional Budget Office—it will reduce the cost of health care.” In early March, Obama again said, “[M]y proposal would bring down the cost of health care . . . .”Some House Democrats even justified their vote for the bill in March by pointing to reduced costs.
But the whole time, even on some of the earliest versions of the bill, the fact was that Democrats’ legislation did not reduce costs, and actually increased them. As far back as October 2009, the actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), part the Obama administration’s own Health and Human Services Department, was warning that “total national health expenditures under [the House Democrats’] bill would increase.” In November, experts, including Brookings’ William Galston and former comptroller David Walker, were saying that none of the Democrat bills would control costs. At the February health care summit, Vice President Joe Biden admitted, “Unless we bend that cost curve, we’re in trouble.” But at the time, both CMS and the CBO were saying the Democrat health care bill increased costs.
And of course, since the bill was signed into law, new analyses have found that the bill increases health care costs and will save almost nothing on the deficit. In April, the AP reported, “[T]he [CMS] analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years.” And Politico reported in May that the CBO estimates the bill will likely cost an extra $115 billion over the next decade, essentially wiping out the deficit savings the Obama administration was touting. Last month, even Erskine Bowles, the Democrat co-chair of President Obama’s fiscal commission, admitted the health care law “didn’t do a lot to address cost factors in health care.”
The American people were rightly skeptical of these claims from the beginning. An October Gallup Poll found that among those opposed to the health care bill at that point, 75% said health costs would get worse, while among those still undecided on the bill, fewer than 1 in 4 thought the bill would lower costs, and not even a majority of supporters believed the bill would reduce costs.
Americans knew better, considering the claims of cost savings were never true to begin with, and Democrats’ health care allies are now admitting those talking points have failed. And now they’re recommending that Democrats don’t even discuss them.
The false and frankly unbelievable claims on health care savings must be one of the many reasons the vast majority of Americans remains opposed to the Democrats’ health care boondoggle. A CNN poll today shows 56% oppose it, while only 40% show support, essentially unchanged from a poll taken at the time of the bill’s passage, when 59% opposed it and only 39% expressed support.
Americans rejected this bill and Democrats’ absurd claims about it all along. And all along Republicans told Democrats the American people understood that you can’t vastly expand coverage and government spending while reducing costs. This bill needs to be repealed and replaced with real solutions for bringing down the cost of health care. Tags:Democrats, ObamaCare, government health care, no savings, Barack Obama, Ben Smith, polls,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Perhaps the most important unanswered question about the Ground Zero mosque just got answered. ABC News reported yesterday that Oz Sultan, a spokesman for the Ground Zero mosque, refused to rule out funding from Saudi Arabia or Iran to build the planned $100 million mega-mosque. That ought to raise red flags – even for those who support the mosque.
As I have outlined in this daily report, there is a lot of concern about just how moderate Imam Feisal Rauf truly is. He refuses to condemn the terrorist group Hamas. He blamed America for the 9/11 attacks, saying, “Osama bin Laden is made in the U.S.A.” And there’s more.
The New York Post reported this week that Rauf’s late father, Mohammed Rauf, raised millions of dollars from “individuals and governments in 46 nations” to build New York’s first mosque. What was taught in that mosque? Consider this from the Post’s report: “In October 2001, the mosque’s imam, Sheik Muhammad Gemeaha, blamed the 9/11 attacks on Jews. He then immediately resigned and returned to his native Egypt. The next month, his replacement, Imam Omar Saleem Abu-Namous, said he needed proof that Islamic extremists were behind the attack.”Feisal Rauf, who leads a mosque 12 blocks away from Ground Zero, has served on the board of his father’s mosque for years. His spokesman won’t categorically reject money from the extremists in Saudi Arabia or the Holocaust-denying regime in Iran.
The Left insists this debate is about tolerance and religious freedom. But should America’s freedom of religion tolerate a foreign power building religious sites at places of honor? For most Americans, the instinctive answer is “NO!”
The Bi-Partisan Opposition Grows Speaker Nancy Pelosi can add two more names to her list of mosque critics to investigate. Yesterday, Illinois’ Democrat Governor Pat Quinn, who is trailing by double-digits against his Republican opponent, was asked about the Ground Zero mosque. He said: “I’ve been to Pearl Harbor. I laid a wreath at Pearl Harbor. I’ve been to Auschwitz. I laid a wreath at Auschwitz. I’ve been to Ground Zero, and I laid a wreath there. I do believe that there are special places on Earth that should have a zone of solemnity around them. I would strongly urge those who are thinking of putting a mosque within that zone to rethink their position.”Quinn was joined in his opposition by former Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, who told WABC Radio, “We have to understand that [the mosque] is a real affront to people who lost [loved ones]… I think another site would be a better idea.” ------------- Gary Bauer is is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families. He submitted the above in an email to the ARRA News Service Editor. Bauer was a former Republican presidential candidate and served as President Ronald Reagan’s domestic policy adviser. Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, money, Ground Zero, mosque,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Next time Democrats liberal elitists call you extreme, show them this Video.
Tags:extremists, extreme, elitists, Democrats, poll, TEA Party, Masque, Sharon Angle, harry Reid, Rand Paul, Tim Kaine, DNC, Crazy, GOPTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Attention! U.S. Combat Troops Depart Iraq, With Victory In Spite Of Dems Prior Attempts To Stop The Surge
Reuters reports today, “The U.S. military is on track to cut numbers in Iraq to 50,000 by end August, when the 7-1/2-year combat mission launched by former President George W. Bush ends and operations switch to assisting Iraq's armed forces.” The Washington Post adds, “The 4th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, which left Iraq this week, was the final U.S. combat brigade to be pulled out of the country, fulfilling the Obama administration's pledge to end the U.S. combat mission by the end of August. About 50,000 U.S. troops will remain in Iraq, mainly as a training force. ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom ends on your watch!’ exclaimed Col. John Norris, the head of the brigade. . . . ‘They’re leaving as heroes,’ Norris said of his soldiers. ‘I want them to walk home with pride in their hearts.’”
Though much work remains in transforming Iraq, the fact that American combat forces are able to withdraw this week from a much more stable country that is moving forward as a young democracy is a testament to the success of the surge strategy ordered by President George W. Bush in 2007 and implemented by Gens. David Petraeus and Ray Odierno and all the American, coalition, and Iraqi government forces in the country.
However, if Democrats had had their way, the surge would have been abandoned and funding for the troops would have been stripped. After Democrats gained control of Congress in 2007, they forced more than 40 votes to either require troops to withdraw, to micromanage forces instead of letting the generals adapt to conditions on the ground, or to outright condemn the surge strategy. In fact, Senate Democrats, including then-Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Joe Biden (D-DE) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), all attacked the surge strategy before it was even implemented. In 2007 alone 30 Senate Democrats voted to cut off funds for the troops in the field, including Obama, Biden, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Reid, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) and other members of the Democrat leadership like Chuck Schumer (D-IL) and Patty Murray (D-WA). Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) repeatedly offered amendments to cut off funds for the troops, forcing multiple votes that failed by large margins but attracting more than half of Democrats each time.
Biden said, “This whole notion that the surge is working is fantasy.” Hillary Clinton said, “It has failed.” Reid famously proclaimed, “[T]his war is lost and that the surge is not accomplishing anything.” And that’s without even getting into the outrageous attacks on Gen. Petraeus from Democrats, who accused him of “carefully manipulating the statistics” on Iraq, declaring, “I don’t believe him,” and “he may be the only one who believes this is a good idea.”
Obama said of the surge in January 2007, “[T]he president's strategy will not work.” A year later he said, “Tonight we heard President Bush say that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know that's just not true.”
And yet the Obama administration is now "falsely" claiming credit for how things have turned out. Obama wrote in an email sent from the White House yesterday, “Shortly after taking office, I put forward a plan to end the war in Iraq responsibly. Today, I'm pleased to report that -- thanks to the extraordinary service of our troops and civilians in Iraq -- our combat mission will end this month, and we will complete a substantial drawdown of our troops.”
To use a few choice military words: Obama, get your head out of your ______. The rest of America knows that credit does not go to the Obama administration but to to General Petraeus, General Odierno, and our military forces who paid in blood, sweat and ultimate sacrifices. Obama has lowered himself to take the credit for the success accomplished by others which he opposed. As for the rest of us, we salute the military for their service and sacrifice. Tags:Iraq War, surge, history, democrats, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, David Petraeus, Ray Odierno, military, combat troops,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Democrats Admitting Flawed Obamacare Bill Won't Reduce Costs Or The Deficit
Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and deficit, and instead stressing a promise to "improve it." Their presentation's final page of "Don'ts" counsels against claiming "the law will reduce costs and deficit." The presentation advises, instead, sales pitches that play on personal narratives and promises to change the legislation.
Wow. After two years of fighting to convince the American people to embrace ObamaCare, the White House is waving the white flag. Michael Steel, Press Secretary for the House Republican Minority said today, "The American people have spoken - loudly and clearly, over and over again: they don’t want ObamaCare. They don’t want the tax hikes, the Medicare cuts, the new bureaucracy. For months, the White House promised wavering Democrats that the bill would become more popular once it became law. The White House was wrong. Now their allies are circulating talking points to explain their defeat. Hopefully, other Washington Democrats – cast loose by the White House - will now feel free to work with Republicans to repeal ObamaCare and replace it with common-sense reforms to lower health care costs.”
Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and deficit and instead stressing a promise to "improve it."
The messaging shift was circulated this afternoon on a conference call and PowerPoint presentation organized by Families USA — one of the central groups in the push for the initial legislation. The call was led by a staffer for the Herndon Alliance, which includes leading labor groups and other health care allies. It was based on polling from three top Democratic pollsters: John Anzalone, Celinda Lake and Stan Greenberg.
The confidential presentation, available in full here and provided to POLITICO by a source on the call, suggests that Democrats are acknowledging the failure of their predictions that the health care legislation would grow more popular after its passage, as its benefits became clear and rhetoric cooled. Instead, the presentation is designed to win over a skeptical public, and to defend the legislation — and in particular the individual mandate — from a push for repeal.
The presentation concedes that groups typically supportive of Democratic causes — people under 40, non-college-educated women and Hispanic voters — have not been won over by the plan. Indeed, it stresses repeatedly that many are unaware that the legislation has passed, an astonishing shortcoming in the White House's all-out communications effort.
"Straightforward ‘policy’ defenses fail to [move] voters’ opinions about the law," says one slide. "Women in particular are concerned that health care law will mean less provider availbality — scarcity [is] an issue."
The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House's first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed. "Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy," says one slide.
The presentation's final page of "Don'ts" counsels against claiming "the law will reduce costs and deficit." The presentation advises, instead, sales pitches that play on personal narratives and promises to change the legislation.
"People can be moved from initial skepticism and support for repeal of the law to favorable feelings and resisting repeal," it says. "Use personal stories — coupled with clear, simple descriptions of how the law benefits people at the individual level — to convey critical benefits of reform."
The presentation also counsels against the kind of grand claims of change that accompanied the legislation's passage.
"Keep claims small and credible; don’t over-promise or ‘spin’ what the law delivers," it says, suggesting supporters say, "The law is not perfect, but it does good things and helps many people. Now we’ll work [to] improve it.”
The Herndon Alliance, which presented the research, is a low-profile group that coordinated liberal messaging in favor of the public option in health care. Its "partners" include health care legislation's heavyweight supporters: AARP, AFL-CIO, SEIU, Health Care for America Now, MoveOn and the National Council of La Raza, among many others.
The presentation cites three private research projects by top Democratic pollsters: eight focus groups by Lake; Anzalone's 1,000-person national survey; and an online survey of 2,000 people by Greenberg's firm.
"If we are to preserve the gains made by the law and build on this foundation, the American public must understand what the law means for them," says Herndon's website. "We must overcome fear and mistrust, and we must once again use our collective voice to connect with the public on the values we share as Americans."
Tags:Democrats, flawed Obamacare, Obamacare, won't reduce cost, ineffective, deficit, democrat plan, avoid the truth, Ben Smith, PoliticoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Which Government Spending Projects are REAL or FAKE?
Sometimes, truth is stranger than fiction, particularly when it comes to government programs. Consider these "potential programs: are the REAl or Fake: Joke-telling robots, expensive walking tunnels, Blackberries for smokers, and training American prostitutes to drink responsibly. Watch the below video and put yourself to the test. See if you can outwit the Rebel Economist before she stumps you. So what is it: REAL or FAKE?
What did you notice in common about the projects in the video? Yes, they're all questionable government spending projects in a time when our economy is struggling and people can't get jobs! Now, learn more about the projects featured in the video, the many other wasteful Federal subsidized projects. Below is a link to an interactive map but a couple when you get to the map, be sure to click on your own state even if you do not see a red dot. There are hundred of dots not displayed and just think you are going to be paying for the debt created by theses projects for the rest of your life unless the project is de-funded. There are no free lunches - someone has to pay even if it is your future grandchildren! Als, you can to do something about it! Visit the Bankrupting American interactive #FAIL Map, which allows you to choose the spending projects of your (dis)liking, and share the facts with others on Facebook, and call and tweet your member of Congress.Tags:Bankrupting America, wasteful spending, lost jobs, national debt, deficits, interactive map, video, government spending, turtle, robots, blackberries, prostitutes, ChinaTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Are Dems Planning a 'Post-Election' Surprise? - Kerpen and Fund On Lame Duck Threat
Even if the balance of power shifts in November, Democrats will still have one last chance to advance their legislative agenda.
"It's possible to have what's called a 'lame duck session' in which the members of Congress from the old Congress, including all of the people who just lost their elections can come back together for one last hurrah before the new Congress is sworn in in January," said Phil Kerpen, vice president for policy at Americans for Prosperity.
John Fund, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, talks more about what to expect from a lame duck session and his outlook on the November elections, on Wednesday's The 700 Club. Key Democrats are already talking about post-election action on controversial bills such as cap and trade legislation and card check -- which is the push to eliminate secret ballots in union votes.
Senate Democrats who think they can use a lame-duck session to force the country into a final, decisive lurch to the left may be in for a big surprise: newly elected senators ready to take their seats and derail major policy changes before the new Congress convenes.
There are now six unelected members of the U.S. Senate; they represent Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, New York, and West Virginia. The rules governing the seating of senators elected to replace appointed senators are left to the states in the 17th amendment. New York’s law specifies the date the new senator takes office as January 3, so Kirsten Gillibrand will still be a senator in a potential lame-duck session, regardless of the outcome of her election bid. The other five states, however, all have laws that indicate the election winners may be seated immediately following their election — in time for the lame-duck session.
Two states are clearly opportunities for the GOP to pick up Senate seats immediately: Delaware and West Virginia. Both are special elections for a portion of unexpired terms — Vice President Joe Biden’s last four years and the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd’s two — in states whose laws specify that newly elected senators are seated once they are certified. Regardless of what happens elsewhere, the winners of these two races should be seated as soon as the election returns are certified.
In Illinois, Blagojevich appointee Roland Burris has been fighting against a special election since he was installed nearly two years ago. But a June 16 decision of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, written by Judge Diane Wood, found that the 17th Amendment requires Illinois to hold a special election — and it may finally happen. The appeals court left the details to District Judge John Grady, who was scheduled to rule yesterday but postponed his decision. The hearing is now scheduled for July 28. The state would do well to accept Wood’s ruling and hold the suggested special election for the lame-duck session — or alter its interpretation of state law to allow immediate seating of the newly elected senator.
Colorado and Florida, like Illinois, are holding elections for full six-year Senate terms to replace their appointed senators — and their laws are silent on the date the new senators should be seated. Given the ambiguity, state officials appear inclined to allow appointed senators to remain through the end of the year. The Congressional Research Service has, however, suggested a way to immediately respect the will of the voters, noting that “it is often customary for the interim senator to resign his or her seat immediately after the election, and for the governor to appoint the special-election winner to serve the balance of the term.” Appointed senators George LeMieux of Florida and Michael Bennet of Colorado (if he loses his election bid) should respect this custom.
The stakes are high because, as Senate Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad recently pointed out, this will be “one of the most significant lame-duck sessions in the history of the United States.” Rep. Henry Waxman has made clear his intent to attach a full-fledged cap-and-trade program to any energy bill that passes the Senate this summer with an eye toward the lame duck. Sen. Tom Harkin has talked about pushing elements of the card-check bill in a lame duck. And big pork-barrelers of both parties are reportedly considering a last-ditch pork-fest as their corrupt Christmas gift to themselves — at taxpayer expense.
Recent votes on financial regulation and unemployment showed how difficult it is for Democrats to reach the 60-vote threshold. On these contested votes, cloture was reached with no room to spare, and with just two or three Republican votes. On health care, not a single Republican voted with Democrats. And pressure will be even more intense on moderate Republicans not to cross party lines during a lame-duck session. (Although retiring Republican incumbents may feel insulated from the pressure.)
Given the number of extremely tight votes in the Senate and the controversial agenda that could be considered in the lame duck, even one or two additional Republicans could make an enormous difference. Moreover, as a matter of principle, there is simply no good reason to allow unelected senators to stay on when their duly elected replacements are available. Candidates in the states where a case can be made for immediate seating should therefore make stopping this far-left agenda in the lame-duck session a selling point with voters and demand to be seated in time to do it.
Tags:Phil Kerpen, John Fund, Post election. Lame Duck threat, CBN, Wall Street Journal, Americans For ProsperityTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Obama Polling Numbers Reach New Low For Handling of the Economy
President Obama briefly drops into Ohio today, attempting to claim that his economic program is producing results. But the numbers show that the $862 billion stimulus package hasn’t improved the economy and the latest polls show Americans don’t agree with Obama’s sunny economic portrait. After his brief Ohio stop, President Obama heads to Miami, Florida for Democratic fundraiser to try and shore-up the Democrats Senate mess.
Despite the stark reality, President Obama said today, “We're on the right track. The economy is getting stronger.” According to a new AP poll, Americans clearly don’t agree. Only 35% say we’re “heading in the right direction” and only 38% think the economy is in better shape than it was 18 months ago when the stimulus was passed. The Miami Herald writes today, "Obama earned his lowest marks ever on his handling of the economy in a new Associated Press-GfK poll, which also found that an overwhelming majority of Americans now describe the nation's financial outlook as poor. A frustrated electorate could take it out on the party in power - Obama's Democrats - in the November elections. Eleven weeks before the Nov. 2 balloting, just 41% of those surveyed approve of the president's performance on the economy, down from 44 percent in April, while 56% disapprove. And 61% say the economy has gotten worse or stayed the same on Obama's watch."
That might be why Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), chairman of the powerful House Financial Services Committee, told Fox Business last night that “[i]t was ‘dumb’ for President Obama and his aides to promise that unemployment would not surpass eight percent if the stimulus act passed,” according to The Hill. Frank said, “President Obama, whom I greatly admire...when the economic recovery bill -- we're supposed to call it the ‘recovery bill,’ not the ‘stimulus’ bill, that's what the focus groups tell us -- he predicted or his aides predicted at the time that if it passed, unemployment would get under eight percent. . . . That was a dumb thing to do.”
As our nation faces tough economic challenges, President Obama continues to make his priorities clear as he crisscrosses the country in an effort to bolster the war chest of his Democrat Party. With Florida facing over 11% unemployment and being #1 in mortgage foreclosure and being behind in mortgage payments, one wonders about Obama priorities which is reflected in the previously cited new lows in the polls for Mr Obama's handling of the economy. Obama is set on fundraising and picking the pockets / checkbooks of more Floridians instead of listening to the Floridians and other American.
Amanda Henneberg, RNC Spokesman, responded today, “President Obama’s sinking approval ratings reveal that Floridians have rejected his liberal policies, his failed $862 billion stimulus, and his handling of the oil spill crisis. While he’s fundraising in South Beach, the President will have a great opportunity to explain how the Obama-Meek big-spending agenda has led to over 152,000 jobs lost in Florida, while the state’s unemployment stands at an unacceptable 11.4 percent. Floridians deserve more from their President than highly scripted, teleprompter-friendly, empty campaign rhetoric that has done nothing to improve the economic hardships of the state.” Ouch! And, Agree! Tags:President Obama, poll, the economy, Ohio, Florida, lost jobs, unemployment, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The below guest article is by Robert "Bob" McDowell. He is a Professional Engineer and Geologist with over 50 years experience in creating drilling prospects, supervising drilling, well completion, production operation, and pipeline design for oil and gas including repair of problem wells. McDowell is a conservative and active in the Oklahoma Republican Assembly. Bob agreed to share the following insights about the Gulf Oil Spill Continuing Saga with our readers.
------------ By Bob McDowell: After all the hue and cry from the Obama (PRESBO) Administration and socialist oriented national media over the enormity of the disaster from oil leaking from the damaged well-head of the deep water well drilled by British Petroleum (BP), it seems as though the issue may very well sneak quietly away. After the passing through of a tropical storm halted all operations, both from a recovery effort and from the drilling of two relief wells as well as capping operations, it was reported that the aircraft sent to search for the 'oil slicks' so that the skimmer ships could recover the leaked oil were unable to even find the oil.
Yes, the old Earth is quite capable of healing itself, as has been proven over centuries of, mostly natural, serious disasters that at the time were believed to be able to bring an end to the way of life practiced at the time. Of course, those that effected hundreds or thousands of people were no less a disaster of a permanent nature to the victims, such as the volcano at Pompeii, the more recent tsunami in the Indian Ocean caused by an undersea earthquake, etc.
It should be remembered that things we use for our own benefit, such as coal, oil, and uranium, actually come from the Earth, and so are natural in nature. In fact, it is well documented that there are literally thousands of naturally caused undersea oil leaks venting far more oil into the oceans of the world each day than the entire postulated (excessively) amount from the BP well leak. It is known in the industry that there are living organisms that can, and do, consume crude oil for their own livelihood. Such appears to be the case here. Also, it is reported that the shrimping season has begun and the catches being brought in show no signs of oil contamination and thus are considered to be totally safe for human consumption.
Now, the question becomes one of the agenda behind all this exaggeration of the enormity of the situation on the part of the administration and its propaganda machine media. We should remember that one of the leaders of the PRESBO staff remarked soon after assuming control words to the effect that "it is a shame to waste a good crisis". If they don't have a good crisis handed to them, they will not hesitate to invent one.
Having lived through the rise and fall of the Nazi rule in Germany and the Fascist order in Italy, these actions today strongly remind me of just what was done in the 1930's by those dictators. As an aside, they are constantly referred to as "right-wing", whereas they actually were socialist in nature. It should be remembered that socialism as a form of government cannot exist without a dictatorship. On thinking about it, one can easily understand why because the entire concept requires the 'stealing' of property and other wealth from those who have worked for it and have it and giving it to those who do not, all the while siphoning off substantial percentages for the 'rulers' who live in royal style.
It is a pain to see that happening here in the U.S. where people all over the world have hoped to emigrate to in order to escape the slave conditions they had and find the freedom that too many of our citizens take entirely for granted. Part of the blame for that mentality can be laid to the government operated schools which are, and have been for decades, under the control of the socialist oriented NEA and OEA teachers' unions. During this time, the text books, and history have been revised to denigrate, belittle, and demean the founders of the Nation and the principles upon which they relied to formulate the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Those who conspire to do this are, in my opinion, no better than the "fifth column" of domestic 'citizen' spies and saboteurs we were faced with in World War II. Only the ones today seek to overthrow our form of government and replace it with an 'old world' dictatorship. Tags:Bob McDowell, Gulf of Mexico, oil spill, socialism, Unites States, Professional Engineer, Geologist, President Obama, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
With Democrats controlling the schedule in Washington, and choosing to take a six week paid vacation, House Republicans are committed to working on issues important to you and your family. If there is any doubt which Party is working for you, just check out some of our August activities. In addition to listening to you via America Speaking Out, House Republicans held tons of townhalls. The following video will help to prove that House Republicans have you covered on all the issues. [video]
Tags:US House, Republicans, America Speaking Out, video,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
18 Months After Biden Says Stimulus Will Create 3.5M Jobs: 3.3M Jobs Lost, 9.5% Unemployment
Eighteen months ago today, President Obama signed the $862 billion stimulus bill into law. The bill expanded the deficit to record levels and adds over a trillion dollars to the national debt, when expensive interest payments are factored in. At the time of the bill’s signing, Vice President Joe Biden said, “This is a monumental project, but I think it’s doable. . . . [T]his is about getting this out and spent in 18 months to create 3.5 million jobs and . . . literally drop-kicks us out of this recession and we begin to grow again . . . .”
And for other funding that didn’t seem absurd on its face, news reports came this week that the money simply isn’t being spent quickly. Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal reported, “The Obama administration has paid out less than a third of the nearly $230 billion allocated to big infrastructure projects in the economic-stimulus program.” And CBS News reported, “Stimulus Money Unspent as Economy Struggles,” noting that even when money was awarded to cities and states, “the money is running into roadblocks” and “[s]ome cities are still trying to figure out what to do with the money.”
It’s obvious to Americans that the stimulus has failed to live up to the promises made about it 18 months ago by the Obama administration. They’ve watched as friends and neighbors continue to lose their jobs while the government wastes money and piles on to the national debt. It’s time for a new approach to strengthening our economy that actually creates jobs in the private sector and doesn’t drown the next generation in a sea of red ink. Tags:Joe Biden, Obama administration, lost jobs, unemployment, stimulus bill, stimulus, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Dr. Thomas Sowell: "We the people" are the familiar opening words of the Constitution of the United States-- the framework for a self-governing people, free from the arbitrary edicts of rulers. It was the blueprint for America, and the success of America made that blueprint something that other nations sought to follow.
At the time when it was written, however, the Constitution was a radical departure from the autocratic governments of the 18th century. Since it was something so new and different, the reasons for the Constitution's provisions were spelled out in "The Federalist," a book written by three of the writers of the Constitution, as a sort of instruction guide to a new product.
The Constitution was not only a challenge to the despotic governments of its time, it has been a continuing challenge-- to this day-- to all those who think that ordinary people should be ruled by their betters, whether an elite of blood, or of books or of whatever else gives people a puffed-up sense of importance. While the kings of old have faded into the mists of history, the principle of the divine rights of kings to impose whatever they wish on the masses lives on today in the rampaging presumptions of those who consider themselves anointed to impose their notions on others.
The Constitution of the United States is the biggest single obstacle to the carrying out of such rampaging presumptions, so it is not surprising that those with such presumptions have led the way in denigrating, undermining and evading the Constitution. While various political leaders have, over the centuries, done things that violated either the spirit or the letter of the Constitution, few dared to openly say that the Constitution was wrong and that what they wanted was right.
It was the Progressives of a hundred years ago who began saying that the Constitution needed to be subordinated to whatever they chose to call "the needs of the times." Nor were they content to say that the Constitution needed more Amendments, for that would have meant that the much disdained masses would have something to say about whether, or what kind, of Amendments were needed.
The agenda then, as now, has been for our betters to decide among themselves which Constitutional safeguards against arbitrary government power should be disregarded, in the name of meeting "the needs of the times"-- as they choose to define those needs.
The first open attack on the Constitution by a President of the United States was made by our only president with a Ph.D., Woodrow Wilson. Virtually all the arguments as to why judges should not take the Constitution as meaning what its words plainly say, but "interpret" it to mean whatever it ought to mean, in order to meet "the needs of the times," were made by Woodrow Wilson.
It is no coincidence that those who imagine themselves so much wiser and nobler than the rest of us should be in the forefront of those who seek to erode Constitutional restrictions on the arbitrary powers of government. How can our betters impose their superior wisdom and virtue on us, when the Constitution gets in the way at every turn, with all its provisions to safeguard a system based on a self-governing people?
To get their way, the elites must erode or dismantle the Constitution, bit by bit, in one way or another. What that means is that they must dismantle America. This has been going on piecemeal over the years but now we have an administration in Washington that circumvents the Constitution wholesale, with its laws passed so fast that the public cannot know what is in them, its appointment of "czars" wielding greater power than Cabinet members, without having to be exposed to pubic scrutiny by going through the confirmation process prescribed by the Constitution for Cabinet members.
Now there is leaked news of plans to change the immigration laws by administrative fiat, rather than Congressional legislation, presumably because Congress might be unduly influenced by those pesky voters-- with their Constitutional rights-- who have shown clearly that they do not want amnesty and open borders, despite however much our betters do. If the Obama administration gets away with this, and can add a few million illegals to the voting rolls in time for the 2012 elections, that can mean reelection, and with it a continuing and accelerating dismantling of America.
------------- Thomas Sowell is an American economist, social commentator, and author of dozens of books. He has a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago and degrees from Columbia University and Harvard University. He is a retired professor of Economic and presently is a Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University. Note: This article was received via multiple emails and the article is provided for educational purposes. Tags:Thomas Sowell, Barack Obama, Obama administration, dismantling America, Constitution, Woodrow Wilson, progressives, elites To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Tags:Democrats, Economy, Elections 2010, George W. Bush, Government Spending, Ground Zero Mosque, Health Care, Hope & Change, Immigration, Political Cartoons, William WarrenTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Our Kids Have $13 Trillion Debt and Growing - Thanks Blanche Lincoln!
In just the last three plus years, since Blanche Lincoln and her big spending allies in Congress and President Obama¹s White House have taken over government spending, our national debt has grown more than 50% -- from $8.7 trillion in early 2007 to $13.3 trillion today. Clearly we cannot afford more of the same. [video]
Tell your friends and family about this new Campaign ad by John Boozman for US Senate Help stop the out of control spending in Washington by clicking the "Stop the Debt" button below! Tags:John Boozman, US Senate, Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas, National Debt, Government Spending, our kids, kids, debtTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Determine: Is Your Local Mosque 'Moderate' or 'Radical'?
Dr. Tawfik Hamid
Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service: On August 6, 2007, I met for over an hour in a private face to face meeting in Saint Louis, MO with a former member of a terrorist Islamic organization. He had recently been allowed along with his wife to enter the United States by the State Department on a visa from a European country to testify before varied national security groups about the dangers of radical Islam. That former terrorist who now boldly speaks publicly is Dr. Tawfik Hamid. I had attended a unannounced special workshop that morning at which Dr. Hamid stunned the audience with frankness about the present dangers of radical Islam and on how many Muslim Clerics calling themselves moderates, are not moderates at all. After the workshop, I interviewed him.
As the only member of the press allowed that meet with him on that day, I asked him, "why should I believe anything that he had to say." His response frankly, "you shouldn't; you should test everything that I am going to say." Since I had heard him at the workshop, we cover his background quickly which you can read now at Tawfikhamid.com. Dr. Hamid had previously been asked if he was afraid of being killed. He quoted his wife, who had said you can only be killed once but if you live in fear, then you have a living death. So, he and his wife have chosen truth and life.
He first detailed the steps to convert Muslims into radical terrorists. Not a pretty picture and these steps are not part of this article. Then on my yellow note pad, he sketched out for me his "A, B, C" Test of Radical Islam which could be used to evaluate a Muslim, especially a cleric who claim to be moderate. His thoughts on this test have transitioned from yellow pad notes to his website where you can read them.
In light of current events, Dr. Hamid now offers a tangible tool: the Declaration of Beliefs of Muslim Moderates. The Ground Zero Mosque controversy has stirred up a lot of discussion and debate about what is a “moderate” Muslim and whether or not the Ground Zero Mosque imam is a “moderate.” Act for America, who has a petition opposing the building of a mosque on at "9/11" Ground Zero, responds, "We are convinced he is not, and in the next few days we will email an extensive dossier on Imam Rauf."
Below, Dr. Tawfik Hamid, himself a Muslim, provides an aid to help answers the question, “What is a moderate Muslim?”
------------- by Tawfik Hamid: After the problem of Ground Zero Mosque has escalated it becomes an urgent necessity to distinguish 'Moderate' from 'Radical' Islam. Without making such a distinction the US and the rest of the world will remain divided regarding this issue. Debates about the issue can be endless unless we define the words 'radical' and 'moderate'.
Mosque leaders, Islamic scholars, and organizations who want to be considered Moderates MUST clearly and unambiguously declare the following declaration in their media outlets and on their websites.
I suggest that you send this declaration to Mosque leaders and the Islamic organizations inside the US and worldwide to see if they are ready to accept such a declaration or not.
Declaration of Beliefs of Muslim Moderates
I (We) are Muslims who want contemporary understandings of Islam to replace currently predominant harsh and radical (Salafi/Wahabbi) interpretations of our religion. We therefore declare that:
1 - Redda Law, the Sharia Law that allows the killing of Muslims who convert to other faiths, must be banned in Islamic teachings and in Sharia legal doctrine. Islamic countries that practice Sharia must stop the practice of this law and must admit that Freedom of belief and the right to convert to other faith or believe is a basic right that must be given to all Muslims.
2 - Current mainstream Sharia doctrines justify the use of violence against women. They encourage men to beat their wives to discipline them. They allow women accused of adultery to be stoned to death. These doctrines are barbarically inhumane, non-egalitarian, and teach Muslim children to be violent. These teachings must be ended by reinterpreting the Islamic text that justifies such violence.
3 - Traditional Sharia doctrines teach Muslims that they must engage in war so that Islam will dominate the world. When Islam becomes dominant, Non-Muslims are offered three options: to convert to Islam, to pay Jizzia (a humiliating tax), or to be killed. These doctrines run contrary to modern respect for diversity and for personal freedom of speech and belief. This understanding of Jihad that seeks domination of Islam over other peoples must no longer be regarded as an Islamic value and its teaching as a duty for Muslims must end.
The early Islamic wars known as "Futohaat Islameia" were fought to implement this doctrine of Jihad. These wars therefore should now be regarded as un-Islamic and un-justifiable.
4 - Jews are individuals who deserve the same respect accorded to all individuals. They should not be called "pigs and monkeys." The Islamic teaching that Muslims must fight and kill all Jews before the end of days is totally incorrect and unacceptable as it does not exist in the Quran. All teachings that encourage anti-Semitic attitudes, violence or disrespect toward Jews must be declared un-Islamic.
5 - Slavery is a crime against humanity. All Sharia laws that justify slavery in our modern times must not be taught any more. Muslim scholars must have a clear and loud voice against slavery.
6 - Islamic Sharia laws currently permit the killing homosexuals. These laws also are advocating a crime against our fellow human beings. They must be declared un-Islamic and their implementation must be considered criminal.
The above violent teachings, which currently are taught in mainstream Islamic books in America, are implemented in countries that allow governance according to Sharia Law. Future Muslim generations must be protected from these destructive doctrines, interpretations and customs.
These violent Sharia doctrines must be replaced with clear and unconditional explanations of why they no longer are valid.
Anything short of a fully clear and unequivocal stand against these doctrines indicates passive approval. Therefore, all Islamic leaders who genuinely consider themselves to be Muslim moderates must post these principles in English and in Arabic in full public view on their websites and declare them in their media outlets.
Failure to publicly post and support these principles should be interpreted as clear evidence that a leader's mosque or Islamic organization must be considered radical. Tags:Sharia doctrines, Mosque, Moderate, Radical, Muslim, Muslims, Cleric, imam, 9/11 mosque, Tawfik Hamid, declaration, ABC test, radical Islam, Bill Smith, ARRA News Service To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Americans Are Not Impressed by Failed Deficit-Financed Stimulus
According to Politico’s Playbook, President Obama will be visiting a Wisconsin battery manufacturer today that’s taking part in a $1.3 million “Recovery Act State Energy Program loan;” in other words, it’s being funded by money from the President’s $862 billion stimulus bill. Though Obama will be touting it as “saving or creating” jobs, the stimulus has continually fallen short of the promises made by the White House and Democrats in Congress about it.
The Wall Street Journal reports today, “The Obama administration has paid out less than a third of the nearly $230 billion allocated to big infrastructure projects in the economic-stimulus program. . . . Administration officials said when pushing for the program that the money would target projects that could create jobs quickly. So far, $182 billion of the infrastructure money has been awarded, though the government has paid out only $66 billion of the total.” Further, the WSJ notes, “The biggest projects have been the slowest to start. None of the $17.5 billion for incentive payments for doctors and hospitals to start using electronic health records has been spent yet, because rules for payment were finalized only in July. A few recipients of $7.2 billion in grants allocated to the expansion of broadband Internet services have started laying cables, but the rest are still busy with pre-construction work, such as environmental assessments, local approvals to attach fiber to utility poles, permits for rights of way and hiring subcontractors.”
But that’s not what Obama administration officials promised 18 months ago. Shortly after the deficit-financed stimulus was signed into law, Vice President Joe Biden said, “[T]his is about getting this out and spent in 18 months to create 3.5 million jobs and do -- to set -- tee this up so the rest of the good work that's being done here literally drop-kicks us out of this recession and we begin to grow again and begin to employ people again.” Former White House budget director Peter Orzag told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer in February 2009 that Americans will see benefits from the stimulus in “weeks to months.” And key White House economic advisor Larry Summers told Blitzer, “You'll see the effects begin almost immediately.”
Yet the 18 months is up this week, and, as the WSJ story points out, all the money hasn’t been spent, and the stimulus clearly hasn’t created 3.5 million jobs. The unemployment rate is still 9.5%, despite promises that the stimulus would keep unemployment from exceeding 8%. And ABC News reports today, “The White House's heralded ‘summer of recovery’ simply hasn't materialized; barring an astounding August turnaround, the nation will have fewer jobs at the end of the summer than it did at the beginning.”
Americans aren’t impressed, as the WSJ points out: “Recent opinion polls suggest the White House has struggled to communicate its message, particularly after its emphasis on ‘shovel-ready’ projects during the debate over the plan's passage in early 2009. Criticism of the pace of the stimulus appears to be resonating with voters. In a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in May, 18% of respondents said the plan was already helping to improve the economy, and 20% said they thought it would help in the future.”
It’s hard to see how yet another Obama press event about stimulus funding is going to change the minds of Americans who saw the Democrat-controlled Congress pass a bill adding over a trillion dollars to the debt (when interest payments are factored in) that has subsequently failed to live up to almost all of the economic promises made about it when it was passed. Tags:Obama administration, stimulus, deficit, deficit-financed stimulus, trillion dollar debt, jobs, failed recovery, the economy, democrats, CongressTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The Republican National Committee (RNC) released a new web video today that puts a spotlight on Democrat candidates who are going out of their way to run away from President Obama and his unpopular policies. The title of the video "Crazy" come from a quote by Democratic national Committee Charmain Tim Kaine, “Democrats who kinda are afraid to be who they are or who are pushing back on their leaders – I think they are crazy.”
The video is both True and Funny. [Video]
“With unemployment hovering around double-digits and a majority of Americans unhappy with the direction of the country, it is not a surprise endangered Democrats do not want President Obama to come to their districts and remind voters of their failed economic policies. Democrat candidates continue to work overtime to distance themselves from the Obama agenda but there is nothing they can do to hide from the spending, tax hikes and government takeovers that have stood in the way of economic recovery. So long as the President continues to ask Democrats to ignore the concerns of voters and help ram through his liberal agenda, he can expect the campaign trail to be quite a lonely place.”
CBS Chip Reid has commented, "“With the President’s approval rating at an all-time low, a lot of Democrats don’t want him anywhere near their districts.” Fox News Steve Doocy reported, “Not only are some Democrats running away from their leaders, but also they’re afraid to mention to the electorate ‘Oh yeah, I’m a Democrat’”
Below are a few of the Democratic candidates who are avoiding the President or avoiding even being identified as a democrat:
Michael Bennet (D-CO):
“Hedges On Obama Role in Election Campaign”
(The Associated Press, 8/11/10)
Elaine Marshall (D-NC):
“I Haven’t Decided Whether I Want Obama To Campaign With Me.”
(Headline From the Huffington Post, 8/6/10)
Travis Childress (D-MS):
“As Much Distance As Possible Between Him And The Party”
(The Hill’s Ballot Box Blog, 8/12/10)
Roy Herron (D-TN)
“Didn’t Describe Himself As A Democrat”
(The Tennessean In Session Blog, 8/9/10)
Bill White (D-TX)
“Stayed Away From the Obama Events”
(Austin American-Statesman, 8/9/10)
Lee Fisher (D-OH):
“When President Obama Came…Fisher Didn’t Show Up”
(The Cleveland Plain Dealer, 5/25/10)
Tags:crazy, democrats, candidates, Barack Obama, DNC, Tim Kaine, Lee Fisher, OH, Bill White, TX, Ron Herron, TN, Travis Childress, MS, Elaine Marshall, NC, Michael Bennet, CO,To 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
Married 48yr #Conservative #Constitution #NRALife #GunRights #USAF 22yr #military #veteran #Christian #CCOT #ProLife #TEAParty #GOP #TCOT #SGP #schoolchoice
Comments by contributors or sources do not necessarily reflect the position of ARRA, its Officers, memberships or the Editors.
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.