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: Dr. Bill Smith [OzarkGuru] - email@example.com
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Veterans' Views On Repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell In The Military
Bill Smith, Editor: Today, the Senate did vote 65 to 31 to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law. A social agenda was enacted which will place others who are in harms way at potential risk. First, all military be they gay or straight fighting on the front lines are heroes in my book. We all bleed red! But, as a former non-commissioned officer and a retired military officer, I opposed this repeal. Rather than rant on this topic, I wish to commend the following article by John Allison a veteran and former active duty Marine who speaks clearly to the situation. John is both a friend and a patriot!
For those who allege either of us are homophobic - forget it! We were willing to die for all Americans. We both see "all" people having value and deserving of dignity. In fact, we may well have served with gays who like all others served effectively and honorable. But in our own particular situations, we never considered our fellow male comrades having thoughts or designs on us or any fellow males. I am sure it is the same for female comrades serving and also being billeted in close quarters. People seemed to have forgotten that President Clinton initiated the Don' Ask, Don't Tell policy to protect gays wishing to serve in the military. This allowed all to serve regardless of sexual orientation but prevented anyone from openly practicing their sexual preferences with members as discussed in the below article.
I also agree with Allison's concluding statement of the article as modified: "May the blood of every young [and not so young] warrior [regardless of sex or sexual orientation] who dies because of this policy shift forever torment the politically correct legislators and low-life, politically motivated military officers who blinded themselves to the realities of the battlefield [, high risk operations, close quarter operations,] and supported this bill."
------------ by John Allison: This weekend may sound the death knell for the ban on gays serving openly in the US military. And if that death song is sung, it will be a detriment to the finest fighting force in the world.
Polling now shows a majority of Americans think it's time to repeal the ban, but less than 10% of American citizens have ever served in the US armed forces. I served four years in the United States Marine Corps, in a unit that heralded itself as the "tip of the spear," meaning we were the first to go in when Marines from our division were called. In two overseas deployments, our vehicles were always staged and ready to hit the beach when called. In my conversations with those who served before me, those who served with me, and those who served after me, I've come to know my views are not anomalous in the combat arms of the US military.
I'm not denying anyone, veteran or not, their right to an opinion on this matter, but I think the opinions of those of us who have served and are serving where the bullets fly and the blood splatters should carry a lot more weight than some protester on a corner at a college campus.
Those who want to repeal the ban often scream that an irrational fear or hatred of gays is the only reason anyone is against homosexuals serving openly. While I'm sure some of that exists, there are many other arguments to uphold the ban that any truly objective person can understand.
Let's start with living quarters. Most people have never been in a position where they were forced to sleep or shower with someone they didn't even know...unless they served in the military. In Marine Corps boot camp, everyone in a platoon showers together without stalls or privacy of any kind. The bathroom is one large room with toilets and urinals lining the walls, no stalls or privacy there. When I went through, Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT) wasn't even policy. Homosexuals were banned from serving period. When we showered, it never crossed our minds that someone might be sexually stimulated because homosexuals were banned from serving.
In the field, we were assigned to sleep in the same tent with another Marine. We didn't get to choose who we slept with, but we didn't have to worry about the guy next to us being gay and coming on to us. On Navy ships, we slept inches apart in a room with 40 men. We dressed and changed without privacy, but we never had to worry about attracting the sexual attention of another man because gays were banned from serving. Our quarters on the airfield in Mogadishu, Somalia consisted of a plywood, one-room building. Forty men slept shoulder-to-shoulder on the floor.
For all of you who think because you have a gay person who works in your office and things work fine, you don't live, sleep, and shower with them. So, if you would feel the least bit uncomfortable working with that person under the above described conditions, you're a complete hypocrite if you still think gays in the military are a good idea.
The second big argument I'll make deals with families. The military has become much more of a family friendly organization over the past couple of decades, but it's still a job that comes with frequent long deployments. Time away is already hard enough on wives and children left at home, but at least they don't have to worry about the guy daddy's with being gay. Imagine the added stress this would put on a wife at home, wondering if her husband is relieving his sexual frustration with his gay foxhole-mate. Stress at home destroys morale for deployed servicemen, and morale is essential when serving in combat zones.
The last case I'll discuss involves the mission. It's understood that serving in a combat zone is an extremely dangerous situation ALL the time. Those who've never been there don't understand what that really means. It means you have to be on your toes all the time, you have to be focused and attuned to what's going on around you always. Danger lurks everywhere and letting down your guard for an instant can get you and your buddies killed. Any distractions are dangerous. But we've never had to worry about sexual attraction creating that distraction on the battlefield because gays can't serve openly in the military. If two guys are getting it on instead of getting the job done, things are going to get really bad really quickly.
I can hear it already, supporters of repeal screaming that just because someone's gay doesn't mean they're going to be coming on to everything around them. It doesn't mean that people who aren't gay will suddenly fall to the lure of sex with their gay buddy. Maybe not, but are you willing to bet our national security on it? Are you willing to bet the lives of servicemen who will die because of that distraction that you don't think will materialize?
Though President Obama has managed to get political a Secretary of Defense and a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to support repeal of DADT, top generals in both the Army and Marines both oppose repeal. These branches bear the brunt of combat operations and their leaders understand the risks better than Washington bureaucrats, and generals who worry more over their own political futures than the welfare of their troops.
"My suspicions are that the law will be repealed" eventually, Marine Corps Commandant James Amos told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "All I'm asking is the opportunity to do that at a time and choosing when my Marines are not singularly tightly focused on what they're doing in a very deadly environment."
Today "Taps" will likely sound for the ban on gays serving openly in the military. And if it does, the finest fighting force in the world--the combat arms units of the US military--will irreparably suffer. But our politicians, including some Republicans, are more concerned with their own reelection prospects than the lives of those brave young men who serve in the combat arms.
May the blood of every young warrior who dies because of this policy shift forever torment the politically correct legislators and low-life, politically motivated military officers who blind themselves to the realities of the battlefield and supported this bill.
------- John Allison is a high school math teacher, conservative activist, and blogs at America, You Asked for It! and Conservative Voices Tags:Combat Arms, Don't Ask Don't Tell, DADT, Military, Gays, Combat, Marine Corps, Army, USMC, Democrat, Republican, War on TerrorTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Dems Hold Another Lame Duck Saturday Session To Vote On Liberal Priorities
Update 2:36 PM CST - Senate voted 65 to 31 to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law.
-------------- Update 10:37 AM CST - Fight Over, for now! The US Senate blocked discussion of DREAM Act, sending the bill to defeat. Democrats could not get 60 votes to support the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, a measure that would have created a pathway to citizenship for undocumented illegal immigrants who were brought to this country as children. The mood of the country "shifted on the issue of illegal immigration, support among Republicans and some Democratic senators evaporated, with many decrying it as backdoor amnesty for lawbreakers. Even a former co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), voted against it." [Source: Washington Post]
Around 11 AM, the Senate will begin a series of roll call votes. The first will be cloture on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 5281, the House-passed version of the DREAM Act, followed by cloture on motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 2965, the House-passed bill to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law.
After the cloture votes, the Senate will then vote on the confirmations of Albert Diaz to be a judge on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals and Ellen Hollander, to be United States District Judge for the District of Maryland.
While there were positive developments in Congress this week, with bipartisan votes to prevent tax hikes and Democrats dropping their $1.1 trillion omnibus bill, once again, Democrats are showing that their priorities are not those of the American people in their Saturday session today.
The Wall Street Journal editors today cheer some good news for a change, pointing to “a Democratic Congress extend[ing] the Bush-era tax rates,” “the demise of the $1.1 trillion ‘omnibus’ spending bill,” and “and a federal court declar[ing] ObamaCare to be unconstitutional.” They explain, “[T]he arc of these events reveals a break from the helter-skelter government expansion of the past four years. Private growth is suddenly good again, profits are recognized as crucial for job creation, and even card-carrying Keynesians (White House aide Larry Summers) have admitted that tax increases would inhibit economic recovery.”
In the Weekly Republican Address, Sen. John Cornyn noted that these things didn’t happen in a vacuum. “This week, even before [newly-elected Republicans] have taken their seats, Republicans showed the American people that we got the message. And everyone can see how your choices have already changed the terms of the debate here in Washington.”>
Sen. Cornyn notes, “First, Republicans prevented a massive, job-killing ‘New Year’s Day tax increase.’ . . . “This bipartisan agreement was made possible because voters gave Republicans much more leverage at the negotiating table. Our leverage forced the White House to abandon its ‘class-warfare’ rhetoric; stop pandering to the President’s left-wing base; and do the right thing for American taxpayers and job creators.” And Republicans also “[held] the line on reckless federal spending,” Sen. Cornyn says “Despite their willingness to work with Republicans on taxes, Senate Democrats went their own way on spending by proposing a nearly $1.3 trillion omnibus bill on the American people and by insisting we’d have to vote on it before anyone had the time to figure out what was in it.”
But Americans spoke out, and as Sen. Cornyn says, “Senate Republicans stood together but we did not stand alone.” The message from the American people to rein in the out-of-control spending in Washington “helped strengthen the resolve of the Republican Caucus and rattled the nerves of the big spenders on the other side of the aisle.”
And yet, 6 weeks after an historic election repudiating Democrats’ headlong rush to enact a liberal wish list of policies to the exclusion of what was foremost in the minds of the American people, Democrats are back today with more liberal agenda items. Now that tax hikes have been prevented, all that remains is to fund the government and send Congress home. Instead, Democrats are using their lame duck session to push for more left-wing priorities.
Republicans seemed to have heard the message of voters on November 2nd: stop the tax hikes, get spending under control, and focus on the priorities of the American people. Yet Democrats have demonstrated again and again since then that the wish list of their liberal base comes first. But as we saw this week, when the American people stand up and say “enough,” positive things can happen. Tags:US Senate, Washington, D.C., Start treaty, federal spending, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Dream ActTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Chip Wood, Personal Liberty Digest: . . . A couple of years ago, Human Events (one of my favorite conservative news-weeklies) asked a group of scholars and public-policy leaders to compile a list of the 10 Most Harmful Booksof the 19th and 20th centuries. . . . A whole bunch of terrible titles got an Honorable Mention. (Or maybe that should be a Dishonorable Mention.) But here are the Top 10 books the scholars credited with causing more harm to mankind than anything else written in the past 250 years.
1. The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
There was near-unanimity on the book that deserved the No. 1 slot. The Communist Manifesto received almost twice as many points as the title that captured second place. And is it any wonder? The “dictatorship of the proletariat,” as implemented by Vladimir Lenin and Mao Zedong, led to the wholesale extermination of more than 200 million people.
I’m not talking about the victims of war here, but the systematic slaughter of entire populations as a means of consolidating and preserving state power. Of course the “withering away of the state,” as promised in the Manifesto, has never occurred anywhere communism has been tried. That was nothing more than boob-bait, as H.L. Mencken rightly observed, designed to seduce credulous idealists and immature college students.
2. Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (“My Struggle”) was originally published in two parts in 1925 and 1926, after Hitler was imprisoned for leading the Nazi Brown Shirts in the so-called “Beer Hall Putsch” that tried to overthrow the Bavarian government. In it, Hitler explained exactly what he planned to do once he seized power — murder the Jews, wage war against France and then Russia and establish a thousand-year reign (his “Third Reich”) for the Aryan race.
What a pity that authorities dismissed him as an insignificant annoyance, instead of the evil genius whose efforts would lead directly to World War II, the deaths of hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians, and the slaughter of millions of Jews. They released him from prison instead of saving all of us from a lot of suffering.
3. Quotations from Chairman Mao by Mao Zedong
This tract, also known as “The Little Red Book,” was ostensibly written by the Chinese Communist dictator in 1966, 17 years after he seized power in China and founded the “People’s Republic.” More than a billion copies were distributed in China as part of Mao’s “cultural revolution.” But believe it or not, Mao’s “Little Red Book” found its greatest popularity among Marxist college professors in the West, who couldn’t get enough of such anti-American pap as this from Chairman Mao: “It is the task of the people of the whole world to put an end to the aggression and oppression perpetrated by imperialism, and chiefly by U.S. imperialism.”
4. The Kinsey Report by Alfred Kinsey
Kinsey and his staff conducted extensive surveys of American sexual habits, including incredibly explicit one-on-one interviews, in the 1940s. The results appeared in two books — Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, published in 1948, and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, published in 1953. Together, the two became known as The Kinsey Report. Kinsey, a zoologist at Indiana University, acknowledged that part of his purpose was to give a scientific gloss to the normalization of promiscuity and deviancy. One reviewer later noted that Kinsey’s first report “stunned the nation by saying that American men were so sexually wild that 95 percent of them could be accused of some kind of sexual offense under 1940s laws.” His second report went even further, describing “sexual activity involving girls younger than age 4 and suggest[ing] that sex between adults and children could be beneficial.”
5. Democracy and Education by John Dewey
Here’s a name that isn’t mentioned much anymore, but Dewey’s influence in the first half of the 20th century was enormous. In this 1916 work, Dewey (the “father of progressive education”) denounced education that focused on traditional character development and the accumulation of “hard” knowledge (i.e., facts). Instead, the secular humanist advocated teaching “thinking skills,” with little concern about what is “right” or “wrong.” We are still paying the price for such idiocy today, nearly 100 years later.
6. Das Kapital by Karl Marx
When he died in 1867, Marx had completed just the first volume of a planned three-volume study. His benefactor Friedrich Engels finished the other two volumes from notes Marx left. In his magnum opus, Marx portrayed capitalism as merely an ugly phase in human development, in which capitalists exploit labor by paying the cheapest wages possible to amass as much wealth as possible. (Sounds like a Barack Obama speech today, doesn’t it?) Such injustice would end, Marx said, in a worldwide proletarian revolution.
7. The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan
In this 1963 bestseller, Betty Friedan, the first of the angry feminists, disparaged stay-at-home motherhood as “a comfortable concentration camp.” Friedan later founded and was for many years the president of the National Organization for Women. Friedan was no mere liberal activist, however. As David Horowitz notes, “from her college days and until her mid-30s, she was a Stalinist Marxist, the political intimate of the leaders of America’s Cold War fifth column, and for a time even the lover of a young communist.” Friedan’s unattractiveness was much more than skin deep; her ugliness went all the way to the bone.
8. Course of Positive Philosophy by Auguste Comte
I’m not sure how this one made it to Top 10. Like you, I can think of lots of books that have done more damage — starting with Dr. Spock’s baby book, which told generations of parents not to spank their children. Still, this six-volume study, published between 1830 and 1842, is generally credited with creating the field of social studies, or “sociology” (a word Comte coined). The son of a royalist Catholic family that survived the French revolution, Comte turned his back on theology, bragging that, “I have naturally ceased to believe in God.” Comte taught that man alone, through scientific observation, could determine the way things ought to be, without any reliance on a Higher Power.
9. Beyond Good and Evil by Friedrich Nietzsche
An oft-scribbled bit of college-campus graffiti goes, “God is dead — Nietzsche,” followed by “Nietzsche is dead — God.” Nietzsche’s contention that “God is dead” first appeared in his 1882 book, The Gay Science, but was expanded and popularized in Beyond Good and Evil, which appeared four years later. In it, the German philosopher argued that all men are driven by an amoral “Will to Power,” and that superior men will sweep aside all obstacles to their ambition, including religiously-inspired moral rules. Not surprisingly, the Nazis loved Nietzsche.
10. General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money by John Maynard Keynes
Lord Keynes was an interesting contradiction. A member of the British elite (he was educated at Eton and Cambridge), he did more to popularize ever-expanding government than any other economist of his era. Keynes became immensely wealthy through his investments, yet argued in favor of deficit spending and government borrowing. Long before Richard Nixon famously said, “We are all Keynesians now,” Franklin Roosevelt used Keynes’ arguments to justify the massive growth of government. As a result, today we have a $3.5 trillion Federal budget and a $13.8 trillion national debt. Thanks, Lord Keynes.
Want some more really bad books? There are 10 titles that garnered a substantial number of votes, but fell short of the top 10. In order they are: The Population Bomb by Paul Ehrlich, What Is To Be Done by V.I. Lenin, Authoritarian Personality by Theodor Adorno, On Liberty by John Stuart Mill [I don't know why this got included], Beyond Freedom and Dignity by B.F. Skinner, Reflections on Violence by Georges Sorel, The Promise of American Life by Herbert Croly, The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin, Madness and Civilization by Michel Foucault and Soviet Communism: A New Civilization by Sidney and Beatrice Webb.
So there you have it — 20 books that have caused unimaginable suffering, horror and devastation in the world. While some of them have (deservedly) disappeared into the trash cans of history, you will still find most of them praised and promoted on our college campuses today.
And allow me to add one more: Dreams from My Father: A Story of Inheritance, by Barack Obama (and William Ayers). This book is credited with helping to launch Obama’s Presidential campaign. You can see where that has gotten us. . . . [Full Article] Tags:books, top 10, worst books, Liberty, Suggested Reading, Barack ObamaTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Update 10:37 AM CST - Fight Over, for now! The US Senate blocked discussion of DREAM Act, sending the bill to defeat. Democrats could not get 60 votes to support the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, a measure that would have created a pathway to citizenship for undocumented illegal immigrants who were brought to this country as children. The mood of the country "shifted on the issue of illegal immigration, support among Republicans and some Democratic senators evaporated, with many decrying it as backdoor amnesty for lawbreakers. Even a former co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), voted against it." [Source: Washington Post]
Kenneth Wallis, Little Rock Immigration Examiner: Saturday morning should be devoted to uneducational cartoons, breakfast in pajamas, and video games, especially so close to Christmas! Sadly, it appears that the Leftist Controlled Senate will attempt to sneak another attempt of The Dream Act Saturday morning! I will have to watch whichever CSPAN it's on instead of reruns of DragonBall Z. This bill will cost millions just in processing by the already overburdened and unsecured Immigration System, which legalized 3 of the Fort Dix Six, giving 1 of them U.S. Citizen status. Keep the calls and faxes going. If the general switchboard doesn't work, call the D.C. and the local offices. Especially Pryor! There may not be an exact amount of the number of illegal aliens who will get citizenship/legal status from the Dream Act, but I can guarantee it's over 9,000. Tags:dream act, amnesty, illegal aliens To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Ethics In Politics? - Arkansas Lobbyist In Disguise
Stop Wasting Money on Traditions & Practices
By Numerous Arkansas Tea Party Groups: Arkansas Senate president pro tempore, Paul Bookout has named former state senator Steve Faris who has been termed out as a paid senate aide. This is an unnecessary position being paid for by tax payer money.
This position will basically create a "Lobbyist in Disguise" for Democratic policies and it's all being funded by your tax dollars. If you think this is the best manner in which your tax dollars are being spent then you don't have anything to be concerned about.
Senator Faris was the author of SB867 during the 2008 legislative session that devised a legislators pocket lining scheme which would have doubled the amount of money that legislators could personally keep from previous campaign contributions and would have allowed them to use campaign contributions from previous campaigns to pay for travel and lodging. The main issue with the scheme was that it was hidden in the back of an unrelated bill that was being touted as an "ethics" bill.
After someone from outside of politics read the bill and applied pressure to the authors the language was quickly removed before it could make headlines. [More on this bill in the below article.]
This type of corruption and "example" of the "good ole boy" traditions and practices that have dominated Arkansas politics for years and must be fought at every corner.
Besides letting your State Senator know your feelings , let Senator Bookout know your opinion on this appointment of a taxpayer funded aide. Senator Bookout can be reached at 870-932-6662, 870-935-8030, or email, firstname.lastname@example.org Six months ago, the ARRA News Service addressed Traditions and Practices Costing Arkansas Taxpayers and that "in Arkansas the issue of ethics in government is often obscured. . . . After 136 years of single party rule, . . . there has been a lot of "tradition and practice" masking of situations, processes and procedures that fleece money from people, that make more people dependence on government, and that corrupt people we have elected. Words like "this is how we have always done it" and relying on unwritten "tradition and practice" is not a suitable response or a justification for continuing to expand government growth, government spending, or fraud, waste and abuse by government."
We identified at that time, that hence forth, there will be no free passes for "traditions and practices" costing Arkansas taxpayers. Well, the above situation is another questionable Democrat "practice."
The below article was written in 2009 and provides background information related to the the above participants. It evidences that concern over the hypocrisy in Arkansas ethics. Fortunately, the rise of numerous Tea Parties, Patriot groups, and other watchdog organizations in Arkansas, more light will be focused on fraud, waste, abuse and inbred familiarity in Arkansas politics. The traditions and practices that abuse Arkansas taxpayers needs to cease. We can no longer afford it! By Todd Sharp (2009): There have been several references to SB867 in the papers recently but after reading Michael Wickline’s article titled “Bill targets lobbyists who pay and run” I felt compelled to address the issue within the issue.
After reading on several occasions how Attorney General Dustin McDaniel and SB867’s sponsor Senator Steve Faris described the “ethics” bill I was convinced that our legislators were doing something right. Both of these politicians touted this bill as an “ethics” bill that would stop lobbyist from paying for a legislator’s meals and other activities if the lobbyist was not present. My only thought was why has this practice not been eliminated before?
Finally my curiosity and skepticism got the best of me and I went to the Arkansas legislative website (where anyone can read legislation for themselves) to see what SB867 was really all about. What I discovered when I read this bill infuriated me.
Deep in the back of the bill were two provisions, the first would allow legislators to double the amount of campaign funds that they had previously been allowed to keep and the second allowed legislators to start using campaign funds for meals, travel, and lodging.
Why were these provisions that line the pockets of legislators stuck in the back of an “ethics” bill that was touted as targeting lobbyist? And, why did Mr. McDaniel and Mr. Faris fail to mention these provisions when pontificating on the honorable merits of the bill while addressing the media? Were they camouflaging the meat of the bill by calling it an ethics bill that limited lobbyists?
Could the real motive behind this bill have been to generate more campaign contributions by lobbyists and their employers to legislators while allowing them to keep and use a larger amount of such campaign funds?
Ethics? Does anyone wonder why politicians are not listed very high on the list of “most honorable professions” anymore?
Before I continue, I’d like to point out that after people started questioning the legitimacy of these provisions being stuck in the bill and after Senator David Johnson did the honorable thing by removing his name as a co sponsor of the bill because of the out of place provisions – the provisions were eventually removed. But the point remains why did they try to slip them in the back of the bill to begin with?
If our legislators wanted to pass some ethical legislation concerning lobbyist, then why wasn’t SB883 passed? SB883 was a bill that would require legislators to wait at least a year after leaving office before they could become a salaried lobbyist? I mean common sense would tell us that the best way for a “special interest” to reward a legislator for helping pass a piece of favorable legislation would be to offer him a future position as a paid lobbyist. But that would not happen; it would not be “ethical”.
How did our legislators respond to SB883 which offered real ethics reform? They shut it down in committee and the Speaker of the House Robbie Wills called it “A solution looking for a problem”. Maybe Speaker Wills is just “too close” to the problem?
The problem is that when lobbyists and legislators get together far too often citizens get fleeced! It’s a case of the fox (legislators) guarding the hen house while the lobbyists are feeding the chickens. Both have a vested interest that doesn’t always have the best interest of the chickens at heart!
If our politicians were really interested in ethics reform concerning lobbyists and their employers – maybe someone would sponsor legislation that would limit lobbyist or companies that hired lobbyist from giving campaign contributions to legislators that pass the bills that affect them. But that would be implying that money influences politicians – and that’s not possible; it would not be “ethical”.
If we as citizens and voters want to see a real effort to instill ethics and reform in our government we must educate ourselves, read the legislation that is being passed for us to live under, pay attention to how our legislators vote, and hold them to a new standard of accountability. Our legislators thrive off of hard working people that make our communities thrive and are just too busy to pay attention to what our politicians are doing.
Our politicians should not tell us what “ethics” reform they are going to pass. We should tell them what we expect, demand that they do it, and hold them accountable when they don’t by electing someone who will.
------- Todd Sharp is a conservative activist from Little Rock and is active in the Arkansas Tea Party and is the State Coordinator for Secure Arkansas. Tags:Arkansas, State Senate, ethics, lobbyist, aide, Democrats, plantation politics, traditions, practices, waste, taxpayers moneyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by William Warren:Today’s cartoon bashes the current Lame Duck congress, commenting on how they have the lowest approval rating in the history of polling.
Tags:2010 Elections, Congress Approval Rating, Lame Duck Congress, Nancy Pelosi, Political Cartoons, William WarrenTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today, the Senate resumed consideration of the New START treaty, Treaty Doc. 111-5. Votes on amendments are possible today.
Richard Perle, Former Reagan deputy Defense Secretary and a key architect in helping to end the Cold War has warned that the New START Treaty with Russia is 'seriously flawed' and should not be ratified by the Senate. Perle, now a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told NewsMax, “It’s certainly not the kind of treaty Ronald Reagan fought for and accomplished. . . . For example, our right to inspections is limited to sites the Russians declare . . . which makes a mockery of the whole idea of on-site inspections. Imagine when Iran asserts a similar right to limit inspections, or the North Koreans or others. For that reason alone, it’s a very doubtful agreement.” Plenty of time is needed to examine the treaty. “That won’t be done if they vote immediately,” he notes. “The Senate has never seen the full negotiating record on the treaty.” That’s because the Obama administration doesn’t want a serious examination of the dispute between the United States and Russia over ballistic missile defense, Perle says. “Russia claims that, if we build future ballistic missile defenses that impinge on what they believe to be their national security, then all bets are off, and the treaty no longer applies,” he says. “That would inhibit our ballistic missile defense program, even though it’s not aimed at Russia — it’s aimed at Iran, North Korea, and others.”
Newt Gingrich, Chairman, American Solutions is calling for voters to call Senators and to tell them to vote against ratifying New START. Gingrich said, "The Lame Duck Congress is still ignoring the mandate from the American people on numerous other issues, not the least of which is the Senate's consideration of the New START Treaty with the Russians. Americans are not interested in having their Senators ratify a controversial treaty and then leave town without any accountability, and this is certainly no way to consider a binding international agreement that weakens our self-defense and further empowers Russia."
Last night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was forced to pull the 2,000 page, $1.1 trillion omnibus Fiscal Year 2011 appropriations bill from Senate consideration after acknowledging he didn’t have the votes. As a point of interest, in all the pork was a provision to fund an $8 million shrine to the late Ted Kennedy! How long are we going to continual to pay for past Camelot memories for the Kennedys? Instead, Reid and McConnell will work out a short-term continuing resolution to fund the government until the next Congress takes over.
Also last night, Reid filed cloture on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 5281, the House-passed version of the DREAM Act (AMNESTY, MONEY AND ACADEMIC BENEFITS FOR ILLEGALS), and on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 2965, the House-passed bill to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law (WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE POSITIONS OF BATTLEFIELD COMMANDERS). The cloture votes are expected to be held sometime on Saturday morning.
Around midnight Washington D.C. time, the House of Representatives voted to prevent tax hikes in January, 277-148. Prior to passing the tax deal, the House rejected an amendment from liberal Democrats to raise the estate tax, by a vote of 194-233.
Speaking on the floor this morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, “I’m pleased to report two pieces of good news out of Congress today. After two years of policies that lacked public support, the tide is beginning to turn. Today the President will sign a bill that ensures no American gets a tax hike on January 1. Republicans have fought hard for this legislation. Up until last week, most Democrats resisted. But in the end the American people were heard. And that’s a welcome change from the past two years. The American people have finally been heard on another matter too. Yesterday, Republicans united against a 2,000-page, $1.2 trillion dollar spending bill that Democrats were trying to ram through Congress in the final hours of the session. . . . By approving this bill, we would have helped cement for another year massive increases in spending and helped pave the way for a health care bill most Americans are asking us to repeal. Once those details became clear, it was imperative that we reject it.”
The Wall Street Journal described the Republican success in defeating the omnibus, writing, “In a victory for fiscal conservatives, Senate Democrats abandoned a $1.1 trillion bill to fund the federal government for the remaining nine and a half months of the fiscal year, acknowledging that there isn't sufficient support among lawmakers. A visibly frustrated Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said late Thursday that he was forced to drop the bill after nine Republicans who had previously indicated they would support the measure wouldn't now vote for it."
The Hill added, “The bill’s collapse will take with it more than 6,000 earmarks as well as more than $1 billion in funding for implementation of healthcare reform.”
Meanwhile, The New York Times looked at the bill preventing tax increases that passed by a large margin in the House last night, a chamber still dominated by Democrats. “The bipartisan support for the tax deal also underscored the urgency felt by the administration and by lawmakers in both parties to prop up the still-struggling economy and to prevent an across-the-board tax increase that was set to occur if the rates enacted under President George W. Bush had expired, as scheduled, at the end of the month. Administration officials said Mr. Obama would sign the package into law on Friday.”
At her Washington Post blog, Jennifer Rubin noted, “[S]o, by a margin of 277 to 148, the House -- still under the speakership of Nancy Pelosi -- approved an extension of the Bush tax cuts, a payroll tax cut, an estate tax with a 35 percent rate and a generous $5-million exclusion, a grab bag of other tax cuts and a year of unemployment benefits. If you think elections don't matter, think again.”
In Summary, this Congress should Pass a One Page Continuing Resolution and Go Home! They have done enough damage to the American people! Tags:US Senate, US House, Washington, D.C., tax reductions, Start treaty, Omnibus bill, tax bill, federal spending, Don't Ask, Don't TellTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Dec 16, 2010 - Dems Grinch American With 2000 Page Omnibus Bill & New Start treaty
Update 11:00 PM CST: House passes tax bill 277-148 extending the majority of expiring tax cuts for 2 years and extending unemployment benefits. The bill avoids a $3.9 Trillion tax increase but also included unfunded democrat pork and unfunded unemployment benefits. This bill is the same bill as the Senate previously approved. The bill now goes to the President for signature.
Reid Returning to Normal
After this mornings post, was please to see Karl Rove on FoxNews using my comparison of Harry Reid to the Grinch. Either I have a new follower, or there are just a lot of us in Whoville that have recognized Reid as the Grinch. He has even threatened to steal Christmas from his fellow Senators.
---------- Update 7:14 PM CST - Grinch (Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid) abandons efforts to pass a $1.1 trillion spending bill and instead extend current funding. Grinch said nine nasty Republicans sold him out and would not vote for the Omnibus bill. It was cool to see Granddaddy WHO (GOP Minority Leader Mitch McConnell) beat back Grinch's 2,000 page bill with his 1 page solution to the present situation. Grinch is still heard in the halls of the Senate shouting: "Hate, hate, hate. Hate, hate, hate. Double Hate. LOATHE ENTIRELY!" However, the rest of us in Whoville may see a Merry Christmas.
The Real Harry Reid Out of Disguise
The Senate reconvened at 9:30 AM and resumed consideration of the New START treaty, Treaty Doc. 111-5. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could move to consider the omnibus Fiscal Year 2011 appropriations bill today.
Yesterday, the Senate voted 81-19 to adopt the agreement preventing taxes from going up in January and sent it to the House for approval. Prior to approving the tax deal, the Senate rejected 3 motions to suspend the rules for amendments to the agreement. All required 67 votes to be adopted.
A motion from Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) for an amendment to offset the unemployment insurance extension in the tax deal with spending cuts was not agreed to by a vote of 47-52. A motion from Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) for an amendment to replace the deal with permanent tax relief was not agreed to by a vote of 37-63.
And a motion from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) for an amendment that replaces the deal with President Obama’s original proposal to raise taxes and additional transportation spending was not agreed to by a vote of 43-57. Also yesterday, the Senate voted 66-32 to agree to the motion to proceed to executive session to consider the START treaty.
Disgusted, The Wall Street Journal editors write today, “The 111th Congress began with an $814 billion stimulus that blew out the federal balance sheet, so we suppose it's only fitting that the Members want to exit by passing a 1,924-page, $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill. The worst Congress in modern history is true to its essence to the bitter end.” They add, “Democrats have had 11 months to write a budget for fiscal 2011, which began on October 1. But Majority Leader Harry Reid and Appropriations Chairman Daniel Inouye have dumped this trillion-dollar baby on Senators at the very last minute, when everyone is busy and wants to go home for the holidays. No doubt that was the plan. The continuing resolution to fund the government expires on Saturday, so Mr. Reid wants to squeeze Senators against the deadline.”
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell found this oddly similar to the situation Democrats had the Senate in last year at this time. “I want the American people to cast their minds back to last year, when Democrats did the same thing. They dropped the 2,700-page health care bill on us because they didn’t want us to see what was in it. Only afterward did we find out about the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, and all the rest. Well here we go again. All of this is eerily familiar to anyone who remembers the health care debate. . . . This bill is so enormous it took the Government Printing Office two days to print it. It spends more than half a billion dollars a page. It runs just under 2,000 pages.”
“This is exactly the kind of thing the American people voted against in November,” Sen. McConnell said. “It’s unbelievable, really. Just a few weeks after the voters told us they don’t want us rushing major pieces of complicated, costly, far-reaching legislation through Congress, we get this.” The WSJ editors had similarly harsh words for the omnibus: “The 111th Congress has shown contempt for taxpayers from its first day, which is why it was so repudiated on November 2 and why Gallup found this week that Congress's approval rating has hit a record low of 13%.”
So instead of the omnibus monstrosity, packed with spending and earmarks, The Hill reports, “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) introduced a one-page continuing resolution Thursday that funds the government through Feb. 18.” On the floor, Sen. McConnell held up his one-page bill, and compared it to the Democrats’ 2,000-page colossus. The contrast is stark. (See video of Sen. McConnell comparing the two bills below.)
The Washington Examiner called for just such an alternative in its editorial today, writing, “Senate Republicans and similarly responsible Democrats should reject the omnibus, as well as any other last-minute spending package introduced by the discredited leaders of the 111th Congress. With the tax-cut compromise headed toward final passage, the only appropriate spending measure for the lame-duck Senate to consider is one that funds the government at current levels until the new Congress is sworn in to start cleaning up the mess.”
As Sen. McConnell said, “Americans don’t want massive, trillion dollar bills rushed through Congress on our way out the door — they want us to be careful and responsible with their money. So I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this one-page CR. I don’t think there’s any question it’s the right thing to do.” Video:
Tags:US Senate, US House, Washington, D.C., tax reductions, Start treaty, Omnibus bill, tax bill, federal spending, Harry ReidTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Even After November, Dems Don't Seem To Understand
By John Allison: Evidently, the slap in the face Democrats experienced in the November elections was not enough to wake them up to the fact that Americans are sick and tired of their flagrant waste of our tax dollars. Worse than last week's House bill that would freeze spending at fiscal 2010's already catastrophic levels, the Senate bill is packed full of earmarks and seeks to spend an extra $16 billion dollars Uncle Sam doesn't have!
The omnibus spending bill is likely to get the most attention, spanning 1,924 pages and spending an average of $575.13 million per page.
High-rolling Harry Reid, the Democrat Senate Majority Leader, even made sure his bill was bloated with $8 billion in earmarks that had been gutted from the House bill. The free-spending Reid is even threatening to keep the Senate in session through the customary break if Republicans continue to honor voters' wishes and stall the wasteful legislation.
Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell stated Democrats have yet to even show the bill to members of his party who would rather see a short term bill that will keep the government operating until the new Congress can be seated in January.
Though President Obama is suddenly making efforts to come across as a reach-across-the-aisle, bipartisan type of guy, his henchman Reid continues the behind-closed-doors, Democrat only crafting of legislation to be rushed out and voted on in the wee hours when few are watching. Just as his heavy in the House, Nancy Pelosi, last week derailed the supposed compromise he forged with Republicans on the soon-to-expire Bush tax rates, Reid is running interference for his party boss Obama. These shenanigans are likely designed to allow the President to claim he is working for compromise with his opposition, while his lackey congressional leaders give him cover with his liberal base.
Perhaps the saddest thing of all though is that at least four Republicans are considering voting with the jackass party to spend another $1.1 trillion of your hard-earned money. Bob Bennett (R-UT), Kit Bond (R-MO), George Voinovich (R-OH), and Susan Collins (R-ME) have all indicated they just might vote for the massive waste of taxpayer dollars.
Last month's elections made clear the will of the American people and too many in DC failed to get the message. With our national debt fast approaching $14 trillion, everyday Americans have been demanding spending cuts from our elected officials in the nation's capitol. But they're still not listening!
So, as you celebrate Christmas this year (probably less festively than in times past because you have no choice but to tighten your belt), know that Democrats in Washington (along with a few RINOs) are working hard to squander as many of your wages as they can before your newly elected representatives take their seats.
Don't ever forget how they take us all for mindless fools. 2012 is just around the corner!
------- John Allison is a high school math teacher, conservative activist, and blogs at America, You Asked for It! Tags:Budget, Election 2010, Waste, Spending, Debt, Tax Cuts, Harry Reid, US Senate, Omnibus, Mitch McConnell, Obama, BipartisanshipTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
With 15 million Americans out of work and millions more struggling just to make ends meet, Senate Democrats released a 1,924-page spending monstrosity on Tuesday. The $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill, which includes more than 6,000 earmarks totaling $8 billion, was crafted privately by a group of bipartisan senators, according to The Washington Post. A dozen or more spending bills were cobbled together into one single measure that would fund the government for a year.
By the numbers:
6,600: Total number of earmarks in the pork-laden bill. (The Hill)
$1 billion: Funding included in the omnibus bill for the implementation of the job-killing health care law, including $176 million to implement Medicare Advantage cuts. (The Hill)
According to a new Gallup poll released today, “Americans’ assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.”
This Congress didn’t listen to the people while in office and they’re not listening on their way out.
This Congress exercised no fiscal responsibility while in office and they appear to be exercising none on their way out.
This Congress did not have the consent of the governed while in office and they certainly do not have it on their way out – except to get out.
Like a defeated army burning and looting on its retreat, this Congress seems to be prepared to leave one more indelible exclamation mark on its garish, meretricious reputation, while Americans attempt to deflect its attacks on their hopes for a better 112th Congress.
---------- Curtis Coleman is the President of The Curtis Coleman Institute for Constitutional Policy and contributing author to the ARRA News Service. Tags:Curtis Coleman, Institute for Constitutional Policy, Congress, omnibus spending bill, national debt, deficit, earmarksTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
By Chris Slavens: It’s that “most wonderful time of the year” again. Children eagerly await a visit from jolly Santa Claus, while their parents try to squeeze shopping into a schedule already filled with parties, parades, church programs, and visiting relatives. Grandmothers bake dozens of gingerbread and sugar cookies, while rascally uncles down too much eggnog. Affluent northerners travel to Florida to escape cold weather, while everyone else yearns for a white Christmas.
And the ACLU—that staunch defender of American traditions and values—threatens to sue public schools for acknowledging what all the excitement is about.
Each Christmas season is marked by a series of spirit-dampening stories of towns forced to disassemble nativity scenes, retail stores intimidated into requiring employees to use generic greetings like “Happy Holidays,” and similar Scroogish travesties. This year, one such story comes from Tennessee, where the American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to 137 public school administrators, supposedly in response to complaints from families, reminding them not to focus on any one religious holiday.
In other words, don’t call Christmas parties “Christmas parties.” Call them winter celebrations, holiday galas, solstice shindigs, or any other creative misnomer that obfuscates their true purpose and creates a comfortable non-reality for the handful of unfortunate students whose malcontent parents are offended by the celebration of a holiday that is jointly religious and secular in nature.
A recent Rasmussen poll found that 92% of Americans celebrate Christmas, while a mere 6% do not. Of that 6%, only 25% celebrate an alternative holiday. That’s a whopping total of 1.5% of Americans who celebrate a December holiday instead of Christmas. And, apparently, most of them live in Tennessee; how else could that state’s chapter of the ACLU have received so many complaints?
Defending the letter, Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the ACLU of Tennessee, cites U.S. Supreme Court decisions, and hints that acknowledging Christmas could be considered an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.
She is alluding, of course, to the oft-misinterpreted establishment clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits Congress from establishing a state religion. It obviously applies to a third-grade teacher planning a classroom Christmas party for the last day before break—or so those on the far left argue, rather unconvincingly.
Could it be that Weinberg is one of the 6% of Americans who do not celebrate Christmas, and is using the ACLU’s legal muscle and financial assets to push a personal agenda? Such Grinch-like behavior would certainly be unprofessional, if not unethical. If there was a Santa, Weinberg would be on the naughty list for sure.
The ACLU expects public schools to stage a pointless charade of pretending that the concerts, parties, and vacations common to this time of year are not specifically scheduled around December 25. This is an unreasonable expectation which deserves no serious consideration.
The correct course of action for public school administrators to take is to ignore the ACLU, which is not a government entity and does not represent the views of a majority of parents. It would be wrong to alter school policy simply to avoid the hassle of a lawsuit; this would be yielding to what is called the “heckler’s veto,” by which an antagonistic group goads the government into restricting another group’s First Amendment rights. In this case, the hecklers are the ACLU and the instigators it claims to represent.
Lawsuits are expensive, true, and no administrator wants to be on the receiving end of one, but what is the cost of a lawsuit compared to the cost of an eroded culture and disunited society, purposely divided by secularist troublemakers who value political correctness over common sense?
------- Chris Slavens is a conservative columnist. He writes from Delaware. Tags:ACLU, American Civil Liberties Union, Christmas, Tennessee, public school, Hedy Weinberg, First Amendment, establishment clause, Chris SlavensTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Bill Smith / Ozark Guru: As we end 2010, conservatives have seen in the last two years an awakening within the general population with respect to the dangers of Big Government. In part, this awakening can be to the many groups, organizations, national figures, and the conservative new media. However, this article and the below research will address only the Tea Party movement.
As a conservative activist, I was involved long before there was a Tea Party. I wish to thank those who nudge me along. As a retired military officer and university professor, at 60, I had planned to retire (slow down) except for writing/ blogging, speaking, fishing, golfing and enjoying home and family. I never expected that by 61, I would be more active than when I worked two or more jobs. By 2008, I was coordinating team efforts supporting 23 US Congressional candidates. After my preferred candidates for the GOP presidential nomination withdrew or were defeated, I supported Sarah Palin and that "other guy" for president. By the end of the 2008 elections, I was physically exhausted. But as disappointed as I was with the election outcomes, I was encouraged and motivated by the number of young conservatives I met during the year.
William Clark, friend and adviser of Ronald Reagan, related how Reagan gathered his close supporters together after the election of President Jimmy Carter and said something to the effect that Americans can not abide socialism for very long. While he was proven right, Reagan had three years to build a coalition before launching his Presidential campaign.
In 2009, after Democrats took total control of Congress and the White House, a few conservative activists recognized that the American reaction would be more visceral and could be mobilized to respond to the Democrats pushing through their progressive agenda. When approached by these young activists wishing to build on "rant" by Rick Santelli on February 19, 2008, I realized that they were on to something. But, I questioned whether large numbers would rally. History has proved that I had no reason to be concerned. Then later, when large numbers responded and joined local Tea Party groups, I was concerned that the conservative movement would not be able to educate them on the political processes or ways to remain active which could lead to the Tea Parties deteriorating or being viewed as a tentative and short lived - thus ignored or suppressed by those in power.
Even with harassment by the Department of Homeland Security - negative warnings - of conservatives, including Tea Party members and the followers of three presidential candidates, I did not need to be concerned. As with any meaningful effort, Providence provided numerous people, including national personalities, who became nation-wide teachers on the issues, threats to freedom and the processes. Existing conservative research and issue groups increased their communication and brought into their organizations many young conservative new media activists to expand their message outreach. Organizations like Americans for Prosperity and American Majority came along side local groups including the Tea Party groups to provided training, information and opportunities for involvement. In the end, leadership for the grassroots Tea Party was nurtured everyday grassroots Americans who adapted and learned as they organized.
A young man approached me about his holding a TEA Party in the Ozark Mountains. On April 15, 2007, Richard Caster, age 17, held the first meeting of the Ozark Tea Party which went on to have as many as 3000 people attend its events. Caster can be identified as one of the "early adopters" discussed later. As an aside, two years later in the 2010 elections, Caster was elected as the youngest Arkansas County Justice of the Peace (County board member) in Arkansas.
The above is just one of literally thousands of stores of people who for varied reasons got involved mostly via the Internet in holding their first Tea Party. So, who were these people, what was their experience in politics, and why did they get involved? Then who joined the Tea Party after they were launched ; what were their interests and why did they join?
Sam Adams Alliance has completed research on Tea Party members. The below will present a summary of findings in two categories: The Early Adopters and The Next Wave. All statistics below are taken from their reports which are available at their website. Sam Adams Alliance was the first to explore through in-depth research and survey data, the motivations, priorities and points of view of Tea party leaders.
The Early Adopters - Reading the Tea Leaves revealed that Tea party activists were a diverse group trying - often for the first time - to change the political landscape by holding elected officials more accountable.
The Early Adopters report reveals that:
A large number of Tea Party leaders are politically involved for the first time. 47% of activists surveyed said that they were "uninvolved" or "rarely involved" in politics before their participation in Tea Party groups.
When asked which issues were "very important" to them, 92% said "budget," 85% said "economy," and 80% said "defense."
No respondents listed social issues as an "important direction" for the movement.
86% oppose the formation of a third party.
90% cited "to stand up for my beliefs" when characterizing their initial reason for involvement.
62% identified as Republicans, 28% as Independents, 10% as "Tea Party"
The Next Wave - A Surf Report gauges the activists who entered the Tea Parties after May 2009 and how they are shaping the momentum and impact of the Tea Party movement.
The Next Wave report reveals that:
Tea Party momentum is building: 74.5% of Next Wavers said the movement is "gaining active supporters" and 66% indicated that the movement is "more enthusiastic."
There was a nearly 30-point drop among Tea Party activists in their affiliation with the Republican brand.
There is a decrease in Republican sources of entrants to the Tea Parties and an increase in independents: 20% of Next Wavers were independents prior to the Tea Parties (compared with 12.6% of Early Adopters that were independents) and 74% of Next Wavers were Republicans prior, compared to 81% of Early Adopters.
The longer a Tea Party activist is in the movement, the more likely they are to be optimistic about the political landscape
Of those who were inspired by an individual to join the Tea Party movement, 63.6% -the largest number- cited a friend as being instrumental in their involvement." Only 37.5 percent of Early Adopters were recruited by friends. Rather, media personalities brought the highest number into the movement.
89.3% of Tea Party activists have been active in introducing new people into the movement.
Both Early Adopters and Next Wave activists were new to politics; 40.5% of Early Adopters and 43.6% of Next Wave activists said they were uninvolved/rarely involved with politics prior to their Tea Party involvement.
Sam Adams Alliance has indicated they will perform future research into exploring the interactions between establishment political players and the Tea Party newcomers, as well as an investigation into understanding why those who share the same values as the Tea Party have not embraced the movement.
Looking back at the November 2010 election, even the biased media noted the reaction by the American voters. Setting aside liberal strongholds, in less than two years, voters voted to remove from office or to rejected the elections of new candidates who were liberals / democrats. As a result, major shifts occurred in the US congress and in State and local governments. Tea Parties activists put both voice and feet to the citizen dissatisfaction and were willing to get out and motivate others to vote conservative. Tea Party members and other did not wait four (4) years for a leader like Ronald Reagan to lead them to victory; instead they acted.
We can only imagine at this point in time the impact that Tea Party members will have in holding the new Congress accountable. And come 2011, if a responsible, honorable, conservative candidate with good communication skills runs for President, the America voters will have the opportunity to sweep liberals from the control of State governments and the US Congress and the White House. From a dream on Jan, 2009 to a real possibility on Jan 2011; let's make it a fact on Jan 2013! Remain faithful, be involved and remember thatbeing a conservative is not for the faint of heart. Tags:Tea Party, research, research, Sam Adams Alliance, Bill Smith, Ozark GuruTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Dec 15, 2010 - Dems Unveil Massive Last-Minute Spending Bill
Update 4:20 PM: The House passed a bill to repeal "Don't Ask, Don' Tell" law 250 to 175 vote. A similar bill is pending in the Senate. Update 12:30 PM: The Senate passed the tax package 81-19 vote. It was sent to the House which may vote on it tomorrow.
At 11 AM, the Senate resumed consideration of the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 4853 with the Reid-McConnell amendment, which contains the tax deal language.
At noon, the Senate began a series of roll call votes on the tax package. The first 3 will be motions to suspend the rule for amendments, which require 67 votes to succeed. The last vote will be on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 4853 with the Reid-McConnell amendment. If the motion is agreed to, the tax deal will be sent to the House for approval.
The motions to suspend the rules are being offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) for an amendment to offset the unemployment insurance extension in the tax deal with spending cuts, by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) for an amendment to replace the deal with permanent tax relief, and by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) for an amendment that replaces the deal with President Obama’s original proposal to raise taxes and includes additional transportation spending.
Following the votes, the Senate will return to morning business until 2:15 PM. At that time, senators will vote on a motion to proceed to executive session (which requires a simple majority) to begin consideration of the New START treaty, Treaty Doc. 111-5.
Reuters reports, “Senate Democrats on Tuesday unveiled an earmark-laden spending bill that would fund the entire U.S. government, and Republicans who have renounced the pet spending projects quickly vowed to oppose it. The 2,000-page spending bill, months overdue, would enable President Barack Obama to tighten financial oversight, subsidize college tuition bills and move forward with other priorities that have essentially been on hold since the fiscal year began in October.” The Wall Street Journal points out the omnibus bill “would lay down $1.1 trillion to fund the various arms of the departments and agencies of the federal government through September 2011, when the government's current fiscal year will end.” The WSJ also notes, “The spending bill is necessary because lawmakers failed to pass any of the 12 budget bills required each year to fund the various arms of the federal government.”
Senate Republicans swiftly announced their opposition to the bloated bill last night. The WSJ writes, “Most Republicans in the Senate are expected to be united in opposition to the bill, preferring instead another short-term measure to fund the government through the early months of next year. ‘The attempt by Democrat leadership to rush through a nearly 2,000 page spending bill in the final days of the lame-duck session ignores the clear will expressed by the voters this past election,’ said Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.), a member of the Senate Republican leadership.”
Speaking on the Senate floor today, Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the case against the Democrats’ omnibus bill: “Americans told Democrats last month to stop what they’ve been doing: bigger government, 2,000-page bills jammed through on Christmas Eve, wasteful spending. This bill is a monument to all three.” He added, “It includes more than $1 billion to fund the Democrat health care bill. For those of us who’ve vowed to repeal it, this alone is reason to oppose to Omnibus.”
Jennifer Rubin has details on the funding for the unpopular health care bill at her Washington Post blog. The $1 billion includes $3 million for one of the many boards, bureaucracies, and programs created by the law, $175 million to implement the Medicaid expansion and cuts to Medicare Advantage, and over $80 million for the Department of Health and Human Services’ Departmental Management account, to enforce the new insurance mandates and regulations created in the law.”
Sen. McConnell said today, “The voters made an unambiguous statement last month: they don’t like the wasteful spending, they don’t want the Democrat health care bill, and they don’t want lawmakers rushing staggeringly complex, staggeringly expensive bills through Congress without any time for people to study what’s buried in the details. This bill is a legislative slap in the face to all those voters who rejected these things.”
And sure enough, Gallup has a new poll today finding, “Americans' assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.”
Clearly, Americans are sick of the way Democrats are doing things and fed up with their lame duck agenda of putting off things like preventing tax hikes for a liberal wish list. As Sen. McConnell explained, “For the first time in the modern era, Congress hasn’t passed a single appropriations bill. Democrats have been too focused on their own left-wing wing wish to take care of the basics. And now, at the end of the session, they want to roll all those bills together, along with anything else they haven’t gotten over the past two years, and rush it past the American people just the way they jammed the health care bill through Congress last Christmas.”
Democrats in Congress should drop this bloated spending bill and instead join with Republicans to pass as short-term continuing resolution to keep the lights on until early next year “when the new Congress will have the opportunity to make a determination on how to best spend taxpayers’ money,” in Sen. McConnell’s words. Tags:US Senate, Washington, D.C., tax reductions, tax bill, federal spendingTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Senator Coburn "We have stopped following the Constitution"
Video of Sen. Tom Coburn Speaking to Congress: Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) discusses on the floor of the Senate, Congresses failure to follow the Constitution . Although the video doesn't cover his entire speech. He get part of the Constitution read into the Congressional record - Article 1, Section 8 and and the 10 Amendment. Sen. Coburn then details that Article 1, Section 8 is the Enumerated Powers that are given to Congress which tells what aspects of the American life that Congress can enter into. The 10th Amendment says what ever is not listed in the Enumerated Powers is totally and absolutely reserved to the rights of the States.
As a practicing physician, Dr. Coburn sees Congress in the same position as a doctor who practices malpractice. "The Cancer is Congresses for years upon years have totally ignored the Constitution of the United States and taken us to areas where we have no business being."
Tell Congress to Read The Constitution!
Tags:Tom Coburn, Senator, doctor, US Constitution, Read the Constitution, enumerated powers, 10th AmendmentTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
RPA Video: Republican Party of Arkansas Chairman Doyle Webb broadcasts live in front of the State Capitol Christmas Tree to talk about the Arkansas GOP's recent State Committee meeting, the special election in Hot Springs to fill the House District 24 seat, the Republican successes this past election, and the true meaning of Christmas.
Although not mentioned in this video, Doyle Webb was re-elected Arkansas State Party Chairman at the recent Arkansas GOP State Convention in Hot Springs. His leadership in the last two years was responsible for the successful plan to recruit and support winning Arkansas Republican conservative candidates thus painting Arkansas red with conservative victory.
Tags:Doyle Webb, RPA, Republican Party of Arkansas, Arkansas, GOP, reviewing blessings, ChristmasTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Liberal Media Views of Current Events - Enjoy the Stupidity!
The following quotes gathered by the Media Research Center evidence how the liberal media views current events in Washington, D.C. Most of us can agree, we do not like the present actions being forced through or failing to be addressed in the last days of absolute control of Government by the Democrats. It is amazing how the liberal media continues to evidence that they wish they were in control of events. They sure have a warped view of events and situations. Represented by these anchors, no wonder these networks ratings are in the toilet. also it is no wonder they envy "middle of the road" Fox News and conservative talk radio hosts. Enjoy the stupidity! NBC Turns on Obama: Tax Deal a “Disaster in the Making”
“The President has said that he’s doing this for the good of the American people, but by some estimates this deal, this tax cut deal, could add another $900 billion to a deficit that is already out of control. So why shouldn’t Americans look at this as a disaster in the making?” — NBC’s Meredith Vieira to White House aide David Axelrod on Today, December 8.
“How do you, as a deficit hawk, justify going along with a larger tax cut for those who really don’t need it? And, it’s been argued, it’s not stimulative — the upper income people, it really doesn’t add to the stimulus that you get from the lower income people.” — NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell to GOP Senator Judd Gregg on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, December 7.
“Let me ask you about fiscal responsibility, because that’s something that’s very important to you. If you extend these tax cuts, we’re hearing that we’re gonna add, what is it, $500 billion to the deficit. So how do you justify that? You said you opposed extending unemployment benefits because that’s gonna add $55 billion, but that’s a lot less....But how, how do you justify adding more money to the deficit? That much more?” — Meredith Vieira to Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann on Today, December 10.
Media Mantra: No Tax Hike = “Tax Break for the Wealthy”
“As the debate continues, we ask Jon Karl to tell us how much the tax break for the wealthy increases the deficit and what is the impact on small businesses.” — Anchor Diane Sawyer setting up a story on the December 2 World News.
“Extending all the cuts means that someone making $10 million a year will keep $450,000 of their income that would have gone to Uncle Sam....Keeping taxes at this level over the next 10 years could add nearly $4 trillion to the national debt.” — ABC’s David Kerley on World News, December 5.
“Brian, none of this is paid for. In terms of lost revenue for the government next year, it’s $450 billion, nearly half a trillion dollars. To compare this, in comparison, the stimulus that President Obama put in, enacted back in early 2009, that cost on an annual basis, approximately half a trillion dollars. So the deficit in the short term is going up.” — NBC White House correspondent Chuck Todd on the Nightly News, December 6.
Jon Kyl Schools Schieffer: It’s Not a “Tax Cut” If No One’s Taxes Go Down Moderator Bob Schieffer: “Now, Senator Kyl, is the Senate going to get down to business and resolve this whole business of the tax cuts?” Senator Jon Kyl: “I hope so. We can. We should. I would just make one point. Nobody is talking about tax cuts. We’re talking about extending the rates that have been in existence for the last decade....” Schieffer: “Why was it so important, why is it so important to Republicans to extend the tax cuts for the upper-income people?... [to Democratic Senator Dick Durbin] Would these tax cuts be temporary for everybody or would this be something permanent?”... Kyl: “First of all, we’re not talking about tax cuts.” Schieffer: “I gotcha.” — CBS’s Face the Nation, December 5. [Audio/video (1:35): Windows Media | MP3 audio]
Imagine All “We” Could Do With Other People’s Money Co-host Meredith Vieira: “Let’s talk about the price tag here. Tax cuts are gonna be financed by adding an additional $900 billion to the national debt. You’ve been talking to the experts. Can we afford this?” CNBC’s Erin Burnett: “The answer to that is no. We can’t afford it....[The] New York Times did a very interesting analysis this morning that said, Meredith, if we didn’t give people over $250,000 the break here, we’d save $60 billion a year. And for that we could have universal pre-school for free and provide free college tuition for half of the college students in this country....” — NBC’s Today, December 7. [Audio/video (1:05): Windows Media | MP3 audio]
“Pathetic” that Democrats Lost Tax Fight, but “Not Bad for the Economy”
“I think it’s pathetic the Democrats lost this fight. On the merits, they should have won it, but they lost it. And this is not a bad thing for the economy.” — Time’s Mark Halperin on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, December 7.
Uncompromising GOP Rebuffs Obama the Peacemaker
“Right after the election, the President invited the leaders here on November 18th. But the newly victorious Republicans said, ‘Sorry, we’re busy.’ The President ignored the rebuff and he is framing today’s meeting as the first step toward a new and productive relationship....But the newly-empowered Republicans, meeting with the President for the first time since the election, seemed in no mood to compromise.” — CBS’s Bill Plante previewing the meeting on The Early Show, November 30.
2011 Preview: Cutting Budget = “Assault on the Poor”
“It seems to me there’s two arguments. There’s what you’re trying to accomplish and then there’s how you’re trying to accomplish, and there are, as you know, critics of what you’re trying to do. James K. Galbraith writes in the New York Times, ‘Bowles-Simpson proposal is an assault on the middle class, the working class and the poor.’” — The only challenging question anchor Brian Williams posed to deficit commission co-chairmen Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson on the December 1 NBC Nightly News.
Brian Casts Tax Fight through a Liberal Prism
“Good evening. It’s a fair question to ask, and for a while now Americans have been wondering how lawmakers in Washington could possibly extend tax breaks for wealthy Americans while allowing benefits for jobless Americans to be cut off.” — Brian Williams leading off the December 6 NBC Nightly News.
Disguising Liberal Activist as Victim of Mean Republicans Correspondent Claire Shipman: “Democrats say that millions of Americans are going to be affected in the next few weeks, and that not extending those benefits will hurt the economy. Republicans say those extended benefits are just too expensive unless they’re paid for. Edrie Irvine never thought her very livelihood would depend on a political debate in Congress.” Edrie Irvine, identified on-screen merely as “unemployed”: “They are talking about tax cuts for the rich and are holding people like me hostage.” Shipman: “But she and about two million other unemployed Americans are caught up in a Capitol Hill showdown.” — ABC’s Good Morning America, December 2. Shipman failed to disclose that Irvine is a liberal activist who participated the previous day at a press conference by Nancy Pelosi and was a speaker at left-wing election rallies this fall.
[Audio/video (0:22): Windows Media | MP3 audio]
Democrat, Journalist — “Much the Same Thing, Isn’t It?” Host Craig Ferguson: “You’re a Democrat, aren’t you?” MSNBC contributor and ex-Newsweek reporter Richard Wolffe: “I am a journalist.” Ferguson: “A journalist? Much the same thing, isn’t it?” — CBS’s Late Late Show, December 8. [Audio/video (0:32): Windows Media | MP3 audio]
WikiLeaks Mastermind: Anarchist “Who’s Also an Idealist”
“In some ways, he [Julian Assange] is a man of the times, in the sense that he’s anti-authority, anti-central government. He’s a kind of information vigilante. He’s a kind of anarchist, but an anarchist who’s also an idealist, who believes that what he’s doing — rather than damaging world security or individuals — is actually making the world more just, that he feels that there’s an information disequilibrium in the world and he wants to rectify that.” — Time editor Richard Stengel on PBS’s Charlie Rose, Nov. 30.
Stolen Document Double-Standard
“The Times believes that the documents serve an important public interest, illuminating the goals, successes, compromises and frustrations of American diplomacy in a way that other accounts cannot match....As daunting as it is to publish such material over official objections, it would be presumptuous to conclude that Americans have no right to know what is being done in their name.” — New York Times executive editor Bill Keller in a November 29 “Note to Readers” about the paper’s decision to publish stolen U.S. diplomatic cables disseminated by the WikiLeaks site.
“The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here.” — New York Times environmental reporter Andrew Revkin on the paper’s “Dot Earth” blog, November 20, 2009, talking about e-mails at the center of the ClimateGate scandal.
Palin With a Gun Makes Meredith “Nervous” Matt Lauer: “Sarah Palin welcomes Kate Gosselin and her eight kids to Alaska for a guest appearance on her TLC show Sarah Palin’s Alaska....You don’t think she [Gosselin] is the ‘roughing it’ type?” Meredith Vieira: “I don’t think she likes it.” Al Roker: “Roughing it, to her, is a Holiday Inn without cable.” Vieira: “Plus, you’re with a woman with a gun. The whole thing makes me nervous, you know?” — NBC’s Today, December 7. [Audio/video (0:56): Windows Media | MP3 audio]
“Hardball is absolutely nonpartisan.” — MSNBC’s Chris Matthews in an interview with local Washington, D.C. host Carol Joynt, as quoted by The Politico’s Patrick Gavin in a December 9 article.
Not Even Mom Buys Dave’s Global Warming Blame Game Host David Letterman: “How are things in Indianapolis?” Dave’s Mom, Dorothy: “Things are very nice. It’s been unseasonably warm.” David Letterman: “How warm. How warm has it been? Like 20 degrees warmer than it should be?” Dorothy Letterman: “About, yes, and it’s very windy.” David Letterman: “Well, that’s that climate change. It’s the global warming. You know that, mom? Do you believe in the climate change, in the global warming?” Dorothy Letterman: “Not really.” — Exchange via satellite shown on the November 24 Late Show.
[Audio/video (0:45): Windows Media | MP3 audio] Tags:media bias, liberal media, current events, Media Research Center, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
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.