Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Morally Challenged Secretary Sebelius Scraps Conscience Exception for Health Plans

"To be morally challenged, one has to have been born. Obviously the same can be said for a moral person. However, the moral person is not seeking the death of the "unborn" or the "elderly." ~ Dr. Bill Smith

Bill Smith, Editor, : While the following shared article is rather long, there was no way I could in good conscious crop it. Why, because the article addresses those claiming to be social conservatives and to those who should be social conservatives based on their faith. Also, it applies to those seeking to be "moral beings."

Is it critical to ask what has brought our Nation to the point that Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sebelius could even consider, let alone proceed with "scraping the conscience exception for health plans"? The Obama administration has again proceeded brazenly without apparent fear of retribution by the public at large or even by those who are morally offended by Sebelius' action.

The article's author addresses his first-hand view of the conflict within the Catholic Church which has aided the Obama administration's open challenge to the moral conscious of the church without fearing that such action could result in negative consequence from Catholic voters in November. If this article awakens people, it will have served a very good purpose, but that will not stop the questionable actions of the Obama administration.

Protestants on the other side of the church isle have the same problem within their ranks. In fact their less restrictive hierarchy, many even aid in their ignoring and / or failing to vote their moral conscious. Numerous Protestants like numerous Catholics have surrendered or subjugated their moral conscious to a man-created, and often perverted, social consciousness. Whenever one considers promoting death in the womb or in the hospital bed, or the re-engineering of marriage and the traditional family, or changing social structure to avoid alleged inconveniences "of life," they have lost their way to the liberal progressive agenda.  That agenda then continues to expand to devour other individual beliefs and values like liberty, freedom, individual responsibility, pride, love of country, etc.

Within the Christian churches of America, thankfully there are those who have continually stood based on moral conscious based in Truth. Unfortunately, there are large numbers of "influential morally challenged people" who have gained access to power via the ballot box. These individuals do not permit themselves to be intellectually confronted by the morals of the church in any way that would stop them in their pursuit of social justice up to and including supporting death and harm to others. Consider these morally challenged individuals: Nancy Pelosi (Catholic), Kathleen Sebelius (Catholic) Harry Reid (Mormon), Chuck Schumer (Reformed Judaism), Hillary Clinton (Methodist), Barack Obama (Christianity/ Former Church of Christ), Joe Biden (Roman Catholicism). Tell me again, why are these people making decisions and taking actions  that affect us and attack our moral conscious? 

by Streiff (Diary), RedState : As the implementation of Obamacare rolls into high gear, we’ve been given insight into how it will be implemented in general. On January 20, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it would not exempt health plans provided by non-profit religious employers from the requirement to provide “contraceptive services.”
… Today the department is announcing that the final rule on preventive health services will ensure that women with health insurance coverage will have access to the full range of the Institute of Medicine’s recommended preventive services, including all FDA -approved forms of contraception. Women will not have to forego these services because of expensive co-pays or deductibles, or because an insurance plan doesn’t include contraceptive services.
The category of “all FDA-approved forms of contraception” includes the abortifacients, like the “morning after pill.” At the same time I couldn’t help but note that the group of health plans provided by “non-profit religious employers” who do not support contraception winnows the field down rather quickly to those provided by either the Catholic Church or one of its social service or medical subsidiaries.

The best is yet to come.

By way of full disclosure, I’m Roman Catholic. I’m a convert who became Catholic with eyes wide open rather than a “cradle Catholic” who was born into the religion. As such I’ve never ceased to be amazed at the antics of many of our Church leadership. I write it off to equal parts cognitive dissonance and a pathological desire to be popular.

The Democrat party has been anti-Catholic in its political positions since George McGovern ran for president yet the priesthood and heirarchy of the Roman Catholic Church in America tend to hail from Democrat constituencies. So on the one hand the Magesterium is teaching very traditional social values while on the other it is embracing without even a hint of credulity every lefty scheme that comes down the pike.

For instance, in 1983, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops declared nuclear weapons to be immoral and weren’t terribly fond of deterrence either. By 1988 they had decided SDI was destabilizing as was the US linking a Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan to future arms treaties. When communist terrorists were trying to create a people’s paradise in El Salvador, many of our bishops ignored what was happening to personal liberty under the Sandinistas in Nicaragua as they stumbled over themselves to create the “sanctuary movement”.

Without putting too fine a point on it but there was no daylight between the position of the Magesterium and that of the Kremlin on these issues.

Not that they are all commies or anything. But there were MOVEMENTS out there that had freakin Pete Seeger singing protest songs and James Earl Jones and Ed Asner at their rallies. How could you not be in favor of these things?

Similar stampedes took place on global warming and immigration.

This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in. When given the choice between seeming to endorse a religious conservative for office and seeming to endorse a heterodox leftist there is no limit to the contortions a large share of our bishops won’t put themselves through to help the lefty. To wit: by the black letter of the Catechism of the Catholic Church supporting abortion is forbidden. If a public figure does so this failure is compounded by “scandal”, that is, an action that could cause others to question their faith. The fact that there are very few bishops in the nation who have taken steps to discipline pro-abort advocates and politicians especially when they proclaim themselves to be devout.

The second strain is the want to be liked. For most of American history, Catholics were THE OTHER. It was a foreign religion practiced by all manner of foreigners who either couldn’t speak English (Italians, Poles, etc.) or who could barely speak it (the Irish, it goes without saying). What other religion still has amendments to state constitutions directly aimed at its religious schools?

Just when things were going well with JFK (another devout Catholic) in the White House, he gets killed and the whole counter culture begins. If there was anything less cool in the 1960s than being in ROTC it was being a Catholic who believed in monogamy and abstinence until marriage not to mention avowing any religion that did not use mind altering drugs. Being cool is still important and despite his views on abortion Obama, that epitome of coolness, was invited to give a commencement address at a Catholic university.

This mindset was most egregiously on display during the 2008 election. The Catholic heirarchy — and I have to digress here for a moment to emphasize that we have many traditional bishops in this country who have fought the good fight for decades — wanted to catch the Hope-and-Change wave and had a problem: Barrack Obama loves him some abortion. Not just plain vanilla abortion. He is in favor of partial birth aboriton. He is in favor of killing a kid who happens to survive the abortion procedure.

Demonstrating again a contortionist skill that would gain them employment at any county fair in the country the bishops issued a document called “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship.”
 
As first blush it looks like a strong statement in favor of life which would not have helped Obama, or any other elected Democrat for that matter, until one reads deeper.
34. Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity.

35. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil.
In other words if you feel like the opposition to the war in Iraq or midnight basketball or furthering the ends of labor unions or any other pet peeve are “morally grave reasons” you can vote for the pro-abort. And they got what they wanted: American Catholics gave a majority of their votes to Obama.

Then came Obamacare which gave the bishops a real taste of what happens when you create a moral equivalence between universal health care and abortion. You get them both.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops was heartbroken and gobsmacked, or gobsmacked and heartbroken, when they got the bad news about the elimination of an exemption for religious conscience in health plans.
President Obama telephoned Archbishop Dolan on Friday morning to tell him of the decision, said a spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The pair had discussed the issue during a November meeting, during which the archbishop “got the message that they could work together,” said the spokeswoman, Sister Mary Ann Walsh.

The issue was likely to form the “backdrop to future relations,” she said. “It’s too big to ignore… the elephant is tramping around in the sanctuary.”

An administration official on Tuesday confirmed the call was made on Friday and reiterated comments made by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius that the administration is committed to its partnerships with faith-based groups.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D., Conn.), a Catholic who supports abortion rights and access to contraception, said she thought the White House had handled the decision “very well” by being open to listening to religious leaders. “Contraception is about preventing unintended pregnancy,” she said. “I think that they did what they needed to do.”
So up until November Archbishop Dolan was being led to believe that he and the Obama Administration could work together and there would be a conscience exemption in the health care reform regulations and then he gets a call telling him that he’s been played for a chump.

It is really difficult to understate the cultural significance of this decision. If Congress doesn’t intervene and we end up with a pro-abort in the White House, which seems virtually certain regardless of how Obama fares in November, it is hard to see how this precedent will not be applied first to euthanasia, which seems to be the next big thing, and then to abortion. If left as it is, it really marks the end of independent churches in the United States.

The decision even managed to concern the Washington Post’s E. J. Dionne, another of the “smells and bells” Catholics on the left, or Catholycs as my friend Tom Crowe terms them, whose collective ass gets tired when confronted with the whole issue of morality.
One of Barack Obama’s great attractions as a presidential candidate was his sensitivity to the feelings and intellectual concerns of religious believers. That is why it is so remarkable that he utterly botched the admittedly difficult question of how contraceptive services should be treated under the new health care law.

His administration mishandled this decision not once but twice. In the process, Obama threw his progressive Catholic allies under the bus and strengthened the hand of those inside the Church who had originally sought to derail the health care law.
. . .

Tags: Morally Challenged, federal healthcare, Obamacare, Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, abortifacients, conscience exception, scrapped, Magesterium, Catholic, Protestant, Church, Christians, faith, US Constitution, freedom of religion, Big Government, violating personal conscious To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Romney Wins Florida GOP Primary

Mitt Romney has won the Florida Republican preferential primary and claimed all of the Florida's delegates to the Republican National Convention. With 99.2% of the precincts reporting, the results were Romney 46.4%, Gingrich 31.9%, Santorum 13.4%, Paul 7.0% and Other 1.3%.

In his victory speech in Tampa, Romney focused on President Obama and his record on the economy. Romney said, "Leadership is about taking responsibility, not making excuses. Mr. President, you were elected to lead. You chose to follow. Now it's time for you to get out of the way."

Romney also focus on the upcoming Republican National Convention in Tampa in August. He said, "Democrats may believe that the primary campaign would leave Republicans divided and weak. A competitive primary does not divide us. It prepares us. And when we gather here in Tampa seven months from now for our convention, ours will be a united party with a winning ticket for America."

Newt Gingrich identified that he intended to compete in all future races. "It is now clear that this will be a two-person race between the conservative leader Newt Gingrich and the Massachusetts moderate. We are going to contest every place and we are going to win."

While Romney did not discount Rick Santorum and Ron Paul in future debates and contest, it was evident that Gingrich has done so. But proclaiming something does not make it so. While both Romney and Gingrich spend millions on ads, Santorum and Paul did not waste their money with Florida being a winner take all delegates state. Both came shared their messaging and then focused on the next state to vote, Nevada.

Santorum responded to Gingrich's claim and said that he is the conservative alternative to Romney because he has less "personal baggage" than Gingrich. As for Ron Paul, he held a rally which sounded more like a victory celebration and detailed his consistent message of limited government and less intrusion on both American lives and into "foreign entanglements." Paul said voters should "Send only people to the White House who know and read the Constitution and enforce the Constitution."

Tags: Mitt Romney, Republican primary, Florida, election 2012, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Obama's "All The Above Energy" . . .

. . . EXCEPT FOR for the Keystone XL Pipeline, permits for oil, shale, and coal on Federal land and and in coastal or waters. Oh, and no dams, nuclear plants, coal fired plants. Oh and  . . . 
by A.F. "Tony" Branco:

Tags: A.F. Branco, political cartoon, Barack Obama, energy policy, All the above, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Presidential Reminder

President Obama Once Pledged To Cut The Deficit In Half By The End Of His First Term

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “And that's why today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks At The Fiscal Responsibility Summit, Washington, D.C., 2/23/09)

REALITY: ‘CBO Projects A $1.1 Trillion Federal Budget Deficit’ For 2012

“CBO projects a $1.1 trillion federal budget deficit for fiscal year 2012 if current laws remain unchanged.” (“The Budget And Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 To 2022,” Congressional Budget Office, 1/31/12)

“If the CBO estimate is correct, it would mean that the United States recorded a deficit of more than $1 trillion for every year of Obama’s first term. The deficit was $1.4 trillion in 2009, $1.3 trillion in 2010 and $1.3 trillion in 2011. The largest deficit recorded before that was $458 billion in 2008.” (“CBO Projects $1.08T Deficit, Higher Unemployment,” The Hill, 1/31/12)

Tags: President Obama, deficit, broken promises, CBO, trillion dollar, Federal Deficit, 2012 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

CBO Predicts 4th Straight Trillion Dollar Deficit! Obama is Missing The Message: "It's the Economy Stupid!"

American People To Obama:
It's The Economy Stupid!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Jan. 31, 2011:
Yesterday, the Senate voted 93-2 to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 2083., The Stock Act. Today, they will begin consideration of that bill which would prohibit Members of Congress from using nonpublic insider information for trading or personal gain. It’s important to note, though, that the STOCK Act does not apply to officials in the executive branch. Czars, the President, VP, and others are free to wheel and deal.

This evening in the US House, a vote is expected on the HR 1173 - CLASS program repeal (created in President Obama's Health Care Reform).

Despite warnings from economists and calls for fiscal sanity from Americans, Washington has continued its irresponsible, misguided and wasteful spending.
  • This morning, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected the fiscal 2012 budget deficit would reach $1.08 trillion and the jobless rate will increase to 8.9% by the end of 2012 and 9.2% by the end of 2013.
  • This is simply further evidence that failing to get spending and debt under control will lead to dire consequences, including higher taxes, higher costs of living, slower economic growth, and fewer jobs.
  • It's time for government to adjust to the current economic realities and tighten its belt just like families across the country have had to do.
Congress: Average approval for mid-December to late January was 13.2% according to the RealClearPolitics average. Average disapproval was 82.4%. President Obama prefers the focus there than on his failing policies.

This morning, Sen. Mitch McConnell noted President Obama’s continued disinterest in discussing his record and his willingness to change the subject to Congress. “The more folks are talking about Congress,” he said, “the less they’re talking about the President’s own dismal economic record. And, frankly, for a President who has presided over a 43% increase in the national debt in just three years and the stain of the first-ever downgrade of America’s credit rating, I can understand why he’d want to change the subject. I can see why he’d rather be talking about Congress, or the Super Bowl, or the weather, or anything other than his own failed economic policies. But the problems we face are too grave and too urgent. And every day that the President spends trying to change the topic instead of changing the direction of our economy is another day he’s failing the people who elected him.

As already identified, today brought even more news it’s obvious that President Obama would prefer not to discuss. The Hill reports, “The Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday predicted the budget deficit will rise to $1.08 trillion in 2012. CBO also projected the jobless rate would rise to 8.9 percent by the end of 2012, and to 9.2 percent in 2013. . . . If the CBO estimate is correct, it would mean that the United States recorded a deficit of more than $1 trillion for every year of Obama’s first term. The deficit was $1.4 trillion in 2009, $1.3 trillion in 2010 and $1.3 trillion in 2011. The largest deficit recorded before that was $458 billion in 2008.”

Meanwhile the AP reports, “A private research group says that consumer confidence retreated in January after two straight months of big gains. The Conference Board is reporting Tuesday that its Consumer Confidence Index now stands at 61.1, down from a revised 64.8 in December. Economists had expected a reading of 68. . . . A reading of 90 indicates a healthy economy, a level the index hasn't approached since December 2007 when the recession began.”

And according to The Wall Street Journal, “U.S. home prices fell again in November, according to the Standard & Poor's Case-Shiller indexes, which reported Tuesday that the majority of metropolitan markets posted declines. The U.S. housing market has remained sluggish despite lower prices and interest rates . . . .”

Yet given all these facts, Democrats continue to claim “we are in great shape.” That’s precisely what Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said last week at a press conference of Democrat Senate leaders. And in a recent weekly address, President Obama said, “[T]he most important thing we need to do is get more Americans back to work. . . . We’re heading in the right direction.”

As Leader McConnell said today, “The President can pretend he just showed up. He can try to convince people, as he tried to do this past weekend, that the economy is moving in the right direction. But he’s not fooling anybody. Americans know that we’re living in an economy that’s being weighed down and held back by legislation he passed with the help of big Democrat majorities in Congress. Americans know that we’re living in the Obama economy now.  And they’re tired of a President who spends his time blaming others for an economy that he put in place. . . ."

In addition, the president seems more than willing to ignore the following stats which rate his performance:
  • According to the Economist, 40% of adults believe the economy is the top issue facing the country. 78% of adults say it is a “very” important issue to them.
  • According to Gallup, 69% of Americans are dissatisfied with the state of the U.S. economy.
Well Mr. President and members of Congress, let's remind you again as we did three and a half years ago: "It's the Economy Stupid!"

Tags: Washington, D.C., US Senate, Stock Act, US house, CLASS, the economy, CBO report, trillion dollars deficit, Barack Obama, excuses, It's the Economy Stupid To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Monday, January 30, 2012

Porker of the Month: Sen. Kent Conrad

By CAGW President Tom Schatz: Today, in commemoration/lamentation of the 1,000th day since the United States Senate Budget Committee last performed its most significant task, which is to pass a budget resolution, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) named Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) as the January 2012 "Porker of the Month". The last time the Senate approved a budget was April 29, 2009. The House has voted in favor of two budget resolutions during the past two years.

Today marks an important milestone in fiscal ineptitude and mindless brinksmanship. When the Senate last passed a budget, the national debt was an already appalling $11.15 trillion. In 2011, House Republicans drafted and passed a budget plan that would dramatically reduce America’s deficit and debt. The only Senate actions on budget resolutions last year were to vote 97-0 against President Obama’s fiscal year (FY) 2012 budget and 40-57 against House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (D-Wis.) Roadmap for America’s Future.

Since April 2009, the budget deficit has exceeded $1 trillion for three straight years, and the national debt has climbed by more than $4 trillion to $15.27 trillion. Chairman Conrad’s bewildering reputation as a budget hawk makes his legislative catatonia all the more frustrating.

Sen. Kent Conrad
The lack of activity by Chairman Conrad has not gone unnoticed. In June 2011, Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle (R-NY) introduced the “Just Do Your Job” Act, which would prohibit further transfer of funds to the House or Senate Budget Committees and the corresponding Office of the Majority Leader if that body of Congress failed to approve a budget resolution for FY 2012. As Rep. Buerkle pointed out at the time, “Even the Libyan government, in the middle of a civil war, passed a budget on June 15, 2011.”

However, Chairman Conrad and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have made it clear that their decision to not enact a budget resolution is conscious, unified, and partisan. In a May 23, 2011 article in The Washington Examiner, Majority Leader Reid said, “There’s no need to have a Democratic budget, in my opinion. It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.” The Examiner article also noted Chairman Conrad’s intent to “defer” work on the fiscal year (FY) 2012 budget indefinitely.

Consequently, for being the "Kim Kardashian of the Senate budget entourage" and cashing a hefty paycheck for doing nothing in the last 1,000 days, CAGW names Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad its January 2011 Porker of the Month.
 -------------
CAGW is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government. Porker of the Month is a dubious honor given to lawmakers, government officials, and political candidates who have shown a blatant disregard for the interests of taxpayers.


Tags: CAGW, Kent Conrad, porker, porker of the month, January 2012, no budget, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

The Culture War Continues

Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: The economy has dominated the headlines, but the radical secularists have not stopped their assault against our values. Last week, a Rhode Island high school was ordered to remove a prayer that has hung in the school since 1963. According to a federal judge, the prayer "violated the principle of government neutrality in religion." Read the banned prayer that is so "harmful" to our students.
Sadly, too many judges today are deeply confused about the meaning of the First Amendment. It guarantees the freedom of religion, so that all may flourish free from government interference, not a freedom from religion. But the First Amendment has been so twisted now that left-wing judges routinely use it to force our schools to be "faith free" zones.

For example, religious liberty and free speech rights are under fire in Wisconsin after a student-run school newspaper published pro and con editorials on the subject of homosexual adoption. A Christian student wrote the editorial opposing homosexual adoption and cited the Scriptures as one reason to oppose it. His editorial resulted in a formal complaint being filed against the school district by a gay parent.

The school quickly issued an apology for the "offensive" letter. According to the Christian Post, Superintendent Todd Carlson said that the article did not follow school policies, and "the 15-year-old's opinion piece constituted 'bullying.'" The student was reportedly threatened with suspension and banned from writing on topics related to "religion, politics, or social issues."

But by punishing this student for expressing his Christian faith, school officials are hardly being neutral. Instead, they are using government force to express their hostility toward faith and free speech.

In Maryland, Democrat Governor Martin O'Malley is doing damage control after his wife, a Baltimore judge, referred to opponents of same-sex marriage as "cowards." An attempt to legalize same-sex marriage last year was defeated in the Democrat-dominated state after a revolt by black pastors who objected to a radical redefinition of marriage and the left's frequent comparison of homosexual rights to civil rights.

Let me repeat: The culture war is very real. While some on the right mistakenly call for a "truce" on values issues, the left has no intention of letting up until it has fundamentally transformed America on every level -- from taxes and spending to the values we will pass on to our children and grandchildren. This election will decide whether we stop this assault on family, faith and freedom or whether we continue "slouching toward Gomorrah."
-------------
Gary Bauer is is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families

Tags: Culture War, school prayer, banned prayer, Rhode Island, slouching toward Gomorrah, Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Obama-Nomics - In A Pigs Snout - Fool's Gold

by A.F. Branco:

Tags: AF Branco, political cartoon, Obama-Nomics, In A Pigs Snout, Fool's Gold To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Another Obama "Green Energy Investment" Lays Off Workers

"How Green Energy Works" by Glenn McCoy
Today in Washington, D.C. - Jan. 30, 2011:
At 4:30 pm, the U.S. Senate will take up the motion to proceed to S. 2083, the STOCK Act, which would prohibit Members of Congress from using nonpublic insider information for trading or personal gain. It’s important to note, though, that the STOCK Act does not apply to officials in the executive branch. At 5:30 pm, a vote is scheduled on cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 2083.

In a must-read editorial today, The Wall Street Journal writes, “President Obama keeps pushing the (Warren) Buffett rule that nobody making more than $1 million a year should pay less than 30% in taxes. He'd do better by the economy if he adopted a Solyndra Rule, in which no company touting unproven and expensive technology should receive millions in taxpayer subsidies. After the demise of Solyndra (with its $535 million loan guarantee) and Beacon Power ($43 million loan guarantee), last week saw the bankruptcy of Indiana-based lithium-ion battery maker Ener1. In 2009 an Ener1 subsidiary was awarded a grant worth up to $118 billion from the Energy Department, with Vice President Joe Biden touring and touting its factory a year ago. Like Solyndra, Ener1 was a foolhardy bet for taxpayer cash. Founded in 2002, Ener1 had not turned a profit by the time of its grant and has proceeded to hemorrhage the $55 million of the DOE money it has received to date. Its losses in fiscal 2010 were $165 million.”

Yet Ener1 isn’t even the latest problem for a so-called “green energy” company that received millions in taxpayer dollars from the Obama administration. The Las Vegas Sun reported last week, “Just seven months after California-based solar power company Amonix Inc. opened its largest manufacturing plant, in North Las Vegas, the company’s contractor has laid off nearly two-thirds of its workforce. Flextronics Industrial, the Singapore solar panel manufacturer that partnered with Amonix to staff the new $18 million, 214,000-square-foot plant, laid off about 200 of its 300-plus employees Tuesday. . . . Amonix received a $5.9 million investment tax credit through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act in 2010, and another $12 million in private capital helped finance the plant.”

The WSJ adds, “Mr. Obama is undeterred. In last week's speech, he defended his taxpayer ‘investments’ in private commercial companies, noting that ‘some technologies don't pan out, some companies fail.’" He would know. Though perhaps if Mr. Obama weren't throwing hundreds of millions down the green sinkhole, he wouldn't have to target the nation's real job creators for higher taxes to foot his losses.”

As Sen. Mitch McConnell told CNN’s Candy Crowly yesterday, “[President Obama has] been in office for three years. He got everything he wanted from a completely compliant Congress for two of those three years. You don't hear him mention any of that. What he's been engaged in since the bus tours began last August is trying to convince the American people that somebody else is standing in his way. … Well, the election is in November and we'll find out how people feel about the record of this administration. Did they like the stimulus? Did they like Obamacare? Did they like the new taxes? Did they like the size of the debt? This election will unquestionably be a referendum on his performance. And he owned the government the first two years. He got everything he wanted, and, Candy, there's no mistaking, we are living in the Obama economy.”

Tags: Obama administration, green energy, failing companies, federal spending, Washington, D.C. U.S. Senate To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Sunday, January 29, 2012

SOPA -- Just Say No.

Mike Landry
By Mike Landry, Contributing Author: In 1980 Alvin Toffler in his classic book The Third Wave predicted that the coming digital age would radically alter the world as did the industrial revolution. While Toffler at the time did not know the word “internet,” he predicted with amazing accuracy how networked computers would change our lives by the year 2000.

That digital change has smashed the business models of travel agencies, movie studios, record producers, the post office, newspapers, photography (imagine, Kodak bankrupt), and telecommunications. Despite the technical progress, legal concepts of intellectual property now lag. They are in an era of big media corporations used to being protected by barriers to entry like locomotive-sized printing presses, broadcast towers reaching a third of a mile into the sky, multimillion dollar production equipment, and century old concepts of distribution systems.

But it’s all changing.  Rapidly.

Now a 14-year-old in his bedroom can operate an electronic newspaper, a television and radio station, an editing suite for his garage band or movie production, and a retailing company. Or he can run it all out of his backpack or back pocket -- even Toffler failed to foresee tablets and smart phones (neither did Star Trek, for that matter).

But the legacy media are fighting back.

Threatened by cheap technology and the obsolescence of a distribution system going back to the sales of sheet music, record labels launched lawsuits on their customers. People just want to steal our product, they cried. Not entirely true, as Steve Jobs demonstrated with iTunes, which had seven-figure sales its very first week. Jobs knew most people are willing to pay for a product when it is marketed using contemporary technology.

Then there was the notorious Righthaven, a Las Vegas law firm that would sue individuals posting online articles from Righthaven’s client newspapers. No warning, no takedown notice, just a lawsuit for $75,000 and perhaps confiscation of your domain name. And then Righthaven would be willing to settle for a few thousand dollars. Righthaven’s founder bragged that it was a great business plan – go to court or settle, he couldn’t lose. But he did when a federal court revealed Righthaven was in a partnership with a newspaper publisher and was not entitled to file copyright suits. But perhaps Righthaven is an extreme case – it was not about copyright protection; it was about legal extortion or what Wired magazine called “copyright trolling.”

Which brings us to something more ominous than a rogue law firm or tone deaf record companies (no pun intended) suing the customers -- the proposed federal Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and companion Protect IP Act (PIPA). The basic thrust of SOPA is that internet providers like Google or YouTube will become civilly or criminally liable for posting material that violates copyright.

Copyright protection is important. And copyright holders should have the right to go after those infringing upon those copyrights. No argument there. But holding internet providers liable will destroy the basic function of the internet – free exchange of information. With the millions of pieces of information moving around the net, there is no way internet service providers can police it all for copyright infringement.

Internet service providers, like transportation companies and utilities, are common carriers. They are open to all who desire their services and they cannot be held liable for unknowingly allowing criminal activity to flourish through their services.

For example, if an escaping convict buys a bus ticket, the bus company – if it does not know the person is an escapee -- must provide transportation. It cannot be held liable for aiding in an escape. It would be ludicrous for the bus company to do criminal background checks on every passenger wanting to ride (Shhhh – don’t give the Transportation Security Administration any ideas).

If a person has a house and seeks electric or gas service, the common carrier utilities must provide it, assuming bills are paid. The utilities are not liable if a person uses the house to run a meth lab because under normal circumstances they could not know. (Although Homeland Security is seeking a change: “If you see something, say something” they whisper to the electric meter reader).

At this writing, members of Congress are backing off their support of SOPA. Constituents are complaining and when thousands of web sites went dark on January 18 it presumably got the message across. But that did not stop the U. S. Justice Department on January 20 from announcing criminal indictments against people involved in the Megaupload file sharing site and shutting down the site. Which raises the question: if the feds can already make such a move (and have people in New Zealand and other countries arrested for alleged piracy), who needs SOPA? And is all this criminal activity? As Megaupload defense attorney Ira Rothkin said: “It’s a civil case in disguise.”

There needs to be copyright protection. We have courts for that. If I post a Disney short online, Disney can come after me. But leave YouTube out of it. And, of course, there are already laws on the books regarding libel, terroristic threatening, pornography, etc. They can be applied to the internet with perhaps some minimal – minimal! – tinkering to adjust to technological realities.

Besides legacy media calling for extreme steps in copyright protection, there are also two possible back stories regarding SOPA. One is that it’s all about control. Governments hate – hate! – the freewheeling communication offered by the internet. Threats of copyright-related indictments will slow down the exchange of free information. That makes big government happy.

The other possible back story of SOPA is the opportunity for lots of litigation. With so many lawyers in Congress, litigation is a language they readily understand. Perhaps the bill shouldn’t be called SOPA, but “FEFLA:” the Full Employment for Lawyers Act. Lots of money to be made holding deep pocket internet service providers like Google liable.

A positive thing about the SOPA issue was how internet providers responded. Some shut down for a day. It was not enough to disrupt things, but it caused some inconvenience and got the message across.

Finally, businesses decided to stand up to the increasing control of the federal government. It’s about time.

Farmers, oil companies, and truckers are you paying attention?
-------------
Dr. Mike Landry is a university business professor, a former minister, journalist, radio talk show host, and contributor to the ARRA News Service. He is actively involved with the Arkansas' Washington County Tea Party and he blogs at the Wildcat Creek Review where this article was first posted.

Tags: Mike Landry, SOPA, Say No, technology, copyright, free speech, fair use To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

No Moral Judgments

by Kerby Anderson, Point of View: There is growing evidence that the moral education in our schools are making it harder and harder for students to make moral judgments. In my book, Christian Ethics in Plain Language, I write about a professor who said he has never met a student who denied the Holocaust happened. But he also reported that 10 to 20 percent of his students cannot bring themselves to say that killing millions of people is wrong.

Chuck Colson provided me with another powerful example when he quoted from an article written in Education Forum. The particular article was written by Dr. Stephen Anderson and carries the title “Moment of Startling Clarity.” He was teaching a philosophy class in Canada and had been talking about social justice issues. In an effort to get his students thinking, he decided to shock them and make them commit to an ethical judgment.

He opened the discussion by showing them a photo of Bibi Aisha. You may have seen this photo before. She was the Afghani teenager who was forced into an abusive marriage with a Taliban fighter. He abused her and kept her with the animals. When she attempted to flee, her family caught her, hacked off her nose and ears, and left her for dead in the mountains. After crawling to her grandfather’s house, she was saved by a nearby American hospital.

If you haven’t see the picture of her, let me just say it is hard to look at. Stephen Anderson was sure that the students seeing the suffering of this poor girl would have a clear ethical reaction. He was wrong. Many of the students had trouble looking at the picture, but they also had trouble making a moral judgment.

He says that the students were essentially confused. The didn’t seem to know what to think. When they did speak, they went out of their way to avoid making any moral judgment. They said things like, “We might not like it, but maybe over there it’s okay.” Another said (with no awareness of the self-contradiction) that, “It’s just wrong to judge other cultures.”

This is what moral education has given us today. Students seem almost unable to make a moral judgment even in the face of a horrible action. I’m Kerby Anderson, and that’s my point of view.
-----------
Kirby Anderson is an author, lecturer, visiting professor and radio host and contributor on nationally syndicated "Point of View" and the "Probe" radio programs.

Tags: Kerby Anderson, Point of View, moral judgements, moral education, Christian Ethics, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Top 1 Percent Paid 38 Percent of Taxes

by Rob Bluey: President Obama used his State of the Union address Tuesday to outline his idea of fairness. To put it simply, that means redistributing wealth by raising taxes on the most successful Americans.

“If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes,” Obama declared. He added: “Now, you can call this class warfare all you want. But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense.”

Heritage’s Curtis Dubay challenged Obama’s characterization of the so-called “Buffett Rule.” Dubay said it was a fallacy.

“The President can claim success on this one even before he ends his speech tonight because the Buffett Rule is already soundly in place,” Dubay wrote in response to Obama’s speech. “According to the CBO, the top 1% of income earners pay 30 percent of their income in all federal taxes.”

This week’s chart reveals the top 10 percent of income earners paid 70 percent of all federal income taxes in 2008, while the bottom 50 percent paid only 3 percent. Remarkably, 49 percent of U.S. households paid no federal income tax at all.

Tags: Buffett Rule, Chart of the Week, class warfare, fairness, income tax, President Obama, state of the union, taxes, Rob bluey To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Surprised! Herman Cain Endorses Gingrich

Cain: "I am endorsing the people!"
Bill Smith, Editor: This evening, at a dinner in West Palm Beach, Florida, former presidential candidate Herman Cain evidenced that he has changed his "unconventional endorsement" of "the people" to "a person." He has endorsed former House Speaker Newt Gingrich for the Republican nomination for president. Cain said, "I hereby officially and enthusiastically endorse Newt Gingrich for president of the United States. . . . I know what this sausage grinder is all about. I know he's going through this sausage grinder because he cares about the American people."

As a former candidate, Herman Cain has earned the right to endorse whomever he wishes. However, his endorsement was a surprise to many grassroots conservatives. After having suspended his race for the nomination, Cain indicated that he would not be endorsing a specific candidate. Just nine days ago, at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference (SRLC) in Charleston, South Carolina, Cain declared that he was making "an unconventional endorsement. Not a candidate seeking the nomination. Not someone that is not running. (sic) My unconventional endorsement is the 'people.' We the People of the United States are still in charge. That is whom I am endorsing because we are the ones who are going to have to lead this revolution. We're the ones who will be able to take our power back. I am endorsing 'the people'!"

Cain's "unconventional endorsement" signaled that he was going to advance the "we the people" conservative message while not endorsing a specific Republican candidate seeking the nomination. Cain endorsed "the people," and most understood that he would support the candidate finally chosen by "the people." It will now be interesting to observe how Mr. Cain expects to speak on behalf of "We the People" having already picked his candidate to support.

Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich know each other well. They both have served the people of Georgia. Newt was as a Representative for a district in Georgia. Herman Cain has been a voice for conservative via his radio show. Also, both Cain and Gingrich have been "big name" speakers at the same conservative events.

Cain has also been viewed as a social conservative which added to his popularity. However, Cain did not endorse Rick Santorum who is the candidate closest to his social conservative beliefs. While Newt Gingrich offers what he sees as bold new ideas with regard to the economy, he has not been considered by Republican to be a credible spokesman for social conservative.

Also, there seems to be a disconnect regarding Cain's referenced "sausage grinder" comment. Cain suffered from what I believe[1] to be false allegation and attacks by the liberal media much in the same manner that were used by the media against former governor Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann.

However, the criticism of Newt Gingrich by fellow conservatives has been based on Gingrich's own past actions be they perceived immoral actions or actions while an elected official. It is interesting that the liberal media has opted to avoided attacking Newt on these situations. Potentially, they are bidding their time to see if Gingrich wins the Republican nomination. As we know, the liberal media bias has favored supporting President Obama.

Obviously Herman Cains has now evidenced his "all in" support for Newt Gingrich. And Gingrich should be very glad to have this endorsement. We also expect that Cain will be ready to support whomever wins the Republican presidential nomination. My concern is what effect this endorsement might have on Herman Cain and his message.
-------------
[1] In full disclosure, I know and respect Herman Cain and therefore did not accept as true the allegations against Herman Cain. I have covered and reported on Cain at many events including traveling with him on the 2010 Spending Revolt Bus Tour in Arkansas. As editor, I have refrained from endorsing any Republican candidate because I see positives in all of the candidates and in the end must support whomever the majority of "the people" select as the Republican presidential candidate. However, my wife and I were pulling for Cain as a presidential candidate. Herman Cain is a man who can make your soul smile.

Tags: Herman Cain, Republican, endorsement, Newt Gingrich, election 2012 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Sen. Marco Rubio Delivers Weekly GOP Address On The Promise Of America


Sen. Marco Rubio: In the Weekly Republican Address, Florida Senator Marco Rubio explains the failures of the Obama administration. He contrasts those with the promise of America that he and Republicans believe in, if the government stops doing the wrong things.

Sen. Rubio says, "As you know, earlier this week, President Obama delivered his fourth annual address to Congress. It was an opportunity for the President to talk about his accomplishments over the last three years and to lay out his plans for the year ahead.

"And he missed on both counts.

"You didn't hear much talk about the success of his Administration—and that's because there isn't much.

"Yes, this President inherited a significant national debt, but over the last three years he's made it worse. Our national debt has grown by nearly 50 percent since he took over, and now, for the first time since World War II, our national debt is larger than our country's economy.

"Yes, this President inherited an economy where unemployment was too high, but over the last three years he's made it worse. Today our unemployment rate is higher than the day he took office. In fact, since he took over, it's been stuck over 8 percent every single month.

"This President didn't talk about his record for one simple reason; he doesn't want you to know about it. But you do know about it, because you feel the failure of his leadership every single day of your life.

"The bottom line is this President inherited a country with serious problems. He asked the Congress to give him the stimulus and Obamacare to fix it. The Democrats in Congress gave it to him. And not only did it not work, it made everything worse.

"President Obama has a year left in the White House. So what are his plans now to make things better? What does he plan to do now, that he didn't do before? Well we got our answer Tuesday night. He plans to divide us against each other. To pit Americans against other Americans in the hopes of generating enough votes to get re-elected.

"He tells Americans worried about their jobs that the way to help them is to raise their bosses' taxes.

"He tells those who are hurting that the only way they can be better off, is for others to be worse off.

"He tells all of us that the only way for some of us to climb up the economic ladder is for others to be pulled down.

"This divisive rhetoric, this effort to gain political support by convincing some that they will be better off if we punish others, this stuff has never worked anywhere it's been tried.

"People end up fleeing countries who adopt economic policies based on these flawed principles. And more often than not, they come here.

"They come here because this is not who we are.

"Americans have always believed that all of us can succeed.

"That those who have made it fairly, can stay there. And those who are trying to make it will have a real chance to join them.

"This is what has made us different. This is what has made us prosperous. This is what makes us exceptional.

"And now, for the first time in my adult life, we have a President who's asking us to abandon our economic heritage.

"To become like the countries people come here to get away from.

"To become like everybody else.

"Yes, people are hurting. Yes, there is a growing gap between the rich and the poor.

"But the way to solve it is not to embrace the 'trickle up poverty' economics of other nations.

"The way to solve it is to embrace the American Free Enterprise system.

"No economic system is perfect. But the American Free Enterprise system has empowered millions of people in the past. I know, because I saw it with my own eyes.

"My father was a bartender. And I thank God every night that there was someone willing to risk their money to build a hotel on Miami Beach and later in Las Vegas where he could work.

"I thank God that there was enough prosperity in America so people could go on vacation to Miami or Las Vegas. Where people felt prosperous enough to have weddings or Bar Mitzvahs and, by the way, could leave tips in my Dad's little tip jar. Because with that money he raised us. And he gave me the opportunity to do things he never had a chance to do.

"Now, we had help along the way. I had student loans and grants from the government to help me get my education. And I went to our public school system.

"That's an important role for government to play. And so I also thank God that we had an economy prosperous enough to afford to pay for these things as well.

"So, I'll just close by saying, I hope this year will be the beginning of our work towards a new and prosperous American century.

"Because I know that this idea of a nation where anyone from anywhere can accomplish anything, it's not just something I read about in history books. I've seen it in my own life. And there's no reason why we cannot continue it here, if only we do the right things."

Tags: Senator, Marco Rubio, Florida, Republican Response, Barack Obama, White House, Economy, Debt, Unemployment, Prosperity, America Exceptional, Free Enterprise To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Missed Opportunity In the Response to the Presidents SOTU Address

By Ken Blackwell, Contributing Author: The official Republican response to the President's State of the Union Address was fine - as far as it went. But Gov. Mitch Daniels missed a golden opportunity to put before the American people a better vision of family, faith, and freedom.

Interestingly,'the only mention of family in Gov. Daniels' response was his praise for President Obama's own family. Let me stipulate: The Obama family is a model family, apparently devoted to one another. The president even lives happily under the same roof with his mother-in-law. Now, that's devotion.

But Gov. Daniels could have noted that the policies of the Obama administration are the most antagonistic to the family of any administration in history. This is a fact. With 42% of American children born out-of-wedlock, a tragedy of fatherlessness is being visited on millions of homes. Bill Bennett rightly calls this "the broken hearth." And broken hearths lead to broken hearts.

Does the president address this in his budget? No. Instead, he gives hundreds of millions to Planned Parenthood, the world's leading trafficker in abortion. We know that the more sexual contacts young people have prior to marriage, the more likely they are never to marry, or to divorce after marriage. You cannot be pro-family and shovel money at this evil enterprise. This is one shovel-ready project we should reject.

Yet, President Obama has told Speaker Boehner that any cut in federal funds for Planned Parenthood is "a non-starter." President Obama has relentlessly pushed abortion at home and abroad. Obamacare is the most massive expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade. Under Obamacare, health care coverage will include abortion. Thus, we will all be forced to pay for the killing of unborn children.

The president is concerned, he tells us, about education. We must all share that concern. But he has taken over college loans, an unprecedented power grab. He does this even as his administration is menacing the liberty of every private and religious college in America. If your college does not want to push condoms in the dorms or dispense abortion-producing drugs at Student Health, the Obama administration threatens you with action.

Dr. Larry Arnn is president of Hillsdale College, a proud independent college founded by abolitionists in the 1850s. Hillsdale takes no federal funds. Dr. Arnn recently spoke of how the intact family undergirds limited government:

The principles of our country stem from the laws of Nature and Nature's God. This word "Nature" is full of rich meaning. It comes from the Latin word for birth, so of course the nature of man, and natural rights must be understood to include the process of begetting and growth by which human beings come to be . . . If families do not raise children, then the government will. What then becomes of limited government?

I offer Dr. Arnn's eloquent analysis to President Obama. That terrible figure of 42% out-of-wedlock births shows up the false promises of those who said that abortion-on-demand would end welfare and poverty. When they said that, the out-of-wedlock birthrate was less than half what it is today.

Social scientist Charles Murray has written a new book, Coming Apart, in which he shows that the dream of upward mobility for millions is being lost. In this important work, he shows that marriage and religion are central to the economic well-being of millions of Americans.

The Obama administration is actively hostile to marriage, refusing even to defend the Defense of Marriage Act. That law was passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by a Democratic president. And Mr. Obama's administration is seeking suppress the conscience rights of millions - including Catholics, Evangelicals, Lutherans, and Orthodox Jews. His radical demand that every federally-supported institution in the country dispense abortifacients is a grave threat to religious liberty.

To the fires of social discord this administration is adding fuel. To those on the lower rungs of life's ladder, asserting their God-given right to rise, this administration is breaking the first rungs. These are the issues I'd like to see both of our major parties address in 2012.
---------------
J. Ken Blackwell is a conservative family values advocate. Blackwell is a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, the American Civil Rights Union and is on the board of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. He is the co-author of the new bestseller: The Blueprint: Obama’s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency. He is a National Federation of Republican Assemblies board member and a contributing author to the ARRA News Service. Blackwell's article was also published today on TownHall

Tags: Ken Blackwell, family, faith, freedom, missed opportunity, response, Mitch Daniels, Barack Obama, State of the Union, SOTU,, 2012 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Friday, January 27, 2012

Chuck Schumer Says "We Are In Great Shape" - Oh Really?


Today in Washington, D.C. - Jan. 27, 2011:
Congress is not in session today. Yesterday, Senate Democrats voted 44-52 to block H.J. Res. 98, the resolution of disapproval of President Obama’s latest debt ceiling increase, thereby allowing the debt ceiling increase to stand.

On Monday, at 5:30 p.m., the Senate is scheduled to vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 2083, the STOCK Act, which would prohibit Members of Congress from using nonpublic insider information for trading or personal gain.

At a press conference on Wednesday, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), a key member of Senate Democrats’ leadership, took to the podium to criticize something Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN) said in his Republican Address the night before.  Oh Really, we should believe New York liberal who has helped to ruin our economy.

The issue surrounded Gov. Daniels comment, “On these evenings, Presidents naturally seek to find the sunny side of our national condition.  But when President Obama claims that the state of our union is anything but grave, he must know in his heart that this is not true.”

In response, Schumer said, “The Republican speaker last night, Mitch Daniels, talked about Americans must talk about the state of the union as grave. So, we think we are in great shape. We are in good shape.”

Schumer and the other Senate Democrats think “we are in great shape”?

Currently, over 13 million Americans are unemployed. There are fewer jobs in America than when President Obama took office in 2009, and the unemployment rate is still more than 8%. And Sen. Schumer thinks “we are in great shape”?

Yesterday, the AP reported, “Fewer people bought new homes in December. The decline made 2011 the worst year for new -homes sales on records dating back nearly half a century. The Commerce Department said Thursday new-home sales fell 2.2 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual pace of 307,000. The pace is less than half the 700,000 that economists say must be sold in a healthy economy. About 302,000 new homes were sold last year. That's less than the 323,000 sold in 2010, making last year's sales the worst on records dating back to 1963. And it coincides with a report last week that said 2011 was the weakest year for single-family home construction on record.” In December, Standard & Poor’s announced, “The Fourth Quarter Starts with Broad-based Declines in Home Prices”. And there have been 7.7 million foreclosure filings since President Obama took office. But Sen. Schumer thinks “we are in great shape”?

Today, National Journal writes, “Real Gross Domestic Product rose by just 1.7 percent in 2011, the Commerce Department reported on Friday. That's not great news for President Obama, who oversaw 3 percent GDP growth in 2010 and cannot use the latest GDP data to support a narrative of economic turnaround.” The AP notes, “The Commerce Department said Friday that the economy grew just 1.7 percent last year, roughly half of the growth in 2010 and the worst since the recession.” And University of Pennsylvania economist Justin Wolfers tells The New York Times, “At this rate, we’ll never reduce unemployment. . . . The recovery has been postponed, again.” But Sen. Schumer says “we are in great shape”?

Unfortunately, Schumer appears to have sold his soul to grievously lie about the actual state of the current economy and the present Obama legacy.  Chuck Schumer is far more qualified to be president than the present White House incumbent and is a whole lot smarter than Senator Harry Reid. To summarize this fact, Schumer received a perfect score on his SAT in High School. He attended Harvard and completed both his undergraduate degree nd his law degree, passed the bar an ran for office and winning by the age of 23. Schumer was the youngest person ever elected to the NY State Assembly.  he has been in elected office the majority of his life and has never lost an election. In 2010 Schumer easily won another 6 years. And unlike President Obama, we can confirm Schumer's academic, employment and residency records.

If we had Sen.Chuck Schumer and Gov. Mitch Daniels in the same room, we would find that we have two very very intellectually smart people. Fortunately, one is willing to speak the truth to his audience about the America's economic situation and to share his opinion, not dictates, on what must be done to restore our economy.  However, the other does the opposite.  Has Schumer become such an extreme liberal elitist that he joins the like of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in attacking the truth.

Schumer must know that America's future is more uncertain under the current president. As Sen.Mitch McConnell said Tuesday, “A better approach is to admit that [President Obama’s] three-year experiment in big-government has made our economy worse and our nation’s future more uncertain.  And that it’s time for a different approach. That’s the message Americans delivered to the President in November 2010. They’re still waiting. . . .”

Tags: Chuck Schumer, Mitch Daniels, the economy, Washington, D.C., Congress To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

CNN Debate: The Jacksonville Brawl

CNN GOP Primary Debate, Jacksonville, FL
America's Best Choice -- Erick Erickson (Diary), RedState: I’m biased, but I think the real winner last night was CNN and I feel confident I’d say that even if they didn’t send me a paycheck. After that disastrous and embarrassing NBC debate, Wolf Blitzer held his own, did not get devoured by Newt Gingrich, and engaged in a lot of substance without a lot of random questions like . . . oh . . . say . . . should states ban birth control.

Let me tell you first who lost the debate because it was in a moment with Wolf Blitzer. There was a moment he asked Newt Gingrich about Romney’s tax returns and Newt tried to say the question was inconsequential. He tied his napkin around his neck, pulled up his fork and knife, and was just about to sink his teeth into Wolf when Wolf pushed again. The crowd heckled Blitzer. Gingrich drooled over the moderator he was about to consume. “Wanna try again,” he asked mischievously. Wolf Blitzer, instead of hopping on Newt’s plate pushed once more, pointing out Gingrich had, just this week, attacked Romney on these things. The crowd reacted a bit and Gingrich suddenly tried to get everyone on stage to call a truce. Romney had none of it, instead calling on Gingrich to, in effect, man up and say to Mitt’s face the things he says elsewhere.

The crowd turned on Newt. They laughed. They jeered. Blitzer, saved from the jowls of moderator eater, went straight in to a tax question based on Romney’s taxes and Newt’s tax plan with Newt still on defense from the prior question. The moderator ate Newt. Live by the debate, die by the debate, and Newt Gingrich died in some clever rhetoric, losing the crowd both in that instance and on Mitt Romney’s stock ownership.

Mitt Romney won the debate. He and Gingrich behaved like petulant children, but Romney got under Newt’s skin in a way Newt did not get under Romney’s skin and Newt came off looking the lesser of the two. Additionally, Mitt Romney finally offered up a bold and clear answer on his wealth with a strong defense of capitalism and self-made men. There was no apology and no defense. It was precisely what he needed to do.

Though he may have won, Rick Santorum had the best night of any candidate and though Romney won on points, Santorum won on style and substance. He offered up the strongest attack yet on Romneycare, pointing out how if Romney is the nominee we cede an important line of attack on Obamacare. He rattled Romney in a way Newt did not. He acted like the adult in the room. He got himself some supporters from Newt Gingrich I’m pretty sure.

Then there was Ron Paul. Many of us quickly dismiss Ron Paul, but his performance was stellar. He offered extremely sound responses on healthcare, education, border security, and more. Very few of the questions were on foreign policy, which is where he tends to go off the reservation. Last night he came off as warm, funny, and right on the mark. It was his best debate performance. Santorum and Paul benefited from Romney and Gingrich’s constant bickering.

But Romney did what he had to do. He stopped any swing back from Gingrich. His performance more likely than not helped him secure Florida unless Gingrich can pour in money and manpower in the next 24 hours.

Tags: CNN, Republican, Primary, debate, Jacksonville, Florida, election 2012, Erick Erikson To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Comedian-in-Chief Obama

by William Warren:

Tags: SOTU, Barack Obama, comedian, Comedian-in-chief, William Warren, political cartoon To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Newt Vows to Establish a Moon Colony

Newtville Moon Colony
Pix via Moon Colony News
COCOA, Fla. (AP) - Newt Gingrich is promising to establish a permanent base on the moon by 2020 if he's elected president. Gingrich, the former House speaker, told an overflow crowd gathered on Florida's space coast Wednesday that he wants to develop a robust commercial space industry in line with the airline boom of the 1930s. He also wants to expand exploration of Mars. . . . Read More

Ozark Guru: Anyone remember why Australia was settled? Maybe Newt's Moon Colony could be a "freedomist prison colony" with a GITMO wing for Muslim terrorists who would then be guarded by members of the other wings.  Potentially, the other wings could include for starters a Jesus wing for overzealous pro-life Fundamentalist Christians and Conservative Catholics, a Mormon wing for the descendants of Romney, Beck and their supporters, and a Freedom wing for any Tea Party Patriots and Constitutionalists who are not already in the previous two wings. Am I having a Newt Dream or a nightmare? Better yet, just this once let's forget this Newtism. Hum, just a minute, what about a Mars colony?

Tags: Republican, presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich, Moon Colony, 2012, campaign rhetoric, review, satire, Ozark Guru To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!