1st collector for 2011 New Year's Eve Fireworks,Viaduct Habour - ...
Follow my videos on vodpod
Best fireworks ever for Auckland!!
1st collector for 2011 New Year's Eve Fireworks,Viaduct Habour - ...
Follow my videos on vodpod
Best fireworks ever for Auckland!!
2011 Fireworks at Auckland, NZ Sky Tower.
These are probably the first large scale fireworks of the New Year 2011, unless Christmas Island had some.
In honor of Christmas, I have set aside my normal format for this column in order to ask you a question: Do you believe in miracles?
Marie Fiala certainly does. Her family experienced God's power at one of the darkest moments of their lives.
Marie, an attorney, and her husband Kris, a business executive, had created a peaceful, happy family life with their two sons and daughter.
But everything normal in their lives -- going out for ice cream, the mad scramble in the morning to leave for school -- -came to a shattering stop the day their 13 year-old-son Jeremy collapsed on the kitchen floor, the blood vessels in his brain inexplicably hemorrhaging.
Comatose at first, then paralyzed and barely responsive, Jeremy lay at the mercy of his bleeding brain for weeks. There was little the doctors could do. In the weeks that followed, email chains updated family, friends, co-workers, unknown friends of friends -- countless people -- about Jeremy's dire situation and the family's struggle.
As Jeremy lay teetering between life and death, a family member organized an international prayer vigil asking for healing. It was a simple request, sent far and wide over the Internet: light a candle and spend one hour at 8 o'clock on a Sunday night, united with thousands of others praying together for Jeremy's recovery. So thousands did.
That night, as the vigil concluded, Marie received message after message from people profoundly touched by faith as they prayed together for Jeremy. His family felt God's presence that night and Jeremy knew the blessing of a peaceful sleep. But it was nothing dramatic -- until 24 hours later.
Surrounded by a roomful of doctors doing their usual pricks and prods, Jeremy spoke out loud. And kept speaking. The jubilant doctors were astounded. Marie, who was taking a rare break at home that night while Kris stayed with Jeremy, got an unexpected, miraculous phone call. "Hi Mom, This is Jeremy. I am sorry to wake you up. I love you."
It was the first of many miracles for Jeremy. Marie shares their story -- including her own doubts and heart-wrenching tests of faith -- in her eloquent, uplifting book, Letters From a Distant Shore. (It would make an excellent Christmas or New Year gift for those who need to be reminded that God is still in the miracle business.)
While the Christmas season seems to flush cynics and skeptics out of their dark corners, deriding believers for their "imaginary friends" and wishful thinking, God is still reaching out to all of us, waiting for us to call on Him to perform the greatest miracle of all -- transform our lives and hearts through the power of Christ.
God is real. God is powerful. And His love is strong enough to work miracles, in our hearts, bodies, workplaces, and in our culture. All we have to do is ask, with faith the size of the smallest mustard seed, hardly bigger than the period at the end of this sentence.
Roughly 80% of Americans say they believe in miracles. Do you? Do you ever ask God to work in your life?
Putting your faith on public display, open to ridicule or scorn, is always an intimidating prospect. In the days leading up to the prayer vigil, as Marie requested prayers from everyone, including sophisticated co-workers and unbelieving friends, she worried about how the request would be perceived. Would it seem desperate? Would they look like fools if Jeremy experienced no perceptible improvement?
But Marie knew that the lame can walk only when they are willing to take a step forward in faith. She was willing to trust God with the future, no matter in which direction He led.
As Christians the world over celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, we remember the power of a God who loved us enough to personally intervene in human history. Let us also claim the power of a God who loves us enough to intervene in our lives. Ask God for your Christmas miracle… and don't forget to open your heart to receive it.
Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post
It’s easy to figure out why the various dictatorships in the Middle East have made a scapegoat of Israel. It allows the various imams and sheiks to keep their oppressed masses focused on a common enemy, lest they awaken and realize that it’s not the Jews who keep the men poor and powerless and keep the women ignorant and oppressed.
Trying to figure out why government leaders, universities and individuals, in so-called civilized nations choose to side with Arabs and Muslims, who not only out-number Israel’s Jewish population 300,000-1, but who represent the antithesis of everything Americans and Europeans allegedly hold dear is the real mystery.
A visitor from another planet would see on one side a people, Israelis, who are educated and accomplished, who believe in freedom of speech, religion and assembly, who defend a free press and who subscribe to the full equality of the sexes.
On the other side, he would see people who, in the 21st century, think, live and behave no differently than their ancestors did 1300 years ago. They stone to death adulterers, they behead their enemies, they perform female mutilations as part of their religion, they make martyrs of those who suicide-bomb school buses and pizza parlors, they rain missiles down on civilians and, proving that they nevertheless have a droll sense of humor, they refer to their religion as one of peace.
If you asked the alien which group a free and democratic people would favor, he would assume it was a trick question. When told that the majority of people in the western world favored the latter group, he would assume it was a trick answer.
His next order of business would be to get back to his space ship and get away from these lunatics as fast as he could.
The question as to why America’s leaders, academicians and young people, choose to hate Israelis, why they continue to believe the worst of them even when the photos and news stories purporting to show their villainy are proven to be clumsy attempts at propaganda, can only be explained by a deep-rooted anti-Semitism.
When Americans, who have experienced not only 9/11, but scores of other brutalities at the hands of Israel’s enemies over the past 30 years, continue siding with those same enemies, it’s impossible to explain except as rampant anti-Semitism.
When a nation that is rooted in Judeo-Christian values, whose Constitution and Declaration of Independence were based on those values, sides with those who despise liberty and freedom, the contradiction cannot be explained except as an anti-Semitism that is bred in the bone. And isn’t it odd that the very same people who go around insisting that “separation of church and state” actually exists in the Constitution have no problem at all defending Muslim theocracies?
No matter how many trains are blown up in Spain, no matter how many riots and murders are committed in France or England, Russia, Germany or Holland, the anti-Semites of Europe inevitably excuse the actual perpetrators, while holding the Jews accountable.
Perhaps if God made an appearance and announced: “When I made them my chosen people, I did not choose for them to be sacrificed to the barbarians,” the world would shape up.
Short of that, my money is on the barbarians.
Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post
Email from Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA
Come To Our Office Tomorrow (VIA LIVE WEBCAST)
And Join Us As We Watch, Comment
And Analyze the House & Senate Amnesty Votes
YOU ALL HAD A GREAT DAY OF ACTIVISM TODAY.
YOU HAVE THE OPEN-BORDERS FOLKS ON THE RUN.
Action: Join our live webcast.
When the debates, arcane parliamentary maneuvers and voting start tomorrow, join our NumbersUSA staff in our conference room and watch with us.
The live streaming from our conference room will be on our home page:
We'll be doing what we always do when immigration comes to the floor for a vote -- anxiously gathering to watch how Congress responds to our days, weeks and months of mobilizing the grassroots. And discussing and arguing over what each detail means.
Nothing fancy or formal. Just turning the cameras on our staff session. But after having you in our conference room for 10 hours on Election Night, we thought you might like to join us again for this occasion.
We'll send you an email perhaps an hour before we go live. It is possible that we won't know when the debate will start until just a half-hour before.
It sounds like the House debate could start no earlier than 1 p.m. Wednesday. And then we'll turn the cameras on again when the Senate starts its debate. That is now scheduled for after 3:30 p.m. At the moment, 10 years of efforts to pass an amnesty could be resolved in just a few hours tomorrow afternoon.
Keep phoning the target congressional office Wednesday until the votes are taken.
You have the email with the list of targets for your own particular region of the country that I sent earlier today. Keep working on that list.
You know that we never advocate letting up the pressure in any way until we have won. But our reports from the Hill suggest that your torrent of faxes and phone calls helped create great turmoil today among those trying to pass the DREAM Act amnesty.
House amnesty leaders are desperately seeking some kind of Hail Mary pass to pull out a last-minute victory.
They apparently still can't persuade 218 Representatives to vote YES on the DREAM amnesty, so they are talking about combining it with the AgJobs amnesty for a few million illegal aliens who can claim some past agricultural work. Their thought is that they can attract some extra Republicans who won't be willing to vote against something that big agri-business wants.
Of course, their plan would also create an amnesty that is twice the size to attract politicians who are squeamish about DREAM being too big.
Your phone calls Wednesday need to keep everybody in Congress as squeamish as possible.
Be sure you have sent all the faxes posted on your customized Action Board:
I apologize for how sluggish our website was today for many of you. We are going to have to expand our capacities, but what a great problem to have so many Americans trying to take action against a bill that would be sure to enlarge by millions the number of future illegal aliens and of additional workers competing against unemployed Americans within what everybody agrees will be a job shortage for many years to come.
Take a look at my new blog for extra ammunition in your faxes and phone calls.
THANKS FOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK.
MAYBE WE CAN END THESE AMNESTY THREATS ONCE AND FOR ALL TOMORROW!
|USS Arizona burning in Pearl Harbor|
"December 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. ... Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory. ... With confidence in our armed forces -- with the unbounded determination of our people -- we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help us God." --Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat far removed from today's crop of defeatists
On that fateful "Day of Infamy," 353 Japanese planes attacked a military target at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, killing 2,390 American servicemen and civilians and wounding 1,282. The attack sank or damaged eight battleships, three cruisers, three destroyers and one minelayer and destroyed 188 aircraft. It took four years and the full military-industrial capability of the United States to defeat Japan.
It is with honor and respect for those who died or suffered terrible injuries that Sunday morning that we should never again fall into the slumber that allowed such a tragedy as Pearl Harbor -- or the attack on Sept. 11, 2001 -- again.
(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)
Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post
Iran's the problem and our "leadership" is allowing it to happen!!! See who the real power in Iran is. (Hint: It's NOT Ahmadinejad!)
Wafa Sultan speaks in an interview broadcast from Cyprus-based al-Hayat TV. She criticizes accentuations of the negative in Islamic culture in the Arab world and what she perceives to be their roots. She offers a few words for Yusuf al-Qaradhawi, the cleric who lambasted her for her March debate appearance on al-Jazeera. Wafa further criticizes other aspects of Islam that she believes to be wrong.
Appearing Sunday on ABC's "This Week," Senator-elect Rand Paul (R-KY.) told host Christiane Amanpour he would push for a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
This is an idea whose time has come. In 1994, Republicans campaigned -- and won -- on a balanced budget amendment (as part of the Contract with America). Back then, the deficit was just $203 billion. Today, the national deficit is at $1.4 trillion (that's roughly $3,500 for each American, and some $14,000 for each family of four in deficit spending just this year alone).
Most states require their elected officials to balance their budget each year, but no such requirement impedes the reckless spending of the United States federal government. A constitutional amendment would bar the federal government from spending more money than it brings in each year -- and require a supermajority in order to raise taxes. This is not a radical idea, but the consequences of failing to enact such a measure cannot be overstated.
Fortunately, as evidenced by the Tea Party movement, there appears to finally be the political will required to get this done. Newly elected Republicans simply must realize they weren't elected to merely "trim" spending or "slow down" the rate of government growth, but rather, to cut, de-authorize and balance the budget. (If they fail to grasp this fact, it will be a short and depressing two years).
It is also worth noting that the conservative movement is united behind this cause.
That Senator-Elect Paul was the one to reignite this debate after the GOP's historic victory on Tuesday is not terribly surprising -- he campaigned on this. And though he represents the libertarian wing of the conservative movement (his father ran for president as a Libertarian), his vocal support is indicative of the broad-based support for this amendment.
The financial crisis has galvanized the disparate elements of the conservative movement, just as the threat of Communism united the "three legs" of the conservative movement during the Reagan years (like Communism, the deficit has become an existential threat to our freedom).
As a Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment at the Family Research Council (FRC), I've seen first hand that social conservatives view the economic crisis -- and, more specifically, a balanced budget -- as a moral issue. Similarly, national security conservatives realize it's a security issue (America's debt is being lent by foreign interests, with China being the largest single holder). This is an issue that transcends the normal dividing lines, and unites us.
Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a solid full-spectrum conservative who is just as at home at a Club for Growth Meeting as he is at a Christian Coalition dinner, and others, are expected to lead the charge on a balanced budget amendment. The additional Tea Party conservatives who were elected on Tuesday will aid them. But they will need reinforcements.
That's why I have agreed to serve as chairman for a new group, 'Balanced Budget Amendment Now.'
Our organization will launch an aggressive campaign to pass a balanced budget amendment. This will include building an infrastructure needed to enlist a minimum of 5,000 supporters in each Congressional district to urge their Members of Congress to vote for an amendment.
Our goal is to accomplish a vote on a balanced budget amendment by October 1, 2011. (Senator-Elect Mike Lee (R-UT) has graciously agreed to draft the balanced budget amendment language for us -- and to enlist the support of his colleagues).
There are many issues vital to our future, but I can think of none more worthy than this effort.
In 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke of the "fierce urgency of now." I would urge all Americans to consider the urgency of passing a balanced budget amendment.
Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post
Do Americans share President Obama’s desire to impose redistributive social justice on the well off? In liberal Washington State, of all places, voters gave a definitive answer this Tuesday: No! The resounding rejection of a punitive “Robin Hood” initiative shows that it’s not just red-state Republicans who oppose extreme tax hikes on the nation’s wealth generators.
As Capitol Hill resumes debate on whether to extend the so-called “Bush tax cuts,” the White House should pay special heed to the fate of little-noticed Initiative 1098. Its defeat by a whopping 65-35 margin doesn’t bode well for Team Obama’s class warriors still clinging bitterly to their soak-the-rich schemes. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner insisted this summer that saddling higher earners with higher taxes was “the responsible thing to do.” Given the chance to weigh in at the ballot box, a diverse majority of voters in the other Washington determined otherwise.
The Evergreen State is just one of seven states in the nation without a personal income tax. The ballot measure, which would have enacted a state income tax on the wealthiest 1 percent of Washington residents to raise $2 billion for bankrupt public schools, was sponsored by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his left-wing corporate lawyer father. Top donors? The Service Employees International Union, whose state and national chapters threw in a combined $2.5 million of its members’ hard-earned dues money, and the National Education Association, which pitched in nearly $760,000.
Hiding behind kiddie human shields, the I-1098 campaign assailed the wealthy for “not paying their fair share” and plastered their campaign literature with sad-faced students and toddlers. Big Labor has been pushing a punish-the-wealthy movement for months. According to Forbes magazine, “six of the 10 states with the highest income tax rates — Oregon, California, Hawaii, New York, New Jersey and North Carolina — raised their levies on high earners, at least temporarily” last year.
But business owners large and small, representing companies from Bartell Drugs to Amazon.com, successfully fought back against the job-killing measure in Washington State. Disavowing the Gateses, Microsoft honcho Steve Ballmer also joined the opposition. The software company’s senior executives expressed grave concern “about the impact I-1098 will have on the state’s ability to attract top tech talent in the future.” Liberal newspaper editorial boards including the Seattle Times and Tacoma News Tribune added their objections, citing I-1098′s reckless targeting of wealth-creation in the middle of a recession and the inevitable extension and increase of income taxes to the middle class. And economists at the independent, nonpartisan Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University found that I-1098′s tax burdens would lengthen and deepen the current economic downturn by destroying private sector jobs, reducing residents’ disposable income and prolonging the state’s high unemployment rate.
Amber Gunn of the free-market Evergreen Freedom Foundation in Olympia, Wash., gave the bottom line on I-1098′s unreality-based advocates: “Initiative proponents like to operate in a Keynesian world where higher tax rates and their effects on human behavior and competitiveness among states don’t matter. But those effects are present in the real world and must be accounted for.”
I-1098′s promoters tried to disguise their wealth-suppression vehicle as tax “relief” by tossing in a few stray targeted cuts. But they were called out by a judge and slapped with a court order to make the income tax burden explicit in the ballot title.
If only the taxmen in Washington, D.C., were required to do the same. Obama’s budget proposal is a soak-the-rich scheme adorned with a few business tax breaks that would — for starters — impose nearly $1 trillion in higher taxes on couples making more than $250,000 and individuals making more than $200,000. Some “relief.”
On Thursday afternoon, still smarting from the nationwide “shellacking” the Democrats received on Election Day, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs signaled that Obama would be willing to “entertain” temporary — not permanent — tax relief for the nation’s highest earners. But a time-limited reprieve in prolonged economic hard times is expedient politics and bad policy. Tax relief should be all or none. The new House majority should force the Democrats to choose.
Republicans must stop allowing the White House to demonize America’s entrepreneurs and producers. By continuing to refer to them as beneficiaries of the “Bush tax cuts” instead of as the besieged victims of Obama tax increases, the GOP cedes the moral high ground. It’s time to make the White House own its noxious war on wealth.
Read more excellent articles from Family Security Matters
AIFD PRESS RELEASE: AIFD American Islamic Forum for Democracy
SQ755 protects the sanctity of the U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause and the rule of One Law
PHOENIX (November 5, 2010) - Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the president and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) issued the following statement regarding the passage of Oklahoma's State Question 755.
"As Muslims dedicated to modernity, reform and our one law system in the west and in the United States, AIFD applauds the people of Oklahoma for passing State Question 755 and making "the legal precepts of other nations or cultures" off-limits to Oklahoma courts and specifically denying the use of Sharia Law.
The issue is simple. As Americans we believe in the Constitution, the Establishment Clause, and our one law system. SQ755 reaffirms the First amendment to the Constitution and prevents the Establishment or empowerment of a foreign legal system like the specific shariah legal systems implemented in many Muslim majority nations and in western shariah courts seen in places like Britain.
By filing a lawsuit, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has wasted no time in proving once again that they are unable to stand behind public declarations that the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights and our one law system supersede and are preferable to a sharia law system. They are using the American cover of religious freedom to try and knock down a simple law that prohibits the domination of one religion over others.
SQ755 is not about religious freedom or minority rights. It is about the inviolable sanctity of the U.S. constitution and our country's foundational belief in a legal system based in one law that is based in reason and individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The law has no impact on the personal practice of Islam or the personal interpretation of "shariah" (God's law to a Muslim), but rather SQ755 focuses on shariah as a total legal system that the people of Oklahoma wanted to make clear shall not be used or respected systemically in deciding law in Oklahoma. CAIR's assertion that it is akin to France's ban of the hijab or personal head covering for women is absurd. There is no evidence that this law prevents any of the personal manifestation of the practice of Islam or the use of personal religious principles in arguing law based in reason in state or federal court. Shariah as a legal system can just not be used as prima facie evidence in court.
SQ755 also thus prevents the establishment of separate shariah or Islamic courts in Oklahoma. As we have seen in Britain, Islamists have transformed the British arbitration system to the point that they are operating upwards of 85 shariah courts now. These courts are mostly operated out of mosques in Britain. While they claim that the courts are voluntary, as Canadians voiced loudly in their rejection of shariah courts, these groups exploit tribal pressures and coercion within Muslim communities in order to circumvent the one law and one legal system of Britain and western nations. It is naïve and ignorant to believe that such courts are purely "voluntary". Just ask many of the women who get pressured through them and pressured to stay "out of western un-Islamic courts."
CAIR's lawsuit proves that they are part of an Islamist establishment in America that do not and will not believe in the separation of mosque and state and that they promote the ideology of political Islam. This ideology is based in a belief in the supremacy of Islamic legal systems and is often a conveyer belt toward radicalization. CAIR shows once again that they are part of the problem not the solution.
To those who say "Why Oklahoma?", we say "Why not Oklahoma?" The Oklahoma precedent and example is important. It has already showed CAIR's hand and where they place shariah law in relation to the Constitution. CAIR flippantly states that the law is not necessary. By implying that Islam and shariah are inseparable they demonstrate a willful denial of the internationally pervasive draconian shariah law systems around the world in places like Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia to name a few, and how academically clear the legal system of shariah law is. Note should be made of how CAIR's response to SQ755 does not address any of the harms instituted against Muslims and non-Muslims around the world in the name of shariah law.
AIFD and most reformist Muslims believe a ban on shariah courts is necessary to protect the rights of the individual and in particular the rights of women."
About the American Islamic Forum for Democracy
The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization. AIFD's mission advocates for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state. For more information on AIFD, please visit our website at http://www.aifdemocracy.org/
Hope you have a good laugh.
Our new video mash-up captures what this election was about - the state of the economy, jobs, and government overspending -- not party devotion.
Voters are anxiously searching for elected officials - regardless of political affiliation - who understand the consequences of government overspending and will respond to economic uncertainty by governing and budgeting responsibly.
Americans are looking for leaders who will restore economic certainty and fiscal sanity.
Will the leaders elected Tuesday respond to the call?
Stay informed, take action. Sign up at http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
For Immediate Release
Contact: David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or (703) 568-4727 or firstname.lastname@example.org
Judy Kent at (703) 759-7476 or email@example.com
Free Speech "Schizophrenia": Left Claims to Support Freedom and Openness, Yet Up in Arms that Andrew Breitbart Might Express an Opinion on ABC News
Washington, D.C. - Members of the Project 21 black leadership network are expressing disgust over the left's lack of real respect for the First Amendment in light of the uproar among professional liberals that ABC News invited conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart to contribute opinions on election night.
"Silencing speech is the consistent theme used by progressives," said Project 21 full-time Fellow Deneen Borelli. "Not too long ago, NPR threw Juan Williams under the bus because he expressed his feelings, and now ABC News is experiencing the wrath of the left for inviting Andrew Breitbart to appear as a commentator on election night. Progressives will conveniently play the race card or launch smear campaigns in their desperate attempt to control conservative thought."
Breitbart is scheduled to take part in an online election night town hall meeting at Arizona State University to be moderated by ABC News anchor David Muir and Randi Zuckerberg of Facebook. The far-left Media Matters for America, a long-time Breitbart critic, claims the network "puts its credibility on the line" by associating with Breitbart.
Media Matters also published the opinion of Rose Sanders, the attorney for Shirley Sherrod, the former U.S. Department of Agriculture official fired by the Obama White House after a video of part of a speech she gave to a local NAACP event was posted online by Breitbart, and sought, but failed to obtain, the opinion of Sherrod herself. Sanders recklessly compared inviting Breitbart to participate in a media event was like "giving a Klansman an award for burning a cross on Shirley Sherrod's house."
"Shirley Sherrod's lawyer personifies the liberal schizophrenia on the subject of free speech," noted Project 21 member Jerome Hudson. "The Left cannot on one hand be champions of decency and openness and then attempt to suppress Andrew Breitbart's views on the other."
Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives since 1992, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research (http://www.nationalcenter.org
Read more informative articles at The National Center for Public Policy Research
Posted by RightChange
Based on Apple's 1984 MAC commercial that marked a new era in computers, and based on the George Orwell book 1984, RightChange introduces our closing argument on the Obama Administration and the 111th Congress for the 2010 Midterm Cycle. This is also the Kick-off for the 2012 Presidential Cycle for RightChange. The New Politizoid "1984 - Big Brother" may be our best yet! "Vote Different."
Cast: Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, George Soros, Maxine Waters, Moveon.org and Louis Farrakhan in their own words. Yes. These are their actual words.
By Tim Potts
This Year's Voting Scam
We received word today of a new voting scam -- Internet voting. If anyone contacts you and suggests that you avoid long lines by voting online, don't do it. PA does not have online voting.
Click here for an article about this from the Nashua, New Hampshire Telegraph.
We know we're preaching to the choir, but please be sure to vote on Election Day. Voting is our muscle as citizens. And like a muscle, it will atrophy if we don't use it. And while you're at it, help a friend get to the polls.
Finally, tune in to the Pennsylvania Cable Network on election night for coverage from around the state. DR's Tim Potts will be providing commentary from 11:00 p.m. to midnight. Click here to find PCN on your cable system.
If you value news about the problems of corruption and the solutions
of integrity, please support our work with a contribution.
Just click here to make an online donation, or send a donation to:
Democracy Rising PA, P.O. Box 618, Carlisle, PA 17013.
Democracy Rising Pennsylvania P.O. Box 618, Carlisle, PA 17013
In only 21 months, the tea party has exploded from a handful of scattered, spontaneous rallies into a full-fledged national movement capable of throwing out incumbents. Challenging entrenched Washington habits, it is a force both parties must reckon with.
Skeptics and opponents, however, continue to ask two basic questions. First, does the tea party have any real philosophical depth, a historical pedigree? Second, will its force dissipate after the elections?
In short, critics accept that the tea party has a present — but they question whether it has a past and a future.
Yes and yes. Yes, the tea party has a pedigree as old as our nation, and yes, we think it is likely to continue to play a significant role in politics after Nov. 2. People in both parties who hope to wish it away and continue business as usual had better think twice.
Americans have been disappointed by leaders in both parties who campaigned to right past wrongs and then, after getting to Washington, cared more about power than promises. Tea party supporters care more about principle than party labels or politics.
Tea party members voice the kinds of concerns that even some of President Barack Obama’s former supporters are beginning to raise. As one Obama voter asked the president at a recent town hall, “Is the American dream dead for me?”
These are the questions Americans are asking nationwide — in their kitchens, church halls and ballparks. These are the concerns expressed at tea party rallies everywhere.
The tea party seeks answers to such questions not in the dictates of Washington today but in our country’s founding principles. There, it finds a prescription for constitutional, limited government based on God-given rights — not a Utopian blueprint for bureaucratic-managed change.
The tea party, in other words, is that inner voice that speaks to us when things go wrong — the conscience of the nation at a crucial point in our history.
What has gone wrong is clear. The “stimulus” package has failed to get this country back on its feet. The latest unemployment figures show that we still have anemic growth and nearly 10 percent unemployment. As Americans suffered, Washington wasted its time on a gargantuan, unmanageable and unaffordable health care package. No wonder many Americans feel frustrated.
But underneath the frustration, the tea party has roots that are deeper and aim higher. Deeper because it is within the best tradition of popular movements in our history — from the Great Awakening that gave rise to the American Revolution to the conservative revival that helped elect Ronald Reagan. Higher because it aims to recover our moral compass, bequeathed by our Founders and preserved ever since.
The tea party also symbolizes Americans’ indomitable desire for a better life. It reminds us that we’re a country of free people who understand that liberty is fragile and must be vigilantly defended.
Some past grass-roots movements have succeeded, and others have failed. Success comes because the energy of the moment is translated into a lasting, governing philosophy consistent with the settled opinions of the American people.
On this score, prospects look good. The tea party isn’t about to go away after the November elections. Its powerful message of limited government is likely to remain a sharp thorn in the side of those in both parties who want to continue politics as usual.
Take Obama’s health care package, which tea partiers have labeled “Obamacare.” Obama and Democrats rammed this through Congress, against the wishes of a majority of the American people.
But the repealing legislation should not itself contain some new massive health care plan. Even if the legislation offers good policy, the tea party is here to remind Republicans that pushing large, unexamined bills through Congress is wrong. We need to repeal Obamacare immediately, then openly debate and pass conservative-drawn, sensible and broadly supported health care reform.
It’s no surprise that pollsters Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen found that more than “half of the electorate now say they favor the tea party movement, around 35 percent say they support the movement, 20 [percent] to 25 percent self-identify as members of the movement and 2 [percent] to 7 percent say they are activists.”
This means that all those protesters with their Constitutions at tea party rallies nationwide represent millions of fellow Americans. The answers they seek won’t be found in the thousands of pages of new legislation coming out of Washington.
They are in those documents that first defined this nation and provide the most just framework for a free people to work hard, play by the rules and succeed.
Ed Feulner is president of The Heritage Foundation. Sen. Jim DeMint is a Republican from South Carolina.
Read more informative articles at The Patriot Post
Posted by vladtepesblogdotcom
An excellent interview with a Christian General, Jerry Boykin on the events at Fort Hood. This is very worth seeing. Many atheists and agnostics relate to much of what this man says.
He was forced to retire from the Army for speaking the truth too boldly.
The shooting was avoidable, but intervention would not have been Politically Correct.
That’s some of the wisdom my Dad taught me. I thought of that saying when I read the attacks on Family Research Council president Tony Perkins. There’s a concerted effort to marginalize those who think marriage is important. In doing so, the left wants to shut out millions of Americans at the grassroots. But Mr. Perkins never runs from a fight. He’s out in front, leading. And all the dogs are barking at him.
Recently, Mr. Perkins was attacked as a big government backer. Apparently, if you try to defend marriage as the union of one man and one woman, that is supposed to make you an advocate of big government.
Perkins has been fighting for tax cuts and less spending for twenty years. He wants the federal government to stop interfering with the family, stop intruding into small businesses, and stop usurping state and local authority. How does that make him an advocate for big Government?
Some critics think that when you stand up for marriage, that makes you an ally of big government. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The wedding march began through the states in Hawaii. The Aloha State was America’s first majority non-white, majority non-Christian state, and Hawaii voters strongly backed a referendum that prevented the state’s Supreme Court from overturning marriage.
Conservative leaders have teamed up with the people against liberal powers in state after state. All too often, the top dogs of both parties opposed these people’s initiatives, or else hung back.
These state and local groups have rack up popular victories for marriage in 31 states. Wherever the marriage issue appears on the ballot, the people say it loud, say it proud: Marriage is between one man and one woman.
There are no marriage questions on the state ballots this year. Liberal journos are trying to say the movement has lost steam. What? Is that why liberals are afraid to let the issue come to a vote in Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York?
Judges of the Iowa Supreme Court are hanging onto their hats and their seats, facing voter wrath because they decided to overturn marriage – and the people’s voice be silenced.
Thirty-eight million Americans have voted to protect marriage. Marriage is more popular than any other issue on the conservative agenda. Marriage wins in liberal states, like Hawaii and Wisconsin, in conservative states like Kansas and Utah, and in middle-of-the-road states like Virginia and Ohio.
Marriage is no “wedge” issue. Some jounalists like to call it that, as if it’s not important. But Marriage is a bridge issue. Marriage wins among blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and whites.
Marriage appeals to non-college educated as well as to blue collar workers. It’s a way of bringing those elusive Reagan Democrats back into the fold.
In California this year, we may see a Republican win the state house and another go to the Senate. But it’s been more than twenty years since Republicans carried the Golden State for President. While John McCain was going down to a crushing defeat in California in 2008, Proposition 8, the Marriage Protection Amendment, was cruising to victory.
We have heard a lot about compassionate conservatism. And we’ve heard accusations that conservatives are “downright mean.” Well, defending marriage is the most compassionate thing conservatives can do.
Even some liberals recognize this. Bill Galston once worked for Bill Clinton. He says if a young couple will just finish high school, avoid having children out of wedlock, and marry, the chances are only 4% they will ever live in poverty.
Big government feeds on the breakdown of marriage. Our prisons are filling up with fatherless young men. What Bill Bennett wisely called the Broken Hearth fuels demands for more money for extra helpers in schools, for food stamps, for expanded medical coverage – all these needs are exacerbated by the breakdown of marriage.
Today, tragically, nearly 40% of our children are born out-of-wedlock. And big government consumes nearly 40% of our Gross Domestic Product.
I don’t believe the 40/40 link is imaginary?
If you want smaller government, lower taxes, and a return to constitutional principles, the fastest way to do that is to defend marriage, empower the family, and show Americans real compassion.
Read more informative articles at The Patriot Post
Reason.tv presents: Citizen's Against Government Waste's Porker of the Month for October 2010: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz!
What do you do when you and your friends in congress go on a taxpayer funded spending binge, only to see massive unemployment and a floundering economy?
Just say something that sounds good and has zero credibility.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is CAGW's October 2010 Porker of the Month for exaggerating the effect of the failed stimulus program, exaggerating jobs numbers, and lying to the American people about the true economic picture.
"Porker of the Month" is written and produced by Austin Bragg. Approximately 1.2 minutes.
For more info on Citizens Against Government Waste and the Porker of The Month, visit cagw.org.
Visit Reason.tv for downloadable versions of all our videos and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.
Donate to help end wasteful deficit spending at www.cagw.org. This new ad is part of an ongoing communications program in CAGW's decades-long fight against wasteful government spending, increased taxes, out-of-control deficit spending, and a crippling national debt that threatens the future and survival of our country.
“Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.” –George Washington
“Nancy Pelosi said Monday that ‘we haven’t really gotten the credit for what we have done,’ and the Speaker is right. However, it appears that her party will get that credit on November 2, which is why so many Democrats are now jumping the liberal ship, at least symbolically, to save their seats. … Mississippi Democrat Gene Taylor … [said] that he won’t support Mrs. Pelosi for Speaker, another revelation considering his vote for her in 2009. ‘I’m very disappointed in how she’s veered to the left,’ Mr. Taylor said, as if Mrs. Pelosi’s ideological predispositions were ever hidden. Mr. Taylor joins a growing list of Democrats who voted for Mrs. Pelosi in 2009 but now profess to be shocked by her left turn. They include Idaho’s Walt Minnick, Pennsylvania’s Jason Altmire, Alabama’s Bobby Bright and Texas’s Chet Edwards, endangered incumbents all. Brett Carter, who is hoping to replace Tennessee Democrat Barton Gordon, has gone even further and requested that Mrs. Pelosi not even run again for the Speakership. ‘Voters in my district believe that you do not represent their values, and my opposition has little to offer apart from critiquing your leadership,’ Mr. Carter wrote in a September letter. … Over in the Senate, the prize for distancing himself from his party goes to West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin, who ran the famous TV ad featuring him literally putting a bullet through the ‘cap and trade bill.’ Apparently that wasn’t politically far enough away from the Washington Democrats he hopes to join, so Mr. Manchin declared on Fox News Sunday that he would have voted against ObamaCare too. … Remind us again why these folks are running as Democrats?” –The Wall Street Journal
“Either this is just the end of a big election that rolls back a few important mistakes, but basically changes little besides who gets the good parking spaces and whose staffers get to cash in for a few years. Or this is the beginning a great reformation that will take America back for liberty. It’s up to the people. We are so close. In 50 years in politics, I have never seen as large a percentage of the public self-motivated for reformation. For those of us who believe we are a providential country, now is the chance for the public to demonstrate it.” –columnist Tony Blankley
“The Democrats are about to be beaten by something they do not in their heart of hearts think exists, a huge national majority. … That majority is amiable, sensible and believes in limited government. It is convinced that we face a catastrophic budget crisis and that measures must be taken against the spending and on behalf of growth. … The liberals show no hint that they realize this, but the American majority does. Now that majority has to deal with the mess we are in. As for the liberals, they have to explain why they are summarily leaving office.” –columnist R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.
“Team Obama’s message in the closing weeks of the campaign was completely eclipsed Friday by a union official who openly boasted in a story reported by The Wall Street Journal: ‘We don’t like to brag,’ but ‘we’re the big dog’ when it comes to campaign funding. Big as in $87.5 million. Big as in the biggest spender of any outside group — all meant to protect the interests of unions, the new ‘privileged class.’ But wait a minute: Team O led us to believe that honor went to the vilified U.S. Chamber of Commerce and all of its alleged contributions from ‘foreign money’ sponsors.” –columnist Mark McKinnon
“All of these [European] countries — and many more — are going through painful retrenchments because they spent too much money, made too many promises and expected too little from their own citizens. The era of European austerity is upon us, because the Europeans — or at least those in charge — understand the mess they’ve made of their economies. This should present a real problem for Barack Obama and the vast (though shrinking) chorus of experts, editorialists and activists who support his agenda. In broad terms, all of the policies Obama and the Democrats have pushed are the sorts of policies the British, the French and other Europeans had for years, even decades.” –columnist Jonah Goldberg
A call for conservatives to vote: “My name may not be on the ballot, but our agenda for moving forward is on the ballot, and I need everybody to turn out.” –Barack Obama ...
Read the rest here
Washington, D.C. – In light of the imminent release of a report on the Justice Department’s apparent politicization of the case of alleged voting rights abuses by the New Black Panthers, members of the Project 21 black leadership network are commenting on revelations that federal civil rights enforcement is not being administered in an impartial manner.
“‘Equal justice under law’ is as central to the American idea as ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’ Unfortunately, this now appears to be an alien concept at the Barack Obama-Eric Holder Department of Justice,” said Project 21 member Deroy Murdock. “The American people should be enraged at news reports — corroborated by the sworn testimony of career federal prosecutors J. Christian Adams and Christopher Coates — that supervisors at the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division seemingly have decided not to prosecute cases in which blacks are the perpetrators and/or whites are the victims of federal crimes at the polls. It now is not the content of one’s criminal behavior but the color of one’s skin that matters at today’s Justice Department. Who knew that race-conscious prosecution, or non-prosecution, would be part of the ‘change’ that President Obama promised us?”
Two career Justice Department prosecutors, J. Christian Adams and Christopher Coates, testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights about Obama Administration Justice Department political appointees opposing the prosecution of three members of the New Black Panther Party for alleged voter intimidation on Election Day 2008. That case, brought against the men during the Bush Administration, was settled early in the Obama Administration after a default judgment had been made. The settlement allegedly was made at the insistence of Obama political appointees.
A report on this case, compiled by the Civil Rights Commission after a year-long investigation, is scheduled to be released this week.
According to the October 23 edition of the Washington Post, three other Justice Department lawyers, who spoke anonymously out of fear of retaliation by supervisors, confirmed charges made by Adams and Coates about an overall environment favoring selective civil rights enforcement. One lawyer told the Post: “There are career people who feel strongly that it is not the voting rights section’s job to protect white voters. The environment is that you better toe the line of traditional civil rights ideas or you better keep quiet about it, because you will not advance, you will not receive rewards and you will be ostracized.”
Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie sent letters to President Barack Obama on December 12, 2009 and July 12, 2010 asking for the appointment of a special prosecutor to address the allegations regarding the New Black Panther Party case. As of October 25, 2010, the White House has not replied to either letter.
“Short of donning robes, hoods and burning crosses, it is hard for me to imagine a more glaring racist practice than that which the Obama-Holder Justice Department has apparently adopted,” said Project 21′s Massie. “It is not just an insult to the Constitution, but a complete abrogation of the Declaration of Independence pursuant to equal justice. The greatness of America can be found in our nation’s Pledge of Allegiance in the words ‘with liberty and justice for all.’ Nowhere is it stated or intimated that said justice and freedom is to be based on color of skin.”
Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives since 1992, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research (http://www.nationalcenter.org).
Read more informative articles at The National Center for Public Policy Research
Steven Crowder Video #1
Steven Crowder Video Series is presented exclusively by the National Center for Public Policy Research. (http://www.nationalcenter.org/)
"We're so quick to jump on that 'hate the rich' bandwagon that we fail to remember often times these people we see as villains aren't villains at all. We're so busy trying to get our 'fair share' that sometimes we end up stealing it from people like Mr. Korzon. People who are your neighbors, employers, your fellow Americans. Here's an idea. Instead of going out there and trying to get our piece of pie, let's tear a page from Leland International's (http://www.lelandinternational.com/#/leland/about/page/history) book and go out there and make more pies." - Steven Crowder in the conclusion of "The Bush Tax Cuts (Why Everything You Know is Wrong)"