Black Conservatives Comment on Needs of Nation Prior to Obama's State of the Union Address

Project 21 / The National Center for Public Policy Research – Press Release

For Immediate Release:
Contact: David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or (703) 568-4727 or dalmasi@nationalcenter.org
Judy Kent at (703) 759-7476 or jkent@nationalcenter.org

Washington, D.C. -  Black conservatives with the Project 21 leadership network have low expectations regarding the State of the Union Address.

While Project 21 members see a nation looking for reassurance that the government is acting in its best interest and focusing on the key issues of economic stability and job creation, they do not expect more than rhetoric from President Obama.

"When the polite applause and the partisan demonstrations of loyalty cease in the wake of tonight's address, will we have seen anything more than the same campaign-style rhetoric we have come to expect from this president? I don't think so," said Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie. "Despite his get-tough talk of late on spending and his alleged epiphany on regulations, there is no getting around the fact that Barack Obama's spending leaves George W. Bush's disregard for the taxpayers' burden in the dust. There is no getting around the fact that Obama's heavy-handed regulatory agenda is set up to continue his agenda where the peoples' new representatives are being told to hold the line. What I expect is a deceptively stylish speech from a desperate man who hopes to convince a very worried nation that he possesses the leadership they need. Unfortunately, he does not."

Project 21's Kevin Martin added: "I don't believe President Obama's speech tonight will do much more than instill a short-term aura of confidence in his leadership. And, even then, there are fewer and fewer left who are likely to believe him. I expect the address to be long on new ideas and policies, but short on how they can be funded without further contributing to our exploding national debt. Furthermore, Obama will likely ignore his vote against increasing the debt ceiling from when he was a senator, instead asking for a blank check to tackle our economic woes in the only way he seems to know how -- more spending. Supporters hope Obama's speech will set a course for the remainder of his term. Before he can do that, however, Obama must actually take control of the currently rudderless ship of state."

Project 21 full-time fellow Deneen Borelli added: "President Obama should end his war on fossil fuels by having the EPA immediately cease his plan to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and ease drilling restrictions in the Gulf of Mexico. These actions would eliminate the air of uncertainty surrounding businesses who are hesitant to invest in manufacturing facilities and stimulate job creation through exploration of our natural resources. By now, Obama should realize his pledge to make energy prices "skyrocket" is bad for business investment and job creation."

Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives since 1992, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research ( http://www.nationalcenter.org).

National Center for Public Policy Research
501 Capitol Court, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
(202) 543-4110
Fax (202) 543-5975
E-Mail: info@nationalcenter.org
Web: www.nationalcenter.org

Read more informative articles at The National Center for Public Policy Research

The Shadows - Wonderful Land

See more at papundits.com

The Shadows - Wonderful Land, posted with vodpod

Sarah Palin Death Wish Frenzy - Video

There are at least two comments that are not condoning these death threats but are a bit satirical and were accidently lumped in with the rest.

On a hysterical note: One lady (redheadonfire2) complained to YouTube her privacy had been invaded because her public tweet was caught on that video. And YouTube stupidly pulled the video. This video is now at Vimeo.

William A. Jacobson, Associate Clinical Professor, Cornell Law School, who owns the Legal Insurrection blog, sets the idiot straight:

"There are two principles at issue. First, there is no expectation of privacy as to death wishes. Second, there is no expectation of privacy on Twitter."

Her tweet is at 1:50 minutes on the video.
According to WakeUpAmerica:
"The punchline to this joke of the day? Her profile says she is a "psych major at UOP".
A psych major!!!!!
That is just wrong on so many levels."

Sarah Palin Death Wish Frenzy, posted with vodpod

IRANIUM - Trailer ... Coming Soon on DVD

Posted by ClarionProductions
A trailer of a feature-length Documentary on the Iranian nuclear threat, and the ideology fueling the regime.

IRANIUM - Trailer ... Coming Soon on DVD, posted with vodpod

Too Bad Obama Is Only Half-White

By Burt Prelutsky

The worst thing about Obama's being a black man is that when you take him to task for his leftist agenda, it's so easy for those who endorse his policies to accuse you of being a bigot.

It's fascinating how that works. If you happen to disagree with Henry Waxman or Charles Schumer, you're not automatically called an anti-Semite. If you take exception to Nancy Pelosi, you're not immediately dismissed as a misogynist. In most quarters, you can even dismiss the lunacies of Barney Frank without necessarily being labeled a gay-basher.

What is it about being black, 150 years after the end of slavery and nearly half a century after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, that gives them this special status? Whatever it is -- and I suspect it's nothing more than the non-stop, self-serving blather by the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the assorted jackasses who comprise the Congressional Black Caucus -- it's high time we stopped giving them the license to whine. In fact, it's long past time that we told them to put a cork in it.

I know a great many people who think that Obama is the worst president we've had in a very long time -- and they are not overlooking Jimmy Carter -- and not one of them gives a hoot about his race. Their reasons have everything to do with his politics and his policies and nothing to do with his pigmentation. If it were otherwise, wouldn't these same people dislike Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and Star Parker, all of whom are 50% blacker than the president?

Obama got off on the wrong foot when we discovered he was a friend of Bill Ayers and that he regarded Jeremiah Wright as his spiritual advisor. It didn't help when we heard him say that the problem with the Constitution and the Civil Rights movement was that they failed to deal with the redistribution of wealth.

Things then went from bad to worse when, after being elected, he went off on a world tour where he bashed our allies, kowtowed to our enemies, and competed with Michael Moore, Hugo Chavez and Mahmud Ahmadinejad, in trashing America.

Not satisfied with all that, he went on to lie about the great contribution the Muslims made in the creation of this country, forcing some of us to wonder if he knew something about the Barbary pirates that Thomas Jefferson didn't.

Perhaps his endless gaffes and apparent contempt for American symbols wouldn't be quite so offensive if so many people, on the right as well as the left, didn't, in spite of his almost comical reliance on Teleprompters, keep reminding us how doggone brilliant the guy is.

A while back, His Brilliance said, "America has its roots in the India of Mahatma Gandhi." Now, I'm grateful that for a change he complimented one of America's few allies in the world, but why is it so impossible for this lunkhead to give credit where it's due? Would it kill him to praise the Founding Fathers? I mean, I know they were a bunch of white guys, but they couldn't help it.

Suggesting that Mahatma Gandhi, 1869-1948, provided the roots for the United States, 1776-????, is comparable to the schlemiel who recently said it was our dropping the Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki that compelled Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.

I think I'm beginning to understand why Obama is so secretive about his academic records.

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post - Opinion

Some Recent Energy & Environmental News

By John Droz, Jr.

This is the current issue of my informal, free collection of recent electrical energy-related developments. Since citizens are daily inundated with material coming out on this topic, I am trying to present a digest summary of the most pertinent applicable information. My bias is for articles that are: scientific, independent, informative, constructive, and/or well-written. (I would STRONGLY recommend that you SAVE these, as you might need links to some good articles in the future.)

At last count there are over 4000 readers of the newsletter. If there are some other open-minded people you think would like this newsletter feel free to pass it on — or provide me with their email addresses and I will include them in the future.

    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *

What this translates to is that the policy statement of any true environmental organization should be the following:

    1)  We believe that we have environmental and energy issues, and

    2)  We believe that these matters should be resolved by applying the Scientific Method.

 

The Scientific Method consists of a comprehensive, objective, independent, transparent and empirical-based assessment. Anything less would amount to promoting a political policy rather than a science oriented one. Citizens should insist on nothing less from organizations they belong to.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just for anyone who wasn’t sure about my New Year's message, the Stella awards appear to be fictitious. My intention for passing on those was to provide a little humor in our otherwise rather serious dealings. Thank you for the hundreds of positive feedbacks that were sent.

--------------

My “Jane Talks About Energy” series of videos is in the process of being translated into several different languages. Here is the French version <<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWW6Hk73CUk&hd=1>>. Thanks to Dominic Mette and EPAW for this fine effort. (The English versions are on my website WindpowerFacts.Info.)

I would like to have had some additional videos done by now, but have been overwhelmed with a LOT of other projects. A video about nuclear power is in progress.

--------------

“Know The Facts Before You Sign” is a fine brochure that attempts to educate farmers who are potential turbine leaseholders to some of the adverse consequences of such an arrangement <<http://www.informedfarmers.org/Images/IFC%20FactSheet.pdf>>. I have long since held that the land owners are the weak link in the chain — and MUCH more attention should be focussed on that.

--------------

Some articles about the economics of Wind Energy — 

Another excellent financial analysis by Glenn Schleede “False claims that ‘wind farms’ provide large economic and job benefits” <<http://www.masterresource.org/2011/01/false-wind-claims/>>

Yet another study (this one in Texas) concludes that the Green Jobs claims are way overblown <<http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/industries/energy/stories/DN-taxbreaks_20tex.ART.State.Edition1.7e0102.html>>.

“The Wind Subsidy Bubble” talks about the high cost of wind energy: <<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703395204576023820064646268.html>>.

A good story about electricity rates going way up due to renewables <<http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2010/12/rates_set_to_jump_for_pacific.html>>.

The Rhode Island manufacturers Association filed a brief with the state Supreme Court against an offshore wind agreement <<http://www.projo.com/business/content/COMMERCE_DIGEST_22_12-22-10_7QLJIPG_v13.323fe87.html>>.

Here is a good story about homeowners holding out for the wind developers to buy their property — and succeeding very well <<http://www.eastoregonian.com/news/local_news/article_2e8dfa2e-10e2-11e0-9076-001cc4c002e0.html>>.

CBS 60 Minutes story about the significant debts that most states are experiencing, maybe that sets the stage for a second thought about funding developers who are making 25% annual profits. PLEASE WATCH THIS! <<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP3b0_fnPxQ&hd=1>>. Nowhere does it mention cutting the funding for renewables, but we should use this opportunity to make that point!

--------------

The analysis “Energy Independence by 2020” is on the mark <<http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/01/us-energy-independence-by-2020/>>

--------------

Wind Energy is a net energy loss <<http://westinstenv.org/sosf/2010/12/22/wind-solar-ethanol-net-energy-balance-negative/>>.

--------------

“Turbines and Turbulence” discusses some interesting aspects of wind projects <<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v468/n7327/full/4681001a.html>>.

--------------

The Buffalo Evening News editorial is good in endorsing nuclear power <<http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial-page/buffalo-news-editorials/article294027.ece.>>

For those concerned about the effects of radiation, here is another story about the medical benefits of radiation <<http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/12/23/saving-life-and-limb/>>. 

And another related post about the false assumption that more radiation is necessarily bad <<http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/12/02/lawrence-solomon-the-apples-and-oranges-of-radiation%C2%A0/>>.

--------------

“China has seen the future, and it is coal” — not wind energy. This George Will article puts things in perspective: <<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/29/AR2010122902899.html>>.

And this announcement of  more energy advances by China, this time in nuclear power. They are moving ahead while we are dithering <<http://hamsayeh.net/world/193-china-announces-nuclear-fuel-processing-breakthrough.html>>.

--------------

Many environmentalists’ new reality: Clean Coal <<http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/12/dirty-coal-clean-future/8307/1/>>.

--------------

A revealing article about how incompetent the Danish energy program is <<http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/12/05/lawrence-solomon-the-7-billion-carbon-scam/>>.

--------------

It’s good that the American Bird Conservancy organization is speaking out about wind turbines’ adverse effects on birds <<http://www.abcbirds.org/newsandreports/releases/101229.html>>.

--------------

Hypertension may be yet another wind turbine related medical consequence. See 

<<http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2010/blood-pressures-elevating-dangerously-after-nighttime-wind-turbine-exposure-australia/>>.

--------------

An Oregon newspaper comes out against wind energy

 <<http://www.democratherald.com/news/opinion/editorial/article_28e1993e-1757-11e0-a015-001cc4c03286.html?mode=story>>.

--------------

This is about the first Tidal Power company to be connected to the national grid <<http://tinyurl.com/2uhmn2f>>.

The Putting Some Balance To It Department —

This NYT article comments on the Energy Department’s recently released energy forecast, which said (among other things) “And even without a national global warming law, American carbon dioxide emissions will not inexorably set new records; they will stay below the rate of 2005 for the next 15 years because of economic forces.” <<http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/the-energy-future-aint-what-it-used-to-be/>>.

Another scientific study indicating that there are other things than CO2 that can cause “Global Warming” — this time stream runoff 

<<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101220150944.htm>>.

“Dust Study Raises Questions Concerning Warming Models 

<<http://www.dailytech.com/Dust+Study+May+Invalidate+Most+Warming+Modeling+Work+Done+to+Date/article20516.htm>>.

Due to new developments, NASA publicly admits that there is a lot going on with the sun that they do not understand. Considering that the sun is intimately connected with “global warming” this is a significant admission: <<http://www.suite101.com/content/vast-solar-eruption-shocks-nasa-and-raises-doubts-on-sun-theory-a327330>>.

I forgot whether or not I had posted a link to Dr. A. Neil Hutton’s extensive series on debunking AGW. If not, here it is 

<<http://friendsofginandtonic.org/page5/page10/assets/hutton%20-%20climate%20change.pdf>>.

“Hot Sensations vs Cold Facts” points out some realities that the mainstream media isn’t promoting 

<<http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/23/media-climate-change-warming-opinions-contributors-larry-bell.html>>.

“Earth Project Aims to Simulate Everything”: be VERY wary! <<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12012082>>.

“EPA Rules Will Trump Your Rights” — be very concerned! <<http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=558325&p=1>>.

“The Pitfalls of Europe’s New Emission Trading System” is a sober assessment of the problems, costs, and unintended consequences of CO2 restrictions <<http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,druck-736798,00.html>>.

A good assessment of the Gulf Oil Spill, where the expert author indicts the media for “hysterical overreaction” and attributes that to the fact that “The media actually relied less on marine biologists and oil spill experts for their information and more on environmental groups”: <<http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/oil-spill-hysteria_522140.html?nopager=1>>

“An Evangelical Backlash Against Environmentalism” covers an important issue 

<<http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/an-evangelical-backlash-against-environmentalism/>>.

Maybe all of our efforts are for naught, considering the end of the planet is now scheduled to be May 21, 2011 

<<http://www.theblaze.com/stories/loose-christian-movement-says-end-of-days-in-may/>>.

The Community Service Department —

The latest form of identity theft: electronically picking your pocket. Watch this video 

<<http://www.wreg.com/videobeta/?watchId=8ba6f8fc-90a2-4711-90ea-1884ec348310>>.

A wealth of good information is at the BillShrink site (credit cards, savings, wireless, etc.) <<https://www.billshrink.com>>. BankRate.com gets a lot of press, but I found better savings and CD rates at <<http://www.DepositAccounts.com/>> and <<http://www.BankingMyWay.com/>>.

Another good quote from Ronald Reagan —

“The taxpayer:  That's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination.”

john droz, jr.

physicist & environmental advocate

Saturday Night Alive?

By Ken Blackwell

We all breathed a sigh of relief when the ball fell in New York's Times Square and the holiday season this year ended without another terror attack, or attempted attack on our homeland. You'll recall that on Christmas day, 2009, the notorious "underwear" bomber tried to blow up his jet over Detroit. Young Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian citizen, wanted to take down his Northwest Airlines Flight 253 right over Detroit's airport. Had he succeeded in detonating his BVDs, his victims would not only have been the 288 passengers and crew he was flying with, but doubtless hundreds or thousands on the ground.

This year, thank goodness, no attacks. But that does not mean we didn't have cause for concern. The newly-installed Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper, was interviewed by ABC TV's Diane Sawyer. In the company of homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano and the president's assistant for homeland security and counter-terrorism, John Brennan, Jim Clapper got the first question:

"London. How serious is it? Any implication that it was coming here? ...Director Clapper?"

London? What about London? That's what Clapper's on-camera face seemed to be saying, but he remained mum. He's really good at keeping national security secrets, it seemed. Or, as we would soon find out, was London a secret to the Director?

It was. It turned out that everybody but Jim Clapper knew about the Britain's MI5 arresting a group of terror suspects ranging in age from 17-28. The ring hailed from the English cities of London, Birmingham and Stoke. Cardiff, in Wales, was also the target of the arrests. It was the largest mass arrest of would-be terrorists in recent memory.

Our director of national intelligence didn't have a clue. Well, that was London, after all. That's 3,000 miles away.

Presidential assistant Brennan went on TV to try to shovel up what the donkeys had left on the ABC set. "I know there was breathless attention by the media to these [London] arrests and it was constantly on the news networks. I am glad that Jim Clapper is not sitting in front of the TV 24 hours a day and monitoring what is coming out of the media."

You can't make this stuff up, folks. It seemed like a skit from Saturday Night Live. Is there anything more bizarre than the Keystone Cops show that was put on TV for Americans this holiday season?

This capital gang voluntarily sat down with a national television news anchor for a group interview. What would be more sensible than for someone who claims to be up on, well, intelligence, to have an aide quickly review the top stories in the world from the war on terror? We used to call a lot of our newpapers intelligencers. Isn't there an intelligencer somewhere in the bowels of the bureaucracy whose job it is not to let the Director go on TV and look like a fool?

We have created a huge bureaucracy to handle homeland security. The idea in establishing the post of Director of National Intelligence was to gather all the loose strands of intelligence, to weigh and sift them, and to let the relevant agencies know what everyone needs to know when they need to know it.

Is there anything in the world more embarrassing than a prime time demonstration that the Director of National Intelligence doesn't have a clue? And no, Mr. Brennan, we don't expect our Director of National Intelligence to sit in front of the tube 24/7. But is it asking to much that national intelligence czar be well-briefed on the latest -- intelligence?

It's a short five hours from London to Washington. As we learned from Abdulmutallab's attempt, it wasn't that hard for a young man bearing a passport from an Islamist-afflicted country to get on a one-way flight to the U.S. -- with no luggage. Those arrested suspects in London might well have had cohorts who were headed here.

It is completely unacceptable for our Director of National Intelligence to be so woefully unprepared, so evidently not up to speed. And to allow the world to see this unpreparedness is not just an appalling lapse; it is itself a major danger to our country.

Let's hope Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), the incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, will hold hearings to determine how it was possible for the DNI to be so out of the loop. Doubtless Mr. King's committee will find out many other useful things about this unprofessional administration.

It's clear that on matters of homeland security, this administration is not ready for prime time. We were spared this time. Next time, we may not be so fortunate. And, like you,I'd rather spend next Saturday night, alive.

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post - Opinion

Liberals Don't Deserve America

By Burt Prelutsky

Considering the way that Obama shows his contempt for patriotism time and again -- as when he misquotes the Declaration of Independence, neglects to place his hand over his heart at flag ceremonies and denies American exceptionalism at every opportunity -- you'd think he'd learn to leave symbolic gestures to the professionals. Instead, whether the issue is closing Gitmo, providing civilian trials for Islamic terrorists or racial profiling at airports, his sole consideration seems to be whether something will annoy Muslims. Understand, I'm not claiming he is a Muslim. I have no proof of that. I'm claiming he's an arrogant idiot.

As I see it, America has been setting the world a damn good example for over 230 years. Most people have gotten the message long before now. The exceptions have mainly been Islamics and communists, and they're not looking for good examples; they're looking for world conquest. If the president wants to set a good example, he should stop insulting our allies and mollifying our sworn enemies.

Frankly, whenever I hear those knuckleheads in academia and the media praising the likes of Castro and Chavez or lamenting the loss of Mao or Che, I want to rap on their heads just to hear the echo. I mean, is it possible that they are totally unaware that, starting with Stalin, every communist regime has started out by employing intellectuals (aka "useful idiots") to propagandize on their behalf, and, inevitably, ended up by executing the ultimately unnecessary pests.

The reasons that intellectuals are so dangerous is because, one, they reside in a bubble, be it at a university, a paper or a TV newsroom, where they are surrounded by their clones; and, two, they are so certain that they're smarter than everyone else that any two-bit despot who pays them the least bit of attention will have them acting like lapdogs, eager to lick his hand and kiss his patootie.

Intellectuals remind me of Randy and Evi Quaid. They're the couple that escaped to Canada. Psychiatrists have suggested that the Quaids suffer from folie a deux, the madness of two. It's a delusional state shared by two people who bolster each other's twisted take on reality. When more than two people share the same delusions, we refer to it as the Democratic party.

In the case of the Quaids, they believe there's a secret cabal in America that has been responsible for murdering Michael Jackson and Heath Ledger. The Quaids believe those mysterious assassins they refer to as the Star Whackers are now after them. Of course, any sane person would realize how ridiculous that is. We're talking about Randy Quaid, for crying out loud. He really shouldn't start worrying until he gets word that he's been targeted by the Has-been Whackers.

Finally, getting back to Obama and foreign policy, the man is convinced that we can actually undermine and destroy Iran through economic pressure. That might be described as folie a un. Still, I can see where he might have gotten the idea. After all, it's worked like a charm for him here in America.

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post

What a Difference a Day Makes

By Tim Potts

The PA House of Representatives this week showed a bipartisan attitude toward improving public integrity for the first time since the Pay Raise of 2005. While neither party can claim to advocate the highest standards of public integrity in America for PA citizens, House Republican leaders since 2009 have put forward ideas while the then-majority House Democratic leaders put forward nothing but rhetoric. That changed with Tuesday’s adoption of some new rules, but by Wednesday the new bipartisan machinery stalled when it came time to adopt new policies.

Tuesday’s rules. The House Democrats’ new leadership joined with the new Republican majority’s leadership to begin making changes that integrity advocates have long wanted. House Resolution 1, the 44-page document that establishes the rules the House should follow for the next two years, includes changes to:

• Clarify that using tax-funded time, space and facilities for partisan political campaigns is prohibited. This reinforces state law that already makes such activity illegal.
• Prohibit lawmakers from donating expense reimbursements to charities. It has become common for lawmakers to make such donations, and get tax deductions, when challenged about accepting per diems and their annual COLA.
• Prohibit mass emails within 60 days of an election. The old rules prohibited only paper mailings.
• Streamline ceremonial resolutions by allowing a single vote, instead of separate votes, on any number of non-controversial resolutions.

Of course, it’s hard to be satisfied with rules changes. In House rule more of same (Jan. 5) the Scranton Times-Tribune points out the long history in the House and Senate of refusing to enforce their rules and frequently suspending them. This is why DR and other integrity advocates have called for laws, not rules, to make lasting improvements.

Wednesday’s policies. Hoping to build on the spirit of bipartisanship, Republican and Democratic leaders intended to bypass floor votes and accomplish more improvements. The plan was for the Bipartisan Management Committee of the House, consisting of the five top leaders, to adopt policies to:

• Require members to document expenses in order to receive reimbursements through per diems. Until now, the daily allowance has amounted to a second salary because lawmakers could claim up to $163 per day for expenses that, in many cases, were entirely fictional.
• Prohibit long-term leases of private cars. There is an exception for long-term leases arranged prior to March 2007. The House’s chief clerk will negotiate a master lease with the Department of General Services.
• Require members to pay 1% of gross wages toward their health care. If adopted, the House would match the Senate, which adopted the same requirement in 2007.

That was the plan. But House leaders couldn’t pull it off yesterday, pending more negotiations. Pa. House measure to curb perks stalls out, The Philadelphia Inquirer, Jan. 6.

That gives House leaders the chance to raise the ante with the Senate on paying for health insurance. Although a long-needed step in the right direction, the health insurance contribution neither saves significant money for taxpayers nor puts lawmakers in a position to know the struggle ordinary citizens face in obtaining health insurance. The total budget impact, based on budget line items for House salaries, amounts to roughly $637,000.

For individual lawmakers, the 1% contribution amounts to about $800 per year (rounding lawmakers’ base salary to $80,000). By comparison, ordinary citizens who can afford it would pay nearly twice that amount per month for comparable coverage.

Question:

• Will your representative encourage leadership to adopt even better changes to House policies?

Reapportionment: Testing bipartisanship. It’s hard to think of a tougher trial for a political relationship than the decennial process of re-drawing the borders of legislative districts. Even within parties, the process has been known to create life-long hostilities.

Following last year’s national census, the Legislative Reapportionment Commission this year will draw new lines for legislative districts, beginning with the election of 2012. The procedure in the PA Constitution that governs reapportionment, Article II, Section 17, is a baldly political one. Ten years ago, it produced the second most gerrymandered legislative districts in America, according to the U.S. League of Women Voters. Then, as now, Republicans controlled the House, Senate and governor’s office. Click here for an excellent report on the subject by the PA League.

One way citizens can test the new bipartisanship in the House is by the quality of the lines drawn this year.

Tonight at 8:00: WITF-TV’s “Smart Talk” will feature a segment on reapportionment, including DR’s Tim Potts. Go to www.witf.org .

Read more informative articles at Democracy Rising Pennsylvania

Culture Challenge of the Week: The Siren Song of Malevolence

By Rebecca Hagelin

Culture Challenge of the Week: The Siren Song of Malevolence

America's children have been taken captive by a brilliantly deceptive culture that offers them a world of pleasure, limitless fun, and the possibility of a utopian harmony with all mankind. The tune is the melody of self-absorption and instant gratification, insidiously crafted to manipulate their vulnerable minds into a numb acceptance of whatever the deceivers tell them. Not unlike those whose imaginations were captivated by the siren songs in Greek mythology, our children are being steadily and brilliantly lured into a dark and dangerous world that seeks to destroy all that is right and just -- and their very souls.

Our children desperately want to be rescued. At some level, their little hearts recognize that the messages of Hollywood decadence and government -as-God don't ring true. They long for their moms and dads to help them sort through the glitz and gleeful tunes to find truth they can count on. Tragically, most parents are so busy listening to their own generational deceivers that they can't even hear their children's cries for help.

How To Save Your Family: Teach Your Children To Reason

Michael Sabbeth's challenging book, The Good, The Bad and The Difference: How to Talk with Children About Values equips parents to help rescue their children. (Available at www.KidsEthicsBook.com.) Based on over twenty years of teaching ethics and moral reasoning to elementary school children, Sabbeth reveals that children are hungry to learn how to reason through the noise, recognize the deceptive messages and discover timeless principles.

Michael teaches by presenting life and its events in a metaphoric context, that is, to illustrate the character or ethos of an event or of a decision and demonstrating that the event or action has qualities that go beyond itself.

For example, the decision to stop and help a driver on the side of the road that seems to have a flat tire is the product of dozens of pieces of information, competing values and complex risks, Michael points out. Some reasons are better than others. Some risks are more unreasonable than others.

Doing 'good' is not easy, Michael writes, "and if we teach children that it is easy, we weaken children, subvert their intellect and moral development and raise apprehensive children that have no faith in or motivation to pursue virtue when challenges are difficult."

By encouraging children to think within a framework of moral principles, such as Sanctity of Life and Justice, and virtues such as Competence, Conscience, Courage and Character, we can inspire children toward enhanced morality. "The stronger they become as moral thinkers, the greater the probability they will act with a will consistent with a moral character," Michael asserts.

The book is about engaging in dialogues, a word derived from the Greek language and which means approximately to "speak across, to share words." It starts with a parent simply asking his child, 'What do you think?'" The implied but powerful message is: Your thoughts matter to me. You matter to me.

Themes of the book include:

1. That good and bad can be measured, contrasted and evaluated.
2. That when good is identified and measured, people are more motivated to do good.
3. That parents are, as a general rule, the best and most credible disseminators of morality and ethics.
4. That children want and expect moral leadership from their parents. Children must no only know that parents are in charge. Children should know that parents deserve to be in charge.
5. That spending time with your children talking about ethics and other serious matters can be a soul-churning joy.

If one theme dominates all others, it is that parents are competing against the world for their children's time, respect and as a legitimate dispenser of moral authority. To be effective, parents must be credible competitors, and that requires a parenting foundation based on reason, ethics, compassion and moral strength. Become your child's rescuer -- visit www.KidsEthicsBook.com today.

Read more informative articles at The Patriot Post

The Lamest Duck of All

By Burt Prelutsky

The question, boys and girls, is: Just how dumb do you have to be in order to be a Republican politician?

I actually believed those ignoramuses had learned their lesson after the elections of 2006 and 2008. I was convinced that they'd seen the error of their ways, that cozying up to the likes of Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold could only lead to both liberals and conservatives holding them in utter contempt.

I was certain that the recent mid-term elections would drive home the point that most voters were experiencing buyers remorse after four years of Pelosi and Reid, and two years of Barack Obama. But, as the lame duck session proved, you can never go wrong underestimating the intelligence of Republican office holders. From this vantage point, it appeared that at the very time when Obama was on the ropes and being chastised by the most left-wing elements of his party, the Republicans decided to buck him up.

Instead of waiting for the newly elected congress to deal with the Bush tax cuts by forcing Obama to either keep them at their current level for everyone or to let them rise on the middle class, something even he wouldn't have done, the Republicans elected to extend unemployment insurance by 13 months, thus providing Obama with his latest budget-busting stimulus program. When I was young, you got six months of benefits. Now you can get three years. At this rate, soon only natural-born suckers will bother working at all.

Then, in spite of those members of the military who are actually fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan being opposed to repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the GOP used the most cockeyed poll in history as an excuse to go along with the liberals.

Finally, in order to make Christmas, 2010, the best one ever for Obama, a fair number of Republican lunkheads voted for the START treaty, which simultaneously served to fill Vladimir Putin's head with visions of sugar plum fairies.

The first question that comes to mind is why we're still making nuclear treaties with the Russians. Rumor has it the Cold War is over. Inasmuch as the preamble to the treaty suggests that we might be denied the right to pursue missile defense systems, which was the only reason Russia negotiated the treaty in the first place, what was the big rush to make it the first treaty ever enacted during a lame duck session?

Charles Krauthammer refers to Obama as the Comeback Kid, basing that conclusion on the fact that he rebounded so miraculously after the shellacking the Democrats received in November. Krauthammer is right, but the comeback is entirely due to the Republicans taking a collective dive. Talk about snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory!

I think that those folks who assumed that, like Clinton, who was forced to move to the center after the 1994 mid-term elections, Obama would become more moderate over the next two years, might be whistling in the dark. With the Republicans acting as his enabler, there might not be any reason at all for Obama to kick his addiction to socialist policies.

I can only hope that the new congressional Republicans will be up to the challenge facing them not only from the progressives on the left, but from the gutless biddies in their own party. If they falter, I'm confident that Tea Party patriots will be around to remind them what happens to RINOs. As any number of them learned during the last election, there's another elephant graveyard besides the one in Africa.

In the meantime, like Santa Claus, I'm keeping my own list of who's been naughty and who's been nice. I don't want to forget the names of those who filled the President's Christmas stocking with so many goodies.

Just to help you along, the 13 "Republicans" who helped provide Barack Obama and Harry Reid with the super majority required to pass START, they were Corker and Alexander from Tennessee, Snowe and Collins from Maine, Brown (Massachusetts), Bennett (Utah), Murkowski (Alaska), Voinovich (Ohio), Cochran (Mississippi), Gregg (New Hampshire), Isakson (Georgia), Johanns ( Nebraska) and Lugar, the pride of Indiana. The reason that the vote was 71-26 when there are 100 members of the Senate was because three Republicans, Bond (Missouri), Bunning (Kentucky) and Brownback (Kansas), all decided to play hooky because they apparently had more important things to do than vote on a major arms treaty.

I'm sure that Obama's only regret is that he didn't ask Santa for Cap & Trade, card checks and the opportunity to make Ramadan a national holiday, while he was at it.

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post

Basic Economics Revisited With Thomas Sowell: Chapter 2 of 5

Thomas Sowell, the Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, discusses, with Hoover fellow Peter Robinson, Bernanke Fed's ongoing policy of quantitative easing (QE2). ---HooverInstitution
(See all 5 videos. ---ed)

Basic Economics Revisited With Thomas Sowell: C..., posted with vodpod