Post Scripts

Posted by Tina

An excellent article in the Wall Street Journal today, “An Economic Time Bomb,” by Pete Du Pont, includes a laundry list of tax changes that will greatly impact individuals as well as our economy in 2010 and 2011. As the progressives in Congress greedily rub their hands together the rest of us are left holding our breath. We’ve already seen how losing investment cash in the private sector translates to hard times keeping a budget for many individuals and job and business losses for others. These higher tax rates and changes will only compound our problems. I’ve excerpted the data:

Expiration of the Bush tax cuts will include the following:

Top personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6% from 35%

Dividend tax rate will rise to 39.6% from 15%

Capital gains tax rate will rise to 20% from 15%

(If the House health care bill had passed, all three of these rates would have risen to 45%)

If you don’t think you’re among those with a target on your back think again:

Continue reading “Tax Hell 2010 & 2011” »

Posted by Tina

Whenever we post stories that inform the American people of the ongoing threat from terrorist enemies a good number of people on the left, and a few who post comments here, are quick to say we are just trying to scare people. Some imply that the information is nonsense, that terrorists are not smart enough or clever enough to be more than a criminal threat and therefore don’t pose a serious threat at all. Some believe the news is manufactured as a way to further the vast industrial complex that only wants to make money on oil and the tools of war. Oh my!

So what about you? Would you rather know about the threats that face us or would you, as a mere citizen, prefer to go on about your days in blissful ignorance? If you love that ignorance read no further. If you prefer to know what we face, read on:

“Al Qaeda terror leaders have eye on chemical, biological or nuclear attack on U.S. soil: report,” by Ethan Sacks – NY Daily News

Al Qaeda planners are lying in wait, plotting another major attack on U.S. soil involving weapons of mass destruction, according to a dire new report. ** Osama bin Laden’s terror network has made several attempts to acquire large-scale biological, chemical or nuclear weapons in the years since the Sept. 11 attacks, according to a new report. ** Former high-ranking CIA official Rolf Mowatt-Larssen reported in a paper for Harvard’s Kennedy School that al Qaeda operatives are desperate to launch the most devastating terror attack yet.

I think we should be kept informed. I also think information like this makes the decision to hold terrorist trials in New York City even more ridiculous. It was an egregious error of judgment that should be reversed immediately!

by Jack Lee

Gary Tedesco, a Willows High student, was permanently expelled because he had two unloaded shotguns inside his locked pick up truck parked off campus. He was on a public street, but unknown to him, he was within 1000 feet of the school and this is a
Continue reading “Tedesco Expulsion Reversed – Guns Found in Truck” »

The points made in this book should make us all more aware just how susceptable we are to advertising and propaganda. The author cites that a false negative political ad even when it’s been proven untrue still carried a negative influence on 72% after they read that it was false.

Book Review excerpt from the Washington Post. . .

Sen. Harry Reid has faced sharp criticism for speculating during the 2008 campaign that Barack Obama may have had an advantage as a black presidential candidate because of his light skin. But a practical test carried out by the Obama campaign — and now revealed in Shankar Vedantam’s book, “The Hidden Brain” — suggests that Reid may have been on target.

Near the end of the race, Democratic strategists considered combating racial bias by running feel-good television advertisements. The campaign made two versions of the same ad. One featured images of a white dad and two black dads in family settings reading “The Little Engine That Could” to their daughters. The other depicted similar scenes with a white dad and a light-skinned black dad. The first version got high ratings from focus groups, but it did not budge viewers’ attitudes toward Obama. The second version elicited less overt enthusiasm, but it increased viewers’ willingness to support the candidate. The spots never aired in part, Vedantam writes, because of budget problems.

Continue reading “Book Review – ‘The Hidden Brain’ by Shankar Vedantam” »

The British authorities have raised their terror alert from substantial to severe. As a statement from the Home Secretary puts it:

“The Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre has today raised the threat to the UK from international terrorism from SUBSTANTIAL to SEVERE.”

The U.S. terror threat level generally is at “elevated” or yellow since Aug 12, 2005. The level for the airlines and airports has been orange or “high” since the airliner bomb plot of August 2006.

The British raised the threat level last Friday and it came on the same day that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was in Geneva, Switzerland meeting with the International Air Transport Association to urge greater action on aviation security in the wake of the Christmas Day bombing attempt on a Northwest Airlines flight on its approach to Detroit.

Coincidentally, (or perhaps not) is the unusual number of people on the no fly list that are trying to board flights to the United States.

By K (guest editorial)

Noted film critic Roger Ebert (shown left in 2005 photo) had some harsh words for influential talk radio host Rush Limbaugh last week, responding to accusations by the latter that President Obama would use the crisis in Haiti as a political tool, then further implying that the president might be using money donated to Haiti for other purposes.

“A Letter to Rush Limbaugh To: Rush Limbaugh From: Roger Ebert You should be horse-whipped for the insult you have paid to the highest office of our nation.

Having followed President Obama’s suggestion and donated money to the Red Cross for relief in Haiti, I was offended to hear you suggest the President might be a thief capable of stealing money intended for the earthquake victims.

Here is a transcript from your program on Thursday: Justin of Raleigh, North Carolina: “Why does Obama say if you want to donate some money, you could go to whitehouse.gov to direct you how to do so?

If I wanted to donate to the Red Cross, why do I have to go to the White House page to donate?”

Rush: “Exactly. Would you trust the money’s gonna go to Haiti?” Justin: “No.”

Rush: “But would you trust that your name’s gonna end up on a mailing list for the Obama people to start asking you for campaign donations for him and other causes?”

Continue reading “Ebert Blasts Limbaugh for Haiti Comments” »

The Sunday Message

By One Vike

When we see and hear about the devastation left by the earthquake in Haiti, we inevitably wonder how anything good can come out of it all. We feel that way when personal disasters strike, whether it follows a car accident, a house burning down, or even the sudden death of a loved one. However, as Christians we are told that it is not this world we are promised, but the next one that Christ will bring when He returns to judge the world. As sojourners here on earth, we must look at this world as a place that is here today and gone tomorrow. While I agree that seeing the destruction and human suffering in Haiti can test ones faith in God’s promise to care for and comfort those who are suffering, if I look beyond what the MSM presents in it’s daily coverage, I can see the miracles happening all over Haiti. It is those miracles which should assure us that God is fulfilling His promises.

A little history on Haiti and its Voodoo problem will help me introduce you to a certain little old lady named Anne Marie Polestier, and the miracle God is performing with her and others all over Haiti. Let me take you back, back to a time when Europe was at war and America was doing all it could to avoid being brought into it; a time when few if any
Continue reading “A Revival in Haiti” »

Posted by Tina

Not long ago I posted one article in a series and suggested that all Americans should be required to read it. Now russian immigrant Svetlana Kunin is back with another article on the same subject…the folly and destructive nature of progressive government. She continues to sound a warning to us to preserve our freedom so that we may continue to live and thrive in America, a blessed nation. Please read the entire article.

“Perspectives Of A Russian Immigrant (No. 5),” by Svetlana Kunin – Investors Business Daily

Visitors to national parks are warned not to feed the wildlife because this interferes with the natural survival ability of the animals. Progressives do not make the same connection with human nature. ** The image of a country where government takes care of its citizens attracts the liberal mind. This image has two dimensions: fairness and equality. ** How do our current political leaders propose to transform America? They ignore the Constitution. They will collect the income of citizens living today and those not yet born. They envision a zoolike country where the citizens are assigned a place to live, to work, the medical care they can get and the food they eat. ** Our leaders will be our zookeepers, fairly distributing services and goods. People will rely on zookeepers and forget how to plan their own lives and take care of themselves. ** The image of a fair and equal society will be projected, but the third dimension — a bureaucratic cruelty over defenseless individuals — will result. This is not a progressive society; it’s an oppressive one. There is no escape from oppressive centralized state control.

by Jack Lee

.

Yesterday, Thursday the 21st day of January, the United States Supreme Court in a 5/4 decision struck down a campaign law that has stood for 76 years. Whether you were for or against this decision one thing remains true, it was monumental and it will have a dramatic effect on how all future elections are conducted.

Let’s take a look at what happened and review some of the arguments pro and con, and then you decide if this was good or bad for America. ( As always, your comments are welcomed and will be posted as quickly as we can. )

The Supreme Court said basically this to the people: The First Amendment does not permit government to decide the “proper” quantity of political speech. And on the face of it this seems like rock solid logic. So why then were their four learned justices that took strong exception to the ruling? Obviously, this was a difficult case and right or wrong may have yielded to political bias, but for now lets not go there.

Corporations, businesses, unions and every entity that is not a non-profit may now contribute as much as they wish to support or oppose a candidate or legislation. Such entities pay taxes and it’s therefore defensible they should have some say in elections. However, many illegal aliens also pay taxes and so do foreign entities that import goods, shall this theory extend to them as well?

The 1st Amendment of the Constitution provides protection for free speech, although it does not specifically define what speech ought to be free. Criminal law defines that part, so we know there are limits to free speech. Criminal law limited free speech under the Harm Principle.

John Stuart Mill, an English philosopher, political theorist, and a member of Parliament was a Classical liberal thinker of the 19th century whose works on liberty justified freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state control. Mill makes a strong case when he tells us that any doctrine should be allowed no matter how immoral or absurd it may seem to everyone else.

“If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”

Such liberty should exist with every subject matter so that we have “absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral or theological”

Then Mill suggests that we need some rules of conduct to regulate the actions of members of a political community. The limitation he places on free expression is “one very simple principle,” now usually referred to as the Harm Principle, which states that the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. This why you can’t yell “Fire” in a crowded building or slander someone.

Continue reading “What Just Happened to Free Speech? A Supreme Court Ruling of Historic Proportions!” »