Sunday, January 07, 2007

A Tsunami of a Problem

Try to remember that time not so long ago when celebrities were flooding the airwaves, begging for help for victims of the tsunami. Only the most heartless of Americans could have possibly turned down those impassioned appeals.

Now comes word from the BBC that half of the billions of dollars pledged by individuals, businesses, and governments around the globe for tsunami aid has not yet been spent—two years after the disaster.

It should come as no surprise, however, that a number of foreign governments have completely reneged on their promise to send aid. Others have only given a small percentage of what they promised.

All told, some 6.7 billion dollars was pledged, but only 3.4 billion has been spent, according to the BBC report. Among the biggest deadbeats—China, which pledged 301 million dollars to Sri Lanka, but has actually given only a paltry million…France, which promised 79 million, but has forked over just a little more than a million…and Spain, which pledged 60 million, but has actually donated less than a million.

With friends like these, the tsunami victims need no enemies.

The BBC reports that the European Commission owes 70 million; Britain, 12 million. Meanwhile, the United States has donated about 38 percent of the dollars it promised. The Red Cross, one of the most trusted relief agencies in existence, promised to build 50,000 homes, but has finished only about 8,000.

The British Red Cross is defending its post-disaster performance, with spokesman Matthias Schmale telling the BBC: “It is incredibly difficult…we said from the beginning, this is happening in very difficult circumstances. We raised the money knowing it was difficult. It will take time to spend this money in a responsible manner.”

Schmale admitted that the speed at which houses are being built sounds like “slow progress.” However, he noted that the tsunami also swept away identity papers and legal documents, creating a bureaucratic storm.

However, an official with the United Nations, Miloon Kothari, sees the excuse-making as uncalled for: “It should really not take this long to build permanent housing,” Kothari told the BBC.

Kothari added, “I do not accept the explanation that it is going to take four to five years, in some cases, seven. I’m an architect, I know how long it takes to build a house.”

It was the day after Christmas in 2004 that an earthquake measuring 9.3 in magnitude sparked a tsunami that resulted in the loss of more than 200,000 lives.
Obviously, it can take a long period of time for those who survive such a disaster to recover. But when promised money is inexcusably slow in coming…when pledges made are not kept…and when snail-paced bureaucracy is involved…recovery is not only hindered—it can actually grind to a halt.

If ever there was an effective argument against nationalized health care, the tsunami relief fiasco is it. If it takes more than two years for a centralized authority to build a house, imagine how long it could take for you to find a surgeon to remove your gall bladder—if the federal government were in charge of the entire health care system.
There are some things that the private sector is simply better equipped to handle. Home building, food service, economy-building, and health care are just a few of them.

Saturday, December 30, 2006

The Legacy Of Gerald Ford


President Gerald Ford was an ordinary guy who did a remarkable job in extraordinary times.
After replacing a disgraced vice president, he stepped in for a disgraced president and led a disheartened nation through trying times.


The jovial, plain-talking Ford immediately soared in popularity, but he cashed in his political capital to pardon Richard Nixon. Time proved his decision right as well as courageous, but it angered liberals and moderates and probably cost him the close 1976 election against Democrat Jimmy Carter.


Now he is mostly remembered as the never-elected, awkward president. The bumbling caricature is unfair. Ford was probably our most athletic president, having played center on a University of Michigan football team that won two national championships.


A Navy veteran, he angered conservatives when he granted conditional amnesty to Vietnam draft evaders and deserters. As a member of Congress, he had angered liberals by criticizing Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" programs as wasteful, but some 30 years later, bipartisan welfare reform confirmed his fears about overly generous handouts.


Throughout his career, his wife, Betty, was a source of moral strength, even when her high-profile advocacy of women's rights was a political liability.


Soon after they left the White House, she was treated for alcohol and pill dependency at a Navy hospital. Recognizing how hard it was to find treatment, she later founded the Betty Ford Center, which has helped thousands of people overcome addiction and helped make her among the most fondly remembered of presidential spouses.


Her husband spent most of his long post-presidency contentedly in the background, lecturing, enjoying his family, answering mail and raising money for charity. He led bravely, upheld his principles and then humbly returned to private life.


President Clinton recognized Ford's contribution in a 1999 ceremony: "President Ford represents what is best in public service and what is best about America."

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Blue Dog Democrats Rise Again?


WASHINGTON, DC – Nine new members-elect are set to join the Blue Dog Coalition, including FL-16 Tim Mahoney, IN-02 Joe Donnelly, IN-08 Brad Ellsworth, IN-09 Baron Hill, NC-11 Heath Shuler, NY-20 Kirsten Gillibrand, NY-24 Michael Arcuri, OH-06 Charlie Wilson, and PA-08 Patrick Murphy.


By electing Blue Dogs to Congress, the country has sent a strong message to Washington in support of fiscal responsibility and the bipartisan ideals that the Blue Dogs were founded upon. The Blue Dog Coalition is dedicated to a core set of beliefs that transcend partisan politics with a particular focus on the financial stability and national security of the United States.


Blue Dogs represent the center of the House of Representatives and appeal to the mainstream values of the American public.


In the 110th Congress, the members-elect will join the Blue Dogs in their fight for fiscal responsibility and greater government accountability. As moderates and fiscal hawks, the Blue Dogs have made a determined effort to reach across the aisle to engage in a real debate on fiscal responsibility – including the adoption of pay-as-you-go, a core Blue Dog value that government should not spend more than it has.


All 35 Blue Dogs who ran for re-election to the House will return to the Coalition in the 110th Congress. Those members include: Joe Baca (CA-43), John Barrow (GA-12), Melissa Bean (IL-08), Marion Berry (AR-01), Sanford Bishop (GA-02), Dan Boren (OK-02), Leonard Boswell (IA-03), Allen Boyd (FL-02), Dennis Cardoza (CA-18), Ben Chandler (KY-06), Jim Cooper (TN-05), Jim Costa (CA-20), Robert E. “Bud Cramer (AL-05), Lincoln Davis (TN-04), Jane Harman (CA-36), Stephanie Herseth (SD), Tim Holden (PA-17), Steve Israel (NY-02), Mike McIntyre (NC-07), Jim Marshall (GA-08), Jim Matheson (UT-02), Charlie Melancon (LA-03), Mike Michaud (ME-02), Dennis Moore (KS-03), Collin Peterson (MN-07), Earl Pomeroy (ND), Mike Ross (AR-04), John Salazar (CO-03), Loretta Sanchez (CA-47), Adam Schiff (CA-29), David Scott (GA-13), John Tanner (TN-08), Ellen Tauscher (CA-10), Gene Taylor (MS-04), and Mike Thompson (CA-01).


The returning members have built the Coalition into a serious player in the policy arena, promoting positions which bridge the gap between ideological extremes. Many of the group’s proposals have been praised as fair, responsible, and positive additions to a Congressional environment too often marked as partisan and antagonistic.


The Blue Dog Coalition was formed following the 1994 election debacle for Democrats. The founding members chose the name Blue Dog Coalition because they literally felt “choked blue by the extremes in both parties”. Over the past 12 years, the Blue Dog Coalition has grown from a small organizing group to a 44 strong member organization when the 110th Congress convenes.

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

The Thought Police of Minneapolis

The Thought Police of Minneapolis
By J. Matt Barber

If you’re a Christian working for the City of Minneapolis, watch your step – your job may already be in jeopardy. In what may be one of the most blatant acts of anti-Christian bigotry and discrimination by an American government agency to date, the Minneapolis Police Department has suspended a Police Psychologist, Dr. Michael Campion of Campion, Barrow & Associates, at the behest of pro-homosexual activists.

What was Dr. Campion’s crime? It seems that until last year he was a board member with the Illinois Family Institute (IFI), a Christian organization which advocates traditional family values. The Minneapolis Police Department admits that because of Dr. Campion’s Christian beliefs, and his former affiliation with IFI, he is now under suspension pending an investigation into his beliefs.

The Minneapolis incident is a sad replay of the character assassination Dr. Campion experienced at the hands of liberal activists in Springfield, Illinois last year. After a liberal rag, the Illinois Times, raised questions of Campion being on the board of IFI, an “anti-choice, anti-gay group,” the Springfield City Council dumped him as psychological screener for police and firefighter candidates.

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports that despite the fact that the Minneapolis Police Department admittedly gave Dr. Campion “’high marks’ on ‘general procedural goodness and specific cultural fairness’ of his testing procedures;” he was nonetheless suspended soon after liberal city activists informed Police Chief Don Harris about his IFI affiliation.

Additionally, and equally confusing, is the fact that Sgt. John Delmonico, president of the police federation, admitted that “it never had any complaints about Campion.” Notwithstanding this admission, Delmonico told the Star-Tribune “…any issues that have been raised should be looked into.”

The Star-Tribune further reported that “Council Member Scott Benson appears to have been the first to hear of Campion's beliefs.” Benson, while referring to a conversation with the Minneapolis P.D., told the Star-Tribune, “‘I asked them if given his background, should he be conducting psychological evaluations… They definitely should conduct an investigation and determine what's fact and what's fiction.’”

So apparently it’s that simple. If a person has Christian beliefs, he’s disqualified from working for the city of Minneapolis. This official government act of anti-Christian discrimination by the Minneapolis Police Department should send shivers down the spine of every person of faith. It is a transparent and egregious violation of Dr. Campion’s First Amendment rights to both freedom of association and religion.

The message from Minneapolis is clear: The Constitution be damned! If you work for our city, and you happen to be a person of faith belonging to a church or public policy organization that advocates traditional family values, then you might as well clean out your desk now – because as soon as we find out…you’re done.

The Minneapolis Police Department has sworn to protect and serve, to uphold the U.S. and State constitutions, and to police its community. But now they’ve dangerously overstepped their authority. They’ve become the Minneapolis thought police… just the latest example of how the militant homosexual lobby, aided by willing liberal activists in high-level positions of government, will not rest until Judeo-Christian principles are abolished, and traditional notions of human sexuality, marriage and family are eviscerated.

Take Action Now:

Please let the city of Minneapolis know that government-sanctioned, anti-Christian bigotry and discrimination will not be tolerated. Telephone the office of Police Chief Timothy Dolan and express your outrage. You can also send an e-mail or letter to the addresses provided below:

Timothy Dolan
Interim Chief of Police
350 South 5th Street
Room 130
Minneapolis, MN 55415-1389
612-673-2853
Fax: 612-673-2613
E-mail: police@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Copyright © 2006 by J. Matt Barber

J. Matt Barber is the Corporate Outreach Director for Americans for Truth, and a conservative, pro-family political strategist. A former undefeated professional Boxer, Matt now fights his battles in the ring of culture and policy. He holds both a law degree and a Master of Arts in public policy from Regent University. Matt is a contributing editor for TheConservativeVoice.com, and a contributor to the Washington Times' "Insight Magazine," AmericanThinker.com, and a number of other top online and print publications.

E-mail your comments to Matt, at jmattbarber@comcast.net

Sunday, August 27, 2006

A Political Problem in Aisle 5

As anyone who lives in the ‘burbs knows, the all-American pastime on Saturdays isn’t necessarily a trip to the baseball diamond. For many of us, it’s a trip to the local Wal-Mart. This is particularly true as the back-to-school season is in full swing.


So, it’s a little bit disconcerting to know that, as families across the U.S. are loading up their shopping carts, the elite in the Democratic Party are scowling. While many of us are concerned about al Quaida, a number of Dems have identified Wal-Mart as public enemy number one this political season.

As far as I know, the CEO of Wal-Mart isn’t running for President, but don’t tell that to Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr. of Delaware, a presumed Presidential contender. In Iowa recently, Biden delivered what the New York Times described as a “blistering attack” against Wal-Mart.

In addition to serving America’s need for clothes, toothbrushes, and other luxuries, Wal-Mart happens to be the nation’s biggest private employer. In other words, the company now has more than a million people on its work force. This is a business that is giving jobs to folks—but, according to the bizarre calculations of Democratic leaders, Wal-Mart is bad news for the economy.

Senator Biden suggests that Wal-Mart doesn’t care about “the fate of middle-class people.” But Wal-Mart does business with middle-class people everyday. I don’t know how often the Washington elite shop at Wal-Mart, but the average-income families that I know shop there all the time, because that’s where they can get the best deals for their dollars.

Granted, chances are you won’t earn a six-figure salary at Wal-Mart. But you can earn a paycheck. And you can gain the type of experience that will help you apply for jobs in the future which require more responsibility and will earn you more money. That is, after all, the American way—to start out on the first floor of business and work your way up to the boardroom.

And, speaking of boardrooms, isn’t it curious that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who was a member of Wal-Mart’s board, returned a campaign contribution from the company to protest Wal-Mart’s health benefits? That, apparently, was the start of the unofficial Democratic campaign against the company.

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana has claimed that the anti-Wal-Mart effort is not anti-business. But, when you attack one of the nation’s biggest businesses, it stands to reason that people are really going to wonder whether you have the best interests of business at heart.

No one can be in favor of corporate corruption…bad management decisions…and mistreatment of employees. But the fact is that, without business, many of us would not have jobs. Of course, that concept is mystifying to career politicians who do not have to meet a weekly payroll or deal with constant competition. Their jobs may be safe—but the average taxpayer’s job isn’t.

I may not agree with every corporate decision made at Wal-Mart headquarters, but there can be little argument that the company is a business success story. If it were not so successful, it wouldn’t be under attack. In fact, a national poll showed that Americans generally support Wal-Mart—an attitude which seems to be borne out in the company’s sales. The company posted an $11 billion profit last year.

In a letter written to Iowa Wal-Mart workers, company officials said they “would never suggest to you how to vote, but we have an obligation to tell you when politicians are saying something about your company that isn’t true. After all, you are Wal-Mart.”

And a lot of us are Wal-Mart shoppers—whether we want to admit it or not.

Sunday, August 20, 2006

Meaning of Lieberman’s Defeat to Gun Owners

Both Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and Ned Lamont who defeated him in the Connecticut Democrat primary are anti-gun. Nevertheless, gun owners should pay attention to the outcome of this race. Indeed, anyone interested in survival should pay attention.

From all that anyone can determine, the only issue that separated Lieberman and Lamont is the war against terrorists. Lieberman, although an enemy of personal self defense, was an unabashed supporter of defending America from Muslim crusaders intent on killing every man, woman and child on earth who does not proclaim themselves to be Muslim.

Fourteen hundred years of jihad is not enough evidence for the Democrat left. They are unconcerned about those who today proclaim jihad even while beheading and exploding as many people as possible in the name of their religion.

Since the left is typically unconcerned about religion, they seem to be incapable of accepting the reality that anybody else might be motivated by religious beliefs.

The students of the ‘60’s who lionized mass murderers such as Che Guevara, Mao Tse Tung and Fidel Castro are now the professors, media elite and other Democrat party activists who still lionize their old heroes – and now also are apologists for Muslim terrorists.

The self-destructive view of the Democrat left goes well beyond the naïve mantra that “violence never solved anything.” Tell that to the people of the south of Sudan. They stopped the genocide of some 2,000,000 non-Muslims by the jihadi regime that illegitimately rules the country. The Sudanese People’s Liberation Army did not stop the jihad by talking. They did it by shooting and killing Muslim crusaders before they could kill any more.

The Democrat Left’s support of terrorists derives from self-hatred. They are convinced that Americans, and Westerners in general (but also including African Christians who were slaughtered without a peep from the Left), are the source of violence and resentment in the world. Because we have caused the problem, they believe, we deserve to be attacked. This belief is so deep set that the Left believes self defense and retaliation are morally unacceptable.

We should not think that the Democrat Left’s hatred is reserved for President Bush. They hate him because he is fighting back against terrorists. Thus, anyone connected with national defense – even a socialist such as Sen. Lieberman – gets treated to the same scathing hatred that has been directed toward President Bush.

If Lieberman’s defeat is a harbinger of future elections, any Democrat who believes in self defense, be it personal or national, can expect to get the same treatment. And of course, Republicans can expect to get more of the same as long as they support self defense.

The issue of our age is self defense. The Democrat Left has drawn a line in the sand in Connecticut. They are against survival.

Larry Pratt is Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, a national gun lobby with over 300,000 members located at 8001 Forbes Place, Springfield, VA 22151, (703) 321-8585.

Thursday, August 10, 2006

Preambles of all 50 States Of The United States

Preambles of all 50 States Of The United States:


Alabama 1901, Preamble. We the people of the State of Alabama, invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution.

Alaska 1956, Preamble. We, the people of Alaska, grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land.

Arizona 1911, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...

Arkansas 1874, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arkansas, grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government...

California 1879, Preamble. We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom.

Colorado 1876, Preamble. We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe.

Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy.

Delaware 1897, Preamble. Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences.

Florida 1885, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Florida, grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution...

Georgia 1777, Preamble. We, the people of Georgia, relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution...

Hawaii 1959, Preamble. We, the people of Hawaii, Grateful for Divine Guidance .. Establish this Constitution.

Idaho 1889, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Idaho, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings.

Illinois 1870, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.

Indiana 1851, Preamble. We, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government.

Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the State of Iowa, grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings establish this Constitution.

Kansas 1859, Preamble. We, the people of Kansas, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution.

Kentucky 1891, Preamble. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties...

Louisiana 1921, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.

Maine 1820, Preamble. We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity ...
And imploring His aid and direction.

Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...

Massachusetts 1780, Preamble. We...the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe .. In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction ..

Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom establish this Constitution.

Minnesota, 1857, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings:

Mississippi 1890, Preamble. We, the people of Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.

Missouri 1845, Preamble. We, the people of Missouri, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness .. Establish this Constitution .

Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution ...

Nebraska 1875, Preamble. We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom .. Establish this Constitution.

Nevada 1864, Preamble. We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom establish this Constitution .

New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V. Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.

New Jersey 1844, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.

New Mexico 1911, Preamble. We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty

New York 1846, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.

North Carolina 1868, Preamble. We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those

North Dakota 1889, Preamble. We , the people of North Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain...

Ohio 1852, Preamble. We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common

Oklahoma 1907, Preamble. Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty ... establish this ..

Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I. Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences..

Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance

Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing

South Carolina, 1778, Preamble. We, the people of he State of South Carolina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.

South Dakota 1889, Preamble. We, the people of South Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties .

Tennessee 1796, Art. XI.III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience...

Texas 1845, Preamble. We the People of the Republic of Texas, acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.

Utah 1896, Preamble. Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution.

Vermont 1777, Preamble. Whereas all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man ..

Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other .

Washington 1889, Preamble. We the People of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution

West Virginia 1872, Preamble. Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God ...

Wisconsin 1848, Preamble. We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility

Wyoming 1890, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Wyoming, grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties .. establish this Constitution.

After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state constitutions, one is faced with the prospect that maybe, the ACLU and the out-of-control federal courts are wrong! If you found this to be "Food for thought.." copy and send to as many as you think will be enlightened as I hope you were.

Please note that at no time is anyone told that they MUST worship God.