Focus on the Family had two recent programs that featured some Christian ministries' aid to Sudan. Must listen to programs at Fight for Life in Sudan and another ministry at Opening Eyes to the Crisis in Sudan. Values Voter News highly recommends a listen to these ministries being interviewed in two links above. But below are links to the ministries themselves and some videos from the two groups.

Below videos are from WithOpenEyesFoundation.com.





Below are videos from MakeWayPartners.org



Share/Bookmark

Watch video of Alito's response as you read further on a critique of our President's statement at the State of the Union. Also, see both sides point of view on the recent Supreme Court decision at Conservative vs Liberal on recent Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and Audio of oral arguments in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission on campaign finance reform



From the Heritage Foundation in response....

The Truth About President Obama and Citizens United

I have to admit that if I had been sitting in the House chamber during President Obama’s State of the Union address, I would have had to fight the urge to have a Joe Wilson moment when the President unjustly criticized the Supreme Court, six of whose members were there. Why? Because the two claims President Obama made about the Court’s decision last week in the Citizens United case are categorically and undeniably false.

President Obama claimed that the Supreme Court had “reversed a century of law to open the floodgates – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections.” Justice Alito seemed to shake his head and mouth the words “not true.” And well he should. The fact is that the Court overturned a federal ban on independent political expenditures by corporations and unions, and in so doing, it rejected the proposition that the government can decide who gets to speak and can ban some from speaking at all.

First of all, the 100-year claim is completely wrong. In 1907, Congress passed the Tillman Act that banned direct contributions by corporations to federal candidates – there was no ban on independent political expenditures in the law. “Contributions” are funds given directly to candidates for their election campaigns; independent expenditures are funds spent by third parties on things like political advertisements without any coordination with the candidate.

The Tillman Act was sponsored by South Carolina Senator Ben “Pitchfork” Tillman, probably the most vicious racist to ever serve in Congress. Tillman was a Democratic segregationist who was chiefly responsible for the imposition of Jim Crow in South Carolina after the end of Reconstruction when he was governor. This federal law, that so-called “progressives” like the President are constantly praising, was intended by Tillman to hurt the Republican Party – the party of abolition and Abraham Lincoln – because many corporations contributed to the Republican Party, not the Democratic Party. These corporations did not like segregation in the South – it cost them money and made it more expensive to sell their goods and services.

Congress did not ban independent political expenditures by corporations and labor unions until 1947. For three decades after the passage of that law, the Supreme Court went out of its way to avoid upholding its constitutionality, and the Court actually struck down a separate ban on independent expenditures as well as a state law prohibiting corporate expenditures on referenda. It was not until 1990 in the Austin case that the Court, in a 5-4 decision, upheld a state ban on independent political expenditures by a nonprofit corporation (a trade association) in a case completely at odds with prior precedent. The actual electioneering communications provision at issue in the Citizens United case was part of the McCain-Feingold amendments to federal campaign finance law in 2002.

So the point is that the law the President claims has been in place for 100 years has been on the books since 1947, and the Supreme Court only issued a very odd decision twenty years ago upholding such a corporate ban in conflict with stare decisis (Quite tellingly, the government refused to defend the 1990 decision on the basis of its actual reasoning when it argued the Citizens United case). As Justice Kennedy said, “[n]o case before Austin had held that Congress could prohibit independent expenditures for political speech based on the speaker’s corporate identity.” While the Supreme Court in Citizens United found that the corporate ban on independent political expenditures is unconstitutional, it did not touch the ban on direct contributions to federal candidates. That is the ban that represents “a century of law” and it remains in force today contrary to the President’s assertion.

The President’s second point about those evil foreign corporations is also totally wrong. 2 U.S.C. § 441e bans all foreign nationals from directly or indirectly contributing to a federal candidate or a political party. It also bans all foreign nationals from making any independent political expenditures – and this ban was not overturned by the Supreme Court. The term “foreign nationals” is defined to include individuals, foreign governments, foreign political parties, and corporations “organized under the laws or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.” It is simply not true that Citizens United freed foreign corporations to make independent expenditures in American elections.

Congress itself put an exemption into the law. If you are not a U.S. citizen but are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the U.S., this ban does not apply to you. The Federal Election Commission has interpreted this provision with regard to corporations to mean that only U.S. domestic subsidiaries of foreign corporations can establish political action committees, and only if those PAC’s donations and disbursements derive entirely from funds generated by the U.S. operations of the subsidiary and all decisions concerning the donations and disbursements are made by U.S. citizens or permanent residents. I was actually on the FEC as a commissioner when we considered an advisory opinion request from a Canadian company over its U.S. domestic subsidiary, and this was the rule followed by the FEC to implement federal law. Under current law, there are multiple layers of protection to prevent foreign influence on our elections.

This makes perfect sense. Foreign corporations are prohibited from participating in American elections. But their domestic subsidiaries that are American companies, employ American workers, have American officers, and pay American taxes, are able to participate in the American election process to the same extent as other U.S. companies as long as all of the money and all of the decisions are American.

The Citizens United decision did not even consider this ban on foreign nationals. So the President was completely out-of-line when he made the claim that foreign corporations would be able to spend without limit in our elections, a claim that seems to have become a talking point for critics of the Supreme Court’s decision.

The President should know better than to make these false claims. After all, he taught a voting rights class at the University of Chicago that loosely covered campaign finance law, and his new White House counsel is Bob Bauer, probably the leading Democratic campaign finance lawyer in Washington. Bauer even wrote one of the only books that exists explaining the nuts and bolts of federal campaign finance law.

The President owes Justice Alito and the other justices of the Supreme Court an apology for completely mischaracterizing their opinion, an opinion that helped restore the full protections of the First Amendment. It was a decision that upheld some of our most basic principles, principles about the freedom to engage in political speech that are incorporated into the Constitution, a document that the critics of this decision seem all to willing to ignore when its requirements don’t fit their political objectives."

Share/Bookmark

Below article is just one more reason why economy flourishes in Texas but is strangled in California but first some very related posts: Texas has created 80% of american jobs in 2008, rejects stimulus spending money and calls for National Tea Party says Palin approved Governor Perry...
More Americans moving from Democrat states to Republican states. Texas may pick up 4 new House seats while many Democrat states will loose one.
Texas vs California when it comes to job creation and economy 
Video: Texas Governor Rick Perry says "This administration...is interested in punishing Texas" and "Time to make Tea Parties twice as big as what they were"
"Green" California leads the nation in job losses...and Czech president says unlike Gore he is able to listen to competing theories...
Newly released stats by Bureau of Labor Statistics show that Job Creation not Job losses are driving unemployment revealing why the stimulus package is not working as the Obama administration claimed it would.
Texas vs California and New York 
Pro-life, Palin approved, economically successful, anti-Big Government and Pro-TEA Party Governor Rick Perry of Texas for president in 2012?
San Francisco is the worst ran big city of the year according to the San Francisco Weekly. "Despite its spending more money per capita on homelessness than any comparable city, its homeless problem is worse than any comparable city's."

PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS ARE SINKING CALIFORNIA-(NCPA)

California is in a precarious position, with a 12.3 percent unemployment rate (more than two points higher than the national average) and a budget $20 billion in the red (only months after the last budget fix closed a large deficit).  Productive Californians are leaving for states with less-punishing regulatory and tax regimes.

Yet so far there isn't a broad consensus to do much about those who have prodded the state into its current position: public employee unions that drive costs up and fight to block spending cuts, says Steven Greenhut, Director of the Pacific Research Institute's journalism center.
Consider:

  • Approximately 85 percent of the state's 235,000 employees (not including higher education employees) are unionized.
  • As the governor noted during his $83 billion budget roll-out, over the past decade pension costs for public employees increased 2,000 percent; state revenues increased only 24 percent over the same period.
  • An advisor for Gov. Schwarzenegger wrote in the San Jose Mercury News last week that, "This year alone, $3 billion was diverted to pension costs from other programs."
  • There are now more than 15,000 government retirees statewide who receive pensions that exceed $100,000 a year, according to the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility. 
Many of these retirees are former police officers, firefighters, and prison guards who can retire at age 50 with a pension that equals 90 percent of their final year's pay.  The pensions for these (and all other retirees) increase each year with inflation and are guaranteed by taxpayers forever -- regardless of what happens in the economy or whether the state's pensions funds have been fully funded (which they haven't been).

A 2008 state commission pegged California's unfunded pension liability at $63.5 billion, which will be amortized over several decades.  That liability, released before the precipitous drop in stock-market and real-estate values, certainly will soar, says Greenhut.

Source: Steven Greenhut, "Public Employee Unions Are Sinking California," Wall Street Journal, January 23, 2010.

For text:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703699204575017182296077118.html
For more on Unions:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=43

Related: Pelosi spent $1,000 a week of tax payer's dollars on "in flight services" like drinks. Check out image of actual receipt and it only gets worse.
Government Public Servants are becoming the Public Masters at the public's tax paying expense.
CBS News follows up on prior report: Congressmen spend $2,200 a night to stay in Copenhagen and it gets worse. 
ABC reports that tax payers will continue to fund not only private jets but now private airports at stimulus package expense
Private sector continues to shed jobs as more and more government workers are making close to $10,000 a month. 
Tax payer funded and Government ran Indian Health Services continues to loose property at an "alarming rate" and yet executives received bonuses even after the fact says GAO.GOV
Veterans Affairs Department workers in Virginia get $24 million in bonuses as Veterans await their own checks  
ABC reports on bonuses for bailed out Wall Street banks but fail to mention $43 million in bonuses for Government owned Fannie and Freddie after cap of bailout has been lifted from $400 billion to unlimited.
Congress condemns CEO on private jets but now approves millions for making their own reports ABC News.

Share/Bookmark

Related: Government Public Servants are becoming the Public Masters at the public's tax paying expense.
CBS News follows up on prior report: Congressmen spend $2,200 a night to stay in Copenhagen and it gets worse. 
ABC reports that tax payers will continue to fund not only private jets but now private airports at stimulus package expense
Private sector continues to shed jobs as more and more government workers are making close to $10,000 a month. 
Tax payer funded and Government ran Indian Health Services continues to loose property at an "alarming rate" and yet executives received bonuses even after the fact says GAO.GOV
Veterans Affairs Department workers in Virginia get $24 million in bonuses as Veterans await their own checks  
ABC reports on bonuses for bailed out Wall Street banks but fail to mention $43 million in bonuses for Government owned Fannie and Freddie after cap of bailout has been lifted from $400 billion to unlimited.
Congress condemns CEO on private jets but now approves millions for making their own reports ABC News.

To the upper left is an image of actual receipt of a congressional trip arranged by Pelosi: 

WND.com has this article out today exposing how Pelosi has been spending tax payer's money titled Taxpayers pay $101,000 for Pelosi's in-flight 'food, booze':

"It reads like a dream order for a wild frat party: Maker's Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey's Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey … and Corona beer.

But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for "in-flight services" – including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That's almost $1,000 per week.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which investigates and prosecutes government corruption, show Pelosi incurred expenses of some $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel over that time...."-Click above link for more. Unbelievable. And to think they rag on CEO's and job creators: Congress condemns CEO on private jets but now approves millions for making their own reports ABC News.

Share/Bookmark



Related: Liberal talk radio Air America file bankruptcy while conservative talk radio flourish.

Share/Bookmark

For both sides on the recent Supreme Court ruling on campaign financing see: Audio of oral arguments in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission on campaign finance reform and Conservative vs Liberal on recent Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

In last week's Presidential weekly address Obama condemned the Supreme Court ruling that bans limits on corporate and union political campaign spending.

What I found interesting was that his campaign out funded McCain's campaign by two times and was a record amount smashing all prior records at $747 million and when you add all the Democrat candidates together there was a total of over a billion dollars.

Not only that but he broke a campaign promise to work with Republicans to use only public financing. In an article from CNSNews.com titled Obama Criticizes ‘Special Interest’ Money in Politics Despite Big Money 2008 Campaign which starts off with: "President Barack Obama was highly critical last week of the Supreme Court’s ruling in a First Amendment case that rolled back government restrictions on political speech, despite his own record-breaking fundraising for his successful 2008 campaign race for the White House, and despite his reversal in 2008 to stick with public financing for his campaign."

Continues with: "...But when Obama’s campaign became a fundraising juggernaut in 2008, the Democratic nominee reversed himself from a pledge he had made during his party’s primary contest.

In a Common Cause questionnaire dated Nov. 27, 2007, then-Senator Obama said, “If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

But Obama held a different view on June 19, 2008, making a Web video on his campaign site, proclaiming to have created a “parallel” public financing system.

“We have created a parallel public financing system where the American people decide if they want to support a campaign, they can get on the Internet and finance it, and they will have as much access and influence over the course and direction of our campaign that has traditionally been reserved for the wealthy and the powerful,” Obama said.

Yet the numbers were hardly parallel. Obama’s presidential campaign raised $452.8 million compared to McCain, who raised $204.4 million.

That was largely because McCain was constrained by the same public financing system used by both presidential nominees in the 2004 race: Republican George W. Bush and Democrat John Kerry. In 2004, Bush raised $256 million compared to Kerry’s $215.9 million...."

Share/Bookmark

As you read below watch or listen to video below on many local town hall meetings during the State of the Union address American's for Prosperity which largely oppose our Presidents agenda.



See Democrat and Republican response in the House to the President's State of the Union address atHouse Democrats vs House Republicans briefing after President Obama's State of the Union address.

From Politifact 2009 Pullitzer Prize winner...

"We've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs."

In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama touted his efforts to bar lobbyists from his administration.

"We've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs or seats on federal boards and commissions," he said on Jan. 27, 2010.

That rang a bell with us because we have tracked a campaign promise he made on that topic. He had promised that "No political appointees in an Obama-Biden administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration."

We rated that one a Promise Broken because his policy has substantial loopholes that have allowed Obama to essentially decide when he wants to ignore the rule.

He's right that on his first day in office, he signed an executive order to bar lobbyists from his administration.

But the order also included a loophole — a "waiver" clause that allows former lobbyists to serve. Waivers are granted by the administration itself, so they are little more than the administration saying it's okay for the lobbyist to work for the administration. The executive order says a waiver may be granted if "the literal application of the restriction is inconsistent with the purposes of the restriction" or "it is in the public interest. ... The public interest shall include, but not be limited to, exigent circumstances relating to national security or to the economy." Another provision allows lobbyists to serve if they agree to recuse themselves from discussions related to their former jobs.

Still, open government groups have given Obama high marks for reducing the number of lobbyists at the White House and for making the process more transparent than other administrations.

"I think that by any fair measure ... the reported number is certainly much fewer," said Meredith McGehee, policy director for the Campaign Legal Center. "In fact, I'd say the waivers are good. It allows them to go in and say, 'Here's someone we think has unique skills.' "

One of the first Obama appointees to get a waiver was William J. Lynn to be deputy secretary of defense, the No. 2 position at the Pentagon. Lynn was a Raytheon lobbyist for six years, lobbying extensively on a broad range of defense-related issues.

Jocelyn Frye, director of policy and projects in the Office of the First Lady, also got a waiver. Previously, Frye lobbied for the National Partnership for Women and Families from 2001 to 2008. The organization advocates for fairness in the workplace, access to health care and "policies that help women and men meet the dual demands of work and family."

And Cecilia Muñoz, director of intergovernmental affairs in the Executive Office of the President, manages the White House's relationships with state and local governments and is a principal liaison to the Hispanic community. Formerly, Muñoz formerly lobbied for National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization.

The White House has issued seven waivers to its ethics rules, which apply to lobbyists as well as to people who served as officers and directors of a company or organization. And agencies have issued 15. The White House has said these waivers are quite rare -- less than 1 percent of the thousands of appointments that have been made.

What about those recusals we mentioned earlier? The administration has not made public how many of these have been issued. We do know that Mark Patterson, the chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, took one -- but that information was only released by the White House after lawmakers and media reports started asking questions. Public records show Patterson worked as a lobbyist for Goldman Sachs in 2008.

Obama said that he has "excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs." But that's not the case. We know of at least four that have taken on policymaking roles in the Obama administration -- Frye's title even contains the word "policy." While these appointments may be few and far between, and while those who made the cut have signed special waivers, we give Obama a False on this claim.

Share/Bookmark



From post titled Fox News not CNN is now the "Most Trusted Name in News". Values Voter News offers solutions.

"See what the NY Times have done with the March for Life at NY Times Wrote Up Four Immigration Protesters, All But Ignored Tens of Thousands Against Abortion and ABC, CBS, NBC Skip March for Life; Abortionist on NPR Calls Pro-Lifers Terrorists."

Found this hilarious video from CNN. Please!!!

Share/Bookmark

Abby Johnson just this last year quit her job as Director of a local Planned Parenthood office in Texas. See more on that story at During 40 days for life campaign a Planned Parenthood director watches ultrasound of an abortion and later quits job



David Bereit speech at same event. David Bereit is founder of 40 days for life which God used as Abby above speaks of to help her get out of the abortion industry.

Share/Bookmark

But first remember John Piper from the Pulpit from a year ago...



Related: Sign up to adopt a liberal to pray for daily
What does praying for kings and modesty have in common?
During 40 days for life campaign a Planned Parenthood director watches ultrasound of an abortion and later quits job
 
We need to pray for Obama says Republican Congressman from New Jersey at this years March for Life event and don't miss Video: Pro-life congressmen speeches at 2010 March for Life running about 40 minutes.!!!



"Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior." -- 1 Timothy 2:1-3




Share/Bookmark

Tim Tebow and God's Providence happens to be in the top ten most viewed posts at Values Voter News in 2009 (see Top 10 most viewed posts of 2009 at Values Voter News). Every weekend that Tim Tebow plays Values Voter News receives more than normal key worded searches for Tim Tebow. For an excellent audio interview of Tebow's parents and what they are doing click here. You can also see Video: Tim Tebow stumps reporter's question on whether or not he is saving himself for marriage for fun and John 3:16 was the number one hit on Google this morning according to ESPN. Why?

CBS has been criticized by many on the left over a soon to air ad to air during the Super Bowl that is suppose to share some of Tebow's story at the expense of Focus on the Family. Below is video of Tim's response. If you wish to email Tebow in support of what he is doing click here. Either way the Tebow story will continue and Lord willing it could be in a Super Bowl some day with some verse painted under his eyes.



With all the controversy set aside here is the story of Tim Tebow as aired on ESPN.



Just happen to run across this video from CBS back in '07 when Tebow was the first Sophmore ever to win the Heisman Trophy.



For other football stars making a stance for their God recently see Mark Ingram wins Heisman and like Tim Tebow gives glory where glory is due. and Colt McCoy of the University of Texas gives glory to Christ after loosing national championship game.

Last year another ad stirred up controversy at NBC during the Super Bowl because it was not allowed to air. Watch it below.

Share/Bookmark

For debate on this Equality Bill in the House of Commons see House of Commons in the UK debates on an amendment to the Equality Bill to protect religious liberty of churches



UK House of Lords also defeated those who were attempting to take out free speech clause in UK's gay hate crimes bill see: House of Lords in the UK accepts free speech clause in the UK gay hate crimes bill and debate in the House of Lords at House of Lords debate motion to reinsert free speech protection into UK's homosexual hate crimes bill

Related: Government in the UK admits Equality Bill will force legal battles for churches if they wish to remain true to their faith

Share/Bookmark



Humor aside our President is actually taking a good step in possibly proposing a spending "freeze" in tonight's State of the Union Address. President Obama is expected to announce a spending freeze which sounds very conservative and what the American public wants. However, coming from President Obama one has a right to be somewhat skeptical with many broken campaign promises on health care and the continued out of control spending. One of the leading conservative think tanks is The Heritage Foundation. On it's blog from this morning is this post titled Morning Bell: President Obama Is Right, We Have A Spending Problem in which is written the following concerns and I insert in italics some comments:

"Tonight in his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama is expected to propose a “freeze” on government spending. Obama’s spending “freeze” will only last three years, will not start until 2011 (interesting enough Democrats will be unable to get most of what they want passed in 2011 anyways after many of them will be gone as expected by current trends with November elections just 9 months away so this is to no loss to the Obama agenda which makes one wonder if this was not the current trend would a spending freeze be on the table tonight), will only apply to a $447 billion slice of the federal government’s $3.5 trillion budget, and will not apply to any of the unspent $862 billion stimulus plan, his health care plan or the House of Representatives’ additional $156 billion stimulus plan. Despite all the loopholes, time limits and procrastination, the President should still be commended for beginning to acknowledge reality. And as a new report issued yesterday by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) shows, the reality is this: the U.S. government has an insatiable spending problem.

The CBO’s summary of the report is bad enough: “Under current law, the federal fiscal outlook beyond this year is daunting … accumulating deficits will push federal debt held by the public to significantly higher levels. At the end of 2009, debt held by the public was $7.5 trillion, or 54% of GDP; by the end of 2020, debt is projected to climb to $15 trillion, or 67% of GDP.” But as bad as those numbers are, our fiscal health is actually worse. The CBO is forced by Congress to make a number of unrealistic assumptions about future revenue and spending changes. But their report makes up for this by including alternative projections that make more realistic assumptions. Heritage fellow Brian Riedl crunched those numbers and found:

  • The public debt — $7.5 trillion at the end of 2009 — is projected to triple to $22.1 trillion by 2020.
  • Over what would be President Obama’s eight years in office if re-elected, baseline budget deficits are projected to total $9.7 trillion — nearly triple the $3.3 trillion in deficits accumulated by President George W. Bush.
  • By 2020, the budget forecasts a $1.9 trillion annual budget deficit, a public debt of 98 percent of GDP and annual net interest spending surpassing $1 trillion.
Our country simply cannot afford to be spending $1 trillion in net interest in 2020. So what is the driving force behind these unsustainable deficits? Unprecedented rises in government spending. More Riedl numbers:
  • Since World War II, federal spending has generally remained between 18 and 22 percent of GDP. During the Bush Administration, spending increased from 18.4 to 20.9 percent of GDP.
  • Discretionary spending has increased 25 percent in three years — not even counting the $311 billion in discretionary stimulus spending and approximately $150 billion in annual spending on the global war against terrorists.
  • In 2009, federal spending reached 24.7 percent of GDP — the highest level in American history outside of World War II. Non-defense spending reached an all-time record of 20.1 percent of GDP.
Comparing our government’s prolific spending habits with the decline in revenues from the recession, Riedl concludes: “Between 2010 and 2020, recession-depleted revenues are projected to gradually rebound to 17.6 percent of GDP (slightly below the 18.3 historical average). Spending is projected expand to 25.9 percent of GDP — well above 20.7 historical average. Compared to those averages, 88 percent of all additional deficits by 2020 come from additional spending (5.2 percent of GDP above average), and only 12 percent comes from low revenues (0.7 percent of GDP below average).”

So 88% of all of our crippling debt problems come from our government’s inability to control its spending habits. Put in this light, President Obama’s spending “freeze” is just a drop in the bucket. A credible commitment to reduce government spending would go much farther. For starters, the remaining TARP and stimulus funds should both be rescinded. Next, instead of the President’s fungible “aggregate” spending freeze, tough hard spending caps should be enacted. Finally, Congress should disclose the massive unfunded obligations of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; put those programs on long-term budgets; and enact the necessary entitlement and programmatic reforms that can keep government within those limits.

Quick Hits:
  • Due to the fact that President Barack Obama’s $787 billion stimulus failed to stem job losses, the Congressional Budget Office now says the scheme will cost American taxpayers $862 billion, thanks to a higher than expected unemployment benefits total.
  • Sens. Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) say they won’t support a deal with the House to pass selective parts of their health care bill through the Senate using reconciliation, and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) says Congress should start over entirely.
  • The leaders of the 9/11 Commission — former-New Jersey Gov. Thomas Keane (R) and former-Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-IN) — told a Senate panel Tuesday the Obama administration mishandled the interrogation of the failed Christmas Day airline bomber.
  • Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Jim Webb (D-VA) signed on to a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder condemning the Obama administration’s decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court.
  • According to a new congressional report, the United States is still unprepared to respond to the threat of large-scale bioterrorism."

Share/Bookmark

Related: Rasmussen Poll: "Most .... think the average reporter is more liberal than they are"
Study: Only Fox News Offered Obama Historically Normal Scrutiny in 2009 .

An online article at Time (partnered with CNN) has this headline Fox: The Most Trusted Name in News with this statement "Fox News is the only outfit trusted by more people than distrust it.". This article also says, "Because we are talking the media and politics, and this is the Internet, someone is probably about to ask if the poll is a conservative setup. PPP, in fact, is a mainly Democratic-affiliated polling firm." This is evidenced by the fact that in there conclusion they mention nothing about Independents favoring Fox News over any other network which would be a very curious inquiry for most. At least that was my first thought even as a conservative Republican. And also evidenced by their interpretation of the results. "A generation ago you would have expected Americans to place their trust in the most neutral and unbiased conveyors of news...but now they're turning more to the outlets that tell them what they want to hear."-For poll results and summary click here.

Here is the Time writers response to this and I think it is a better response then the PPP poll summary: "I think what we're seeing here is that Fox viewers are more likely to believe that all news outlets are biased—and either they don't mind it, or they at least accept that such is the way of the world. And they either simply prefer to watch a channel they see as being biased in their direction, or they believe it is a necessary counterbalance to the (unacknowledged) liberal bias of all other TV news, or they believe other channels are hypocrites for denying being biased, or all of the above. Whereas the rest of the news audience either still sees neutrality as possible, or at least still values it as an ideal."

I would disagree with the last sentence. But totally agree with what is in bold. That is the goal here at Values Voter News: "News and Views Big Media Misses". It is all about counterbalance and exposing liberal media bias as label evidences and the lack of coverage on say events like the hundreds of thousands at the recent March for Life in DC event which evidences forth liberal media bias. See what the NY Times have done with the March for Life at NY Times Wrote Up Four Immigration Protesters, All But Ignored Tens of Thousands Against Abortion and ABC, CBS, NBC Skip March for Life; Abortionist on NPR Calls Pro-Lifers Terrorists.

I am not sure that one should blindly trust any organization claiming neutrality, fairness and balance. The only way one will know if the reporter is being neutral and unbiased is if that one knows the argument themselves. There are two ways to do this.

1) Values Voter News has suggested a solution from the last Pew Research poll on this subject at Public opinion in accuracy of news stories are at a 20 year low but Values Voter News has a suggestion. Namely, that if one really is desiring to get both sides of the issue one should get a dose of CNN and a dose of Fox News then one could make their decision after hearing both sides.

2) Since then Values Voter News has set up a site titled AvoidtheBias.com where both sides are heard and sometimes more than just two sides on many issues. Another solution is CSPAN where you can watch the health care debates and other issues debated right on the Senate and House floor and instead of learning what the debate consists of by having to trust in any media network interpreting the debate for you you can interpret it yourself. At AvoidtheBias.com you will find many debates on the House and Senate floor and elsewhere on various current issues.

I myself do not have cable so I do not watch either CNN or Fox News but I sure am not happy with ABC, NBC and CBS. But online and for free CSPAN provides both sides of the issues. CSPAN is where AvoidtheBias.com gets a lot of its embedded video.

AvoidtheBias.com claims "A tri-partisan solution to media bias." and on its about page it reads:

Why Avoid the Bias?

1) To get different sides of the issues without the influence of media bias so that one can make his or her own decision about the issues untainted by media bias.

2) To know the different sides of the issues without bias so that one can be able to better detect bias in the media and be aware of when they are being biased against or for a certain side of the issue.

Avoid the Bias assumes that as its readers know the different sides of the issues and can get the different sides of the issues without media bias then the readers of Avoid the Bias will be better informed as to bias in our media and will be better informed themselves on the issues then the media itself."

And on post titled See how any congressman or woman voted on the bills and watch how they debated on the floor going back 10 plus years claims: 

"Found these excellent links that document how any congressman or woman voted on any bill for the past 10 plus years and watch video of any congressman or woman that debated on the floor concerning any subject or bill for the past 10 plus years.

As much as it is important to know how a congressman or woman voted on a bill it is also important to know why. That is why the third link above will be of some use as to why one voted for or against a certain bill. Even if a congressman or woman did not speak on the floor in a debate over a bill most of the time you can get a flavor as to why by watching the debate from both sides on the bill. And sometimes there are many different sides concerning a bill not just two.

This is another reason for AvoidtheBias.com. You will find many debates on the issues in and outside of the Floor debates and many committee discussions/debates and much more so that the readers of AvoidtheBias.com will have a better understanding of the issues and the debate without media bias. See more on AvoidtheBias.com at About."

Share/Bookmark

At one time being a public servant was just that now it appears private citizens are becoming the public servants. See below new article and CBS News follows up on prior report: Congressmen spend $2,200 a night to stay in Copenhagen and it gets worse. and Private sector continues to shed jobs as more and more government workers are making close to $10,000 a month. and Veterans Affairs Department workers in Virginia get $24 million in bonuses as Veterans await their own checks and As the tax paying private sector jobs are being lost the tax payer funded federal employees 6 figure incomes explode during recession and 237 millionaires in congress and apparently they are not all Republicans as 4 of top 5 are Democrats and the top 2 are from the liberal state of California with no Texans in top 5 etc etc etc

Below article from NCPA.....

CLASS WAR: HOW PUBLIC SERVANTS BECAME OUR MASTERS

Government employees have turned themselves into a coddled class that lives better than its private-sector counterpart, and with more impunity.  In effect, the public's servants have become our masters, says Steven Greenhut, a columnists with the Orange County Register.

There was a time when government work offered lower salaries than comparable jobs in the private sector but more security and somewhat better benefits. These days, government workers fare better than private-sector workers in almost every area -- pay, benefits, time off, and job security:

  • According to a 2007 analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Asbury Park Press, the average federal worker made $59,864 in 2005, compared with the average salary of $40,505 in the private sector.
  • Across comparable jobs, the federal government paid higher salaries than the private sector three times out of four, the paper found.  
The Obama administration has extended the hiring binge started by President Bush:
  • The executive branch employment (excluding the Postal Service and the Defense Department) slated to grow by 2 percent in 2010 -- and more than 15 percent if you count temporary Census workers.
  • The average federal salary (including benefits) is set to grow from $72,800 in 2008 to $75,419 in 2010, CBS reported.
But the real action isn't in what government employees are being paid today; it's in what they're being promised for tomorrow, says Greenhut:
  • Public pensions have swollen to unrecognizable proportions during the last decade.
  • In June 2005, BusinessWeek reported that more than 14 million public servants and 6 million retirees are owed $2.37 trillion by more than 2,000 different states, cities and agencies, numbers that have risen since then.
  • State and local pension payouts, the magazine found, had increased 50 percent in just five years. 
People who are supposed to serve the public have become privileged elite that exploit political power for financial gain and special perks.  It is a two-tier system in which the rulers are making steady gains at the expense of the ruled.  The predictable results: Higher taxes, eroded public services, unsustainable levels of debt, and massive roadblocks to reforming even the poorest performing agencies and school systems.  If this system is left to grow unchecked, we will end up with a pale imitation of the free society envisioned by the Founders, says Greenhut. 

Source:  Steven Greenhut, "Class War: How Public Servants Became our Masters," Reason, February 2010.


For text:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/12/class-war/
For more on Employment Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=30

Share/Bookmark

This is a follow up to CBS News actually reports tax payer funded trips of our Congressmen and women to Copenhagen and how much carbon dioxide this all produce.


Watch CBS News Videos Online

It is not to often Big Media reports on issues like this and especially CBS. ABC has had some highlights at: ABC reports that tax payers will continue to fund not only private jets but now private airports at stimulus package expense and  At ABC: Diane Sawyer asks tough questions of Al Gore and Jack Tapper points out some flaws in Obama job numbers and Only ABC reports on Obama Administration's effort to suppress criticism that Medicare benefit to seniors will be cut and Only ABC highlights how fast Obama's poll numbers are falling but these highlights are far short of fairness. To get both sides of the story go to AvoidtheBias.com and for a values voter perspective stick around here.

Related: Tax payer funded and Government ran Indian Health Services continues to loose property at an "alarming rate" and yet executives received bonuses even after the fact says GAO.GOV
Private sector continues to shed jobs as more and more government workers are making close to $10,000 a month. 
ABC reports on bonuses for bailed out Wall Street banks but fail to mention $43 million in bonuses for Government owned Fannie and Freddie after cap of bailout has been lifted from $400 billion to unlimited.
Veterans Affairs Department workers in Virginia get $24 million in bonuses as Veterans await their own checks  

Or better yet hit label .

Share/Bookmark

NCPA reports on IPCC mistake in 2007 report. 2009 has been a bad year for global warming advocates from a failed Copenhagen event to Climate Gate to the Earth not warming and now we start it off in 2010 with mistake in report concerning the Himalayan Glaciers. See below article for Himalayans and BBC News: Current climate models fail to forecast that the globe is not warming even though man made carbon dioxide continues to rise and Climate Change skepticism has been the number one news story 7 out of the last 52 days in the blogosphere according to BlogPulse why hasn't Big Media picked up on it? and Video: World's largest particle physics laboratory funding project now a second time that supports global climate caused by cosmic rays 

THE IPCC'S ABOMINABLE SNOWMEN

The scientists who said that Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2035 have admitted the claim has as much credibility as sightings of the mythical Yeti.  It's their fraudulent claims that are melting away, says Investor's Business Daily (IBD).

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.N. body tasked with scaring us to death about global warming, has admitted that the claim in its 2007 report about the Himalayan glaciers disappearing was not based on any scientific study or research.  It was instead based on one scientist's speculation in a telephone interview with a reporter.

  • The IPCC claimed: "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of their disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the earth keeps warming at the current rate."
  • As it turns out, the earth hasn't been warming at all, at least not in the last decade, and reputable scientists have said it may continue to cool for decades to come.
  • Even if it was warming, glaciologists insist, the sheer mass of Himalayan glaciers made such a prediction laughable.
According to Professor Julian Dowdeswell, director of the Scott Polar Research Institute at Cambridge University:
  • Even a small glacier, such as the Dokriani glacier, is up to 120 meters (394 feet) thick; a big one would be several hundred meters thick and tens of kilometers long.
  • The average glacier is 300 meters thick, so to melt one even at the rate of five meters a year would take half a century.
  • That is a lot faster than anything we are seeing now, so the idea of losing it all by 2035 is unrealistically high; the current maximum observed rate of glacier melt worldwide is two to three meters a year.
Like the infamous "hockey stick" graph purporting to show sudden and man-induced warming, and the Climate-gate e-mails showing the efforts by researchers associated with Britain's Climate Research unit to "hide the decline" in global temperatures, the Himalayan glacier claim, like the IPCC report itself, is science fiction and not science fact, says IBD.

Source: Editorial, "The IPCC's Abominable Snowmen," Investor's Business Daily, January 21, 2010.
For text:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=518615
For more on Global Warming:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=32

Share/Bookmark

Rasmussen is Values Voter News personal favorite for accuracy when it comes to elections so far. Pollster.com is another great resource. Rasmussen as you will note in chart below was the first to report that Brown was within 9 points 2 weeks before the election while the Boston Globe reported a 17 point difference. Then the next week Rasmussen showed Brown down by only 2 points. Unfortunately, Rasmussen did not do a poll before the election for us to know what they polled then.

Here is embedded a poll chart done by Pollster.com which Values Voter News posted at Pollster.com releases live polling chart for last week of Massachusetts Senate race between Coakley and Brown on January 14th so readers could see where each candidate was in the combined polls.



Values Voter News also tries to report election results and the accuracy of the polling. For Rasmussen's accuracy on New Jersey and Virginia Governor see Special Report: Conservatives picked up more than a Governor seat in Virginia but 5 House delegates, Lt Governor and Attorney General.

Here are some notes from Rasmussen and further reasons why Rasmussen has become Values Voter News favorite poll along with the charts from Pollster.com. From Breaking Poll: Rasmussen has Senate race in Massachusetts with Coakley (D) 49% and Brown (R) 47% - Rasmussen accurately polled the Presidential election and results in Virginia and New Jersey Governor races:

Rasmussen also states this in defense of their polling on many of their Obama approval rating updates:

"Rasmussen Reports has been a pioneer in the use of automated telephone polling techniques, but many other firms still utilize their own operator-assisted technology (see methodology).

Pollster.com founder Mark Blumenthal noted that “independent analyses from the National Council on Public Polls, the American Association for Public Opinion Research, the Pew Research Center, the Wall Street Journal and FiveThirtyEight.com have all shown that the horse-race numbers produced by automated telephone surveys did at least as well as those from conventional live-interviewer surveys in predicting election outcomes.”

In the 2009 New Jersey Governor’s race, automated polls tended to be more accurate than operator-assisted polling techniques. On reviewing the state polling results from 2009, Mickey Kaus offered this assessment, “If you have a choice between Rasmussen and, say, the prestigious N.Y. Times, go with Rasmussen!” During Election 2008, Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com said that the Rasmussen tracking poll “would probably be the one I'd want with me on a desert island."
 
A Fordham University professor rated the national pollsters on their record in Election 2008. We also have provided a summary of our results for your review. In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% and our final poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%. While we were pleased with the final result, Rasmussen Reports was especially pleased with the stability of our results. On every single day for the last six weeks of the campaign, our daily tracking showed Obama with a stable and solid lead attracting more than 50% of the vote.

An analysis by Pollster.com partner Charles Franklin “found that despite identically sized three-day samples, the Rasmussen daily tracking poll is less variable than Gallup.” During Election 2008, the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll was the least volatile of all those tracking the race.

In 2004 George W. Bush received 50.7% of the vote while John Kerry earned 48.3%. Rasmussen Reports was the only firm to project both candidates’ totals within half a percentage point by projecting that Bush would win 50.2% to 48.5%. (see our 2004 results)."

Found this interesting link to article at Rasmussen concerning the various results of different polls at: Looking Closer at the Massachusetts Senate Polls

Share/Bookmark

Head to about 43:30 to 83:30 for many pro-life Representatives and Senators speak at the 37th annual March for Life event in Washington, DC.

And don't miss related links below video.




Do check out Values Voter News 2nd most viewed post of 2009 at Genocide Awareness Project hits liberal University of CA at Berkely with disturbing yet powerful images and comments and the testimony of the very Roe of Roe v. Wade before a Senate committee Testimony of the very Roe of Roe v Wade after finding forgiveness in Christ for her sins. Once abortion activist now trying to reverse Roe v Wade which happen to be the two top most rated posts at Values Voter News since the start of the rating process.

Related: A March for Life event in San Francisco turns out 20 to 30,000 walkers. Check out vides  
Virtual March For Life. If you can't be with the hundreds of thousands in DC this year sign up as a virtual marcher.
25,000 in Paris, video of thousands in Arkansas and video of thousands in Dallas marching for Life while 100,000's prepare to March for Life in DC and so far 25,000 to virtually March for Life. 
50,000 march for life and family in Costa Rica reports LifeSiteNews.com
1300 March for Life in Berlin
10,000 girls march for life in India while 20,000 march in Africa
Video: 1 million prolife protesters in Spain. CNN actually covers it but what about America's annual pro-life protests?  
Canadian March for Life increases size of crowd by 25% this year to protest Canada as being the only nation in the western world with no abortion law. 

Share/Bookmark

LifeNews.com has been keeping a good tally on incidents like the one below. Here are a long list of related incidents before the article:

LifeNews reports on yet another charge concerning a killing of a woman who refused to have an abortion in Florida 
Man accused of giving pregnant girlfriend abortion drug to force an abortion
Alaska Air Force man accused of causing forced abortion of wifes unborn child...
Husband pressures woman to get abortion and woman later commits suicide
Girlfriend and Daughter killed by boyfriend after refusing to have an abortion in Seattle.
Yet another teen murdered after refusing to have an abortion
Further evidence that legalized abortion disadvantages women against men as Tennessee man charged with murdering woman and unborn child over abortion.
LifeNews.com reports on how legalized abortion empowers men over women
British Doctor found guilty of poisoning lover to cause an abortion
Man in Texas convicted of attacking pregnant woman and challenges unborn victims law
Teen admits to tainting girlfriend's drink with drug used to abort pregnancies in cows
ACLU to defend man who killed pregnant girlfriend and unborn child after shooting into her stomach
Man arrested after stabbing pregnant girlfriend after refusing to abort child
Pregnant woman killed and unborn child at 8 months taken from her body
If your in Oklahoma and you are pregnant you have the right to use force to defend your unborn child. that all evidence forth this great opinion piece at LifeNews.com: LifeNews.com reports on how legalized abortion empowers men over women. 

Florida Man Caught Who Paid for Abortion After Sexually Abusing Teen

Land O' Lakes, FL (LifeNews.com) -- A 45-year-old meat market owner wanted on a charge of having sex with a 16-year-old girl was caught at the Canadian border, according to the Pasco County Sheriff's Office. Ramon A. Ventura was extradited to Pasco County on Wednesday. Ventura, who told authorities he owns A&R Meat Market in St. Petersburg, is charged with unlawful sexual activity with a minor.

According to court records, the teen skipped school and ended up at Ventura's house in Land O'Lakes sometime between April and June 2009. At the home, Ventura had sex with the girl, who later found out she was pregnant, records state. The girl's mother confronted Ventura, and he paid $2,400 for the girl to get an abortion, records state. The victim's name and relationship to Ventura were not disclosed due to the nature of the crime.

A judge signed the warrant for Ventura's arrest on Dec. 11, court records state. According to The Buffalo News, Ventura tried to flee to Canada as a passenger in a taxi on Jan. 7. He was arrested by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers, who seized $13,000 in cash Ventura had on him, the News states. He was turned over to the Buffalo police, incarcerated and extradited to Pasco. Ventura has been released from the Pasco County jail on $25,000 bail.

Share/Bookmark



Do check out Values Voter News 2nd most viewed post of 2009 at Genocide Awareness Project hits liberal University of CA at Berkely with disturbing yet powerful images and comments and the testimony of the very Roe of Roe v. Wade before a Senate committee Testimony of the very Roe of Roe v Wade after finding forgiveness in Christ for her sins. Once abortion activist now trying to reverse Roe v Wade which happen to be the two top most rated posts at Values Voter News since the start of the rating process.

Related: Virtual March For Life. If you can't be with the hundreds of thousands in DC this year sign up as a virtual marcher.
25,000 in Paris, video of thousands in Arkansas and video of thousands in Dallas marching for Life while 100,000's prepare to March for Life in DC and so far 25,000 to virtually March for Life. 
50,000 march for life and family in Costa Rica reports LifeSiteNews.com
1300 March for Life in Berlin
10,000 girls march for life in India while 20,000 march in Africa
Video: 1 million prolife protesters in Spain. CNN actually covers it but what about America's annual pro-life protests?  
Canadian March for Life increases size of crowd by 25% this year to protest Canada as being the only nation in the western world with no abortion law.  

Share/Bookmark

Last Week In Review

Headlines

Last week's email update was titled A major upset in the working for Senate seat in Massachusetts replacing Kennedy on Tuesday. World Health Organization ranks the US health care #1. Ministries across America respond to Haiti. and boy was it. On a forum I predicted a healthy 3-6 point win for Brown on Monday morning and he won by 5 points on Tuesday night. I predicted this on the basis of the numbers and energy at each rally on the Sunday before the election when Obama visited Massachusetts to campaign for the Democrat (see Video: Check out these videos from Tea Party endorsed Scott Brown's rally in Massachusetts as Obama campaigns for Coakley on Sunday), Intrade.com, the energized voters for Brown vs those for Coakley which is key to voter turnout, the overall sentiment of the nation and all the polls (see Pollster.com releases live polling chart for last week of Massachusetts Senate race between Coakley and Brown) for the last week or so pointed to a healthy Brown victory. Actually, I didn't think it was to risky of a prediction except that this was Massachusetts and a Kennedy's seat held for 50 years and Kennedy's life goal was health care reform which ironically was in a big part what Brown campaigned against (go to a little over 3 minutes of final debate between Brown and Coakley at Video of debate between Coakley, Brown and Kennedy for Massachusetts Senate seat.).
Even those in Europe got the message. Check out this recent speech at the EU by MEP Hannan at Conservative MEP in the UK uses the recent victory of the people in Massachusetts and American history to inspire a revolution of the voters in Europe vs. the EU

But my favorite is the BBC News description of the victory. BBC News had one of the best descriptions of the victory in Massachusetts. See BBC News on Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts: "...a shock victory...a huge blow...a humiliating blow...one of the biggest political upset in years...a referendum on his first year in office...". This is indeed one of the biggest political upsets in years. BBC News description of what this means and was about is dead on target.

Check out this video as Republican Representative in the House describes what some did when they lost hope of killing the health care reform bill at: Rep. King reports on the House floor that he and Grassley prayed that the Republican would win in Massachusetts when the Republican was down some 30 points in the polls.. Last week before the Brown win Values Voter News reported: "All political eyes will be on Massachusetts Tuesday. History is in the working....If Brown pulls this off in Massachusetts filling the seat of popular Massachusetts Senator Kennedy after Obama, Kerry and the current Governor of Massachusetts along with the Kennedy's have all been strongly endorsing Coakley what a blow to liberalism in America and the current congress and White House." And as BBC News describes boy was it not only a blow but a humiliating blow and referendum on Obama's first year in office (see Obama's average approval rating for first year in office according to Gallup polls puts him second only to Clinton for worst first year average approval rating.).

For more on this election see: Video: Pro-lifer interrupts Obama speech campaigning for Coakley with sign that says "Jesus loves all babies". and You are a racist not only if you oppose Obama, Reid and PelosiCare but now you are a racist if you have a truck or so says MSNBC.

I also sent you all out a post titled Watch this hilarious most viewed video today on You Tube: "Hitler Finds Out Scott Brown Won Massachusetts Senate Seat" which was reporting on this new video going viral. Since then the video has 2.4 million views on You Tube in 6 days and is number 1 this week in 7 categories. Most Discussed, Most Viewed over all and in the UK and India, Top Favorited and Top Rated under News and Politics. And lastly, the most viewed video of this week period. Some are calling this election the political "shot heard round the world" and when you look at the most viewed videos on You Tube in News and Politics you see this video in the tops from Germany to Sweden to Israel to Brazil to Russia and 15 other countries. For more on the significance of the phrase "shot heard round the world" see 3rd video at post Rep. King reports on the House floor that he and Grassley prayed that the Republican would win in Massachusetts when the Republican was down some 30 points in the polls.

Debates

Video: Gary Demar vs Thomas Ice on whether or not The Great Tribulation has already happened in the past or still yet future.

Testimonies

New Virginia Governor says "The hand of God..." helped prepare him for his job as Governor of Virginia

American Remembrance

Video: New painting "One Nation Under God"

Videos

Education

Video" Governor Perry of Texas rejects $750 million from Federal Government. See letter from Perry to Duncan.

International

Conservative Party leader in the UK says Good parenting is the single most important determinate of our future success or failure

Economy

Dow Jones drops over 400 points since Obama announces attack on job creators and investors via The Volcker Rule.

Liberal Media Bias

Liberal talk radio Air America file bankruptcy while conservative talk radio flourish.

Pro-Life

25,000 in Paris, video of thousands in Arkansas and video of thousands in Dallas marching for Life while 100,000's prepare to March for Life in DC and so far 25,000 to virtually March for Life.

First Amendment Case Victories


Court orders Hartford Police Department to dish out $20,000 for violating a Christian's free speech rights

International

Scotland

Abuse of alcohol cost tax payers in Scotland over $1400 a year per tax payer or $5.74 billion a year over all says University of York study.

Canada

Study in Canada shows that teenagers who drank from a few times to weekly or monthly in the past year are much more likely to have sexual intercourse

Taxes

Tax payer funded and Government ran Indian Health Services continues to loose property at an "alarming rate" and yet executives received bonuses even after the fact says GAO.GOV

Education

Christian college defeats Oxford at home and in England, wins their 4th championship in 6 years and amongst only 18 in the world awarded the UN's highest award.

Faith and Family Philanthropy

Church volunteers at a church in San Diego band together to complete nearly $10 million in service to the community

Share/Bookmark