Now We're Opening Up Top Secrets?

I usually talk about policy facts but this is over the pale and needs to be addressed. Obama promised transparency. He failed to say it would be of the previous administration and not of himself.

This sets precedence for any future administration, CIA or FBI agents to face possible criminal charges if their decisions during their rein aren't approved by their successor. The people making these important decisions on whether to go to war or simply confront our enemy in any way is always going to be compromised in fear of being punished later for it. Never in history has this EVER happened.

President Bush was a gentleman. Even tho he was urged to look into matters done in the previous administration he respected the duties, authority, and decisions of Mr. Clinton. President Bush looked forward, not backwards. President Bush DID NOT look for excuses in Mr. Clinton. President Bush was NOT a puppet for special interests.

Regardless of what one may think of President Bush, and he made his mistakes too, he kept us safe. He kept the enemy OFF our soil. They waged war on US and President Bush took it back to them on THEIR land. Absolutely NOTHING else is going to matter if our enemy wins. They just have to be right once. We have to be right 100% of the time.

This new administration has an agenda unlike any we've seen. He's Pelosi's puppet for her little vengeful acts against the previous administration. He's Soros's, the unions, and any extreme leftist's puppet for getting him elected. If he doesn't destroy us with the economy our enemies were just given an open door to come in and finish the job.

May God save our souls.

How Would You Assess President Obama’s Performance? (click for survey)

By The Heritage Foundation

How would you assess President Obama’s performance? How would you rate his economic policies, his national security decisions, his energy policies, his method of governing, and his overall agenda?

Today, conservatives face what may be their greatest obstacle -- the Obama agenda.

By cloaking his domestic agenda in terms of economic recovery, President Obama and his team of liberals have been able to pass the largest spending bill in history, repeal welfare reform, set us on the course to socialized healthcare, advance a very costly energy policy, impose high costs on productive people, and enact unprecedented expansions of governmental power.

Furthermore, by cutting the defense budget and ordering the closing of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, the President demonstrates his complacency toward national security and undermines our ability to respond to future attacks.

This must stop.

President Obama Announces Support for Firearms Treaty (click for additional stories)

From the NRA

During an official visit to Mexico on April 16, President Obama announced his support for Senate ratification of an inter-American treaty on firearms trafficking. In response, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox issued the following statement:

"The NRA is well aware of the proposed Organization of American States treaty on firearms trafficking, known by its Spanish initials as CIFTA. The NRA monitored the development of this treaty from its earliest days, but contrary to news reports today, the NRA did not 'participate' at the meeting where the treaty was approved.

"The treaty does include language suggesting that it is not intended to restrict 'lawful ownership and use' of firearms. Despite those words, the NRA knows that anti-gun advocates will still try to use this treaty to attack gun ownership in the U.S. Therefore, the NRA will continue to vigorously oppose any international effort to restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding American gun owners."

The Thomas More Law Center (Ann Arbor, MI) and Michael Savage Sue Janet Napolitano (click for full story and suit)

By Bob Unruh
WorldNetDaily

"ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced that yesterday evening it filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Rightwing Extremism Policy,” as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of their political beliefs."

This Proves CNN Out Of Touch (click for video)

This is why I no longer trust or watch CNN. The Tea Parties held yesterday weren't organized by the GOP or by FOX. These were simple hard working Americans from ALL parties who are fed-up with what Washington has done and continues to do to it's people. This anchor should be fired! These people are so pathetically out of touch and really are a part of the problem. Why were they calling for a revolution themselves before election and now we're just stupid mindless people who don't know what we're talking about?

Yesterday wasn't a one day event. I assure you people are mad at Washington, disgusted with this kind of media NOT telling the truth and will continue on a grassroots level to take back control of whom WE hired to work for US. Ms. Roesgen better get over it because we're here to stay.

These tea parties also show the BIG difference between conservatism and angry liberals like Roesgen. We can demonstrate peacefully without the insults where her immature, irresponsible and unprofessional reporting tried to over-shadow the truth. I believe there is a movement to try to suppress the opposing voice starting IN Washington with all their little puppet followers down to this level.

Is Tax Exemption Status for Churches Unconstitutional? (click for entire article)

Congressman George Hansen in "Caesar's Grip", by Peter Kershaw

Religion cannot be free if you have to pay the government, through taxation, to exercise it. Since churches aren't taxable in the first place, why do so many of them go to the IRS and seek permission to be tax-exempt?

Most churches in America have organized as "501c3 tax-exempt religious organizations." This is a fairly recent trend that has only been going on for about fifty years. Churches were only added to section 501c3 of the tax code in 1954. We can thank Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson for that. Johnson was no ally of the church. As part of his political agenda, Johnson had it in mind to silence the church and eliminate the significant influence the church had always had on shaping "public policy."

Although Johnson proffered this as a "favor" to churches, the favor also came with strings attached (more like shackles). One need not look far to see the devastating effects 501c3 acceptance has had to the church, and the consequent restrictions placed upon any 501c3 church. 501c3 churches are prohibited from addressing, in any tangible way, the vital issues of the day.

For a 501c3 church to openly speak out, or organize in opposition to, anything that the government declares "legal," even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion, homosexuality, etc.), that church will jeopardize its tax exempt status. The 501c3 has had a "chilling effect" upon the free speech rights of the church. LBJ was a shrewd and cunning politician who seemed to well-appreciate how easily many of the clergy would sell out.

Did the church ever need to seek permission from the government to be exempt from taxes? Were churches prior to 1954 taxable? No, churches have never been taxable. To be taxable a church would first need to be under the jurisdiction, and therefore under the taxing authority, of the government. The First Amendment clearly places the church outside the jurisdiction of the civil government: "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Tax Day Talking Points from The Heritage Foundation

By Nathaniel Ward
Have you had enough of Congress borrowing, spending, and taxing away your future? It seems every time we turn around the ever-expanding government announces a new bailout package, "stimulus" plan or budget increase.

Because the government is moving so quickly to pass these costly measures, the American people are having an increasingly hard time keeping up with the facts. But awareness of them remains extremely important to this debate.

Heritage experts are working every day to get your voices heard in the halls of Congress. But it's just as important that you speak out in your own community. As Thomas Jefferson once said, "all tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." Your voice is your weapon — exercise it.

The President’s Plan

* Blames Bush: President Obama correctly points out that he inherited a projected $1.2 trillion deficit in 2009 from President Bush and a Democratic Congress. However, his budget adds an additional $659 billion to that deficit, pushing it above $1.8 trillion. Although Obama has pledged to reduce the budget deficit to approximately $600 billion by 2012, that would still be $150 billion above pre-recession levels. Quadrupling the deficit and then cutting it in half is not “change.”
* Increases Spending, Again: After an $800 billion stimulus bill, the Obama budget increases spending by $1 trillion over 10 years, includes an additional $250 billion placeholder for another bailout, and calls for a Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) law while astonishingly violating that rule by $3.4 trillion.
* Expands Government: The 25% spending increase in the Obama budget represents the largest non-war government expansion since the New Deal.
* Leaves Deficits: The Obama budget leaves permanent deficits averaging $600 billion even after the economy recovers and doubles the publicly held national debt to over $15 trillion ($12.5 trillion in 2009 dollars).
* Cuts Defense: The Obama budget fails to fully fund the core defense needs of the United States. About $30 billion more is needed in the base defense budget.
* Puts Government in Charge: The $634 billion for health care reform in the Obama budget is only a “down payment” on an eventual government-run system. Experts believe the actual cost could reach $1.6 trillion over 10 years. This is in addition to the trillions already spent on health care this year in the stimulus and SCHIP bills.

Taxes, Taxes, Taxes

* Energy Taxes: The Obama budget proposes a $646 billion cap-and-trade tax that White House officials admit could actually generate $1.9 trillion in tax revenue over eight years. This tax would cost each American household between $650 and $2,000 annually in new energy costs, even though President Obama promised that “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket” under this cap-and-trade program (January 2008).
* Oil and Gas Taxes: The Obama budget would collect $31 billion in new oil and gas tax revenue. These industries are already taxed above the industrial average, and increasing the burden would be detrimental to increasing or even maintaining domestic supply.
* Excise Taxes: The Obama budget would reinstate unnecessary Superfund excise taxes that expired in 1995.
* Death Taxes: The estate tax is set to expire in 2010, but the Obama budget and liberals in Congress are proposing keeping it between 35 and 45%.
* Tobacco Taxes: The largest tobacco tax in history is three times as likely to affect low-income Americans, who are more likely to smoke, as it is to affect high-income Americans.

There Are Alternatives

* A Path to American Prosperity: There are now two 10-year budget plans being offered in Washington. The Obama budget raises taxes by $1.4 trillion; the conservative Alternative avoids all tax increases and even simplifies the tax code. One budget does nothing to address the unsustainable costs of Social Security and Medicaid; the other begins to reform these programs. One budget permanently raises federal spending to over 22% of GDP; the other lowers it to pre-recession levels.
* Lower Taxes: Senator Jim DeMint’s “American Option” would have reduced business taxes from 35 percent to 25 percent to spur rapid growth in wages, jobs and business incomes. It also would have permanently repealed the Alternative Minimum Tax and reduced the individual tax rate to three levels—10, 15, and 25 percent—giving Americans more of their own money to fuel the economy and increasing disposable income for an average family of four by up to $4,500 by 2013.

Job Losses From Obama Green Stimulus Foreseen in Spanish Study

By Gianluca Baratti - Bloomberg.com

March 27 (Bloomberg) -- Subsidizing renewable energy in the U.S. may destroy two jobs for every one created if Spain’s experience with windmills and solar farms is any guide.

For every new position that depends on energy price supports, at least 2.2 jobs in other industries will disappear, according to a study from King Juan Carlos University in Madrid.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s 2010 budget proposal contains about $20 billion in tax incentives for clean-energy programs. In Spain, where wind turbines provided 11 percent of power demand last year, generators earn rates as much as 11 times more for renewable energy compared with burning fossil fuels.

The premiums paid for solar, biomass, wave and wind power - - which are charged to consumers in their bills -- translated into a $774,000 cost for each Spanish “green job” created since 2000, said Gabriel Calzada, an economics professor at the university and author of the report.

“The loss of jobs could be greater if you account for the amount of lost industry that moves out of the country due to higher energy prices,” he said in an interview.

Spain’s Acerinox SA, the nation’s largest stainless-steel producer, blamed domestic energy costs for deciding to expand in South Africa and the U.S., according to the study.

“Microsoft and Google moved their servers up to the Canadian border because they benefited from cheaper energy there,” said the professor of applied environmental economics.