Happy 13th birthday, Savannah!
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
This Week in History
Below is an article from Personal Liberty Digest
Communists and the United Nations
On April 25, 1945, 45 countries convened in San Francisco for the founding conference of the United Nations (U.N.). The general secretary of the meeting was none other than the notorious Soviet espionage agent, Alger Hiss. He had been picked personally for the post by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and was promptly approved by FDR's buddy, "Uncle Joe" Stalin.
Hiss was not the only American involved in the formation of the United Nations who was later revealed to be a Communist. In fact, of the 18 Americans cited by the State Department in 1950 as "the important men who shaped the UN," all but one was later identified as Communists. The lone exception was former Secretary of State Dean Acheson, who may not have been red, but was certainly very pink.
With such a record it is no surprise that the U.N.'s "Universal Declaration of Rights" makes absolutely no mention of the source of our rights being a Creator—or anything else but government—and further says that all rights and freedoms "shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law."
No wonder that the U.N.'s idea of "world peace" has always and everywhere been the same as "world socialism." Or why so many responsible Americans insist that the U.S. should get out of the U.N.—and vice versa.
—Chip Wood
Communists and the United Nations
On April 25, 1945, 45 countries convened in San Francisco for the founding conference of the United Nations (U.N.). The general secretary of the meeting was none other than the notorious Soviet espionage agent, Alger Hiss. He had been picked personally for the post by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and was promptly approved by FDR's buddy, "Uncle Joe" Stalin.
Hiss was not the only American involved in the formation of the United Nations who was later revealed to be a Communist. In fact, of the 18 Americans cited by the State Department in 1950 as "the important men who shaped the UN," all but one was later identified as Communists. The lone exception was former Secretary of State Dean Acheson, who may not have been red, but was certainly very pink.
With such a record it is no surprise that the U.N.'s "Universal Declaration of Rights" makes absolutely no mention of the source of our rights being a Creator—or anything else but government—and further says that all rights and freedoms "shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law."
No wonder that the U.N.'s idea of "world peace" has always and everywhere been the same as "world socialism." Or why so many responsible Americans insist that the U.S. should get out of the U.N.—and vice versa.
—Chip Wood
Friday, April 16, 2010
Who Should Re-distribute Wealth?
The argument regarding re-distribution of wealth seems to come down to this: Should care of the poor and needy fall to our individual, charitable and church responsibilities, with government playing a minimal role? Or should government take the major role, with individual charitable efforts in support?
Consider these words from 2 Thessalonians 3: 8, 10-12:
8 Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you:
10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.
12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
We believe in helping those in need. We have been in need at times in our lives and received help. But the help should be given freely and with no coercion from government. The receivers of charity should do all they can to be contributing members of society; if not financially, then with labor. We are denied the joy that accompanies reaching out and helping others when we allow government to do that job for us. Additionally, we have no control over how the government re-distributes our money. As stewards of all that God has given us, shouldn't part of that stewardship include ensuring that our offerings are received by the poor and needy? The government is often irresponsible with their stewardship over what they take from us. It is our belief that assistance should be done locally from churches, community, and neighbors.
Consider these words from 2 Thessalonians 3: 8, 10-12:
8 Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you:
10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.
12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
We believe in helping those in need. We have been in need at times in our lives and received help. But the help should be given freely and with no coercion from government. The receivers of charity should do all they can to be contributing members of society; if not financially, then with labor. We are denied the joy that accompanies reaching out and helping others when we allow government to do that job for us. Additionally, we have no control over how the government re-distributes our money. As stewards of all that God has given us, shouldn't part of that stewardship include ensuring that our offerings are received by the poor and needy? The government is often irresponsible with their stewardship over what they take from us. It is our belief that assistance should be done locally from churches, community, and neighbors.
Live Free or Die
"I don't know how you feel, but I would rather be dead than to lose my liberty. I have no fear that we will ever lose it because of invasion from the outside, but I do have fear that it may slip away from us because of our own indifference, our own negligence, as citizens of this land. I plead with you that you take an active interest in matters pertaining to the future of this country."
Ezra Taft Benson
BYU Devotional
December 1, 1952
Ezra Taft Benson
BYU Devotional
December 1, 1952
Silence Isn't Always Golden
"To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men."
— President Abraham Lincoln
— President Abraham Lincoln
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Federal Spending & Budget Issues
We received the following article from the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA)
EARMARKS: WHO BROUGHT HOME THE BACON
EARMARKS: WHO BROUGHT HOME THE BACON
Despite a deficit that's pushing $1.5 trillion, members of Congress slipped a whopping 9,100 pork barrel projects into legislation this fiscal year, according to the Citizens Against Government Waste's 20th annual "Pig Book."
"What it does is it buys votes," said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. "And if any senior member of our conference or this Congress wants to pass a bill, they use earmarks. They sprinkle them around like candy."
Here are some of the earmarks that made it into legislation this year:
$5 million for the Presidio Heritage Center in California.
$2.5 million for potato pest management and research.
$1.4 million to study mosquito trapping in Florida.
$1 million for Portsmouth Music Hall in New Hampshire.
$800,000 for catfish genome mapping in Alabama.
$206,000 for wool research in Montana, Texas and Wyoming.
For the third year in a row, Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran ran away with the title of the biggest earmarker. The ranking Republican on the powerful appropriations committee snagged $490 million for 240 pet projects.
"He's what we call an unrepentant porker. He doesn't care what anyone thinks," said Tom Schatz, the president of Citizens Against Government Waste. "And he thinks that this is the way that he can get reelected."
But many lawmakers can't ignore the anti-spending sentiment sweeping the nation, says CBS News:
House Democrats recently swore off earmarks to for-profit companies while House Republicans agreed to shun all earmarks for a year.
The result: pork-barrel spending is actually down, from $19.6 billion in 2009 to $16.5 billion in 2010 - and nearly half of that spending was requested anonymously.
"I urge them to come out of the shadows and stand up and defend the projects that they've put forward, because the nation demands it and their constituents demand it," said Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.).
Forty-seven members of Congress have vowed not to seek any earmarks ever. It's a start, but that's less than 10 percent of all lawmakers, says CBS News.
Source: Report, "2010 Congressional Pig Book," Citizens Against Government Waste, April 14, 2010; and Nancy Cordes,"Earmarks: Who Brought Home the Bacon," CBS News, April 14, 2010.
For text:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/14/eveningnews/main6396553.shtml
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Principles of Conservatism
"Out of the mouths of babes..." If only the members of Congress had half the IQ points that this young man has. We hope there are more youth out there like him. They are the future of this country.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Delusional
The following is by Jim Geraghty at http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODQ3YzlkNDU1NmFjYWE0NWRhMDQzNGE5YWFiZjYyOTk=
Taken from an interview with Greta Van Susteren at Fox News.
"Do You Feel Like a 'Rare Exception'?
"Harry Reid, a man with his finger on the pulse of the people:
VAN SUSTEREN: "Why do you think that there was such — and I don't want to use a term that overstates it, but there were an awful lot of people who didn't like it. More people were unhappy, I think, with the bill, the health care bill, than were happy with it. Why do you think that?"
SEN. HARRY REID, D-NEV, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: "Because the loud minority made a lot of noise. Now that the legislation passed, it is amazing how much different people attitude is. I mean traveling on an airplane people are so nice to me. We have people — it wasn't that way before . . .
". . . So everybody acknowledges with rare exception that what we did was terrific, and if there are some problems in out years we'll be happy to look at them."
"Got that? Opposition to the health-care bill is the 'rare exception.'"
(The last poll in Nevada puts the "rare exceptions" at 62 percent.)
"By the way, Senator Reid, they're called flight attendants, and they're paid to be nice to you."
Taken from an interview with Greta Van Susteren at Fox News.
"Do You Feel Like a 'Rare Exception'?
"Harry Reid, a man with his finger on the pulse of the people:
VAN SUSTEREN: "Why do you think that there was such — and I don't want to use a term that overstates it, but there were an awful lot of people who didn't like it. More people were unhappy, I think, with the bill, the health care bill, than were happy with it. Why do you think that?"
SEN. HARRY REID, D-NEV, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: "Because the loud minority made a lot of noise. Now that the legislation passed, it is amazing how much different people attitude is. I mean traveling on an airplane people are so nice to me. We have people — it wasn't that way before . . .
". . . So everybody acknowledges with rare exception that what we did was terrific, and if there are some problems in out years we'll be happy to look at them."
"Got that? Opposition to the health-care bill is the 'rare exception.'"
(The last poll in Nevada puts the "rare exceptions" at 62 percent.)
"By the way, Senator Reid, they're called flight attendants, and they're paid to be nice to you."
Monday, April 5, 2010
Keep Our Freedoms Inviolate
"It was all part of God's plan—the coming of Columbus, the colonization, wise men raised up to frame the Constitution, Joseph Smith prepared for his part in the restoration of the gospel, even the persecution which drove the Saints to the Rocky Mountains where the Church could continue to grow.
"What does all this mean to you and me as individuals? It means that God, as our Father, made all these arrangements for you and me. We were part of his eternal scheme. And so it is not enough merely to observe these various anniversaries, but we must recommit and rededicate ourselves to uphold the convictions and the principles upon which the blessings we enjoy are predicated. We too must be prepared to sacrifice, where necessary, to keep our freedoms inviolate. My father used to say: 'The true way to honor the past is to improve upon it.'"
N. Eldon Tanner, "Pioneers Are Still Needed," Ensign, July 1976, 4
"What does all this mean to you and me as individuals? It means that God, as our Father, made all these arrangements for you and me. We were part of his eternal scheme. And so it is not enough merely to observe these various anniversaries, but we must recommit and rededicate ourselves to uphold the convictions and the principles upon which the blessings we enjoy are predicated. We too must be prepared to sacrifice, where necessary, to keep our freedoms inviolate. My father used to say: 'The true way to honor the past is to improve upon it.'"
N. Eldon Tanner, "Pioneers Are Still Needed," Ensign, July 1976, 4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)