Where Did Christmas Symbols Originate?

An interesting article from www.ucg.org about Christmas celebration and this Patriotic take on this topic. This follows this post about Jesus Christ. For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632!


Where Did Christmas Symbols Originate?


An enormous number of traditions we now associate with Christmas have their roots in pre-Christian pagan religious traditions. Some of these have social, sexual, or cosmological connotations that might lead educated, culturally sensitive moderns to discard the traditions once they have understood their roots more clearly ...



"The pre-Christian elements of Christmas hail primarily from Europe ... From southern Europe come such familiar pagan traditions as feasting, fertility rituals, tree worship, and the exchange of gifts. From the harsher lands of northern Europe come the ancient conventions we identify with the term 'Yule.' The Yule log tradition, now almost forgotten, rose from this stream. So too are many of the details of holiday feasting, the ritual use of candles, and the earliest forerunners of Santa Claus ...



"Here is a brief review of the pre-Christian sources from which some of our best-loved holiday traditions sprang.



"Evergreens symbolize immortality and the continuity of life ... The Romans, too, decorated their homes and public places with evergreens near the time of the winter solstice. Among the forerunners of today's holiday gifts were strenae, tree branches presented to political and military leaders as tokens of loyalty ...



"The holiday's most conspicuous smaller plant is mistletoe ... Historically, mistletoe has long been associated with both magic and fertility. Sprigs of mistletoe were once fastened over the conjugal bed on the wedding night. Our modern use of mistletoe as a social aphrodisiac is clearly related.



"Nineteenth-century German immigrants to the United States were among the first to use a recognizable Christmas tree in this country, so it is often assumed that the Christmas tree hails from the traditions of northern Europe. In fact, it is more authentically a product of much older southern traditions. Ancient Egyptians viewed the evergreen tree as a fertility symbol. During the winter solstice they decorated their homes with palm fronds, using them as Romans would later use boughs of fir ...



"Gift giving is an inescapable part of Christmas. Christian legend assumes that the tradition began when the Magi presented gifts to the baby Jesus ... To believe that you have to pitch centuries of history out behind the manger. Long before New Testament times, the Romans were exchanging gifts" (Tom Flynn, The Trouble With Christmas, 1993, pp. 19, 37-40, emphasis in original). GN

Media Targets To Defeat Dream Act Amnesty

An interesting post from www.Alipac.us about Media Targets to contact about the Dream Act. This follows this post about key Senators to contact about the Dream Act and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here, an interesting article about Jessica Alba here or another article about Salma Hayek here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE!


ALIPAC's Media Targets To Defeat Dream Act Amnesty








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------







NEW ADDITIONS AND UPDATES IN PROGRESS PLEASE CHECK BACK OFTEN



Amnesty opponents, please take the following steps below to inspire these media sources to properly warn Americans of the impending Amnesty votes in Washington. While the Spanish media and liberal newspapers are leading the charge to pass Amnesty, we need a better response from the media that may still be loyal to the AMERICAN public.





Make sure all your favorite talk radio shows get a call and email from you along with these below...





#1 Fox News





Sample Message:



Quote:







Dear ______, Please warn your viewers of the impending Dream Act Amnesty cloture vote in Washington!



A few months ago, as the US Senate voted for cloture on the Dream Act Amnesty which would have set the stage for millions of illegal aliens to become voters and thus displacing the voting power of Fox News viewers. Fox News had no coverage of the impending vote. Fox News did not adequately cover this issue or warn viewers of the vote.





Please do not allow Fox News viewers to be in the dark this time. Another cloture vote on the Dream Act Amnesty is expected any day now. Please start reporting on this approaching vote that would damage our nation and please put as many sources as possible on the air who oppose the Dream Act Amnesty. I will be watching in the hopes that Fox News will cover this and warn viewers this time. We need Fox to deliver "Fair and Balanced" coverage on this issue unlike many of the other networks.







Contact info:



Shows Email



America Live w/ Megyn Kelly kelly@foxnews.com





America's Newsroom w/ Bill and Martha americasnewsroom@foxnews.com



Bulls and Bears bullsandbears@foxnews.com



Cavuto on Business cavuto@foxnews.com



Forbes on FOX forbes@foxnews.com



FOX & Friends friends@foxnews.com





FOX News Specials fncspecials@foxnews.com





FOX News Sunday fns@foxnews.com





FOX News Watch newswatch@foxnews.com





FOX Report w/ Shepard Smith foxreport@foxnews.com





Hannity hannity@foxnews.com



Happening Now w/ Jon Scott & Jenna Lee happeningnow@foxnews.com



Glenn Beck glennbeck@foxnews.com 





On the Record w/ Greta Van Susteren ontherecord@foxnews.com 





Special Report w/ Bret Baier special@foxnews.com





The O'Reilly Factor oreilly@foxnews.com







#2 Drudge Report





Sample Message



Quote:





Dear Drudge Report,



Please consider immediately adding articles to Drudgereport.com that warn your readers about the impending cloture vote on the Dream Act Amnesty in Washington. Passage of the Dream Act Amnesty would lead to voting rights for millions of illegal aliens who would then displace most of your readers in American politics.



Most of the articles coming out of the major newspapers in America are heavily biased in favor of this radical Amnesty agenda.





Please locate the many articles online that point out both sides of the debate and the many negative consequences for Americans if the Dream Act Amnesty passes this week and then place them on Drudge Report.





A few months back, the Drudge Report failed to place any significant coverage of this news on the site while the Spanish language media and liberal newspapers inspired their readers to call Congress. Please do not leave conservative Americans and our many American talk radio programs in the dark this time. Please post numerous reports about the approaching Dream Act Amnesty on DrudgeReport as soon and as often as possible!



CONTACT INFO



Go to website and use Submission box on lower right at...

http://www.drudgereport.com/





#3 Rush Limbaugh Show



Quote:



Mr. Limbaugh, Thank you for leading the way in the fight against Dream and Comprehensive Amnesty legislation. I'm glad that you have the wisdom to understand that these bills would decimate the conservative base and relegate most Limbaugh fans to the scrap heap of history in American politics.





Please work hard this week to warn your listeners of the impending votes on the Dream Act Amnesty which would set the stage for millions of American students, workers, and voters to be displaced and replaced by illegal aliens granted legal status.





It is clear that over 90% of your supporters oppose the Dream Act Amnesty concept and I hope you will properly inform, motivate, and lead them in opposition to this push! We need you Rush Limbaugh, please lead the charge!







CONTACT INFO



http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/private.guest.html?ck=1291158174592





#4 Sean Hannity Show





Sample Message



Quote:



Dear Mr. Hannity, I listened to your show yesterday and while you addressed many of the bills Democrats are pushing in Washington DC right now that you oppose, I did not hear any mention of the Dream Act Amnesty legislation.



Please take the time to warn your listeners about both the approaching Dream Act Amnesty vote in Washington and the numerous negative consequences that the passing of Dream Act Amnesty would have on your listeners. Can you just imagine what that new block of 3-20 million illegal aliens becoming new voters who vote 70+% Democrat in every election, will do to the political influence of your listeners?





Why would you encourage your listeners to take political action, yet not warn them of their own political destruction via the Dream and Comprehensive Amnesty bills?. Please do not let coverage of the impending Dream Act Amnesty vote be conspicuously absent from your remaining broadcasts during the "lame duck session."



Contact Info

http://www.hannity.com/contact





NEW ADDITIONS AND UPDATES IN PROGRESS PLEASE CHECK BACK OFTEN

TODAY (FRI.) IS YOUR LAST DAY TO STOP DREAM ACT AMNESTY

An interesting post from www.NumbersUSA.com about the Dream Act CLOTURE! This follows this previous post about  the DREAM ACT and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here, an interesting article about Jessica Alba here or another article about Salma Hayek here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE!



TODAY (FRI.) IS YOUR LAST DAY



TO STOP DREAM ACT AMNESTY



Sen. Reid Is Shoe-Horning Vote on Saturday Morning

As Other Senate Efforts Are Falling Apart



PLEASE PICK UP YOUR PHONE TO COUNTER

THE GIANT SURGE OF PRO-AMNESTY LOBBYING



Here Are Today's Target Lists For Phoning



Sen. Reid's change of plans was announced suddenly Thursday evening.



Does that mean he thinks he has the 60 votes to pass this amnesty? Not necessarily. Our NumbersUSA whip count says he doesn't have the votes. But votes could change over the next 24 hours under the barrage of last-minute personal appeals from poster-child illegal-alien students and groups of local clergy all saying the amnesty is a moral requirement. Pres. Obama put out an appeal for clergy to help him round up the last votes needed.



So, the moment of truth is upon every one of us. Will we rise to the occasion and help our allies in the Senate defeat this amnesty?



Your most important phone calls are to your own two Senators.



Following are the lists that show the kinds of calls each Senator needs to get.



TOP PRIORITY: Encourage These 12 Senators

To Stick With Leanings or Pledges To Vote NO



This is the group that we HAVE to win. Fortunately, they are all leaning toward voting NO and their staff may even be saying they probably will vote NO. But our allies in the Senate don't feel absolutely sure of these votes. The dozen Senators are under enormous lobbying pressure intended to make them feel inhumane if they vote NO.



Give them quick phone calls to thank them for their intention to vote NO on the DREAM Act amnesty. And note that a key reason they are right is that DREAM provides zero enforcement to stop future millions of illegal workers from coming and taking jobs from hard-pressed Americans.



Florida

George LeMieux (R)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-3041 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001

Coral Gables, FL ph: 305-418-8553 adr: 8669 NW 36th St.,, Coral Gables, FL 33166

Jacksonville, FL ph: 904-398-8586 adr: 1650 Prudential Drive,, Jacksonville, FL 32207

Pensacola, FL ph: 850-433-2603 adr: 1 N. Palafox St., Pensacola, FL 32502

Tampa, FL ph: 813-977-6450 adr: 3802 Spectrum Boulevard, Tampa, FL 33612



Kansas

Sam Brownback (R)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-6521 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001

Topeka, KS ph: 785-233-2503 adr: 612 S. Kansas Ave., Topeka, KS 66603

Garden City, KS ph: 620-275-1124 adr: 811 North Main St., Garden City, KS 67846

Overland Park, KS ph: 913-492-6378 adr: 11111 West 95th - Suite 245, Overland Park, KS 66214

Wichita, KS ph: 316-264-8066 adr: 245 N. Waco, Wichita, KS 67202

Pittsburgh, KS ph: 620-231-6040 adr: 1001-C N. Broadway, Pittsburgh, KS 66762



MAINE



Susan Collins (R)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2523 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Augusta: ph: 207-622-8414 adr: 68 Seawall Street, Augusta, ME 04330

Bangor: ph: 207-945-0417 adr: 202 Harlow Street - Room 204, Bangor, ME 04401

Biddeford: ph: 207-283-1101 adr: 160 Main Street, Biddeford, ME 04005

Caribou: ph: 207-493-7873 adr: 25 Sweden Street - Suite A, Caribou, ME 04736

Lewiston: ph: 207-784-6969 adr: 11 Lisbon Street, Lewiston, ME 04240

Portland: ph: 207-780-3575 adr: 1 City Center, Portland, ME 04101



Olympia Snowe (R)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5344 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Auburn: ph: 207-786-2451 adr: Two Great Falls Plaza, Auburn, ME 04210

Augusta: ph: 207-622-8292 adr: 68 Sewall Street - Suite 101C, Augusta, ME 04330

Bangor: ph: 207-945-0432 adr: 1 Cumberland Place, Bangor, ME 04401

Biddeford: ph: 207-282-4144 adr: 231 Main Street, Suite 2, Biddeford, ME 04005

Lewiston: ph: 207-784-6969 adr: 11 Lisbon Street, Lewiston, ME 04240

Portland: ph: 207-874-0883 adr: 3 Canal Plaza - Suite 601, Portland, ME 04112

Presque Isle: ph: 207-764-5124 adr: 169 Academy Street, Presque Isle, ME 04769



MONTANA



Max Baucus (D)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-2651 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Billings: ph: 406-657-6790 adr: 202 Fratt Building, Billings, MT 59101

Bozeman: ph: 406-586-6104 adr: Federal Building, Bozeman, MT 59715

Butte: ph: 406-782-8700 adr: Silver Bow Center, Butte, MT 59701

Great Falls: ph: 406-761-1574 adr: 18 5th Street South, Great Falls, MT 59401

Helena: ph: 406-449-5480 adr: 225 Cruse Avenue - Suite D, Helena, MT 59601

Missoula: ph: 406-329-3123 adr: 211 North Higgins - Room 102, Missoula, MT 59802



Jon Tester (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2644 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001

Billings: ph: 406-252-0550 adr: 222 North 32nd Street, Billings, MT 59101

Helena: ph: 406-449-5401 adr: 208 North Montana Avenue, Helena, MT 59601

Missoula, MT ph: 406-728-3003 adr: 116 West Front Street, Missoula, MT 59802

Butte, MT ph: 406-723-3277 adr: 125 West Granite, Butte, MT 59701

Great Falls, MT ph: 406-452-9585 adr: 321 First Avenue North, Great Falls, MT 59401

Kalispell, MT ph: 406-257-3360 adr: 1845 Highway 93 South, Kalispell, MT 59901



NORTH CAROLINA

Kay Hagan (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6342 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Greensboro: ph: 336-333-5311 adr: 701 Green Valley Rd, Greensboro, NC 27408

Raleigh: ph: 919-856-4630 adr: 310 New Bern Avenue, Raleigh, NC 27601



NORTH DAKOTA

Kent Conrad (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2043 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Bismarck: ph: 701-258-4648 adr: Federal Building, Bismarck, ND 58501

Fargo: ph: 701-232-8030 adr: Federal Building, Fargo, ND 58102

Grand Forks: ph: 701-775-9601 adr: Federal Building, Grand Forks, ND 58203

Minot: ph: 701-852-0703 adr: 100 First Street SW, Suite 105, Minot, ND 58701



OHIO

George Voinovich (R)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-3353 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001

Nelsonville, OH ph: 740-441-6410 adr: 78 West Washington Street, Nelsonville, OH 45764

Columbus, OH ph: 614-469-6697 adr: 37 West Broad Street - Room 310, Columbus, OH 43215

Toledo, OH ph: 419-259-3895 adr: 420 Madison Avenue - Room 1210, Toledo, OH 43604

Cincinnati, OH ph: 513-684-3265 adr: 36 East 7th Street - Room 2615, Cincinnati, OH 45202

Cleveland, OH ph: 216-522-7095 adr: 1240 East 9th Street - Suite 2955, Cleveland, OH 44199



Texas

Kay Bailey Hutchison (R)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-5922 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001

Harlingen, TX ph: 956-412-1468 adr: 222 East Van Buren Street, Harlingen, TX 78550

Dallas, TX ph: 214-361-3500 adr: 10440 North Central Expressway - Suite 1160, LB 606, Dallas, TX 75231

Houston, TX ph: 713-653-3456 adr: 1919 Smith Street - Suite 800, Houston, TX 77002

Austin, TX ph: 512-916-5834 adr: Federal Building, Austin, TX 78701

San Antonio, TX ph: 210-340-2885 adr: 145 Duncan Drive, San Antonio, TX 78226

Abilene, TX ph: 325-676-2839 adr: 500 Chestnut Street - Suite 1570, Abilene, TX 79602



West Virginia

Joe Manchin (D)

Washington, DC

ph: 202-224-3954 adr: 311 Hart Office Bldg., Washington, DC 20510



Vermont

Judd Gregg (R)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-3324 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 205100001

Berlin, AL ph: 603-752-2604 adr: 60 Pleasant Street, Berlin, AL 03570

Portsmouth, NH ph: 603-431-2171 adr: 16 Pease Blvd., Portsmouth, NH 03801

Manchester, NH ph: 603-622-7979 adr: 41 Hooksett Street, Manchester, NH 03104

Concord, NH ph: 603-225-7115 adr: 125 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301



2nd PRIORITY: Pound These 3 Senators Up For Re-Election in 2012 Who Are Leaning YES on Amnesty



There is no logical political reason for these Senators to vote YES on amnesty . . . if the people of their states know what they are doing. All three of these have good tendencies in our direction on amnesty in the past. But they are acting like this amnesty is somehow different.



Your job with these Senators is to persuade their staffs that voting for an amnesty without any enforcement will definitely be a key issue in the 2012 elections during what all experts predict will be continuing high unemployment for U.S. workers.



All three of these are Democrats in states that swung heavily Republican in last month's elections. A vote for amnesty might look like political suicide.



MICHIGAN

Debbie Stabenow (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4822 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Detroit: ph: 313-961-4330 adr: 243 West Congress, Detroit, MI 48226

East Lansing: ph: 517-203-1760 adr: 221 W Lake Lansing Rd, East Lansing, MI 48823

Flint: ph: 810-720-4172 adr: 2503 South Linden Road, Flint, MI 48532

Grand Rapids: ph: 616-975-0052 adr: 3230 Broadmoor Street, Grand Rapids, MI 49512

Marquette: ph: 906-228-8756 adr: 1901 West Ridge, Marquette, MI 49855

Traverse City: ph: 231-929-1031 adr: 3335 South Airport Road W, Traverse City, MI 49684



MISSOURI

Claire McCaskill (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6154 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Cape Girardeau: ph: 573-651-0964 adr: 555 Independence Ave., Cape Girardeau, MO 63703

Columbia: ph: 573-442-7130 adr: 915 East Ash Street, Columbia, MO 65201

Kansas City: ph: 816-421-1639 adr: 4141 Pennsylvania, Kansas City, MO 64111

Springfield: ph: 417-868-8745 adr: 324 Park Central West, Springfield, MO 65806

St. Louis: ph: 314-367-1364 adr: 5850 A Delmar Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63112



VIRGINIA

Jim Webb (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4024 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Falls Church: ph: 703-573-7090 adr: 7309 Arlington Boulevard, Falls Church, VA 22042

Richmond: ph: 804-771-2221 adr: 507 East Franklin Street, Richmond, VA 23219

Roanoke: ph: 540-772-4236 adr: 3140 Chaparral Drive, Roanoke, VA 24018

Virginia Beach: ph: 757-518-1674 adr: 222 Central Park Ave, Virginia Beach, VA 23462



3rd PRIORITY: These 3 Senators Do NOT Face 2012 Re-Election But Are On The Fence And Leaning YES



All three of these have voted with us against amnesty in the past.



Tell their staffs that you don't understand how the Senator could oppose "comprehensive immigration reform" in the past when amnesty and enforcement were wrapped together, but now they are willing to pass an amnesty with NO enforcement.



ALASKA

Lisa Murkowski (R)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6665 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Anchorage: ph: 877-829-6030 adr: 510 L Street, Anchorage, AK 99501

Fairbanks: ph: 907-456-0233 adr: 101 12th Avenue, Fairbanks, AK 99701

Juneau: ph: 907-586-7400 adr: 709 West 9th Street, Juneau, AK 99802

Kenai: ph: 907-283-5808 adr: 130 Trading Bay Road, Kenai, AK 99611

Ketchikan: ph: 907-283-5208 adr: 540 Water Street, Ketchikan, AK 99901

Wasilla: ph: 907-376-7665 adr: 851 East Westpoint Drive, Wasilla, AK 99654



LOUISIANA

Mary Landrieu (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5824 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Baton Rouge: ph: 225-389-0395 adr: U.S. Postal Building, Baton Rouge, LA 70801

Lake Charles: ph: 337-436-6650 adr: One Lakeshore Drive, Lake Charles, LA 70629

New Orleans: ph: 504-589-2427 adr: Hale Boggs Federal Bldg, New Orleans, LA 70130

Shreveport: ph: 318-676-3085 adr: U.S. Courthouse, Shreveport, LA 71101



NORTH DAKOTA

Byron Dorgan (D and retiring)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2551 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Bismarck: ph: 701-250-4618 adr: Federal Building, Bismarck, ND 58501

Fargo: ph: 701-239-5389 adr: 112 Roberts Street, Fargo, ND 58102

Grand Forks: ph: 701-746-9126 adr: 102 North 4th St, #108, Grand Forks, ND 58201

Minot: ph: 701-852-0703 adr: 100 First Street South West, Suite 105, Minot, ND 58701



4th PRIORITY: These 6 Senators Lean Strongly YES On Amnesty But Will Have To Face Voters In 2012



Most of these Democrats have had very little interest in hearing from us in the past.



But after last month's cataclysmic results, these Senators find themselves in states where they could have a really competitive race in 2012. Thanks to all of you who phoned them today. Now, we need another round of calls telling them how much an amnesty vote Saturday will be like an albatross around their necks during the 2012 campaigns.



CONNECTICUT

Joseph Lieberman (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4041 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Hartford: ph: 860-549-8463 adr: One Constitution Plaza, Hartford, CT 06103



FLORIDA

Bill Nelson (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5274 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Coral Gables: ph: 305-536-5999 adr: 2925 Salzedo Street, Coral Gables, FL 33134

Davie: ph: 954-693-4851 adr: 3416 South University Drive, Davie, FL 33328

Fort Myers: ph: 239-334-7760 adr: 2000 Main Street, Fort Myers, FL 33901

Jacksonville: ph: 904-346-4500 adr: 1301 Riverplace Boulevard, Jacksonville , FL 32207

Orlando: ph: 407-872-7161 adr: 225 East Robinson Street, Orlando, FL 32801

Tallahassee: ph: 850-942-8415 adr: U.S. Courthouse Annex, Tallahassee, FL 32301

West Palm Beach: ph: 561-514-0189 adr: 500 Australian Ave, West Palm Bch, FL 33401



MINNESOTA

Amy Klobuchar (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-3244 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Minneapolis: ph: 612-727-5220 adr: 1200 Washington Ave S, Minneapolis, MN 55415

Moorhead: ph: 218-287-2219 adr: 121 4th Street South, Moorhead, MN 56560

Rochester: ph: 507-288-5321 adr: 1134 7th Street NW, Rochester, MN 55901

Virginia: ph: 218-741-9690 adr: 820 9th Street North, Virginia, MN 55792



NEW MEXICO

Jeff Bingaman (D)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-5521 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Albuquerque: ph: 505-346-6601 adr: 625 Silver Ave SW, #130, Albuquerque, NM 87102

Las Cruces: ph: 575-523-6561 adr: Loretto Town Centre, Las Cruces, NM 88001

Las Vegas: ph: 505-454-8824 adr: 118 Bridge Street - Suite 3, Las Vegas, NM 87701

Roswell: ph: 575-622-7113 adr: 105 West Third Street - Suite 409, Roswell, NM 88201

Santa Fe: ph: 505-988-6647 adr: 119 East Marcy - Suite 101, Santa Fe, NM 87501



OHIO

Sherrod Brown (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2315 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Cincinnati: ph: 513-684-1021 adr: 425 Walnut Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202

Cleveland: ph: 216-522-7272 adr: 1301 East Ninth St., Cleveland, OH 44114

Columbus: ph: 614-469-2083 adr: 200 N High St., Columbus, OH 43215

Lorain: ph: 440-242-4100 adr: 205 West 20th St., Lorain, OH 44052



WASHINGTON

Maria Cantwell (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-3441 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Everett: ph: 888-648-7328 adr: 2930 Wetmore Avenue, Everett, WA 98201

Richland: ph: 509-946-8106 adr: 825 Jadwin Avenue, Richland, WA 99352

Seattle: ph: 206-220-6400 adr: 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174

Spokane: ph: 509-353-2507 adr: U.S. Federal Courthouse, Spokane, WA 99201

Tacoma: ph: 253-572-2281 adr: 950 Pacific Avenue, Tacoma, WA 98402

Vancouver: ph: 360-696-7838 adr: 1313 Officers Row, Vancouver, WA 98661



WISCONSIN

Herb Kohl (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5653 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Appleton: ph: 920-738-1640 adr: 4321 West College Ave., Appleton, WI 54914

Eau Claire: ph: 715-832-8424 adr: 402 Graham Ave, #206, Eau Claire, WI 54701

LaCrosse: ph: 608-796-0045 adr: 425 State Street - Suite 202, LaCrosse, WI 54601

Madison: ph: 608-264-5338 adr: 14 West Muffin Street - Suite 312, Madison, WI 53703

Milwaukee: ph: 414-297-4451 adr: 310 W Wisconsin Ave - #950, Milwaukee, WI 53203



Friends, you will need to start phoning as soon as you get up Friday and see this. And your phone calls will be good all day.



Very few Senate offices are likely to keep their phones open Friday evening or Saturday morning. So, you need to make the calls before this evening.



THANKS FOR ONE LAST FLURRY OF CALLS

DEAR AMNESTY OPPONENTS,

An interesting post from www.NumbersUSA.com about the Dream Act CLOTURE! This follows this previous post about  the DREAM ACT and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here, an interesting article about Jessica Alba here or another article about Salma Hayek here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE


DEAR AMNESTY OPPONENTS,







Here Are Today's (THURS) Target Lists For Phoning


(Includes Direct Phone Numbers For DC & Local Offices)




It seems possible that the Senate could vote on the DREAM Act amnesty as early as Sunday (Majority Leader Reid is keeping Senators in session all weekend.) You will be unlikely to get a phone answered on the weekend, so you need to voice your opinion today.



These Senators Lean Strongly YES On Amnesty

But Will Have To Face Voters In 2012



Friends, this is a mostly new target list. Can we really hammer these phones today?



A Newsweek blog now notes that Sen. Reid's dragging out the amnesty vote may be starting to endanger several Senators in his Party who are more and more dreading having to run for re-election in 2012 with a recent amnesty vote on their record.



This first list is entirely of Democratic Senators who must run for re-election in 2012 in competitive states. In other words, each of them knows he/she could lose (especially after what just happened in the elections last month).



All you have to do is dislodge one or two of these from voting YES and I think you would guarantee amnesty defeat. (Or you may pressure them enough that they will beg Sen. Reid to just not hold the vote.)



Here is some starter language for you on the phone calls (in addition to key points listed at the bottom of this email):

Sen. xmxmx is going to have a rough time campaigning in 2012 with a record of voting for this DREAM Act amnesty while 22 million Americans can't find a job.





Everybody is going to know that Sen. xmxmx's amnesty vote forced our unemployed Americans to compete with millions more foreign-born workers without doing a single thing to increase enforcement to stop millions more illegal aliens from coming here and taking jobs.





Sen. xmxmxm is backing the wrong DREAM Act. The Senator wants to help young adults who presumably were brought here illegally as children and now find themselves many years later in tough situation.



But what caused that? The cause was that our government allowed their parents to illegally take a job from an American worker and then to illegally keep that job for years and years.



THIS DREAM Act amnesty does nothing to keep that from happening again and again forever.



Vote NO on this DREAM amnesty and come back and work on a DREAM that will stop all parents in the future from putting their kids in this situation by living and working here illegally for years at a time.

Yes, adding extra calls to all the local offices can really help sow doubt and concern within a Senator's organization.



CONNECTICUT

Joseph Lieberman (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4041 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Hartford: ph: 860-549-8463 adr: One Constitution Plaza, Hartford, CT 06103



FLORIDA

Bill Nelson (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5274 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Coral Gables: ph: 305-536-5999 adr: 2925 Salzedo Street, Coral Gables, FL 33134

Davie: ph: 954-693-4851 adr: 3416 South University Drive, Davie, FL 33328

Fort Myers: ph: 239-334-7760 adr: 2000 Main Street, Fort Myers, FL 33901

Jacksonville: ph: 904-346-4500 adr: 1301 Riverplace Boulevard, Jacksonville , FL 32207

Orlando: ph: 407-872-7161 adr: 225 East Robinson Street, Orlando, FL 32801

Tallahassee: ph: 850-942-8415 adr: U.S. Courthouse Annex, Tallahassee, FL 32301

West Palm Beach: ph: 561-514-0189 adr: 500 Australian Ave, West Palm Bch, FL 33401



MICHIGAN

Debbie Stabenow (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4822 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Detroit: ph: 313-961-4330 adr: 243 West Congress, Detroit, MI 48226

East Lansing: ph: 517-203-1760 adr: 221 W Lake Lansing Rd, East Lansing, MI 48823

Flint: ph: 810-720-4172 adr: 2503 South Linden Road, Flint, MI 48532

Grand Rapids: ph: 616-975-0052 adr: 3230 Broadmoor Street, Grand Rapids, MI 49512

Marquette: ph: 906-228-8756 adr: 1901 West Ridge, Marquette, MI 49855

Traverse City: ph: 231-929-1031 adr: 3335 South Airport Road W, Traverse City, MI 49684



MINNESOTA

Amy Klobuchar (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-3244 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Minneapolis: ph: 612-727-5220 adr: 1200 Washington Ave S, Minneapolis, MN 55415

Moorhead: ph: 218-287-2219 adr: 121 4th Street South, Moorhead, MN 56560

Rochester: ph: 507-288-5321 adr: 1134 7th Street NW, Rochester, MN 55901

Virginia: ph: 218-741-9690 adr: 820 9th Street North, Virginia, MN 55792



MISSOURI

Claire McCaskill (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6154 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Cape Girardeau: ph: 573-651-0964 adr: 555 Independence Ave., Cape Girardeau, MO 63703

Columbia: ph: 573-442-7130 adr: 915 East Ash Street, Columbia, MO 65201

Kansas City: ph: 816-421-1639 adr: 4141 Pennsylvania, Kansas City, MO 64111

Springfield: ph: 417-868-8745 adr: 324 Park Central West, Springfield, MO 65806

St. Louis: ph: 314-367-1364 adr: 5850 A Delmar Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63112



NEW MEXICO

Jeff Bingaman (D)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-5521 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Albuquerque: ph: 505-346-6601 adr: 625 Silver Ave SW, #130, Albuquerque, NM 87102

Las Cruces: ph: 575-523-6561 adr: Loretto Town Centre, Las Cruces, NM 88001

Las Vegas: ph: 505-454-8824 adr: 118 Bridge Street - Suite 3, Las Vegas, NM 87701

Roswell: ph: 575-622-7113 adr: 105 West Third Street - Suite 409, Roswell, NM 88201

Santa Fe: ph: 505-988-6647 adr: 119 East Marcy - Suite 101, Santa Fe, NM 87501



OHIO

Sherrod Brown (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2315 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Cincinnati: ph: 513-684-1021 adr: 425 Walnut Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202

Cleveland: ph: 216-522-7272 adr: 1301 East Ninth St., Cleveland, OH 44114

Columbus: ph: 614-469-2083 adr: 200 N High St., Columbus, OH 43215

Lorain: ph: 440-242-4100 adr: 205 West 20th St., Lorain, OH 44052



VIRGINIA

Jim Webb (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-4024 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Falls Church: ph: 703-573-7090 adr: 7309 Arlington Boulevard, Falls Church, VA 22042

Richmond: ph: 804-771-2221 adr: 507 East Franklin Street, Richmond, VA 23219

Roanoke: ph: 540-772-4236 adr: 3140 Chaparral Drive, Roanoke, VA 24018

Virginia Beach: ph: 757-518-1674 adr: 222 Central Park Ave, Virginia Beach, VA 23462



WASHINGTON

Maria Cantwell (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-3441 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Everett: ph: 888-648-7328 adr: 2930 Wetmore Avenue, Everett, WA 98201

Richland: ph: 509-946-8106 adr: 825 Jadwin Avenue, Richland, WA 99352

Seattle: ph: 206-220-6400 adr: 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174

Spokane: ph: 509-353-2507 adr: U.S. Federal Courthouse, Spokane, WA 99201

Tacoma: ph: 253-572-2281 adr: 950 Pacific Avenue, Tacoma, WA 98402

Vancouver: ph: 360-696-7838 adr: 1313 Officers Row, Vancouver, WA 98661



WISCONSIN

Herb Kohl (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5653 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Appleton: ph: 920-738-1640 adr: 4321 West College Ave., Appleton, WI 54914

Eau Claire: ph: 715-832-8424 adr: 402 Graham Ave, #206, Eau Claire, WI 54701

LaCrosse: ph: 608-796-0045 adr: 425 State Street - Suite 202, LaCrosse, WI 54601

Madison: ph: 608-264-5338 adr: 14 West Muffin Street - Suite 312, Madison, WI 53703

Milwaukee: ph: 414-297-4451 adr: 310 W Wisconsin Ave - #950, Milwaukee, WI 53203



These Senators Do NOT Face 2012 Re-Election

But Are On The Fence And Leaning YES



ALASKA

Lisa Murkowski (R)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6665 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Anchorage: ph: 877-829-6030 adr: 510 L Street, Anchorage, AK 99501

Fairbanks: ph: 907-456-0233 adr: 101 12th Avenue, Fairbanks, AK 99701

Juneau: ph: 907-586-7400 adr: 709 West 9th Street, Juneau, AK 99802

Kenai: ph: 907-283-5808 adr: 130 Trading Bay Road, Kenai, AK 99611

Ketchikan: ph: 907-283-5208 adr: 540 Water Street, Ketchikan, AK 99901

Wasilla: ph: 907-376-7665 adr: 851 East Westpoint Drive, Wasilla, AK 99654



LOUISIANA

Mary Landrieu (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5824 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Baton Rouge: ph: 225-389-0395 adr: U.S. Postal Building, Baton Rouge, LA 70801

Lake Charles: ph: 337-436-6650 adr: One Lakeshore Drive, Lake Charles, LA 70629

New Orleans: ph: 504-589-2427 adr: Hale Boggs Federal Bldg, New Orleans, LA 70130

Shreveport: ph: 318-676-3085 adr: U.S. Courthouse, Shreveport, LA 71101



NORTH DAKOTA

Byron Dorgan (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2551 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Bismarck: ph: 701-250-4618 adr: Federal Building, Bismarck, ND 58501

Fargo: ph: 701-239-5389 adr: 112 Roberts Street, Fargo, ND 58102

Grand Forks: ph: 701-746-9126 adr: 102 North 4th St, #108, Grand Forks, ND 58201

Minot: ph: 701-852-0703 adr: 100 First Street South West, Suite 105, Minot, ND 58701



Encourage These Senators To Stick

With Recent Pledges To Vote NO



MAINE



Susan Collins (R)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2523 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Augusta: ph: 207-622-8414 adr: 68 Seawall Street, Augusta, ME 04330

Bangor: ph: 207-945-0417 adr: 202 Harlow Street - Room 204, Bangor, ME 04401

Biddeford: ph: 207-283-1101 adr: 160 Main Street, Biddeford, ME 04005

Caribou: ph: 207-493-7873 adr: 25 Sweden Street - Suite A, Caribou, ME 04736

Lewiston: ph: 207-784-6969 adr: 11 Lisbon Street, Lewiston, ME 04240

Portland: ph: 207-780-3575 adr: 1 City Center, Portland, ME 04101



Olympia Snowe (R)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-5344 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Auburn: ph: 207-786-2451 adr: Two Great Falls Plaza, Auburn, ME 04210

Augusta: ph: 207-622-8292 adr: 68 Sewall Street - Suite 101C, Augusta, ME 04330

Bangor: ph: 207-945-0432 adr: 1 Cumberland Place, Bangor, ME 04401

Biddeford: ph: 207-282-4144 adr: 231 Main Street, Suite 2, Biddeford, ME 04005

Lewiston: ph: 207-784-6969 adr: 11 Lisbon Street, Lewiston, ME 04240

Portland: ph: 207-874-0883 adr: 3 Canal Plaza - Suite 601, Portland, ME 04112

Presque Isle: ph: 207-764-5124 adr: 169 Academy Street, Presque Isle, ME 04769



MONTANA

Sen. Max Baucus (D)

Washington, DC ph: 202-224-2651 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Billings: ph: 406-657-6790 adr: 202 Fratt Building, Billings, MT 59101

Bozeman: ph: 406-586-6104 adr: Federal Building, Bozeman, MT 59715

Butte: ph: 406-782-8700 adr: Silver Bow Center, Butte, MT 59701

Great Falls: ph: 406-761-1574 adr: 18 5th Street South, Great Falls, MT 59401

Helena: ph: 406-449-5480 adr: 225 Cruse Avenue - Suite D, Helena, MT 59601

Missoula: ph: 406-329-3123 adr: 211 North Higgins - Room 102, Missoula, MT 59802



NORTH CAROLINA

Kay Hagan (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-6342 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Greensboro: ph: 336-333-5311 adr: 701 Green Valley Rd, Greensboro, NC 27408

Raleigh: ph: 919-856-4630 adr: 310 New Bern Avenue, Raleigh, NC 27601



NORTH DAKOTA

Kent Conrad (D)

Washington, DC: ph: 202-224-2043 adr: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510

Bismarck: ph: 701-258-4648 adr: Federal Building, Bismarck, ND 58501

Fargo: ph: 701-232-8030 adr: Federal Building, Fargo, ND 58102

Grand Forks: ph: 701-775-9601 adr: Federal Building, Grand Forks, ND 58203

Minot: ph: 701-852-0703 adr: 100 First Street SW, Suite 105, Minot, ND 58701



Most Senate Offices Are Unaware Of The Millions Of 10-Year Work Permits That DREAM Offers To Illegal Aliens



1. Application: The DREAM amnesty begins with illegal aliens filling out applications. They merely have to claim -- not provide evidence -- that they meet criteria of having been brought to the U.S. before age 16 and being under the age of 30 at time of enactment and being present in the U.S. at least 5 years before enactment of the amnesty, among other criteria.



2. Work Permits Given: Once they allege these minimal criteria, the illegal aliens are given "conditional lawful permanent resident status" and are given a 10-year work permit to compete directly with the 22 million Americans who want a full-time job but can't find one.



Estimates suggest that up to 2 million illegal aliens could legitimately qualify for the opening application, and perhaps a couple million more might be or look young enough to fraudulently apply.



Those millions would immediately be able to legally compete for any U.S. job.



3. Ten Years of Work Before Education Required: Despite all the talk about how this amnesty is just for people who go to college or serve in the military, the illegal aliens don't have to do much of anything in that regard to have the legal right to work for 10 years.



Everybody who applies and gets the work permits has 10 years to complete two years of college or two years of military. Ten Years!



By the way, despite the fact that some media outlets have taken to referring to the potential recipients of the amnesty as "the best and the brightest" and "stars," illegal aliens can get the 10-year work permit merely by completing a GED and enrolling in a single course in a community college or trade school.



4. When 10 Years Are Up, What's The Chance of Anybody Being Asked to Leave? At the end of 10 years, illegal aliens who have not compiled two years of college or military would finally lose the right to compete legally with unemployed Americans for a job.



But they also would have sunk 10 more years of roots into their communities, building up an even bigger claim that it would be a hardship to be forced to leave this country. In addition, their advocates in the open-borders groups can say that they aren't really illegal aliens since they have just spent 10 years living and working as legal residents.



Fortunately for them, the DREAM amnesty allows those who fail to meet any of the criteria after 10 years to file a claim of hardship. The US Citizenship & Immigration Services agency is given the right to issue waivers and allow these illegal aliens to stay. By the way, they can get a waiver if the hardship is to them, or if it would be to a spouse, one of their children or one of their parents.



In the end, it is not only the 2 million potential qualified opening applicants but millions of potential fraudulant applicants who will get 10 years of legal competition against unemployed Americans. The only way the frauds can lose their work permit is if the government brings individualized cases to prove that they lied on the applications. Want to guess how many of the millions of fraud cases the government would have time to investigate and prosecute -- one by one?



Are any of the pro-DREAM amnesty supporters thinking about that?



Aside from all the issues of rewarding or encouraging law-breaking, there is the question about why this Lame Duck Congress at this time of 9.8% unemployment would feel the need to greatly increase the job competition for unemployed Americans.



THANKS FOR CALLING AGAIN TODAY

The Real Nativity Story: Surprising Truths You May Not Know!

An interesting article from www.ucg.org about Christmas celebration and this Patriotic take on this topic. This follows this post about Jesus Christ. For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632!

The Real Nativity Story: Surprising Truths You May Not Know!


The biblical accounts of Jesus Christ's birth present some surprising differences from popular ideas and traditions. Do you know the facts from the fiction?

by John Ross Schroeder and Doug Johnson

Most of us have been brought up with the traditional Christmas story—you know, the one about Jesus being born on Christmas day in a stable in Bethlehem with the shepherds and three wise men looking on as depicted in countless manger scenes.



But is that the way it really happened? Most people think so, but a careful look at what the Bible really says reveals some surprising differences. Let's examine what the Bible actually does say about the circumstances surrounding Christ's birth.



While the Gospel accounts of Matthew and Luke describe the true story of Jesus' birth, we'll see that they assuredly do not describe the Christmas story so popular at this time of year.



Luke's important background

Consider first Luke, the Gospel writer who had the detailed mind of a physician and a historian. He wanted to make sure he presented all the pertinent facts.



Notice his preface: " Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed" (Luke 1:1-4, New Revised Standard Version, emphasis added throughout).



Luke, in other words, interviewed those who had witnessed or were knowledgeable of the events of Christ's life, and that information was the basis for his Gospel. After this important introduction, Luke begins the true story leading to Jesus' birth with an account of God's dealings with Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist:



"There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the division [or "course"] of Abijah. His wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth " (verse 5). Later in the account it tells us she was a cousin of Mary (verse 36, King James Version).



"And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and they were both well advanced in years" (verses 6-7).



Zacharias' priestly assignment or "division" helps us to know and understand the general time frame of Christ's birth. His was "the course of Abijah." But what does this mean?



About a thousand years earlier, King David had organized the Levitical priesthood into 24 "courses" or "divisions." As explained in 1 Chronicles 24 and more specifically in verses 3, 10 and 19, there was an abundance of priests to serve in the various temple functions.



Not wanting any to be left out of serving, David's solution was to divide the priests into 24 courses. Each priest would then serve for a specified week-long term twice during the year, plus the three festival seasons (Deuteronomy 16:16) when all the priests would serve.



The question is: Do we know at what times of the year the course of Abijah served at the temple? Yes, we do. The determination can be made by combining the information in 1 Chronicles 24 with a study into the traditions of Judaism regarding when the temple courses were carried out during the year.



The evidence points to Zacharias' week of service described by Luke being around Pentecost, which generally falls in late May to mid-June on our calendar. Although they fall at specific times on God's sacred calendar, the dates of His annual Holy Days and festivals vary up to several weeks on the Roman calendar we use today.



So it seems we can ascertain when Zacharias was serving in the temple. One resource, The Companion Bible, calculates it to the week of June 13-19 in the determined year (1974, Appendix 179, p. 200).



An unexpected angelic appearance

Luke's account continues: "So it was, that while he was serving as priest before God in the order of his division, according to the custom of the priesthood, his lot fell to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord" (Luke 1:8-9).



What happened next would have been rather frightening to anyone. "Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him . . . And when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled, and fear fell upon him. But the angel said to him, 'Do not be afraid, Zacharias, for your prayer is heard; and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John'" (verses 11-13).



Then the angel explained the mission of Zacharias' son-to-be, John the Baptist: "He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother's womb . . . He will also go before Him [Jesus Christ, the coming Messiah] in the spirit and power of Elijah . . . to make ready a people prepared for the Lord" (verses 15-17).



Although a righteous man, in this instance Zacharias was all too human and displayed a lack of faith in the angel Gabriel's message. Because of his unbelief, he would not be able to speak again until his son John was born (verses 18-20).



Timing of Elizabeth's and Mary's conceptions

"So it was, as soon as the days of his service were completed, that he departed to his own house. Now after those days his wife Elizabeth conceived; and she hid herself five months" (Luke 1:23-24). Since Zacharias' temple course was in mid-June, assuming she became pregnant within a couple of weeks, five months would put this into mid- to late November.



The scene then shifts to the Messiah's birth: "Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph . . . The angel said to her, 'Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women" (verses 26-28).



This account clearly shows that Mary was a remarkable young woman of faith. Gabriel said to her, "And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest . . . And He will reign over the house of Jacob [Israel] forever" (verses 31-33).



Mary, since she was a virgin, then asked the obvious question. The answer came back: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you" (verse 35).



Gabriel emphasized God's miracle-working power: "Now indeed, Elizabeth, your relative [ cousin, KJV] has also conceived a son in her old age; and this is now the sixth month for her who was called barren. For with God nothing will be impossible" (verses 36-37).



Mary and Elizabeth

So a little more time has elapsed. It is now Elizabeth's sixth month, perhaps late December or a little beyond. "Now Mary arose in those days [the same basic time frame] and went into the hill country with haste, to a city of Judah, and entered the house of Zacharias and greeted Elizabeth. And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb" (verses 39-41).



Elizabeth at this time was in her sixth month of pregnancy with John the Baptist. It would not be a stretch to understand from the previous passage that Mary was now also pregnant with Jesus. Elizabeth even speaks of Mary as though she knows Mary is an expectant mother: "But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy" (verses 43-44).



Verse 56 says, "And Mary remained with her about three months, and returned to her house." Timewise it was now late March. Mary stayed with Elizabeth right to the birth of John the Baptist. "Now Elizabeth 's full time came for her to be delivered, and she brought forth a son" (verse 57).



We see, then, that Mary was probably three months pregnant when John was born. John was probably born in late March or early April. So when was Jesus Christ born? Six months later would be late September or early October—in the autumn of the year, not in the dead of winter, as so many today mistakenly assume.



The evidence of the Roman census

Can we find other biblical evidence that Jesus was born in the autumn rather than in winter? Indeed we can.



Continuing in Luke's account: "And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered" (Luke 2:1). "All the world" in this context would mean all the areas under Roman rule. "This census took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. So all went to be registered, everyone to his own city" (verses 2-3).



What kind of people were the Romans when it came to order and efficiency? They built bridges, roads and buildings that in some cases are still in use to this day, 2,000 years later. Their roads were marvels of engineering. They constructed great waterworks and sewage systems. Even today, our city planning owes a great deal to the Romans. Even much of modern government and military organization is copied from the Romans. They were masters of organization and structure.



Would the Romans, then, have ordered a census in the dead of winter? Of course not. This would have defeated the whole purpose! In winter, temperatures drop below freezing around Jerusalem, and the roads would have been muddy and wet with cold rains and occasional snow. It would've been a terrible time to travel, especially for a wife nearing her delivery.



One author states that this census "could hardly have been at that season [winter], however, for such a time would surely not have been chosen by the authorities for a public enrollment, which necessitated the population's traveling from all parts to their natal districts, storms and rain making journeys both unsafe and unpleasant in winter, except in specially favorable years. Snow is not at all uncommon at Jerusalem in the winter months, and I have known it so deep that people lost their way outside the gates" (Cunningham Geikie, "Christmas at Bethlehem," Edward Deems, editor, Holy-Days and Holidays, 1968, p. 405).



No rational Roman official would have scheduled a census in winter. For an agrarian society such as that of first-century Judea, a census in the autumn, when the crops would've been safely gathered in, would have made much more sense.



Why was there no room in Bethlehem?

Picking up our story in Luke again, we find other biblical evidence for the true timing of Jesus Christ's birth.



"Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth . . . because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child. So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered" (verses 4-6).



We don't know how far ahead of time they traveled, nor how long they were there for the census. The essential point is that the most important human birth in all history took place under these circumstances.



"And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloth, and laid Him in a manger [margin, feed trough], because there was no room for them in the inn" (verse 7).



But why was there no room for Joseph and Mary in Bethlehem? We learn a great deal from understanding the culture of the time.



If we have judged the time frame correctly based on John being conceived shortly after the time of the first term of Abijah around Pentecost, and his birth following nine months later, followed by Jesus' birth six months after that in late September or possibly early October, was something else happening at that particular time of the year that would've created crowded conditions in Bethlehem?



Indeed there was. Late September and early October is the autumn festival season on God's calendar, one of the three times in the year when families would travel to Jerusalem to observe God's Holy Days (see Deuteronomy 16:16). With the Jews of Israel still obeying this command, even today it is difficult to find a hotel room in Jerusalem at this time of year!



The population of Jerusalem swelled several times over to overflowing at this time. This affected nearby towns such as Bethlehem, a few miles south of Jerusalem. Because of this huge influx of people, every house was filled. Joseph and Mary did find a place in what was normally used to shelter animals. It certainly wouldn't have been first class, but likely they were thankful to have even that.



The shepherds and their flocks

Continuing in Luke's account, we find further proof that Jesus wasn't born in winter. Verse 8 tells us, " Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night."



This likewise shows that these events did not take place in winter. The common practice of shepherds was to keep their flocks in the open fields from April to October, but in the cold and wet winter months they took their flocks back home and sheltered them.



The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary (1971) says this passage argues "against the birth [of Christ] occurring on Dec. 25 since the weather would not have permitted" shepherds watching over their flocks in the fields at night.



Adam Clarke's Commentary explains that, "as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, our Lord was not born on the 25th of December, when no flocks were out in the fields; nor could He have been born later than September, as the flocks were still in the fields by night. On this very ground the nativity in December should be given up. The feeding of the flocks by night in the fields is a chronological fact, which casts considerable light upon this disputed point."



Again, the evidence in Luke points to a late September birth.



The shepherds come to see Jesus

Continuing the story in Luke 2:10-17: " Then the angel said to them, 'Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. For there is born to you this day

in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.'



". . . And they came with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the Babe lying in a manger. Now when they had seen Him, they made widely known the saying which was told them concerning this Child."



We might notice that only the shepherds arrive in time to see Jesus in the manger. The wise men, as we will see, didn't arrive on the scene until later.



" And when eight days were completed for the circumcision of the Child, His name was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before He was conceived in the womb. Now when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, 'Every male who opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord'), and to offer a sacrifice . . . a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons" (Luke 2:21-24; compare Exodus 13:2).



This was called "redeeming the firstborn." Leviticus 12:2-3, 6 tells us that this ceremony occurred 40 days after the birth of a son. So if Christ was born in late September, we are now into mid-November.



The wise men and Herod

We'll now continue the story flow in Matthew 2:1-3: "Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, saying, 'Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.' When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him."



Why did this news disturb Herod? Other historical accounts attest to Herod's paranoia about being overthrown. The news that a new king of the Jews had been born threatened his position.



Herod obviously knew of the traditions and the prophecies relating to the Messiah. "And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. So they said to him, 'In Bethlehem of Judea'" (verses 4-5).



King Herod carefully concealed his murderous intentions. "Then Herod, when he had secretly called the wise men, determined from them what time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem and said, 'Go and search carefully for the young Child, and when you have found Him, bring back word to me, that I may come and worship Him also'" (verses 7-8).



Notice that now Herod referred to Jesus not as a baby, but as "the young Child." He realized how long their travels would have taken the wise men—possibly from as far away as Parthia or the region around Babylon, where the Israelites and Jews had been exiled centuries before. Herod knew from when the star had appeared that he was not seeking a newborn baby, but a boy by now considerably older.



And to remove any threat to his position, Herod "put to death all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the wise men" (verse 16). Herod, covering all of his bases in protecting his throne, ordered the murderous slaughter of those 2 years old and under.



It wasn't the common nativity scene

The wise men were miraculously guided to the Christ child (verses 9-10). "And when they had come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother" (verse 11). The typical nativity scene completely falls apart at this point. There is no mention of a manger here. Rather Jesus was, as stated, in a house. And Jesus was no longer an infant, He was a young child. The wise men obviously visited Jesus long after the shepherds had come and gone—perhaps a year or more later.



The typical manger scene includes three wise men. The Bible, however, nowhere says how many wise men there were. It does note, however, that they presented three kinds of giftsto Him—gold, frankincense and myrrh.



Why these three particular gifts? Their symbolism is striking when we understand it.



Gold was a gift for royalty—in this case the chosen King of the Jews and ultimately the "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" who will rule over the entire earth (Revelation 19:16).



Frankincense was an incense intimately connected with the priesthood and temple sacrifices, foreshadowing the fact that Jesus Christ would serve as our High Priest and give Himself as the perfect sacrifice to pay the penalty for the sins of all mankind (Hebrews 4:14-15; 9:11-14; 1 Peter 1:18-19).



Myrrh had a much more sobering symbolism. When a person died, this perfuming agent was wrapped with the body to help cover up the stench of death. Jesus' own body would be wrapped in linen with myrrh and aloes (John 19:39-40).



Why we should celebrate God's Holy Days instead

Matthew and Luke reveal the true story of the birth of Jesus Christ and the general timing of when it really occurred. John the Baptist was born in the spring. His cousin Jesus was born six months later—probably in late September, possibly early October. The shepherds visited immediately; the wise men—their number unknown—arrived much later.



It's tragic that the true story should have become so badly garbled by human traditions. It's also tragic that people ignore the Bible's clear instructions and invent their own. Jesus Himself roundly condemned religious leaders of His day who were "making the word of God of no effect through your tradition" (Mark 7:13).



A strong and weighty biblical principle is found in Deuteronomy 12. It tells us why we should observe the annual Holy Days and festivals God has revealed in His Word—not traditional holidays borrowed from paganism:



"You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates have they done to their gods . . . whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it, nor take away from it" (Deuteronomy 12:31-32).



Have you ever thought it curious that although two of the Gospel writers describe the circumstances surrounding Christ's birth (the other two don't even cover the event), neither of them gives the date? Has it puzzled you that the Bible never once mentions "Christmas"? And that none of the biblical writers says anything about commemorating that birth?



We do find, however, explicit commands to commemorate Jesus Christ's sacrifice and death on our behalf (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). We also find commands to observe other biblical festivals, the same festivals Jesus and the New Testament Church celebrated. Isn't it about time you looked into the Bible to see what God's Word says about them? GN





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Related Resources

God's Holy Day Plan: The Promise of Hope for All Mankind

What are the annual Holy Days God has commanded us to keep? A complete list is found in Leviticus 23. The opening verses tell us that these annual festivals belong to God. They are His! They reveal His true plan for salvation in a step-by-step manner.



What's Behind the Magnetic Pull of the Christmas Season?

Millions observe Christmas because it's a feel-good time with holiday music filling the air, brightly decorated trees, Santa Claus for the children and family togetherness. But does the Christmas season have a strong, commercially motivated magnetic pull that goes unnoticed by most?



The Top 10 Reasons Why I Don't Celebrate Christmas

It’s that time of year again! You’ll soon be barraged by the sights, sounds and smells of Christmas. Shoppers will soon go into spending overdrive, and when the bills arrive, some will wonder if it’s really worth it. Here’s a perspective from one who kicked the Christmas habit.



Christians Who Don't Celebrate Christmas: Here's Why

Why do some Christians not celebrate Christmas? Here are the reasons some gave for kicking the Christmas habit



4,000 Years of Christmas

'Tis the season for mistletoe and decorating the tree. But the origins of Christmas may surprise you. Did you know one of the American colonies outlawed observance of this holiday in 1659?



Where Did Christmas Symbols Originate?

An enormous number of traditions we now associate with Christmas have their roots in pre-Christian pagan religious traditions. Some of these have social, sexual, or cosmological connotations that might lead educated, culturally sensitive moderns to discard the traditions once they have understood their roots more clearly.



Was Christ Born on Christmas Day?

Do you observe Christmas because you think it's Christ's birthday? Was He born on or anytime near Dec. 25? If Jesus lived on earth today, would He celebrate Christmas at all?



Christmas Before Christ? The Surprising Story

Most people know the Bible doesn't mention—much less sanctify—Christmas. Does it make any difference as long as it's intended to honor God and bring families together?



Christmas Reconsidered

Does the Bible permit a believer to observe religious festivals that are not established by God? Does He allow us to use forms of worship that originated in pagan ceremonies, adapting them to worship Him? Is the New Testament more flexible than the Old, allowing us to disregard God's prior instructions on how to worship Him? More to the point, can we justify the observance of Christmas by Christians?

Thank You Tom Coburn

A very interesting post from www.redstate.com about the Senate Budget. This follows this post about the Tax Cut Compromise and this article about  the recent news about ending the ban on offshore drilling which would encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran  and Venezuela. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE!

Thank You Tom Coburn


Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)


Senator Tom Coburn has had an early Christmas gift handed to him in the form of the Ominous Omnibus. Coburn, perhaps best known for making fools of the big spenders in Washington, is doing it yet again.



He has set up a database where you can dig through and find all the corruption, greed, and lunacy in the Omnibus.



If this doesn’t pass by Saturday, according to the good senator, the government shuts down.



Perhaps we should let it. Go here now to call your Senator. Tell him to vote no

The Sufferings of Salma Hayak

The Sufferings of Salma Hayek
This post from http://www.vdare.com/  talks about Salma Hayek's sufferings. This follows this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here or an interesting article about Jessica Alba here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE!

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2010/12/11/the-sufferings-of-salma-hayek/

[Allan Wall]

Who do you get when you cross the arrogance of a Hollywood movie star with the sense of entitlement of a Mexican open borders activist? Why, Salma Hayek, of course.
She was born with a silver spoon in her mouth into a rich family in Mexico. After moving to the U.S. and becoming a Hollywood star, Salma decided to become an American citizen. Of course, she lied when she took the citizenship oath and retained her Mexican citizenship. The reason she became a U.S. citizen was so she could agitate in favor of Latinos. (See Salma´s Citizenship Strategy - And Ours).
Now in a recent interview, Salma is proud to boast that at some undisclosed point in time she was an illegal alien.
It's reported in a Daily Mail article with this whimsical title: Now That's the American Dream: Salma Hayek Reports That She was Once an Illegal Immigrant Daily Mail Online, December 9th, 2010:

Salma Hayek has confessed that she entered the U.S. as an illegal immigrant.
The actress, now considered one of the most influential Latino stars in Hollywood, admitted she was classed as an illegal for a 'small period of time'. The Mexican born star did not reveal at what age she was illegal or any other details, but told a Spanish magazine: 'I was an illegal immigrant in the United States, 'It was for a small period of time, but I still did it.'

It's a status symbol for Mexicans to be an illegal alien in the U.S. Even President Calderon claimed to have relatives living illegally north of the border, though one of his relatives was interviewed and didn't know who he was talking about.
Regarding Salma, when she moved to Los Angeles to make it in Hollwyood, she was already famous in Mexico and had a BMW. But at some point she says she was an illegal alien.
The Mail continues:

The actress, who is now a naturalised U.S. citizen, also said she suffered from racial discrimination as she tried to build her career.

Well, yes, she is a U.S. citizen but she obtained her citizenship for the express goal of enabling herself to be a Latino activist. She maintains her Mexican citizenship, in contravention of the U.S. citizenship oath.
Now, how about this "racial discrimination" she says she suffered from ? Salma Hayek is of Lebanese and Spanish descent, from a rich family in Mexico. How was she discriminated against in Hollywood?

'I had to endure the worst time of all in terms of racial discrimination in Hollywood when I first started out,' Hayek says.

Sounds horrible. But, once again, how was she discriminated against?

'It was inconceivable to American directors and producers that a Mexican woman could have a lead role.'

Oh, so Salma's definition of being discriminated against is not being the star of a Hollywood movie!
Well, I personally haven't been the star of a Hollywood movie. I suppose none of my readers has either. So by the Salma test, haven't we all been discriminated against?
Here's how the article ends:

As well as being the most powerful Latino star in Hollywood she is also an active campaigner for women's rights as well as those of undocumented workers.

Was Jesus a Created Being?

An interesting article from www.ucg.org about the Divinity of Jesus Christ. This follows this post about Christmas celebration.  For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Was Jesus a Created Being?


John 1:3 contains two direct statements that tell us that it was the preexistent Jesus who created all things. "All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made." Notice that John is not content to say only that all things were made through Him, but John adds the fact that "without Him nothing was made."



Paul confirms exactly what John wrote: "For by Him all things were created." Paul goes on to make sure that we understand what he means by all things—"that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him" (Colossians 1:16).



Since Jesus created all things, He could not have been one of the "created things." Paul then adds, so there can be no mistake, "He is before all things, and in him all things hold together" (verse 17, NIV).



Dr. Norman Geisler comments: "The context of this passage makes it clear that there are no exceptions; Christ is the Creator of all things including angels and everything visible or invisible. Nowhere is this made more clear that Christ is not a creature—angelic or otherwise—than in the relation of angels to Him. Since Christ could not be both the Creator of everything and at the same time a creature Himself, it is necessary to conclude that He is Himself the uncreated Creator of all creation" (Christian Apologetics, 1988, p. 338).



He adds a footnote: "In view of the clear teaching that Christ is Creator and not a creature, the Arian misinterpretations of phrases like Christ is 'firstborn' (Colossians 1:15) or 'beginning of creation' (Revelation 3:14) are wrong. Christ is 'firstborn' in the sense of being the unique (not created) Son of God. Christ is first over creation, not first in it" (ibid.).



Micah 5:2 stated that the messianic King to come was "from everlasting." Jesus had appeared in His divine life before His human birth as the priest-king Melchizedek (see Hebrews 7), "having neither beginning of days nor end of life" (verse 3). (Download or request our free booklet Who Is God? to learn more.)



Jesus was not created. He existed from eternity along with God the Father.

The Ominous Omnibus

A very interesting post from www.redstate.com about the Senate Budget. This follows this post about the Tax Cut Compromise and this article about  the recent news about ending the ban on offshore drilling which would encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran  and Venezuela. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE!


The Ominous Omnibus




Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)


The Senate has released an omnibus appropriations bill that blows the lid off spending. They waited until the last possible minute to put it out for review. It is 1,924 pages long, filled with earmarks, and goes so far as to declare Nevada a Pacific Coast state so it can get in on a few million dollars to protect salmon. The Democrats have also put a provision in the legislation to begin funding Obamacare.



It is insane and the GOP claims it will fight. Naturally though, several of the outgoing Republican Senators have decided they can finally flip the middle finger at their constituents. Senator Susan Collins is joining these departing senators — Voinovich, Bennett, Bond.



Please take a few moments to call these 4 Senators and tell them to Vote NO:



Senator Kit Bond: (202) 224-5721



Senator George Voinovich: (202) 224-3353



Senator Bob Bennett: (202) 224-5444



Senator Susan Collins: (202) 224-2523



Then click here to go to the RedState Action Alert Center and call your own Senator. Tell him to vote no.

Senate Staying In DC Longer To Have Time To Pass Amnesty

An interesting post from www.NumbersUSA.com about the Dream Act CLOTURE! This follows this post about Media Sources to contact about the DREAM ACT and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here or an interesting article about Jessica Alba here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE!

PRO-Amnesty Groups Claim 160,000 Phone Calls


Senate Staying In DC Longer To Have Time To Pass Amnesty


TODAY'S UPDATE ON YOUR LONG & VALIANT BATTLE


Yes, your phone calls are still needed -- and today!



202-224-3121



And be sure to visit your www.NumbersUSA.com/actionbuffet



The PRO-amnesty groups have virtually unlimited funds to solicit phone calls and run them through their expensive call services so they can monitor. I am guessing that their claim of 160,000 phone calls may be accurate. I'm sorry to say this in the middle of the holiday season and just before Christmas, but your calls are the only things keeping a couple more Senators from jumping onto the amnesty bandwagon.



See target lists below.



HERE'S THE UPDATE IN BRIEF FOR TODAY:

Pro-amnesty forces claim they are only one vote short of victory. I really believe this is part of their two-year-long bluff to try to make themselves seem like they have momentum in order to perhaps frighten some Senators to join the "winning" team. Nonetheless, their claim is unnerving. We can't afford to do anything but take it seriously. The pro-amnesty TV network Univision is reporting 4 votes short of 60, with several still Undeclared. That is scary enough.





Sen. Brown says NO! That's the best news from yesterday. He was the Republican whom the pro-amnesty forces claimed was going to get them to the 60-vote victory mark. (See more details below.) Congratulations to all you activists in Massachusetts.





Senate isn't going home at end of week. Senate Majority Leader Reid had earlier indicated he wouldn't keep Senators in session until Christmas Eve like he did last year. Typically, Congress adjourns before Thanksgiving to allow the nation to feel safe at least for the month of December. Reid was supposedly going to let the Senate go home at the end of this week. (The newly elected Congress takes over Jan. 5.) If the Congress adjourned at the end of this week, it was going to be hard to shoe-horn the DREAM Act amnesty debate and vote in between all the giant have-to business. But now, it looks like the Senate is staying in session until next week and maybe until next Thursday the 23rd. Bad news for us.





Amnesty vote unlikely before LATE this week. Yesterday, we were saying the amnesty vote might happen as early as Wednesday (tomorrow). With the extended Senate session, it is difficult to see the amnesty coming up before this weekend and probably next week. That gives the various contingents of illegal-alien students and clergy coalitions a lot more time to lay guilt trips on Undeclared and squishy-NO Senators back home. More bad news.





We have only one chance instead of two to defeat on cloture votes. Previously, Sen. Reid had to get 60 votes to pass cloture to START debate on the DREAM amnesty. If we lost that one, we would have another chance to keep him from getting 60 votes to pass cloture to STOP debate and have a final vote. That has changed. Because the House has sent over its own DREAM amnesty, Reid can bring it up for debate at any time WITHOUT a cloture vote. We expect that he will immediately file cloture to STOP the debate even before it begins. Once he does that, he can't hold the cloture vote until two days later. This isn't a big deal, but the change does disadvantage us somewhat from our ability to kill the amnesty.

TOP SENATE TARGETS



UNDECLARED BUT LEANING YES



202-224-3121



ALASKA

Sen. Murkowski (R)

No statement on her web site and no media quotes. Daily Kos says multiple whips counts have her as a likely supporter. Most of the PRO-amnesty groups are counting her as a YES.



LOUISIANA

Sen. Landrieu (D)

She indicates that the House bill needs to be considered because it has some changes (suggesting that she will claim the House bill closes loopholes). She talks of major concern for the "children."



MICHIGAN

Sen. Stabenow (D)

She was a certain YES on cloture to start debate. But she has not indicated whether she would vote YES to end debate and thus pass the bill. She is up for re-election in 2012 in a state that turned sharply Republican in the 2010 elections. Now (as noted above), we are facing only a cloture vote to END debate. PRO-amnesty forces count her as theirs. But I don't think she has to be at all.



MISSOURI

Sen. McCaskill (D)

McCaskill has a wide-ranging interview on her web site. Appears to be leaning toward yes but its non-committal. She says (1) we have never punished children, (2) this is a different bill than the one I voted against, and (3) if this bill is more narrowly drawn, I will take a serious look at it. She needs to be reminded that any amnesty support will certainly show up when she tries to be re-elected in 2012 by a state that went sharply Republican in the 2010 elections.



NORTH DAKOTA

Sen. Dorgan (D)

He was a certain YES on cloture to start debate. But he has not indicated whether he would vote YES to end debate and thus pass the bill. Now (as noted above), we are facing only a cloture vote to END debate. In the past, he has been one of our most reliable NO votes on amnesty. But he is retiring and acting squishy. PRO-amnesty forces are counting him as theirs. I don't think that has to be true at all.



UNDECLARED BUT LEANING NO



202-224-3121



These Senators' staff continually tell our members that they will vote NO. But for some reason, all media and political whip counts are calling them Undeclared. Thank them and encourage them to go ahead and publicly declare themselves a NO.



MONTANA

Sen. Baucus (D)



NORTH CAROLINA

Sen. Hagan (D)



NORTH DAKOTA

Sen. Conrad (D)



UNDECLARED AND TOTALLY UNKNOWN



202-224-3121



WEST VIRGINIA

Sen. Manchin (D)



DECLARED NO BUT OF SOME CONCERN



202-224-3121



MAINE

Sen. Collins (R)



OHIO

Sen. Voinovich (R)



202-224-3121



Please make those calls. We can win this, like we have beaten every amnesty in every year since 2000.



KEY MESSAGES IN ALL PHONE CALLS TO SENATORS WHO ARE SYMPATHETIC TO THE DREAM ACT POSTER CHILDREN



Keep this in mind about Senators who are Undeclared, or who say they will vote NO but are squishy, or who say they will vote YES but are potentially movable to NO:



They all are sympathetic to the poster children of the DREAM Act -- those are the minority of potential amnesty recipients who were brought to the U.S. by their parents when they were infants or toddlers and who are now good high school or college students.



You will gain nothing with the Senators we are trying to reach today by being negative about these students.



Instead, you have to approach these Senators on the basis of practicality. Perhaps the poster children do deserve consideration in the future but not before the enforcement is put in place to stop future illegal immigration. Your argument is that it is not possible in this rushed Lame Duck session to create and pass an amnesty that is limited to the deserving and which will stop future unfair illegal labor competition to unemployed Americans.



My thought is that it would be helpful today for every phone call to make the same pitches to Senators who are sympathetic to the poster children of the DREAM amnesty:

No matter how sympathetic these students may be, you can't give out another mass amnesty without fixing the weak enforcement that allowed their parents to bring them here and keep them here for years and years. DREAM has ZERO enforcement.





The DREAM Act amnesty includes no requirement that jobs be shut off to the millions of future illegal aliens who will bring THEIR children and put them in this exact same predicament that DREAM puports to resolve. It is totally irresponsible to the 22 million unemployed Americans to give out a big amnesty without requiring mandatory verification to keep illegal aliens from holding jobs.



SENS. BROWN (R-Mass.) & LeMEIUX (R-Fla.) SHOW THE PRACTICAL RESPONSE TO EMOTIONAL APPEALS



Perhaps no two Senators have been subjected to as much emotional pressure to bow to amnesty. The PRO-amnesty forces have bet the farm on moving these two because of special political circumstances in their states.



In its report of Sen. Brown's declaration of opposition to DREAM amnesty yesterday, the Associated Press reported:



Brown's remarks came as a coalition of educators, religious leaders and immigrant advocates made a last ditch appeal Monday asking him to support the proposal. Brown also had been a target of a national campaign by advocates.



For months, supporters of the bill and illegal immigrant college students, who call themselves "DREAMers," have staged sit-ins, rallies and marches outside Brown's office. Students have left hundreds of signed letters from supporters and young immigrants who said they would enlisted in the military if the bill passed.



Imagine if you were under that kind of emotional pressure? Imagine having all those clergy suggesting that you are inhumane, anti-Hispanic and even immoral if you don't legalize these young adult illegal aliens!



I have to tip my hat to Sen Brown for having the confidence of his convictions and a sense of that morality of standing up for 22 million Americans who want a full-time job but who can't find one. He once again declared his opposition to the DREAM amnesty at a Salvation Army charity event in downtown Boston!!!!!



Sen. LeMieux has been under similar pressures. After the Senate voted to postpone the amnesty vote last week, he put out this statement:



I am very sympathetic to the young people who entered our country illegally by no fault of their own, but I will not support consideration of the DREAM Act without addressing border security. I recently visited the US-Mexico border in Arizona and witnessed the progress toward securing the border. Fully funding and replicating our security successes across the border would allow us to address the DREAM act. However, we are still far from achieving a level of border security that is acceptable to me or to the American people.



I would have liked to see Sen. LeMieux set a higher standard of pre-conditions, including mandatory workplace verification and an end to chain migration, but his standard works just fine for the few weeks until he leaves office.



This is the line in the sand you are asking every Senator to draw . . .



. . . . . The line is that whatever one's feelings about the merits of some illegal aliens for an amnesty, no amnesty should be even talked about until the border is secure against continued mass illegal immigration and our jobs are secure from illegal aliens being able to take them from Americans.



THANKS SO MUCH FOR PICKING UP THAT PHONE ONCE AGAIN