A timely post about from www.Vdare.com about the liberal group, the NAACP, which doesn’t receive tax audits, but does call its opponents racist. This follows this post about Texas lawmakers being a lot less conservative than the media portrays it. In the meantime, you can get more involved if you like here and read an interesting book HERE.
Look Who's Talking: NAACP Calls The Tea Party Racist
http://www.vdare.com/articles/look-whos-talking-naacp-calls-the-tea-party-racist
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Rescuing itself from the obscurity it richly deserves, the NAACP has found a way back onto the front page: accuse the tea party movement of harboring racists.
At its Kansas City convention, NAACP President and CEO Ben Jealous declaimed: "Expel the bigots and racists in your ranks, or take the responsibility for them and their actions. We will no longer allow you to hide like cowards."
Is it not an absurd world we live in?
Here is an organization whose very name, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, pronounces its goal—advancement through affirmative action, quotas, contract set-asides based on race—accusing another organization of being motivated by race.
Jealous might revisit the Sermon on the Mount.
"Judge not that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged. ... Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"
If discrimination means favoring people or opposing people based on race, two questions arise. Is that not pretty much the job description of the NAACP? And when has the tea party advocated hirings, promotions or school admissions based on race?
In the South Carolina gubernatorial primary, the tea party backed a woman of Indian-American descent, Nikki Haley, who was raised a Sikh, over three white men with superior resumes.
In the GOP primary in South Carolina's 1st Congressional District, African-American Tim Scott, with tea party backing, routed Strom Thurmond's son three to one.
In Florida, the tea party vaulted a Hispanic, Cuban-American Marco Rubio, into so strong a lead over favorite Gov. Charlie Crist in the race for the U.S. Senate that Crist quit the GOP.
And the NAACP?
In the year 2000, the organization ran an ad using the daughter of James Byrd, the victim of a dragging death by white racists, to imply Gov. George W. Bush's opposition to a hate crimes bill meant that Bush was indifferent to the lynching of James Byrd.
This was as nasty a piece of political advertising as has been run in our time. When or where has the tea party run such a despicable ad?
In the last month, the major story with a racial dimension has been the charge that Eric Holder's Justice Department dropped an open-and-shut case against members of the New Black Panther Party of Philadelphia, two of whom were caught on tape threatening and intimidating white voters in the November 2008 election.
Justice's J. Christian Adams, who resigned to protest dropping the Panther case, testified before the Civil Rights Commission that attorneys in the Civil Rights Division of Justice were told to ignore cases involving black defendants and white victims.
A tape has now turned up where New Black Panther Minister King Samir Shabazz, one of the two charged with voter intimidation, rants before a small crowd: "You want freedom. You're gonna have to kill some crackers. You're going have to kill some of their babies."
Perhaps we can hear from the NAACP on the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia. Perhaps we can hear more from the NAACP on the ugliest form of racism in America, interracial violent crime—which, according to FBI statistics, is largely black-on-white, not the reverse.
Remarkable. In the black community, the jobless rate is 15 percent, the dropout rate is sometimes 50 percent, the illegitimacy rate is over 70 percent, nearly a million black Americans are in jail, prison or juvenile detention—and the NAACP is passing resolutions denouncing some guys carrying signs portraying Obama as The Joker.
According to a CBS poll this week, the five issues of most concern to all Americans, having to do with the president and Congress, are the economy (far and away No. 1), deficits and debt, Afghanistan and Iraq, health care and the oil spill.
None of these issues has anything directly to do with race.
Jealous and the NAACP are trying to change the subject from Obama's failure to Obama's race, and from the failures of liberals to the motivations of conservatives.
By accusing the tea party of harboring racists, the NAACP is, in effect, demanding that the party appear in a court of public opinion to prove itself innocent of an unsupported slander.
Sorry, that's not how things work in America.
Folks here are innocent until proven guilty, and name-calling is the last recourse of exhausted minds, to which attention need not be paid. The NAACP has become what Graham Greene called a "burnt-out case."
As longshoreman-philosopher Eric Hoffer observed, every great movement begins as a cause, eventually becomes a business, then degenerates into a racket. Time for the Ford Foundation to pull the plug on its subsidiary, whose time has come and gone a long time ago.
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his book State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America , can be ordered from Amazon.com.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Editorial: The IRS allows Leftist Lobbying Groups to go Unmolested!
Editorial
As the U.S. moves away from its Constitutional Foundations. It is worth analyzing the fact that there are so many groups that are able to lobby for their political viewpoints that don't get attacked by the IRS as the Tea Party and Patriot groups have over the past few years. There are entire leftist groups who do nothing BUT lobby for their views and yet have never had any investigation about their partisanship. There are also lobbying caucuses in Congress that exist only for their own group's advancement at the expense of the rest of the country.
On the eve of a possible government shutdown, we should step back and ponder how this situation has come to be!
As the U.S. moves away from its Constitutional Foundations. It is worth analyzing the fact that there are so many groups that are able to lobby for their political viewpoints that don't get attacked by the IRS as the Tea Party and Patriot groups have over the past few years. There are entire leftist groups who do nothing BUT lobby for their views and yet have never had any investigation about their partisanship. There are also lobbying caucuses in Congress that exist only for their own group's advancement at the expense of the rest of the country.
On the eve of a possible government shutdown, we should step back and ponder how this situation has come to be!
Wknd Box Office: Rush, Don Jon, Baggage Claim, The Citizen (Tax-Funded Muslim Propaganda Alert)
Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!
Wknd Box Office: Rush, Don Jon, Baggage Claim, The Citizen (Tax-Funded Muslim Propaganda Alert)
By Debbie Schlussel
I’ll start with the relative “best” of the new movies debuting in theaters today, as it only gets worse from there. Note that one of the new movies this week sucked hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to fund Muslim propaganda and pay a horribly anti-Israel Muslim actor who stars in Jew-baiting propaganda. Yay, America!
* “Rush“: This is a “based on the true story” movie that appears to be more truthful and accurate than most, based on my research into it after having seen the film. It’s about the early-to-mid-1970s rivalry between two professional Formula One race car drivers, Niki Lauda of Austria (Daniel Brühl) and James Hunt of the UK (Chris Hemsworth). Lauda is a strait-laced European and Hunt is a drunken playboy constantly sleeping around with models and similar others. The real-life Lauda, who is still alive, says that the movie is quite accurate, but that he got his share of the women, too. The hard-living Hunt died of a heart attack in 1993 at age 45 (but they don’t tell you that in the movie).
Directed by Ron Howard, this is somewhat a formulaic sports/racing flick. But I thought it was a fun, entertaining movie and enjoyed it. I also loved the period hairstyles and clothes, etc. I enjoyed the rivalry between Lauda and Hunt, and the movie captured what I read about them in sports news articles. Brühl and Hemsworth really resembled them (with the help of Hollywood magic a/k/a makeup artists and hairstylists).
I thought Daniel Bruhl was quite excellent and really was the star of the movie. Anyone can play a brash playboy, like Hemsworth did, but the real acting chops were in playing the strait-laced Austrian. Lauda came from a wealthy Austrian family, which opposed his entry into racing as a profession. As the movie portrays, the family wanted him to go into the family business of paper factories. While watching the movie, I wondered if members of the Lauda family were Nazis and did a little research into this after seeing the film. In fact, they opposed the Nazis, and for this reason they were removed from their paper company, which they retook after World War II. That is an interesting footnote that the movie unfortunately leaves out.
While I enjoyed the movie, I regret, though, that it was so sexual because a family cannot take their kids to see it, and it would have been fine as a racing movie without the sexual themes. It’s rated “R” for a reason. Still, as a movie for adults, I thought it was good, and it is a fact that Hunt was a playboy. It was a big part of who he was, and, like I said, his hard-living lifestyle was probably a factor in why he died so young. The one time the movie shows Hunt trying to settle down, it is with model Suzy Miller (Olivia Wilde), who later left him for actor Richard Burton (yes, Elizabeth Taylor’s Richard Burton). Wilde’s English accent needs work.
A tragic event strikes Niki Lauda in the movie and puts him in the hospital. There is a scene with lung-vacuuming that is so real it was painful to watch. And while the movie delves into their on-the-track rivalry, I think Ron Howard and the writers made a mistake not showing what happened later on in the lives of the two, much of which is very interesting. And it’s not just Hunt’s death in his 40s just after proposing to another woman. Lauda built a successful airline, Fly Niki, and left his loyal wife who stayed with him through tragic, disfiguring injury, for one of his stewardesses . . . er, flight attendants. In 2011, Lauda found himself under fire from gays for opposing gay and straight men dancing together as partners in a European edition of “Dancing With the Stars,” saying he doesn’t want young kids to be exposed to that. He responded that he employs many gays at Fly Niki, and some of them are trainers. His colorful post-racing life was in many ways just as notable and entertaining as his life as a race car driver.
This isn’t the greatest sports movie I’ve ever seen, but it’s one of the better ones. And it’s light and entertaining, a good escapist movie that’s funny and will get your mind off of real life for a couple of hours.
TWO-AND-A-HALF REAGANS
* “Don Jon“: What was the point of this disgusting movie? I’m not quite sure, other than to get Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Scarlett Johansson, and Julianne Moore another paycheck and give Tony Danza some work. Oh, and to give them all a chance to talk in a really annoying, heavy New Jersey accent. And to mock Catholicism.
Gordon-Levitt is a New Jersey Catholic who is addicted to online porn. He cannot have a real relationship because, he says, the sex is never as good as masturbating while watching online pornography. Yeah, I know: classy movie, right? He begins a relationship with Johansson, but again, he prefers the online porn, and she becomes very controlling, bossy, and snobby, and he doesn’t like that. She catches him watching online porn and ultimately breaks up with him over it. Soon, he is having sex with a woman who could be his mother (Julianne Moore), whose husband and child were killed in a car accident and with whom he smokes pot. Throughout the whole movie, Gordon-Levitt constantly goes to confession at church and confesses his many sexcapades just before engaging more of them. The end.
Yup, pointless. And a waste of time. But I’m sure it will do well because America’s Kardashian-addled demographic will love it and think it’s just hilarious. And you wonder why America is ever coarsening and at the same time, ever dumber.
Danza is Gordon-Levitt’s sleazy, stereotypical Italian, wife-beater-wearing father. I think he’s in the movie to show us that he still looks good. But he has so much makeup on, he looks like he just left RuPaul’s house.
FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR OBAMAS PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS
* “Baggage Claim“: Is it racist if I call this, “The Black Love Boat”? ‘Cuz that’s basically what it is. Robin Thicke’s wife, Paula Patton, plays an airline stewardess, er . . . “flight attendant,” who is under pressure from her mother to get married. Her younger sister is marrying a football star, and she has no one to bring to the wedding events. So, she and her fellow airline steward (Adam Brody) and stewardess (Jill Scott, who is supposed to be funny but isn’t) help Patton fly around the country and go on dates with her many former boyfriends trying to find one to marry. With each one, it turns into a madcap disaster, none of it funny (despite the fact that this is supposed to be a comedy). Aside from being completely predictable, this movie is incredibly dopey and a waste of time. Yet, this is what Hollywood serves up Black America, and Black America seems to like it just fine. So, who is really the racist here? Not the movie critic (me) who dares to call out this crap. (On the other hand, I’ve seen far too many movies featuring White actors that are almost as dopey and stupid.)
There’s a reason smart people don’t check luggage: so they can avoid disasters like Baggage Claim.
FOUR MARXES
* “The Citizen“: This is like one of those lecture-filled, BS-endowed ABC “After School Specials” the liberals used to make to propagandize us. Except this is the Muslim edition. Paid for with more than $561,000 in Michigan taxpayer dollars, this movie got made because the Islamo-pandering affirmative action at play at the Michigan Film Office discriminates in favor of Muslim Arabs (including terror suspects and open supporters of Islamic terrorism) and gives them tax money to fund the most absurd propaganda parading as “movies.” That’s how a first-time “director” and “writer,” Sam Kadi (a Syrian extremist who supports the Al-Qaeda rebels), gets hundreds of thousands of taxpayer money thrown at him for free, so that he can make a movie trashing America and telling us that the only good thing here are the devout Muslim immigrants that infect our shores. That’s essentially the message of this amateur-and-it-shows dud (which co-stars Agnes Bruckner, star of Lifetime’s Anna Nicole Smith movie–yup, she played Ms. Smith).
Egyptian actor Khaled Nabawy, who is the lead in this movie, has a creepy resemblance to 9/11 Mohammed Atta, and he’s got a history of starring in anti-Israel movies in the Muslim world (and, now, if you pay taxes in Michigan, you paid him for more propaganda). Nabawy starred in such “gems,” as “Fatat Meen Israeel,” in which,
A teacher and his wife, accompanying their son Tarek, find themselves in the same place where their eldest son was killed by the Israelis. During the trip Tarek falls in love with a girl called Lisa after saving her from drowning, unaware of the fact that she is Israeli, believing she and her father are American.
OH, NO! THE EVIL JOOOOS!
And, then, there’s this joke of a movie, in which Nabawy plays a devout Lebanese Arab Muslim who comes to America after winning the Green Card Lottery (something that should have ended long ago, if America had any common sense about national security and secure borders). The day after he arrives in New York (the setting of this movie), the 9/11 attacks happen, and, of course, all Americans hate innocent, patriotic Muslims and physically attack them in this movie. Actually, there were few such incidents post-9/11, but who cares about the truth, when Michigan taxpayers are paying Muslims to make whatever BS propaganda they want, right?
Even though everyone in America–including Homeland Security (which locks him up for no reason for six months and won’t allow him a lawyer), the Lebanese Arab is such a good and decent guy. He saves a woman from her violent, drug-addicted boyfriend and gives her candy and the $4.50 bottle of water at his hotel, even though it is too expensive. He helps a homeless guy, buys him food, and gives him a place to stay. He works hard and goes to English class (even though he already speaks perfect English). And he saves a Jewish guy from being beaten to death by skinheads on Christmas Eve, when no one else with intervene. (This is on the streets of New York, by the way.) Newsflash: in real life in America, Muslims are often the perpetrators–NOT the saviors–in anti-Semitic violence, including in New York. He cares about America and is upset over the 9/11 attacks because he’s such a caring, pro-American guy . . . all while he prays on his Muslim prayer mat and reads the Koran. This Muslim Arab immigrant, like all Muslim Arab immigrants, is a complete saint. Isn’t that the way they all are? I mean none of them would ever take public assistance, support Hezbollah and HAMAS, be anti-Semitic, and money-launder for terrorist groups. Right? That never happens . . . in this movie, at least.
The movie shows us that despite how hard the Arab Muslim works and tries, he cannot catch a break because of us evil Americans and the mean Department of Homeland Security, which deports all these Arab Muslims, including the innocent, good ones. Yup, someone’s living deep inside fantasy (and propaganda) land, since Homeland Security deports very few Arab Muslims, including many of those who are involved in Islamic terrorism. See HAMAS terrorist Mohammad Salah, Muslim Brotherhood/Anwar Al-Awlaki-tied Jamal Abusamhadaneh (who lied to government agents about his Islamic terrorist connections), Palestinian Muslim immigration defrauder Anees Sous, etc., etc., etc., ad absurdum. Yes, there are plenty of Islamic terrorists we not only don’t deport, but to whom we welcome with open arms and citizenship.
In contrast, the movie shows that Americans are mean, cold, uncaring, drug-addicted, unambitious, lazy, homeless, bigoted, racist, violent, and criminals. Aren’t ya glad tax dollars went into financing this?
If only the vast majority of Muslim immigrants were as saintly and patriotic to America as the character fraud that is perpetrated in this movie. Sadly, as we all know, THEY. ARE. NOT.
There is a reason why many Muslims, on 9/11, cheered and danced in the streets from Dearbornistan to Paterson, New Jersey, and why many Muslim women in Dearbornistan induced their children’s births to take place on their “holiday” anniversary of 9/11. There is a reason why the vast majority of the many death, rape, and torture threats I’ve received come from American Muslims living nearby.
When Michigan tax dollars pay to fund a movie portraying any of that, we’ll be making progress.
FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR OBAMAS PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS
Wknd Box Office: Rush, Don Jon, Baggage Claim, The Citizen (Tax-Funded Muslim Propaganda Alert)
By Debbie SchlusselI’ll start with the relative “best” of the new movies debuting in theaters today, as it only gets worse from there. Note that one of the new movies this week sucked hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to fund Muslim propaganda and pay a horribly anti-Israel Muslim actor who stars in Jew-baiting propaganda. Yay, America!
* “Rush“: This is a “based on the true story” movie that appears to be more truthful and accurate than most, based on my research into it after having seen the film. It’s about the early-to-mid-1970s rivalry between two professional Formula One race car drivers, Niki Lauda of Austria (Daniel Brühl) and James Hunt of the UK (Chris Hemsworth). Lauda is a strait-laced European and Hunt is a drunken playboy constantly sleeping around with models and similar others. The real-life Lauda, who is still alive, says that the movie is quite accurate, but that he got his share of the women, too. The hard-living Hunt died of a heart attack in 1993 at age 45 (but they don’t tell you that in the movie).
Directed by Ron Howard, this is somewhat a formulaic sports/racing flick. But I thought it was a fun, entertaining movie and enjoyed it. I also loved the period hairstyles and clothes, etc. I enjoyed the rivalry between Lauda and Hunt, and the movie captured what I read about them in sports news articles. Brühl and Hemsworth really resembled them (with the help of Hollywood magic a/k/a makeup artists and hairstylists).
I thought Daniel Bruhl was quite excellent and really was the star of the movie. Anyone can play a brash playboy, like Hemsworth did, but the real acting chops were in playing the strait-laced Austrian. Lauda came from a wealthy Austrian family, which opposed his entry into racing as a profession. As the movie portrays, the family wanted him to go into the family business of paper factories. While watching the movie, I wondered if members of the Lauda family were Nazis and did a little research into this after seeing the film. In fact, they opposed the Nazis, and for this reason they were removed from their paper company, which they retook after World War II. That is an interesting footnote that the movie unfortunately leaves out.
While I enjoyed the movie, I regret, though, that it was so sexual because a family cannot take their kids to see it, and it would have been fine as a racing movie without the sexual themes. It’s rated “R” for a reason. Still, as a movie for adults, I thought it was good, and it is a fact that Hunt was a playboy. It was a big part of who he was, and, like I said, his hard-living lifestyle was probably a factor in why he died so young. The one time the movie shows Hunt trying to settle down, it is with model Suzy Miller (Olivia Wilde), who later left him for actor Richard Burton (yes, Elizabeth Taylor’s Richard Burton). Wilde’s English accent needs work.
A tragic event strikes Niki Lauda in the movie and puts him in the hospital. There is a scene with lung-vacuuming that is so real it was painful to watch. And while the movie delves into their on-the-track rivalry, I think Ron Howard and the writers made a mistake not showing what happened later on in the lives of the two, much of which is very interesting. And it’s not just Hunt’s death in his 40s just after proposing to another woman. Lauda built a successful airline, Fly Niki, and left his loyal wife who stayed with him through tragic, disfiguring injury, for one of his stewardesses . . . er, flight attendants. In 2011, Lauda found himself under fire from gays for opposing gay and straight men dancing together as partners in a European edition of “Dancing With the Stars,” saying he doesn’t want young kids to be exposed to that. He responded that he employs many gays at Fly Niki, and some of them are trainers. His colorful post-racing life was in many ways just as notable and entertaining as his life as a race car driver.
This isn’t the greatest sports movie I’ve ever seen, but it’s one of the better ones. And it’s light and entertaining, a good escapist movie that’s funny and will get your mind off of real life for a couple of hours.
TWO-AND-A-HALF REAGANS
* “Don Jon“: What was the point of this disgusting movie? I’m not quite sure, other than to get Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Scarlett Johansson, and Julianne Moore another paycheck and give Tony Danza some work. Oh, and to give them all a chance to talk in a really annoying, heavy New Jersey accent. And to mock Catholicism.
Gordon-Levitt is a New Jersey Catholic who is addicted to online porn. He cannot have a real relationship because, he says, the sex is never as good as masturbating while watching online pornography. Yeah, I know: classy movie, right? He begins a relationship with Johansson, but again, he prefers the online porn, and she becomes very controlling, bossy, and snobby, and he doesn’t like that. She catches him watching online porn and ultimately breaks up with him over it. Soon, he is having sex with a woman who could be his mother (Julianne Moore), whose husband and child were killed in a car accident and with whom he smokes pot. Throughout the whole movie, Gordon-Levitt constantly goes to confession at church and confesses his many sexcapades just before engaging more of them. The end.
Yup, pointless. And a waste of time. But I’m sure it will do well because America’s Kardashian-addled demographic will love it and think it’s just hilarious. And you wonder why America is ever coarsening and at the same time, ever dumber.
Danza is Gordon-Levitt’s sleazy, stereotypical Italian, wife-beater-wearing father. I think he’s in the movie to show us that he still looks good. But he has so much makeup on, he looks like he just left RuPaul’s house.
FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR OBAMAS PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS
* “Baggage Claim“: Is it racist if I call this, “The Black Love Boat”? ‘Cuz that’s basically what it is. Robin Thicke’s wife, Paula Patton, plays an airline stewardess, er . . . “flight attendant,” who is under pressure from her mother to get married. Her younger sister is marrying a football star, and she has no one to bring to the wedding events. So, she and her fellow airline steward (Adam Brody) and stewardess (Jill Scott, who is supposed to be funny but isn’t) help Patton fly around the country and go on dates with her many former boyfriends trying to find one to marry. With each one, it turns into a madcap disaster, none of it funny (despite the fact that this is supposed to be a comedy). Aside from being completely predictable, this movie is incredibly dopey and a waste of time. Yet, this is what Hollywood serves up Black America, and Black America seems to like it just fine. So, who is really the racist here? Not the movie critic (me) who dares to call out this crap. (On the other hand, I’ve seen far too many movies featuring White actors that are almost as dopey and stupid.)
There’s a reason smart people don’t check luggage: so they can avoid disasters like Baggage Claim.
FOUR MARXES
* “The Citizen“: This is like one of those lecture-filled, BS-endowed ABC “After School Specials” the liberals used to make to propagandize us. Except this is the Muslim edition. Paid for with more than $561,000 in Michigan taxpayer dollars, this movie got made because the Islamo-pandering affirmative action at play at the Michigan Film Office discriminates in favor of Muslim Arabs (including terror suspects and open supporters of Islamic terrorism) and gives them tax money to fund the most absurd propaganda parading as “movies.” That’s how a first-time “director” and “writer,” Sam Kadi (a Syrian extremist who supports the Al-Qaeda rebels), gets hundreds of thousands of taxpayer money thrown at him for free, so that he can make a movie trashing America and telling us that the only good thing here are the devout Muslim immigrants that infect our shores. That’s essentially the message of this amateur-and-it-shows dud (which co-stars Agnes Bruckner, star of Lifetime’s Anna Nicole Smith movie–yup, she played Ms. Smith).
Egyptian actor Khaled Nabawy, who is the lead in this movie, has a creepy resemblance to 9/11 Mohammed Atta, and he’s got a history of starring in anti-Israel movies in the Muslim world (and, now, if you pay taxes in Michigan, you paid him for more propaganda). Nabawy starred in such “gems,” as “Fatat Meen Israeel,” in which,
A teacher and his wife, accompanying their son Tarek, find themselves in the same place where their eldest son was killed by the Israelis. During the trip Tarek falls in love with a girl called Lisa after saving her from drowning, unaware of the fact that she is Israeli, believing she and her father are American.
OH, NO! THE EVIL JOOOOS!
And, then, there’s this joke of a movie, in which Nabawy plays a devout Lebanese Arab Muslim who comes to America after winning the Green Card Lottery (something that should have ended long ago, if America had any common sense about national security and secure borders). The day after he arrives in New York (the setting of this movie), the 9/11 attacks happen, and, of course, all Americans hate innocent, patriotic Muslims and physically attack them in this movie. Actually, there were few such incidents post-9/11, but who cares about the truth, when Michigan taxpayers are paying Muslims to make whatever BS propaganda they want, right?
Even though everyone in America–including Homeland Security (which locks him up for no reason for six months and won’t allow him a lawyer), the Lebanese Arab is such a good and decent guy. He saves a woman from her violent, drug-addicted boyfriend and gives her candy and the $4.50 bottle of water at his hotel, even though it is too expensive. He helps a homeless guy, buys him food, and gives him a place to stay. He works hard and goes to English class (even though he already speaks perfect English). And he saves a Jewish guy from being beaten to death by skinheads on Christmas Eve, when no one else with intervene. (This is on the streets of New York, by the way.) Newsflash: in real life in America, Muslims are often the perpetrators–NOT the saviors–in anti-Semitic violence, including in New York. He cares about America and is upset over the 9/11 attacks because he’s such a caring, pro-American guy . . . all while he prays on his Muslim prayer mat and reads the Koran. This Muslim Arab immigrant, like all Muslim Arab immigrants, is a complete saint. Isn’t that the way they all are? I mean none of them would ever take public assistance, support Hezbollah and HAMAS, be anti-Semitic, and money-launder for terrorist groups. Right? That never happens . . . in this movie, at least.
The movie shows us that despite how hard the Arab Muslim works and tries, he cannot catch a break because of us evil Americans and the mean Department of Homeland Security, which deports all these Arab Muslims, including the innocent, good ones. Yup, someone’s living deep inside fantasy (and propaganda) land, since Homeland Security deports very few Arab Muslims, including many of those who are involved in Islamic terrorism. See HAMAS terrorist Mohammad Salah, Muslim Brotherhood/Anwar Al-Awlaki-tied Jamal Abusamhadaneh (who lied to government agents about his Islamic terrorist connections), Palestinian Muslim immigration defrauder Anees Sous, etc., etc., etc., ad absurdum. Yes, there are plenty of Islamic terrorists we not only don’t deport, but to whom we welcome with open arms and citizenship.
In contrast, the movie shows that Americans are mean, cold, uncaring, drug-addicted, unambitious, lazy, homeless, bigoted, racist, violent, and criminals. Aren’t ya glad tax dollars went into financing this?
If only the vast majority of Muslim immigrants were as saintly and patriotic to America as the character fraud that is perpetrated in this movie. Sadly, as we all know, THEY. ARE. NOT.
There is a reason why many Muslims, on 9/11, cheered and danced in the streets from Dearbornistan to Paterson, New Jersey, and why many Muslim women in Dearbornistan induced their children’s births to take place on their “holiday” anniversary of 9/11. There is a reason why the vast majority of the many death, rape, and torture threats I’ve received come from American Muslims living nearby.
When Michigan tax dollars pay to fund a movie portraying any of that, we’ll be making progress.
FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR OBAMAS PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS
Weekend Box Office: Prisoners,Thanks For Sharing
Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!
Weekend Box Office: Thanks For Sharing
By Debbie Schlussel
Because of the myriad Jewish holidays, I did not see most of the new movies debuting in theaters today. (I did not see “Prisoners” or “Battle of the Year,” but I will try to see the former later this weekend and post my review afterward.) In fact, I only saw one, “Thanks For Sharing,” and I wish I hadn’t. It’s more like, “No Thanks For Sharing. TMI [Too Much Information].”
Is America hurting from some shortage of sex addiction/masturbation movies? Seems like the pervs in Hollywood must think so, because I’ve seen more than one movie recently involving those topics. This one and “Don Jon,” which will come out in theaters next week, and my review will be posted then.
I wasn’t sure what the point of this movie was . . . other than to provide paychecks for the equally loathsome Mark Ruffalo, Tim Robbins, and Josh Gad, and to give Gwyneth Paltrow the opportunity to strip and show off her flat-chested body in lingerie. Yes, we know–a trainer paid tens of thousands of dollars to spend several hours a day in a gym with Gwyneth works. Thanks for the tip. Paltrow, per usual, is more than just a little bit annoying. She’s mega-annoying.
The story: three men (Ruffalo, Robbins, and Gad) are in different stages of recovery from sex addiction. They were all ordered to attend twelve steps meetings through court orders. Ruffalo has been “over” his sex addiction for five years, Robbins for several (he gave his wife Hepatitis C), and Gad has just started. It follows them as they struggle to avoid sex addiction and build monogamous relationships (Ruffalo with Paltrow, and Gad with someone other than his five fingers). To add to the annoying part, the singer Pink a/k/a Alecia Moore also joins in as a sex addict. We are the world, we are the children, blah, blah, blah.
The movie is not only disgusting, stupid, and completely pointless, but it’s a total waste of ten-plus bucks and nearly two hours of your life you’ll never get back.
Avoid that mistake, and STAY. AWAY. Just awful.
FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR OBAMAS PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS
Weekend Box Office 2: Prisoners
By Debbie Schlussel
“Prisoners,” in theaters this weekend, is a well-crafted thriller. While it is very violent–and not suitable for kids (it’s rated “R” for a reason)–the movie is tight and keeps you riveted and on the edge of your seat the whole time. At 2.5 hours, the movie is a little long, but you’re never bored, and there’s little of it that should be cut. It’s a very dark movie–dark and dreary the entire time in cinematics as well as story.
The story: two couples (Hugh Jackman/Maria Bello and Terrence Howard/Viola Davis) are close friends. On Thanksgiving, they have dinner together, but suddenly each couple’s younger daughter is missing. Jackman’s son believes a camper parked in the neighborhood is responsible for the kidnapping. And when the camper is located, the driver, Paul Dano, is mentally slow, and the investigating police detective (Jake Gyllenhaal) does not believe he’s the culprit, after hours of intense questioning. Jackman believes he’s responsible and begins surveilling Dano at the home of his aunt (Melissa Leo), where Dano lives. Soon, after Dano does and says suspicious things, Jackman captures him and subjects him to torture to try to find out where his daughter is.
Telling you more would give away the movie. But it’s incredibly creepy. I had a few reservations. Jackman’s character is a devout Christian, and yet he resorts to torture, something they’d never show Muslims doing, despite the fact that Muslims are more likely to sanction and engage in that kind of behavior. They do it on a regular basis. Jackman’s character is also a hunter, and it appears that Hollywood is trying to show that Christian gun-owners will engage in unnecessary violence when set up in the right circumstances. It’s interesting also that the movie engages in mild racial politics, with the torturer in the in the movie being the White Christian hunter. In contrast, the movie shows the Black man–whose young daughter has also been abducted–as the voice of reason who opposes this sort of violence and torture. The Christian part is explained because it is an element of the plot. However, it wasn’t necessary.
If you can look beyond those momentary parts of the movie, it’s worth seeing and is far better than I expected. I lowered my rating of the movie (from THREE or THREE-AND-A-HALF REAGANS), though, because of those things.
It’s suspenseful, entertaining, well done, and filled with good acting. And I loved the ending, which is pitch perfect.
TWO-AND-A-HALF REAGANS
Weekend Box Office: Thanks For Sharing
By Debbie Schlussel
Because of the myriad Jewish holidays, I did not see most of the new movies debuting in theaters today. (I did not see “Prisoners” or “Battle of the Year,” but I will try to see the former later this weekend and post my review afterward.) In fact, I only saw one, “Thanks For Sharing,” and I wish I hadn’t. It’s more like, “No Thanks For Sharing. TMI [Too Much Information].”
Is America hurting from some shortage of sex addiction/masturbation movies? Seems like the pervs in Hollywood must think so, because I’ve seen more than one movie recently involving those topics. This one and “Don Jon,” which will come out in theaters next week, and my review will be posted then.
I wasn’t sure what the point of this movie was . . . other than to provide paychecks for the equally loathsome Mark Ruffalo, Tim Robbins, and Josh Gad, and to give Gwyneth Paltrow the opportunity to strip and show off her flat-chested body in lingerie. Yes, we know–a trainer paid tens of thousands of dollars to spend several hours a day in a gym with Gwyneth works. Thanks for the tip. Paltrow, per usual, is more than just a little bit annoying. She’s mega-annoying.
The story: three men (Ruffalo, Robbins, and Gad) are in different stages of recovery from sex addiction. They were all ordered to attend twelve steps meetings through court orders. Ruffalo has been “over” his sex addiction for five years, Robbins for several (he gave his wife Hepatitis C), and Gad has just started. It follows them as they struggle to avoid sex addiction and build monogamous relationships (Ruffalo with Paltrow, and Gad with someone other than his five fingers). To add to the annoying part, the singer Pink a/k/a Alecia Moore also joins in as a sex addict. We are the world, we are the children, blah, blah, blah.
The movie is not only disgusting, stupid, and completely pointless, but it’s a total waste of ten-plus bucks and nearly two hours of your life you’ll never get back.
Avoid that mistake, and STAY. AWAY. Just awful.
FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR OBAMAS PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS
Weekend Box Office 2: Prisoners
By Debbie Schlussel
“Prisoners,” in theaters this weekend, is a well-crafted thriller. While it is very violent–and not suitable for kids (it’s rated “R” for a reason)–the movie is tight and keeps you riveted and on the edge of your seat the whole time. At 2.5 hours, the movie is a little long, but you’re never bored, and there’s little of it that should be cut. It’s a very dark movie–dark and dreary the entire time in cinematics as well as story.
The story: two couples (Hugh Jackman/Maria Bello and Terrence Howard/Viola Davis) are close friends. On Thanksgiving, they have dinner together, but suddenly each couple’s younger daughter is missing. Jackman’s son believes a camper parked in the neighborhood is responsible for the kidnapping. And when the camper is located, the driver, Paul Dano, is mentally slow, and the investigating police detective (Jake Gyllenhaal) does not believe he’s the culprit, after hours of intense questioning. Jackman believes he’s responsible and begins surveilling Dano at the home of his aunt (Melissa Leo), where Dano lives. Soon, after Dano does and says suspicious things, Jackman captures him and subjects him to torture to try to find out where his daughter is.
Telling you more would give away the movie. But it’s incredibly creepy. I had a few reservations. Jackman’s character is a devout Christian, and yet he resorts to torture, something they’d never show Muslims doing, despite the fact that Muslims are more likely to sanction and engage in that kind of behavior. They do it on a regular basis. Jackman’s character is also a hunter, and it appears that Hollywood is trying to show that Christian gun-owners will engage in unnecessary violence when set up in the right circumstances. It’s interesting also that the movie engages in mild racial politics, with the torturer in the in the movie being the White Christian hunter. In contrast, the movie shows the Black man–whose young daughter has also been abducted–as the voice of reason who opposes this sort of violence and torture. The Christian part is explained because it is an element of the plot. However, it wasn’t necessary.
If you can look beyond those momentary parts of the movie, it’s worth seeing and is far better than I expected. I lowered my rating of the movie (from THREE or THREE-AND-A-HALF REAGANS), though, because of those things.
It’s suspenseful, entertaining, well done, and filled with good acting. And I loved the ending, which is pitch perfect.
TWO-AND-A-HALF REAGANS
Senate Democrats Block Republicans’ Effort to Defund Pro-Abortion Obamacare
An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about the U.S. Senate’s pro-abortion vote on Obamacare. This follows this post about a woman who was tricked into an abortion. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can also get two very interesting books HERE.
Senate Democrats Block Republicans’ Effort to Defund Pro-Abortion Obamacare
With the Senate voting 54-44 on a party-line vote today, Senate Democrats blocked an effort by Republicans to de-fund the Obamacare legislation that pro-life groups oppose because it will fund abortions and presents rationing concerns.
AP has more on the vote: The Democratic-led Senate has blocked an effort to strip money from the president’s health care law. The party-line, 54-44 vote clears the last obstacle to Senate approval of a measures aimed at preventing a government shutdown on Tuesday. http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/27/senate-democrats-block-republicans-effort-to-defund-pro-abortion-obamacare/
Senate Democrats Block Republicans’ Effort to Defund Pro-Abortion Obamacare
With the Senate voting 54-44 on a party-line vote today, Senate Democrats blocked an effort by Republicans to de-fund the Obamacare legislation that pro-life groups oppose because it will fund abortions and presents rationing concerns.
AP has more on the vote: The Democratic-led Senate has blocked an effort to strip money from the president’s health care law. The party-line, 54-44 vote clears the last obstacle to Senate approval of a measures aimed at preventing a government shutdown on Tuesday. http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/27/senate-democrats-block-republicans-effort-to-defund-pro-abortion-obamacare/
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
A Friendly Smile and Wave for Safe Travels
An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about kindness toward travelers. This follows this post about comforting the suffering. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.by Aaron Booth
Be sure to extend a friendly smile to others as you travel to the Feast.
Source: Thinkstock
You never know what a smile and wave might mean to someone's day. Never underestimate the value of a friendly greeting.
On my way to work I drive by a small white house where an elderly lady stands outside her front porch waiting to greet each car as it drives by. As I drive by, I return the wave and tap a few honks of my horn to say hello. She is always outside waving to the commuters, most people drive past, maybe some wave back. Sometimes, I don't see her and wonder if she is ok? I always slow down when I get to her home so she can see me wave back.
Today, I wanted to do something different when I saw her wave to me. I greeted her with a wave and honk as I usually do. But this time as I drove past, I found the next drive way and turned around. I wanted to go back and talk to her. Something I have wanted to do for a long time, but never took the time. I was in the middle of the road stopped in front of her house just to say a quick hello. Well, she left her post and came right up to my car and we started to chat.
Her name is Betty and she was outside planting beautiful flowers that a friend from church had given her. She told me that they were just too pretty to be inside and needed to be in front of her home. She told me about her dog Ginger, and that she would like me. She was hinting for me to stop back again and visit longer. I thanked Betty for always waving to me in the morning, and she talked about how she is always outside waving to people and how much she enjoyed doing this. You could see the twinkle in her eyes as she talked. It was her great joy!
As you get ready to travel to various places around the world for the Feast of Tabernacles lets remember to extend a warm friendly smile or a hello to those who you may encounter in your journey. You just never know... you might make a difference in a person's life.
May you have a safe and spiritually refreshing Feast!
POLL: Catholic voters disagree with pro-amnesty bishops & see moral priority in protecting American workers!!!
A very interesting post from www.NumbersUSA.com about Roman Catholics who are standing against the bishops of their church on immigration!!!!! This follows this previous post about the Roman Catholic Church’s push on hurting America’s poor by encouraging more immigrants to compete with them for jobs and wages. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what you can do click here and you can read two very interesting books HERE.
POLL: Catholic voters disagree with pro-amnesty bishops & see moral priority in protecting American workers
By Roy Beck - posted on NumbersUSA
https://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax
The moral arguments on immigration that Members of Congress are hearing from Catholic bishops this month are not the ones that most Catholic voters believe are the most important issues in immigration policy, according to polling by Pulse Opinion Research of 4,967 Catholic likely voters in 26 politically competitive states.
Polling of Catholic voter moral opinions about immigration suggests that Catholic bishops face a tough task in their announced effort this month to persuade parishioners to urge the U.S. House to pass the Senate's immigration bill that would legalize an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants and double the flow of new legal immigration in the first decade.
It isn't that Catholic voters disagree on the importance of morality in immigration policy, but that they believe the highest moral responsibility is protecting vulnerable American workers.
(Read the full text of all questions of the poll, and the methodology, here.)
MORAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT U.S. WORKERS FROM IMMIGRANT-WORKER COMPETITION
Catholic voters were three times more likely to say the government has "a lot" of moral responsibility to protect American workers from competition with immigrant workers than to say it has "a lot" of moral responsibility to protect illegal immigrants from being separated from their families by deportation.
Catholic bishops are asking priests this month to preach on the moral need to pass the Senate bill to give legal status, lifetime work permits and a path to citizenship to most foreign citizens who are in the country illegally.
But in a compilation of the polls during the Senate debate, Pulse Opinion Research found that few Catholic likely voters agreed in their answer to this question:
How much moral responsibility do you feel Congress has to help protect the ability of current illegal immigrants to hold a job and support their families without fear of deportation?"
Only 14% of Catholic likely voters answered "a lot."
About one-fourth (27%) answered they feel the government has "some" moral responsibility, while 26% said "very little" and 28% said "none."
Catholic voters had an almost opposite reaction to the next question in the poll:
How much moral responsibility do you feel Congress has to help protect unemployed or low-wage Americans from having to compete with foreign workers for U.S. jobs?"
Nearly half (48%) said "a lot," 31% said "some," 12% said "very little" and 7% said "none."
NumbersUSA Education & Research Foundation sponsored the polling. It is a non-partisan, non-ideological grassroots group that was formed in 1996 to advocate for the lower-immigration recommendations of the bi-partisan, congressional-presidential U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, chaired by Barbara Jordan. Most of the states that were polled are politically competitive in that they have U.S. Senators from both parties (such as Pennsylvania) or are represented in the Senate by a party that is different from the one that won the state's 2012 Electoral votes (such as Montana). The compilation of polls has a margin of error of 1.4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
COMPLEXITY IN DEPORTATION VIEWS
On the matter of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, the polling found that most Catholics agreed with their bishops about not wanting to deport most of them.
But Catholic voters disagreed with their bishops about giving illegal immigrants work permits to compete directly with the 20 million Americans who want a full-time job but can't find one.
• One-third (32%) of Catholic voters said the government should deport most of the illegal immigrants.
• Another third (30%) said the government should "deport only some but ensure the rest take no jobs or taxpayer assistance."
• 28% of Catholics agreed with the bishops' position that the government should provide most illegal immigrants with "legal status and work permits."
CATHOLIC VOTERS DISAGREE WITH BOTH BUSINESS & BISHOPS ON URGENCY ISSUE
The polls asked Catholics what they felt is the government's most urgent priority in setting immigration policy this year and gave them three choices.
• The majority (56%) of Catholics said the priority was to "protect unemployed less-educated Americans from competition from foreign workers."
• 22% said the priority was to "bring otherwise law-abiding illegal immigrants out of the shadows."
• 14% said the priority should be "ensuring that employers get the foreign workers they need to keep the economy strong."
Most Catholic voters also disagreed with several other aspects of the Senate bill that the bishops are promoting:
• Only 21% agreed with giving work permits to illegal immigrants first before 10 years of "implementing border and workplace enforcement to stop future flows of illegal workers." (68% said all enforcement must be fully implemented before even "considering" giving work permits.)
• Only 9% agreed with the Senate that the current issuance of around 1 million green cards to immigrants is "too low."
• Only 22% somewhat or strongly agreed with the argument of many of the Senate advocates of the bill that the "United States is faced with labor shortages and needs more immigrant workers."
Part of the moral concerns and priorities of most Catholic voters can be understood in the fact that two-thirds (67%) of them said they believe that "less educated illegal immigrants compete with less-educated Americans for construction, manufacturing, hospitality and other service jobs."
On most questions, there was little difference in the answers of Catholics who attend church infrequently and those who attend regularly.
The greatest variation of opinions was seen among political parties. For example, 42% of Democratic Catholics favored giving work permits and legal status to illegal immigrants, while 27% of Independents and 16% of Republicans did. Catholics were more similar among parties on the issue of needing more immigrant workers, with only 31% of Democrats, 17% of Independents and 18% of Republicans thinking so.
If Catholic voters resist the political pressure from their bishops, it won't be because the laity refuses to consider the moral issues of immigration but because most of the laity places a higher moral priority on protecting the most vulnerable members of their national community who are unemployed or who struggle because of low wages.
ROY BECK is Founder & President of NumbersUSA
NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
POLL: Catholic voters disagree with pro-amnesty bishops & see moral priority in protecting American workers
By Roy Beck - posted on NumbersUSA
https://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax
The moral arguments on immigration that Members of Congress are hearing from Catholic bishops this month are not the ones that most Catholic voters believe are the most important issues in immigration policy, according to polling by Pulse Opinion Research of 4,967 Catholic likely voters in 26 politically competitive states.
Polling of Catholic voter moral opinions about immigration suggests that Catholic bishops face a tough task in their announced effort this month to persuade parishioners to urge the U.S. House to pass the Senate's immigration bill that would legalize an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants and double the flow of new legal immigration in the first decade.
It isn't that Catholic voters disagree on the importance of morality in immigration policy, but that they believe the highest moral responsibility is protecting vulnerable American workers.
(Read the full text of all questions of the poll, and the methodology, here.)
MORAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT U.S. WORKERS FROM IMMIGRANT-WORKER COMPETITION
Catholic voters were three times more likely to say the government has "a lot" of moral responsibility to protect American workers from competition with immigrant workers than to say it has "a lot" of moral responsibility to protect illegal immigrants from being separated from their families by deportation.
Catholic bishops are asking priests this month to preach on the moral need to pass the Senate bill to give legal status, lifetime work permits and a path to citizenship to most foreign citizens who are in the country illegally.
But in a compilation of the polls during the Senate debate, Pulse Opinion Research found that few Catholic likely voters agreed in their answer to this question:
How much moral responsibility do you feel Congress has to help protect the ability of current illegal immigrants to hold a job and support their families without fear of deportation?"
Only 14% of Catholic likely voters answered "a lot."
About one-fourth (27%) answered they feel the government has "some" moral responsibility, while 26% said "very little" and 28% said "none."
Catholic voters had an almost opposite reaction to the next question in the poll:
How much moral responsibility do you feel Congress has to help protect unemployed or low-wage Americans from having to compete with foreign workers for U.S. jobs?"
Nearly half (48%) said "a lot," 31% said "some," 12% said "very little" and 7% said "none."
NumbersUSA Education & Research Foundation sponsored the polling. It is a non-partisan, non-ideological grassroots group that was formed in 1996 to advocate for the lower-immigration recommendations of the bi-partisan, congressional-presidential U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, chaired by Barbara Jordan. Most of the states that were polled are politically competitive in that they have U.S. Senators from both parties (such as Pennsylvania) or are represented in the Senate by a party that is different from the one that won the state's 2012 Electoral votes (such as Montana). The compilation of polls has a margin of error of 1.4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
COMPLEXITY IN DEPORTATION VIEWS
On the matter of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, the polling found that most Catholics agreed with their bishops about not wanting to deport most of them.
But Catholic voters disagreed with their bishops about giving illegal immigrants work permits to compete directly with the 20 million Americans who want a full-time job but can't find one.
• One-third (32%) of Catholic voters said the government should deport most of the illegal immigrants.
• Another third (30%) said the government should "deport only some but ensure the rest take no jobs or taxpayer assistance."
• 28% of Catholics agreed with the bishops' position that the government should provide most illegal immigrants with "legal status and work permits."
CATHOLIC VOTERS DISAGREE WITH BOTH BUSINESS & BISHOPS ON URGENCY ISSUE
The polls asked Catholics what they felt is the government's most urgent priority in setting immigration policy this year and gave them three choices.
• The majority (56%) of Catholics said the priority was to "protect unemployed less-educated Americans from competition from foreign workers."
• 22% said the priority was to "bring otherwise law-abiding illegal immigrants out of the shadows."
• 14% said the priority should be "ensuring that employers get the foreign workers they need to keep the economy strong."
Most Catholic voters also disagreed with several other aspects of the Senate bill that the bishops are promoting:
• Only 21% agreed with giving work permits to illegal immigrants first before 10 years of "implementing border and workplace enforcement to stop future flows of illegal workers." (68% said all enforcement must be fully implemented before even "considering" giving work permits.)
• Only 9% agreed with the Senate that the current issuance of around 1 million green cards to immigrants is "too low."
• Only 22% somewhat or strongly agreed with the argument of many of the Senate advocates of the bill that the "United States is faced with labor shortages and needs more immigrant workers."
Part of the moral concerns and priorities of most Catholic voters can be understood in the fact that two-thirds (67%) of them said they believe that "less educated illegal immigrants compete with less-educated Americans for construction, manufacturing, hospitality and other service jobs."
On most questions, there was little difference in the answers of Catholics who attend church infrequently and those who attend regularly.
The greatest variation of opinions was seen among political parties. For example, 42% of Democratic Catholics favored giving work permits and legal status to illegal immigrants, while 27% of Independents and 16% of Republicans did. Catholics were more similar among parties on the issue of needing more immigrant workers, with only 31% of Democrats, 17% of Independents and 18% of Republicans thinking so.
If Catholic voters resist the political pressure from their bishops, it won't be because the laity refuses to consider the moral issues of immigration but because most of the laity places a higher moral priority on protecting the most vulnerable members of their national community who are unemployed or who struggle because of low wages.
ROY BECK is Founder & President of NumbersUSA
NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Mother Tearfully Recalls: My Boyfriend Tricked Me Into Aborting My Baby
An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about a woman who was tricked into an abortion. This follows this post about Obamacare covering abortions. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can also get two very interesting books HERE.
Mother Tearfully Recalls: My Boyfriend Tricked Me Into Aborting My Baby
The interview yesterday with CNN’s Chris Cuomo lasted only a few minutes, but no viewer could watch Remee Lee tearfully recall how she had been duped into chemically aborting her child and not be deeply moved.
Andrew Welden pled guilty this week to lesser charges in exchange for the prosecution dropping the murder charge made possible by the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act legislation that was instigated by NRLC and signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2004. http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/12/mother-tearfully-recalls-my-boyfriend-tricked-me-into-aborting-my-baby/
Mother Tearfully Recalls: My Boyfriend Tricked Me Into Aborting My Baby
The interview yesterday with CNN’s Chris Cuomo lasted only a few minutes, but no viewer could watch Remee Lee tearfully recall how she had been duped into chemically aborting her child and not be deeply moved.
Andrew Welden pled guilty this week to lesser charges in exchange for the prosecution dropping the murder charge made possible by the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act legislation that was instigated by NRLC and signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2004. http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/12/mother-tearfully-recalls-my-boyfriend-tricked-me-into-aborting-my-baby/
Weekend Box Office: The Family, Austenland, Adore
Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!
Weekend Box Office: The Family, Austenland, Adore
By Debbie Schlussel
Nothing that great and new at the movies, this weekend. I did not see “Insidious 2,” as the screening was at the same time as “The Family.”
* “The Family“: I had mixed feelings about this. Luc Besson, a director whose stuff I usually admire, was also at the helm of this one. But the movie fell flat in a few ways. It’s incredibly, unnecessarily violent, and for a dark comedy, it’s not that funny. It’s not a movie for kids, and not just because of the violence, but the language. It’s full of F-bombs and so on. On the other hand, it is a light, relaxing movie, but I’m not sure what the point was. None of the characters are likable, and it’s kind of a waste of time.
Robert De Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer, in novel roles for them, play, respectively, a mobster and his wife. Yes, I’m being sarcastic. Seems like that’s all they play. Ever. They and their two kids–a son and a daughter–are in the witness protection program and keep having to be relocated by their handler, Tommy Lee Jones, because De Niro keeps roughing up the locals throughout Europe. Now, they are in Normandy and bored to death. Meanwhile, the mobsters whom De Niro ratted out–particularly the Don–are plotting to find and murder De Niro and his family in revenge.
If you are a De Niro superfan, you might like this. And like I said, it’s light and entertaining, but distastefully violent and pointless. And just not entertaining enough to spend ten bucks-plus on. It might be better to be estranged from “The Family.”
HALF A REAGAN
* “Austenland“: Help, I’ve been dropped in a Jane Austen concentration camp, and they won’t let me out!
This is another one I had mixed feelings about, but mostly on the negative side. Keri Russell plays “Jane,” one of those women who is obsessed with Jane Austen books and fantasizes about living in that time and romancing Mr. Darcy. So, she spends her life savings to attend “Austenland,” a fantasy vacation world in England, owned and operated by Jane Seymour, where no modern appliances or accoutrements are allowed, and actors are hired to “romance” the guests. Jane is treated shabbily by Seymour because she only purchased a “copper” package, not the more expensive “platinum” one. Forced to compete with the other guests for two male actors, she falls for the help.
I’m making the movie sound far better than it is. It’s mostly dopey and like a bad ’80s movie, with a bad ’80s (and ’90s) soundtrack to boot. The jokes are silly, the characters–particularly one played by the awful Jennifer Coolidge (whose “acting” career should be shot and put out of its misery)–are annoying and stupid. And I felt like I was trapped on a dumb episode of “The Love Boat,” Jane Austen edition.
The idea for this movie–a woman facing her unrealistic fantasies taken from classic novels and finally growing up to live in the real world–was interesting and could have made for a very interesting flick. But the execution was just uber-vapid and ludicrous.
The ending isn’t bad, and the movie gets better in the last fifth or so. But it’s just so bad to begin with that all things are relative. And it’s weird that a dumb comedy with so much stupidity suddenly gets too serious and likable in the last moments. But that doesn’t make this nearly worth sitting through. This is supposed to be a comedy, but, amidst the moronism, there are few genuine laughs to be had. Except on the ticket buyer. The joke’s on you, even if you are a Jane Austen obsessive-compulsive.
By the way, I think I can hear the sound of the whale bones in Jane Austen’s corset crackling as she turns over in her grave.
HALF A MARX
* “Adore“: This is possibly the most warped, incestuous, weird movie I’ve seen. Or at least in that category with only a few others. If this movie were made with the genders reversed, there would be holy hell to pay about men having sick, nearly-incestuous, very creepy relationships with young women who are like their daughters. And, yet, this is promoted and pimped on us by celeb magazines as a “steamy soap opera.” And The Guardian incredibly called the movie, “brave” and “masterclass.” But, hey, if you use the concept of “cougars,” it’s a-okay, right? Yay, feminism!
Two Australian best friends from childhood (Robin Wright–the ex-Mrs. Sean Penn who does a crappy Aussie accent–and Naomi Watts) are now middle-aged women with gorgeous, barely legal, surfing Adonises, who are only 17 or 18. One (Watts) is a widow, and the other (Wright) is growing apart from her husband, who wants to move to Sydney. Both the women live on the Australian coast in fabulous houses and have fabulous jobs in addition to their fabulous, hunky sons (Xavier Samuel, James Frecheville). Soon, each finds herself having a sexual relationship with the other’s son. Ultimately, they end their warped sexual relationships with the two adonises–or do they?–when one of them falls for a girl his own age and decides to marry her.
This movie is so messed up, I cannot put it into words. But it draws you in with its glamour and unlikely symmetry of fabulous lives of the Australian well-to-do and the nice scenery–natural and human. But it’s still just sick. By the way, this “Fifty Shades of Greying Women Bleached Blonde” is based on a book called, “The Grandmothers .” (And I think one point of this movie is to show us that “grandmothers” Wright and Watts still have good enough bodies to sport bikinis and bed male teen hotties.)
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to know about any grandmas’ pedophiliac fantasies, and I don’t wanna see ‘em onscreen. There ain’t nothin’ “Adore”-able here. Not even close.
See, if only Ariel Castro had written a novel about his exploits and made a movie. And if only he and his captives were better looking, they’d have a movie, right? Yeah, that’s the ticket.
The West is now so warped that this is now “high-brow” cinema.
THREE MARXES PLUS FOUR BETTY FRIEDANS
Weekend Box Office: The Family, Austenland, Adore
By Debbie Schlussel
Nothing that great and new at the movies, this weekend. I did not see “Insidious 2,” as the screening was at the same time as “The Family.”
* “The Family“: I had mixed feelings about this. Luc Besson, a director whose stuff I usually admire, was also at the helm of this one. But the movie fell flat in a few ways. It’s incredibly, unnecessarily violent, and for a dark comedy, it’s not that funny. It’s not a movie for kids, and not just because of the violence, but the language. It’s full of F-bombs and so on. On the other hand, it is a light, relaxing movie, but I’m not sure what the point was. None of the characters are likable, and it’s kind of a waste of time.
Robert De Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer, in novel roles for them, play, respectively, a mobster and his wife. Yes, I’m being sarcastic. Seems like that’s all they play. Ever. They and their two kids–a son and a daughter–are in the witness protection program and keep having to be relocated by their handler, Tommy Lee Jones, because De Niro keeps roughing up the locals throughout Europe. Now, they are in Normandy and bored to death. Meanwhile, the mobsters whom De Niro ratted out–particularly the Don–are plotting to find and murder De Niro and his family in revenge.
If you are a De Niro superfan, you might like this. And like I said, it’s light and entertaining, but distastefully violent and pointless. And just not entertaining enough to spend ten bucks-plus on. It might be better to be estranged from “The Family.”
HALF A REAGAN
* “Austenland“: Help, I’ve been dropped in a Jane Austen concentration camp, and they won’t let me out!
This is another one I had mixed feelings about, but mostly on the negative side. Keri Russell plays “Jane,” one of those women who is obsessed with Jane Austen books and fantasizes about living in that time and romancing Mr. Darcy. So, she spends her life savings to attend “Austenland,” a fantasy vacation world in England, owned and operated by Jane Seymour, where no modern appliances or accoutrements are allowed, and actors are hired to “romance” the guests. Jane is treated shabbily by Seymour because she only purchased a “copper” package, not the more expensive “platinum” one. Forced to compete with the other guests for two male actors, she falls for the help.
I’m making the movie sound far better than it is. It’s mostly dopey and like a bad ’80s movie, with a bad ’80s (and ’90s) soundtrack to boot. The jokes are silly, the characters–particularly one played by the awful Jennifer Coolidge (whose “acting” career should be shot and put out of its misery)–are annoying and stupid. And I felt like I was trapped on a dumb episode of “The Love Boat,” Jane Austen edition.
The idea for this movie–a woman facing her unrealistic fantasies taken from classic novels and finally growing up to live in the real world–was interesting and could have made for a very interesting flick. But the execution was just uber-vapid and ludicrous.
The ending isn’t bad, and the movie gets better in the last fifth or so. But it’s just so bad to begin with that all things are relative. And it’s weird that a dumb comedy with so much stupidity suddenly gets too serious and likable in the last moments. But that doesn’t make this nearly worth sitting through. This is supposed to be a comedy, but, amidst the moronism, there are few genuine laughs to be had. Except on the ticket buyer. The joke’s on you, even if you are a Jane Austen obsessive-compulsive.
By the way, I think I can hear the sound of the whale bones in Jane Austen’s corset crackling as she turns over in her grave.
HALF A MARX
* “Adore“: This is possibly the most warped, incestuous, weird movie I’ve seen. Or at least in that category with only a few others. If this movie were made with the genders reversed, there would be holy hell to pay about men having sick, nearly-incestuous, very creepy relationships with young women who are like their daughters. And, yet, this is promoted and pimped on us by celeb magazines as a “steamy soap opera.” And The Guardian incredibly called the movie, “brave” and “masterclass.” But, hey, if you use the concept of “cougars,” it’s a-okay, right? Yay, feminism!
Two Australian best friends from childhood (Robin Wright–the ex-Mrs. Sean Penn who does a crappy Aussie accent–and Naomi Watts) are now middle-aged women with gorgeous, barely legal, surfing Adonises, who are only 17 or 18. One (Watts) is a widow, and the other (Wright) is growing apart from her husband, who wants to move to Sydney. Both the women live on the Australian coast in fabulous houses and have fabulous jobs in addition to their fabulous, hunky sons (Xavier Samuel, James Frecheville). Soon, each finds herself having a sexual relationship with the other’s son. Ultimately, they end their warped sexual relationships with the two adonises–or do they?–when one of them falls for a girl his own age and decides to marry her.
This movie is so messed up, I cannot put it into words. But it draws you in with its glamour and unlikely symmetry of fabulous lives of the Australian well-to-do and the nice scenery–natural and human. But it’s still just sick. By the way, this “Fifty Shades of Greying Women Bleached Blonde” is based on a book called, “The Grandmothers .” (And I think one point of this movie is to show us that “grandmothers” Wright and Watts still have good enough bodies to sport bikinis and bed male teen hotties.)
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to know about any grandmas’ pedophiliac fantasies, and I don’t wanna see ‘em onscreen. There ain’t nothin’ “Adore”-able here. Not even close.
See, if only Ariel Castro had written a novel about his exploits and made a movie. And if only he and his captives were better looking, they’d have a movie, right? Yeah, that’s the ticket.
The West is now so warped that this is now “high-brow” cinema.
THREE MARXES PLUS FOUR BETTY FRIEDANS
Friday, September 13, 2013
What do you do when someone suffers a major loss?
An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about comforting the suffering. This follows this post about how popular culture affects the U.S. and other countries. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.What do you do when someone suffers a major loss?
by Victor Kubik
Last week my staff and I conducted a ministerial conference in the Rocky Mountain States.
One subject of special interest was this: How does one comfort someone who has suffered catastrophic loss? What can we do or say that will help? We will all go through this dark experience during our lifetimes, and many sometimes find it awkward or difficult to talk to someone who has recently suffered a major loss through death: a mate, a child or a parent. Many are in denial—it's emotionally tough to deal with the fact that they will never see or talk to them again in this lifetime.
So what can we say that will give relief and comfort, even assurance to the one grieving?
1. Sometimes we don't know what to say or do in cases like these.
I'd like to share a few practical points from the conference that may be helpful when we face this moment: Do not avoid the person close to you who is reeling from the death of a loved one. Don't pretend that it isn't happening. Their grief may absorb their entire consciousness. Do make yourself available and be around them in showing support, even if you don't say much. What's meaningful to the person going through shock is that you as their friend are around and available.
2. When speaking to them, do not be afraid to mention the person who died.
The grieving person is stunned and deeply hurt by the loss. Your making mention of the person by name can actually be a comforting action and help them deal with the loss.
3. Where possible, do take care of some of the normal and routine needs of the person going through grief.
Provide food is most common…and it does comfort. The grieving person often has little interest in taking care of some of the simple things of living.
In my experience, the greatest comfort often comes from understanding what really happens when one dies. Paul encourages a grieving church in Thessalonica to deal intelligently and not ignorantly about death:
"But I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who have fallen asleep [those who have died in the faith], lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus."
Continuing, Paul wrote: "For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words" (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 [13] But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
[14] For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
[15] For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
[16] For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
[17] Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
[18] Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
See All...).
Here a supernatural literal resurrection from the dead at the sound of a trumpet is promised. The trumpet sounds when Jesus Christ returns and the dead return to life! Note this encouraging companion statement in 1 Corinthians 15:52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
See All...: "In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible , and we shall be changed" (emphasis added).
Knowing the truth of what a wonderful future awaits those whose human life ends does more to alleviate the pain of loss than anything else I could say. This truth gives hope and assurance that death is not the absolute end.
As I write this, we are preparing to observe an annual biblical festival called the Feast of Trumpets . This festival celebrates the return of Jesus Christ to this earth and the resurrection of the dead. As we observe this day, it represents a reassuring and comforting declaration of peace and joy for all.
To understand more about the Feast of Trumpets and other festivals of God, I invite you to read our free Bible study aid God's Holy Day Plan: The Promise of Hope for All Mankind . This short but packed booklet lays out all the biblical plan that Christians observe that give them hope and comfort. You may be surprised at the depth of knowledge of sure and wonderful truth that is in the pages of your Bible. After you read it, I would welcome your comments.
Is Purple the New Red in Texas Legislation?
A timely post about from www.EmpowerTexans.com about Texas lawmakers being a lot less conservative than the media portrays it. This follows this post about Eric Holder having the state of Texas in his crosshairs. In the meantime, you can get more involved if you like here and read an interesting book HERE.
Is Purple the New Red?
by Dustin Matocha
http://www.empowertexans.com/features/is-purple-the-new-red/
If Texas is such a red state, why was so much “purple” legislation passed this session? Perhaps it’s because so many Republicans in the Legislature voted so much like their Democratic counterparts, they forgot the color of the team they were on.
Professor Mark Jones, Chairman of the Department of Political Science at Rice University, offered his statistical analysis of the 83rd session in the Texas Tribune not too long ago, explaining what he described as “purple legislation” passing despite having such a “red state” mentality among voters in Texas.
Sadly, his analysis confirms what conservatives have felt all throughout the 83rd Legislature. Good conservative legislation was left in the parliamentary waste-basket, while “bi-partisan” legislation was pushed through.
This session, too many legislators were willing to go along with moderate establishment “leadership” than stand on conservative convictions.
Why? Because so many were willing to go along with moderate establishment “leadership” rather than stand on conservative convictions.
Despite having a near 2/3 majority in both chambers of the Legislature, it often felt like taxpayers could only rely on about 1/3 of the House (if that) to stand with principle, and only a handful of senators to do the same at any given time.
Some of the worst Republicans in fact voted more like Democrats than Republicans. Out of 95 Republicans in the House, 46 of them scored below a 60 on our Fiscal Responsibility Index. Reps. J.D. Sheffield (R – Gatesville) and John Zerwas (R – Simonton) were so bad, they literally scored worse than a Democrat!
In the Senate, 7 of 19 Republicans scored below a 60, with Sens. Bob Deuell (R – Greenville), Kel Seliger (R – Amarillo) and Robert Duncan (R – Lubbock) scoring worst than the top-rated Democrat.
Considering the fact that there are more Republican failures in the Legislature than Republicans scoring an 80 or above (38 to 34 respectively), it’s no wonder the Legislature produced such poor outcomes.
Here’s a list of all the Republicans below 60 on the Fiscal Responsibility Index. Taxpayers should study it closely between now and next March.
HOUSE
District Legislator Party 2013 Rating
56 Anderson, Charles
R 58.9
108 Branch, Dan
R 58.2
30 Morrison, Geanie
R 56.1
9 Paddie, Chris
R 55.5
47 Workman, Paul
R 52.9
150 Riddle, Debbie
R 52.9
55 Sheffield, Ralph
R 52.3
44 Kuempel, John
R 52.2
32 Hunter, Todd
R 51.0
133 Murphy, Jim
R 50.6
52 Gonzales, Larry
R 50.5
126 Harless, Patricia
R 50.2
127 Huberty, Dan
R 49.4
11 Clardy, Travis
R 49.3
58 Orr, Rob
R 49.1
57 Ashby, Trent
R 48.9
64 Crownover, Myra
R 48.7
114 Villalba, Jason
R 48.1
73 Miller, Doug
R 46.9
71 King, Susan
R 46.4
81 Lewis, Tryon
R 45.1
134 Davis, Sarah
R 44.7
8 Cook, Byron
R 42.0
87 Price, Four
R 41.6
115 Ratliff, Bennett
R 41.6
85 Stephenson, Phil
R 39.7
20 Farney, Marsha
R 39.6
122 Larson, Lyle
R 39.0
132 Callegari, William
R 39.0
88 King, Ken
R 38.6
21 Ritter, Allan
R 37.0
99 Geren, Charlie
R 37.0
94 Patrick, Diane
R 36.7
14 Raney, John
R 36.3
54 Aycock, Jimmie Don
R 36.2
72 Darby, Drew
R 35.7
18 Otto, John
R 35.5
60 Keffer, Jim
R 35.3
12 Kacal, Kyle
R 33.6
43 Lozano, J.M.
R 32.9
128 Smith, Wayne
R 31.4
10 Pitts, Jim
R 29.7
129 Davis, John
R 29.7
59 Sheffield, J.D.
R 27.5
28 Zerwas, John
R 25.3
SENATE
District Legislator Party 2013 Rating
4 Williams, Tommy
R 59.8
1 Eltife, Kevin
R 58.8
3 Nichols, Robert
R 58.7
24 Fraser, Troy
R 55.4
2 Deuell, Bob
R 53.1
31 Seliger, Kel
R 52.3
28 Duncan, Robert
R 48.8
Is Purple the New Red?
by Dustin Matocha
http://www.empowertexans.com/features/is-purple-the-new-red/
If Texas is such a red state, why was so much “purple” legislation passed this session? Perhaps it’s because so many Republicans in the Legislature voted so much like their Democratic counterparts, they forgot the color of the team they were on.
Professor Mark Jones, Chairman of the Department of Political Science at Rice University, offered his statistical analysis of the 83rd session in the Texas Tribune not too long ago, explaining what he described as “purple legislation” passing despite having such a “red state” mentality among voters in Texas.
Sadly, his analysis confirms what conservatives have felt all throughout the 83rd Legislature. Good conservative legislation was left in the parliamentary waste-basket, while “bi-partisan” legislation was pushed through.
This session, too many legislators were willing to go along with moderate establishment “leadership” than stand on conservative convictions.
Why? Because so many were willing to go along with moderate establishment “leadership” rather than stand on conservative convictions.
Despite having a near 2/3 majority in both chambers of the Legislature, it often felt like taxpayers could only rely on about 1/3 of the House (if that) to stand with principle, and only a handful of senators to do the same at any given time.
Some of the worst Republicans in fact voted more like Democrats than Republicans. Out of 95 Republicans in the House, 46 of them scored below a 60 on our Fiscal Responsibility Index. Reps. J.D. Sheffield (R – Gatesville) and John Zerwas (R – Simonton) were so bad, they literally scored worse than a Democrat!
In the Senate, 7 of 19 Republicans scored below a 60, with Sens. Bob Deuell (R – Greenville), Kel Seliger (R – Amarillo) and Robert Duncan (R – Lubbock) scoring worst than the top-rated Democrat.
Considering the fact that there are more Republican failures in the Legislature than Republicans scoring an 80 or above (38 to 34 respectively), it’s no wonder the Legislature produced such poor outcomes.
Here’s a list of all the Republicans below 60 on the Fiscal Responsibility Index. Taxpayers should study it closely between now and next March.
HOUSE
District Legislator Party 2013 Rating
56 Anderson, Charles
R 58.9
108 Branch, Dan
R 58.2
30 Morrison, Geanie
R 56.1
9 Paddie, Chris
R 55.5
47 Workman, Paul
R 52.9
150 Riddle, Debbie
R 52.9
55 Sheffield, Ralph
R 52.3
44 Kuempel, John
R 52.2
32 Hunter, Todd
R 51.0
133 Murphy, Jim
R 50.6
52 Gonzales, Larry
R 50.5
126 Harless, Patricia
R 50.2
127 Huberty, Dan
R 49.4
11 Clardy, Travis
R 49.3
58 Orr, Rob
R 49.1
57 Ashby, Trent
R 48.9
64 Crownover, Myra
R 48.7
114 Villalba, Jason
R 48.1
73 Miller, Doug
R 46.9
71 King, Susan
R 46.4
81 Lewis, Tryon
R 45.1
134 Davis, Sarah
R 44.7
8 Cook, Byron
R 42.0
87 Price, Four
R 41.6
115 Ratliff, Bennett
R 41.6
85 Stephenson, Phil
R 39.7
20 Farney, Marsha
R 39.6
122 Larson, Lyle
R 39.0
132 Callegari, William
R 39.0
88 King, Ken
R 38.6
21 Ritter, Allan
R 37.0
99 Geren, Charlie
R 37.0
94 Patrick, Diane
R 36.7
14 Raney, John
R 36.3
54 Aycock, Jimmie Don
R 36.2
72 Darby, Drew
R 35.7
18 Otto, John
R 35.5
60 Keffer, Jim
R 35.3
12 Kacal, Kyle
R 33.6
43 Lozano, J.M.
R 32.9
128 Smith, Wayne
R 31.4
10 Pitts, Jim
R 29.7
129 Davis, John
R 29.7
59 Sheffield, J.D.
R 27.5
28 Zerwas, John
R 25.3
SENATE
District Legislator Party 2013 Rating
4 Williams, Tommy
R 59.8
1 Eltife, Kevin
R 58.8
3 Nichols, Robert
R 58.7
24 Fraser, Troy
R 55.4
2 Deuell, Bob
R 53.1
31 Seliger, Kel
R 52.3
28 Duncan, Robert
R 48.8
Thursday, September 12, 2013
Hannah Montana Values
An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about how popular culture affects the U.S. and other countries. This follows this post about the will of the U.S. to fight terrorists. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.Hannah Montana Values
From where do you draw your values? How much does entertainment influence you?
[Steve Myers] Miley Cyrus' performance at the MTV Video Awards kind of turned the entertainment world upside down. Some have said that Hannah has left Montana. Of course, Miley Cyrus was the little girl that at one time played the Disney character of Hannah Montana, this kind of all-American cute little girl. And yet her performance this week some have characterized as something totally abrasive, something that was immoral, all kinds of adjectives have been attributed to it. And yet as we look at this scenario, can we really be surprised in the kind of world that we live in?
You know where do we obtain our values? Where does morality come from? Now this isn't an accusation against Miley Cyrus. Instead our world accepts these kinds of things. Our society, even though we say we're a people who believe in God. If you did a survey in America, probably over 90% of the people would say they believe in God. But there's a problem because the point is then, yes we may say we believe in God, but do we really believe God? When it comes to morals, when it comes to our mindset, when it comes to how we look at the world do we really look to God?
There's a wonderful Proverb that should really set the tone for our world view, for our perspective. If you look to Proverbs 2:6For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding.
See All... here's what it says, it says: "The Lord gives wisdom. From His mouth come knowledge and understanding."
So if we're really a believing people, we have to look at these kinds of sections from the Bible and say: If I believe in God, I have to have an understanding where does wisdom come from? Where does knowledge come from? Where does morality, where does understanding from? You see it shouldn't come from Hollywood. It shouldn't come from entertainment. It shouldn't come from the mindset of this world, but instead it's got to come from the pages of this word, this word of God.
And so if we say we believe in God, let's make sure we don't get tuned into the ways of this world and this entertainment that surrounds us and invades us. Instead let's look to the word of God and believe God.
That's BT Daily . We'll see you next time.
New Amnesty supporting GOP lawmakers detected: Hit em hard
A very interesting post from www.Alipac.US about GOP Representatives that FACEBOOK analyzes as leaning towards amnesty with all of their microtargeting. This follows this post about the Roman Catholic Church’s push on increasing immigration to hurt America’s poor. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what you can do click here and you can read two very interesting books HERE.
New Amnesty supporting GOP lawmakers detected: Hit em hard
by
ALIPAC
Wow, we really got a big response out of the biased liberal publications like Huffington Post and other George Soros backed groups yesterday when we hit www.FWD.us and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook and pointed out how illegal aliens are trying to hijack our government like terrorists trying to take over a plane cockpit!
Yes, it is true that the 9/11 terrorists exploited our immigration laws and security gaps to attack America, and while you may not term them "illegal immigrants," illegal immigrants do the same when they break into America or overstay visas and then go on to steal taxpayer resources, steal an American job, or brutalize or kill an American citizen.
So many readers of these biased liberal propaganda machines supporting Amnesty seem shocked by our statement that thousands of Americans are being killed by illegal aliens each year, but this is a fact! Our government's failure to secure our borders, track visa overstays, and adequately enforce our existing immigration laws is resulting in the deaths of thousands of Americans each year, and publications like the Huffington Post do their best to both conceal these mass atrocities and attack any messenger of truth that would highlight them.
This is exactly what happened yesterday on 9/11 2013 about an hour after our e-mail went out to you. ALIPAC being hit by opposition anti aircraft fire tells us we are over the correct targets!
We have more good news to report beyond the fact that we generated quite a response from the Amnesty traitors yesterday.
We discovered 4 more GOP lawmakers over at Mark Zuckerberg's pro Amnesty organization FWD.us that we think may go their way on Amnesty legislation this year all thanks to your efforts!
Many of you were NOT ABLE TO GET A RESPONSE BECAUSE IT APPEARS ZUCKERBERG'S SITE STOPPED GIVING US THE NAMES OF THE TURNCOATS ONCE THEY FOUND OUT WE WERE MAPPING THAT INFORMATION.
But here are 4 more names to add to our DC amnesty sellout list.. Spencer Bauchus, Pete King, Devin Nunes, and John Carter
Step 1: Call, email, fax, tweet, and Facebook post to each of these Amnesty supporting lawmakers we have detected via the opposition site fwd.us. Remember that each office will deny supporting Amnesty, but you must hold them to it.
Step 2: Call in and post your own personalized and distinctive version of our sample message. Do not copy our sample message as it will be discarded or filtered out unless you rewrite it your way.
"I am writing/calling Congressman _____ to say I am very disappointed to learn he is supporting Amnesty for illegal aliens and that Mark Zuckerberg's group FWD.us is asking illegal alien supporters to call him to thank him for supporting Comprehensive Immigration Reform Amnesty! Your office needs to listen to American citizens like me and not cheap labor advocates and illegal aliens. Legalizing illegal immigrants will only lead to more illegal immigration, more losses and hardships for American citizens, and a loss of any future border or immigration law control. Stop supporting Zuckerberg's Amnesty now!"
Hit them hard on the phones, their Twitter accounts, and their Facebook pages this week and don't let up!
4 New GOP Amnesty Supporters Detected Via Opposition Website www.Fwd.us
Spencer Bauchus
Twitter-- @BachusAL06
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/SpencerBachus
Website-- http://bachus.house.gov/index.php?op...tpage&Itemid=1
Washington Office
2246 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(p) 202-225-4921
(f) 202-225-2082
Email: https://forms.house.gov/write/bachus/email-me.shtml
Birmingham Office
1900 International Park Dr.
Suite 107
Birmingham, AL 35243
(p) 205-969-2296
(f) 205-969-3958
Clanton Office
703 2nd Ave. North
P.O. Box 502
Clanton, Al 35046
(p) 205-280-0704
(f) 205-280-3060
Pete King
Twitter-- @RepPeteKing
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/reppeteking
Email-- pete.king@mail.house.gov
Website-- http://peteking.house.gov/
Washington, DC Office
339 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
phone: (202) 225-7896
fax: (202) 226-2279
Email: https://peteking.house.gov/contact/email-me
Massapequa Park District Office
1003 Park Boulevard
Massapequa Park, NY 11762
phone: (516) 541-4225
fax: (516) 541-6602
Devin Nunes
Twitter -- @DevinNunes (personal account)
Also -- @Rep_DevinNunes
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/pages/Devin-Nunes/376470350795
Website-- http://www.house.gov/nunes/
Washington, D.C.
Longworth House Office Building
Suite 1013
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2523
Fax: 202-225-3404
Email: https://nunes.house.gov/contactform/default.aspx
Visalia Office
113 North Church Street
Suite 208
Visalia, CA 93291
Phone: 559-733-3861
Fax: 559-733-3865
Clovis Office
264 Clovis Avenue
Suite 206
Clovis, CA 93612
Phone: 559-323-5235
Fax: 559-323-5528
Key Staff
Johnny Amaral
Chief of Staff
Phone: 202-225-2523
Fax: 202-225-3404
John Carter
Twitter-- @JudgeCarter
also @RepJohnCarter
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/JudgeJohnCarter
Website-- http://carter.house.gov/
Washington, D.C. Office
409 C.H.O.B.
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3864
Email: https://carterforms.house.gov/email-john2
Round Rock District Office
One Financial Centre
1717 North IH 35
Suite 303
Round Rock, TX 78664
(512) 246-1600
Bell County Office
6544B S. General Bruce Drive
Temple, TX 76502
Located next to the DPS office
(254) 933-1392
We will fight these illegal alien supporters on the phones, in the town hall meetings, and in the social media arena! We will fight these invaders and their supporters on every political and communications front.
We will continue to end our e-mail alerts with the same battle cry we have used for more than 7 years now!
Let's Roll!
William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team
www.alipac.us
www.AgainstAmnesty.com
New Amnesty supporting GOP lawmakers detected: Hit em hard
by
ALIPAC
Wow, we really got a big response out of the biased liberal publications like Huffington Post and other George Soros backed groups yesterday when we hit www.FWD.us and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook and pointed out how illegal aliens are trying to hijack our government like terrorists trying to take over a plane cockpit!
Yes, it is true that the 9/11 terrorists exploited our immigration laws and security gaps to attack America, and while you may not term them "illegal immigrants," illegal immigrants do the same when they break into America or overstay visas and then go on to steal taxpayer resources, steal an American job, or brutalize or kill an American citizen.
So many readers of these biased liberal propaganda machines supporting Amnesty seem shocked by our statement that thousands of Americans are being killed by illegal aliens each year, but this is a fact! Our government's failure to secure our borders, track visa overstays, and adequately enforce our existing immigration laws is resulting in the deaths of thousands of Americans each year, and publications like the Huffington Post do their best to both conceal these mass atrocities and attack any messenger of truth that would highlight them.
This is exactly what happened yesterday on 9/11 2013 about an hour after our e-mail went out to you. ALIPAC being hit by opposition anti aircraft fire tells us we are over the correct targets!
We have more good news to report beyond the fact that we generated quite a response from the Amnesty traitors yesterday.
We discovered 4 more GOP lawmakers over at Mark Zuckerberg's pro Amnesty organization FWD.us that we think may go their way on Amnesty legislation this year all thanks to your efforts!
Many of you were NOT ABLE TO GET A RESPONSE BECAUSE IT APPEARS ZUCKERBERG'S SITE STOPPED GIVING US THE NAMES OF THE TURNCOATS ONCE THEY FOUND OUT WE WERE MAPPING THAT INFORMATION.
But here are 4 more names to add to our DC amnesty sellout list.. Spencer Bauchus, Pete King, Devin Nunes, and John Carter
Step 1: Call, email, fax, tweet, and Facebook post to each of these Amnesty supporting lawmakers we have detected via the opposition site fwd.us. Remember that each office will deny supporting Amnesty, but you must hold them to it.
Step 2: Call in and post your own personalized and distinctive version of our sample message. Do not copy our sample message as it will be discarded or filtered out unless you rewrite it your way.
"I am writing/calling Congressman _____ to say I am very disappointed to learn he is supporting Amnesty for illegal aliens and that Mark Zuckerberg's group FWD.us is asking illegal alien supporters to call him to thank him for supporting Comprehensive Immigration Reform Amnesty! Your office needs to listen to American citizens like me and not cheap labor advocates and illegal aliens. Legalizing illegal immigrants will only lead to more illegal immigration, more losses and hardships for American citizens, and a loss of any future border or immigration law control. Stop supporting Zuckerberg's Amnesty now!"
Hit them hard on the phones, their Twitter accounts, and their Facebook pages this week and don't let up!
4 New GOP Amnesty Supporters Detected Via Opposition Website www.Fwd.us
Spencer Bauchus
Twitter-- @BachusAL06
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/SpencerBachus
Website-- http://bachus.house.gov/index.php?op...tpage&Itemid=1
Washington Office
2246 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(p) 202-225-4921
(f) 202-225-2082
Email: https://forms.house.gov/write/bachus/email-me.shtml
Birmingham Office
1900 International Park Dr.
Suite 107
Birmingham, AL 35243
(p) 205-969-2296
(f) 205-969-3958
Clanton Office
703 2nd Ave. North
P.O. Box 502
Clanton, Al 35046
(p) 205-280-0704
(f) 205-280-3060
Pete King
Twitter-- @RepPeteKing
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/reppeteking
Email-- pete.king@mail.house.gov
Website-- http://peteking.house.gov/
Washington, DC Office
339 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
phone: (202) 225-7896
fax: (202) 226-2279
Email: https://peteking.house.gov/contact/email-me
Massapequa Park District Office
1003 Park Boulevard
Massapequa Park, NY 11762
phone: (516) 541-4225
fax: (516) 541-6602
Devin Nunes
Twitter -- @DevinNunes (personal account)
Also -- @Rep_DevinNunes
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/pages/Devin-Nunes/376470350795
Website-- http://www.house.gov/nunes/
Washington, D.C.
Longworth House Office Building
Suite 1013
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2523
Fax: 202-225-3404
Email: https://nunes.house.gov/contactform/default.aspx
Visalia Office
113 North Church Street
Suite 208
Visalia, CA 93291
Phone: 559-733-3861
Fax: 559-733-3865
Clovis Office
264 Clovis Avenue
Suite 206
Clovis, CA 93612
Phone: 559-323-5235
Fax: 559-323-5528
Key Staff
Johnny Amaral
Chief of Staff
Phone: 202-225-2523
Fax: 202-225-3404
John Carter
Twitter-- @JudgeCarter
also @RepJohnCarter
Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/JudgeJohnCarter
Website-- http://carter.house.gov/
Washington, D.C. Office
409 C.H.O.B.
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3864
Email: https://carterforms.house.gov/email-john2
Round Rock District Office
One Financial Centre
1717 North IH 35
Suite 303
Round Rock, TX 78664
(512) 246-1600
Bell County Office
6544B S. General Bruce Drive
Temple, TX 76502
Located next to the DPS office
(254) 933-1392
We will fight these illegal alien supporters on the phones, in the town hall meetings, and in the social media arena! We will fight these invaders and their supporters on every political and communications front.
We will continue to end our e-mail alerts with the same battle cry we have used for more than 7 years now!
Let's Roll!
William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team
www.alipac.us
www.AgainstAmnesty.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
