Monthly Archives: July 2012

Taking the Black Vote for Granted?

Today, the Black Pastors Coalition met.

Christians, in general, are not too happy about the idea of same sex marriage. It goes against their beliefs. It wasn’t that long ago that President Obama professed these same beliefs. The Black Pastors Coalition was excited to endorse this president.

But, times have changed. An election is upcoming. Votes are needed. And suddenly President Obama is quite in favor of same sex marriage. This new policy might rally the far left but has it alienated the Black voters? Maybe.

The Black Pastors Coalition, led by Reverend William Owens, met today. They are very unhappy with a policy that goes against their biblical principles.

They say they are not going to back down on this matter. And they are organizing a national campaign aimed to ‘save the family.’ Rev. Owens was joined at a press conference by five other black pastors who say there are over 3,700 African-American pastors joining together for an anti-Obama campaign.

There is a large portion of the Black voting population who are people of faith. What will be the impact of the coalition’s campaign? Has this president taken the Black vote for granted?

Obamacare: States Cut Medicaid Dollars

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation (via Kaiser Health News) sixteen states are now limiting the number of prescription drugs each month. Seven of the states have made these adjustments in the past two years.

The limits vary across the country. For example, Mississippi has a limit of two brand-name drugs. In Arkansas adults are limited to up six drugs a month.

Doctors fear the state’s cost-cutting move could backfire on patients, who have to get state permission to go beyond the limit.

KHN: “We understand the state is trying to get its Medicaid budget under control,” says Dr. William Werner, president of the Illinois State Medical Society. “But our concern is it not be a hardship for patients and a hassle for doctors in the execution.”

States with Medicaid drug limits are Alabama, Arkansas, California, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.

KHN: Doctors in these states are concerned that some of their patients will not be able to find generic replacement drugs. Jarod Speer, a family doctor in Alabama is concerned that his patients with asthma and other lung diseases face limited options for medications that are not available in generic form.

Additionally, thirteen states are cutting Medicaid to balance their budgets. Medicaid services will be trimmed through reduction of benefits, eligibility, paying health providers. This happens even as the Affordable Health Care Act prepares to expand coverage for as many as 17 million people.

This year’s reductions come on the heels of more extensive cuts last year, threatening to limit access for additional millions.

KHN: “With more people on Medicaid, states will have to continue to ratchet down payments and limit services,” says Nina Owcharenko, director of the center for health policy studies at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Some worry the cuts to doctors and hospitals could make it more difficult to expand the state-federal program in 2014, as called for by the federal health law.  Providers may be unwilling to accept new Medicaid patients due to the reduced payments from the states.

Health Care Reform is necessary. But a review of these cuts should bring up many questions about the Affordable Health Care Act.

Provider Cuts


Detail of Provider, Benefit or Eligibility Cuts


Cut fees to doctors and dentists by 10 percent. Eliminated eyeglass coverage; limited brand name drugs for most adults to one drug a month (exempted are long-term-care patients and HIV and psychiatric drugs) through July 31, after which the limit will be four brand-name drugs a month; cut routine eye exams from once every two years to once every three.


Cut payments to private hospitals by $150 million; froze rates for payments to nursing homes; cut fees to clinical laboratories by 10 percent. Added $15 co-pay for non-emergency ER use and $1 and $3 co-pays for certain drugs. (Source: California 2012-13 State Budget)


Cut nursing home rates by 1.5 percent. Limited orthodontics coverage, added some co-pays and enrollment fees to its Children’s Health Insurance Program based on family income. (Source: Colo. Dept. of Health Care Policy & Financing)


Preparing to seek federal approval to eliminate coverage for adults with assets exceeding $10,000 (excludes home and one car), and to count parental income and assets for adult children aged 19 to 25 who live with their parents.


Cut hospital rates by 5.6 percent, and nursing home rates by 1.3 percent. Seeking federal approval to limit home health visits for non-pregnant adults to no more than three per day, primary care visits to no more than two per month and ER coverage to a maximum of six visits per year.


Reduced eligibility for non-pregnant adults from 200 percent of poverty level ($46,100 for family of four) to 133 percent ($30,656 for family of four)..


Cut fees to health providers, except physicians and dentists, by 2.7 percent. Cut payments to non-safety net hospitals by 3.5 percent. Reduced parents’ eligibility from 185 percent of federal poverty level ($42,642 for family of four) to 133 percent ($30,656 for family of four) to eliminate more than 25,000 people from the program; increased co-pays for drugs; limited prescriptions to four a month, with state permission needed for more; added a $3.65 fee for nonemergency ER use; eliminated chiropractic coverage and regular dental care for adults. Pregnant women are exempt from co-pays. (Source: Ill. Dept. of Healthcare & Family Services)


Cut fees to doctors (primary care excluded) by 3.4 percent, cut fees to dentists by 3.7 percent, cut mental health providers by 1.9 percent and cut fees to dialysis centers by 3.7 percent.


Planning to seek federal approval to eliminate coverage for 19- and 20-year-olds and to reduce eligibility for parents from 200 percent of poverty level ($46,100 for family of four) to 100 percent of poverty level (23,050 for family of four). Also eliminated coverage for ambulatory surgery centers, sexually transmitted disease clinics and coverage of smoking cessation products, except for pregnant women.


Cut fees to nursing homes by 2 percent and to hospitals by 1 percent.

New Hampshire

Cut payments to hospitals by $160 million.

South Dakota

Added a $1,000 annual limit for non-emergency dental services for adults. Implemented a $1 co-pay for generic drugs and increased co-pays for brand name drugs to $3.30.


Eliminated coverage for non-pregnant adults over 133 percent of the federal poverty level ($30,656 for family of four) if they are offered affordable coverage by their employers; added or increased monthly premiums for some non-pregnant adults; eliminated presumptive eligibility for adults. (Sources: Wis. Dept. Of Health Services news release and update)
Graph reprinted with permission from Kaiser Health News

No More Mr. Nice Mitt

Mitt Romney has been around politics all of his life. His father, George Romney, was governor of Michigan and ran for president in 1968. His mother, Lenore, also ran for office, losing a tough Senate race against incumbent Senator Phil Hart (D-Michigan) in 1970. According to the Times, which headlined its June issue with a story about Romney’s relationship with his mother, Mitt has followed more in the footsteps of Lenore than George.

George Romney was a more ferocious figure than Mitt has become. He was less inclined to hold back his true feelings, a tendency that backfired at times, as in his strident opposition to the Vietnam War. Lenore Romney, on the other hand, though no less commanding than her husband, was said to be more cautious. She was more accommodating than confrontational in her character, and she approached politics accordingly. Like his mother, Mitt is also cautious, and fearful of making mistakes. He prefers predictability and civility to spontaneity and brashness. Ironically, his careful nature sometimes makes him seem awkward and robotic.

The Romney campaign, like most campaigns, reflects the character of its figure head. Romney’s campaign has highlighted his business experience, (how captivating?) portraying him as the pragmatic manager eager and ready to solve America’s economic problems. His campaign managers believe this persona contrasts well with Barack Obama’s image as a detached intellectual, a man who is cerebral but fails to understand how the real world works.

Mitt’s message may strongly appeal to effusive conservatives like Sean Hannity, who is already convinced that defeating Obama, a president presiding over an anemic economy, a failed stimulus package, a high unemployment rate, swelling welfare rolls, and a litany of public relations disasters – from Fast and Furious to Solyndra – will be a walk in the park. But Romney’s campaign has been lackluster, evoking no feeling and missing any real or compelling narrative that can rival Obama’s.

Romney’s campaign strategy thus far smacks of another failed presidential campaign, that of John Kerry in 2004. The Kerry campaign arrogantly dismissed Bush as a reckless dullard who unwittingly led America into the failed and unpopular Iraq War. They discounted Bush’s political acumen and personal appeal. The Left promoted John Kerry as the perfect alternative: in sharp contrast to Bush, Kerry was articulate, a seasoned diplomat, and a decorated war veteran.

But Kerry never moved America. He seemed above it all, remote from real Americans and disinclined to get into the trenches and inspire people to vote for him, other than saying “I’m not Bush.” Bush on the other hand, appeared genuine, oozed commonness, and connected with the average American.

That’s not the whole story of course. Kerry’s very strength, his laurels as a war veteran and his opposition to the Iraq War, was shredded by the Bush team. Karl Rove and company adroitly disfigured Kerry’s image as an upright war hero, recasting Kerry’s outspoken opposition to Vietnam as unpatriotic and questioning his wartime exploits. They also characterized Kerry as a flip-flopper, someone apt to change his position (supporting then opposing the Iraq war). Sound familiar?

Obama’s campaign has followed a similar strategy. The Obama team has utterly eviscerated Romney’s persona, flooding the airways with blistering attack ads tearing Romney apart for his time at Bane Capital, unreleased tax returns, and offshore bank accounts. Romney has not countered these attacks well, reacting defensively and deflecting rather than engaging. The tone of the campaign has been dictated by Obama, not Romney.

Romney will not win this campaign by default. He must roll up his sleeves and hit back if he wants to win. Team Romney must ramp up their own attacks, focus on Obama the person, not just the president. Romney should not jab at Obama but strike at him directly, paint Obama as the socialist, the Ivory Tower Liberal, and the anti-American. And Mitt must verbalize these criticisms himself, not some amorphous surrogate.

Then he must put forth a simple and concrete vision of America, divorced completely from Obama’s. Mitt Romney must tell Americans why he is the man to lead them back from the brink. He must forget about comparing himself to Obama and start communicating to the frustrated, angry, and struggling Americans desperate for change. Obama had “Hope and Change.” Romney needs something similar and ideally more substantive.

Mitt needs, to some extent, to throw caution to the wind. The political atmosphere is charged, not neutral. America is a country enshrouded in uncertainty, waning in confidence, and wanting in leadership. Mitt must recognize that he is not running for Governor in Massachusetts. He is no longer vying for the GOP nomination. Before, all he had to do was hold serve. Now, he needs to serve some aces.

Essentially, Mitt needs to channel his inner George. The American people must get to know this man. Mitt should eschew his reserved nice guy but unfeeling and artificial exterior and confront his critics directly, answer questions about his past pointedly, take assertive positions. Don’t dither and equivocate. Running for president is a big undertaking, and boldness wins elections, not timid fear of mistakes.

Cameron Macgregor is a former Naval officer and USNA grad. His is writing his first book.


Antonio Villaraigosa: America’s First Latino President?

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa is a long-time supporter of the current occupier in chief.  Over the course of the past year Villaraigosa has done no less than 20 official or campaign events on the White House’s behalf.  He will be in the national spotlight when he gavels the opening of the 2012 Democratic National Convention in September.

Questions are already being raised about whether Villaraigosa, mayor of the country’s second largest city and part of the rapidly growing Hispanic population, has presidential aspirations.

“The answer is no.  The job I’ve said to people I would like is I would like to be governor of the state of California” he said.

As did his hero during the 2008 presidential campaign, Villaraigosa demonstrates enough politically savvy to paint himself as a centrist.  He has publically expressed support for the Simpson-Bowles Commission and concerns over the strength of government sector unions.  Much like those of his idol in the White House, Villaraigosa’s expressions of concern are empty rhetoric.

In the state of California, a growing number of cities are teetering on the brink of or have already filed for bankruptcy.  Mammoth Lakes, Vallejo, Stockton, Compton, Bell and San Bernardino are all guilty of mishandling their finances.  They have spent years shuffling monies from fund to fund in attempts to hide huge budget deficits.  The city of Los Angeles is right there with them.

“The enemy is algebra” says San Jose city councilman Sam Liccardo, a Democrat.   “The fact is the unions own the Democratic Party” he said.  Government employee unions call the shots for the Democratic Party in California.  California’s widespread, growing fiscal problems are directly tied to the corrupt quid quo pro relationship between government sector unions, the Democratic politicians they elect, and the ballooning costs of government sector union salaries, benefits and pensions.  “Party orthodoxy is much more strictly enforced at the state level, because the unions decide who wins and who loses” said Liccardo.

There is a solution: San Diego, a California city that is projecting five years of budget surpluses, addressed their biggest fiscal concern by switching most of its government union pensions to a 401(k)-style plan.

Villaraigosa talks tough about fiscal matters and reining in the power of government sector unions, but as mayor of Los Angeles, his actions belied his words.  As mayor of the country’s second largest city, Villaraigosa has never led any such action, has never made any such attempt, never proposed any such policy.

Villaraigosa caused great concern when he openly spoke of bankruptcy in regards to the fiscal future of Los Angeles.  Says Kevin James, a stalwart Republican fiscal Conservative running to replace him: “He says a bankruptcy won’t happen under his watch, but his watch is over in a few months. He didn’t say anything about what happens after that.”

Do not be misled by the centrist smokescreen.  Villaraigosa is as “progressive” as Democrats come, which is to say that he is as much a radical fringe leftist as are House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and the current Oval Office occupant.  The outgoing L.A. mayor’s expressed support for Simpson-Bowles is undoubtedly rooted in the Commissions’ willingness to raise taxes…not exactly a trail blazing innovative position for a “progressive” to take.

Villaraigosa has been a corrupt, free spending, fiscally irresponsible mayor in Los Angeles.  Despite protestations to the contrary, there is no evidence to support the conclusion that he would make anything but an equally disastrous choice for either governor or president.

Tonight on the Dark Side with Kira Davis

7/31/12  We’ll talk about Romney’s trip, Tuesday’s voting results and stories that are probably a little more important than Chick-Fil-A but aren’t getting coverage. Tune in tonight at 7pm Pacific/10pmEST on the CDNews Network on BlogTalk Radio.

UPDATE: Journalist and Breitbart contributor Brandon Darby will join me to discuss his investigation and recent report on human trafficking (one of the stories that does not receive nearly enough coverage). Don’t miss this!

Missed the show? Listen to or download the full episode right here.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on Blog Talk Radio

Obamacare Costs $1.9 Trillion AND Still Leaves 30 Million Uninsured

I need to know how many quality years this patient has left STAT

Since the 5-4 decision to uphold Obamacare as constitutional through the taxing authority of Congress, the CBO gave their final grade. .  But it’s not biggie.  This entire overhaul is “deficit neutral” and will save money in the long run.  That’s what the Left try to sell us.  Even Joe Six Pack knows that something can’t be deficit neutral when you spend over a $1 trillion dollars on a new entitlement program.  As Jeffrey Anderson of The Weekly Standard wrote on July 27:

So, what — besides less liberty — would Americans get for their $1,930,000,000,000 and change?  Well, the CBO now says that Obamacare would cause between 4 and 6 million Americans to lose their employer-sponsored insurance, writing, “Between 4 million and 6 million fewer people are estimated to have coverage through an employer, compared with coverage in the absence of the [Affordable Care Act].”

Moreover, the CBO and/or the Medicare chief actuary have previously said that Obamacare would raise health insurance premiums, would raise overall U.S. health costs, would raise taxes on Americans and on American businesses, and would siphon something approaching $1 trillion (from 2014 through 2023) out of Medicare.  In the process (according to the Medicare chief actuary), Obamacare would reduce reimbursement rates for Medicare providers to the point where they’d be lower even than the notoriously low reimbursement rates paid to Medicaid providers — therefore jeopardizing seniors’ access to care.  Oh, and Obamacare would also establish the unelected and largely unaccountable 15-member Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) to institute further Medicare cuts.

Lastly, one of the most intrusive pieces of legislation will still leave 30 million uninsured a decade from now.

However, we shouldn’t be surprised. The CBO reported back in March that 20 million could lose their coverage as a result of Obama’s health care takeover.  Heritage’s Mike Brownfield cited this report on March 16 in The Foundry:

In one of the CBO’s reported scenarios20 million Americans could lose their employer-sponsored health benefits, and 49 million more Americans could become dependent on government-sponsored health care. And it won’t come cheaply for American taxpayers. Projecting through 2022, Obamacare could cost as much as $2.134 trillion, and individual and employer mandate penalties could hit $221 billion.

Then there’s the issue of the unconstitutional individual mandate that forces Americans to buy government dictated health insurance or pay a penalty, as well as the anti-conscience mandate that religious employers, including schools, hospitals, and charities, must provide abortion-inducing drugs and contraception despite the fact that such services totally contradict many of these groups’ core religious beliefs.

Under Obamacare, costs will go up, people will lose the coverage they have, and quality of care will decline. Individuals and businesses will face penalties, seniors will feel the effects of Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare, doctors will suffer from increased regulation and lower government reimbursement for services, taxpayers will face new taxes, jobs will be lost, millions of Americans will remain uninsured and stuck in overcrowded emergency rooms, religious institutions and the faithful will suffer the loss of their religious liberties, and future generations will pay the costs.

While the cost of this bill is astronomical, the scary number for me is 49 million.  An additional 49 million Americans dependent on government run health care services, which coupled with the 67 million Americans already receiving funds from at least one federal program, is a staggering 116 million people who need Washington to survive.  If you don’t believe the political left is pushing a pernicious dependency agenda, you’re insane.  Obamacare is a cornerstone in their lust to make everyone dependent on government since a federal program is considered, by liberals, to be an inherent good and an equalizer in outcomes.  Note that opportunity has become a fossilized term in the lexicon of the far left.

However, since Obamacare is the largest tax increase in history, especially for middle class families, let’s see what we all owe Uncle Sam and the consequences we will have to endure in the coming years compliments of Alyene Senger.


  • 20 million. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that as many as 20 million Americans could no longer have their current employer-based health coverage by 2019; others predict it could be as high as 35 million.
  • 85 million. The Office of the Actuary at CMS estimates that, by 2020, Medicaid enrollment will increase from 54 million in 2010 to 85 million, pushing America closer to government-run health care.
  • 400 percent of the federal poverty level. Individuals earning over $44,680 a year and families earning over $92,200 a year are not eligible for any federal subsidies to help purchase coverage under Obamacare.
  • $1 trillion. Based on an updated CBO score, Obamacare imposes 18 new taxes or penalties totaling over $1 trillion from 2013 to 2022 that will directly or indirectly impact families, including those earning below $250,000.
  • 8.1.2012. Starting August 1, Obamacare forces many employers, regardless of their religious or moral convictions, to offer abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception.
  • $1.683 trillion. Obamacare expects to spend over one-and-a-half trillion dollars between 2012 and 2022 on its coverage expansion provisions alone, according to the CBO.
  • 30 million. Updated CBO estimates show that despite spending over a trillion dollars, Obamacare will leave 30 million Americans uninsured in 2021.
  • $716 billion. Although Medicare faces $37 trillion in unfunded obligations, Obamacare takes $716 billion out of Medicare to pay for non-Medicare coverage provisions, according to CBO’s latest update.
  • 15. The number of unelected officials that will be in charge of cutting Medicare payments for millions of seniors under the Independent Payment Advisory Board in Obamacare.
  • 50.8 percent. The majority of Americans continue to support repeal. The Real Clear Politics Average from March 10, 2012, to July 28, 2012, shows that voters support repeal by an 8-point margin.

Repeal needs to be the primary initiative for a, God willing, Romney administration with the help of a Republican Congress.  No time to debate with squishy Republicans.  The Obama administration has raised the Dependency Index by 23% in two years.  That’s where the 67 million new dependents come from.

In addition, almost half the nation doesn’t pay income taxes.  We’re dealing with a larger proportion of a dependent demographic that’s subsidized by a smaller and smaller tax base. A tax base that the political left feels it can squeeze more revenue out of and still maintain its social welfare commitments, which, as George Will astutely noted, is the flawed logic of trying to leap a chasm in two bounds. To complicate matters, the president holds a deep antipathy towards small business owners and the wealthy, who are also known as the job creating and investing class.  A class that pays 70% of all the income taxes filed. They’re the ones who keep the dependents alive and will  pay for this new entitlement program nobody wants, but will keep the Democratic base of freeloaders pacified. With the cost of $1.9 trillion dollars and about the same number of uninsured as we have right now a decade out, it’s just another episode highlighting the failure of big government policies.

Epic Beckfest, Restoring Love, Wraps Up in Dallas with Music Concert, History Lesson and Serve-Your-Neighbor Call to Action; but no Chalkboards.

Conservative Radio Host Glenn Beck

Did anybody see the epic Beckfest known as Restoring Love this weekend in Dallas? Business Insider has pictures. National Conservative Radio Host Glenn Beck wrapped up his three-part series with a history lesson, music concert, performance and monumental serve-your-neighbor call to action, with just a hint of what is to come in the future. Absent from the event was Beck’s renowned chalkboards. Oh well.

This event, Restoring Love, was billed as the final installment of the trilogy that began with Beck’s Restoring Honor in Washington D.C. and continued with Restoring Courage in Jerusalem, (the capital of Israel.) Knowing Beck, it was going to be big. He worried aloud for months on whether or not he was going to fill the ginormous stadium he was renting, but not only managed, but sold out two other events as well, the Freedomworks Free Pac and the Women’s Conference as well.

What struck me was not the enormity of the event. Beck, like Sarah Palin, always garners huge crowds. So many showed up ready not to just be entertained and inspired, but to help. Beck boasted Saturday that thousands showed up to participate in service training and stuffed semi-trucks bound for eleven US cities to help the poor. These trucks were filled to the brim with food and clothing meant to help needy families and the volunteers who showed up at Restoring Love were responsible for filling those trucks with their labor and donations.

On Saturday Beck deliberately pokes President Barack Obama and other leftist politicians square in the eye with the admonition that Americans don’t need permission to help their neighbor and won’t be stopped, referring to municipal governments around the country that have actually blocked charities from helping the poor.

Beck also alluded that this event, though big, is not the end of service. Every day from now on is an opportunity to build on what was begun. Beck also hinted at an event and partnership with Freedomworks coming up in Ohio in the very near future.

Those who missed the Restoring Love event can view some of the speeches at The Daily Beck You Tube site where the creator has posted many of Glenn’s past programs, including speeches this weekend. Some of the most pivotal are the comments from dynamic speakers like C.L. Bryant, whose movie Runaway Slave comes out in theaters very shortly. Dana Loesch gave a moving speech as did Deneen Borelli, John Fund, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Rand Paul. The cast was diverse which should raise the ire of pc cops who continually unfairly call Beck a racist.

I especially enjoyed Beck’s use of props, though sadly, the chalkboards were absent. Lincoln’s writing desk, John Wilkes Booth’s handwritten manifesto, an original painting of George Washington praying, the Liberty Bell, a $2 million baseball card. All of these showed the incredible greatness of America as well as our scars. Moments of history both good and bad propelled us into The Now and shapes our future. It is our turn to make a legacy for those who come after us.

Westboro Baptist protestors -photo by Rebekah Phelps-Beck via Twitter

As noticeably absent as the chalkboards was any commentary on the MSM about the Beckstock. What media there was seemed to comment on the negative, like the Westboro Baptist Church cook-heads who showed up outside to protest “Love”. Fox News in Dallas wrote a paragraph or two about the Westboro cooks with no analysis and left it at that. Unfortunately for us, or fortunately as your perspective dictates, there are some good analysis from a blog called Rip and Reader, which is sourced heavily in Glenn Beck’s own Internet Publication, The Blaze.

Rip and Reader includes quotes from Westburo which I find interesting. They claim that Beck is a false prophet who has stated his hate for God, to which I say, “show me the money? Show me the proof!”

I think a lot of Beck haters despise his rather unique version of American Religion and his Mormonism. I’ve researched Mormonism and I don’t agree with their theology, I’ll say that right now. But Beck has never made pronouncements on the deeper theological points of Mormonism that separate them from other Christian denominations. Beck’s version of American Religion seems shaped by values we all can share; faith, family, service, patriotism. I’ve not once heard Beck say anything against faith or God.

Whether or not you are a person of faith or not, whether or not you find yourself on the political left, right or middle, the Beckorama event poses some interesting questions that may have interesting diverse individual answers. Where do we as a nation go from here? Beck says, are you going to be a person who pushes ahead and does good, or are you one who embraces anger and stays on the couch, (paraphrase)?

Beck bemoans the fact that one of his mentors, a spiritual mentor for the country really, Billy Graham, could not attend. While that would have been nice to see Mr. Graham, I don’t think the event could have been much improved upon. After all, it wasn’t about one man and a personality, it was about us as Americans and the world wide Freedom Movement.

What’s next?

Chinese ‘Angel’ Rescues 30 Abandoned Babies

Translationg: ‘It is forbidden to discriminate against, mistreat or abandon baby girls’

The story of a Chinese ‘angel’ has come to the international stage after details of her rescue of 30 abandoned Chinese babies came to light.

Hailed as a hero, Lou Xiaoying, now 88 and suffering from kidney failure, found and helped raise 30 abandoned Chinese babies in the Eastern China as she struggled to make a living recycling rubbish.

The first child was found in 1972. She and her husband kept four children and passed others on to family and friends. Her youngest son Zhan Qilin, now 7, was found when Lou was 82.

DailyMail: “Even though I was already getting old I could not simply ignore the baby and leave him to die in the trash. He looked so sweet and so needy. I had to take him home with me,” she said.

I took him back to our home, which is a very small modest house in the countryside and nursed him to health. He is now a thriving little boy, who is happy and healthy.

My older children all help look after Zhang Qilin, he is very special to all of us. I named him after the Chinese word for rare and precious.”

China introduced its ‘policy of birth planning’ in 1978 to slow the country’s population explosion. Married couples are restricted to having one child. Those who follow the rules can receive an additional month’s salary every year until the child turns 14. The Chinese government claims that the policy has probably prevented more than 400 million births and in 2010 it was reported that for every 120 boys born there are 100 girls.

Critics inside China and around the world have condemned the policy and accused the government of enforcing abortions. Despite the fact that it is illegal to kill newborn babies in the country, female infanticide and the failure to report female births is widely suspected, especially in rural areas. Faced with governmental punishment many newborns are thought to be abandoned in dumpsters.

DailyMail: One fan of Lou explained: “She is shaming to governments, schools and people who stand by and do nothing. She has no money or power but she saved children from death or worse.’

‘In the local community she is well known and well respected for her work with the abandoned babies. She does her best. She is a local hero. But unfortunately there are far too many abandoned babies in China who have no hope of survival.”

This woman, poor by most standards, found the ability and means to give these 30 abandoned babies a second chance.

For more pictures visit: Whatsonshenzhen.

Brandon Darby Exposes Negligence At DOJ In Handling Child Sex Slaves

Brandon Darby

Former left wing activist and Breitbart contributor Brandon Darby opined a disturbing column on July 30th detailing his efforts to get the FBI and the Department of Justice to act more diligently on child sex trafficking in the United States.  The findings point to outright negligence.

The column, which is featured in Townhall Magazine, is prefaced by the notion that this isn’t a hit piece.  It’s based on facts and from information ascertained by serious people who are in the FBI or work for them.  One of them being another FBI asset named Dottie Laster, who helped Darby in this investigation.

Darby states that problems with pursuing a full investigation into sex trafficking of minors partially rested with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  They seem to have problems coordinating, which is a typical problem in government. In fact, as Darby found out, any law enforcement agency receiving federal funds was required to inform ICE of any investigation involving human trafficking. A point of fact rendered moot by ICE’s penchant to go solo on raids.

In all, “ICE has a very thin charter, and removing possible illegal aliens took priority over prosecutable cases. If ICE engaged in a raid too soon, the local agency investigating the possible human trafficking was left with little evidence for prosecutions and therefore wasted much needed dollars and work hours. The end result of this dynamic was human traffickers walking away with little consequence, free to continue their enterprise, and law enforcement agencies that shied away from launching such investigations.”

However, concerning the FBI, which Darby states is an apex law enforcement agency, they have the full authority to launch investigations without informing local law enforcement or ICE.  Thus, less red tape to get the job done and deliver these evildoers to justice right? Wrong.  To further complicate matters, the U.S. Attorneys’ Office often didn’t have the resources to properly tend to the victims needs.  These needs centered on basic amenities like food and shelter, hence, why most cases weren’t pursued by the Bureau. Darby pointed out that:

The FBI was dependent on the U.S. Attorneys’ Office to designate the victims as witnesses before resources were available to the victims. This dependence on the U.S. Attorneys’ Office for short-term and intermediate resources seemed to be the clog preventing freedom and safety for many trafficking victims based on my research and the FBI agents and assistant U.S. attorneys I [Darby] spoke with. Human traffickers often targeted illegal aliens who were already in the United States, or would kidnap and bring unwilling citizens from other countries across the United States’ porous border. Therefore, various types of visas would have to be made available for many victims if their testimony was needed to prosecute and neutralize the perpetrators of the slavery. However, other human trafficking victims were U.S. citizens who were either suffering from various addictions or were teenage runaways. Both Laster and I saw the same DOJ hesitancy to help in both groups.

Since food and shelter seemed to be at the heart of the hesitancy amongst the various agencies, Darby  “[reached] out to the now-deceased Andrew Breitbart. In short order, Breitbart, Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote, Hannah Giles and I created a nonprofit named Citizen Patriot Response to organize tea party groups to help communities and individuals in need without governmental funding and dependence.” Darby stated that this group wasn’t founded on the basis on human trafficking, but remains a critical issue.  As a result, he used his home as a place of refuge for the exploited.  Darby also began to work with a source within the FBI known as::


Special Agent X [who] began to dutifully examine the cases Laster and I presented…Laster and I presented dozens of cases to the FBI. Many of the cases involved minors who were being forced to have sex with adults for monetary reasons under the threat of violence from human traffickers. Special Agent X worked diligently to record our information and initiate investigations. Laster and I educated ourselves further on guidelines and protocols that the DOJ used in handling such cases. We felt assured by our research that it was a matter of law and a matter of internal policy that the FBI had to investigate and act on cases where minors were identified as being involved. All seemed well.

But the majority of the cases we worked on with Special Agent X never turned into investigations for the FBI—even the ones involving children that the FBI was mandated to act onSpecial Agent X was shipped to a different part of the United States and was forbidden to work on human trafficking issues any further, even though the guidelines had been followed. I was deactivated without cause (meaning in good standing). As of press time, the new special agent assigned to Laster returned her call but hasn’t communicated with her about the cases.

What an absolute disgrace.

Obama Administration considering oppressive regulations on ammunition

Oppressive ammo regulation to kill ammunition industryOn Monday, a White House spokesman avoided a question on the Democrat proposal to  restrict ammunition purchases.

The proposal has been reported to be called the “Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act” from Democrats Frank Lautenberg and Carolyn McCarthy. They say that the move is in response to the purchase of ammunition by James Holmes for use in the Aurora tragedy, but as quickly as it emerged, it is likely a pre-conceived ban that was waiting for a tragic event.

The legislation has only one  goal: prevent anyone, anywhere from easily and cheaply purchasing ammunition for their hunting or competition rifles or their home protection pistols and shotguns.

The legislation has been reported to have four major provisions that are all tragically flawed. In the following list, some commentary on each of the provisions:

    • Anyone selling ammunition to be a licensed dealer (ammunition will get much more expensive as retailers are forced to pass licensing/conformance costs on to consumers)
    • Ammunition buyers who are not licensed dealers to present photo identification at the time of purchase, effectively banning the online or mail order purchase of ammo by regular civilians . No way to do this online. At gun shows, this will make ammo as expensive as the huge mega-shops (Bass Pro, etc)
    • It requires licensed ammunition dealers to maintain records of the sale of ammunition. Dealers will spend more time and money filling out “books” and less time selling American products. Who wins here?
    • Requires licensed ammunition dealers to report the sale of more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition to an unlicensed person within any five consecutive business days Large sales reports are probably the least harmful statute here, but if they get one, they’ll go after the other 3 soon enough.

Time to deal with the elephants in the room

The two Presidential candidates refuse to acknowledge the “elephant in the room” and prefer to deal with issues only after it deteriorates into a national crisis. Unfortunately there is not one, but a half dozen elephants in the room and American voters will no longer allow our politicians to ignore them as they pander for their votes. This Presidential election is the perfect time to deal with these issues with commitments to finally address these major, long term problems. The candidate who demonstrates the best understanding of the issues and offers reasoned ideas will earn the voter’s support.

Out-of-control government spending is the biggest elephant rampaging through the room. The annual deficits have set new records and the national debt has grown astronomically. Continuing resolution debates and extending the spending limits only delay any real long term solution. The first candidate to propose a bipartisan commission to develop a plan by yearend 2012 to achieve a balanced budget in the near term would demonstrate political leadership and earn voter respect.

Our tax code is the big ugly elephant that tramples others in its wake. Out tax code is so large and so complex that billions are wasted just trying to comply and limit our tax liability. Now the IRS has been expanded to enforce new health care compliance. The first candidate to vow that they would simplify and reform the tax code by yearend 2012 would earn voter accolades for finally addressing this long term problem. A key requirement for this bipartisan solution would be to consider all alternatives including completely replacing the existing income taxes with a flat consumption or value-added tax.

Our health care system was the best in the world, but costs have been rising at an unsustainable rate. Medicare routinely spends more than it collects. Medicaid is jointly funded by the federal and state governments, but lack of continued federal subsidies have threatened state budgets with bankruptcy. Despite public resistance, ObamaCare was introduced to use central management of health insurance to coerce this industry to hold down costs. Once passed, ObamaCare benefits were found to be over-promised and costs under-estimated causing a further drain on the over-burdened federal budget. Repealing ObamaCare as Romney suggests will not fix all of the problems. Whichever candidate promises a bipartisan commission to address the root causes and develop a long term sustainable plan for health care would demonstrate understanding of the scope of the problem and a vision for a long term sustainable solution.

The issue of immigration has only gotten worse over the last 40 years. Comprehensive immigration reform was last attempted in 1986 with amnesty offered for illegal immigrants, but borders were not effectively closed, legal sanctions were not uniformly enforced, and immigration gradually increased. Illegal immigrants are over-whelming our entry level job market, our health care systems, our education systems, and our welfare systems. Offering amnesty to millions of illegal aliens only makes these systems worse, since it does not discourage further illegal immigration. The first candidate who commits to addressing these underlying problems by yearend 2012 with a bipartisan plan would earn the gratitude and probably the vote of concerned Americans.

Social Security is the oldest entitlement and the one that has recently begun outspending its funding. Most people alive today have paid into the Social Security system their whole lives, and look to this program to provide income in their retirement years. The pay-as-you-go (Ponzi-like) funding model depends on new workers paying the benefits for the retirees, but demographics has undermined this model’s sustainability. The first candidate who promises to develop a bipartisan plan to put Social Security on a sustainable basis long term will please seniors today and younger voters who doubt this system’s viability long term. This solution must look at short term changes to fix the funding problem, but also evaluate long term solutions to return to the original personal accounts as originally conceived in 1935.

National Defense is perhaps the most important elephant in the room because defense is an explicit responsibility of the federal government in the Constitution. Providing for common defense has been termed “discretionary” with affordability driving funding levels. National security is an extension of foreign policy and the first candidate who demonstrates they understands that the security of the country and its national interests drive the size of the defense spending, not what can we afford. This recognition of this critical mission will earn the nation’s trust and vote as commander-in-chief.
These six elephants have been treated like untouchable issues and ignored, avoided because they are so large and so complex and there is no easy solution. Commitment to seek bipartisan work to agree on the problems to be solved, understand the root causes of those problems, and design solutions to address the issues both in the short term and in the long term. Key design factors will be preserving what is good in the current systems while delivering the desired improvements and functionality at an affordable cost.

This is a Presidential election year. The choice should not be “Anybody But Obama” vs. the “Anti-Romney.” The time for speeches is past. The time for real pragmatic solutions is now. Voters yearn for leadership in this uncertain time. The first candidate to display the vision how they will address these key issues will earn the voter’s trust and the electoral victory.

Latest Obama 2012 email – reading between the lines

Of course I get all the frantic emails from Obama’s re-election campaign pleading with their followers to send in more money even though, thanks to Obamanomics, many of them don’t have jobs, few have extra cash and some of them don’t even want one.

The tone and content is pretty similar in every one I’ve received. They don’t sound hopeful at all. This time, we’ll read between the lines (editorial commentary in red).

Hi — see how desperate.. wait, no that just means hello.

Yep, me again. Surprise: I’m here to ask you for money. No need to read into this one either, it’s what they’ve been doing since just after Obama got elected in 2008

Here’s why: Tomorrow is our biggest fundraising deadline yet, and I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t ask everyone who is able to make a donation. No, but at least you’ve got a job.

We just can’t win without supporters like you pitching in what you can, when you can — we’re facing too much special-interest spending on the other side to keep up without everyone doing their part. And I’ve been instructed  not to mention all the special interest money we’ve pulled in from SEIU, Tides, United Auto Workers (they’d better after we handed them a nice piece of GM!), Planned Parenthood, ACORN (now known by many other names), Sally Susman (Pfizer), David L. Cohen (Comcast) .. the list goes on..

Can you donate $3 or more before tomorrow night’s deadline?  Please!! We have already spent everything we had and have bills to pay.

To be frank, we’ve gotten our behinds handed to us the past two FEC deadlines by Mitt Romney and his crew. We’re going to lose and we know it, but we’d rather pay the bills for all of this with your money. I’ll refrain from sharing how that really makes me feel. I’m going to get fired if you all don’t give us money.. 

But that hasn’t stopped us from opening more offices, hiring more field organizers, and reaching out to more voters. Because being out of money has never stopped us from spending it. There are always dolts friends like you to pay off our poorly-managed spending. Ultimately, that’s what’s going to deliver us a win in November — and that’s all thanks to the 2.4 million grassroots donors like you who are building this campaign. We know we don’t have a chance, but we don’t want to spend Michelle’s dress budget on our own campaign now do we?

It might sound crass, but ramping up our ground game to the level it needs to be across the country takes cash — a whole lot of it. And we don’t have any of it – but you do! Redistribute what wealth that you have to the most golfed, sunned and Europed first family in history.

You know what to do. Chip in if you can, before tomorrow at midnight: (for the love of God America humanity, PLEASE!)

99 days left. Here we go.

Ann Marie

Ann Marie Habershaw
Chief Operating Officer
Obama for America not really…

Why Progressives Are Always Wrong

The Objectivist Ayn Rand wrote a lot about the Aristotelian Law of Identity – where A is A – and the associated (Platonic) “Law of Non-Contradiction,” where a thing must be what it is and it cannot be something else. Liberals believe in subjectivism, or solipsism, that way they don’t have to be held accountable by reality.

In the progressives’ world there is no such thing as contradiction – only “false choices.” One could even say that Marxist theory (based on Hegelian theory) wars against the notion of non-contradiction by posing that thesis and anti-thesis are united in a synthesis.

Yet things are not this way. Either there is objective reality or everything is as a dream, with no causation (like Hume argued) and no consequences (as the Frankfurt School would have us believe). It cannot be that there is a half-way objective reality and half-way a dream that are synthesized. Ontologically speaking, it is either one way or the other. Either there is a real world that exists independently of our minds that we perceive, or everything is an illusion of the mind. The latter alternative is impossible, because a universe cannot be the unity of one mind, the product of a self-generated illusion with no external causes. This idea is non-sensical.

Thus all progressive arguments, based on post-modernism, post-structuralism, subjectivism, intrinsicism, solipsism, radical skepticism, and pure idealism, rest on feet of clay because these ideologies’ ontological assumptions are simply wrong or even absurd.

Note: Occasionally you will get the pseudo-intellectual who holds up the Wave-Particle Theory of Light as an example of how the Law of Non-Contradiction is incorrect. Yet light is a phenomenon that we perceive in a distinctly human fashion; we receive and interpret sense-data using our eyes. Our minds thus use concepts to describe the sense-data we refer to as “light.”

But even if we explain light’s behavior as exhibiting characteristics of a wave in some circumstances and as a particle in other circumstances, we should not conclude that light is both two different phenomena at the same time – simply because our apprehension of its behavior at the sub-atomic level is only indirectly observable and not fully understood. Ultra-violet and infra-red light are not directly perceivable, but since some physicists’ rationality indicated to them that these types of light must exist (in the wave spectrum) they invented instruments to detect these other wave-lengths.

An excellent supplementary example of how rationality can guide our interpretation of sense-data, and actually our discovery of new forms of sense-data, is the history of the concept of the atom. The idea that material reality is composed of miniscule discrete units was first formulated in ancient Greece by Leucippus and his student Democritus. The concept of the atom was confirmed empirically much later using electron microscopes.

The formulation of the related concept of the molecule was developed in the early 19th century by such physicists as Avogadro.The structure of molecules was later confirmed empirically by the “evil” corporation IBM.

What led to real progress is the acknowledgment that there is an objective reality by such men as Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Francis Bacon. Their pioneering in the philosophy of science fostered a neo-Aristotelian scientific revolution whose tangible benefits we are still reaping today, and whose base ontological assumptions the political left directly war against. The way to preserve the legacy and the ideological integrity of Western Civilization is to understand and appreciate its philosophical and cultural heritage.

Small Victory for Catholic Business Owners

The U.S. District Court in Colorado has granted an injunction to a Colorado business that filed suit against the Obama administration’s mandate that their health insurance cover contraceptive services. Hercules Industries is owned by the Newland family. These devout Catholics sued Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius after being told the mandate applied to small businesses run by Catholics as well as Catholic religious institutions.

In granting the injunction Judge John Kane has said the business does not have to comply with the Health and Human services rule that the provide contraception.

The Newlands are devout Catholics and like the religious institutions that have filed suit against the Obama administration’s mandate that their health insurance cover contraceptive services, the Newlands filed suit against Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius when they were told the mandate applied to small businesses run by Catholics as well as Catholic religious institutions.

Since Hercules Industries would be required to begin offering the new coverage when its self-insured plan renews on November first the group representing Hercules, Alliance Defending Freedom requested a preliminary injunction to prevent the government from enforcing the mandate against the company until a hearing can be conducted..

From the Investors Business Daily:

“In the Department of Justice’s filing in Newland v. Sebelius — a suit brought by William, Paul and James Newland, and their sister, Christine Ketterhagen, the Department of Justice made the assertion — worthy of Stalinist Russia — that Hercules Industries has “made no showing of a religious belief which requires that (it) engage in the (HVAC) business.””

While their faith does not require them to open up an HVAC business, it does require them to act in all aspects of their lives and dealings with others in accordance with their faith. They argued that the mandate to provide contraceptive coverage or face existential fines placed an undue burden on their First Amendment right to practice their faith. The court agreed.

In his order, Kane said the government’s arguments “are countered, and indeed outweighed, by the public interest in the free exercise of religion. The injunction applies only to the Newlands and their family business.

The Family Research Council President Tony Perkins offered additional comments:

“We are pleased that the court is offering temporary protection for the Newland family, ensuring that, for now, the family will not be forced to violate their religious beliefs as demanded by President Obama’s abortion drug and contraceptive mandate. While this ruling is a victory, it is limited to the Newland family which underscores why Congress must act soon to protect all families.

Thousands – if not hundreds of thousands of dollars – in fines await any company that ignores the President’s decree. For the Newlands, and other families like them, the effect on business could be back-breaking new taxes. For the first time in history, the government would become a vehicle for punishing business owners who apply their faith to their professional lives.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration is so hostile to Christians and beholden to the abortion movement that it fails to see the profoundly human element of this mandate and how it impacts everyday life for millions of Americans. The Newlands are the face of family businesses across America which, next week, will be the casualties of an unprecedented war on religious freedom.”

Stay tuned. This story is not finished.

« Older Entries