Churchill: "What Kind of a People Do They Think We Are?"

 

"If you will allow me to use other language, I will say that he must indeed have a blind soul who cannot see that some great purpose and design is being worked out here below of which we have the honor to be the faithful servants. It is not given to us to peer into the mysteries of the future. Still, I avow my hope and faith, sure and inviolate, that in the days to come the British and American peoples will, for their own safety and for the good of all, walk together in majesty, in justice and in peace."

Those words of Winston Churchill, addressed to a joint session of Congress,Dec. 26, 1941, shortly after The United States entered the War, are still a powerful acknowledgement of the Providence of God, and a battle cry to unite against Evil in all its intrusions.

Churchill spoke clarity and truth with resolve, clarion in its urgency:

You do not, I am certain, underrate the severity of the ordeal to which you and we have still to be subjected. The forces ranged against us are enormous. They are bitter, they are ruthless. The wicked men and their factions, who have launched their peoples on the path of war and conquest, know that they will be called to terrible account if they cannot beat down by force of arms the peoples they have assailed. They will stop at nothing.

When our leaders fail to inspire, our hearts must lean heavy on the lessons and inspirations of the past. We are the same American people, again, being tested, yet still knowing how remarkable we are on the scene of history. As cultures go, we are yet in our youth, still seeking immortal values to carry this ship of State.

Churchill asks Congress on December 26, 1941:

What kind of a people do they think we are? Is it possible that they do not realize that we shall never cease to persevere against them until they have been taught a lesson which they and the world will never forget?

Churchill’s words proved oh, too, true!  We are still learning that we never cease procuring and securing our freedoms.

,

EPIC – Trey Gowdy gets a standing ovation on House Floor – ‘ – The Absurd Report.

20 Ways Media Completely Misread Congress’ Weak-Sauce Benghazi Report

20 Ways Media Completely Misread Congress’ Weak-Sauce Benghazi Report

By Mollie Hemingway

On September 11, 2012, Islamist militants attacked U.S. complexes in Benghazi, Libya. Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed, the first U.S. Ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979. Three other men were killed and 10 were injured.

The media immediately turned it into a political story, focusing more anger on Mitt Romney’s comments about the administration’s blaming of a YouTube video critical of Islam than determining the facts of the attack itself. Many in the media thought it fine that President Obama jetted off to a high-dollar fundraiser before the bodies cooled. When various high-level government officials blamed either a YouTube video critical of Islam — or our laws protecting free speech, it didn’t generate much controversy among big media.

The media tended to parrot White House talking points about the attack even years later. So even though everyone with knowledge of the scene in Benghazi knew otherwise, the New York Times was claiming until Friday — just this past Friday — that al Qaeda had nothing to do with the attack on Benghazi.

Really. Less than one year ago, the New York Times ran one of its massive “projects” — Pulitzer Prize attempts, basically — around the following claim:

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

If there’s something true in that pile of horse manure, you’ll have to point it out. Within days this was thoroughly debunked by those in the know (albeit highlighted by media outlets such as CNN). But just this past Friday afternoon, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released “the definitive House statement on the Intelligence Community’s activities before, during and after the tragic events that caused the deaths of four brave Americans” in Benghazi. We’ll look through all the flaws with this report (.pdf) here soon, but first we need to talk about the media reaction to same.

Things seemed to kind of get going with this tweet at 5:47 PM: read more via :20 Ways Media Completely Misread Congress’ Weak-Sauce Benghazi Report.

NAACP doesn’t acknowledge minority GOP wins | Fox News Video.

 

NAACP doesn’t acknowledge minority GOP wins | Fox News Video.

via NAACP doesn’t acknowledge minority GOP wins | Fox News Video.

Throw the Rascals Out Part ! &2 Thomas Sowell

via Throw the Rascals Out? – Thomas Sowell –

Polls indicate that the public is so disgusted with Washington politicians of both parties that a surprisingly large proportion of the people would like to get rid of the whole lot of them.

It is certainly understandable that the voters would like to "throw the rascals out." But there is no point in throwing the rascals out, if we are just going to get a new set of rascals to replace them.

In other words, we need to think about what there is about current political practices that repeatedly bring to power such a counterproductive set of people. Those we call "public servants" have in fact become public masters. And they act like it.

They squander ever more vast amounts of our tax money, and still leave trillions of dollars of national debt to be paid by our children and grandchildren. They intrude into our private lives with ever more restrictions, red tape and electronic surveillance. And they turn different groups of Americans against each other with class warfare rhetoric and policies.

None of this is inevitable. In fact, this pattern is largely the culmination of political trends set in motion during the 1930s, and reaching a climax today. During the 1920s, the national debt was reduced and the role of government scaled back. Unemployment went as low as 1.8 percent.

President Calvin Coolidge, with every prospect of being reelected in 1928, declared simply: "I do not choose to run." Later, in his memoirs, he explained how dangerous it is to have anyone remain too long in the White House, surrounded by flattery and insulated from reality. What a contrast that attitude is with the attitude of the current occupant of the White House!

The contrast extends beyond these two presidents. What we have today that we did not have in the early history of this country is a permanent political class in Washington — a Congress and an ever growing federal bureaucracy composed of people who have become a permanent ruling class.

The United States was not founded by career politicians but by people who took time out from their regular professions to serve during a crucial time in the creation of a new nation, and a new kind of nation in a world ruled by kings and emperors.

Read more: Throw the Rascals Out? – Thomas Sowell – part 1 and Throw the Rascals Out?: Part II – Thomas Sowell – Page full.

The public’s opinion of politicians of both parties seems to have reached a new low. But no matter how much the voters detest Congress — or how justifiably — that does not mean that there will be radical changes at the next election.

For one thing, \"Congress\" is not on the ballot. Only individual members of Congress are. Most voters like their own Senator or Representative, often because of special favors that these incumbents have done for their own constituency — at the taxpayers\’ expense.

Add to this the so-called \"campaign reform\" laws that restrict the raising of money that challengers need, in order to counter the millions of dollars\’ worth of free advertising that incumbents get through ordinary media coverage, enhanced by the incumbents\’ sponsoring of ever more legislation, expanding the role of government.

The very longevity of incumbents in Congress makes it expedient for them to treat each other as \"facts of life\" — people with whom you have to \"go along to get along.\" One of their common interests as incumbents is reelection. This can lead to all sorts of bipartisan log-rolling legislation to hand out the taxpayers\’ money in ways that benefit incumbents of both parties.

In short, longevity in office can create more longevity in office. Moreover, this longevity can attract campaign contributions from special interests who expect something in return — if only a lightening up on government restrictions and red tape.

Many among the intelligentsia prefer to think of special interests as corrupting our dedicated public servants with campaign contributions. But Peter Schweizer\’s new book, \"Extortion,\" shows what happens as the extorting of tribute by politicians in a position to do a lot of harm to businesses that do not pay them protection money.

via Throw the Rascals Out?: Part II – Thomas Sowell – Page full.

Voter’s’ Voice–Michael Taylor–Congress Must Act

August 8, 2013
Dear Friend,
The Obama Administration’s contraceptive/abortifacient/sterilization mandate will begin to be enforced against nonprofit religious schools, charities and health care providers on January 1, 2014. In the weeks to come, Congress must decide whether to address this problem before that deadline.
Members of Congress should continue to be urged to co-sponsor the Health Care Conscience Rights Act (H.R. 940, S. 1204), and to work for its approval in the next "must-pass" bill needed to keep the federal government operating. Government must not force Americans to violate their religious and moral beliefs on respect for life when they provide health care or purchase health coverage.
Congress is now in its summer recess (August 5-September 9). The recess presents special opportunities to contact your Members and urge their support for H.R. 940/S. 1204. Members will be in their home districts and states. They will be learning what is important to their constituents, and this will influence their actions when they return in the fall. Please consider taking one or more of the following actions:

  • Meet with Members in their local offices.
  • Ask questions at town hall meetings.
  • Step forward to talk with Members at county fairs and other public events listed on Members’ schedules.
  • Write letters-to-the-editors for local papers and newsletters in response to stories or editorials related to conscience rights.
  • Participate in radio and TV call-in shows. Members and their staffs read the local papers and track local media.

Always be polite and respectful. Full contact and scheduling info can be found on Members’ web sites at: www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.
Of course, if you have not yet sent e-mail messages to your Representative and two Senators urging support of H.R. 940/S. 1204, you can do so by clicking on the link below. A note: You also will be able to send a separate message to House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) using his special Speaker’s web form.
Some background. Under the new health care law, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requires most health plans to cover “preventive services for women,” including drugs and procedures that many citizens find objectionable for moral and religious reasons.  These objectionable items include sterilization, FDA-approved birth control (such as the IUD, Depo-Provera, ‘morning-after’ pills, and the abortion-inducing drug Ella), and “education and counseling” to promote these to all “women of reproductive capacity,” including minor girls. Under the final rule released by HHS on June 28, the mandate allows only a very narrow exemption for a “religious employer,” chiefly aimed at what HHS calls “houses of worship.”  Other religious organizations offering education, health care and charitable services do not qualify for the exemption. The mandate will be enforced against them beginning January 1, 2014, under an “accommodation” that only changes the way the objectionable items must be provided to all employees and their dependents. There is no exemption or delay for individuals, or for businesses owned and operated by families with moral or religious objections.
Thanks for all you do in support of life!
Michael Taylor
Executive Director
Click the link below to log in and send your message:
https://www.votervoice.net/link/target/nchla/Mt629RzE3.aspx

Support the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

Michael Taylor
Executive Director :

Please support the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 1797) and oppose all weakening amendments. This bill represents a common-sense reform of abortion policy.

"It is anticipated that the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 1797) will be considered on the House floor as early as June 18.

Please urge your Representative to oppose all weakening amendments and to support the bill. Please click on the link below to send your message today!

Because there is substantial medical evidence that an unborn child is capable of experiencing pain at least by 20 weeks after fertilization, this measure asserts a compelling governmental interest in protecting unborn children from this stage.

In testimony before Congress, Dr. Maureen Condic, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Utah, School of Medicine, concluded: “In light of the scientific facts, the observations of medical professionals, our own experience of pain, and our indirect experience of others’ pain, we must conclude that there is indeed a ‘compelling governmental interest in protecting the lives of unborn children from the stage at which substantial medical evidence indicates that they are capable of feeling pain.’ And this unambiguously requires a 20 week fetus to be protected from pain, as proposed under H.R. 1797.”

Find your president and congressman:


Abortion Non-Discrimination Act (ANDA)


Assisted Suicide


Born-Alive Infants Protection Act


Child Custody Protection Act/CIANA


Conscience Protection


District of Columbia Abortion Funding


Embryo/Fetal Research


Federal Employees’ Health Benefits (FEHB)


Fetal Tissue Research


Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE)


Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)


Health Care Reform


Human Cloning


Human Life Amendment


Hyde Amendment


Medical Training Non-Discrimination (ACGME)


Mexico City Policy


Military Abortion Policy


Morning-After Pill


Parental Involvement


Partial-Birth Abortion


Prison Abortion Funding


RU-486: Chemically Induced Abortion


Stem Cell Research


Terri Schiavo Dies


Umbilical Cord Blood Banks


Unborn Victims of Violence Act


United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

Liberals Want to See Shameful Photographs

Our President seems bent on shaming America before the world with pictures.  Not for the faint of heart, but here are the pictures that should shame the President and the world.

Priests for Life reports:

Baby Body Parts

Priests for Life has known for some time of the grisly trade in baby parts taking place in abortion facilities throughout the nation. Through the efforts of our friends at Life Dynamics, Inc., the details of this trade have come to light. You may obtain from Life Dynamics (1-800-401-6494) copies of the actual order forms used. Some of the forms request that there be no abnormalities. Many mistakenly think that abortions in later stages of pregnancy are performed only in cases of fetal abnormality.

Fetal tissue wholesalers are companies which place employees in abortion clinics to harvest tissue, limbs, organs, etc. from aborted babies. This material is then shipped to researchers working for universities, pharmaceutical companies and government agencies. Although it is against federal law to sell human tissue or body parts, these organizations have devised a system to circumvent this restriction. Technically, all fetal material they harvest is “donated” to them by the clinics. However, they do pay a “site fee” to the clinics for the right to access the tissue. The tissue is then “donated” to the researchers who in turn pay the wholesalers for the cost of retrieval. Profit is realized by the wholesalers’ ability to set their own retrieval fees.

As to the harsh realities of keeping our country safe, the Gateway Pundit says Fox reports:

The release of the photos along with Obama’s decision last week to release CIA memos has federal agents feeling dispirited.
Jake Tapper reported:

Calling the ACLU push to release the photographs “prurient” and “reprehensible,” Dr. Mark M. Lowenthal, former Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for Analysis and Production, tells ABC News that the Obama administration should have taken the case all the way to the Supreme Court.

“They should have fought it all the way; if they lost, they lost,” Lowenthal said. “There’s nothing to be gained from it. There’s no substantive reason why those photos have to be released.”

Lowenthal said the president’s moves in the last week have left many in the CIA dispirited, based on “the undercurrent I’ve been getting from colleagues still in the building, or colleagues who have left not that long ago.”

“We ask these people to do extremely dangerous things, things they’ve been ordered to do by legal authorities, with the understanding that they will get top cover if something goes wrong,” Lowenthal says. “They don’t believe they have that cover anymore.” Releasing the photographs “will make it much worse,” he said.

Along the same lines of disclosures that hurt our country, Michelle Malkin points to the Rasmussen report in her, “Public to White House”:

Results from the latest Rasmussen poll show a public more in tune with Dick Cheney than George Soros:

Fifty-eight percent (58%) believe the Obama administration’s recent release of CIA memos about the harsh interrogation methods used on terrorism suspects endangers the national security of the United States. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 28% believe the release of the memos helps America’s image abroad.

Thirty-seven percent (37%) of voters now believe the U.S. legal system worries too much about protecting individual rights when national security is at stake. But 21% say the legal system is too concerned about protecting national security. Thirty-three percent (33%) say the balance between the two is about right.

This reflects a significant shift over the past couple of years. In several surveys conducted during 2008, Americans were fairly evenly divided as to whether our legal system worried too much about individual rights or too much about protecting national security…

…Forty-six percent (46%) of voters disagree with Obama’s decision to close the prison camp for terrorism suspects at the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba, while 36% agree with the president’s action. Support for the decision has fallen since the president announced it in January.

Ed Morrissey says more:

Instead of the headlines being about what the Bush administration sanctioned, they became about Nancy Pelosi’s denial and then non-denial of her knowledge on waterboarding interrogations, the success of the interrogations in preventing an attack, and Obama’s lack of testicular fortitude in sticking with his original position to let sleeping dogs lie. Small wonder that he began backtracking in earnest yesterday when meeting with Congressional leaders.

Now we have confirmation that Obama planned this all along as a political attack against a man who hardly matters on the national political scene any longer – or at least he didn’t until Obama decided to pick a fight with him. Just as with his strange attack on Rush