ChristiansUnite Forums

THE FOUNDATION

"Every new regulation concerning commerce or revenue; or in any manner affecting the value of the different species of property, presents a new harvest to those who watch the change and can trace its consequences; a harvest reared not by themselves but by the toils and cares of the great body of their fellow citizens." --James Madison (likely), Federalist No. 62

POLITICAL FUTURES

The only emissions problem is on Capitol Hill

"The Heritage Foundation's senior policy analyst for energy and environment, Ben Lieberman, has produced a stellar paper on [the cap and trade bill]... Based on available evidence and analysis, Lieberman concludes 'that both the seriousness and imminence of anthropogenic global warming has been overstated.' But even if we assume the problem is as bad as the hysterics claim, the proposed bill 'would have a trivial impact on future concentrations of greenhouse gases. ...[It] would reduce the earth's future temperature by 0.1 to 0.2 degree C by 2100, an amount too small to even notice.' The bill would bind only the U.S., not other nations, many of which, like China, are 'polluting' at a record pace. Also note that many European nations that have already imposed similar emissions restrictions have seen their emissions rise. But what would the costs be for this quixotic legislative paean to earth goddess Gaia? Contrary to the flawed analyses being advanced by the bill's proponents, Heritage estimates that the direct costs would be an average of $829 per year for a household of four, totaling $20,000 between 2012 and 2035. But when considering the total cost as reflected in the cost of allocations and offsets, the average cost to that family unit would be $2,979 annually from 2012 to 2035. Adding insult and hypocrisy to injury, the bill would hurt the poor the worst because they would bear a disproportionate burden of the higher energy costs the bill would trigger. Now here's the kicker. The bill is also projected to harm the manufacturing sector and cause estimated 'net' job losses, averaging about 1.15 million between 2012 and 2030. The overall gross domestic product losses would average $393 billion per year from 2012 to 2035, and the cumulative loss in gross domestic product would be $9.4 trillion by 2035. The national debt for a family of four would increase by $115,000 by 2035. Enough already. Throw the bums out." --columnist David Limbaugh

GOVERNMENT

"The EPA is now considering designating CO2 a dangerous pollutant. The regulation of essential elements of life by our government scares me. It should scare us all. I am devastated by the notion that our own government founded on freedom would regulate and control the most fundamental aspects of life on earth. Regulation on life's important things is certainly tyranny.... If we regulate carbon dioxide or water, we will all be subject to the regulations because we cannot avoid producing both and releasing them into the environment. Me and my children, and yours too, will become polluters as we simply live and respire. I cannot comprehend it. ... Carbon dioxide is the basis of the energy cycle for life. Without sufficient carbon dioxide plants stop photosynthesis. Without plants, the whole chain breaks down, and we all die. ... Government stepping beyond its basic essentials always harms more than it helps. Government can never be efficient. It is not in its nature. The scorpion stings because it is a scorpion. Government oppresses because it is the governing power. Our founding fathers tried to control the beast, and it can probably not be done better, so do not thwart the controls. The controls are to be on the government, not we the people. Reduce the EPA, not carbon dioxide. In the end, that will save our children." --columnist Lonnie Schubert

FOR THE RECORD

"Why do we need President Obama's big-bang health-care reform at all? What's the real agenda here? If it's really to cover the truly uninsured, a much cheaper, targeted, small-ball approach would do the trick. But on the other hand, maybe the real goal is a larger, ultra-liberal plan aimed at a government takeover of the U.S. health system. ... According to the U.S. Census Bureau, we don't have 47 million folks who are truly uninsured. When you take out college kids plus those earning $75,000 or more who choose not to sign up for a health-care plan, roughly 20 million people are removed from the list of uninsured. After that, you can remove the 10 million who are not U.S. citizens and the 11 million who are eligible for SCHIP and Medicaid but for some reason have not signed up for those programs. So that leaves only 10 million to 15 million people among the long-term uninsured. Yes, they need help. And yes, they should get it. But not with mandatory universal coverage, or new government-backed insurance plans, or massive tax increases. And certainly not with the Canadian-European-style nationalization that has always been the true goal of the Obama administration and congressional Democrats. Instead, we can give the truly uninsured vouchers or debit cards that will allow for choice and coverage, and even health savings accounts for retirement wealth. ... Knocking down profits and telling people what to do because government planners know best, right? Wrong. Absolutely wrong." --economist Lawrence Kudlow

THE GIPPER

"The Founding Fathers established a system which meant a radical break from that which preceded it. A written constitution would provide a permanent form of government, limited in scope, but effective in providing both liberty and order. Government was not to be a matter of self-appointed rulers, governing by whim or harsh ideology. It was not to be government by the strongest or for the few. Our principles were revolutionary. We began as a small, weak republic. But we survived. Our example inspired others, imperfectly at times, but it inspired them nevertheless. This constitutional republic, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, prospered and grew strong. To this day, America is still the abiding alternative to tyranny. That is our purpose in the world -- nothing more and nothing less." --Ronald Reagan

INSIGHT

"Men have been taught that the highest virtue is not to achieve, but to give. Yet one cannot give that which has not been created. Creation comes before distribution -- or there will be nothing to distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement." --novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

LIBERTY

"I am in awe at what our military has accomplished in Iraq despite having most of the public and the vast majority of the media totally abandon them. In my view, what has been accomplished there, against all odds, is perhaps the greatest achievement in the history of our military and perhaps any volunteer force in modern times. I certainly love my country, but what it is that inspires men and women to volunteer for military service when the benefits are so sparse and the burdens so great is beyond my comprehension. We are all incredibly lucky to live in a nation that, despite all of its faults, still have enough courageous young people to serve it in ways that allow 'chicken hawks' (as the Left loves to describe conservative commentators who never served in the military) to worry about things that in comparison don't seem all that significant. Thank you for all you do for us. I wish we appreciated you in a way that was nearly as significant as what you deserve." --radio talk-show host John Ziegler

OPINION IN BRIEF

"The anti-government protests in Iran following the government's rigged elections are doubtless a little more than the 'robust debate' among Iranians that President Barack Obama welcomed during the election. Some of the debaters have been shot dead. Others have been hustled off to jail. I wonder whether this is an eye-opener for our novice president. ... Yet my question remains: Has our sententious new president learned anything from the unforeseen violent culmination of the Iranian elections? Frankly, I doubt it. He reminds me so much of our most recent sanctimonious pontificator, President Jimmy Carter, who at first attempted to end the Cold War by lecturing Americans against their 'inordinate fear of communism.' Then the Soviets became more aggressive. Finally, Carter began the military buildup for which his successor took justifiable credit. President Ronald Reagan knew the value of a strong military in support of resolute diplomacy. Neither Carter nor Obama has any sense of the linkage of the two, and now it looks as if the Obama administration is going to cut back on our military, even as the dangers to world peace grow. At the heart of our new president is, it seems to me, ambivalence. Within him exist opposite attitudes. What we have seen during the protests in Iran is not a clear sense of geopolitics, but uncertainty. President Obama has not had a clue as to what to do. ... Let the mainstream media purr on about this president's mastery of government. My sense is that he is out of his depth. His dithering over the Iranian protests is but one bloody example." --R. Emmett Tyrrell

RE: THE LEFT

"President Barack Obama came into office apparently believing that his non-traditional background, charisma and good intentions could placate dictators hostile to America and ease global tensions. ... But so far the world's thugs do not seem to appreciate that new goodwill. ... Obama's confusion about the world's bad actors suggests that he needs a general refresher course in the world of thugs. ... Being anti-American and mouthing tired charges about imperialism, colonialism or capitalism do not make a thug authentic or populist. By definition, thugs acquire power illegitimately. They keep it unlawfully. And they exercise it illegally -- regardless of their professed concern for the 'people' or their gripes against America. Thugs are thugs, and they come in all ideologies, colors and religions -- from Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe to North Korea's Kim Jong-il to the late Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia. ... Most of the world's problems are caused by a handful of thugs. Any time one can be isolated and replaced by a consensual government, the world gets just a bit safer. ... So, Mr. President, do not talk to a thug unless you absolutely have to. Do not apologize to -- or put our trust in -- one. And whenever people rise up against a thug, speak out immediately and forcefully on their behalf -- and let the thug, not America, worry about the consequences of the spread of freedom." --Hoover Institution historian Victor Davis Hanson

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

(To submit reader comments visit our Letters to the Editor page.)

"Alexander's essay, 'Robert's Rules' was an excellent review of the historical use of successful unconventional methods for dealing with terrorism, 'fighting fire with fire,' and a well-placed boot to Obama's arrogant rear end -- this one had it all." --Los Angeles, California

"Alexander wrote that as non-U.S. citizens, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri have no constitutional rights, but they may have some rights under international conventions. However, do they not have natural rights? I know Alexander fully understands that our rights are not awarded by government but by God. Bringing up the terrorists' barbaric executions and torture does not justify using rights-violating methods of interrogation." --Seattle, Washington

Alexander replies: Several dissenters echoed this reader's comment. First, Obama's complaint is about constitutional rights not natural rights, and I am certain that Obama distinguishes between the two, as do his Leftist cadres. He believes that your "rights" are the gift of government, not God. I have written extensively that all people have "unalienable rights" as our Founders wrote in our Declaration of Independence, however those who would take away the rights of others, forgo their own. Our prisons are full of thugs who erroneously believed their rights superseded those of their victims -- and now they have lost their right to liberty. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri have forgone any and all rights to life and liberty because they have, with great success, taken those rights from thousands of others. As for Obama's objection to waterboarding, and all the media and political play this has received, we are the laughingstock of the "tolerant" Islamic world.

"If Major Robert Rogers were alive today and in charge of our current ranks of fine Rangers, he would respond to airplane hijackers by having his men seek out anyone associated with the terrorists, and in end them with prejudice. As for captives, like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, after getting what actionable intel he could, he would treat Khalid to the same violent end Khalid used to murder Daniel Pearl, but the knife would not only be dull, it would be rusty and covered with pig blood. And, Khalid's departure would be on YouTube for all his friends to see!" --Boston, Massachusetts

Alexander replies: I learned early that you do not bring a knife to a gunfight. Obama has shown up to combat nuclear terror with a cotton ball.

"As for 'cruel and unusual punishments,' cruel is a moral judgment as defined in the context of a particular society or culture in time. When the framers wrote the Constitution, dunking, hanging, flogging, keelhauling and public display in stocks, were acceptable measure of punishment. And as Alexander aptly noted, Rogers scalping of a French captive in full view of his fort's garrison was also acceptable. Today some may disagree. So today, the Left not only thinks applying water to the face of terrorists is torture,' but also complain it is 'cruel and unusual' for a judge to make a student wear a sandwich board proclaiming him a truant, or make a tagger clean up his mess. And where have such constraints on punishment gotten us as a nation?" --St. Louis, Missouri

Alexander replies: Yes, and it is 'cruel and unusual' not to allow murderers and rapists access to cable TV, the best-equipped gyms and libraries.

"I agree with your general thesis that waterboarding is not torture. In many instances, our Marines and Troops live with far fewer 'creature comforts' than the terrorists at Gitmo. Somebody should probably contact Amnesty International!" --Fort Benning, Georgia

THE LAST WORD

"A week ago, CNN, the Washington Post and other major news outlets covered Obama's killing of a fly as if it was a major news event. (At least when the Russian press similarly gushes over Vladimir Putin, he's karate-chopping cinderblocks in half.) The good news: More photo-ops are coming, because the White House apparently has a major fly problem. I know that because I read the New York Times' flood-the-zone coverage. As Kool Aid-allergic columnist Robert Samuelson has noted, such sycophancy is a serious public-policy problem because the president is proposing a radical overhaul of pretty much everything, and for the most part the press hasn't cared that his explanations are iffier than gas-station sushi, his assurances more dubious than a North Korean press release. Obama's ongoing promise that he's 'creating or saving' jobs is as plausible as the chess team captain's claim that his supermodel girlfriend can't fly down from Canada for the prom. Maybe the fly infestation at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has something to do with the fact that the White House is a central hub of bovine manure distribution?" --National Review editor Jonah Goldberg

*****

Veritas vos Liberabit -- Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot's editors and staff.

(Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)