YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK

[nChrist]

Posting anonymously to be a crime?
Lawmaker wants $500 fine for 1st offense, $1,000 for each after that



Kentucky Representative Tim Couch filed a bill this week to make anonymous posting online illegal.

The bill would require anyone who contributes to a website to register their real name, address and e-mail address with that site.

 Their full name would be used anytime a comment is posted.

If the bill becomes law, the website operator would have to pay if someone was allowed to post anonymously on their site. The fine would be five-hundred dollars for a first offense and one-thousand dollars for each offense after that.

Representative Couch says he filed the bill in hopes of cutting down on online bullying. He says that has especially been a problem in his Eastern Kentucky district.

Action News 36 asked people what they thought about the bill.

 Some said they felt it was a violation of First Amendment rights. Others say it is a good tool toward eliminating online harassment.

Represntative Couch says enforcing this bill if it became law would be a challenge.

I personally think this is a BIG bunch of BALONEY. This is simply a way to SILENCE many voices of the people. Politicians can't stand the idea that many people feel safe voicing their opinions on the Internet. This represents a real danger to dirty politicians, and that's why they want to REGULATE OR SILENCE FREE SPEECH. Folks with average common sense should be able to see through this one easily.

There are many other considerations than just silencing FREE SPEECH. Using a real name and other information on the Internet would expose the person to identity theft, harassment, and all kinds of other problems. Everyone already knows this to be a fact, so much fewer people would participate. The end result would still be to SILENCE FREE SPEECH.

[Soldier4Christ]

2nd Muslim elected to Congress
Convert serving balance of grandmother's term

Indiana voters on Tuesday elected a Muslim to Congress, only the second of that faith chosen in U.S. history.

Andre Carson, grandson of the late Democrat Rep. Julia Carson, was elected to serve the balance of her term in the U.S. House of Representatives in a special election.

She died in December 2007, after serving 11 years in the heavily Democratic district.

The younger Carson, 33, a member of the Indianapolis City Council who converted to Islam about a decade ago, will serve out the remainder of his grandmother's term through calendar 2008. He beat Republican Jon Elrod and a third party candidate with 52 percent of the vote to 44 percent for Elrod.

The first and only other Muslim member of the U.S. Congress is Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota, also a Democrat, who is in his first term.

Carson will face a strong challenge against other contenders in a May primary which will determine who runs in November for the next full two-year term in the district which covers most of the city of Indianapolis.

His Democratic opponents then are expected to be two state legislators -- Carolene Mays, an Indianapolis newspaper publisher, and David Orentlicher, a lawyer and doctor who is a professor of law and medical ethics at Indiana University School of Law and Indiana University Medical Center.

Carson's faith had not been an issue in the special election.

[Soldier4Christ]

Bush opposes 'Fairness Doctrine'
But spokeswoman warns Congress doesn't share opinion

President Bush believes the so-called Fairness Doctrine is "Orwellian" and disagrees with its very concept, but that isn't the case in the Democrat-controlled Congress, a spokeswoman said today, hinting perhaps a warning of what could come under a Democratic triumvirate in the Senate, House and White House.

The response came from White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, who said President Bush, "believes in a free press, yes."

The question was from Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House, who asked:

"Yesterday in Nashville the president called the so-called Fairness Doctrine 'an Orwellian name,' whose supporters, by 'insisting on so-called balance they want to silence those they don't agree with.' And my question: This means the president believes that the First Amendment's freedom of both speech and of the press means that there must be as much freedom for the electronic or spoken or e-mailed press, as for the printed press, doesn't it?

Then Kinsolving continued. "The president also said, 'Republicans have drafted legislation that would ban reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine. Unfortunately, Democratic leaders have blocked action on this bill' My question: Does that mean the entire Democratic leadership in both Houses, or was it just San Francisco Speaker Pelosi and Nevada Majority Leader Reid?"

Perino said she wasn't sure and those congressional leaders would have to respond.

Former White House spokesman Tony Snow earlier told WND when he held the post that the Fairness Doctrine, which periodically is raised as an issue by members of Congress, is not needed. Such a provision requires broadcast outlets to air both sides of any issue, and was instituted when the industry often had only a single station outlet in many cities.

"Our views on the Fairness Doctrine are well known, which we don't think it's necessary," Snow said.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., has lobbied for the provision. "I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they're in a better position to make a decision."

In a column, WND founder and editor Joseph Farah, issued a warning about what would be coming if Democrats retain control of the Senate and House in November.

"Prepare for a major, frontal assault on the First Amendment – perhaps the worst in American history," he wrote, citing a letter written by U.S. Senate President Harry Reid, D-Ariz., to talk radio superstar Rush Limbaugh's network several months ago, demanding he apologize for something he never said.

"It was a shot across the bow by an arrogant group of petty, wannabe tyrants who would, if they could, use the coercive power of the state to stifle all dissenting views," Farah warned.

"They would do it under the rubric of 'hate speech' legislation. They would do it with the rationalization of 'fairness' and 'accuracy' – two qualities they wouldn't recognize if they tripped over them. They would do it in the name of campaign finance reform. In fact, they would do it without any excuse whatsoever," he continued.

"To them, the First Amendment doesn't actually protect the inalienable right to free speech and the free press. It only protects their speech and their press. They want a monopoly on media. They had it once and they got spoiled. They decided they can't live without it any more."

He said come January 2009, if Reid still is running the Senate and Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., still is running the house, "they are going to pass a law bringing back the so-called 'Fairness Doctrine.' If Barack Obama is in the White House, he will sign it. If Hillary Clinton is in the White House, she will sign it."

Its chilling effect can be assessed by the fact that in 1987, the last year it existed, there were 75 radio talk shows in the United States. Today there are more than 3,000, he said.

President Ronald Reagan saw to it that it died while he was in office, because it apparently required a balance of opposing views on radio and television airwaves, but in reality, opened the door to government to meddle in the content of radio talk shows and other mediums.

"If the Democrats and their me-too Republican allies are successful at sacking talk radio, there will be no stopping them," Farah warned. "Broadcast will be first. Then they will go after the Internet with taxes and new regulations and hate-crimes laws. And when they succeed at muzzling dissenting voices there, they will even turn to print. Remember, we are dealing with a neo-fascist mentality here," he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate rejects extending some tax cuts
Symbolic vote puts lawmakers on record for when Bush plan expires in 3 years

The Senate has embraced the idea of extending President Bush's tax cuts aimed at low-income workers, married couples and people with children after he leaves office.

The overwhelming 99-1 vote was largely symbolic. But it put senators in both parties on the record for when the tax cuts expire in three years.

Republicans complain that a plan for future tax cuts by Montana Democrat Max Baucus would still permit increases in income tax rates and higher taxes on investments and stock sales.

The Senate has rejected an extension of President Bush's tax cuts for middle- and higher-income taxpayers, investors and people inheriting businesses and big estates.

The partisan 52-47 vote was largely symbolic and followed an overwhelming vote endorsing cuts aimed at low-income workers, married couples and people with children. But it put senators in both parties on the record for when the tax cuts actually expire in three years.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting, voted for the additional tax cuts. Democratic rivals Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama voted against them.

[Littleboy]

I thought this was going to be about Gov. Spitzer?
Watch c-span 1 & 2, The Sen. & the House of Reps.,
You can watch your tax dollars at work everyday, NOT!
Have you heard what Obamha want's to do? OUGH BOY, I hope you have deep pockets everyone!
I'm so low on the bracket, they cant get much more outta me, Unless that changes too...

It's come down to this for me:
1. Do I continue to vote for a Republican J. McCain, who will continue to Band-Aid
    our problems like we've done for so long...
2. Vote for a Demoncrat and just let them put us out of our Misery in a hurry!

I Don't know about you, But I'm tired of Listening to Godless people & what they want to do to my Country.

I asked God once, I was about 18, Father, My Faith in all you say, surpasses all that can be contained in a mans Heart, Mind & Soul,
Why is it these mountains won't move?
I've put a thorn in your side, So that in your Time of Ignorance, 
you would'nt hurt those that hav'nt come to me yet!

This was'nt something that I heard with my ears,
But it was Spoken within me, I heard it with the ears of my Heart
and in the stillness of my Spirit.
If it has'nt happened to you yet, you may wonder, But
if it has, you know what i'm saying...

I've been waiting for that thorn to be removed,
My mom told me when i was a Littleboy,(10)
Your tongues like a knife that cuts to the Soul.

I'm transporting some trucks tomorrow,
I'll get to witness to some people, God willing...
YLBD



 

[Soldier4Christ]

Ex-GOP treasurer diverted up to $1 million
National Republican Congressional Committee says money went to personal accounts

The former treasurer for the National Republican Congressional Committee diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars -- and possibly as much as $1 million -- of the organization's funds into his personal accounts, GOP officials said yesterday, describing an alleged scheme that could become one of the largest political frauds in recent history.

For at least four years, Christopher J. Ward, who is under investigation by the FBI, allegedly used wire transfers to funnel money out of NRCC coffers and into other political committee accounts he controlled as treasurer, NRCC leaders and lawyers said in their first public statement since they turned the matter over to the FBI six weeks ago.

"The evidence we have today indicated we have been deceived and betrayed for a number of years by a highly respected and trusted individual," said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), the NRCC chairman.

The committee also announced that it has submitted to banks five years' worth of audits and financial documents allegedly faked by Ward, some of which were used to secure multimillion-dollar loans. It is a violation of federal laws to obtain loans through false statements; the crime is punishable by up to $1 million in fines and 30 years in prison.

Before yesterday, the committee, which raised $49 million in 2007, had not acknowledged that any money was missing. It announced on Feb. 1 that it had discovered "irregularities" that might involve fraud, dismissed Ward and called in federal investigators.

Robert K. Kelner, a lawyer with Covington & Burling, which has been hired to oversee an internal forensic audit, told reporters he is certain only that Ward had made "several hundred thousand dollars" in unauthorized money transfers since 2004. However, he said, the year-end report filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in 2006 overstated the NRCC's cash on hand by $990,000.

That may be the upper level of what Ward allegedly skimmed from NRCC coffers, Kelner said. But the total will not be known until forensic auditors finish "drilling down" to determine how much money might have been misappropriated and how much may be missing as a result of sloppy bookkeeping, he said.

Kelner said Ward was the only NRCC official empowered to use wire transfers to shift money into any account without a second approval. After transferring the money into accounts he controlled, often for dormant fundraising committees associated with the NRCC, Ward allegedly moved it into accounts for his political consulting business or his personal bank accounts, Kelner said.

Kelner said the NRCC has had no contact with Ward since he was fired on Jan. 28. Ronald Machen, Ward's attorney, declined to comment on the investigation yesterday, as did the FBI.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that Ward had served as treasurer for 83 GOP committees this decade. In the past five years, the committees took in more than $400 million in contributions.

Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.) told The Post this week that Ward paid himself $6,000 from King's PAC in 2007 after the congressman thought he had closed down the committee.

Politico.com reported last night that Ward lent himself more than $4,200 from the political action committee of Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.), an unusual expenditure for a campaign treasurer to make. Ward repaid the money early last month, after the FBI was called in to investigate his work at the NRCC, Politico.com reported.

According to a source familiar with the investigation, some of those committees were closed down in filings to the FEC but their accounts were left open at banks. That would have allowed Ward to divert money into their coffers and then to his political consulting firm or his personal bank accounts.

Kelner said the NRCC had not met with its outside auditors for nearly five years, describing that as unusual. Rep. Greg Walden (Ore.), who previously served as chairman of the NRCC's audit committee, said he had asked to meet with the outside auditing firm, Deloitte & Touche, and that the fake audits were almost perfect forgeries.

"I sought for several years to meet with the outside auditors," Walden said. "There was always some seemingly legitimate reason why that didn't happen." The scheme began to unravel this year, when Rep. K. Michael Conaway (Tex.), the new head of the audit committee, insisted on meeting the auditors.

The magnitude of the alleged fraud staggered Republicans, who are bracing for the final accounting from the forensic audit in six to eight weeks. Many said they expect a total far greater than the minimum cited yesterday.

The largest confirmed political fraud in the modern campaign finance era, after a 1974 law set strict contribution limits, is believed to be the embezzlement of $1 million from the 1992 presidential campaign of the late Sen. Paul Tsongas (D-Mass.).

Cole told reporters yesterday evening that the NRCC has spent about $370,000 on the audit being conducted by Kelner's firm and accountants from PricewaterhouseCoopers, draining precious dollars from a campaign committee that has badly trailed its Democratic counterpart in fundraising for more than a year.

Kelner said federal election and banking laws, which require proof that such frauds were done "knowingly," are likely to put the legal burden on Ward and not the NRCC. He said the internal probe so far has turned up no signs of "anybody else colluding with" Ward.

[Soldier4Christ]

Alaska senators make another push for oil drilling in ANWR
Bill would allow extraction if price of crude hits $125 a barrel

Hoping to capitalize on consumer concern about gasoline prices, Alaska's two Republican senators introduced legislation Thursday that would allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if the price of oil hits $125 a barrel.

With oil hovering near $110 a barrel and gasoline expected to reach $4 a gallon, Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Ted Stevens said that they hoped the continuing price spiral would spark consumer clamor and overcome opposition to opening the wildlife refuge to drilling.

"This has got to come from the ground up," Murkowski said. "From the constituents, from the American consumer saying 'Enough, Congress.' This is the No. 1 issue domestically in the country right now, what is happening with the price of energy."

Efforts to open up the refuge for drilling have had a long and storied history in Congress, with Stevens or Murkowski (or her father) offering up some form of legislation annually. In 2005, when Congress rejected yet another bid to open the refuge to development, Stevens called it the "saddest day of my life."

This year's proposal has a few new twists that Murkowski, the lead sponsor, says might help persuade some former skeptics.

After the state of Alaska gets a cut of the 12.5 percent royalties, 50 percent of the proceeds would go toward alternative energy research overseen by the Department of Energy. Another 33 percent would go toward federal low-income home energy assistance or weatherization programs. The final 17 percent would go toward the food stamp program.

Drilling in ANWR would do more than any economic stimulus package, Stevens said. It also would trim U.S. dependency on foreign sources of oil.

"The money we send overseas for oil could be spent in the United States, stimulate our economy," he said. "I think this country's going to need a real stimulus before this year's over."

The Bush Administration also sees the development of ANWR as a national security issue and continues to support the "environmentally responsible production of energy" from the refuge, said Shane Wolfe, a spokesman for Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne.

The Interior Department hasn't seen the legislation and wouldn't comment on it, but the president's 2009 budget assumes that ANWR would open for development, Wolfe said.

If drilling were to be allowed, the first lease sales in 2010 could bring in as much as $9 billion, Wolfe said.

"The coastal plain of ANWR is the nation's single greatest onshore prospect for future oil," he said.

But environmentalists say they're confident that Murkowski and Stevens simply don't have 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster that would allow the bill to be heard. It's equally unlikely that a Democratic-led House of Representatives would even consider hearing the legislation, said Myke Bybee, a spokesman for the Sierra Club.

Environmentalists also have a proven track record at rallying national opposition to drilling in the refuge and could mobilize their forces with a simple e-mail campaign. They're confident that outside of Alaska, there simply isn't public support for drilling in ANWR, Bybee said.

"No amount of oil and no amount of money is worth despoiling the Arctic Refuge," Bybee said. "I don't think there's support for opening up a special place like the Arctic Refuge at any cost, at any amount of oil or at any cost of oil."

Drilling in ANWR is "not going to be help anyone at the pump," said Cindy Shogan, executive director of the Alaska Wilderness League. "The consumer is not that naive."

It's an interesting tactic to tie the present-day price of oil to the decision whether to drill, said Frank Verrastro, senior fellow and energy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington D.C. But even if Congress were to sign off on opening ANWR to development today, it would have little to do with the price a decade from now.

"You're talking eight to ten years," Verrastro said. "And during that time maybe we would have lost some production, maybe demand would have gone down because of sustained higher prices."

[Littleboy]

I have some Dem. friends at work, I've been telling them
and they agree we need to start drilling & Building some more refineries.
They use to wine about gas prices & the war, I got a few of them convinced that
They have been part of the PROBLEM, By voting for people that WON'T allow drilling,
WON'T Build More Refineries, No Nucular power site, Ect. ect.
I also told them IT'S your Senators & your House Members that HOLD this Stuff up. NOT the President...


I also told them this is A dem. strategy, So they have something to beat the Republicans
over the Head with, Economy, Enviroment, ect.ect. and with the Main stream Media you watch
You miss the FACT that it is YOUR DEM. REPS. that are really the ones who are causing this stuff..

THERE against EVERYTHING that would PROTECT Americans at home & Soldiers Abroad!
DAMN them Father for they are truely against you & us,
Show them your mighty hand & Buckle the legs of  the upright & cleave the Tongues of the unrighteous
to the roofs of their mouths...

YLBD

[Soldier4Christ]

Sex offenders collect financial aid
'Most insane waste of taxpayer money that I have seen in my 8 years in Congress'

James Sturtz is not your ordinary college student struggling to pay tuition.

The 48-year-old rapist is one of Iowa's most dangerous sex offenders, locked up in a state-run treatment center for fear he will attack again if released. Yet he has received thousands of dollars in federal aid to take college courses through the mail.

Across the nation, dozens of sexual predators have been taking higher education classes at taxpayer expense while confined by the courts to treatment centers. Critics say they are exploiting a loophole to receive Pell Grants, the nation's premier financial aid program for low-income students.

Prison inmates are ineligible for Pell Grants under a 1994 law. Students convicted of certain drug offenses are also ineligible. But sexual predators qualify once they are transferred from prison to treatment centers.

"This is the most insane waste of taxpayer money that I have seen in my eight years in Congress," said Rep. Ric Keller, R-Fla., who is pushing to stop the practice. "It is a national embarrassment that we are wasting taxpayer dollars for pedophiles and rapists to take college courses while hardworking young people from lower-class families are flipping hamburgers to pay for college."

Moreover, some institutions report that sex offenders are putting the financial aid to questionable uses by buying such things as clothes, a DVD player and music CDs—sometimes, after they have dropped out of school. Pell Grants can legally be put toward expenses that are education-related. But the unused portion of a grant is supposed to be repaid when someone withdraws from school.

Keller's plan would affect 20 states that allow authorities to hold violent sex offenders indefinitely after they have served their prison sentences. He predicted the measure would save taxpayers millions.

Some say taking away the financial aid for correpondence courses would be a mistake. They say education could help sex offenders build stable lives and reduce their chances of committing another crime if they are ever released.

The U.S. Education Department does not track how many sexual predators confined to treatment centers have received aid, in part because the offenders do not have to disclose their living arrangements on the application forms. But within the past five years, at least several dozen have received Pell Grants. And the department is only following the law.

"They are eligible," Education Department spokeswoman Stephanie Babyak said. She said the department generally does not track how recipients pay their expenses, "but if there is an issue with people getting overawards, we would look into that. We'll be happy to check it out."

The institutions and the government do not keep count of how much money sexual predators receive. The maximum Pell Grant is $4,310 per year. The government generally sends payments to colleges for tuition, and any leftover is sent to the student to cover expenses.

At the Sand Ridge Secure Treatment Center in Mauston, Wis., six patients are getting Pell Grants, and others did so in the past. Some patients used their grants for living expenses that were already being covered by the state's taxpayers, according to administrators.

"I think that the current practice—which results in large checks being sent to the patients for living expenses—is pretty much indefensible," director Steve Watters wrote in an e-mail to an aide last year.

In Iowa, 14 offenders in the Cherokee Mental Health Institute have received Pell Grants in recent years, said administrator Jason Smith. He said nine of them dropped courses after receiving money.

Some patients used their money to buy a DVD player, a television, a radio, music CDs and movies, Smith said. Because of vague guidelines, staff members could not determine whether those were inappropriate expenditures, he said.

In California, a number of predators living at the Coalinga State Hospital receive Pell Grants, said Department of Mental Health spokeswoman Nancy Kincaid. But she said the hospital has no way of tracking who gets them or how much money they receive.

Representatives of other states, including Kansas and Minnesota, said they could not recall sex offenders signing up for Pell Grants. Other states said they had no idea whether that was the case.

"They don't really tell us what they are doing. They have a lot of liberties they want to exercise without our oversight," said Dr. Henry Richards, superintendent of the Special Commitment Center in Washington state, where some patients take correspondence courses.

Keller introduced his bill to ban the practice after a newspaper reported in 2003 that 54 offenders at one Florida center got $200,000 in Pell Grants in one year.

Some Democratic members of Congress and others say it would be counterproductive to put up a barrier to education for sex offenders who are trying to rehabilitate themselves.

"These are people who we want to prepare to go into the communities. They need to have access to educational programs," Richards said. "I think the numbers of committed persons aren't so large they would significantly preclude other citizens from taking advantage of educational support. To preclude them seems mean-spirited to me."

Sturtz illustrates both sides.

The Iowa man was convicted in 1980 of sexually assaulting a 4-year-old girl. He earned his high school equivalency diploma behind bars and trained to be a janitor. He was convicted again in 1989 of attempted rape after pulling a knife on a woman.

After another stint behind bars, he struck again in 1994. This time, he met a Coe College student waiting for a bus, persuaded her to get in his car and raped her at knifepoint. He was sent back to prison and then ordered to Cherokee after his sentence ended in 2006.

Sturtz said he signed up to take business courses through Kirkwood Community College and received B's in business communication courses. But he has put his schooling on hold.

He said he dropped algebra and two other courses that were too hard. And he said he was unable to complete one class because he was not able to watch the required movies. Like other sexual predators, he is not allowed access to the Internet, and that has complicated his schooling.

He said he used his $100 in leftover grant money to buy jeans and underwear and saved the rest in case he tries to take more courses.

So far, none of the 72 predators in the Iowa center has been released since it opened in 1999. Sturtz admitted he is not ready for freedom anytime soon.

"It wasn't about the money for me, man. It was about the education," he said. "God knows I'm going to need all the help to get a job."

[Soldier4Christ]

Personhood Amendment Gets New Support

Colorado’s most conservative lawmakers signed petitions Monday supporting the Colorado Human Life Amendment to the state Constitution.

The group Colorado for Equal Rights needs 76,000 signatures by May 13.

Kristi Burton, a spokesperson for the group, estimated they have gathered about 40,000 signatures. She thinks they will meet the required number to put the issue on the November ballot.

The amendment would define life as beginning at the time a woman’s egg is fertilized.

It doesn’t specifically mention abortion, but many think the new definition would lead to legislation to try to outlaw abortions in Colorado or build a test case that could be taken to the United States Supreme Court.

Cal Zestro spends almost every day gathering signatures or working the phones to try and build support for the petition drive.

He told 7NEWS, "I think the law should protect everybody."

Monday, the petition drive picked up the signatures of some of Colorado's most conservative political leaders.

A public vote is a way to get around the legislature which has historically protected abortion rights and contraceptive choices.

State Sen. Greg Brophy Wray said, "Clearly it’s always the right time to take the stand for the sanctity of life."

A similar amendment is being proposed in Montana.

Proponents have tried but failed to pass Personhood Laws in Georgia, Mississippi and Michigan.

Abortion rights groups are watching the petition process closely and said they are prepared for a battle if the amendment gets on the November ballot.

Jody Berger of Colorado Planned Parenthood thinks the issue will fail in a statewide race.

"It is an extreme law that goes too far. People recognize that,” Berger said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Attorney predicts Supreme Court will ultimately side with FCC, families

Attorney Pat Trueman says a case before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding broadcast indecency will have a far-reaching impact. He is optimistic that the high court will rule the FCC has the authority to protect the public airwaves from profanity.

The high court will review a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) policy that calls for broadcasters to be fined for "fleeting expletives," or one-time uses of a common four-letter word. The case before the court involves two airings of the Billboard Music Awards on FOX. During both airings, celebrities' expletives were broadcast live. NBC has a separate challenge to an FCC fine for airing a rock star's expletive during a Golden Globe Awards show in 2003.
 
The FCC appealed to the high court after a federal appeals court said the agency's policy regarding fleeting expletives was not valid. The Alliance Defense Fund's Pat Trueman says the U.S. Supreme Court has tackled the issue before, but the ruling will not be known for some time.
 
According to Trueman, the high court will review the cases this fall. He believes the justices will decide again what the court decreed 30 years ago – that "the FCC acts appropriately, according to federal criminal law, in regulating indecency and profanity on broadcast television and radio."

[Soldier4Christ]

How the U.S. Navy Inadvertently Supports Hugo Chávez

When U.S. Navy and Marine personnel purchase gasoline at their local Navy Base Exchange, they might be unknowingly supporting America's enemies. This is happening because the Navy Exchange buys its gasoline from a company owned by Venezuelan Dictator-President Hugo Chávez. A designation by the Bush Administration of Venezuela as a terrorist-sponsoring state would allow the Navy to end this awkward situation.

Hugo Chávez is on an arms-buying spree. Chávez has already bought $3.4 billion[1] worth of Russian weapons, including "100,000 AK-103s and AK-104 assault rifles, a munitions factory, 53 helicopters--including a dozen Mi-17 military helicopters--and 24 SU-30MK fighter jets."[2] Venezuela is negotiating a multi-billion dollar, multi-year contract to purchase from Russia "five Project 636 Kilo-class diesel submarines and four state-of-the-art Project 677 Amur submarines....and several Tor-M1 air defense missile complexes."[3] A Chávez military adviser boasts that the Russian sub­marines will "make Venezuela's navy the strongest in the region,"[4] potentially putting the U.S. Navy in harm's way at some point in the future.

The Chávez-Terrorist Connection

In addition to this military build-up, new evidence is emerging that documents Chavez's sinister intentions and actions in the region. The government of Colombia, assisted by the U.S. government and Interpol, is analyzing the contents of a laptop belonging to the second-in-command of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), Raul Reyes,[5] who was killed by the Colombian military in an attack two kilometers inside Ecuador's border on March 1, 2008.[6]

The U.S. Secretary of State designated the FARC as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in 1997.[7] In 2003, President George W. Bush designated the FARC as a "significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act due to its extensive narcotics trafficking activities." The FARC has also been designated as a terrorist organization by the European Union,[8] Canada,[9] and the Latin American Parliament.[10]

Evidence from the three captured FARC laptops has revealed that Chávez was planning to send $300 million to the FARC[11] and was pressuring European governments to drop FARC's terrorism designation. With political legitimacy, FARC could then mount a political campaign against Colombian President ÁlvaroUribe's party in the 2010 national elections. There is also evidence from the laptops that Chávez funneled money to his Chavista ally, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, during Correa's 2006 election campaign.[12]

An Awkward Contract

Surprisingly, part of Chavez's oil-based financial windfall comes from the U.S. Navy. Its "Navy Exchange (NEX) Service Command" has a contract, running until 2010, which specifies that Citgo supply gasoline to all NEX service stations. Formerly known as Cities Service, an American-owned refiner and gasoline retailer, Citgo was sold in the 1990sand is now owned by PDV America, Inc., an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary ofthe state-owned oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PdVSA), which is in turn wholly owned and controlled by the Hugo Chávez-led government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.[13] Citgo's refineries are the only ones in the U.S. (and among the few in the world) built specifically to refine Venezuela's heavy, dirty, and high-sulfur crude oil,[14] so the Chávez regime is heavily reliant on them for income.

Given the aggressively anti-American actions of Hugo Chávez, it is at the least a great irony that the U.S. Navy is buying gasoline from him. A Navy press spokesman says that "Citgo's competitively bid $60 million-a-year contracts to supply the Navy Exchange with gas run through 2010....Citgo's relationship with the exchange dates back to 1989." The spokesman reported that any action to prohibit Citgo from bidding on future contracts could be taken only by Navy headquarters in Washington.[15] The Navy did demonstrate its sensitivity about the issue in 2006, however, when it replaced Citgo signs with "NEX" signs at all of its service stations in the aftermath of Chávez's speech in September of that year at the UN General Assembly, where he called President Bush "the Devil."[16]

A State Sponsor of Terror?

The Bush Administration is reportedly investigating whether the actions taken by the Chávez regime to support and promote the FARC could lead to Venezuela being placed on the U.S. government's list of state sponsors of terrorism. [17] This action would result in the imposition of four main sets of U.S. government sanctions: (1) a ban on arms-related exports and sales; (2) controls over exports of dual-use items for goods or services that could significantly enhance the terrorist-list country's military capability or ability to support terrorism; (3) prohibitions on economic assistance; and (4) imposition of miscellaneous financial and other restrictions, including: (a) requiring the United States to oppose loans by the World Bank and other international financial institutions; (b) lifting diplomatic immunity to allow families of terrorist victims to file civil lawsuits in U.S. courts; (c) denying companies and individuals tax credits for income earned in terrorist-listed countries; (d) denial of duty-free treatment of goods exported to the United States; (e) authority to prohibit any U.S. citizen from engaging in a financial transaction with a terrorist-list government without a Treasury Department license; and (f) prohibition of Defense Department contracts above $100,000 with companies controlled by terrorist-list states. [18]

Designation by the U.S. of Venezuela as a terrorist-sponsoring state would put into jeopardy the billions of dollars the Chávez regime takes in annually from the sale of oil to the United States. It would also, incidentally, give the Navy a way out of its awkward contract with Citgo.

[1]RIA Novosti, "Venezuela to Buy Russian Submarines, Air Defense Systems--Source," June 18, 2007, at http://en.rian.ru/world/20070618/67363794.html (March 12, 2008).

[2]Pablo Bachelet, "U.S. Alerted to Cuba Migration, Chávez Weapons," Miami Herald, February 27, 2008, at www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/cuba/story/435985.html (March 12, 2008).

[3]RIA Novosti, "Venezuela to buy Russian Submarines, Air Defense Systems--Source."

[4]James M. Roberts, "If the Real Simón Bolívar Met Hugo Chávez, He'd See Red," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2062, August 20, 2007, at www.heritage.org/Research/LatinAmerica/bg2062.cfm

[5]Frank Bajak, "Letters: Ecuador Leader Got Rebel Funds," The Washington Post, March 10, 2008, at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031000090.html (March 12, 2008).

[6]Ray Walser, "Hugo Chávez, the FARC, and Threats of War," Heritage Foundation WebMemo

No. 1834, March 4, 2008, at www.heritage.org/Research/LatinAmerica/wm1834.cfm.

[7]U.S. Department of State, Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs), Fact Sheet,October 11, 2005, at www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/fs/37191.htm (March 12, 2008).

[8]http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/es/oj/2005/l_272/l_27220051018es00150017.pdf (March 14, 2008)

[9]http://www.presidencia.gov.co/cne/2003/abril/03/03032003.htm (March 14, 2008)

[10]http://www.parlatino.org/news_cont.php?id=85&lg=es (March 14, 2008)

[11]Frank Bajak, "Colombian Leader's Raid Gamble Pays Off," The Washington Post, March 11, 2008, at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102151_2.html?sub=AR (March 12. 2008).

[12]Bajak, "Letters: Ecuador Leader Got Rebel Funds."

[13]Citgo.com, Company History, at www.citgo.com/AboutCITGO/CompanyHistory.jsp (March 12, 2008).

[14]http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000086&sid=aP3vwKnY0rNU&refer=latin_america (March 14, 2008)

[15]Kevin McKenzie, "New Navy Brand; Bases Pull Off Citgo Logo for Their Own Label," The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN), May 11, 2007, Page MTB 1.

[16]http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/09/20/chavez.un/index.html (March 14, 2008)

[17]Sharon Behn and Carmen Gentile, "U.S. Examines Laptops Seized in Ecuador Raid," The Washington Times, March 12, 2008, p. 2, at www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080312/FOREIGN/875493344 (March 12, 2008).

[18]U.S. Department of State, Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Country Reports on Terrorism, Chapter 6: State Sponsors of Terror Overview, April 28, 2006, at www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2005/64337.htm (March 12, 2008).

[Soldier4Christ]

Mississippi pro-life bills die in committee

Two key pro-life bills passed by the Mississippi State Senate have died in a House committee. Pro-life activist Tonya Britton is outraged at the lack of action by her state's lawmakers to protect innocent human life and young girls who've been the victims of sexual assault.

State Senator Alan Nunnlee sponsored the Child Protection Act, which would have required abortion providers to report sex crimes against minors; and a measure that would have prohibited the unlawful distribution of the abortion-inducing drug RU-486. Pro-life supporters were hoping for passage of the basic measures to hold abortion providers accountable for failing to disclose information on child rapists, and to restrict access to a drug that causes the death of a baby at the earliest stages of development.
 
Tonya Britton is president of Pro-Life Mississippi, which is based in Jackson, the state capital. She is outraged and disappointed at Mississippi Democrats.
 
"The Democratic Party in this state, and in this country, has systematically refused to honor the wishes of the majority of the people," laments Britton. "They also don't seem to understand that the targeted discrimination against the unborn is actually robbing them of votes."
 
Britton says it is outrageous that black Democratic lawmakers across the country refuse to acknowledge that they have the power to stop, or at least slow down, the number-one killer of black babies in America -- abortion.

[Soldier4Christ]

Pennsylvania Senate passes bill to protect traditional marriage

A bill that would protect traditional marriage in Pennsylvania has moved one step closer to the ballot.

On Tuesday, SB 1250 was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee with strong bi-partisan support. The bill would prohibit civil unions and recognize marriage as only between a man and a woman. According to a press release from the pro-family American Family Association (AFA) of Pennsylvania, voting out the bill was necessary because "legalizing civil unions would be used as a stepping stone to same-sex marriage," much like Connecticut, Vermont and New Jersey.
 
Diane Gramley, president of the AFA of Pennsylvania, believes that protecting marriage is the number-one issue facing the state and nation. She says liberal voters want to focus on property tax relief and healthcare as more important issues than defending traditional marriage. However, Gramley points out that "none of those things matter if we let the foundation of society go into ruin -- and I feel we need to deal with that first before the other issues."
 
According to Gramley, much work remains to be done before the measure can go to voters. She believes legislators must take proper action to protect "traditional marriage and the natural family" because those entities are under nationwide attack.
 
"We still need to put pressure on members of the Senate Appropriations Committee in the immediate future [and] all the senators and all the state representatives need to hear from their constituents," Gramley says.
 
The measure must pass the Pennsylvania House and Senate by June 30.  If it does, then the process would have to be repeated in the next legislative session before it would appear on the ballot as a proposed amendment to the state constitution.

[Soldier4Christ]

Democrats: For higher gas prices or against higher gas prices?

One guy has answered: “BOTH!”

Michigan Congressman Wants 50-Cent Tax Hike on Every Gallon of Gas

    A Michigan congressman wants to put a 50-cent tax on every gallon of gasoline to try to cut back on Americans’ consumption.

    Polls show that a majority of Americans support policies that would reduce greenhouse gases. But when it comes to paying for it, it’s a different story.

    Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., wants to help cut consumption with a gas tax…

Here’s the same Dingell buried with his own idiotic contradictions.

The Democratic Party: Congressman John Dingell (MI-15) Delivers Democratic Radio Address (2005)

We must respond to the needs of the American consumers who are seeing the prospect of $4 a gallon gas

Yes! By creating the prospect of $4.50 a gallon gas! Brilliant!

But Dingell can explain why that’s OK:

That’s right; millions of your hard-earned tax dollars would go to the same companies reaping the benefit of $3 a gallon of gas and $60 a barrel of oil…We have proposed a tough anti-price gouging law.

So, it’s OK for the government to “gouge” Americans of their “hard-earned tax dollars” (notice the language — it’s not YOUR dollars, it’s TAX dollars). First off, this guy is an economic ignoramus. Second off, even IF the oil companies had been “price gouging” for their “windfall” profits (which is a lie), isn’t that better than the government putting to paper a policy that would purposely cripple the economy?

Sure, look into whether the oil companies are doing anything illegal. Let the facts speak. However, if you are going to scream about unaffordable fuel (which Dingle admits in his 2005 address hurts the economy), how can you then proposed ANOTHER tax that would visit havoc on this country?

Easy answer — the Democrats’ ONLY guiding principle is increased consolidation of centralized government power. Whatever eggs need to be cracked, so be it…we need that omelet.




That's a negative 100 on the logic probe, Captain.