Protest - September 3rd & 4th

Protest - Thursday, September 3 and Friday, September 4, 3:30 - 6:00 P.M. both days. Newtown Park, Lawrenceburg. US 50 and Main Street across from UCB. Be sure and bring your signs and or flags and join us. Travis Hankins, running for Indiana's 9th Congressional District will be there at 6:00 to talk with everyone. Please try to be there for this!

Progress in Afghanistan

August 25, 2009 By Amanda Reinecker

Last Thursday, war-torn Afghanistan held a presidential election. Its outcome will weigh heavily on America's efforts to defeat the Taliban terrorists.

Although the results remain unknown, Heritage experts James Phillips and Lisa Curtis applauded the electoral process and respectable voter turnout as a significant "blow to the Taliban, since it demonstrates that Afghans support the democratic process and not the Taliban's version of harsh Islamist rule."

Despite this important show of democracy, however, Heritage Vice President Kim Holmes reminds the administration that success in Afghanistan will only result from strategic planning to build effective coalitions with Afghan leadership. The current challenge the administration faces is devising a way to "integrate successfully its nation-building efforts at the central government level with the much harder work of dealing with local factions and tribes susceptible to Taliban intimidation.”

Leading up to the elections, Taliban terrorists ran a fierce propaganda campaign, threatening to dismember and disfigure voters. And while 135 violent incidents claimed at least 26 lives and dampened turnout somewhat, "voter turnout appears to have been respectable."
Incumbent President Hamid Karzai is running neck-and-neck with challenger Abdullah Abdullah after early vote tallies. If neither garners 50 percent of the vote, the candidates will go before voters again in a runoff election. In addition to underscoring a desire to confront the fear-mongering and corruption of the Taliban, Heritage experts believe the closeness of this election could help "bolster Afghans' faith in the democratic process by demonstrating it was a genuinely competitive campaign."

No matter who wins, however, "the real test will be the extent to which Afghan leaders can effectively cooperate after the elections to build a more stable and prosperous Afghanistan," writes Heritage Middle East expert Jim Phillips in The Foundry.

America's efforts in the region will largely depend on cohesion among a legitimately elected Afghan leadership. "America will not be able to stabilize Afghanistan and ensure it does not again turn into a terrorist safe haven," Phillips and Curtis write in a separate analysis, "unless it has an Afghan government partner with credibility among the people."

» Heritage's Lindsey Shaw explains how beating the militants in Pakistan is key to winning in Afghanistan.

Last week's election was certainly "a step in the right direction." But as Heritage Vice President Kim Holmes explains, this step must be followed by "devising a workable strategy on Afghanistan and sticking to it…for as long as necessary and no matter the political fallout."

Obama's Union Car Czar Gets Big Promotion

Obama’s Union Car Czar Gets Big Promotion
Ron Bloom, the former United Steelworkers (USW) union bigwig appointed by President Barack Obama as “car czar” earlier this year is now poised to oversee ALL American manufacturing.

That’s right, a union boss whose forced unionism dogma destroys jobs, crushes employee free choice, and cripples the country’s competitiveness will soon be in charge of America’s entire industrial policy.

Bloom’s appointment and pending promotion are just pieces in the pattern of Obama’s shameless payback to the union bosses who got him elected.

What’s so troubling about Bloom’s ascendancy is the obvious connection between forced unionism and the debacle of General Motors and Chrysler in Detroit.

After the United Auto Workers (UAW) union bosses systematically crippled Detroit for decades with asinine and wasteful work rules and stifling union monopoly contracts that made it virtually impossible for America’s automotive industry to compete, the Obama Administration turned around and rewarded these UAW bosses with substantial ownership in the automakers they destroyed.

The appointment of Bloom suggests President Obama wants to impose Detroit’s catastrophic forced unionism model on all American manufacturing workers.

Read more about Bloom’s expected promotion on the National Right to Work Foundation’s blog.


As always, remember to check back regularly at the Foundation's blog for all the latest updates from National Right to Work.

The National Right to Work Foundation provides free legal aid to employees so they can fight back against union coercion and abuse.

The Foundation must rely on the voluntary support of individual Americans who believe in our cause and wish to advance our strategic litigation program. To make a fully tax-deductible donation in whatever amount, please click here.
________________________________________
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, is assisting thousands of employees in more than 200 cases nationwide. Its web address is www.nrtw.org/.

To help the National Right to Work Foundation grow; please forward this to a friend.

To view as a web page, please click this link: view online.

Sen. Lieberman: Postpone Universal Healthcare

Sunday, August 23, 2009 2:18 PM

One of the Senate's most powerful Democrats said Sunday that President Obama should take an "incremental" approach to fixing health care and argued that the country should postpone adding nearly 50 million new patients to the government system until after the recession is over.

"We morally, every one of us, would like to cover every American with health insurance," Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, told CNN's John King on the "State of the Union" program.

"But that's where you spend most of the $1 trillion plus, a little less that is estimated, the estimate said this healthcare plan will cost," he said.

"I'm afraid we've got to think about putting a lot of that off until the economy's out of recession," he added.

"There's no reason we have to do it all now, but we do have to get started. And I think the place to start is health delivery reform and insurance market reforms."

John King asked Lieberman if it was "time for the president to hit the reset button? Forget sweeping healthcare reform this year, do three or four incremental things that are less costly?"

Lieberman responded: "In a word, yes. I don't think -- I give the president tremendous credit for taking on the healthcare problem. And it really is a problem that we've got to deal with. But he took it on at a very difficult time that was not of his making.

"In other words, we're in a recession. People are very worried about their jobs, about the economic future. They've watched us add to the debt of this country. We're projected to run a $1.8 trillion deficit this year, September 30th, more than $1 trillion next year. You mentioned the 10-year numbers. People are nervous, I think the protests coming out at the public meetings around the country this month are as much to do with that larger environment as they are with questions about healthcare reform. I think great changes in our country often have come in steps. The civil rights movement occurred — changes occurred in steps. Let's focus now on how to reduce costs. That's been a central theme of the president.

"Let's talk about how to change the way health care is delivered. Let's talk about protecting people from not getting insurance because of pre-existing illness. Let's take off the caps on the amount of insurance coverage you can get over the years. Let's pay for preventive services for health from the first dollar. Here's the tough one. We morally, every one of us, would like to cover every American with health insurance. But that's where you spend most of the $1 trillion plus, a little less that is estimated, the estimate said this healthcare plan will cost."

Lieberman also said he oppose any attempt his colleagues to use a Senate maneuver called "reconciliation," in which only 51 votes — rather than 60 — would be needed to overcome opposition to a health care bill.

"I think it's a real mistake to try to jam through the total health insurance reform, healthcare reform plan that the public is either opposed to or of very, very passionate mixed minds about," he said. "It's just not good for the system, frankly, it won't be good for the Obama presidency."

© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Social Security Payments to Shrink in 2010 "President Barack Obama has said he would like tackle Social Security next year

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
AP
WASHINGTON (Aug. 23) - Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.
The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won't be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn't happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

"I will promise you, they count on that COLA," said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. "To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal."

Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.

Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.

"For many elderly, they don't feel that inflation is low because their expenses are still going up," said David Certner, legislative policy director for AARP. "Anyone who has savings and investments has seen some serious losses."

About 50 million retired and disabled Americans receive Social Security benefits. The average monthly benefit for retirees is $1,153 this year. All beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent increase in January, the largest since 1982.

More than 32 million people are in the Medicare prescription drug program. Average monthly premiums are set to go from $28 this year to $30 next year, though they vary by plan. About 6 million people in the program have premiums deducted from their monthly Social Security payments, according to the Social Security Administration.

Millions of people with Medicare Part B coverage for doctors' visits also have their premiums deducted from Social Security payments. Part B premiums are expected to rise as well. But under the law, the increase cannot be larger than the increase in Social Security benefits for most recipients.

There is no such hold-harmless provision for drug premiums.
Kennelly's group wants Congress to increase Social Security benefits next year, even though the formula doesn't call for it. She would like to see either a 1 percent increase in monthly payments or a one-time payment of $150.

The cost of a one-time payment, a little less than $8 billion, could be covered by increasing the amount of income subjected to Social Security taxes, Kennelly said. Workers only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,800 of income, a limit that rises each year with the average national wage.

But the limit only increases if monthly benefits increase.

Critics argue that Social Security recipients shouldn't get an increase when inflation is negative. They note that recipients got a big increase in January — after energy prices had started to fall. They also note that Social Security recipients received one-time $250 payments in the spring as part of the government's economic stimulus package.

"Seniors may perceive that they are being hurt because there is no COLA, but they are in fact not getting hurt," said Andrew G. Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. "Congress has to be able to tell people they are not getting everything they want."

Social Security is also facing long-term financial problems. The retirement program is projected to start paying out more money than it receives in 2016. Without changes, the retirement fund will be depleted in 2037, according to the Social Security trustees' annual report this year.

President Barack Obama has said he would like tackle Social Security next year, after Congress finishes work on health care, climate change and new financial regulations.

Lawmakers are preoccupied by health care, making it difficult to address other tough issues. Advocates for older people hope their efforts will get a boost in October, when the Social Security Administration officially announces that there will not be an increase in benefits next year.

"I think a lot of seniors do not know what's coming down the pike, and I believe that when they hear that, they're going to be upset," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is working on a proposal for one-time payments for Social Security recipients.

"It is my view that seniors are going to need help this year, and it would not be acceptable for Congress to simply turn its back," he said.

Killing Obamacare ‘Death panels’ cuts to the chase, which is the only way Democrats can be stopped.

By Andrew C. McCarthy

Earlier this week, some of my National Review colleagues recoiled from Sarah Palin’s bracing allegation that Obamacare would foist government “death panels” on vulnerable Americans. I recoiled from the recoil, which I thought exemplified the same sort of “hysteria” the editorial in question, “Rationing and Rationality,” condemned. There followed a debate (see The Corner archives for August 17 and 18), largely a fine parsing of how — rationally, of course — the term “death panel” ought to be defined. As we went back and forth, I kept having this nagging thought:

We could still blow this thing.

Obamacare and its proponents have taken a drubbing in the polls. Americans are passionate about matters of life and death and who gets to decide them. Unlike appropriations for the F-22 or another billion or so in “stimulus” so the NEA can underwrite simulated-sex dances, the health-care issue aroused the public. Citizens read the bill (something their legislators haven’t been anxious to do) and blew a gasket. Saul Alinsky’s bag of tricks doesn’t say what to do when the opponent to be smeared in the public mind is the public itself. So our organizer-in-chief is adrift at sea, and sinking.

But this battle is far from over. Since Barack Obama first emerged in national politics, it’s been chattering-class wisdom to throw both caution and Occam’s Razor to the wind. No need for concern, the pundits proclaimed, about Ayers and Dohrn and Khalidi and Wright and Pfleger and Frank Marshall Davis and ACORN and the Chicago New Party and infanticide and . . . and . . . and . . . . No matter the fever swamps of his past, they insisted, Obama has a first-rate intellect and a winning temperament — why, he even writes his own books (about himself) and knows who Reinhold Niebuhr was. Once he takes the reins and grapples with the concrete complexities of governing, we were assured, ideology will dissolve. He’ll become moderate and pragmatic, if for no other reason than his own political survival.

But we knuckle-draggers figured that if it walks like a radical and quacks like a radical it’s probably not all that moderate and pragmatic. Nothing we’ve seen so far calls for revising that assessment. If anything, these last seven months ought to tell us that the usual political rules don’t apply when predicting this president’s behavior. His purpose is revolutionary change in an American society he grew up understanding to be fundamentally unjust, racist, materialist, imperialist, and the agent of global misery. He is in Washington to transform the nation from the top down. Nationalized health care is key for him. If he gets it, sovereignty shifts from the citizen to the state. By law, government will be empowered to manage minute details of our lives. Over time — when, as the American Thinker’s Joseph Ashby observes, a “1,000-page health-care law explodes into many thousands of pages of regulatory codes” — that is precisely what government will do.

Obama is not a normal politician. He’s a visionary, and using health care to radically expand the scope of government happens to be central to his vision. For my money (if I have any left), achieving it is more important to him than is getting reelected. His poll numbers and those of congressional Democrats may keep plunging (for the latter, there must come a point where that is statistically impossible), but they have the votes to Rahm this thing through.

To be sure, Washington is still populated with normal politicians, and that is why you can almost touch the Democrats’ desperation. They don’t want to walk this plank, and they are praying to Gaia, night and day, for that magic moment when the usual RINO rabbits spring from the bipartisan hat to give them cover from their fuming constituents. But at its highest levels, this Democratic government is being steered by the party’s most extreme leftists. Obamacare is their life’s dream, they have the power to make it happen, and if they have to go it alone, they will try going it alone.

Even if Obama were a normal politician, 2012 is three years away, and he’ll worry about that later, if he has to worry at all: With his Justice Department green-lighting election fraud, ACORN and the New Black Panther party riding high, and amnesty for millions of illegal aliens on the horizon, 2012 may take care of itself.

Things may appear to be going well at the moment for opponents of Obamacare, but the stubborn fact remains that only one thing can stop this monstrosity: wavering congressional Democrats’ discovery that they have more to fear from their districts than from their leadership and the White House. The ardor of public opposition will determine whether this battle is won or lost.

That’s why I found our “death panel” debate so disconcerting. The editorial that pooh-poohed the label acknowledged, as my friend Rich Lowry later emphasized, that the legislation gave great reason (I’d say grave reason) to be concerned about “government rationing and a general slide toward euthanasia.” The editorial’s contention was that there wouldn’t “literally” be death panels. To me, that’s not much different from quibbling over “what the meaning of ‘is’ is.” The stakes here couldn’t be higher, time is short, and “death panel” cuts to the chase.

What, after all, is “end of life” counseling in a bill that, we here all agree, rations care (i.e., redirects it away from those who consume most of it now: the elderly and the infirm) and raises fast-track-to-euthanasia worries? In the Wall Street Journal, former Bush White House official Jim Towey alerts us that, at the Veterans Administration, Obama has reinstated a 52-page “end of life planning document” authored by a medical ethicist who has advocated doctor-assisted suicide in a Supreme Court brief. This Orwellian “Your Life, Your Choices” questionnaire, in the familiar “push poll” manner, methodically steers the patient toward the notion that he is a malingering near-vegetable causing a “severe emotional burden” for his family. I don’t know what the correct, non-hysterical term for such a process is, but “Grim Government Reaper” strikes me as more accurate than “Your Life, Your Choices.”

Imagine a woman lying dead of stab wounds and a man holding a bloody knife in his hand. If the reaction of the first cop on the scene is, “You killed her,” I don’t think that’s hyperbole. Most of us would find it weird if he instead said, “Well, now, wait just a second. There are complex issues of causation here, to say nothing of the epistemology of mind — intentional, involuntary, insanity, crime of passion? Let’s scrutinize this dispassionately, have the five-week trial with all the due-process trimmings, and then rationally decide what to call this. No point in leaping to rash conclusions.”

The second reaction might be sound, but it’s neither natural nor practical. Like your health, murder is a gripping matter — it’s not your everyday material misstatement in the exchange of commercial paper. “You killed her” gets to the heart of the matter, to the big things you need to think about. Plus, most of us don’t have a year for scrutiny, discovery, and settlement negotiations. We have lives to live. What we need to know is whether he probably did kill her, so we can evaluate some practical concerns, like whether he should be free to walk the streets while he waits for his five-week trial.

Obama, of course, wanted health-care “reform” done — all 1,000-plus pages of it — before the summer recess. In essence, Democrats want to repeal individual liberty; move one-sixth of the private sector into the same government-controlled model that has produced bankruptcy in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid; add additional trillions to the already exploded national debt; and they want to do it all right now — no discovery, no settlement negotiations, no five-week trial, no delays.

Given this Democratic whirlwind, I don’t see why we owe them better than “death panels.” They are what we’re sure to get if Obamacare isn’t killed first.

— National Review’s Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and the author of Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad (Encounter Books, 2008).

Join us at a rally for responsible energy policy

I want to invite you to join your neighbors on Tuesday, August 25 at 11:00 AM at RV Hall of Fame in Elkhart, IN for a rally supporting responsible energy policy. This rally is part of an “Energy Citizens” campaign that we are supporting with other national organizations to get the message across to our elected officials that we simply can’t accept new laws that will increase fuel prices, send jobs overseas and slow economic growth!

According to recent studies, new climate change legislation approved by the U.S. House will cost 2 million American jobs, raise gas prices to $4 per gallon, and reduce America’s energy security. During this economic downturn, we can’t afford to increase energy prices or lose more American jobs.

Now the U.S. Senate is considering this same costly legislation. That’s why I’m inviting you to the rally. It’s a fun and easy way to make a difference and to let our Senators know they can’t make the same mistakes as the House. There will be free food, drinks and great entertainment. So, I hope I’ll see you, your family and friends!

Tuesday, August 25 at 11:00 AM
RV Hall of Fame
21565 Executive Parkway
Elkhart, IN 46514

Together our voices will be heard! If you choose to attend, please take a moment after the event to email me at bill.rozett@partnershipforenergy.com and let me know how it went.
Join us and hundreds of your neighbors at our rally in support of American jobs and energy security. Support the Partnership for American Energy Security’s “Energy Citizens” campaign, a campaign for small business owners, truckers, farmers, homemakers and other citizens who want workable solutions to this nation’s energy needs! You can learn more about the Energy Citizen campaign at www.energycitizens.org.

Thank you for your continued support.
Sincerely,
Bill Rozett
Executive Director
Partnership for America’s Energy Security

The Death Book for Veterans Ex-soldiers don't need to be told they're a burden to society.

• By JIM TOWEY

If President Obama wants to better understand why America's discomfort with end-of-life discussions threatens to derail his health-care reform, he might begin with his own Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). He will quickly discover how government bureaucrats are greasing the slippery slope that can start with cost containment but quickly become a systematic denial of care.

Last year, bureaucrats at the VA's National Center for Ethics in Health Care advocated a 52-page end-of-life planning document, "Your Life, Your Choices." It was first published in 1997 and later promoted as the VA's preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes. After the Bush White House took a look at how this document was treating complex health and moral issues, the VA suspended its use. Unfortunately, under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated "Your Life, Your Choices."

Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing.

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his surrender.

I was not surprised to learn that the VA panel of experts that sought to update "Your Life, Your Choices" between 2007-2008 did not include any representatives of faith groups or disability rights advocates. And as you might guess, only one organization was listed in the new version as a resource on advance directives: the Hemlock Society (now euphemistically known as "Compassion and Choices").

This hurry-up-and-die message is clear and unconscionable. Worse, a July 2009 VA directive instructs its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to "Your Life, Your Choices." Not just those of advanced age and debilitated condition—all patients. America's 24 million veterans deserve better.

Many years ago I created an advance care planning document called "Five Wishes" that is today the most widely used living will in America, with 13 million copies in national circulation. Unlike the VA's document, this one does not contain the standard bias to withdraw or withhold medical care. It meets the legal requirements of at least 43 states, and it runs exactly 12 pages.

After a decade of observing end-of-life discussions, I can attest to the great fear that many patients have, particularly those with few family members and financial resources. I lived and worked in an AIDS home in the mid-1980s and saw first-hand how the dying wanted more than health care—they wanted someone to care.
If President Obama is sincere in stating that he is not trying to cut costs by pressuring the disabled to forgo critical care, one good way to show that commitment is to walk two blocks from the Oval Office and pull the plug on "Your Life, Your Choices." He should make sure in the future that VA decisions are guided by values that treat the lives of our veterans as gifts, not burdens.

Mr. Towey, president of Saint Vincent College, was director of the White House Office of Faith-Based Initiatives (2002-2006) and founder of the nonprofit Aging with Dignity.

Amazing USA Today/Gallup Poll you have to hear about

Dear Fellow Freedom Fighter:

I'm writing to you from our Americans for Prosperity Foundation's RightOnline conference conference in Pittsburgh, where almost 600 free-market activists are training to win the battle for our freedoms online.
New York Times bestselling author Michelle Malkin just spoke to the crowd.Since yesterday, these intrepid activists have been learning in panel discussions like "blogging 101" and "social networking communications".

One of the breakout sessions at RightOnline
Yesterday, hundreds upon hundreds of activists gathered for our AFP rally to send Sen. Arlen Specter a simple message -- vote NO on the health care takeover and NO on the job-killing cap-and-trade.We heard from an amazing 11-year-old Pennsylvania middle schooler named Quentin Cody who eloquently made the case for freedom and from Teri Adams who
heads the Independence Hall Tea Party (Philadelphia).

The crowd roaring at the Send Specter a Message Rally
And here's some encouraging news from the USA Today/Gallup poll published Thursday.In a survey of 1,000 adults, 34% of Americans say demonstrators at town hall style meetings (that's you and me) have made them MORE SYMPATHETIC to the protesters' views, and only 21% said the protests made them less sympathetic.

Even more importantly, Independents by a 2 to 1 margin (35% to 16%) say they are MORE SYMPATHETIC to the protesters' (our) views.These Independents are the Holy Grail of politics, and they're agreeing with us that the health care takeover is a disaster for our families and our nation.

In the face of the Obama Administration, Pelosi, Reid and their liberal friends vilifying us as "un-American," "evil-mongers," "astroturf," "mobs" and worse -- the American people are taking our side against these political elites.

If you ever wondered, "Can I make a difference by getting involved?" here is your answer.Hundreds of thousands of Americans just like you and me are getting involved.They're attending rallies, calling and emailing their elected officials, talking to friends and family.And, it's working.It's making a difference.

You're making a difference.

But, we face enormous challenges.Right across town, the left-wing NetRoots Nation is meeting to plot how they are going to turn things around for their side.They heard from Bill Clinton Thursday who made an aggressive pitch for government-run health care.Sen. Arlen Specter spoke to the liberal crowd and bragged that he would help them pass Card
Check and other "Democrat priorities" by opposing filibusters.

We've still got a long way to go.To win, we must keep up the pressure. Keep winning over new supporters. Keep turning out at rallies and events.

Americans for Prosperity's Patients First 'Hands Off My Health Care' bus continues -- one's in Montana right now and the other heads to Indiana first thing Monday.Our anti-cap-and-trade "Cost of Hot Air" tour gets back on the road this Tuesday hitting Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia and Virginia. Please come to one of these great events.

And, make plans now to come to Washington, D.C. for a national "Town Hall" meeting on October 2nd, as well as Americans for Prosperity Foundation's 3rd Defending the American Dream Summit right at the final decisive moments in the health care and cap-and-trade battles and I want you there!

Sincerely,

Tim Phillips
For more information on our national "Town Hall" meeting on October 2nd
-- and Americans for Prosperity Foundation 3rd annual Defending the American Summit on October 2nd and 3rd, please click here. It has never been a more important time to get involved.

Glenn Beck: How Much Is Your Life Worth? Obama's 'Health Care' Will Tell You 08-11-09

Part One

Part Two

Demonstrations August 20 and August 21

We the Hoosiers will be holding demonstrations next week at Newtown Park, Lawrenceburg, Indiana on Thursday, August 20 and Friday August 21 from 3:30 until 6:00 pm. The park is located on US 50 at the corner of US 50 and Main Street. It is across the highway from UCB Bank. Parking is on the side streets.

Bring your signs. Bring your flags. Most of all bring yourselves. This is your opportunity to show your friends and neighbors where you stand and let them know they need to become involved in stopping this march to socialism.

American Heritage Series by WallBuilders sponsored by We The Hoosiers

Discover the forgotten and astonishing story of our nation’s foundation in the American Heritage Series. For centuries, Americans were taught a truthful view of history that recognized the Godly heroes and moral foundation our nation was founded upon. But in recent years, a new version of history has assaulted the moral and spiritual fiber of our nation, leaving the truth of our past eliminated and forgotten. Until today. From Separation of Church and State, to the Civil Rights Movement, the heroism of our founding Fathers to the building of our nation’s monuments, this series will inspire every American to reclaim the Godly, true story of our nation. Join historian David Barton and experience the untold story of our nation’s history in the American Heritage Series.
This DVD series will be presented at the Lawrenceburg Public Library in the Depot Room and open to the public. Each session will last 1 1/2 hours. Seating is limited to 49.

Thursday, October 15 at 1 p.m. Topic: Why History Matters - Unearthing America’s Christian Foundation: Parts 1 & 2

Thursday, October 22 at 1 p.m. Topic: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers: Parts 1 & 2

Thursday, October 29 at 1 p.m. Topic: The Ideas that Birthed a Nation; Our Biblical Constitution; Is America a "Christian Nation?"

Thursday, November 5 at 1 p.m. Topic: Church, State & the Real 1st Amendment: Parts 1 & 2

Thursday, November 12 at 1 p.m. Topic: Influence of the Bible in America; How Pastors Shaped Our Independence: Parts 1 & 2

Please contact Debi at
pdk85@comcast.net or 487-2633 to reserve your seat.


A second set of five week presentations that will conclude the series will be scheduled at a later date due to limitations in reserving library rooms.

Alex Parniuk on The Fly Pod Show

Gary Pucket interview with Alex Parniuk

Congressman Baron Hill in Lawrenceburg

Congressman Baron Hill will be at the American Legion, adjacent to Newtown Park in Lawrenceburg on Thursday, August 13 at 2-2:30 to meet with the "Honor Flight" vets.

If you can go to make a presence, it would be a good thing to show Congressman Hill that we are indeed here. If we get the chance to ask questions, we ask that everyone be respectful and patient. We do not want to look like the mobs that are being shown on television. That kind of response, while understandable, is not doing our cause any good!!!

We hope to see a good number there on Thursday at 2:00!!

Remember, Newtown Park is on US 50 across from the UCB bank, and the construction of the overpass highway through Lawrenceburg. The Legion is at the back, left end of that park , a block off 50.

Demonstrations August 11 and August 12

We the Hoosiers will be holding demonstrations next week at Newtown Park, Lawrenceburg, Indiana on Tuesday Aug 11 and Wed Aug 12 from 3:30 until 6:00 pm. The park is located on US 50 at the corner of US 50 and Main Street. It is across the highway from UCB Bank. Parking is on the side streets.

Bring your signs. Bring your flags. Most of all bring yourselves. This is your opportunity to show your friends and neighbors where you stand and let them know they need to become involved in stopping this march to socialism.

After the demonstration on Wednesday plan on enjoying the evening with us by bringing a picnic dinner and listening to a guest speaker on the current health care plan. Become informed.

We keep hearing you want to do something so here is your opportunity. We are having an impact because the demonstration has grown from two guys on a rainy day to over thirty Thursday of this week. We will be heard but we need your support.

We the Hoosiers Protest Event

Click here to view

Singe Most Important Question

Here is the single most important question you can ask your Representative and Senators concerning ObamaCare.


" Will you vote to require yourself and all other members of Congress and their families to get health care coverage exclusively through the government option plan currently under consideration and being voted on in the halls of Congress? Please give me a yes or no answer."


If the ObamaCare health care bill isn't good for the members of Congress, then it is not good for the general public. Members of Congress should (MUST) live under the same laws as the general public.

Become More Knowledgeable

No matter how many books you now own about America’s Christian history, I encourage you to get this one ...
The Book That Made America by Dr. Jerry Newcombe explores our nation’s roots in the Word of God.
It’s a vitally important work in an era when the President of the United States declares that America is not a Christian nation and Newsweek announces with glee the demise of Christian America!
This is exactly what happened in communist Russia and China! Get rid of the Christian religion and they’ll have free reign.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people," John Adams famously announced in 1798. "It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." "The only foundation of a free Constitution, is pure Virtue" — when the new nation was but a dangerous dream.

Three years later, cousin Sam Adams observed, "While the People are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their Virtue they will be ready to surrender their Liberties to the first external or internal Invader.... If Virtue & Knowledge are diffused among the People, they will never be enslavd [sic]."

Support the Czar Accountability and Reform Act of 2009

Support the Czar Accountability and Reform Act of 2009
By Michelle Malkin • August 3, 2009 07:20 AM
I met with a group of terrific conservative House Republicans on the Hill last week to talk about Culture of Corruption. Two of the dominant themes from the book we discussed: transparency and accountability.
The czar explosion continues to resonate across party lines. As I’ve reported, it’s not just the number of czars, it’s the superfluousness. The conflicts of interest. The criminal history. And the compromised quality of so many of them.
GOP Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia is sponsoring a Czar Accountability and Reform Act that would “would bar the use of appropriated funds to pay either expenses or salaries of members of task forces, councils, or similar offices established by the president and headed by a person appointed inappropriately to such a post without Senate advice and consent.”
Every member of Congress worth his/her oath of office should support the bill. Take advantage of the recess to press your representatives on the issue.
Do they support accountability or do they support the unlimited growth and empowerment of Obama’s shadow cabinet?

TITLE(S): (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)
• SHORT TITLE(S) AS INTRODUCED:
Czar Accountability and Reform (CZAR) Act of 2009
• OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED:
To provide that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, or similar office which is established by or at the direction of the President and headed by an individual who has been inappropriately appointed to such position (on other than an interim basis), without the advice and consent of the Senate.


H.R.3226
Title: To provide that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, or similar office which is established by or at the direction of the President and headed by an individual who has been inappropriately appointed to such position (on other than an interim basis), without the advice and consent of the Senate.
Sponsor: Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] (introduced 7/15/2009) Cosponsors (34)
Latest Major Action: 7/15/2009 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3226
To provide that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, or similar office which is established by or at the direction of the President and headed by an individual who has been inappropriately appointed to such position (on other than an interim basis), without the advice and consent of the Senate.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 15, 2009
Mr. KINGSTON (for himself, Mr. CARTER, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. LATTA, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. LINDER, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Ms. FALLIN, Mr. SHADEGG, and Mr. LAMBORN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
________________________________________
A BILL
To provide that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, or similar office which is established by or at the direction of the President and headed by an individual who has been inappropriately appointed to such position (on other than an interim basis), without the advice and consent of the Senate.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Czar Accountability and Reform (CZAR) Act of 2009'.
SEC. 2. LIMITATION.
(a) In General- Appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, or similar office--
(1) which is established by or at the direction of the President; and
(2) the head of which--
(A) is appointed to such position (on other than an interim basis) without the advice and consent of the Senate;
(B) is excepted from the competitive service by reason of its confidential, policy-determining, the policy-making, or policy-advocating character; and
(C) performs or delegates functions which (but for the establishment of such task force, council, or similar office) would be performed or delegated by an individual in a position to which the President appoints an individual by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(b) Definition- For purposes of this section, the term `competitive service' has the meaning given such term by section 2102 of title 5, United States Code.

COSPONSORS(34), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 7/15/2009 Rep Bachmann, Michele [MN-6] - 7/15/2009
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 7/16/2009 Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 7/16/2009
Rep Boozman, John [AR-3] - 7/28/2009 Rep Brady, Kevin [TX-8] - 7/15/2009
Rep Broun, Paul C. [GA-10] - 7/15/2009 Rep Brown-Waite, Ginny [FL-5] - 7/16/2009
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 7/21/2009
Rep Campbell, John [CA-48] - 7/15/2009
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 7/15/2009 Rep Chaffetz, Jason [UT-3] - 7/15/2009
Rep Coble, Howard [NC-6] - 7/16/2009 Rep Fallin, Mary [OK-5] - 7/15/2009
Rep Fleming, John [LA-4] - 7/15/2009
Rep Garrett, Scott [NJ-5] - 7/20/2009
Rep Granger, Kay [TX-12] - 7/20/2009 Rep Hoekstra, Peter [MI-2] - 7/15/2009
Rep Johnson, Sam [TX-3] - 7/24/2009
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] - 7/15/2009
Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 7/15/2009 Rep Latta, Robert E. [OH-5] - 7/15/2009
Rep Linder, John [GA-7] - 7/15/2009
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [OK-3] - 7/24/2009
Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 7/28/2009
Rep Pitts, Joseph R. [PA-16] - 7/15/2009
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 7/15/2009
Rep Rogers, Harold [KY-5] - 7/20/2009
Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [WI-5] - 7/20/2009 Rep Shadegg, John B. [AZ-3] - 7/15/2009
Rep Shimkus, John [IL-19] - 7/20/2009 Rep Simpson, Michael K. [ID-2] - 7/21/2009
Rep Smith, Lamar [TX-21] - 7/16/2009 Rep Young, Don [AK] - 7/28/2009

I wonder why mike Pence (IN-6) and john Boehner (OH-8) are not co-sponsors???? need to send some letters…