Friday, July 15, 2011

STRATFOR Dispatch: Russia's Eurasian Economic Union


Forbes Stands By Article suggesting Palin Illegality in Newsweek cover attire

Forbes Stands By Article suggesting Palin Illegality in Newsweek cover attire

Katyusha multiple launch rocket system is 70 years old

Dick Morris TV; Lunch ALERT! Obama Puts America on Welfare

Cartwright: Budget cuts will mean huge changes - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

Cartwright: Budget cuts will mean huge changes - Army News News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

Labor-Management Dynamic Shifts in Wisconsin Schools, Taxpayers Reap Rewards

Labor-Management Dynamic Shifts in Wisconsin Schools, Taxpayers Reap Rewards

Wisconsin Legislative Update


e-Update – July 14, 2011

Capitol Connection

By State Senator Joe Leibham

July 14, 2011

~ Information on Redistricting ~

Article 4 of the Wisconsin State Constitution requires that the state legislature, upon receipt of decennial census information from the federal government, develop and approve updated congressional and legislative district boundary lines. This process is formally known as redistricting and the state legislature is currently in the midst of fulfilling this constitutional responsibility.

While state statutes set certain requirements, the end goal of redistricting as prescribed in the constitution is simple - the establishment of election districts that provide representational equality for all potential voters.

Based on the 2010 federal census, Wisconsin’s population has grown from 5,363,675 persons in 2000 to 5,686,986 persons in 2010. This is an increase of 323,311 people or a 6% positive change. Interestingly, 52 counties grew in population, with St. Croix and Calumet experiencing the largest percentage growths, and 20 counties lost population.

Using this information and based on our constitutional authority and responsibilities, the legislative majorities have developed new district boundaries for all 33 State Senate and 99 State Assembly districts. Most districts will see substantial changes from the current boundaries based on population changes and shifts across the state. In 2000, the ideal Senate district had a population of 162,536. This will now grow to 172,333. The ideal Assembly district will grow from 54,179 to 57,444.

If interested, you can view an interactive map of the proposed new Senate districts at:

An interactive map of Assembly districts can be viewed at:

The proposed map would mean substantial changes for our 9th Senate district. The district has actually experienced a decline in population over the past ten years going from 161,775 persons in 2000 154,979 persons in 2010, according to the census. The boundaries will therefore have to be expanded to gather a population base of just over 172,000 people.

In an effort to accomplish this specific goal and in connection with changes that are required in all 32 other Senate districts, the new map proposes that the following communities become a part of the 9th district: the Town of Maple Grove, the Town of Chilton, the City of Chilton, the Town of Lima, the Town of Wilson, the Town of Sherman, the Town of Holland, the Village of Cedar Grove, the Village of Oostburg, the Village of Random Lake and the Village of Adell.

The following communities would no longer be a part of the 9th district: the Town of Greenbush, the Town of Russell, the Town of Forest, the Town of Marshfield, the Village of Mount Calvary, the Village of St. Cloud, the Town of Calumet, the Town of Brothertown, the Town of New Holstein and the City of New Holstein.

The proposed maps, if approved and signed into law, would be in effect for the 2012 legislative and congressional elections and new Senate and Assembly representation would begin in January 2013.

As I review the maps in advance of a vote, I will seek to ensure that the new districts meet three key requirements:

  • Equal Population - The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the U.S. Constitution requires legislative districts to be “as nearly equal in population as practical.”
  • Minority Representation - The federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires that redistricting may not result in the denial or abridgment of any voting right based on race, color or minority status. District lines may not be drawn in a way that results in “packing” minorities into a small number of districts, nor “fracturing” minorities into districts made up primarily of non-minorities.

  • Compact, Contiguous Districts - WI Statute 4.001(3) requires that districts give “due consideration to the need for contiguity and compactness of area.”

If the maps meet these conditions, I hope the legislature will fulfill its constitutional responsibility in a timely manner and approve new legislative maps for the state of Wisconsin.

For more general redistricting information, log-on to the non-partisan Legislative Technology Services Bureau website at:

As always, it has been a pleasure communicating with you. Please remember to communicate with me and share your input by calling 888-295-8750, writing to me at P.O. Box 7882, Madison, WI 53707-7882, or by e-mailing me at You can also log on to the 9th Senate District on-line office at

It is an honor to work for and represent the residents of the 9th District in the State Senate.

To learn more about Senator Leibham's efforts, log-on to his:

"On-line" Office of the 9th Senate District at:

or contact him at:

Toll Free - 888.295.8750

Capitol Address -

P.O. Box 7882

Madison, WI 53707-7882

Putin takes stock of his political career

RIA NovostiIn what could be seen as the start of a presidential campaign, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin reflected Friday on decisions he made that he said could have cost him his political career - and declared that the risk was always justified.Putin takes stock of his political career
17:28 15/07/2011 In what could be seen as the start of a presidential campaign, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin reflected Friday on decisions he made that he said could have cost him his political career - and declared that the risk was always justified.>>

KA-52 Alligator

Weekend Watching: "For Liberty" Documentary Recut: 1hr slim handout version, now shipping & on YouTube

Weekend Watching: "For Liberty" Documentary Recut: 1hr slim handout version, now shipping & on YouTube

Founding Fathers Quote

How prone all human institutions have been to decay; how subject the best-formed and most wisely organized governments have been to lose their check and totally dissolve; how difficult it has been for mankind, in all ages and countries, to preserve their dearest rights and best privileges, impelled as it were by an irresistible fate of despotism.

James Monroe

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Values Make A Come Back - Ron Paul And Michele Bachmann Surge In Recent Polls

Voters let their voices be heard in Iowa

A poll consisting of 600 likely Republican caucus voters Michele Bachmann received 21% of the votes and Ron Paul received 14%.  These are huge increases from earlier polls.  They have proven they have the momentum to be top tier candidates.  Now we will see if the mainstream and RINO medias can accept what the base is shouting from their roof tops that they want; freedom, liberty, a restrained government, states' rights, nation sovereignty, and a neutral foreign policy with a strong military to protect our closed borders.  Let's support these candidates and show the world what a revived republic can really do.

Ron Paul Ad - Conviction

Honest and effective.

Dick Morris TV; Lunch ALERT! Obama is No Centrist

I am really starting to enjoy these videos. Obama is most certainly not a centrist and our side should remember that.

Rep. Michele Bachmann Supports PROMISES Act

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Ron Paul Not Seeking Re-Election

Ron Paul has announced he will not be running for re-election.  After almost 24 years of service as a congressman he has decided to focus his efforts into his presidential campaign.  This is a loss for District 14, but an exciting move for his bid for the presidency.  He can now put his undivided attention into spreading his message.  This should stir up a lot of energy in his supporters.  This could be the decision that makes him Obama's replacement.  Keep an eye on his campaign over the next couple of months; it is going to get interesting.

When Will America Stop Imitating France

One thing that constantly drives me crazy is that our government will allow our troops to be slaughtered by little puppet governments with no response. Our troops deserve better and we would end a lot of conflicts early if people knew we were serious about protecting our interests and the men and women who serve our Republic. I want point out this excellent post at Notes from the Cab regarding Iran and the United States' lack of a response to Iranian aggression.

VIDEO: Cut, Cap, & BALANCE - A Complete Picture

Perry's Taxpayer-Funded Home Could Pose Political Hazard

Perry's Taxpayer-Funded Home Could Pose Political Hazard

India Suffers Another Terror Attack On The City Of Mumbai

Our prayers go out to India and all the dead and wounded of this vicious attack. I hope those responsible are quickly caught and dealt with.

Dick Morris TV; Lunch ALERT! Raise Revenue By Shrinking Government

Eat Our Peas

Senator Ron Johnson on CNN's In the Arena

Founding Fathers Quote

If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave.

John Adams

New FDA Report: Abortion Drug Kills 14 Women, Injures 2,200

New FDA Report: Abortion Drug Kills 14 Women, Injures 2,200

ACLU Using Food Pantries To Undermine Voter ID In Wisconsin

ACLU Using Food Pantries To Undermine Voter ID In Wisconsin

Is North Dakota Really a State? - Valley News Live - KVLY/KXJB - Fargo/Grand Forks

Is North Dakota Really a State? - Valley News Live - KVLY/KXJB - Fargo/Grand Forks

VA Gov. Bob McDonnell on CNBC's Squawk Box

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

NOT GUILTY!…SEIU Thugs Cleared in Brutal Gladney Beatdown!…Update: Gladney Reaction (Video)

NOT GUILTY!…SEIU Thugs Cleared in Brutal Gladney Beatdown!…Update: Gladney Reaction (Video)

ALG Blasts McConnell Plan to Give President Unilateral Authority to Raise Debt Ceiling

For Immediate Release Contact: Robert Romano (press); Rebekah Rast (TV & radio)

July 12, 2011 Phone: (703) 383-0880

ALG Blasts McConnell Plan to Give President Unilateral Authority to Raise Debt Ceiling

July 12th, 2011, Fairfax, VA—Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson today released the following statement on a Senate Republican proposal to give the White House singular authority to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval:

"Under the Senate Republican proposal, Congress would cede its constitutional power to borrow on the full faith and credit of the U.S. in deference to the Executive Branch. All of this, apparently, to solve a short-term political problem for Republicans seeking to avoid blame for a failure to pass an increase in the $14.294 trillion debt ceiling.

"This abdication of responsibility is puzzling to say the least. When spending is this out of control, and the only thing keeping it in check is the congressionally authorized debt ceiling, why would Congress cede its say on the nation's finances?

"If Republicans give sole power to raise the debt ceiling to Barack Obama, it will be a colossal failure of this Congress."

Interview Availability: Please contact Rebekah Rast at (703) 383-0880 or at to arrange an interview with ALG President Bill Wilson.

Americans for Limited Government is a non-partisan, nationwide network committed to advancing free market reforms, private property rights and core American liberties. For more information on ALG please call us at 703-383-0880 or visit our website at

STRATFOR Dispatch: Assassination and Post-NATO Afghanistan

Senator Glenn Grothman On The Earned Income Tax Credit

For Immediate Release July 11, 2011

Contact: Senator Glenn Grothman 1-800-662-1227 - Capitol
1-262-689-8421 – Cell

Earned Income Tax Credit:

Anti-Marriage and Anti-Work

One of the more controversial provisions in the budget bill made minor changes to the Earned Income Tax Credit. Democrats are claiming that Republicans are raising taxes on the poor by putting small reductions into this program. A thorough understanding of the Earned Income Tax Credit, however, makes it clear that it is an anti-work, anti-marriage program that easily could have been reduced more.

The federal government gives out their own, larger, Earned Income Tax Credit to people who work. They give a check of up to $5,666 to families with three or more children if they make less than $16,000 a year ($21,000 if married). The state currently adds a check of $2,436 to this amount. So, if you only work part-time or work for minimum wage you can get a combined check of about $8,139 when you file your tax return. As you make more money, the check is reduced so that single parents with three children get nothing when they make $44,000 a year and married couples get nothing when they make $50,000 a year. The credit is smaller with one or two children. The state and federal combined maximum credit for one child is $3,600, and for two children is $5,752. In Governor Walker’s budget, the credit for one-child families was not changed. For two-child families, the maximum combined credit dropped from $5,752 to $5,698. For three children it dropped from $8,139 to $7,621.

There are several problems with the Earned Income Tax Credit:

First, it is misleading to call this credit a reduction in taxes. Most low income people pay no taxes. Seventy-seven percent of this credit does not go to reduce income taxes. It would more accurately be described as a gift.

Second, while the budget Governor Walker just signed mildly reduced the credit, it is still the largest credit of all 50 states for families with three or more children. (The District of Columbia gives out a higher credit, and Minnesota provides a different type of credit which is not comparable.) Is it a good thing that we have the highest welfare benefits in the country? We are 12th highest for families with two children and tied for 19th for families with one child. Twenty-seven states have no Earned Income Tax Credit at all.

Third, because of the generosity of the credit, it encourages fraud. In 2006 the federal government estimated that 30-percent of all Earned Income Tax Credit dollars went to people as a result of fraud. We could, I suppose, hire still more Department of Revenue agents to police around and look for unreported income or pretend children. However, this would cost even more money, and I don’t like more government employees poking around in peoples’ lives.

Fourth, the credit discourages work. Since one’s Earned Income Tax Credit (remember a maximum of $8,000 for two checks) is phased out between $16,000 and $44,000 as other taxes are phased in, it would cause one not to want to work much harder. Food Stamps, rent assistance, energy assistance, and health care assistance are also phased out as you earn more money. A good case can be made that if you have a child you’d be better off making $16,000 than $36,000.

Finally, and most importantly, the Earned Income Tax Credit is anti-marriage, since a man in the house would (if he made $30,000 to $35,000) greatly reduce or eliminate the credit (also reduce the Food Stamps, rent assistance, etc.) This is one of many programs state and federal governments have that tell women it’s financially foolish to get married, and marriage is our best weapon against child poverty.

The only mistake Governor Walker made was to not reduce this payment more. For some Democrats to accuse me and other Republicans of raising taxes when we cut an anti-work, anti-marriage program is absurd. There are some deserving people for whom the earned income credit is helpful – it’s hard to spend this amount of money and not do some good. But due to the overall negative message, I hope it is reduced in the future.

Please contact my office with any comments you have regarding the Earned Income Tax Credit. Call me at 800-662-1227 or email me at


Union curbs rescue a Wisconsin school district | Byron York | Politics | Washington Examiner

Union curbs rescue a Wisconsin school district Byron York Politics Washington Examiner

Libya and the Problem with The Hague

Libya and the Problem with The Hague is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

By George Friedman

The war in Libya has been under way for months, without any indication of when it might end. Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s faction has been stronger and more cohesive than imagined and his enemies weaker and more divided. This is not unusual. There is frequently a perception that dictators are widely hated and that their power will collapse when challenged. That is certainly true at times, but often the power of a dictator is rooted in the broad support of an ideological faction, an ethnic group or simply those who benefit from the regime. As a result, naive assumptions of rapid regime change are quite often replaced by the reality of protracted conflict.

This has been a characteristic of what we have called “humanitarian wars,” those undertaken to remove a repressive regime and replace it with one that is more representative. Defeating a tyrant is not always easy. Gadhafi did not manage to rule Libya for 42 years without some substantial support.

Nevertheless, one would not expect that, faced with opposition from a substantial anti-regime faction in Libya as well as NATO and many other countries, Gadhafi would retain control of a substantial part of both the country and the army. Yet when we look at the situation carefully, it should be expected.

The path many expected in Libya was that the support around Gadhafi would deteriorate over time when faced with overwhelming force, with substantial defections of senior leaders and the disintegration of his military as commanders either went over to the other side en masse, taking their troops with them, or simply left the country, leaving their troops leaderless. As the deterioration in power occurred, Gadhafi — or at least those immediately around Gadhafi — would enter into negotiations designed for an exit. That hasn’t happened, and certainly not to the degree that it has ended Gadhafi’s ability to resist. Indeed, while NATO airpower might be able to block an attack to the east, the airstrikes must continue because it appears that Gadhafi has retained a great deal of his power.

The International Criminal Court

One of the roots of this phenomenon is the existence of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which became operational in 2002 in The Hague, Netherlands. The ICC has jurisdiction, under U.N. mandate, to prosecute individuals who have committed war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity. Its jurisdiction is limited to those places where recognized governments are unwilling or unable to carry out their own judicial processes. The ICC can exercise jurisdiction if the case is referred to the ICC prosecutor by an ICC state party signatory or the U.N. Security Council (UNSC) or if the prosecutor initiates the investigation him or herself.

The current structure of international law, particularly the existence of the ICC and its rules, has an unintended consequence. Rather than serving as a tool for removing war criminals from power, it tends to enhance their power and remove incentives for capitulation or a negotiated exit. In Libya’s case, Gadhafi’s indictment was referred to the ICC by the UNSC, and he was formally indicted in late June. The existence of the ICC, and the clause that says that it has jurisdiction where signatory governments are unable or unwilling to carry out their own prosecutions, creates an especially interesting dilemma for Gadhafi and the intervening powers.

Consider the case of Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia. Milosevic, like Gadhafi, was indicted during a NATO intervention against his country. His indictment was handed down a month and a half into the air campaign, in May 1999, by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), a court that was to be the mold, to a large extent, for the ICC. After the intervention, Milosevic clung to power until 2001, cracking down on the opposition and dissident groups whom he painted as traitors during the NATO air campaign. Milosevic still had supporters in Serbia, and as long as he refused to cede his authority, he had enough loyalists in the government who refused to prosecute him in the interest of maintaining stability.

One of the reasons Milosevic refused to cede power was the very real fear that regime change in Serbia would result in a one-way ticket to The Hague. This is exactly what happened. A few months after Serbia’s October 2000 anti-Milosevic revolution, the new and nominally pro-Western government issued an arrest warrant for Milosevic, finally sending him to The Hague in June 2001 with a strong push from NATO. The Milosevic case illustrates the inherent risk an indicted leader will face when the government falls in the hands of the opposition.

The case of Radovan Karadzic, the Bosnian Serb political leader, is also instructive in showing the low level of trust leaders like Gadhafi may place in assurances from the West regarding non-prosecution. Serbian authorities arrested Karadzic in July 2008 after being on the run for 12 years. He claimed in court proceedings at the ICTY that he was given assurances by the United States — denied by Washington — that if he were to step down and make way for a peace process in Bosnia, he would not be prosecuted. This obviously did not happen. In other words, the likely political arrangements that were arrived at to initiate a peace process in Bosnia-Herzegovina were wholly disregarded by the ICTY.

Gadhafi is obviously aware of the Balkans precedents. He has no motivation to capitulate, since that could result in him being sent to The Hague, nor is there anyone that he can deal with who can hold the ICC in abeyance. In most criminal proceedings, a plea bargain is possible, but this is not simply a matter of a plea bargain.
Regardless of what a country’s leader has done, he or she holds political power, and the transfer of that power is inherently a political process. What the ICC has done since 2002 — and the ICTY to an extent before that — is to make the political process moot by making amnesty impossible. It is not clear if any authority exists to offer and honor an amnesty. However, the ICC is a product of the United Nations, and the authority of the United Nations lies in the UNSC. Though there is no clear precedent, there is an implicit assumption that the UNSC would be the entity to offer a negotiated amnesty with a unanimous vote. In other words, the political process is transferred from Libya to the UNSC, where any number of countries might choose to abort the process for their own political ends. So the domestic political process is trumped by The Hague’s legal process, which can only be trumped by the UNSC’s political process. A potentially simple end to a civil war escalates to global politics.

And this is not simply a matter of a leader’s unwillingness to capitulate or negotiate. It aborts the process that undermines men like Gadhafi. Without a doubt, most of the men who have surrounded him for years are guilty of serious war crimes and crimes against humanity. It is difficult to imagine anyone around Gadhafi whose hands are clean, or who would have been selected by Gadhafi if their hands weren’t capable of being soiled. Each of them is liable for prosecution by the ICC, particularly the senior leadership of the military; the ICC has bound their fate to that of Gadhafi, actually increasing their loyalty to him. Just as Gadhafi has nothing to lose by continued resistance, neither do they. The ICC has forged the foundation of Gadhafi’s survival and bitter resistance.

It is not a question only of the ICC. Recall the case of Augusto Pinochet, who staged a coup in Chile against Salvador Allende and presided over a brutal dictatorship. His support was not insubstantial in Chile, and he left power in a carefully negotiated political process. A Spanish magistrate, a minor figure in the Spanish legal system, claimed jurisdiction over Pinochet’s crimes in Chile and demanded that he be extradited from Britain, where Pinochet was visiting, and the extradition was granted. Today the ICC is not the only authority that can claim jurisdiction in such cases, but under current international law, nations have lost the authority to negotiate solutions to the problem of transferring power from dictators to representative democracies. Moreover, they have ceded that authority not only to the ICC but also to any court that wants to claim jurisdiction.

Apply this to South Africa. An extended struggle took place between two communities. The apartheid regime committed crimes under international law. In due course, a negotiated political process arranged a transfer of power. Part of the agreement was that a non-judicial truth commission would review events but that prosecutions would be severely limited. If that transfer of power were occurring today, with the ICC in place and “Spanish magistrates” loose, how likely would it be that the white government would be willing to make the political concessions needed to transfer power? Would an agreement among the South Africans have trumped the jurisdiction of the ICC or another forum? Without the absolute certainty of amnesty, would the white leadership have capitulated?

The desire for justice is understandable, as is the need for an independent judiciary. But a judiciary that is impervious to political realities can create catastrophes in the name of justice. In both the Serbia and Libya cases, ICC indictments were used by Western countries in the midst of bombing campaigns to legitimize their humanitarian intervention. The problem is that the indictments left little room for negotiated settlements. The desire to punish the wicked is natural. But as in all things political — though not judicial — the price of justice must also be considered. If it means that thousands must die because the need to punish the guilty is an absolute, is that justice? Just as important, does it serve to alleviate or exacerbate human suffering?

Judicial Absolutism

Consider a hypothetical. Assume that in the summer of 1944, Adolph Hitler had offered to capitulate to the allies if they would grant him amnesty. Giving Hitler amnesty would have been monstrous, but at the same time, it would have saved a year of war and a year of the holocaust. From a personal point of view, the summer of 1944 was when deportation of Hungarian Jews was at its height. Most of my family died that fall and winter. Would leaving Hitler alive been worth it to my family and millions of others on all sides?

The Nuremberg precedent makes the case for punishment. But applied rigorously, it undermines the case for political solutions. In the case of tyrannies, it means negotiating the safety of tyrants in return for their abdication. The abdication brings an end to war and allows people who would have died to continue to live their lives.

The theory behind Nuremberg and the ICC is that the threat of punishment will deter tyrants. Men like Gadhafi, Milosevic, Karadzic and Hitler grow accustomed to living with death long before they take power. And the very act of seizing that power involves two things: an indifference to common opinion about them, particularly outside their countries, and a willingness to take risks and then crush those who might take risks against them. Such leaders constitute an odd, paradoxical category of men who will risk everything for power, and then guard their lives and power with everything. It is hard to frighten them, and harder still to have them abandon power without guarantees.

The result is that wars against them take a long time and kill a lot of people, and they are singularly indifferent to the suffering they cause. Threatening them with a trial simply closes off political options to end the war. It also strips countries of their sovereign right to craft non-judicial, political solutions to their national problems. The dictator and his followers have no reason to negotiate and no reason to capitulate. They are forced to continue a war that could have ended earlier and allowed those who would have died the opportunity to live.

There is something I call judicial absolutism in the way the ICC works. It begins with the idea that the law demands absolute respect and that there are crimes that are so extraordinary that no forgiveness is possible. This concept is wrapped in an ineluctable judicial process that, by design, cannot be restrained and is independent of any moderating principles.

It is not the criminals the ICC is trying who are the issue. It is the next criminal on the docket. Having seen an older dictator at The Hague earlier negotiate his own exit, and see that negotiation fall through, why would a new dictator negotiate a deal? How can Gadhafi contemplate a negotiation that would leave him without power in Libya, when the Milosevic case clearly illuminates his potential fate at the hands of a rebel-led Libya? Judicial absolutism assumes that the moral absolute is the due process of law. A more humane moral absolute is to remove the tyrant and give power to the nation with the fewest deaths possible in the process.

The problem in Libya is that no one knows how to go from judicial absolutism to a more subtle and humane understanding of the problem. Oddly, it is the judicial absolutists who regard themselves as committed to humanitarianism. In a world filled with tyrants, this is not a minor misconception.

Read more: Libya and the Problem with The Hague | STRATFOR

Dick Morris TV; Lunch ALERT! The Palin/Bachmann Primary

Ron Paul: Competing Currencies – a Defense Against Profligate Government Spending

The end of June marked what is hopefully the end of the Federal Reserve's policy of quantitative easing. For months the Fed has purchased hundreds of billions of dollars of Treasury debt, enabling the government to fund its profligate deficit spending, push the national debt to its limit, and further devalue the dollar. Confidence in the dollar is plummeting, confidence in the euro has been shattered by the European bond crisis, and beleaguered consumers and investors are slowly but surely awakening to the fact that government-issued currencies do not hold their value.

Currency is sound only when it is recognized and accepted as such by individuals, through the actions of the market, without coercion. Throughout history, gold and silver have been the two commodities that have most fully satisfied the requirements of sound money. This is why people around the world are flocking once again to gold and silver as a store of value to replace their rapidly depreciating paper currencies. Even central banks have come to their senses and have begun to stock up on gold once again.
[read more]

Catholic League News Release


There was a book review in yesterday’s New York Times by Bill Keller, executive editor of the newspaper, of Absolute Monarchs: A History of the Papacy, by John Julius Norwich. Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on it today:

It’s hard to say who is dumber—Bill Keller or John Julius Norwich. But to say that Pope Urban VIII imprisoned Galileo and banned all his works is without doubt the voice of a moron: Urban VIII lauded Galileo’s work and showered him with gifts and medals. Furthermore, Galileo was never imprisoned; he was put under house arrest in an apartment in a Vatican palace, with a servant.

Similarly, to say that Pope Pius XII was an enabler of fascism is libelous: no one in the world did more to save Jews and undermine Hitler than Pius XII. That is why the Israelis planted 800,000 trees in his honor, one for every Jew he saved.

Keller is right to say that Norwich is “no scholar,” and he is doubly right to say that he is “selective about where he lingers.” Where he lingers is in the mythical world. Any author who wants to be taken seriously does not offer an entire chapter about some alleged historical figure whom the author reluctantly admits never lived. But that is just what he did by offering up fairy tales about “Pope Joan.”

Naturally, Keller says the bishops blamed “the libertine culture” for the “scourge of pedophile priests.” But the “blame Woodstock” explanation originated with the New York Times, not the bishops, and the scourge he mentions is homosexuality, not pedophilia. So he is twice wrong.
It is not surprising that the book ends by begging the Catholic Church to accept homosexuality and women priests. That is what these people live for. But since neither Keller nor Norwich is Catholic, why should they care? They care because the Church does not entertain their trendy ideas about sexuality, and it never will.

Contact Bill Keller:

Contact our director of communications about Donohue’s remarks:
Jeff Field
Phone: 212-371-3191 Promotional Trailer

The Week Ahead: Ron Paul And Stalled Debt Ceiling Talks

The Week Ahead: Ron Paul And Stalled Debt Ceiling Talks

STRATFOR Dispatch: Chinese-U.S. Military Leaders Meet in Beijing

Monday, July 11, 2011

Dick Morris TV; Lunch ALERT! The Question That Will Defeat Obama

Update from the House Republican Study Committee (RSC)

Monday, July11, 2011

RSC Update: The House Stays to Vote on Balanced Budget Amendment

From the Chairman

As Americans learned after the 1990 Budget Deal, promises of spending cuts today can easily turn into spending increases tomorrow. The only way to guarantee real, long-term cuts in government spending is with a constitutional requirement that Washington balance its budget. That’s why the Balanced Budget Amendment forms the cornerstone to our three-pronged Cut, Cap, and Balance plan to limit government spending in the short, medium, and long-term.

With the demand for discipline in Washington growing stronger every day, the House will debate and vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment next week. We know Washington won’t live within its means by choice. It’s time to take the choice away.

God Bless,

Congressman Jim Jordan

Chairman, Republican Study Committee

RSC Media Activity – RSC members work hard to ensure that the conservative viewpoint is well-represented in all corners of the media. Visit our Media Center for more.

· Rep. Jeff Miller (FL-01): Getting Veterans Back to Work; National Review, July 7.

· Rep. Paul Broun (GA-10): Thinking Outside the Box: Let’s Lower the Debt Ceiling; National Review, July 7.

· Rep. Mike Pence (IN-06) Video: Pence Talk Debt Ceiling on America’s Newsroom; Fox News, July 8.

· Rep. Tom Graves (GA-09) Video: Tom Talks Debt Limit Negotiations; Bloomberg TV, July 8.

· Paul Ryan (WI-01) & Sen. Jeff Sessions (AL): Jobs and the Punting of Responsibility; National Review, July 8.

RSC Member Activity – RSC members make it a priority to introduce productive, conservative solutions for America’s future.

· Rep. Paul Broun (GA-10) introduced the Debt Ceiling Reduction Act, which would lower the debt ceiling from $14.3 trillion back down to $13 trillion.

House Floor Activity – The following key legislation came through the House of Representatives recently.

· On Friday, the House passed H.R. 2219, the 2012 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

Outlook – A quick look at what’s on the horizon.

· On Monday, debt ceiling negotiations will continue at the White House.

· Also on Monday, the House will begin consideration of H.R. 2417, the Better Use of Light Bulbs (BULB) Act, and HR 2354, the Energy and Water Appropriations Act.

· Tuesday through Friday, the House is expected to consider HR 1309, the Flood Insurance Reform Act, HR 2018, the Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act, and HR 2434, the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act.

· Next week, the House will consider H. J. Res. 1, a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

RSC Reports

· Each week the House is in session, the RSC Budget and Spending Taskforce compiles a weekly report on the latest budget and spending news. Additionally, the RSC Money Monitor tracks how bills passed by the House affect authorizations, mandatory spending, and federal government revenue.


House Republican Study Committee
Rep. Jim Jordan, Chairman

Paul Teller, Executive Director
Brad Watson, Policy Director
Bruce “Fez” Miller, Professional Policy Staff

Joe Murray, Professional Policy Staff
Curtis Rhyne, Professional Policy Staff

Ja’Ron Smith, Professional Policy Staff
Wesley Goodman, Director of Conservative Coalitions and State Outreach

Yong Choe, Director of Business Outreach and Member Services
Brian Straessle, Communications Director
Ben Miller, Deputy Communications Director
Cyrus Artz, Research Assistant

1524 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 226-9717