tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15951108060192144622024-03-05T03:05:46.506-06:00Phyllis Schlafly EaglesPhyllis Schlafly Eagles is an identifying moniker for Phyllis Schlafly's continuing Eagle organizations, including the Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund, The Eagle Trust Fund (publisher of the Phyllis Schlafly Report since 1967), The Phyllis Schlafly Center in St. Louis (housing the archives and libraries of Phyllis Schlafly), and many others of Phyllis Schlafly's conservative grassroots organizations.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.comBlogger115125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-38601712749365021312017-05-03T07:00:00.000-05:002017-05-03T07:00:05.239-05:00Remembering the ‘Name of the Game’ in 2017 Let me paint a picture for you. America is suffering under the weight of eight years of failed liberal policies, government has expanded, people are ready for change, and a strong conservative Republican candidate is replacing a liberal Democrat president. If you were to guess this is February 2017, you’d be right. However, the same circumstances were true in February 1969, when the Phyllis Schlafly Report headlined the article “Patronage Is the Name of the Game.” Phyllis knew that electing the right people is only the first step to real change. The next step is to surround the right person with a strong and competent team of staff and advisors.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Unfortunately, the Democrats understood that fact too, so in 1969 they attacked President Richard Nixon’s ability to fill positions in the executive branch. Immediately after the election, Democrats shouted about the “unethical” practice of replacing employees from a previous administration. This practice is commonly known as “patronage.” While Democrats were quick to cry foul on Nixon for using patronage, they weren’t so vocal when Democrats like Johnson or Kennedy did the same. As Phyllis pointed out: “The Democrats have never permitted Civil Service to impede their political objectives.” Clearly, Democrats don’t consider patronage to be a moral issue until a Republican gets in office.<br />
<P> The same story can be told of the Trump administration today. Democrats realize that the best way to attack President Trump is to block his ability to surround himself with conservative people who want to help him achieve his policy goals. <br />
<P> Phyllis Schlafly warned President Nixon in her February 1969 Report that he shouldn’t ignore the importance of surrounding himself with the right staff. As she recounted in the updated A Choice, Not An Echo, Nixon “froze out the conservatives who had nominated and elected him” when he appointed mainstream cabinet members to ease the confirmation process. Trump should not make the same mistake. He must fight against those who would hamper him from putting good conservative people in his staff. As Phyllis Schlafly did in 1969, we ought to remember the importance of patronage. It truly is the “name of the game.”<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/320348080&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-42154834341108341992017-05-02T07:00:00.000-05:002017-05-02T07:00:01.336-05:00Back to Community Organizing When Donald Trump took office on January 20, Barack Obama did not leave Washington, D.C. for a private life, as all of his recent predecessors have done. He remains on the scene to help lead the insurgency against Trump. The Obamas moved into a $5 million mansion just two miles from the White House. The mansion is owned by Joe Lockhart, who was the White House press secretary when Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Before moving in, contractors built a beautiful brick wall between the house and the street. This wall will protect the Obamas from anyone illegally entering their new home as they work to stop Trump from building a “big, beautiful wall” on our southern border.<br />
<p>The Obamas’ new neighbors include Tony Podesta, brother of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta, and The Islamic Center of Washington, one of the largest mosques in the Western hemisphere.<br />
<p>Then came the news that Obama’s former Chief of Staff, Valerie Jarrett, has also moved into the mansion. She lived in the White House for the last eight years, and President Obama reportedly didn’t make a major decision without her input.<br />
<p>As the centerpiece of his post-presidential life of leading the resistance to Trump, Obama has restarted Organizing for Action, which was formed out of his 2012 reelection campaign. With its stated mission of “mobilizing and training the next generation of progressive organizers,” OFA boasts 32,525 volunteers nationwide.<br />
<p>Since their restart, OFA has been quite busy. They helped disrupt town hall meetings held in February by Republican members of Congress. According to a training manual uncovered by journalist Paul Sperry, OFA advised protestors not to sit together, but to spread out in order to falsely “reinforce the impression of broad consensus.”<br />
<p>“OFA is dedicated to empowering progressive talent at every level,” their website says. “From first-time student organizers to organizing professionals and community leaders, we’re here to equip folks with the skills and tools that can help them turn their passion into action.”<br />
<p>We’ve seen what happens when leftwing agitators “turn their passion into action.” On college campuses from California to Vermont, conservative scholars have been assaulted and property has been damaged by mask-wearing anarchists.<br />
<p><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/320348081&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-23429829629035629282017-05-01T07:00:00.000-05:002017-05-01T11:17:22.435-05:00Trump Battles the ‘Shadow Government’ The President of the United States is often called the most powerful man in the world, but the forces arrayed against Donald Trump are unprecedented. To the 63 million Americans who voted for him, the campaign to undermine President Trump is downright frightening.<br />
<a name='more'></a> <br />
The first sign of trouble came when the President’s national security adviser, Mike Flynn, was forced to resign. A telephone call between General Flynn and the Russian ambassador was wiretapped by one of our intelligence agencies, and its contents were leaked to the press.<br />
<P> We still don’t know if the Flynn wiretap was properly authorized by a court order, and Judicial Watch is suing to find out. But we do know that whoever leaked its secret contents to the press is guilty of a felony.<br />
<P> With blood in the water, the so-called deep state went to work to against Trump’s other appointees, such as Attorney General Jeff Sessions. As Rush Limbaugh commented, “They’re trying to isolate Trump from the people he trusts ... from the best people around him.”<br />
<P> The term “deep state” was coined to mean the permanent governing class, the people who really exercise power regardless of who is elected. Also known as the shadow government, the deep state includes our intelligence-collecting agencies such as the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI.<br />
<P> On his way out the door in January, Barack Obama made a drastic change in the way these intelligence agencies operate. As reported by the New York Times, Obama wanted to make sure that raw intelligence was widely shared across many government agencies, where it could then be easily leaked to the press.<br />
<P> With Obama’s support, according to the Times, “there was a push to process as much raw intelligence as possible, and to keep the reports at a relatively low level of classification, to ensure as wide a readership as possible across the government.” This had the effect of leaving a “trail of bread crumbs.”<br />
<P> The “bread crumbs” of unverified information were then leaked to the mainstream media, a vast industry devoted to generating “fake news” against President Trump and his supporters. As Steve Bannon said to the White House press corps, the media have become “the opposition party” to this president.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/320348085&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-77135971289568201592017-04-28T14:38:00.000-05:002017-04-28T14:44:58.229-05:00Radio Live: 4/28/17 | Trump's 100 Days, Inside The Beltway, PSR 50th AnniversaryHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar discuss the first 100 days of the Trump Administration. D.C. Director Rebekah Gantner gives our weekly "Inside the Beltway" update. Research Director Jordan Henry talks about this week's installment of "50 Years of the <i>Phyllis Schlafly Report</i>."<br />
<p><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/319946936&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-717054272614892332017-04-28T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-28T07:00:02.257-05:00Reasons to Oppose the Travel Ban While liberals around the country were busy complaining about President Trump’s travel ban that sought to stop the onslaught of outrageous aggression, the liberals in California made their own travel ban against religious expression. According to a new California law, public universities are no longer allowed to send students to states that oppose gay rights. Students that have prepared for months to make presentations of their research have been told to cancel their plans. Athletes have been told not to expect any games with rivaling teams from states like Tennessee, Kansas, or North Carolina. The logic is that California doesn’t want taxpayer dollars going to states that hold conservative, pro-family principles. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
This is just another example of how far liberals will go to shut out those that disagree with them to the detriment of students seeking a quality education. First and foremost, this shows that California liberals are willing to sacrifice education for political expediency. They want to withhold students from educational opportunities like interstate conferences, research seminars and symposiums, and speaking engagements simply because they disagree with the governmental policies of the state in which the events take place. Not only will this hinder the educational experience of students, but it’s highly unlikely that real change will come about for homosexuals. Why throw away educational opportunities when there will be no real change? <br />
<p>Also, this new law illustrates just how isolated these liberals want to be. If the state of California wants to oppose traditional marriage, they should be encouraging their students to travel to other states and promote a differing viewpoint, not shut them in to prevent open discussions. In reality, California simply cannot handle an opposing conservative voice. They want to make their entire state a safe space to block out anyone who disagrees with the liberal agenda. If you really want to know if the conservatives or the liberals are on the right side of this issue, just ask yourself who wants to open an honest discussion and who wants to suppress the discussion. It’s clear to see that California liberals are willing to go to extreme lengths to suppress an open dialogue for their college students.<br />
<p><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/315417698&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-85170748065869648702017-04-27T12:51:00.001-05:002017-04-27T12:51:22.629-05:00Radio Live: 4/27/17 | Court Watch, Chris Herrod on Illegal ImmigrationHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar get our weekly "Court Watch" update from Andy Schlafly. Should the 9th Circuit be broken up? What's the latest judicial action against the conservative Trump agenda? Listen in to find out! We also talk with Chris Herrod today, author of "The Forgotten Immigrant - How Tolerating Illegal Immigration Hurts Immigrants."<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/319762108&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-6087065054061897112017-04-27T11:00:00.000-05:002017-04-27T11:00:06.065-05:00Fifty Years of the Phyllis Schlafly Report: Johnson Amendment Recalls the "Determined Drive Against Churches"<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
The Founding Fathers recognized that the U.S. Constitution should not be easily amended. That is why they determined that amendments must pass both houses of Congress and be approved by three-fourths of the state legislatures, the most stringent majority requirement since the Articles of Confederation. This notion of a “living” constitution is a complete non sequitur to the actions taken by the Framers. Because of this great weight placed on the passage of constitutional amendments, there is an equally great weight placed behind the authority of amendments when they are passed. The authority of amendments is paramount to understanding the implications of what the Equal Rights Amendment would have done to the American system of government. Phyllis Schlafly understood this gravity better than most, which equipped her to write about the implications of ERA on religious freedom in the March 1975 <i>Phyllis Schlafly Report</i>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; font-family: -webkit-standard;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: "times new roman";">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
If ERA had passed, the prohibition of segregation based on sex would have been put at the same level of authority as the First Amendment protection on religious expression. Therefore, religious organizations and schools would be dictated by the Federal Government how they view men and women. As Phyllis put it, “The Equal Rights Amendment is a proposed constitutional amendment which would impose a strict bar on discrimination on the basis of sex, and impose the obligation on the Federal Government to make sure that sex discrimination is eliminated from every facet of our life touched by government.” Churches and synagogues would no longer be able to choose not to ordain women. Single-sex religious schools and colleges would lose their nonprofit status or become illegal altogether, regardless of which gender they catered to. Clearly, the ERA would have led to devastating Federal encroachment into the religious practices of American citizens. Feminists never seemed to mention that religious women were out of luck if their religious convictions did not line up with the feminist agenda.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
Federal encroachment on religious expression is the antithesis of traditional American values. The Johnson Amendment is the primary example of this encroachment in our nation today. Originally introduced by then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson in 1954, this law prevents nonprofit organizations with 501(c)3 status from engaging in political activity or speech. While not a constitutional amendment, the Johnson Amendment has been used as a scare tactic for years against churches. Since nearly all religious organizations hold 501(c)3 status, the Johnson Amendment essentially seeks to silence them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
The issue today is not whether religious institutions should be involved in politics. The issue in 1975 was not about whether religious institutions should ordain women or have single-sex schools. Regardless of your personal beliefs on those subjects, we should all be able to agree that the Federal Government has no business regulating places of worship. While most conservatives seem to be in agreement on this fact, liberals cannot keep their positions straight. Where are those advocates of the “separation of church and state” when the state wants to regulate the church? Shouldn’t liberals be the first to want government out of the church house? Unfortunately, liberals do not see separation of church and state as a two-way street. While they are quick to criticize the words “under God” in the pledge or Christmas decorations on public property, they do not care about separating churches from burdensome government regulations that seek to gag them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">
People of faith everywhere were delighted to hear then-candidate Donald Trump assuage the fears of religious conservatives by promising to get rid of the Johnson Amendment once and for all. At the National Prayer Breakfast on February 2, 2017, President Trump repeated his promise to “get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment.” By realizing this goal, President Trump will make an incredible step in the fight to restore this nation to its constitutional foundation of free religious expression. If the Johnson Amendment could so devastate the faith community as an amendment to a law, one can only imagine the devastation that the Equal Rights Amendment could have done as a part of the U.S. Constitution. We should never forget the incredible service Phyllis Schlafly did for people of faith by seeing to the demise of ERA.<br />
<br /></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="714" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" src="//www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/7HQCMVUZiEVpMx" style="border-width: 1px; border: 1px solid #ccc; margin-bottom: 5px; max-width: 100%;" width="668"> </iframe> <br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
<strong> <a href="https://www.slideshare.net/PhyllisSchlaflyEagles/phyllis-schlafly-report-1975-march" target="_blank" title="Phyllis Schlafly Report 1975 March">Phyllis Schlafly Report 1975 March</a> </strong> from <strong><a href="https://www.slideshare.net/PhyllisSchlaflyEagles" target="_blank">PhyllisSchlaflyEagles</a></strong> </div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04288911202682955146noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-60455577304603562072017-04-27T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-27T07:00:17.847-05:00Creeping Socialism? During the Roosevelt and Truman Years, Republican Candidates used to hold forth on a subject called “Creeping Socialism.” This was defined as the growth of big government, taxes, debt, bureaucrats, and controls – all leading to the ultimate horror of Socialism like in England. I doubt that many votes were swayed by this oratory. The result sounded too remote and the semantics too extravagant. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
But it’s now time for all those tiresome Cassandras to loudly proclaim, “I told you so.” The lesson of England is indeed a spectre to make us shudder. But the growth of our own government has been greater than even the most pessimistic prophecies of the 1940s. It took 173 years for the U.S. Federal budget to reach $100 billion in 1962. In 2015 – fifty-three years later – the U.S. budget clocked in at an unfathomable $3.8 trillion. These leaps since 1962 represent a more than 3,700% increase in just 28% of our country’s existence.<br />
<p>Phyllis Schlafly addressed this subject in 1975, and said then that: “The Government bureaucracy has grown so vast that today one out of every six working persons is employed directly by some governmental unit. One of the reasons for the growth of this bureaucracy is the phenomenon that can be called “regulatory reflex.” When anyone sees something he thinks is undesirable, the suggestion immediately follows that the government substitute its decision-making power for the free market. This often results in one group of zealots determining what they think is good for us, and then making the rest of us pay for it.”<br />
<p>She continued: “President Ford stated recently that, ‘by the year 2000, 50 percent of our people will be living off the other 50 percent.’ This means that ever taxpayer will be carrying on his back not only his own family dependents, but another citizen drawing unemployment insurance, Social Security, Medicare, or general welfare payments.” <br />
<p>Time has marched on since 1975, and we can see now, more clearly than ever, that Phyllis Schlafly was absolutely right. We may not be “over the cliff,” But as Phyllis said: “The question is – as we head for a cliff, are we creeping or galloping?” <br />
<p><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/315417700&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-81749750404090524852017-04-26T13:00:00.000-05:002017-04-27T10:17:33.610-05:00Radio Live: 4/26/17 | Judicial Activism Against Trump, Argument Against Con ConHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar are joined by John and Andy Schlafly today as we talk about their latest column "100 Reasons to Celebrate Trump's First 100 Days," the latest in judicial activism against Trump, and the latest news on efforts for a new Constitutional Convention.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/319741907&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-37085221540667262642017-04-26T11:26:00.001-05:002017-04-26T11:27:18.624-05:00Mark Your Calendar & Register NOW for Collegians!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh62WJEGNNzLVTh8FY9XUnmYZRU1cFX6VL4F0jzKaLq0H3ZiuiOOp_ptoR9FLEoyQuYdP5V27GccFM7jmYxWBMKUzLCBtGs2Bt5Ae1CavgWLh0JaH5hATzotZHAj-PY3Urn_dt2FsFhrhQ/s1600/facebookcover_collegians.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh62WJEGNNzLVTh8FY9XUnmYZRU1cFX6VL4F0jzKaLq0H3ZiuiOOp_ptoR9FLEoyQuYdP5V27GccFM7jmYxWBMKUzLCBtGs2Bt5Ae1CavgWLh0JaH5hATzotZHAj-PY3Urn_dt2FsFhrhQ/s640/facebookcover_collegians.jpg" width="640" height="243" /></a></div><p> Mark your calendars for July 18-20 and share the flyers below with any high school graduates, undergraduate, and post graduate students you know! This event is FREE for college students and travel/lodging scholarships are available. You won't find another in-depth and interactive event for students like it! <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
We are excitedly preparing for our 24th Annual Phyllis Schlafly Collegians summit this summer! From July 18th through the 20th we will host top students and activists from across the country here in Washington, D.C. Phyllis always called our Collegians Summit one of the most important projects of her Eagle network. Arming the next generation with facts, logic, and tools for action was one of Phyllis's top priorities, and it continues to be front and center for Phyllis Schlafly Eagles. <br />
<p> For more information or to register, email Ryan Hite at ryan@phyllisschlafly.com! Forward these flyers to any students and young activists that know "politics is where the action is!"<br />
<p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjV6nJSc6E2Y4ItSQ9AYhnbd1rnp43Kj11VIjehvFywGIcYRbJM5-I5N3yp8P24jbMdbrqXu18B09lSpeV9VX_gVIpfJ2mskgvJJBvB_jbhxsqNvGaLYCn-MW47PSISQk9IuYE7npqSHKM/s1600/DCSummit17+v2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjV6nJSc6E2Y4ItSQ9AYhnbd1rnp43Kj11VIjehvFywGIcYRbJM5-I5N3yp8P24jbMdbrqXu18B09lSpeV9VX_gVIpfJ2mskgvJJBvB_jbhxsqNvGaLYCn-MW47PSISQk9IuYE7npqSHKM/s640/DCSummit17+v2.jpg" width="495" height="640" /></a></div><p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNfmsavvbIjYiaBLEvIfULbz17Ot5BvaBzd-685mX9R9cXEoSi6bVwg9wFNtaJBqi7sDtop1U6d6Ccs9Ru1AMksfgwCJ4P2JNMVY5HOIftXmXuydvJYXf0-FtmOlm2LjWqinv9OYT5vbg/s1600/DCSummit17.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNfmsavvbIjYiaBLEvIfULbz17Ot5BvaBzd-685mX9R9cXEoSi6bVwg9wFNtaJBqi7sDtop1U6d6Ccs9Ru1AMksfgwCJ4P2JNMVY5HOIftXmXuydvJYXf0-FtmOlm2LjWqinv9OYT5vbg/s640/DCSummit17.jpg" width="495" height="640" /></a></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-37536465252422905402017-04-26T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-26T10:47:04.067-05:00Taxpayers Face Billions in Obamacare Judgements In February the U.S. Court of Claims ordered the federal government to pay $214 million to a small Oregon insurer based on its participation in the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. Moda Health had enthusiastically participated in Obamacare health insurance exchanges only to nearly go out of business. They participated based on a promise by the Obama Administration that it would provide financial support under the “risk corridor program” to companies that lose money insuring unhealthy patients. Moda Health participated and lost money, but then the government refused to fully reimburse it.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Moda sued for hundreds of millions of dollars in the U.S. Court of Claims, which ruled in favor of Moda and included some harsh language against the federal government. “The Court finds that the Government made a promise in the risk corridors program that it has yet to fulfill,” the court wrote. “Today, the Court directs the Government to fulfill that promise. After all, to say to [Moda Health], ‘The joke is on you. You shouldn’t have trusted us,’ is hardly worthy of our great government.”<br />
<p>But this ruling exposes the federal government to many billions of dollars in claims by larger insurance companies that had far greater losses on the socialistic Obamacare exchanges. It is hard to feel sorry for the large insurance companies. It is hard to feel sorry for the large insurance companies. They strongly supported Obamacare, which never would have passed without their backing of it. Overall, large insurance companies made a fortune on Obamacare and taxpayers should not be footing the bill for isolated losses.<br />
<p>Government isn’t typically bound by its own promises because policies change with every election. The Obama Administration should not be able to bind the Trump Administration – or future taxpayers – any more than someone should be bound by promises that his neighbor might make.<br />
<p>The court, however, found the government to be liable under a theory of agency. The court held that Obamacare created “a contractual framework,” requiring that the Secretary of HHS “shall establish” the risk corridors program and “shall pay” risk corridors payments. The result is for taxpayers to foot the bill for bad policies of the Obama Administration under Obamacare.<br />
<p><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/315417704&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-14844249080893046212017-04-25T13:00:00.000-05:002017-04-27T10:17:46.563-05:00Radio Live: 4/25/17 | Babette Francis, Stop ERA IL, Caitlyn Jenner on FoxHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar talk about the new Stop ERA movement in Illinois as new bills surge to the House and Senate there. We also cover Tucker Carlson's interview with 'Caitlyn' Jenner on Fox News prime time. Babette Francis of Endeavour Forum Australia joins us as well - a long-time friend and associate of Phyllis Schlafly.<br />
<p><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/319740153&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-25798120169426403312017-04-25T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-25T07:00:14.161-05:00A History of Public Prayer Beginning this day – April 25 – in 1789, every session of the U.S. Senate has opened with prayer. This was a continuation of the Continental Congress’ practice during the Revolution, as Ben Franklin remarked in 1787: “In the beginning of the Contest with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for Divine protection.” <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
The first Senate Chaplain was Bishop Samuel Provoost, who conducted George Washington’s Inaugural Service at St. Paul’s Chapel in New York City. All 62 Senate Chaplains have been Christian, though leaders of other faiths have periodically been invited to offer prayer. The U.S. Senate Chaplain after World War II was Peter Marshall, who prayed: “Our liberty is under God and can be found nowhere else. May our faith be not merely stamped upon our coins but expressed in our lives.”<br />
<P> On February 7, 1984, President Reagan addressed the National Association of Secondary School Principals, saying: “God…should never have been expelled from America’s schools. As we struggle to teach our children…we dare not forget that our civilization was built by men and women who placed their faith in a loving God. If Congress can begin each day with a moment of prayer…so then can our sons and daughters.”<br />
<P> The wisdom of Phyllis Schlafly rings true, when she said on this subject in 1984: “All those who wrote the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment were educated in schools in which prayers were recited and the Bible was ready daily. From the founding of our country, those practices had never been seriously challenged.”<br />
<P> “The Supreme Court,” she continued, “has been widely criticized for handing down decisions so out of touch with American culture and traditions, and for pretending to discover a new meaning in the First Amendment which no one else had ever seen in the preceding 173 years. All public opinion polls have shown that the overwhelming majority of the American people oppose those decisions. Unfortunately, subsequent court cases have extended, rather than limited the effect of the Court’s decisions, and moral training of pupils has largely disappeared along with prayer.”<br />
<P> “The Supreme Court,” she continued, “has been widely criticized for handing down decisions so out of touch with American culture and traditions, and for pretending to discover a new meaning in the First Amendment which no one else had ever seen in the preceding 173 years. All public opinion polls have shown that the overwhelming majority of the American people oppose those decisions. Unfortunately, subsequent court cases have extended, rather than limited the effect of the Court’s decisions, and moral training of pupils has largely disappeared along with prayer.”Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-54811649605868773532017-04-24T14:39:00.002-05:002017-04-24T14:39:21.043-05:00Radio Live: 4/24/17 | Immigration, David Horowitz, Con ConHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar talk to Steven Camarota of the Center For Immigration Studies. David Horowitz joins us to discuss the liberal opposition. And Jordan Henry discusses the Con Con issue as he prepares to testify again in the Missouri House against this terrible idea. All that and more on today's Phyllis Schlafly Eagles Live!<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/319279676&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-58220529290077483492017-04-24T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-24T07:00:24.467-05:00NYC Forces Fast Food to Disclose High Sodium The average American consumes about 3,400 milligrams of sodium each day, which is nearly 50% more than the suggested amount. Studies show that nearly one-third of all the sodium ingested by Americans is from restaurant food. Surveys conducted in New York City and Philadelphia estimate that the salt content in fast food meals served in those cities increased by 23% between 1997 and 2010.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
“Enough,” said New York City regulators in 2015. They enacted a law requiring chain restaurants to put a salt-shaker symbol next to any item on the menu that contains more than the recommended daily intake of sodium. Local New York City restaurants that are not part of a chain are not required to comply. This is Big Brotherism to many, and the National Restaurant Association promptly sued to block enforcement of this law. The Association pointed out that the law was irrational for singling out large fast food chains for being burdened by this regulation, while exempting smaller one-of-a-kind restaurants for which New York City is famous.<br />
<P> But the lawsuit failed at the trial court level, and failed again on appeal. Declaring salt to be a “significant health hazard” when consumed in excess, the unanimous five-judge panel of the appellate court sided with the New York City Board of Health (the “Board”). The court ruled that “the Board acted legally, constitutionally, and well within its authority in adopting this limited yet salutary rule.” <br />
<P> This new rule is costly, as most regulations are, and that drives up the price of meals. There’s nothing beneficial about that. And it is controversial whether most Americans are even adversely affected by an increased consumption of sodium. But all Americans are harmed by the higher costs imposed by Big Brother regulations.<br />
<P> The appellate state court in New York justified its ruling by pointing out that the Board has imposed similar regulations. For example, the Board already restricts the use of artificial trans fats and forces chain restaurants to post the calorie contents of menu items. <br />
<P> Adding a little salt to numerous existing regulations was just fine for the unanimous appellate panel, but it is just one more burden that makes it so difficult for businesses to survive.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/315417713&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-60689815490490871022017-04-21T12:40:00.000-05:002017-04-21T12:40:09.138-05:00Radio Live: 4/21/17 | "Fox Factor" Interview, Inside The Beltway Report, 50 Years PS ReportHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar cover timely topics and reports. Ed Martin was featured on Fox News's "Factor" program last night to talk about Elizabeth Warren's war-of-words on President Trump. D.C. Director Rebekah Gantner gives us her "Inside the Beltway" report. Research Director Jordan Henry guides us through this week's installment of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Phyllis Schlafly Report - Getting Education out of the hands of "professionals."<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/318827786&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-3568674640329399632017-04-21T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-21T07:00:15.137-05:00Truth in Black and White Liberals are experts at taking very bad ideas and making them look very good. The issue of free speech on college campuses is an excellent example. After all, conservatives and liberals would generally agree that we do not like to see real hateful speech on college campuses. However, the liberal ideology uses that sentiment to muzzle free speech while the conservative realizes that curtailing First Amendment protections is not a real solution. The only true response to speech that we disagree with is to meet it with other speech of a differing viewpoint.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Unfortunately, Michigan State University chose to take the liberal route to deal with the problem of disagreeable speech. Putting whiteboards on dorm room doors has been an institution on college campuses for years. They are used as a means of free expression. Students post their favorite quotes, ask questions for people to write responses to, and generally serve as a way to unify dorm residents. However, complaints of racial slurs have led Michigan State University to ban all whiteboards on dorm room doors starting this fall.<br />
<P> It may seem like a small step, but this reflects the liberal mindset on campuses. Rather than err on the side of Constitutionally-protected speech, they err on the side of not hurting people’s feelings. Sometimes these cases can get even more extreme. Skidmore College labeled it a hate crime when students put the popular campaign slogan “Make America Great Again” on campus whiteboards. Skidmore’s “Bias Response Group” claimed that their group “does not interpret these messages as political speech but as racialized, targeted attacks.” <br />
<P> Although no one likes legitimately hateful language, taking away the right to free speech on college campuses is a slippery slope. What may seem like a good idea can easily turn into an unconstitutional nightmare for the rights of college students. Do not be fooled by liberals who claim that taking away tools for expression like whiteboards is going to solve any problems. The only way to conquer false ideologies is to use the tool of free speech to overcome misinformation with the truth.<br />
<P>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-23166415744449690612017-04-20T15:57:00.001-05:002017-04-20T16:19:45.898-05:00Radio Live: 4/20/17 | Next SCOTUS Pick, English Official Language, Joseph FarahHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar talk to some great guests on the top issues of the week! Andy Schlafly joins us for the Court Watch segment - talking about the next potential Supreme Court pick from Trump. Mauro Mujica, Chairman of U.S. English, talks about the importance of English as our official language. Joseph Farah, founder and CEO of World Net Daily, talks about his memories of Phyllis and her work.<br />
<p><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/318696561&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-28837903445798094702017-04-20T11:00:00.000-05:002017-04-21T10:30:43.950-05:00Fifty Years of the Phyllis Schlafly Report: Taking Education From "The Hands Of The Professionals"<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">Education is a critical part of Phyllis Schlafly’s
legacy. Between stopping the Equal Rights Amendment, fighting for America First
foreign policy, and securing military superiority, Phyllis always brought the
dialogue back home to the most basic issues families face every day. She valued
education policy because she knew the pro-family movement means nothing if
young minds are indoctrinated to turn away from traditional American values and
reject the principles a family is supposed to instill. From this closely held
passion, Phyllis Schlafly pioneered a number of education-related endeavors,
such as founding the monthly </span><i style="font-family: "times new roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">Education
Reporter</i><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"> in 1986, writing her </span><i style="font-family: "times new roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">First
Reader</i><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"> and </span><i style="font-family: "times new roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">Turbo Reader</i><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"> books,
and leading the fight against Common Core. In May 1974, Phyllis was just
beginning her fight for education.</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: "times new roman";">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">The failure of our public school system is not
something that started recently. The May 1974 </span><i style="font-family: "times new roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">Phyllis Schlafly Report</i><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"> proves that public schools have been
failing our students for decades. From 1974 to today, we can see a continuing
trail of slowly declining aptitude and slowly lowering standards within our
public schools. Having established that the problem is statistically undeniable,
we must determine what the root of the education problem is. Phyllis Schlafly had
the benefit of drawing from her incredible life experiences of seeing firsthand
the implementation of disastrous policies like the federal takeover of
</span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 12pt;">education</span><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"> in 1965 and the forced removal of prayer from schools in 1962. We
have the benefit of reading her firsthand writings so that we can affect
lasting change for the sake of our children and grandchildren.</span></div>
</div>
<br />First, we must dispel the myth that more money equates to better education. Phyllis said, “One of the evidences that our society has<span style="font-family: inherit;"> become more materialistic than idealistic is the general presumption that all problems can be solved by sp</span>ending more money. Nowhere is this delusion so rampant as in the field of education.” As school districts become increasingly dependent on increasing federal tax dollars, the quality of the education being provided has substantially diminished. However, any legislator knows how unpopular it is to point out this fact. No politician wants to be the one to suggest that more money should not be poured into a failing education system. Phyllis Schlafly was not so beholden to public opinion. She was unafraid to say that while our schools should be funded, we should not be fooled into thinking that throwing money at a bad system will inherently make it a good system.<br /><br />Second, we must dispel the myth that new methods of teaching are always better than old ones. From the very beginning of her involvement in education policy, Phyllis stood behind traditional teaching methods like phonics as the best way for children to learn. Our constantly changing society of technological gadgets has conditioned us to embrace each new trend as better than its predecessor. Nonetheless, the old way really is the best way in most cases where education is concerned. It would not be wise to stray from time-tested methods of teaching in favor of some new idea a federal Education Department employee cooks up in some remote office. We must rule out “outdated methods” as the cause of our schools’ declining effectiveness. <br /><br />Ultimately, the root of the problem is control. In 1974, Phyllis was able to see the failure of federal involvement in education after only a decade of its implementation. We can see with the passage of forty-two more years that Phyllis’s assessment was correct. No one has more motivation to see a child succeed than that child’s parent. Therefore, educational choices should ultimately belong to parents. Phyllis said, “Federal funding must inevitably result in more Federal control. We can't have it both ways, and the American people are kidding themselves when they think they can get huge checks from Washington without controls.” Her clear and direct language still rings true today.<br /><br />There is no free lunch with federal funds. While there are many good teachers with a passion for educating young people, the hunger for the almighty federal dollar reigns supreme in our schools. Students’ education has taken a back seat to fulfilling federal requirements and passing standardized tests to squeeze just a few more dollars. Parents are the ones with an eye on the real prize. They have a vested interest in their child’s education. As Phyllis said in 1974, it is time to take education out of the “hands of the professionals” and put it back in the hands of states, communities, and parents where it belongs.<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #222222; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="714" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" src="//www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/6e6Zm1zQuDr6vq" style="border-width: 1px; border: 1px solid #ccc; margin-bottom: 5px; max-width: 100%;" width="668"> </iframe> <br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
<strong> <a href="https://www.slideshare.net/PhyllisSchlaflyEagles/phyllis-schlafly-report-1974-may" target="_blank" title="Phyllis Schlafly Report 1974 May">Phyllis Schlafly Report 1974 May</a> </strong> from <strong><a href="https://www.slideshare.net/PhyllisSchlaflyEagles" target="_blank">PhyllisSchlaflyEagles</a></strong> </div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04288911202682955146noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-38921454640549898642017-04-20T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-20T10:04:17.576-05:00Christie Loses 6-0 Despite Appointing the Judges New Jersey Governor Chris Christie appointed five of the seven justices on the New Jersey Supreme Court so the court should be as conservative as Christie-the-candidate. But not one of these justices voted for the conservative side on one of the biggest issues in the state.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
“Mount Laurel Doctrine” originated in New Jersey and is taught in law schools nationwide. It forces rural towns to establish affirmative action in housing. The New Jersey Supreme Court entered sweeping decisions in 1975 and 1983 to order municipalities to provide low-cost housing. These decisions supposedly prohibit so-called economic discrimination by municipalities, even though economic discrimination is not recognized as a civil right by the U.S. Supreme Court.<br />
<P> In implementation of these decisions, the New Jersey legislature enacted the so-called Fair Housing Act to create the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH). The purpose of COAH was to police hundreds of small towns in New Jersey to assess whether they were satisfying their obligation to provide low-cost housing.<br />
<P> But COAH has been ineffective for years and even stopped issuing regulations in 1999, resulting in ongoing litigation ever since. In 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that delays in developing low-cost housing had persisted for too long. The Court ordered hundreds of towns to ignore COAH and instead bring their zoning plans before trial court judges to resolve the disputes.<br />
<P> But that decision was not good enough for civil rights advocates, who then insisted that remedies be ordered for the 16-year “gap period” between 1999 and 2015. During that gap period there were record foreclosures on properties, multiple recessions, and Hurricane Sandy. Despite this, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that the hundreds of small towns remain fully liable to the extent they did not satisfy their obligations during that gap period. <br />
<P> Mount Laurel Doctrine itself is not a bellwether judicial issue, but judges who embrace the concept of an evolving Constitution and legislating new rights are likely to be liberal on other issues also. Residents of New Jersey will now suffer for decades.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/315417715&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-92058894046638615682017-04-19T13:00:00.000-05:002017-04-19T13:00:13.291-05:00Radio Live: 4/19/17 | Legal Immigration, Jobs, Grassroots OrganizingHost Cherilyn Eagar talks with producers Jordan Henry and Becky Pirente about our Wednesday news headlines. John Schlafly joins us to discuss how legal immigration is affecting American Jobs. And Montana Eagle state leader Eric Olson joins us to discuss his success in organizing the grassroots and connecting with his state legislature.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/318494892&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-7142386655112655432017-04-19T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-19T07:00:15.023-05:00Paul Revere’s Ride Listen, my children, and you shall hear of the midnight ride of Paul Revere, on the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-Five; hardly a man is now alive who remembers that famous day and year. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
He said to his friend, “If the British march by land or sea from the town to-night, hang a lantern aloft in the belfry arch of the North Church twoer, as a signal light, -- one, if by land, and two, if by sea; and I on the opposite shore will be, ready to ride and spread the alarm through every Middlesex village and farm, for the country-folk to be up and to arm.”<br />
<P> Mostly he watched with eager search the belfry-tower of the Old North Church, and lo as he looks, on the belfry’s height a glimmer, and then a gleam of light! He springs to the saddle, the bridle he turns, a second lamp in the belfry burns!<br />
<P> The fate of a nation was riding that night; and the spark struck out by the steed, in his flight, kindled the land into flame with its heat.<br />
<P> It was twelve by the village clock, when he crossed the bridge into Medford town. It was one by the village clock, when he galloped into Lexington. It was two by the village clock, when he came to the bridge in Concord town. <br />
<P> You know the rest. In the books you have read, how the British regulars fired and fled, -- how the farmers gave them ball for ball. From behind each fence and farm-yard wall, chasing the red-coats down the lane, then crossing the fields to emerge again under the trees at the turn of the road, and only pausing to fire and load. <br />
<P> So through the night rode Paul Revere; and so through the night went his cry of alarm to every Middlesex village and farm, -- a cry of defiance and not of fear, and a word that shall echo forevermore! For, borne on the night-wind of the Past, through all our history, to the last, in the hour of darkness and peril and need, the people will waken and listen to hear the hurrying hoof-beat of that steed, and the midnight message of Paul Revere.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/315417716&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-59030244802871235892017-04-18T13:00:00.000-05:002017-04-18T15:43:49.680-05:00Radio Live: 4/18/17 | Trump Immigration PoliciesHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar talk about Trump immigration policies, anchor babies, illegal aliens voting, and reasons for Trump to stick with Steve Bannon in the White House.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/318312024&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-71263135631516666052017-04-18T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-18T10:44:59.440-05:00Court Orders Removal of Ten Commandments Our federal judiciary is now so stacked with liberal appointees that multiple federal courts have ordered the removal of a small Ten Commandments monument from the lawn of a New Mexico city hall. The town of Bloomfield has been displaying the Ten Commandments alongside the U.S. Constitution, the Gettysburg Address, and the Bill of Rights, but a lawsuit by the ACLU is forcing the removal of only the Ten Commandments monument. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
The small town even posted a disclaimer to negate any perception that it was improperly proselytizing, but that was not good enough for the ACLU crowd. “The City has intentionally opened up the lawn around City Hall as a public forum where local citizens can display monuments that reflect the City’s history of law and government,” the sign read. “Any message contained on a monument does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the City, but are statements from private citizens,” the disclaimer continued. An appellate court admitted that this “dampens” the religious message of the monument, but demanded its removal anyway. <br />
<P> The three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit unanimously ruled that “we find an impermissible effect of endorsement” and that the disclaimer was “insufficient.” They ordered the town to uproot the Ten Commandments from its display among the half-dozen historic documents. The town petitioned for a rehearing, but only two out of the twelve active judges on the Tenth Circuit sided with the Ten Commandments, and the petition for rehearing was denied. <br />
<P> The two judges in favor of allowing the Ten Commandments to remain explained that the court’s decision “continues the error of our Establishment Clause cases. It does not align with the historical understanding of an ‘establishment of religion’ and thus with what the First Amendment actually prohibits.” These two conservative judges, Paul Kelly and Timothy Tymkovich, cited the U.S. Supreme Court precedent that allows the Texas State Capitol to display the Ten Commandments on its grounds, a plaque that remains to this day. <br />
<P> President Obama placed five judges on the Tenth Circuit, and along with President Clinton’s two appointments and additional liberal Republican nominees they have a solid leftist majority that could unfortunately remain in power there for a long time.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/315417723&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1595110806019214462.post-56972480361089770112017-04-17T13:00:00.000-05:002017-04-18T15:42:46.150-05:00Radio Live: 4/17/17 | Abstinence Based Sex Ed, Tax DayHosts Ed Martin and Cherilyn Eagar talk about the latest headlines and news worldwide as well as Tax Reform on this Tax Day Observed. Priscilla Gray joins to talk about her involvement running the California arm of the successful CCAP abstinence education program. She also recounts her time working for Phyllis Schlafly.<br />
<P><iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/318133796&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17013195286256227630noreply@blogger.com0