National Review Headlines: July 20, 2010
Published July 20, 2010 | 
Contra Thernstrom – (The Case Against the New Black Panthers)
Abigal Thernstrom is wrong about the New Black Panther case. ► ANDREW C. McCARTHY
The NAACP harms black America far more than imaginary tea-party racism. ► DENNIS PRAGER
Race-Card Fraud
Supporters of President Obama consider any criticism of him to be racism. ► THOMAS SOWELL
Is This the America You Know and Love?
Published July 20, 2010 | By Adam Cassandra, CNSNews, July 20, 2010
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) wants assurances that an Arizona Christian school teacher will not be arrested if she and her class pray on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court building. In May, police told Maureen Rigo the act of bowing her head and praying on the Supreme Court steps was unlawful.
The U.S. Supreme Court, Washington, D.C.
According to attorneys from ADF, Supreme Court police forced teacher Maureen Rigo from the building steps and told her the act of bowing her head and praying on the Supreme Court steps was unlawful.
A Supreme Court spokeswoman, meanwhile, told CNSNews.com that the Court does not have a policy prohibiting prayer.
Nathan Kellum, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, said on May 5 of this year Mrs. Rigo and her class from Wickenburg Christian Academy in Wickenburg, Ariz., visited the Supreme Court for an educational tour. While standing on the Oval Plaza of the Court steps, the group began to pray quietly. Despite having prayed on Court grounds without incident during a previous trip, a Supreme Court police officer interrupted the prayer, informed the group they could not pray in that location, and guided them toward the street.
Kellum said when Rigo contacted the Supreme Court Police headquarters, an unidentified Supreme Court Police sergeant confirmed the policy. The sergeant, Kellum said, asked Rigo if her group contained more than three persons, and if they bowed their heads. Rigo answered “Yes” to both questions.
Then sergeant allegedly told Rigo that her actions were, “definitely contrary to the law” and added: “The police officer acted correctly forcing you to leave under threat of arrest because you violated federal statute.”
The Supreme Court Police did not comment to CNSNews.com, but an official statement from the Court, issued by a court spokeswoman, indicates that assemblages engaged in activities which may draw onlookers are illegal, but the Court does not prohibit prayer on Supreme Court grounds.
“The Court does not have a policy prohibiting prayer,” said Patricia McCabe Estrada, deputy public information officer for the U.S. Supreme Court, in a statement to CNSNews.com.
The Court’s policy regarding the use of most public areas at the Court has been to permit “activity related to the business of the Court, including traditional tourist activity and ingress and egress for visitors, but not to permit demonstrations and other types of activity that may tend to draw a crowd or onlookers,” she said.
“In addition, under 40 U.S.C. section 6135, it is unlawful to parade, stand or move in processions or assemblages in the building and grounds, including the plaza and steps, but not including the perimeter sidewalks,” the statement concluded.
The federal statute cited states: “It is unlawful to parade, stand, or move in processions or assemblages in the Supreme Court Building or grounds, or to display in the Building and grounds a flag, banner, or device designed or adapted to bring into public notice a party, organization, or movement.”
But Kellum explained to CNSNews.com that while the statute’s intent seemed to be focused on protests, the application of the law by the Supreme Court police could easily be construed as banning public prayer — and infringing upon First Amendment rights.
“While the statute doesn’t specifically mention prayer, the way they apply it bans prayer,” Kellum said.
The statute bans assemblages that bring public notice to a movement, Kellum noted.
“If you consider Christianity a movement, and you bow your head, that’s bringing public notice to it,” he added.
The Alliance Defense Fund sent a letter to the Supreme Court police Marshall Pamela Talkin, public information officer Kathleen Arberg, and Court counsel Scott Harris last Thursday asking for assurance that Rigo and her students will be allowed to pray on Court grounds without being harassed during their next visit.
“The only logical explanation for prohibiting Mrs. Rigo’s activities, while allowing other conversations, pertains to the viewpoint of Mrs. Rigo’s expression,” the letter stated. “Evidently, people may engage in all sorts of conversational expression on Supreme Court grounds unless that expression happens to involve prayer. In doing so, the Supreme Court police have not targeted a subject matter or class of expression, but targeted a particular viewpoint for censorship. They have singled out and censored religious prayer as the only form of conversation to be silenced.”
If Rigo does not receive written assurance that her right to pray is protected within three weeks, Kellum said the Alliance Defense Fund will pursue federal court action.
Faith in the Military
Published July 20, 2010 | Posted By Charles Colson, Catholic Exchange, July 17, 2010
As you know, I am devoting my remaining years of ministry to equipping Christians to live out, defend, and apply their faith—their Christian worldview—in all areas of life.
And that’s why I am deeply committed to movements—like-minded Christian organizations working together. So I purposely try to highlight the work of other organizations that are making a difference—helping Christians impact and shape culture.
One of those organizations is the Alliance Defense Fund, which is on the front lines and in the court rooms, defending religious freedom. I recently received an email from Alan Sears, ADF’s president, pointing out some superb resources ADF has created on one of the most recent threats to religious liberty: the impending repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.
The repeal of this policy would essentially normalize homosexual behavior in the military. Not only would this jeopardize what we call “unit cohesion,” but it would endanger the religious liberties of ordinary soldiers, sailors, and airmen, and would be a serious threat to the careers of our nation’s military chaplains—who may have to choose between obeying God or obeying man.
Forcing chaplains to make this choice will have two consequences—both terrible. First, knowing they risk discipline and damaging their careers if they don’t embrace the normalization of homosexuality, some chaplains will feel pressured to water down or even abandon key elements of their faith. Second, as a group of former chaplains wrote in a published letter, “chaplains might have their ability to freely share their religious beliefs challenged and torn away” in everyday situations.
For example, chaplains administer a marriage support program called Strong Bonds. It helps couples endure the stresses of military life. Should homosexual conduct be normalized, same-sex couples may sign up for Strong Bonds. But, as the letter states clearly, the beliefs of many chaplains “would not allow them to support relationships that are both harmful and sinful.”
So the chaplains will either deny their religious beliefs or face “the potentially career-ending consequences of a discrimination complaint when they deny the request.”
I’m happy to report that the Alliance Defense Fund is fighting the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” And now ADF has online materials and information at SpeakUpMovement.org [1] on this and a number of issues relating to religious freedom.
But come to BreakPoint.org, and we’ll link you directly to their information on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” including video testimonies from military chaplains themselves. The chaplains include a brigadier general, a colonel who’s earned two Bronze Stars for valor in Vietnam, a colonel who later served as a state legislator, and a chaplain who—before becoming a chaplain—was an enlisted Marine wounded three times fighting in Vietnam.
Also, at BreakPoint.org, we’ll link you to a great article that Alan Sears wrote for us about religious liberty.
So come to BreakPoint.org, educate yourself and others not only about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but about all the dangers facing our religious liberties.
This update courtesy of BreakPoint.
http://catholicexchange.com/2010/07/17/132356/
What is the Mystical Body of Christ?
Published July 20, 2010 | The Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ
By Fr. William G. Most, EWTN
Speaking of full membership in the Church, Pius XII, in his Encyclical on the Mystical Body, said it is the society of those who have been baptized, and who profess the faith of Christ, and who are governed by their bishops under the visible head, the Pope, the Bishop of Rome.
The Church came into being when Christ died on the Cross, but it was formally inaugurated on Pentecost, when He sent the Holy Spirit as He had promised. St. Paul speaks of all Christians as members of Christ, so that with Him, they form one Mystical Body (Cf. 1 Cor 12:12-31; Col 1:18; 2:18-20; Eph. 1:22-23; 3:19; 4:13). St. Paul did not use the word Mystical. It was developed more recently to bring out the fact that this union is unique, there is no parallel to it. It is not the same as the union of a physical body, nor that of a business corporation.
The Church, the Mystical Body, exists on this earth, and is called the Church militant, because its members struggle against the world, the flesh and the devil. The Church suffering means the souls in Purgatory. The Church triumphant is the Church in heaven.
The unity and cooperation of the members of the Church on earth, in Purgatory, in Heaven is also called the Communion of Saints. When St. Paul uses the word “Saints” in opening an Epistle, he does not mean they are morally perfect. He has in mind Hebrew qadosh, which means set aside for God, or coming under the covenant. Being such means of course they are called to moral perfection. But of course, not all have reached it in this world.
The word “Saint” in the modern sense means someone who has been canonized by the Church in recent times, or was accepted as such by the Church in earlier times. If a person is shown to have practiced heroic virtue–beyond what people in general do – in all virtues, the title “Venerable” is given; with two miracles by that one’s intercession, the title is “Blessed”; two more miracles can lead to canonization and the title of Saint.
Taken from The Basic Catholic Catechism
PART FIVE: The Apostles’ Creed IX-XII
Ninth Article: “The Holy Catholic Church; the Communion of Saints”
http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/chura1.htm
Greatness!
Published July 20, 2010 | 
“The world offers you comfort, you were not made for comfort, but for greatness.”
-Pope Benedict XVI
GOSPEL & MEDITATION: Scoring Goals in Life
Published July 20, 2010 | July 20, 2010
Tuesday of the Sixteenth Week in Ordinary Time
Father Robert DeCesare, LC
Matthew 12: 46-50
While Jesus was still speaking to the crowds, his mother and his brothers were standing outside, wanting to speak to him. Someone told him, “Look, your mother and your brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” But to the one who had told him this, Jesus replied, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” And pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
Introductory Prayer: Lord, I begin my meditation aware of my need of your grace and your help. Without you, Lord, I can do nothing, but with you, Lord, I can do all things. I believe that you are truly present in the Eucharist. There, under the guise of bread, Lord, you remain to be with me. I trust in you, Lord, because you have given me a reason for living. I trust you because you are faithful to your promises. Lord, I love you because you have given me the treasure of my Catholic faith. You have given me this gift to enable me to follow the path to heaven and be with you forever.
Petition: Lord, grant me the grace to know your will and to follow it in my life.
1. What is the Goal of My Life? This is the fundamental question of our purpose in life. The Father made us so that we may come to know, love and serve him in this world, so as to be happy with him forever in the next. “Of all visible creatures only man is ‘able to know and love his creator’. He is “the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake”, and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God´s own life. It was for this end that he was created” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 356). To aid us, God gave his Son for us to follow and to learn from, so that we might fulfill our purpose in life. This is why we follow him, this is why we listen to him; so that we may fulfill our purpose.
2. I’m On a Mission Our mission in life is to fulfill our purpose. Thus the fulfillment of our mission is a fundamental concern for our conscience. The immediate norm for the right exercise of our conscience could put it like this: “Anything that helps me fulfill my mission is good for me; anything that comes between me and it is bad for me.” Or, using Christ´s words: “My food is to do the Will of Him who sent me and to complete his work” (John 4:34); “I do always what pleases Him” (John 8:29). The reason is obvious: Action follows being, so what we are determines what we do. Similarly, the apostolic mission flows from our Christian essence. What we are and what we do are two sides of the same coin.
3. Part of God’s Family As Christ says in another passage of the Gospel, “Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother” (Mark 3: 35). The family of Christ is eternal. He welcomes those who do his will because we were made to do his will. If we are faithful to our vocation, and we fulfill our purpose in life, then we meet the hopes and dreams the Lord has for us. He wants us to be holy. He made us for himself. Nothing would please him more than to be able to say to us at the end of time: “Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 25:34).
Conversation with Christ: Lord, I want to be part of your family. I want to do your will, because I know that it will make me holy. Your will is sanctifying. I want to be sanctified. Grant me the grace to know your will, love it and fulfill it.
Resolution: I will review my day before I go to bed to examine how I have fulfilled God’s will today.
http://www.regnumchristi.org/english/articulos/articulo.phtml?se=363&ca=975&te=735&id=20302
CHESTERTON
Published July 20, 2010 | 
“Progress is Providence without God. That is, it is a theory that everything has always perpetually gone right by accident. It is a sort of atheistic optimism, based on an everlasting coincidence far more miraculous than a miracle.”
- G.K. Chesterton
DID YOU MISS THIS? America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution
Published July 20, 2010 | By Angelo M. Codevilla from the July 2010 – August 2010 issue
As over-leveraged investment houses began to fail in September 2008, the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties, of major corporations, and opinion leaders stretching from the National Review magazine (and the Wall Street Journal) on the right to the Nation magazine on the left, agreed that spending some $700 billion to buy the investors’ “toxic assets” was the only alternative to the U.S. economy’s “systemic collapse.” In this, President George W. Bush and his would-be Republican successor John McCain agreed with the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. Many, if not most, people around them also agreed upon the eventual commitment of some 10 trillion nonexistent dollars in ways unprecedented in America. They explained neither the difference between the assets’ nominal and real values, nor precisely why letting the market find the latter would collapse America. The public objected immediately, by margins of three or four to one.
When this majority discovered that virtually no one in a position of power in either party or with a national voice would take their objections seriously, that decisions about their money were being made in bipartisan backroom deals with interested parties, and that the laws on these matters were being voted by people who had not read them, the term “political class” came into use. Then, after those in power changed their plans from buying toxic assets to buying up equity in banks and major industries but refused to explain why, when they reasserted their right to decide ad hoc on these and so many other matters, supposing them to be beyond the general public’s understanding, the American people started referring to those in and around government as the “ruling class.” And in fact Republican and Democratic office holders and their retinues show a similar presumption to dominate and fewer differences in tastes, habits, opinions, and sources of income among one another than between both and the rest of the country. They think, look, and act as a class.
Although after the election of 2008 most Republican office holders argued against the Troubled Asset Relief Program, against the subsequent bailouts of the auto industry, against the several “stimulus” bills and further summary expansions of government power to benefit clients of government at the expense of ordinary citizens, the American people had every reason to believe that many Republican politicians were doing so simply by the logic of partisan opposition. After all, Republicans had been happy enough to approve of similar things under Republican administrations. Differences between Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas are of degree, not kind. Moreover, 2009-10 establishment Republicans sought only to modify the government’s agenda while showing eagerness to join the Democrats in new grand schemes, if only they were allowed to. Sen. Orrin Hatch continued dreaming of being Ted Kennedy, while Lindsey Graham set aside what is true or false about “global warming” for the sake of getting on the right side of history. No prominent Republican challenged the ruling class’s continued claim of superior insight, nor its denigration of the American people as irritable children who must learn their place. The Republican Party did not disparage the ruling class, because most of its officials are or would like to be part of it.
Never has there been so little diversity within America’s upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America’s upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter. The Boston Brahmins, the New York financiers, the land barons of California, Texas, and Florida, the industrialists of Pittsburgh, the Southern aristocracy, and the hardscrabble politicians who made it big in Chicago or Memphis had little contact with one another. Few had much contact with government, and “bureaucrat” was a dirty word for all. So was “social engineering.” Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday’s upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed.
Today’s ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters — speaking the “in” language — serves as a badge of identity. Regardless of what business or profession they are in, their road up included government channels and government money because, as government has grown, its boundary with the rest of American life has become indistinct. Many began their careers in government and leveraged their way into the private sector. Some, e.g., Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, never held a non-government job. Hence whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America’s ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.
The two classes have less in common culturally, dislike each other more, and embody ways of life more different from one another than did the 19th century’s Northerners and Southerners — nearly all of whom, as Lincoln reminded them, “prayed to the same God.” By contrast, while most Americans pray to the God “who created and doth sustain us,” our ruling class prays to itself as “saviors of the planet” and improvers of humanity. Our classes’ clash is over “whose country” America is, over what way of life will prevail, over who is to defer to whom about what. The gravity of such divisions points us, as it did Lincoln, to Mark’s Gospel: “if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.”
The Political Divide
Important as they are, our political divisions are the iceberg’s tip. When pollsters ask the American people whether they are likely to vote Republican or Democrat in the next presidential election, Republicans win growing pluralities. But whenever pollsters add the preferences “undecided,” “none of the above,” or “tea party,” these win handily, the Democrats come in second, and the Republicans trail far behind. That is because while most of the voters who call themselves Democrats say that Democratic officials represent them well, only a fourth of the voters who identify themselves as Republicans tell pollsters that Republican officeholders represent them well. Hence officeholders, Democrats and Republicans, gladden the hearts of some one-third of the electorate — most Democratic voters, plus a few Republicans. This means that Democratic politicians are the ruling class’s prime legitimate representatives and that because Republican politicians are supported by only a fourth of their voters while the rest vote for them reluctantly, most are aspirants for a junior role in the ruling class. In short, the ruling class has a party, the Democrats. But some two-thirds of Americans — a few Democratic voters, most Republican voters, and all independents — lack a vehicle in electoral politics.
Sooner or later, well or badly, that majority’s demand for representation will be filled. Whereas in 1968 Governor George Wallace’s taunt “there ain’t a dime’s worth of difference” between the Republican and Democratic parties resonated with only 13.5 percent of the American people, in 1992 Ross Perot became a serious contender for the presidency (at one point he was favored by 39 percent of Americans vs. 31 percent for G.H.W. Bush and 25 percent for Clinton) simply by speaking ill of the ruling class. Today, few speak well of the ruling class. Not only has it burgeoned in size and pretense, but it also has undertaken wars it has not won, presided over a declining economy and mushrooming debt, made life more expensive, raised taxes, and talked down to the American people. Americans’ conviction that the ruling class is as hostile as it is incompetent has solidified. The polls tell us that only about a fifth of Americans trust the government to do the right thing. The rest expect that it will do more harm than good and are no longer afraid to say so.
While Europeans are accustomed to being ruled by presumed betters whom they distrust, the American people’s realization of being ruled like Europeans shocked this country into well nigh revolutionary attitudes. But only the realization was new. The ruling class had sunk deep roots in America over decades before 2008. Machiavelli compares serious political diseases to the Aetolian fevers — easy to treat early on while they are difficult to discern, but virtually untreatable by the time they become obvious.
Far from speculating how the political confrontation might develop between America’s regime class — relatively few people supported by no more than one-third of Americans — and a country class comprising two-thirds of the country, our task here is to understand the divisions that underlie that confrontation’s unpredictable future. More on politics below.
The Ruling Class
Who are these rulers, and by what right do they rule? How did America change from a place where people could expect to live without bowing to privileged classes to one in which, at best, they might have the chance to climb into them? What sets our ruling class apart from the rest of us?
The most widespread answers — by such as the Times‘s Thomas Friedman and David Brooks — are schlock sociology. Supposedly, modern society became so complex and productive, the technical skills to run it so rare, that it called forth a new class of highly educated officials and cooperators in an ever less private sector. Similarly fanciful is Edward Goldberg’s notion that America is now ruled by a “newocracy”: a “new aristocracy who are the true beneficiaries of globalization — including the multinational manager, the technologist and the aspirational members of the meritocracy.” In fact, our ruling class grew and set itself apart from the rest of us by its connection with ever bigger government, and above all by a certain attitude.
Other explanations are counterintuitive. Wealth? The heads of the class do live in our big cities’ priciest enclaves and suburbs, from Montgomery County, Maryland, to Palo Alto, California, to Boston’s Beacon Hill as well as in opulent university towns from Princeton to Boulder. But they are no wealthier than many Texas oilmen or California farmers, or than neighbors with whom they do not associate — just as the social science and humanities class that rules universities seldom associates with physicians and physicists. Rather, regardless of where they live, their social-intellectual circle includes people in the lucrative “nonprofit” and “philanthropic” sectors and public policy. What really distinguishes these privileged people demographically is that, whether in government power directly or as officers in companies, their careers and fortunes depend on government. They vote Democrat more consistently than those who live on any of America’s Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Streets. These socioeconomic opposites draw their money and orientation from the same sources as the millions of teachers, consultants, and government employees in the middle ranks who aspire to be the former and identify morally with what they suppose to be the latter’s grievances……….CONTINUED…………………….
For the First Time, Women Can Sue for Psychological Injuries After Abortion
Published July 20, 2010 | SOURCE: ELLIOT INSTITUTE
New Nebraska Law Removing Obstacles to Lawsuits
for Negligent Screening Goes Into Effect
Springfield, IL (July 15, 2010) — A new Nebraska law that is the first to allow women to sue for psychological injuries related to abortion went into effect today, the Stop Forced Abortions Alliance has announced.
Until now, women who experienced psychological problems after an abortion had no standing to sue abortionists for subsequent psychological problems, even when the women were coerced into unwanted abortions. The Nebraska law removes that legal obstacle and also clarifies the standard of care for appropriate pre-abortion screening.
Enactment of Law Survives First Court Challenge
Nebraska’s Planned Parenthood affiliate filed suit in federal court last month seeking an injunction and declaratory judgment that the law was unconstitutional. In a preliminary ruling issued yesterday, the federal district court ruled that neither the effective date of the bill nor the law itself could be enjoined, clearing the way for the law to go into effect July 15.
District Judge Laurie Smith Camp also rejected Planned Parenthood’s motion to strike the legislature’s finding of fact that was included in the law, which states that “the existing standard of care for pre-abortion screening and counseling is not always adequate to protect the health needs of women.”
However, the court did grant a preliminary injunction to protect Planned Parenthood and its employees from any criminal penalties, fines, or loss of license in the event they fail to provide the standard of care required by the law. This does not effect women’s ability to sue for negligent screening or psychological damages while the injunction is in effect.
Specifically, the injunction prohibits the state attorney general, the governor, and other officers of the state from seeking to use the new law as a basis for revoking the licenses of abortion clinics or for engaging in other disciplinary measures against clinics or their staff.
Proponents said the law was never intended to provide for prosecution by state authorities, but was simply meant to allow abortion patients or their survivors to more easily hold abortion providers accountable for negligent screening. That aspect of the law has not been affected by the ruling.
Number of Coerced Abortions Expected to Drop
A key aspect of the law is that it exposes abortion providers to lawsuits for negligence if they fail to ask a woman if she is being pressured, coerced or forced to undergo an unwanted abortion.
This could affect many women, as one study found that 64 percent of women who had abortions reported that they felt pressured by others to do so. Numerous studies have also shown that women who are pressured to abort are at much higher risk of experiencing psychological complications following the abortion. Continue reading
LifeNews.com Headlines: July 20, 2010
Published July 20, 2010 | SURGEON GENERAL KOOP URGES NO VOTE ON KAGAN BASED ON ABORTION MANIPULATIONS
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop has written an extensive letter to members of the Senate calling for a no vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Elena Kagan. The letter focuses attention on the Clinton administration memos Kagan authored showing her attempting to manipulate abortion opinion.
REPORT: OBAMA ADMIN HAS SPENT $23 MILLION BACKING PRO-ABORTION KENYA CONSTITUTION
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – A new report issued by the Inspector General (IG) for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) reveals the Obama administration has spent over $23 million for activities in Kenya to influence voters there to support a new constitution that would allow virtually unlimited abortions.
KAGAN APPROVAL LOWEST OF ANY RECENT SUPREME COURT PICK BEFORE CMTE VOTE
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – A new Gallup poll shows just a plurality of Americans support Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court. The new survey also finds support for the pro-abortion Solicitor General is lower than the support for any recent previous Supreme Court nominee days before their committee vote.
REVIEW: OBAMA ADMIN WOULD HAVE FUNDED ABORTIONS IN HEALTH CARE WITHOUT EXPOSE’
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – Last week, the Obama administration came under heavy fire from a pro-life group that discovered, in three states, officials had approved paying for abortions under new high risk insurance programs created under the national health care law President Barack Obama signed.
PETITION OPPOSING PRO-ABORTION ELENA KAGAN GETS 8K SIGNATURES, SENT TO SENATE
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – A petition co-sponsored by Students for Life of America and LifeNews.com opposing the nomination of Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court, ultimately received almost 8,000 signatures. SFLA officials took copies of the signatures today to members of the Senate for whom they were intended.
ADOPTION FIGURES IN U.S. INCREASE THANKS TO ADOPTIONS AFTER HAITI EARTHQUAKE
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – Due to the increased attention about adoptions resulting from January’s earthquake crisis in Haiti and other external factors, Bethany Christian Services says it is seeing significant growth and interest in the U.S. adoption market. The large adoption agency says overall international and domestic adoption placements up 26 percent over the same time period in 2009.
MICHIGAN ABORTIONS DROP 14 PERCENT IN 2009 TO RECORD LOW, DESPITE POOR ECONOMY
Lansing, MI (LifeNews.com) – The poor economic conditions in Michigan were supposed to elevate the number of abortions, but recently-released statistics from the Michigan Department of Community Health reveal otherwise. The number of abortions performed in Michigan decreased in 2009.
PENNSYLVANIA POLL: PRO-LIFE PAT TOOMEY STILL LEADS PRO-ABORTION JOE SESTAK
Harrisburg, PA (LifeNews.com) – The new numbers in the high-profile Pennsylvania Senate race remain relatively unchanged from last month — which means pro-life candidate Pat Toomey continues to lead pro-abortion candidate Joe Sestek. This is one of several Senate races that provide pro-life advocates with a potential pickup.
Maryland Plan Indicates HHS Approved High Risk Pools With No Abortion Requirements
Published July 20, 2010 | 
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Was the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) approving state applications for running federal high-risk insurance pools without a second thought to abortion? That is how it seems to the National Right to Life Committee, which discovered that Maryland’s plan to cover individuals with pre-existing conditions also had no restrictions on abortion coverage until media attention and public controversy propelled the HHS to clarify the matter.
In an email sent Friday to LifeSiteNews.com, NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson said that Maryland was “on the way to providing federally funded abortion coverage in the new federal Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP)” until the HHS declared that Hyde amendment restrictions on abortion funding – allowing abortion only for rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother – would apply to the federal high risk pools.
The federal PCIPs are a $5 billion HHS program to help give coverage to individuals with pre-existing medical conditions unable to afford health insurance, until the health care reform law takes full effect in 2014. The HHS is directly administering the program in 21 states, while 29 states and the District of Columbia will administer the PCIPs through their own programs.
Johnson pointed out a press release from Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, which explained that the Maryland Health Insurance Plan (MHIP) would be administering the PCIP for that state. But the release also directed readers to a “Frequently Asked Questions” page which explained that the “MHIP Federal Plan offers the same benefit package as other MHIP plan options.”
But the MHIP also provides coverage for abortion, a fact Johnson said could be seen for itself on page 53 of MHIP’s “2010 Plan Year Certificate of Coverage.” In the “Covered Services” section, under the heading “Maternity Services,” is listed abortion. For individuals with an HMO plan – one of five plans available – inpatient abortion surgery has a “$250 co-pay per admission,” while outpatient abortion surgery has “No Facility Copay.”
“Each day brings more evidence that federal DHHS was merrily approving abortion-funding plans without a second thought,” observed Johnson. “There is no evidence that DHHS either conveyed to the states that abortion could not be included, or that DHHS had any intent of imposing such a policy, until NRLC put the spotlight on the issue.”
Johnson’s theory that the federal government was approving plans without abortion guidelines has already been bolstered by the cases of two other states’ plans. Continue reading
Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn’t Give ‘Full Force’ of Help to White Farmer
Published July 20, 2010 | … “I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land — so I didn’t give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough.”….
FoxNews.com, July 20, 2010
NAACP Bigotry in their ranks
Days after the NAACP clashed with Tea Party members over allegations of racism, a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy — video that now has forced the official to resign.
Shirley Sherrod, the department’s Georgia director of Rural Development, is shown in the clip describing “the first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm.” Sherrod, who is black, claimed the farmer took a long time trying to show he was “superior” to her. The audience laughed as she described how she determined his fate.
“He had to come to me for help. What he didn’t know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him,” she said. “I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land — so I didn’t give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough.”
The Agriculture Department announced Monday, shortly after FoxNews.com published its initial report on the video, that Sherrod had resigned.
“There is zero tolerance for discrimination at USDA, and I strongly condemn any act of discrimination against any person,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a written statement. “We have been working hard through the past 18 months to reverse the checkered civil rights history at the department and take the issue of fairness and equality very seriously.
The NAACP released a statement late Monday condemning Sherrod’s admission.
“We are appalled by her actions, just as we are with abuses of power against farmers of color and female farmers,” the statement said.
“Her actions were shameful,” it continued. “While she went on to explain in the story that she ultimately realized her mistake, as well as the common predicament of working people of all races, she gave no indication she had attempted to right the wrong she had done to this man.”
Sherrod explained in the video that, at the time, she assumed the state or national Department of Agriculture had referred the white farmer to her. In order to ensure that the farmer could report back that she was indeed helpful, she said she took him to see “one of his own” — a white lawyer.
“I figured that if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him,” she said.
The point of the story wasn’t entirely clear; only an excerpt of the speech is included in the video clip.
“It was revealed to me that it’s about poor versus those who have,” she said, suggesting she had learned that race is less important.
The video clip was first posted by BigGovernment.com. The clip is dated March 27 from an NAACP Freedom Fund banquet.
The clip adds to the firestorm of debate over the NAACP’s decision to approve a resolution at its convention last week accusing some Tea Party activists of racism — a charge Tea Party leaders deny.
In a second clip from the same event posted online, Sherrod appeared to urge black job seekers to find work at the Department of Agriculture because the federal government won’t lay people off.
“There are jobs at USDA and many times there are no people of color to fill those jobs because we shy away from agriculture. We hear the word agriculture and think, why are we working in the fields?” she said. “You’ve heard of a lot of layoffs. Have you heard of anybody in the federal government losing their job? That’s all I need to say.”
Michael Voris: Do The Right Thing–Never Doubt That Abortion is Demonic.
Published July 20, 2010 | It can be hard to do the right thing, but when the right thing is done . . . the right thing happens! Never doubt that abortion is demonic.
Please take a few moments to watch this video, and share it with your friends and family.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV#p/a/u/0/QUjzAhv1-Jc
This program is from RealCatholicTV.com
Founder’s Quote Daily
Published July 20, 2010 | 
“In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any.”
–James Madison, Federalist No. 14, 1787
TODAY’S SAINT: ST. MARGARET OF ANTIOCH
Published July 20, 2010 | CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY, JULY 20, 2010
Margaret’s mother died when she was an infant and her father was a pagan priest. She was raised by a Christian woman and eventually adopted by her nurse. She converted to Christianity and consecrated herself as a virgin to God.
She spent her days working as a shepherdess. A Roman prefect was taken by her beauty and tried to seduce her. When she refused his advances, he denounced her as a Christian and she was brought to trial.
When she refused to sacrifice to the pagan gods, she was sentenced to death. The authorities tried to burn her, then boil her in a large cauldron. But each time, her prayers kept her unharmed. She was finally martyred by beheading.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint.php?n=542
SCHLAFLY: Illinois Failures Go Nationwide Under Obama
….Unsustainability is the operative moniker for Barack Obama’s massive deficit spending . . . The new definition of a liberal is no longer tax-and-spend; it’s borrow-and-spend…..
‘Unsustainable” is a scary word that recently entered political discourse, coming authoritatively from Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf. Unsustainability is the operative moniker for Barack Obama’s massive deficit spending, which Elmendorf said “cannot be solved through minor tinkering.”
The CBO predicts an increase in our public debt from $7.5 trillion at the end of 2009 to $20.3 trillion at the end of 2020 if Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget is implemented. As a percentage of gross domestic product, the debt will rise to 90% from 53%.
Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., sharpened the focus by asking the CBO director: “What’s going to be necessary (is) either a 25% increase in taxes or a 20% reduction in spending, or some combination thereof. Is that correct?” Elmendorf replied “yes.”
Americans are beginning to wonder if Greece is the picture of the U.S.’ future. But we need look no further than the place where Obama and his team were trained in community organizing and bully tactics to redistribute the wealth: Illinois.
Illinois was the stomping ground for years for Obama, his top advisers Rahm Emanuel, Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod, and his appointees such as Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. After they promoted themselves to Washington to run the country, other Obama associates who didn’t make the cut continued to run Illinois into the ground, as the Illinois unemployment rate jumped from less than 5% to nearly 11%.
For years, we thought California was the most fiscally irresponsible of all 50 states, but Illinois has now taken the lead. A lengthy news article in the New York Times was headlined: “Illinois Stops Paying Its Bills, but Can’t Stop Digging Hole.”
Under years of Democratic leadership, Illinois has refused to honor its obligations, cut spending or trim its shockingly large deficit, which at $12 billion per year approaches nearly half its budget. As a result, Illinois’ credit rating has been downgraded and it pays a massive amount in interest on its loans.
That’s like a family making $50,000 but spending $75,000 each year. Obviously, it won’t take long before such a family would lose everything it has.
The big-majority Democratic state legislature, defying Illinois’ balanced-budget law, has been passing deficit budgets for years. The new definition of a liberal is no longer tax-and-spend; it’s borrow-and-spend.
It’s no surprise that unemployment keeps increasing, and the reason why the rate isn’t higher than we are told is that the government has stopped counting people who have given up looking for a job. Employers are not hiring because taxes and regulations are expected to rise
Starting Jan. 1, 28 million middle Americans will be socked with a massive Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), which Republicans had suspended. That’s a “gotcha” that penalizes taxpayers in ways they never expect, adding big tax penalties based on an “alternative” way of calculating taxes due.
Upper-income Americans will see a big jump in their marginal tax rates. Their accountants are already telling them that the more they work, the less additional money they will take home, so they may be already slowing down, canceling investments or retiring to draw Social Security.
Hardworking parents who are saving for their children’s future will be hit by the reinstatement of the massive “death tax” on Jan. 1. They may wonder why they work hard and save if their money will go to Uncle Sam and to people who choose not to work.
Marriage penalties will hit couples hard, both in the income tax law and in ObamaCare. Obama’s financial favoritism toward unmarried women, his second biggest voting bloc, has become common knowledge.
Those who choose to control their own health care through Health Savings Accounts will be slapped with new taxes. That’s just one more way to promote Obama’s goal of moving all health care to government control.
Employers are not hiring because they know they will soon be paying not only higher taxes but also more health care costs or penalties. Depreciation allowances for investment in equipment will be lowered from $250,000 to $25,000, which means businesses will do less investing.
Our ability to compete in the marketplace, of course, depends on our advanced research and development. New taxes will hit R&D hard, which means more slowdowns and more outsourcing overseas.
The expiration of the GOP tax cuts will impose the largest tax hikes in history, affecting all taxpayers. The nearly 50% who pay no taxes will also be hurt by more loss of jobs.
There is only one antidote for these depressing prognostications. On Nov. 2, American voters will have the chance to choose real change from Obama’s failed Illinois borrow-and-spend policies by electing Republicans who commit to extend the expiring tax cuts.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/540837/201007191905/Illinois-Failures-Go-Nationwide-Under-Obama.aspx