DONATE

Showing posts with label Big Business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Business. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 19, 2020

An Intro to ‘The Unsustainable Trajectory of America's Economy’

Intro By John R. Houk
Original post by Justin O. Smith
Intro © February 19, 2020

As a Conservative in 2016 I was a Cruzer (Ted Cruz). After Cruz’s mathematical elimination from winning the GOP nomination, only then did I support Donald Trump.

In my mind Trump did not fit my image of a guy that supported Christian causes such as Christian religious freedom, Pro-Life, Pro-Israel, Pro-Originalist Judges and Anti-LGBTQ (who desire the destruction of Christian morals in America. Trump early got on board with Conservative thoughts on illegal immigration and the craziness of importing American-Culture-hating Muslim refugees. That got my attention.

I’m a limited government, Balance the Budget, Bring down deficit spending guy too; but the above issues I listed are more important to me. Trump has delivered or at least worked hard in the face of Dem obstruction to deliver on my primary list of concerns (although Trump seems a bit wishy-washy on LGBTQ morality). Lately President is even vocally lining up behind pro-2nd Amendment issues.

For Conservatives that economics is a primacy, President Trump’s economic actions pertaining to Budget issues should be a huge waving red flag. Trump’s centrist perspective could produce big problems for America after a Trump second term in Office (YUP, I’m still voting Trump). Justin Smith effectively goes over those budget red flags.


JRH 2/19/20
Your generosity is always appreciated - various credit, check 
& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 
Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 
OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You're temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”
**********************
The Unsustainable Trajectory of America's Economy

By Justin O. Smith
Sent 2/14/2020 10:38 PM

"The suspicions that the system is rigged in favor of the largest banks and their elites, so they play by their own set of rules to the disfavor of the taxpayers who fund their bailout, are true. It really happened. These suspicions are valid." ~ Neil Barofsky, TARP Inspector General [Wikipedia info]

America is witnessing President Trump's "I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system"" moment, similar to former President George Bush on November 16th 2008 and the high-speed implementation employed by former President Obama in 2009, as Trump presented his 2021 Budget and a $4.8 trillion spending plan to the press on February 10th. It is a farce of a "budget", since it doesn't even balance until 2035, according to the Wall Street Journal, and it sells America a load of economic crap, that includes the same old out-of-control socialist spending, now adopted by the Republican Party too, minus the taxes, and certain to harm America; given the socialist trends in the ranks of the Millennials, the Democrats are certain to hold the White House during a few of these years and take full advantage of Trump's lapse in judgement on this issue.

On January 18th 2020, the Washington Post reported: "To those who criticized his spending and the growth of the national debt, Trump said: 'Who the hell cares about the budget? We're going to have a country.'

For most of President Barack Obama's time in office, Republicans seemed to care very much about the budget, making fears around the national debt and deficit their top talking point. They've backed off those concerns under Trump."

President Trump's proposal will run a near trillion dollar, $996 billion [Blog Editor: I couldn’t locate “$996 billion” figure nonetheless there are a plethora of sources predicting a near or over a Trillion dollar deficit for 2020; e.g.: fxstreet.com, MarketWatch.com, baynews9.com, cbo.gov and more], deficit next year, just as he did in the previous years of his administration, that is close to fifty-percent higher than the $666 billion deficit Trump inherited from President Obama in 2017. Federal spending will accelerate from $4.6 trillion next year to more than $6.5 trillion in 2030, and the proposed cuts to be made by Congress in this year's budget are not significant enough to offset the recent spending increases Trump has approved since taking office. 

And all of this with our national debt at over $23 trillion, rapidly on its way to $24 trillion.

Has America so soon forgotten the worse economic recession since the 1930s -- the 2008 economic collapse and the collapse of fifty percent of the stock market -- and the terrible risks banks and businesses took that created it? Not much has changed, because many of the financial markets proceeded, from the first day of the bailout, that followed, to the present, with the same exact risky practices. They know the government, essentially the U.S. taxpayer -- the American people, will bail them out again, that is if there's any money or credit line available for a bailout, which is going to be unlikely.

Midway of 2008, the United States' national debt was approximately $9.4 trillion and right at 65 percent of the Gross Domestic Product. Consumer debt stood at $2.7 trillion, while the total credit market debt had peaked at $54 trillion. And mortgage debt was a massive $14.8 trillion, as the Federal Reserve balance sheet remained below $900 billion as it had for years.

Most logical minded Americans believed then and now that there is not any such thing as "too big to fail", and they thought the regular bankruptcy laws could have handled the situation and allowed the crisis to settle itself. People understood that liquidating bad debt and expunging it from the system would reset the economy forcing corporations and consumers to live within their means and act conservatively, using debt wisely for real needs, and most of us saw that as the best road to take for America's future. 

AIG, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, Citicorp, Bank of America and several other "too big to fail" banks were bankrupt by September of 2008. They should have been liquidated through existing bankruptcy law, and their assets should have been sold to still reputable banks that had not undertaken fraudulent risks, that hit their investors with devastating consequences.

Nobody in 2007 would have ever forecast that the national debt would climb to over $23 trillion during the past twelve years, or that the national debt would be 105 percent of GDP, with consumer debt exceeding $4 trillion. The ruling class "elite" of both parties have had their propaganda machines operating at warp speed to convince Americans that somehow $1 trillion annual deficits are normal and sustainable. 

Never underestimate the ability of this president, or any president, or any Congress and the Federal Reserve to take outrageous and reckless steps to convince America that the abnormal is really normal. One should always keep in mind the egregious $700 billion TARP bailout and the lies and threats Hank Paulson perpetrated in order to protect his billionaire pals, whenever one gives scrutiny to today's events. 

[Blog Editor: Articles examining Hank Paulson:




o   Tyrants and human nature; By Walter Williams; WND; 7/17/12 6:11pm]

President Donald Trump promised to eliminate the national debt in eight years, and although I thought it was an impossible task at the time, I did think Trump might reduce spending quite a bit, along with reducing annual deficits. He was constantly haranguing the Federal Reserve's moves to keep interest rates at an unsafe level, which created a stock market bubble and contributed to the exorbitant rise in debt; and, one would have thought that after experiencing one Federal Reserve induced market crash after another, the American people would have realized this gross rise in debt since the 1990s had to end.

But Trump's relationship with the Truth is something far less than stellar, and for him, it is something to manipulate at the drop of a dime and to shift in content depending on the President's immediate need and desired effect. And over the years, he has used this manipulation to bend Fed puppet, Jerome Powell, to do his bidding, after finding the Fed's 2.25 percent rate increase too much to handle.

In July 2019, President Trump stated: "The U.S. economy would grow more quickly if monetary policy were eased. If we had a Fed that would lower interest rates, we would be like a rocket ship. We don't have a Fed that knows what they're doing. Our most difficult problem is not our competitors, it is the Federal Reserve. The Fed raised rates too soon, too often, and doesn't have a clue!" 

That's quite contrary to what Candidate Trump was saying on the campaign trail in September 2016, when he stated: "They're keeping the rates down so that everything else doesn't go down. We have a very false economy (J. Smith: something I've stated for years now). At some point the rates are going to have to change. The only thing that is strong is the artificial stock market. The U.S. economy is in a big, fat, ugly bubble. I will get rid of the nation's more than $19 trillion national debt over a period of eight years. I'm renegotiating all of our deals, the big trade deals that we're doing so badly on. (J. Smith: And still are, i.e. USMCA)"

Will the Real Donald Trump please stand up? It's almost as though we have a president with multiple personalities, at least two at conflict with one another. 

Trump's proposed $4.4 trillion cuts to domestic spending, including $2 trillion in promised savings from entitlement programs, with some $844 billion cuts to Medicaid and $750 billion to Medicare spread over the next decade. With Congress unlikely to cooperate on this and Trump unwilling to spend too much political capital on it, this will probably fall by the wayside. After calling for fairly large domestic spending cuts in 2018, Trump still signed a deal in 2019 that added $320 billion in spending and demolished previous spending caps. 

And even when Republicans controlled both the House and the Senate, they still agreed to a bipartisan budget that increased domestic discretionary spending in all government departments, especially the Pentagon. They essentially refused to cut the State Department's and the Environmental Protection Agency's budgets, so whether they follow through with cutting the EPA by 26 percent in this budget is anyone's guess. 

Ironically, on February 4th, when Pres. Trump was practicing his State of the Union Speech for twenty Republican supporters, former Congressional deficit hawk, Mick Mulvaney, head of the Office of Management and Budget, argued there wasn't any need to mention the growing deficit, because :nobody cares" about it. That's a one-hundred and eighty degree turnaround since he campaigned to earn his spot over the OMB and a time he made deficit reduction his "central policy concern." Mulvaney's change of heart seems to have coincided with the Republican Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. 

And, on February 7th 2020, Vice-President Mike Pence told MSNBC's audience that deficits can help boost economic growth, which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Republican Party, or at least Trump's Republican Party, has now seeming embraced socialist and Keynesian economics and notions on spending. This same argument used by Leftists across America used to drive Republicans to some great degree of anger, whenever it was stated by Obama and his staff. 

[Blog Editor: Economics theory hurts my brain. Simplistically, choice in supply and demand good. Being told what, when, or able to buy – bad. To those of you who like to hurt your brain, here are some Mises Institute economics critical of Keynesian economics (article, audio, pdf-book & video):


o   Modern Myths of Keynesian Economics; 56 minute audio presented by Jeffrey M. Herbener; Mises Institute; posted 11/03/2018 delivered at Harvard Square in 1989

o   The Critics of KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS; Edited with an Introduction and new Preface by HENRY HAZLITT; Published by The Foundation for Economic Education, Inc. – 439 page pdf on Mises Institute; ©1995 - Originally published 1960 by D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.


Posted by misesmedia
88.4K subscribers - Jul 30, 2019

Recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, on 18 July 2019.

Mises University is the world's leading instructional program in the Austrian school of economics. Mises.org/MU19]


The federal subsidies are still flowing to the Repurchasing Markets at $100 billion a day, as they have since October, so corporations can buy back billions of their own stock, resulting in the artificially high stock market, the highest valuations since 2000. And in the meantime, the military is getting anything and everything it wants, as America continues to act as the World's Policeman and our entitlement payouts are constant and on an unsustainable trajectory, as President Donald John Trump and all the feckless Congressmen in Washington, D.C. pretend all is well. 

Despite boasts of the "Greatest Economy Ever", record corporate profits, stock market the highest ever, lowest unemployment in history and the Federal Reserve balance sheet at $750 billion, approximately $150 billion lower than normal, and interest rates still at emergency levels, somehow the Federal Reserve feels compelled to cut rates and restart Quantitative Easing, although they are not using that terminology. Powell is taking Trump's orders and acting in a way that is only ever seen during a recession or a financial crisis. 

Several successive administrations have used every debt based solution for this debt based crisis in their attempt to avoid another 1930s style Depression, but essentially, they have merely ensured that the next collapse is going to be exponentially much worse than it has to be. And the angst and divisions in our society are only compounding the situation through a whispered promise of impending catastrophe that sweeps the existing social order away in a chaotic cataclysm of death and destruction and all-out war. 

America's future is being stolen and sold. The future of America's children is being stolen and sold. America is being sold down the river, pillaged and raped, by the few at the top, the "elite" ruling class, at the expense of the American people, in an egregious manner that harms all society and America during the long journey ahead towards our eventual rise from the ashes of the coming economic chaos. 

By Justin O. Smith
+++++++++++++++++++++++
BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You're temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”
_______________________________
Edited by John R. Houk
Text embraced by brackets and source links are by the Editor.

© Justin O. Smith


Wednesday, December 17, 2014

No more RINO POTUS Nominations

RINO Alert

John R. Houk
© December 17, 2014

The Republican Establishment is beginning to slowly suggest their preferred candidates for the nomination of President for the November 2016 cycle. Honestly (and probably to the chagrin of Lefties) the only news I watch on TV is Fox News. And that network’s subliminal suggestions have been Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush. Both former Governors but both with long elements of Left Wing compromises.

I was extremely dissatisfied with the GOP nominating Romney for 2012. I did vote for him; however it was a between a rock-and-a-hard-place vote. I was any person but Obama voter. Romney has been indicating some stealth hints considering a 2016 run. God Forbid!

If the Republican Establishment succeeds in re-nominating for the 2016 election cycle, I am NOT voting for him. Neither will I vote for any Democrat. I will be voting for a Third Party candidate even if it is a wasted vote. The idiocy of the GOP Establishment of business as usual and the Dems Left Wing agenda are no choices for a fiscal and social Conservative.

Since I have experienced the idiocy of supporting Establishment candidates in 2008 and 2012, if the GOP nominates another alternative to Romney but with the same RINO credentials, I will not be voting for that person either. It is my opinion that Jeb Bush’s Conservative bona fides are suspect to be pro-RINO.

Now Jeb may not be as much as a RINO as Romney but he is probably enough of a RINO to perpetuate some of Obama’s America transformation. He would more than likely have a Dem-like immigration policy doctored up to fool voters, keep funneling money to Planned Parenthood funding abortion, abandon Christian morality in not fighting to reverse the courts mandate to allow same-sex marriage, remove everything Christian from taxpayer supported institutions, forcing Christians to do business with Biblically ungodly homosexuals under threat of a civil suit, increasing the deficit, keeping Obamacare rather than more Free Market medical reforms and on and on.

I’d have to do some more exploring into Jeb Bush to pin down some exact criticism rather than suspicions. Michelle Malkin has a good start toward a Jeb examination. Ironically I found this Malkin opinion piece in GOP USA. Perhaps that is an indication that GOP USA is not an Establishment dominated tool of the Republican Party.

JRH 12/17/14
***************************
Jeb Bush: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Waterboy

By Michelle Malkin
December 17, 2014 6:55 am

Allow me to unite America's left, right and center in just three words: No, Jeb, No.

Former GOP Florida governor Jeb Bush made the obvious official this week when he announced on Facebook that he's "actively exploring" a 2016 White House run. Of course, he's running. That's what inveterate politicians do.

Well, I hate to break it to Jeb Inc. There's no popular groundswell for Bush Part III. None, zip, nada. Independents, progressives and conservatives are all weary of the entrenched bipartisan dynasties that rule Washington and ruin America. Only in the hallowed bubble of D.C. and New York City elites does a Jeb Bush presidential bid make any sense.

Jeb's indulgent (and ultimately doomed) enterprise has three privileged constituencies: Big Business, Big Government and Big Media. This iron triumvirate explains how the failed campaigns of so-called "pragmatic," "thoughtful" and "moooooderate" liberal Republican candidates such as John McCain, Jon Huntsman and Bob Dole ever got off the ground. The "Reasonable Republican," anointed and enabled by the statist Big Three, serves as a useful tool for bashing conservatives and marginalizing conservatism.

For Republicans who argue that Jeb is the most "electable" choice, I ask: What planet are you on? After two disastrous terms of Barack Obama's Hope and Change Theater, the last thing the Republican Party needs is an establishment poster child for Washington business as usual. I mean, really? A third Bush who's been working for his dad, his dad's friends or the government since 1980?

A Beltway-ensconced scion so chummy with the Clinton family that he awarded close family friend -- and potential 2016 nemesis -- Hillary a "Liberty Medal" last year as chairman of the National Constitution Center?

That's the GOP donor bigwigs' "fresh idea" for "American Renewal?"

To blunt criticism from the grassroots base on the right, Jeb's cheerleaders at the Wall Street Journal cite his "conservative" gubernatorial record of cutting taxes and privatizing jobs. So we're supposed to swoon when a GOP governor acts like he's supposed to act on standard, bread-and-butter GOP issues? Whoop-de-doo.

One thing Jeb's promoters won't be emphasizing: Over the course of his eight years in the Florida governor's mansion, government spending skyrocketed. The libertarian Cato Institute notes that Florida general fund spending "increased from $18.0 billion to $28.2 billion during those eight years, or 57 percent" and that "(t)otal state spending increased from $45.6 billion to $66.1 billion, or 45 percent."

Like big-spending father, like big-spending big brother, like big-spending second son and lil' brother.

I have another interpretation of Bush's "conservative" Florida years: It's called biding his time. Yes, Jeb put in his obligatorily GOP service on taxes and the Second Amendment. Not because he was wedded to deep-rooted principles, mind you. But because the "conservative" facade will come in handy during the primaries when he has to defend radical, divisive positions on his two defining national policy issues: Education and immigration.

Jeb Bush's agenda is neither left nor right. His agenda is the agenda of the D.C. headquarters of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Remember: The chamber is a politically entrenched synod of bipartisan special interests. As I've said before, these fat cats do not represent the best interests of American entrepreneurs, American workers, American parents and students or Americans of any race, class or age who believe in low taxes and limited government.

The chamber's business is the big business of the Beltway, not the business of mainstream America. And so is Jeb Bush's.

The Chamber supports mass amnesty for cheap, illegal alien workers. Jeb Bush supports mass legalization of cheap, illegal alien workers and accuses those of us who oppose it on constitutional, sovereignty, security and fairness grounds of lacking "compassion."

The Chamber supports the top-down, privacy-undermining, local autonomy-sabotaging Common Core racket. Jeb Bush spearheaded and profited from Common Core -- and accuses those of us who oppose it of opposing academic excellence for our own children. Jeb's problem isn't just Common Core. It's that he has no core. Instead of retreating from the costly federalized scheme that has alienated teachers, administrators and parents of all backgrounds, Bush has doubled down with his Fed Ed control freak allies and corporate donors.

The reign of Obama ushered in massive cronyism, corporate favoritism and Boomtown boondoggles galore. We've lived too long already under the boot of arrogant D.C. bureaucrats who've exploited their power to serve their friends.

No more business as usual: Stop Jeb Bush.
_____________________________
No more RINO POTUS Nominations
John R. Houk
© December 17, 2014
______________________________
Jeb Bush: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Waterboy

Michelle Malkin is the author of "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks and Cronies" (Regnery 2010). Her email address is malkinblog@gmail.com.

COPYRIGHT 2014 CREATORS.COM


Thursday, February 27, 2014

That Which Makes America Good is Dissipating

Lady Liberty Drowning in Decay
John R. Houk
© February 27, 2014

Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona vetoed SB 1062 designed to keep people of faith – particularly Biblical faith – from being sued by exercising their First Amendment Right to Religious especially against the abomination of the practice of homosexual specifically condemned by the Word of God in both the Old and New Testament.

Why?

Homosexual Activists have essentially been successful in convincing Americans that homosexuality must be accepted even though God Almighty forbids it. This tells me that Secular Humanism has become so pervasive in our society that a majority of Americans are convinced that human desires are better to be satisfied than the will of the Creator that gave His only begotten Son – God emptied of Divine prerogatives to become the only sinless man – to Redeem humanity back to the path of Oneness with God that Adam experienced before he separated himself from God’s Presence by believing and allying with the Deceiver – Satan – by eating the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Sins deemed by humanity to be harmless matters of choice is basically the worship of creation rather than worship of the Creator. Hence as in the days of Noah, humanity has no fear of any consequences by openly disregarding the statutes of the Creator.

Jan Brewer had good reasons to veto SB 1062. NONE of those reasons had anything to do with the direction and guidance of God Almighty. Rather here are a few of the obvious reasons dispensed by intense human pressure:

The marketing revenue that would flow in Arizona was threatened by both Major League Baseball (MLB), National Basketball Association (NBA) and the National Football League (NFL).

  MLB:

 “As the sport of Jackie Robinson, Major League Baseball and its 30 Clubs stand united behind the principles of respect, inclusion and acceptance. Those values are fundamental to our game’s diverse players, employees and fans. We welcome individuals of different sexual orientations, races, religions, genders and national origins.

“MLB has a zero-tolerance policy for harassment or discrimination based on sexual orientation, as reflected by our collective bargaining agreement with the MLB Players Association. Accordingly, MLB will neither support nor tolerate any words, attitudes or actions that imperil the inclusive communities that we have strived to foster within our game.”

The Seattle Mariners issued an individual statement prior to the veto too, and it had an ever stronger call to action than MLB's:

"The Seattle Mariners have enjoyed 37 years of spring training in Arizona. Our fans flock to Peoria for baseball in March, and have always been made to feel welcome by the businesses and good people of Arizona. This should apply to all of our fans. The Mariners respect and value diversity. We welcome fans of all races, colors, religious beliefs, nationalities, ages, and sexual orientations. We believe that intolerance has no place in our game or society. Unfortunately, Senate Bill 1062 sends a message that not everyone is welcome. We hope Governor Brewer will reject that message."

NFL:

While no overt threat was made to yank the Super Bowl, it was clear the NFL was watching Brewer.

"Our policies emphasize tolerance and inclusiveness and prohibit discrimination based on age, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation or any other improper standard," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said in a statement before the decision.

"We are following the issue in Arizona and will continue to do so."

NBA:

Both of Arizona’s professional basketball teams [the NBA’s Phoenix Suns and the WNBA’s Phoenix Mercury] publicly called for a veto.

JP Morgan Chase

Go Daddy Group

Apple Computers

PetSmart

American Airlines

Southwest Airlines

Delta Airlines

Intel Corp

This list does not include large Arizona businesses and large business associations AND since the above article was written yesterday probably more Corporations were added.


o   Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ)

o   Senator John McCain (R-AZ)

o   Mitt Romney (R- President Nominee 2012)

o   Steve Schmidt, former John McCain Senior Campaign Advisor

o   Matthew Dowd, Former George W Bush Campaign Strategist

o   Mike Murphy, GOP Political Consultant

o   Bob Worsley (R – State Senator initially voted for SB 1062)

o   Adam Driggs (R – State Senator initially voted for SB 1062)

o   Steve Pierce (R – State Senator initially voted for SB 1062)


The Power of Homosexual Activism

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) provides insights of the kind of Homosexual power/mafia-style oppressive measures by Homosexual Activism that is involved in pressuring Governor Brewer:


o   'GAY' POWER VS. RELIGIOUS LIBERTY;” WND.com; 11/29/13

Everything to do with power and influencing Americans from the Media, Political Power and Left Wing Secular Humanism such as Homosexual Activism; has SILENCED Christian morality in America. We live in a day that the very evilness that took over and essentially condemned the people of Canaanite heritage become displaced by Divine Ordinance that enabled the fruition of God’s Promise to Abraham for a family heritage that Believers’ in the Bible call the Promised Land, the Holy Land, the Land of Israel and so on (by the way NOT Palestine).

Don’t believe the fullness of the times of the Gentiles has completely arrived yet or the Pax Americana will have begun its collapse. I don’t know, maybe Americans are at the beginning of that collapse and is just awaiting the history books or the Return of Christ to record the end of the USA.

AND I haven’t touched on America’s Left Wing activist judiciary that has recently (again) affirmed the homosexual debauchery as normal in Adam and Steve or Adriana and Eve marriages.

JRH 2/27/14
*******************************
Blog Editor: Here are some related articles that may be of interest

****************************

Posted by ChurchMilitantTV
Published: Feb 19, 2014
________________________
7 MYTHS ABOUT ARIZONA'S RELIGIOUS FREEDOM LAW

26 Feb 2014

UPDATE:

On Wednesday evening, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R) deliberately misread Arizona SB 1062 -- and, out of a misguided sense of political correctness, proceeded to veto it. "My agenda is to sign into law legislation that advances Arizona," Brewer said, in a massive cop-out avoiding the central issue of protection of religious freedom.

Brewer stated that the bill "could divide Arizona in ways we could not even imagine and no one would ever want." Of course, her veto of the bill is even more divisive, given that it now sends the message that it is open season on private religious business owners who wish to live out their religious principles throughout their lives, not just within the four walls of their churches or homes.

She continued by stating that the bill was too broadly worded, although she could not point to a specific provision that would allow for additional discrimination currently barred by Arizona law. She also suggested that Arizona's religious population does not face a threat of lawsuit or government action based on practice of religion in the workplace, overlooking the fact that such cases have cropped up repeatedly throughout the United States over the course of the last two years.

***

This week, controversy has broken out over Arizona’s law protecting the right of religious businessowners to reject service to particular customers. The law came hard on the heels of a series of outrageous court decisions finding that private businesses could be forced, in violation of their religion, to serve events such as same-sex weddings.

Cowardly Republicans including former presidential candidates Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) have been running headlong from the law, suggesting that it is somehow granting the moral okay to discrimination to recognize Americans’ First Amendment rights. They have been joined by outraged Democrats and leftists who lie about the nature of the law and suggest that without government intervention, America will be rife with roving bands of Christians looking to bludgeon gays in the streets.

Here, then, are 7 myths the left has told about the Arizona religious freedom law – and why they’re myths:

Arizona’s Law Loosens Discrimination Against Gays and Lesbians in The State.

Adam Serwer of MSNBC says that “‘religious freedom laws could be a license to discrimination.” That’s nonsense. Arizona state law has no provision currently barring discrimination against gays and lesbians. So what does the law do? It actually narrows the law with regard to supposed discrimination against gays and lesbians. The law only provides religious people with an excuse to pick and choose clients if they can prove actual religious adherence (which, by the way, should offend atheists, who should have the same First Amendment right to associate as religious Americans).

The law also makes clear what should be clear from the text of the First Amendment: religious practice is not restricted to your church or your home. Individuals operating businesses have a right to act in accordance with their religion at work. The law also states that religious businessowners can defend lawsuits using the law against other private parties, not merely government prosecution
.
This is the essence of American religious freedom. The disgusting attempt to use government to run roughshod over that religious freedom is blatantly unconstitutional. The law, which simply reinforces that, should be unobjectionable to anyone who actually believes in freedom of religion. Unfortunately, many on the left simply do not.

The Government’s Recognition of a Right to Religious Practice “Allows” Discrimination.

“I strongly support religious freedom,” Kansas state Rep. Patricia Sloop (D) explained with regard to a similar law being considered in her state, “but this bill is not about religious freedom. In my opinion, this is about legalized discrimination, and I cannot vote in support of this.”

The logic here is deeply flawed. My right to religious practice does not spring from the government; therefore, it is not up to the government to “allow” me to do anything with regard to my practice of religion. The question is whether government has a right to invade my religious practice in the name of some majority-determined or court-determined or regulator-determined social good. If the answer is yes on any sort of broad level, the Constitution is rendered meaningless. Rights can be balanced with communal needs, and are generally done so through the mechanism of the market. Once you hand the club of social enforcement to the government, however, rights are no longer balanced with communal goods. Communal goods win. Individuals lose.

The right to practice religion is not unique in this respect. My right to associate does not spring from the government; the government’s protection of that right – not violation of that right – is the purpose for the institution of government. My right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure is not subject to the government’s decision that suspicion of racism justifies violation of that right.

Allowing Private Businesses to Discriminate Among Customers Is Like Jim Crow.

On Tuesday evening, NBC’s Brian Williams made this comparison explicit, stating, “Good evening. It’s just one state out of our 50, but tonight what’s happening in Arizona is being compared by some to the epic battles this nation has fought over lunch counters, separate drinking fountains and restrooms.” Outspoken gay activist and former actor George Takei has called Arizona a Jim Crow state” thanks to the law. Even Fox News’ Andrea Tantaros has jumped on the bandwagon, stating, “I don’t know why you want to bring Jim Crow laws back to the forefront for homosexuals,” prompting host Martha MacCallum to state, “I mean, that’s exactly what it sounds like.”

No, it doesn’t. Private discrimination may be nasty and evil, but it is not and was not Jim Crow. Jim Crow laws mandated segregation in public areas. Here, for example, is Alabama’s Jim Crow law with regard to those “lunch counters:”

It shall be unlawful to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment.

State-compelled discrimination is not the same as private citizens discriminating.

As to suggestions that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would be overthrown by the act, the supremacy clause of the US Constitution prevents any state from superseding federal law.

Immorality and Illegality Should Be Identical.

Many opponents of the bill have argued, in absurd fashion, that if you support the right of religious Americans to discriminate, you therefore support discrimination. That line of argument is as wrong as it is dangerous. You can believe that something is immoral and yet agree that it should not be illegal. I think that Mein Kampf is an evil book. But I don’t think we should ban it in the United States, because I think people have a right to print it and read it. Does that mean I’m an advocate for the dissemination of Mein Kampf?

Ironically, this line of argumentation cuts against gay rights. If we now believe that anything the majority believes to be immoral should be illegal, regardless of countervailing rights, what exactly is the problem with anti-sodomy laws? Where exactly is the objection to segregation by this twisted logic?

Of course, we don’t feel that way in the United States. We believe that people have rights to activity of which we don’t approve. Otherwise, we’re living in a tyranny in which we elect the tyrants.

Race and Homosexuality Are Analogous.

Any analogy between refusing to service same-sex weddings to refusing to serve black customers is fatally flawed. Race is an immutable characteristic; homosexuality is only publicly known due to homosexual behavior. No matter how much you may be attracted to a member of the same sex, no one will ever know unless you choose to divulge that fact, or to engage in sexual activity with someone of the same sex. That means that discrimination against homosexuals would actually be discrimination against either homosexual activity, or against evidenceless perception of homosexuality. The former is entirely within the purview of religious morality (it should be and always has been my choice whether or not to participate in a gay wedding); the latter is entirely outside logic (if someone throws you out of his store because you wore a pink shirt, he’s a moron).

The same is not true for race. If you are black, you are black. Blackness is not behavior-linked, despite what some racists on the left may believe. That means that discrimination based on race is entirely morally unjustified in any religious universe. The same is not true of behavior; homosexual activity falls under a behavioral classification.

This distinction is vital, because we have decided (rightly) as a society that immutable characteristics should not be the basis for discrimination – but we continue to believe that behavior can be the basis for discrimination. It would be wrong for you to refuse me service based on my last name being Shapiro. It would not be wrong, however, for you to refuse to photograph my future son’s religious circumcision if you are an anti-circumcision activist. The same holds true with regard to race versus homosexuality.

America Is a Nasty Place.

If an alien were to land on earth today and watch the media coverage of the Arizona law, he would likely believe that the American people are incredibly homophobic, and that only the massive bulwark of government prevents Americans from routinely lynching gays and lesbians. That, at least, is the implication the media look to make when they label America on the verge of another Jim Crow era – the idea is that religious Americans can’t wait to erect separate straight and gay sections of their cigar bars.

That’s bull. No business has ever used Arizona’s current religious freedom law to defend against charges of discrimination. Hate crimes against gays and lesbians, while heinous and evil, are thankfully remarkably rare. In 2012, according to FBI statistics, there were a grand total of 1,376 hate crimes based on sexual-orientation bias. According to the Williams Institute at UCLA, there are approximately 9 million LGBT people in the country. By way of contrast, there are approximately 6.7 million Jews in America, and 836 Jews were victims of hate crimes in 2012. That means that approximately one out of every 6,540 LGBT people in the United States was victimized by a hate crime in 2012; one out of every 8,014 Jews in the United States was victimized by a hate crime in 2012. America is not an anti-Semitic country; America is not a gay-bashing country.

But it is in the interest of those in the gay rights movement to continue to maintain that America is just moments away from an anti-gay outbreak. Such feelings prompt government action to crackdown on religious opponents of homosexuality. Which is, of course, what this entire debate is about.

The Left Will Leave Your Church Alone.

Even those who oppose the Arizona law maintain that they simply want individual religious businessowners to face a crackdown by the state. But that’s patently false. What, exactly, would be the justification for stating that a business, which is privately held and for-profit, would have to service same-sex weddings, but that a church, which receives non-profit privileges from the state, would not? Where is the left’s internal logic? If a religious person – a person who by definition acts in accordance with religious values in the entirety of his or her life, not just inside the four walls of the church – can be forced to violate religious values, why not a pastor?

A religious person is a religious institution. Anyone who fails to understand that has never met a religious person. Religion starts at home, not in the church. It reaches to businesses, not just to the pews. The left knows that. And that’s why the left will not stop.

Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the New York Times bestseller “Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America” (Threshold Editions, January 8, 2013). He is also Editor-in-Chief of TruthRevolt.org.

________________________________
Taking Fire In Arizona
Group behind religious freedom bill becomes a target.

FEBRUARY 26, 2014 6:28 PM
Cathi Herrod- Prez Center for Arizona Policy

As she spoke on the phone with National Review, Cathi Herrod was interrupted. Protestors and news media were outside of her building; staff members were trying to get through to her. For the past few days, hundreds have protested at Arizona’s state Capitol against the law her organization proposed. Today, they were outside of her office.

Herrod is the president of the Center for Arizona Policy, an evangelical Christian organization devoted to defending life, marriage, the family, and religious liberty. Nowadays, they are best known for being the originators of Arizona’s SB 1062, the proposed law that would allow individuals to refuse to provide services for events against their religious principles.

“People think this law would enable a restaurant to refuse serving homosexuals, or a teacher religiously opposed to divorce to not teach a child with divorced parents,” Herrod tells me. “This law wouldn’t enable claims like that to be made. Opponents found a way to get a foothold and lambaste the bill for unrelated reasons and carry the day.”

In recent days, SB 1062 has been the center of widespread, national controversy. News outlets from Slate to CNN have taken positions against the law, overtly or not, and Governor Jan Brewer, a Republican, is expected to veto the legislation.

Yet the controversy surrounding the bill — and the distortion of the bill by politicians and the media — seem to have taken Herrod by surprise.

The Center for Arizona Policy first decided to make religious freedom more legislatively clear after the Elane Photography case in New Mexico, where Elaine Huguenin was charged with discrimination for refusing to photograph a same-sex “commitment ceremony.”

“Around the country we saw increased hostility toward people of faith,” Herrod says. “Our understanding was that in the Elane lawsuit, one of the issues was the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act did not apply to the case because the government was not a party to the lawsuit.”

In order to protect religious freedom in Arizona, the Center for Arizona Policy proposed what is now SB 1062 in order to ensure religious freedom protections in cases where the government isn’t involved.

“This does not create any new legal rights,” Herrod says. “It only clarifies that these rights apply to private actions.”

After debate and hearings in both houses of the state legislature, the bill was passed by the Arizona House and Senate on Wednesday and Thursday of last week, respectively.

It was right then that things began to “explode,” as Herrod put it. People in the tourist industry were worried that, following the passage of the bill, tourists would boycott Arizona, in the same way that the state was boycotted after the passage of its controversial immigration bill in 2010.

Then “it snowballed overnight,” as businesses turned sour and the media pushed increasingly ridiculous portrayals of the proposed law.

I asked Herrod if she believes reports that Brewer will veto the law. “It is incredibly difficult for the governor,” she says. “She’s a woman of faith, she’s a woman who’s strong, but the political upheaval has gotten beyond the pale.

As the protest began to dissipate outside her office, Herrod told me that, as she sees it, the perception of the law has now become the reality. But the real issue is “the First Amendment, the first freedom,” Herrod says. “We should have the right to live out our religious beliefs. That’s what’s at stake here, and this is a wake-up call.”

— Alec Torres is a William F. Buckley Fellow at the National Review Institute.
_______________________________
That Which America Good is Dissipating
John R. Houk
© February 27, 2014
______________________________
7 MYTHS ABOUT ARIZONA'S RELIGIOUS FREEDOM LAW

Copyright © 2014 Breitbart
______________________________
Taking Fire In Arizona

© National Review Online 2014. All Rights Reserved.