Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, observations on life in general, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them all!

RSS Feeds, Etc.

Get New Posts Via Email! Enter your e-mail address and hit the 'Subscribe' button. Your address will never be sold or spammed.


Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them!.





Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations

Jerry Sproul, CPA

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

Guest Post: The Sad Truth about TARP

February 17th, 2009 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

Last fall with the values of real estate declining, record foreclosures being recorded, diminishing confidence in financial markets and financial institutions, congress passed an emergency “rescue” package. The $700 billion TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) was created to stem the tide and was to be administered by the Secretary of the Treasury that had two primary functions.

In significantly simplified terms, the first function of the TARP was to purchase illiquid (difficult to convert to cash) and non-performing assets from banks and other financial institutions. Those assets were primarily securities in the form of collateralized debt obligations, partially comprised of sub-prime mortgages. Sub-prime mortgages are those issued to borrowers with questionable ability to repay the loan based on various criteria, including credit worthiness. By purchasing these illiquid assets the second objective of TARP was realized, as banks and other lending institutions could get those bad loans off their balance sheets, freeing them up to continue lending since that is such a crucial component of our growing economy.

The mortgage bond market is worth about $6 trillion, and is the largest single part of the whole $27 trillion US bond market, bigger even than Treasury bonds. Mortgage bonds consist of mortgages that are securitized and layered into securities that pay monthly interest to the bond holders. The total mortgage market (including mortgages held by banks and other lending institutions) at the end of 2007 was over $12 trillion, according to Federal Reserve data. According to the Mortgage Finance Statistic Annual for 2007, total subprime mortgage originations from 1994 through 2006 was $3.3 trillion.

With that much in subprime mortgages outstanding, and a default rate of nearly 5% of all mortgages, it was clear that the original TARP funding of $700 billion was not going to make much of a dent in removing these risky mortgages from bank balance sheets. That was undoubtedly why then Treasury Secretary Henry Paulsen quit using the TARP funds to buy them up; it wasn’t going to come anywhere close to what was needed.

Consequently, Paulsen changed the focus of the TARP from buying the “toxic assets” of distressed financial institutions, to purchasing the debt (corporate bonds and preferred stock) and equity (stocks) of distressed institutions. This was anticipated to increase the liquidity of those 250 institutions by improving their equity and debt ratios to get them in a position to be able to lend interbank and to customers again. That hasn’t seemed to ameliorate the situation either.

New Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, has now unveiled his plan for implementing the last half of the TARP. He said the new plan will entail “a comprehensive housing program to assist the millions of Americans who have lost their homes, and the millions more who live with the risk that they will be unable to meet their payments or refinance their mortgages.” Paulsen’s plan can potentially return the capital invested by selling those securities at a profit for the taxpayer. Geithner’s plan seems to be a flushing of the remaining TARP funds down a black hole.

Could there have been other options? Undoubtedly yes, but the most logical would have been two-phased. First, temporarily suspend the portion of Sarbanes Oxley Act that requires mark-to-market accounting of all assets on financial institutions balance sheets. This would have allowed those institutions to take those “toxic assets” off their balance sheets and work through their bad mortgages and mortgage-backed securities without having to meet Federal Reserve liquidity or cash requirements. Some banks would have still gone belly up, but the strong ones would have survived, and the massive spending to “bail out” the struggling ones wouldn’t have been added to the federal debt.

The second phase could have included something like the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) that was put in place in the 1980s to salvage the savings and loan industry. The RTC, from 1989 to 1995 folded up 747 S&Ls and sold off a portfolio of assets of $660 billion, in current dollars. Total cost to tax payers to do that was $231 billion in today’s dollars, according to Investors Business Daily.

The most critical factors in this mess have yet to be corrected. The Community Reinvestment Act is still on the books and needs to be repealed. This is the program that forced banks to lend to non-creditworthy borrowers. And Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are still around. The government should have never been in the mortgage business. Bad regulation made this mess, and undoing that bad regulation should be the top priority, not more regulation or non-stimulating “stimulus” plans.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Politics in General, Taxes | No Comments »

Bryan Fischer: Two Good Education Bills Introduced

February 13th, 2009 by Halli

Idaho Values Alliance

House Education chairman Bob Nonini (below right) introduced two bills yesterday that, if passed, will be good for Idaho’s school-age children and their parents and will make education more nimble in Idaho.

One bill would eliminate teacher contracts of more than one year, which will give school principals greater freedom to select staff who can get the job done in the classroom. Rolling contracts, of the kind used by Boise and Meridian school districts, tie the hands of principals and force them, in some cases, to employ teachers who are simply not hitting the mark in delivery of content.

One of the quickest ways to improve education in Idaho is to give principals the authority they need to put their best team on the field.

The other bill would allow school districts to reduce salaries or contract days, which is essential to give districts the flexibility they need to weather economic downturns, and which, by the way, would save jobs in the process. (The only other alternative would be to fire enough teachers to close the gap between revenue and expenses.)

House Speaker Lawerence Denney is a co-sponsor of the bills, as is Senate pro-tem Bob Geddes, and State Superintendent Tom Luna supports the bill.

One of the surest indicators the bill is on the mark is that it has already met fierce opposition from the Idaho Education Association, which frankly seems to care more about teachers than education, and probably should, for the sake of accuracy, be called the Idaho Teachers Association.

But the purpose of our public school system is student education, not teacher security. If we put the educational needs of students at the top of our priority list, then ending tenure for teachers is a good move.

The Statesman’s headline is illuminating, since it just as easily could have read, “House Education Committee moves forward with plans to improve quality of classroom teachers.” Instead, the chosen phrase is “targeting teacher contracts,” which turns Bob Nonini into a conscienceless big game hunter and creates sympathy for underperforming teachers by turning them into innocent, unsuspecting prey.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Education, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Taxes | No Comments »

Guest Post: History or Media Spin?

February 12th, 2009 by Halli

From Andi Elliott

A teaching moment, please…as a student of history, a former history teacher, and a student of politics, I’m amazed at the “ostrich position” assumed willingly by many people. It’s easier to have someone else do your thinking for you. But, a free people MUST be free thinking.

Recently I read a political analysis published by a non-partisan group. This watchdog agency publishes an annual list of the top ten “most corrupt” politicians. It was rather evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. I was astounded to see that three of our newly elected/appointed officials made this list: Hiliary Clinton (Sec of State who, by the way, according to the US Constitution is ineligible to serve), Barack Hussein Obama (who, by the way, could not even qualify for a security clearance), and our newly appointed Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, who is shrouded in “ethical questions”.

Have you heard about these issues in the media? Not hardly. Do you think “they” want a “thinking” public that would actually ask questions and demand answers and accountability and refuse to be caught up in the winds of “change”? How much more difficult would it be to control a politically educated public? Ask China…they have solved that problem.

History dictates that governments who control the flow of information control the minds of the people. It’s called totalitarianism. Look it up and you’ll see how closely we’ve come to this type of governing system. Control the minds of the people and you control the people.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Presidential Politics | 1 Comment »

Lincoln: The Real Legacy

February 11th, 2009 by Halli

Note from Halli: Abraham Lincoln is lionized (if not canonized) by virtually all Americans. And now Barack Obama tells the American people that he is the reincarnation of the popular president. I believe it is about time we took a hard look at the real Abraham Lincoln and his actions. The following post is written by Tim Urling, and begs for your further personal research. In addition, it may contain warnings for Obama’s real intent.

Like most everyone, I was force-fed Lincoln adoration from my elementary school days up until my university history courses. Mostly, that Lincoln saved the Union and ended slavery. However, like Charles Dickens said, “the American Civil War was solely a fiscal quarrel.” Like so much of what the government schools have taught me, my learning didn’t fit the truth. As a student of the Civil War and Lincoln, I realize how untraditional it is to speak anything but praise for this man, but please consider some points.

The United States was the only country that resolved slavery with a war that cost 620,000 lives. Most did so by emancipated compensation where the government paid slave owners in order to free slaves. Lincoln was motivated by power and gain. Rather than the Great Emancipator, Lincoln should be remembered as the Great Centralizer of Power.

Lincoln ran roughshod over the Constitution and suspended habeas corpus; he closed newspapers, seized telegraph lines, conscripted railroads, and jailed Northerners who criticized and objected to his policies. In particular, Congressman Vallandigham and Chief Justice Taney were arrested because of their staunch opposition to Lincoln’s policies.

Like a dictator, Lincoln circumvented the Constitution and waged war on the South without approval from congress as the Constitution demands.

Lincoln oppressed states’ rights, including secession. Many states included in their constitution their right to leave the Union if the government becomes destructive. The states created the federal government and the creature cannot exceed the creator.

Lincoln had no fondness for the black man nor believed in racial equality. Stating in 1858: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.” Lincoln promoted the idea of shipping blacks to Liberia or Haiti during the war.

It is unfortunate that my children learn in school the greatest presidents were Lincoln, Wilson and FDR-all war presidents, when in fact they were masters of deceit. I love the advice from a great patriot who said he supports no president “save exactly to the degree he upholds and follows the Constitution.” I believe with all my heart it’s not what government did that made America great, but what government was prevented from doing that made America great.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Taxes | 1 Comment »

Idaho House Highlights: February 11

February 11th, 2009 by Halli

By Representative Tom Loertscher, R-31

This will probably go down as a year of firsts in the Idaho
Legislature. Don’t get me wrong, there are a number of things that are
routine in nature and every session produces its own flavor. This one
seems to have something new almost daily that at least in recent memory
has not happened before.

We got tangled up in the State Affairs Committee the other day over
some rules that had been put in place by the Lottery Commission. One was
to prohibit a business from doing charitable work for a charitable bingo
organization. That one was laid to rest by the committee. Another that
was voted down would have allowed the Lottery to charge a fee for the
use of debit cards for ticket purchases through one of those little
green machines you see in retail businesses. The first in this instance
was that the Lottery Commission did not realize that under current law
they have to gain full approval of the legislature in order for their
rules to become permanent.

The Association of Counties was in town this past week working on what
they view as important issues that will soon be put into legislation. I
got a chance to visit with several county officials from all five
counties in our district. The biggest concern they have is that the
state might decide to balance the budget by placing more financial
burden on them. Every time Health and Welfare cuts a Medicaid program
the potential exists for the counties to pick up the services through
the indigent fund. I walked in on a conversation early one morning last
week that was occurring around my desk about the necessity of reducing
benefits in Medicaid. I quickly reminded my colleagues that if in fact
we should do that, counties and the property tax payers would bear the
brunt of the cuts. It was another first to get agreement that we would
have to make other changes so as not to cause a shift of financial

Just prior to State Affairs one morning I visited a few moments with
one of the State Tax Commissioners. I know him well and I just quickly
asked him, “How bad is it?” (meaning January revenue numbers.) He
answered, “You don’t want to know.” I responded, “Well, maybe I
don’t want to, but I have to.” This is the first time in the years I
have known him that he was not been upbeat about state revenues.

Superintendent Luna proposed a budget for education last week, that if
approved would be substantially below what was appropriated last year.
You’ve probably heard of some of the ideas of the Governor on the
matter and legislators are hearing from educators daily about ways they
see to save money and to get as much to the classroom as possible. One
of the things we have not ever quite achieved in Idaho was a better way
to have the funding follow the kids. Representative Gibbs told me the
other day that the House Education Committee had a lesson on how the
funding formula works. To those new around here it is almost
incomprehensible. This is certain to be the first year ever that less
money will be appropriated to education than the previous year. To keep
the funding to the classroom as high as possible, even the “C”
(consolidation) word is being bantered about by some. That would require
another first.

As we progress through the session his year, there are bound to be more
firsts come up along the way. I have been asked several times what my
predictions for the session are. I give this answer. This will be the
first session of the legislature in the history of the state that will
be completely successful. Everyone will be unhappy with us.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Education, Idaho Legislature, Property Rights, Rep. Tom Loertscher, Taxes | No Comments »

Bryan Fischer: States Shave High School Sports Schedules to Save Money

February 10th, 2009 by Halli

Idaho Values Alliance

The purpose of a public system of education is to, well, educate. It does not exist for the purpose of offering athletic programs to a small percentage of its students.

Idaho’s constitution only requires the state to offer “a general, uniform and thorough system” of free public education. “Uniform” means the state has a constitutional obligation to offer the same fundamental education to every one of its students.

Athletic programs (and extracurricular programs in general), while a lot of fun for students and parents alike, fall outside the constitutional responsibility of the state, and there are plenty of private alternatives – Optimist Football, Capital Youth Soccer, AAU, American Legion, etc. – to offer a competitive outlet to gifted athletes.

The typical footprint for a new high school in Idaho now requires 60 acres, the vast majority of that for athletic facilities, including gymnasiums, football fields, baseball fields, softball fields and soccer fields.

Trimming athletic programs would save the state significant amounts of money in land costs, construction costs, and staffing, maintenance and operational costs.

Other states have, out of sheer necessity, begun to trim back on their athletic programs in a tightening
economy. Can Idaho afford to be too far behind?

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Education, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Taxes | No Comments »

Bryan Fischer: Lewiston Tribune Columnist Admits Open Primaries Help Liberals

February 9th, 2009 by Halli

Idaho Values Alliance

Jim Fisher of the Lewiston Morning Tribune unwittingly confirmed the charges of social conservatives that open primaries encourage independents and Democrats to vote in Republican primaries, thus skewing results in a centrist direction.

Fisher ruminates on the possibility of former Rep. Bill Sali running in 2010 in what again could be a crowded GOP primary field. Sali has not made a decision with regard to 2010; his recent filing was necessary for technical reasons.
Of a closed primary, Fisher says, “If independents, Democrats and Republicans who do not want to go on record as party members are denied Republican ballots, a majority of those left voting might favor Sali no matter how many rivals he has.”

Fisher posits a veritable plethora of voters – independent, Democrats and Republicans who don’t anybody to know what they are – who likely would not vote in a closed Republican primary. If primaries are closed, all that will be left – horror of horrors! – will be social and fiscal conservatives. Can’t have them picking a Republican standard-bearer now, can we?

Republicans can be forgiven for saying, “Well, if you’re not willing to be publicly identified as a member of our party, maybe you shouldn’t be helping us pick our candidates.”

Democrats should – and in fact do – say the same thing. When the Democrats hold a presidential caucus, it is a decidedly closed affair. Republicans and independents need not apply. No one can or should blame them – it’s form of political insanity and suicide to do anything else.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Government Spending Won’t Rescue Economy

February 9th, 2009 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

Published – Idaho State Journal, 02/08/2009
The need for economic stimulus is apparently a consensus in Washington today though how to provide it is heavily debated. President Obama has been pressing Congress for passage of his plan which is being presented as a measure to put a tourniquet on the hemorrhaging of private sector jobs and kick-start the economy. By most objective accounts, the $150 billion Bush stimulus of 2008 did little to stimulate economic activity, even though it placed $700 in most tax-payers, and non-taxpayers, hands. According to the Wall Street Journal, most stimulus check recipients used the checks to pay down debt, rather than engage in new spending to stimulate the economy.

We should learn a valuable lesson from the Japanese who struggled with an anemic economy from 1989 through 1999. Often called the “lost decade,” that ten year period featured eight massive “stimulus” spending programs by the Japanese government. None of the stimulus programs turned their economy around to get them growing again. What it did succeed in doing, however, was to turn a once thriving economy into one that may never fully recover from that decade of spending. Japan still struggles under the massive debt incurred from that period as their debt to GDP ratio still stands at 86%. If the congress approves this $1.1 trillion package (including interest) being debated in the Senate this week, U.S. debt to GDP ratio will stand at 68%. Taxes are the only way to pay off such debt, and taxes constitute one of the greatest deterrents to economic growth.

Thomas Jefferson declared, “Public debt is the greatest of the dangers to be feared.” The House version of the bill which passed last week is nothing more than a massive federal spending package. Over half of the $850 billion “stimulus” bill could be more correctly classified as discretionary spending. And after the interest is added in, the true cost ends up over $1.1 trillion according to the Wall Street Journal.

Let’s examine some of the items included in this “stimulus” bill. $4.1 billion is targeted to community action groups, like ACORN (Association of Community Organization for Reform Now). It also includes $650 million for digital TV coupons, $600 million for new cars for the federal government, $6 billion for colleges and universities, $50 million for the National Endowment of the Arts, $44 million to repair the U.S. Department of Agriculture headquarters, $200 million for the National Mall. And more inexplicably, the House bill includes $136 billion for 32 new government programs. Plus it adds spending to at least 150 different federal programs.

Many of those are worthy areas to consider funding through discretionary appropriation, but their inclusion in the “stimulus” plan, dilutes any potentially stimulative effect the plan may have on the nations’ economy.

More importantly, those projects only expand government spending, and do nothing to create a positive economic climate for creating permanent jobs in the private sector.

The Congressional Budget Office “scoring” of the stimulus package indicated that only 12 cents of every dollar would have a stimulative affect on the economy within the first 18 months. The scoring process has its faults, and is designed to be non-partisan, but in this case their results indicate the impotence of the bill for creating positive economic activity.

During the Depression era, we know that even with a tripling of federal government spending from 1931 through 1939, the U.S. was still in a dire depression, and unemployment was still over 17%. What snapped the country out of the economic doldrums was our involvement in World War II, which saw a dramatic increase in economic activity from the private sector because of high demand for everything from trucks and jeeps, to airplanes and bullets.

The Obama administration has been pressing for passage of the stimulus plan for improvement to our infrastructure and the jobs that would be created with a massive influx of spending to improve it. Regrettably, less than 10%, or only $63 billion of the House version of the stimulus plan was aimed at infrastructure investment, and only $30 billion specifically for roads and bridges. Yet even if the entire $850 billion was spent on infrastructure, while there would be an increase in jobs in construction and construction supplies, they would not be permanent jobs to the tune of 2.5 to 3 million jobs, as desired by the administration.

This is not a typical recession, and without something dramatic, it could easily deepen and last longer than the 10.5 months that U.S. recessions historically average. This one is worsened due to the erosion of real estate values, the number of home foreclosures, and the concomitant failure of many banks because of the mortgage meltdown.

So what will snap the U.S. out of its economic doldrums? Certainly not government spending. The great Nobel Laureate for economics, Milton Friedman, declared a couple of years ago, “unbridled government spending is the single greatest deterrent to faster economic growth in the United States today.” He’s probably rolling over in his grave as he observes the unprecedented spending spree the federal government is engaging in.

The best way to emerge from a recession is to free up capital, or money. Reduction of capital for investment and expansion, and reduced consumer spending are characteristic of recessions. While scoffed at by those who prefer government solutions, the best way to free up capital is to reduce the costs of capital. Forbes economists recommend making the capital gains tax cuts permanent, which would freeze them at 10%, and a 15-20% cut in corporate tax rates. Currently the U.S. has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, only trailing Japan in that category. No wonder so many companies have been moving operations overseas, to escape the confiscatory taxes collected from companies domiciled domestically. By reducing the tax rates on corporations, companies have that much more of their net profit to reinvest in their companies for expansion, mergers, and increase manufacturing capacity. That translates to more jobs, and the kind of jobs that are more permanent than infrastructure-related construction jobs would be.

And to free up capital for all of us as consumers, the Forbes economists say that rather than send out a one-time stimulus check, what would be much more stimulative would be to declare a month or a quarter holiday from payroll taxes. These are the taxes that employers are required to withhold from their employees pay, as well as those that employers themselves pay which are directly related to employing a worker and are typically linked proportionally to an employee’s pay scale. Such a payroll tax holiday period would free up significant spending cash for everyone who pays taxes. If you are paid $4,000 gross per month, and your tax withholding shrinks that to $3,000 net per month, $1,000 would be freed up for every month the holiday is in force. Now that is change that even I can believe in.

There is a tendency for many Americans to hold corporations in contempt, especially the profitable ones. For example, Exxon Mobil posted record annual profits for 2008 of $45.2 billion. They anticipate maintaining their capital spending of nearly $30 billion next year, which is just less than half of the infrastructure spending of the House stimulus bill, yet the jobs created from that capital spending will most likely be permanent.

We don’t know yet what Exxon Mobil’s tax bill will be for this past year, but in 2007 Exxon Mobil paid $30 billion in total taxes on revenue of just over $40 billion in revenue. Corporations don’t technically pay taxes, people do. You and I paid the majority of that $30 billion that Exxon had to pay out in taxes. If corporate tax rates are lower, you and I pay less for their products and services, and the company is left with more capital to invest in their companies, creating jobs and expanding operations.

A statement released last week by 200 economists and printed in several major newspapers affirms these principles. The statement says in part, “More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan’s “lost decade” in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.”

The Senate is still working on their version of a stimulus plan, and it may end up not resembling the House version very much. For the sake of our country and our future economic growth, let’s hope that it doesn’t.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Guest Post: If Obama Were a Republican….

February 8th, 2009 by Halli

From Andi Elliott

If Obama were a Republican, just think of how the headlines over the past year would have read:

“Obama’s minister Rev Wright is ‘Hatemonger’!”

“Obama: Twenty years of ‘hate speech’!”

“Obama’s self-avowed Communist friend, Bill Ayers’ firm to receive millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money!”

“Obama’s nominee Gov. Bill Richardson involved in ‘pay to play’ scheme!”

“ Obama’s appointment of Daschle marred by tax evasion charges!”

“Obama’s policies begin the takeover of American business following in the footsteps of Communists!”

“First Lady Michelle O is ashamed of her country!”

“Michelle O has been ‘muzzled’!”

“Obama continues to fill administration with lobbyists though vowing the opposite!”

“Obama nominates another tax cheater for a Cabinet Position!”

“Obama appointed Sen. Clinton as Sec of State – Constitution declares her ineligible!”

“Obama Ineligible for Presidency, declares suit bought by Judicial Watch client!”

“Obama spending bill paves way for Socialism as the government moves to swallow banks!”

“Obama’s inauguration most expensive in history – money that could have helped the communities!”

“Obama’s daughters to attend prestigious private school – public education isn’t good enough for the Obama’s!”

“Obama used influence to allow illegal aunt to remain in country!”

“Obama used influence so that his citizenship case was dropped by US Supreme Court!”

“Obama held secret talks with terrorist supporters!”

“Obama’s Chief of Staff declares disarming Americans as #1 Issue

“Obama and General Electric are “bed partners”!

“Obama personally attacks American citizen – Joe the Plumber!”

“Obama goes after Rush – citizens wonder who is next!”

“Obama refuses to prove eligibility to serve!”

“Obama seals his college records as Dems demand transparency.”

“Was Obama born in Kenya? Grandma says yes!”

“Democrats excited by Obama’s anti-2nd Amendment Positions.”

“Barry (or whatever his name is) during first weeks of Presidency says he ’screwed up’.

Three years and 49 weeks to go!

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

Guest Post: The Depths to which Aborton has Brought Us

February 7th, 2009 by Halli

From David Ripley, Idaho Chooses Life

The horrific murder of a newborn baby in Florida provides us, should we have the moral courage, with an opportunity to look our Abortion Holocaust full in the face.

A young woman, 23 weeks along in her pregnancy, decided to kill her baby via abortion. She arranged an appointment with a Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique. But on the day of her scheduled abortion, the mother went into labor in the waiting room and delivered the baby girl.

One of the abortuary owners, not a doctor herself, rushed to cut the umbilical cord and knocked the newborn onto the floor. The baby began bleeding to death through the open cord. As the mother watched, the female owner then collected the baby and afterbirth into a biohazard bag and threw her out in the trash.

The AP story ( purports that everyone on both sides of the abortion issue are wringing their hands in horror at this terrible turn of events. But let’s tell some truth here.

First, state officials have been “investigating” the incident since getting an anonymous tip some 2 ½ years ago – a week after the baby was killed. An autopsy demonstrated that the baby girl had air in her lungs, which is generally the crucial fact in determining whether or not a “live birth” occurred. And, yet, no criminal charges have been filed.

In fact, we would probably know nothing about this horror if it were not the subject of a civil lawsuit filed by the mother.

That, my friends, is the purest form of chutzpah. The woman should be charged as an accomplice to murder: She witnessed the crime and never notified authorities – not then, not ever. No ambulance was called, no policeman, nothing. But all you abortion promoters out there needn’t worry. No one will be charged with the cruel destruction of this innocent baby girl, despite the fact that a federal law (The Born Alive Infants Protection Act) was passed to address just this horror. The abortionist, who wasn’t even on hand, may have his license suspended at some point; and the mother will almost certainly cash in on her role in aiding in the baby’s murder, by now playing the victim.

And that, as they say, will be that.

But this situation provides us all with an opportunity to grapple with the barbarity to which we have sunk as a society; moral corruption has been mainstreamed.

Look at the cowardice of our law enforcement system! Attorneys who hold the public trust to uphold the law cannot force themselves to bring criminal charges a five-year-old could discern. See the coldness of conscience which allows a mother to sue for her “pain and suffering”, while avoiding any responsibility for her role in silently watching as her baby is murdered and thrown away like trash.

What a terrible price Roe v. Wade has exacted from us all.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Copyright © 2oo6 by Powered by Wordpress          
Ported by ThemePorter - template by Design4 | Sponsored by Cheap Web Hosting