Marching Orders

Call these swing Congressmen! Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty Another Threat to Advertising Deductibility Urge the Blue Dogs to Oppose Obamacare
Alren's Bogus Website Obama's Mother's Day Gift to DC: Free Abortion U.S. Senate is Voting on So-Called 'Hate Crimes' Bill Jefferson county cancels event and teaparties
Obama budget with massive tax increases DNC plans to avoid filibuster Congress moves "Hate Crimes" bill along Pennsylvania trying to pass local gun laws


    These thirty Democratic Congressmen all voted for Obamacare the first time around.  But Pelosi cannot count on their votes again as Obama tries to jam the bill through using reconciliation in the Senate.  These members are all vulnerable and are frightened of the voter backlash their support for Obamacare has kindled

    Pick up the phone and call these swing Congressmen. Let them hear from you! Here is the list:

    Harry Mitchell (202) 225-2190 (480) 946-2411
    Gabrielle Giffords (202) 225-2542 (520) 881-3588
    Ann Kirkpatrick (202) 225-2315 (928) 226-6914
    Jerry McNerney (202) 225-1947 925-833-0643
    John Salazar 202-225-4761 970-245-7107
    Jim Hines (202) 225-5541 (866) 453-0028
    Alan Grayson (202) 225-2176 (407) 841-1757
    Bill Foster (202) 225-2976 630-406-1145
    Baron Hill 202 225 5315 812 288 3999
    Mark Schauer (202) 225-6276 (517) 780-9075
    Gary Peters (202) 225-5802 (248) 273-4227
    Dina Titus (202) 225-3252 702-256-DINA (3462)
    Carol Shea-Porter (202) 225-5456 (603) 743-4813
    Tim Bishop (202) 225-3826 (631) 696-6500
    John Hall (202) 225-5441 (845) 225-3641 x49371
    Bill Owens (202) 225-4611 (315) 782-3150
    Mike Arcuri (202)225-3665 (315)793-8146
    Dan Maffei (202) 225-3701 (315) 423-5657
    Earl Pomneroy (202) 225-2611 (701) 224-0355
    Steven Driehaus (202) 225-2216 (513) 684-2723
    Mary Jo Kilroy (202) 225-2015 (614) 294-2196
    Zach Space (202) 225-6265 (330) 364-4300
    Kathy Dahlkemper (202) 225-5406 (814) 456-2038
    Patrick Murphy (202) 225-4276 (215) 826-1963
    Christopher Carney (202) 225-3731 (570) 585-9988
    Paul Kanjorski (202) 225-6511 (570) 825-2200
    John Spratt (202) 225-5501 (803)327-1114
    Tom Perriello (202) 225-4711 (276) 656-2291
    Alan Mollohan (202) 225-4172 (304) 623-4422
    Nick Rahall (202) 225-3452 (304) 252-5000
    Steve Kagen (202) 225-5665 (920) 437-1954

    See for latest information, and to see TV ads or donate to the League of American Voters to run those ads in swing states

  • Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty

    Keynote speaker Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, gave a scathing and lengthy presentation, complete with detailed charts, graphs, facts, and figures which culminated in the utter decimation of both the pop culture concept of global warming and the credible threat of any significant anthropomorphic climate change.

    Here were Monckton's closing remarks:

    At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen, this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed.  Your president will sign it.  Most of the third world countries will sign it, because they think they're going to get money out of it.  Most of the left-wing regime from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won't sign it.

    Related Links
  • ResistNet article - UNFCCC 09/17/09 and the Copenhagen Treaty
  • WorldNetDaily article - Thatcher adviser: Copenhagen goal is 1-world government - 'Global warming' to be used as 'pretext' for 'change'.
  • Minnesota Free Market Institute - Monckton Speaks to Over 700 at Minnesota Free Market Institute Event - Full speech by Lord Christopher Monckton, along with PDF of his slideshow, and links to the full language of the treaty.
  • I read that treaty.  And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created.  The word "government" actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity.  The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, "climate debt" - because we've been burning CO2 and they haven't.  We've been screwing up the climate and they haven't.  And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.

  • Another Threat to Advertising Deductibility

    To: All AAF Members
    From: Clark Rector, Executive Vice President-Government Affairs
    Senate Democrats have introduced legislation (S. 1763) to disallow the federal tax deduction for all advertising and marketing expenses for prescription drugs.

    Senators Al Franken, D-Minn., Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., have introduced legislation (S. 1763) to disallow the federal tax deduction for all advertising and marketing expenses for prescription drugs.  The Senators have indicated they would like to have the proposal added to the health reform legislation and may offer it as an amendment when the measure is considered by the full Senate.

    Please contact both of your Senators as soon as possible and express your strong opposition to any effort to deny the deductibility of advertising expenses.  Talking points and contact information are both included.

    - The federal Tax Code treats all advertising as an ordinary and necessary business expense.  It is deductible in the year the expense is made along with all other business expenses such as rent, utilities, salaries and office supplies.  To disallow this expense is to directly increase the cost of advertising and marketing by up to 35 percent for affected companies.

    - Advertising is critical to the economic recovery of our nation.  Advertising provides $6 trillion in sales and 21 million jobs in America.  In these challenging economic times we cannot afford to make any form of advertising more expensive by taxing it.  Basic economics demonstrates that if you make advertising more expensive, businesses will have to reduce their advertising budgets, and if there is less advertising there will be far fewer sales generated of goods and services.

    - Advertising expenses must fit the budget like all other business costs.  If advertising becomes too expensive, a business must cut back costs or reduce its work force or find other savings.  All advertising, including advertising for prescription medications, helps pay for the cost of news and entertainment in print and television media.  The proposed tax on advertising and marketing would cost advertisers billions of dollars a year, resulting in cutbacks in advertising - a bad policy any time - but particularly harmful to media and advertising businesses in this economy.

    - It would violate the First Amendment to tax one type of advertising with the intent to discourage commercial speech about the advertised product.  While Congress has broad discretion to grant or withhold many tax deductions or credits, The United States Supreme Court has said that even a tax can be unconstitutional if used the way this legislation has proposed - to tax speech about a product in order to make it more difficult and more costly to advertise that product.  Because the tax makes this form of speech more expensive, it would violate the First Amendment because the suppression of this speech means consumers will receive less information.

    - Advertising is protected because it is important to the daily lives of Americans.  A 2004 Prevention magazine survey found 65 million patients talked with a physician as a result of seeing an ad for a prescription medication.  Almost 30 million spoke to a physician for the first time about a specific medical condition.  Advertising of prescription medications has helped millions of Americans receive medical care for diseases that might otherwise have gone untreated or undiagnosed.

    - "Where does one draw the line?" One United States Senator has asked.  Would we also tax advertising for vehicles that do not meet emissions or fuel economy standards, advertising for gaming, or foods that do not meet some nutrition standard?

    I have attached a list of Senator's chiefs of staff that includes contact information.  Or Senators can be contacted through the Senate webpage at or by calling the Senate switchboard at 202-224-3121.  Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any comments, questions or feedback from your contacts.

    Thank you.

  • Jefferson county cancels scheduled event and says no more tea parties!?!?  Please send an e -mail!!!


    These commissioners don't realize that they better ban everyone else or they better allow all.  I think the Parties are causing a lot of problems for them.  They don't realize what they are doing. Terry is one of the coordinators of the Jefferson County movement.

    M. Graham
    Wheeling WV

    Dear All,

    I am writing to you today to inform you of the most recent egregious acts by our local government.

    We The People West Virginia has had a class scheduled for 2 months on "How to run for public office" at the Jefferson County Courthouse in Charles Town, West Virginia.  This event has been advertised as a non-partisan event with Democrats, Republicans and Independents registered to attend.  The Journal Newspaper published a great story yesterday announcing the class.

    Thursday at 3:00 pm the Jefferson County Commissioners voted, unanimously, that no "tea party" group would be allowed access to public buildings for any events.  Again, this is 2 months after we scheduled a non-partisan event at the Courthouse.

    We had previously scheduled with the county and held a tea party rally on April 15 and had more than 200 people show up.  In the pouring rain.  This was a peaceful rally and Patricia and I personally cleaned up and made sure that no trash was left behind and no damage done.  The County has no reason, aside from attempting to stifle our group, our Constitutional right to free speech and our rights to use of public buildings.  This is the same county that has allowed the KKK use of public space for their meetings in the past.

    Patricia has worked very hard to put this free, non-partisan event together. She is working very hard to get us all together, to give us all the opportunity to learn and participate in our government, which we some times take for granted that they have our best interests at heart, and as we see now that they don't.  What's next?  Denying use of public buildings to Republicans, or women with blue eyes?  Where do they draw the line?

    We were not notified of this meeting or that they were even putting this up for a vote.  They did not bother to call Patricia directly to inform her that there was an issue with the scheduling of the class.  I have been searching for quite some time and cannot even find the agenda mentioning that it was even up for discussion.

    We will not stand for this.  They cannot shut us down.  We will not sit down and shut up!

    I will be scheduling a rally in front of the County Courthouse, we will walk down the street back and forth sign waving if that is how we have to do it.

    I will also be contacting an attorney, there will be letters to all the elected officials, to Shelly Moore Capito and more than I can list here.  If you have anything you would like to do to assist us in this effort, or any suggestions in how to combat this, I would appreciate it.

    Thank you.
    Terri Clark

  • Urge the Blue Dogs to Oppose Obamacare!

    Dear Patriot,

    The battle against a government takeover of the healthcare system is raging this summer in Washington. Public support for Obamacare has been dropping significantly the last few weeks, and I believe that much of that is due to your grassroots organizing. So let me start by saying thank you to everyone who has called their congressman, written a letter to the editor or protested outside a congressional district office this summer. We have slowed the legislation down over the past few weeks, and we are on the verge of stopping it and forcing Congress to rethink its approach to health care reform.

    One of the promising developments has been the opposition to the government takeover by the Blue Dog Democrats in the House of Representatives. Some of these Congressmen have flat out told President Obama that they will not support a government takeover, and others have focused on the trillions of dollars in new taxes that would be required for Obamacare. The battle against government-run health care is being fought within the Democrat party, and that is where we must focus our efforts. We need to urge the Blue Dog Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee to continue to oppose a government takeover of the healthcare system.

    Please TAKE ACTION NOW to send a message to these key Members of the committee. Then, follow up your email with phone calls and faxes:

    Bart Gordon (TN 6th), 202-225-4231, fax 202-225-6887
    Jane Harman (CA 36th), 202-225-8220, fax 202-226-7290
    Mike Ross (AR 4th), 202-225-3772, fax 202-225-1314
    Jim Matheson (UT 2nd), 202-225-3011, fax 202-225-5638
    Charlie Melancon (LA 3rd), 202-225-4031, fax 202-226-3944
    John Barrow (GA 12th), 202-225-2823, fax 202-225-3377
    Baron Hill (IN 9th), 202-225-5315, fax 202-226-6866
    Zach Space (OH 18th), 202-225-6265, fax 202-225-3394

    I know that you have been working hard all year to fight against the outreageous federal spending, bailouts and the inevitable tax hikes required to pay for this unprecedented push to grow government. It's been a tough fight, but one worth fighting. If we stick together during the next few weeks we can put enough pressure on the Blue Dog Democrats to sink Obamacare and defend our liberty. Thank you for everything that you have done, and we will see you on September 12th for the March on Washington!


    Dick Armey

  • Alren's Bogus Website

    Thanks to our listener; Bill who forwarded Eric Heyl's story in the Pittsburgh TRIBUNE-REVIEW last Friday.

    According to the Trib story, So desperately does Arlen Specter crave your cash that he's willing to be deplorably disingenuous to obtain it.

    Apparently Spector is willing to risk offending anyone who has suffered from cancer, autism, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's or diabetes.

    That is because, Those are the illnesses and conditions specifically mentioned in a new Web site the spfincter has launched, ostensibly to help vanquish various diseases.

    In reality, the site exists exclusively to bankroll Specter's continued mischief in Washington. All of the contributions will be directed to his re-election campaign, writes Mr. Hyle.

    But the site isn't called Shekels for Specter.  It's called Specter for the Cure.  This is a classic bait-and-switch scheme.  Mr. Hyell writes; if you don't believe him - check it out for yourself.

    Visit the site and decide for yourself.

    Its main page doesn't feature a photo of Specter with tin cup in hand, but a picture of girl with strips of red tape over her mouth.  To her right, below a "Donate Now!" button, is this modest proclamation: "Senator Arlen Specter intends to build a bridge over the valley of death."

    "Specter has launched Specter for the Cure, a bold new initiative to reform our government's medical research efforts, cut red tape and unstrangle the hope for accelerated cures."

    Just how does Specter hope to accomplish those goals?  By getting re-elected next year.

    But it isn't until the fundraising plea's 11th paragraph that it becomes clear that donations made to Specter for the Cure actually go to a cause much closer to the senator's heart: Specter for the Senate.

    Only at the very bottom of the page, in type not much larger than the microscopic bacteria you would find in a Petri dish, is it disclosed that the site is paid for by Citizens for Arlen Specter.  Misleading?  Not according to Specter campaign manager Chris Nicholas, who insisted, "No one is genuinely confused about where contributions to this Web site go."  Federal election campaign law requires those paying for campaign solicitations to provide "clear and conspicuous" identification on the solicitation.

    The statute specifically states the notice does not meet those criteria if it is placed in a location where it can easily be overlooked.

    Federal Election Commission spokesman Christian Hillard said that if someone feels the Web site is violating the law by having an inconspicuous disclaimer, "they are more than welcome to file a complaint with the commission."

    He declined to say whether any have been filed.  The FEC keeps all complaints confidential until they are reviewed and resolved, he said.

    Even if Specter has adhered to the letter of the law, he has trampled its spirit.  He has insulted those fighting the very ailments he professes he wants to eliminate.  Co-opting cancer for campaign purposes?  Eric Heyl asks?  Sick stuff indeed.

    Indeed Mr. Heyl.  Excellent story, I'm sure you can all guess what we Should do now -

    File a complaint with the FEC.  Go to or google "how to file a complaint with the fec"

    Here is an excerpt from the page:

    I. Filing a Complaint
    Any person may file a complaint if he or she believes a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Laws or Commission regulations has occurred or is about to occur.  The complaint must be made in writing and sent to the Office of General Counsel, Federal Election Commission, 999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463.  The original must be submitted along with three copies, if possible. Facsimile or e-mail transmissions are not acceptable.  A complaint must comply with certain requirements.  It must: Provide the full name and address of the person filing the complaint (called the complainant); and Be signed, sworn to and notarized. This means that the notary public's certificate must say "...signed and sworn to before me...," or words that connote the complaint was affirmed by the complainant, (such as "under penalty of perjury").'

    Furthermore, in order for a complaint to be considered complete and proper, it should:
    Clearly recite the facts that show specific violations under the Commission's jurisdiction (citations to the law and regulations are not necessary);
    Clearly identify each person, committee or group that is alleged to have committed a violation (called the respondent); Include any documentation supporting the allegations, if available; and Differentiate between statements based on the complainant's (the person who files the complaint) personal knowledge and those based on information and belief. Statements not based on personal knowledge should identify the source of the information.
    For self-reported complaints (called "sua sponte" submissions), the submission should include an admission of the violation(s), a complete recitation of the facts along with all relevant documentation that explains how the violation was discovered, the internal actions that were taken in response to the violation and what other agencies, if any, are investigating the violation (or facts surrounding the violation). The Commission seeks to increase the number of self-reported submissions in order to expedite enforcement of the law. To encourage self-reporting, the Commission will generally negotiate penalties between 25 and 75 percent lower than those for matters arising by other means, such as through complaints or the Commission's own review of reports. In certain circumstances, the Commission may allow committees who voluntarily report their violations and make a complete report of their internal investigation to proceed directly into conciliation before the Commission makes a finding as to whether there is reason to believe the committee violated campaign finance laws or Commission regulations.

  • Obama's Mother's Day Gift to DC: Free Abortion

    While local families planned their Mother's Day celebrations, President Obama observed the weekend by releasing a budget that would reduce the number of D.C. moms.  The President's gift to Washington's women is robbing them of the joys of motherhood by offering the government's help in paying for their abortions.

    It is already a great tragedy that the District of Columbia has the highest abortion rate in the country.  The Alan Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, reports that nearly half of all pregnancies in the District of Columbia end in abortion.

    President Obama highlighted the new details of his budget, which asks Congress to repeal a provision in the law that, if eliminated, would allow for taxpayer-funded abortions in the District of Columbia.  Once the District's abortion funding is approved, the White House will have effectively opened the door for liberals to pursue the same agenda nationwide.

    Although the President did retain the Hyde Amendment (which bans national taxpayer-funded abortions) in his plan, it is certain to be a major target of congressional leaders who want nothing more than to overturn the decades-old provision.  So far, the move has incensed pro-lifers who will be forced to pay for the capital city's new culture of death.

    And the concerns don't end there.  The budget also includes language that would govern the funding for a group called the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), which at one time actively litigated against pro-life laws.  The President has changed the wording in this proposal to allow LSC grantees to resume abortion litigation.

    Meanwhile, President Obama continues his pattern of political payoffs.  His budget would pad Planned Parenthood's bottom line by $10 million through even more Title X funding.

    For those of you doing the math, $10 million is the exact amount Planned Parenthood pledged in the last election to help get President Obama elected.

    The President also considers it a priority to increase money for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) to $50 million.

    UNFPA has been complicit with both forced abortions and sterilizations.  To help silence his critics on the government's out-of-control spending, the President decided to make new budget cuts yesterday.

    Unfortunately for teenagers, they included halting the dollars for abstinence programs in favor of projects that promote condoms.

    Although the White House did offer $17 billion in cuts, the reductions account for about one-half of one percent of the $3.4 trillion budget Congress has approved.

    If the President truly cared about reducing abortions, he ought to explain how funding abortionists helps him reach that goal.

    Obama wants to give our tax dollars to increase this horrendous statistic.  Common sense tells us, we can't reduce abortions as long as we continue to fund and promote it with our tax dollars.

    Tell your Representatives and Senators to protect the Dornan Amendment and keep our tax dollars from aborting more innocent unborn boys and girls in the District of Columbia!  Even one more life lost to abortion is one too many.

    Please be a voice for the voiceless!

    Source: Susan B. Anthony List

  • U.S. Senate is Voting on So-Called 'Hate Crimes' Bill

    Click HERE to Tell the Senate to REJECT 'Thought Crime' Bill!

    ALERT: If a bill that the U.S. House just passed isn't STOPPED in the Senate, here's what can happen, according to Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX):

    If a mother hears that their child has been raped and she slaps the assailant with her purse, she is now gone after as a hate criminal because this is a protected class.  There are other protected classes in here.  I mean simple exhibitionism.  I have female friends who have told me over the years that some guy flashed them, and their immediate reaction was to hit them with their purse.  Well now, he's committed a misdemeanor, [and] she has committed a federal hate crime because the exhibitionism is protected under sexual orientation.  You see someone spying on you changing clothes and you hit them -- they've committed a misdemeanor; you've committed a federal felony under this bill.  It is so wrong.

    Rep. Gohmert is correct: IT IS SO WRONG!

    But now, the Senate is ready to PASS that bill and send it to Barack Obama to sign into law -- which means we have to FIGHT HARD TO STOP IT!


    Whatever happened to "equal justice for all"? As Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) stated, "Under this bill, justice will no longer be equal.  Justice will now depend on the race, gender, sexual orientation, disability or other protected status of the victim.  It will allow different penalties to be imposed for the same crime.  This is the real injustice."

    Look, we all know that every year, many violent crimes are committed out of hate.  But just as many violent crimes, if not more, are motivated by something other than hate - whether it's greed, jealously, desperation, or revenge, to name a few.  A person's motivation for committing a violent crime is usually complex, and often we can only guess as to why he or she did it.

    Every violent crime is deplorable -- regardless of its motivation.  Every violent crime can be devastating not only to the victim and their family, but also to the larger community whose sense of safety has been violated.  That's why ALL violent crimes must be vigorously prosecuted.

    But this bill goes MUCH, MUCH FARTHER that simply prosecuting violent crime -- it creates a new "protected class" of people that would now be protected under "hate crimes" definitions.  That means that this bill will protect all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or "Paraphilias" listed by the American Psychiatric Association!  This would provide a HUGE MASS of "sacred cows" in our society, which includes pedophiles who would be given elevated protection -- giving "the offender" an additional decade behind bars.

    And that "offender" could be YOU!  If a pedophile tries to molest your daughter, or your nephew, or your granddaughter, or some little boy in the street -- if you step in and beat the pedophile to get him away, YOU could spend ten years in prison for your "offense"!

    I am NOT exaggerating this.  Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), who supports this horrendous bill, admitted that the bill would protect all 547 forms of sexual deviancy listed by the APA. Here's what Hastings said on the floor of the U.S. House itself:

    This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these "Philias" and fetishes and "isms" that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are.  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule.

    Apparently, supporters of this bill have no problem with sexual deviants, including pedophiles, getting a higher level of protection against you and me!

    Don't think that some people in the House didn't try to stand up against the Thought Police crowd.  The House version of the so-called "hate crimes" bill was adopted on a 249-175 vote, but not before several amendments were proposed by Republicans trying to mitigate the impact of the draconian law.

    For example, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) offered an amendment that was very simple: "The term sexual orientation as used in this act or any amendments to this act does not include pedophilia."

    The majority Democrats refused to accept that amendment -- or any OTHER amendment along the same lines!

    Far-leftist Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) have introduced the bill into the Senate, where they might try to get a vote on it without even going through a committee hearing!

    And that means WE have to take action NOW!


    In George Orwell's classic book, "1984," the State was constantly cracking down on what they called "thought crimes" -- that is, you didn't face prosecution just because of what you DID -- but also because of what you THOUGHT.

    That is EXACTLY what this "hate crime" bill will do -- it blurs the lines between violent belief, which is constitutionally protected, and violent action, which is not. If we go down this road, where does it end? With speech monitors and thought police?

    As Janet Porter of Faith2Action noted, "Pushing away an unwelcome advance of a homosexual, transgendered, cross-dresser or exhibitionist could make you a felon under this law. Speaking out against the homosexual agenda could also make you a felon if you are said to influence someone who pushes away that unwelcome advance. And pedophiles and other sexual deviants would enjoy an elevated level of protection while children, seniors, veterans, and churches would not."

    Rep. Gohmert warned that this law would be used against pastors -- or anyone else -- who speaks against homosexuality or other alternative sexual lifestyle choices, saying that it provides that anyone who through speech "induces" commission of a violent hate crime "will be tried as a principal" alongside the active offender.

    Critics say that would allow for prosecutions against pastors who preach a biblical ban on homosexuality if someone who hears such a message later is accused of any crime.  A pastor's sermon could be considered "hate speech" under this legislation if it's heard by someone who then commits an act of violence against someone based on "sexual orientation."  The pastor could be prosecuted for "conspiracy to commit a hate crime". Don't think it could happen?

    It already is.

    Similar state laws have resulted in persecution for Christians.  In Philadelphia several years ago, a 73-year-old grandmother was jailed for trying to share Christian tracts with people at a homosexual festival.  In Canada, which already has severely restrictive "hate crime" laws, government "Human Rights Commissions" review any "suspect" speech or actions that might be perceived as being against any of their "protected classes."

    So today, Canada has a major national magazine, a federal political party leader and a registered political party, a major Catholic newspaper (Catholic Insight) and an internationally renowned journalist (Mark Steyn) -- all of whom are being investigated by appointed "hate speech therapists" from the commissions.  Even Focus on the Family, one of the largest Christian publishing and broadcasting organizations in the nation, has admitted that it has been reviewing, and if necessary editing, its broadcasts to avoid complications with Canadian "hate crimes" laws.

    THIS IS WHAT WE FACE IN OUR FUTURE -- unless we take action NOW to stop this bill in the Senate!

    So, we've set up our website to enable you to send "Blast Faxes" to every single U.S. Senator AT ONCE, demanding that they REJECT this pro-pedophile "thought crimes" bill!

    For about what it would cost you in time and telephone charges, you can send Blast Faxes to Democrats, Republicans, Independents -- EVERYONE in the U.S. Senate, DEMANDING that they say NO to so-called "hate crimes" legislation!


    Please, take action right away to STOP this bill dead in its tracks!

    William Greene, President PAC

    P.S. FBI statistics show that the incidence of so-called hate crimes has actually declined over the last ten years.  In 2007, of the approximately 17,000 homicides that occurred in the U.S., only NINE were determined to be motivated by bias. This is a so-called "solution" to a problem that doesn't even exist!!!

    And what does President Barack Obama say?  "I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance."

    THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS -- and it MUST be stopped! Send your faxes right away to make sure these Senators get a STRONG message, to STOP this so-called "hate crimes" legislation NOW -- Thank you!


    As always, you can also send a FREE message directly to your Senators by clicking here.  Thank you.

  • From the Desk of: Steve Elliott, President Alliance

    LAST week the Senate passed the Obama budget with massive tax increases, a doubling of the national debt and fast-track provisions for socialized healthcare.

    The vote was 53-43, which means we fell just four votes short of stopping it.

    I have identified the 12 key Democrats who had voiced opposition to fast-tracking.  Several specifically signed a letter opposing use of this procedural trickery to pass the carbon tax and "Roll Call" magazine said many of these also opposed fast-tracking for healthcare.

    In all, 9 of the 12 we identified voted in favor of fast-tracking socialized healthcare... and we're naming names:

    Senator Max Baucus 202-224-2651
    Senator Mark Begich 202-224-3004
    Senator Robert Casey 202-224-6324
    Senator Daniel Inouye 202-224-3934
    Senator Amy Klobuchar 202-224-3244
    Senator Mary Landrieu 202-224-5824
    Senator Carl Levin 202-224-6221
    Senator Blanche Lincoln 202-224-4843
    Senator Mark Pryor 202-224-2353

    Please call these Senators and tell them you are outraged that their votes caused socialized healthcare to get put on the fast track.

    So, after you make your calls, please forward this message to your friends and urge them to sign the petition so they can be included in the delivery as well:

    We cannot allow two-faced politicians to push us further and further toward socialism without feeling any pushback from grassroots Americans.

    That's why we're naming names... and delivering your petitions on Capitol Hill next week.

    Steve Elliott, President

  • Democrats Clear Path for Health-Care Bills

    WASHINGTON -- Top Democrats tentatively agreed on a plan that would fast-track President Barack Obama's health-care initiative and ensure it couldn't be bogged down by a Senate filibuster.

    The health-care protection would be at the heart of a compromise version of the fiscal 2010 budget, which Democratic leaders in the House and Senate hope to push through both chambers early next week. That would provide Mr. Obama with a symbolic victory in time to mark his 100th day in office Wednesday.

    Congressional aides who described the deal Friday cautioned that a few details of the blueprint remain to be finalized, including the amount of spending on education. But they stressed that the essential framework of the budget had been hammered out in a late-night negotiating session Thursday, and top Democrats were busy Friday briefing colleagues.

    Even after a budget is adopted, action will be required on separate legislation to spend the money on specific items. But the outline is significant, particularly in the legislative protections it confers on priorities such as Mr. Obama's health-care plan.

    Overhauling the nation's health-care system is a top Obama goal, and Democrats in the House and Senate are determined to begin moving legislation this summer. But the initiative is certain to be contentious: It would come with a big price tag and a possible mandate that everyone who can afford health insurance must buy it. [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at a press conference in March.] Getty Images

    In the House, Democrats have firm control of the levers of power and will be able to push through a health bill as long as they build consensus within their ranks. But passage is more complicated in the Senate, where members have wide latitude to block bills.

    Under normal Senate rules, the support of 60 senators would be needed to thwart the Republicans' likely attempt to kill any health-care overhaul with a filibuster, a procedural move that can stall legislation indefinitely. More

    Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) said he is hopeful of reaching bipartisan consensus on a health-care package. He has been convening a series of roundtables with senators, health analysts and industry officials to work on building wide support for the effort from both parties.

    "When we jam something down someone's throat, it's not going to last," Mr. Baucus said.

    In the event he fails, the emerging budget deal would allow Democrats to overcome a filibuster because it gives health-care provisions "reconciliation" protection. That categorization shields bills from procedural delays and requires just 51 votes to pass. Democrats currently have 58 seats in the Senate.

    President George W. Bush used reconciliation to overcome Democratic opposition and enact his major tax cuts.

    Republicans nonetheless blasted the move to shield health care from a filibuster as divisive. "Ramming through a partisan plan that needs only a simple majority to pass is a far cry from the bipartisanship that has been promised," New Hampshire Republican Sen. Judd Gregg said.

    The budget blueprint also includes filibuster-proof protections for an Obama plan to overhaul student-loan programs, congressional aides said. The proposal would cut back on federal subsidies that now go to private loan companies, and would steer the money instead to direct assistance for needy students and others going to college.

    The $3.6 trillion budget, which generally tracks the White House proposal unveiled in February, provides a framework for the government's spending and tax priorities for the coming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. The blueprint would make good on a promise by Mr. Obama to sharply trim the federal deficit, bringing it down to about 3% of gross domestic product in 2014 from more than 8% in 2010, congressional aides said. It would also increase the government's nonmilitary spending by a little more than 7% over 2009.


    The so-called "Hate Crimes" Bill just passed through the House Judiciary committee and is expected to sail through the Rules Committee and then to the House and Senate for quick votes.

    Once the John Conyers/ Barney Frank H. B. 1913 is signed into law by Barack Obama, America may soon see the wholesale gagging of pastors, talk show hosts and other "hateful extremists" who dare call homosexuals "sinners" or Muslim terrorists "Muslim terrorists." Carrying the full force of U.S. law, heaven help the poor Pastor who dares to preach what the Bible says to preach. And in prisons, wardens will be wondering why the new inmates talk so much - because the jails will be filled with talk show hosts!!!

    Conducting Talk Show interviews on this topic is Evangelist Bill Keller, founder of, with 2.4 million subscribers to its daily prayer bulletin. Keller says that although the Bill appears to be targeting crimes and not speech, in reality its sponsor's true aim is to silence the pulpit from sending bible thumping 'guilt trips' to people who have chosen a homosexual or other sort of sinful lifestyle.

    During your interview Keller gives his first hand experience with being accused of committing "hate crimes," when CAIR (Counsel of Arab Islamic Relations) succeeded at getting Bill Keller’s TV show taken off air. He had been enjoying top ratings in his time slot, yet CBS television affiliate WTOG of Tampa yanked him off the air in response to the complaint by CAIR claiming Keller was inciting people with hatred and violence toward Muslims by his statements that Islam is a false religion.

    "What’s next?" asked Keller predicted, "Speaking out against legal abortions will be considered a hate crime." When asked if he will back down once the Hate Crime legislation becomes law, Keller said, "I refuse to back down from preaching the truth of the bible, regardless of what the government says. I will continue to call homosexuality a sin and those who refuse to repent from that sin, like any sin, will end up in hell."

    Will Bill Keller get arrested after the H. B. 1913 becomes law simply for saying homosexuals are going to hell? Time will tell...

    Christian leaders have pointed to hate crime laws in England, Sweden and Canada, where Christians have been prosecuted for breaking these laws. According to The Christian Post 11 Christians in Pennsylvania were reportedly prosecuted under the state’s hate crimes law shortly after "sexual orientation" was added, resulting in ten adults and one teenager getting arrested for singing hymns and carrying signs at a homosexual celebration in Philadelphia, the city of brotherly love. (See article in link above)

    Current federal law covers crimes committed on the basis of race, religion, color or national origin but under the new John Conyers/Barney Frank law, sexual preference will be elevated to these categories.

  • Tell Congress to vote NO on H.R. 1913, the so-called hate crimes bill. We do not need a bill like this as all crime is hate crime.

    H.R. 1913 claims, without any evidence, that homosexuals and cross-dressers are being persecuted so much they are fleeing across state lines to avoid being beaten up. This nonsense is in the "findings" section of the legislation.

    The bogus "findings" claims that because they flee across state lines, this makes it an interstate commerce issue and the federal government must intervene. This is insane. Surely, if this were such a huge problem, the highway patrol would have reported this to local law enforcement agencies. The problem doesn't exist. It's a phony argument to justify federal intrusion into local law enforcement. We already have far too much federal intrusion in our lives as it is.

    This legislation is designed for only two purposes: to further the gay/transgender agenda and to silence anyone who opposes this radical agenda.

    The so-called hate crimes bill will be used to lay the legal foundation and framework to investigate, prosecute and persecute pastors, business owners, Bible teachers, Sunday School teachers, youth leaders, Christian counselors, religious broadcasters and anyone else whose actions are based upon and reflect the truths found in the Bible.

    H.R. 1913 broadly defines "intimidation," thus a pastor's sermon could be considered "hate speech" under this legislation if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on any "sexual orientation." The pastor could be prosecuted for "conspiracy to commit a hate crime."

    Pastors and people like me could be arrested for preaching or een talking against homosexuality if this so-called hate crime becomes law. A pastor could be convicted of "inciting" to violence if someone in his congregation goes out and commits a crime against a cross-dresser or homosexual.

    All hate crime legislation in the past has been based on false assumptions and phony statistics. Anyone who reads FBI statistics on hate crimes can readily see that there's never been an epidemic of "hate" against homosexuals in this country. According to Table 7 of the FBI statistics for 2007, there were only 242 sexual orientation crimes that resulted in bodily injury to the victims.

    All of the other "hate" against homosexuals or drag queens involved name-calling and pushing or shoving. Local law enforcement is capable of handling these misdemeanors. There is no need for federal involvement in a local crime issue.

    H.R. 1913 will make 30 sexual orientations into federally-protected minority groups.

    I urge you to read the Traditional Values Coalition reports on hate crimes. Here are the URLs for TVC's series of reports:

    So-Called hate crime bill threatens religious freedom

    Protecting 30 Bizarre "Sexual Orientations" And "Gender Identity" -- Ever-Expanding Definitions

    Religious Freedom Is Threatened By H.R. 1913

    H.R. 1913 Will Inevitably Fund Anti-Christian and Anti-Biblical Bigotry - And Attack Bible Speech

    Misleading 'Hate Crime' Statistics

  • Pennsylvania Gov Ed Rendell is asking the State house and Senate to pass laws giving each and every town, borough, city and county the right to regulate gun laws to re-interpret the 2nd Amendment as they wish!  Please email your representatives!
    Name Party District - click on name to email
    Alloway, Richard L. R 33
    Argall, David G. R 29
    Baker, Lisa R 20
    Boscola, Lisa M. D 18
    Browne, Patrick M. R 16
    Brubaker, Michael W. R 36
    Corman, Jake R 34
    Costa, Jay D 43
    Dinniman, Andrew E. D 19
    Earll, Jane M. R 49
    Eichelberger, John H. R 30
    Erickson, Edwin B. R 26
    Farnese, Lawrence M. D 1 Ferlo, Jim D 38
    Folmer, Mike R 48
    Fontana, Wayne D. D 42
    Gordner, John R. R 27
    Greenleaf, Stewart J. R 12
    Hughes, Vincent J. D 7
    Kasunic, Richard A D 32
    Kitchen, Shirley M. D 3
    Leach, Daylin D 17
    Logan, Sean D 45
    McIlhinney, Charles T. R 10
    Mellow, Robert J. D 22
    Musto, Raphael J. D 14
    O'Pake, Michael A. D 11
    Orie, Jane Clare R 40
    Piccola, Jeffrey E. R 15
    Pileggi, Dominic R 9
    Pippy, John R 37
    Rafferty, John C. R 44
    Robbins, Robert D. R 50
    Scarnati, Joseph B. R 25
    Smucker, Lloyd K. R 13
    Stack, Michael J. D 5
    Stout, J. Barry D 46
    Tartaglione, Christine M. D 2
    Tomlinson, Robert M. R 6
    Vance, Patricia H. R 31
    Vogel, Elder A. R 47
    Ward, Kim L. R 39
    Washington, Leanna M. D 4
    Waugh, Michael L. R 28
    White, Donald C. R 41
    White, Mary Jo R 21
    Williams, Anthony H. D 8
    Wonderling, Robert C. R 24
    Wozniak, John N. D 35
    Yaw, Gene R 23