The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment
And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).
The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....
T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE
Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???
The Watcher’s Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.
“When one with honeyed words but evil mind Persuades the mob, great woes befall the state.” ― Euripides, Orestes
This week’s winner, Joshuapundit’sWhite House On Benghazi: ‘No More Questions!!’, is my reaction to testimony and statements from SecDef Leon Panetta, JCS Chief General Dempsey, the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the Benghazi debacle that all directly contradict each other… and the White House’s insistence that we all move along now, no more questions. Here’s a slice:
The White House is getting downright testy about U.S. Senators (not to mention the rest of us) continuing to ask unanswered questions about the Benghazi debacle.
White House spokeshole Jay Carney had a major hissy fit after Senator Lindsay Graham threatened to put a hold on the nominations of Chuck Hagel and John Brennan unless the administration was more forthcoming:
White House press secretary Jay Carney on Monday blasted Senate Republicans for threatening to block Defense Secretary-nominee Chuck Hagel and John Brennan, nominated to head the CIA, in a quest for more information about what President Obama did on the night that terrorists killed four Americans in the U.S. Consulate in Libya.
“We have answered these questions,” Mr. Carney said. “The president found out about the attack in Benghazi in a meeting with his secretary of defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs from his national security adviser. He immediately ordered those two leaders to take every action necessary to try to position forces in a way that could assist in Benghazi and also potentially take action, if necessary, elsewhere, because of all that was enfolding around the region.”
He added that Mr. Obama was “regularly updated and kept appraised [sic] of events in Benghazi and in the region throughout that evening and into the night.”
“Those are the facts,” Mr. Carney said.
Outgoing Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta told lawmakers last week that he didn’t have any communication with the White House on the night of the Benghazi attack after informing Mr. Obama of the assault during a meeting at the White House late in the afternoon.
To use Mr. Panetta’s exact words, “He left it up to us.”
So Jay Carney is either misinformed or lying. Or both. Actually, I assume President Obama probably voted present that evening, based on past performance. The questions I want answered are far different.
In our non-Council category, the winner was Amity Schlaes with The Small Presidency submitted by Joshuapundit. It’s a wonderful piece on why returning to small government may be the ultimate answer to America’s problems, by a superb writer whose upcoming biography of Calvin Coolidge I can’t wait to get my hands on.
Okay, here are this week’s full results. Only the Right Planet was unable to vote this week, but was not subject to the mandatory 2/3 vote penalty:
See you next week! Don’t forget to tune in on Monday AM for this week’s Watcher’s Forum, as the Council and their invited special guests take apart one of the provocative issues of the day with short takes and weigh in… don’t you dare miss it. And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that!
RUSH: So yesterday I was openly complaining, some might even say whining, that I was gonna have to watch the State of the Union show. It was gonna be sickening to listen to what was being said and then to watch members of Congress stand up and essentially applaud the destruction of the country. And I talked to a bunch of people who said, "I'm not watching. I'm not gonna watch it. Not gonna spend any time on it." And I said, "Well, I have to." It reminds me of the days when I was in school and everybody told me they weren't doing their homework, so I didn't, either. Turns out they were lying. They all did their homework and I got D's and F's. Well, everybody that told me they weren't gonna watch the State of the Union ended up watching it.
I'll tell you what I thought of it, folks. I disagreed with everything the president said pretty much, in terms of his policies. I disagreed with everything he said, but it was a great speech. I liked the speech and you know what I really liked? I liked that part where he said that we all have to get along and work together to help people. I really liked that. That really scored with me. And I was watching the Frank Luntz focus group after the State of the Union speech and after Marco Rubio's response, it was on Hannity on the Fox News Channel. He had this focus group, and, if you didn't see it, it's too bad. If you did, you were looking at the very definition of low-information voters. It's amazing. They had the same reaction I had.
They disagreed with pretty much everything Obama said, policy-wise, but they supported him, and they thought it was a great speech, and they liked the part about everybody working together to get along. They liked the fact that he's gonna tackle the deficit. They liked the fact that he's gonna create jobs. They didn't agree with how he was gonna do it, but they liked that he's going to. They liked that he's gonna reduce the deficit. They liked the fact that he's gonna bring the debt down. They liked the fact that health care costs are gonna come down. Did you know that? Health care costs are already coming down and I found myself agreeing. I thought it was cool. I disagreed with, you know, how the president said he's gonna do it.
Look, I had a bit of a problem with the president on global warming where he basically said that if Congress doesn't act, he will. But I do think we need to deal with global warming. Everybody knows that. I didn't agree with much, but I liked the speech. I was very, very supportive. And Obamacare, the costs are coming down. That's good. I'm very happy about that. The debt, deficit is coming down. We're already over halfway to the targeted debt reduction of $4 trillion. So at least somebody's working on this stuff and somebody's trying to make it happen. I wasn't crazy about some of the things I heard the president say on taxes, but I had to acknowledge that the rich have been getting away with murder all these years. It's about time somebody tried to make everything fair, and who could oppose fairness.
You know, yesterday we had the Gallup poll, and on every issue except one -- and I forget what the one issue was -- every issue, every policy, by vast majority numbers, the American people disagree with Obama. A vast majority disagree with Obama on every policy. I mean, it's not close. In some cases, the numbers of people that disagree are in the 60 percentages, and the people agree with Obama are in the forties. But they liked the speech last night. They thought it was exactly what was called for.
Now, the New York Times has a story today. "Polls Show Dissatisfaction With Country's Direction, but Support for Obama's Agenda -- Just ahead of President Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday night, new polls find continued public dissatisfaction with the direction of the country, yet support for several of the policies the president has said he will push in his second term." And that's what I saw in the focus group last night on Frank Luntz. They don't like the way the country's going but, man, they love what Obama's doing about it. Well, I know folks, don't ask me. I'm just telling you what I saw, what I heard, and what's in the news. It's a little conflicting. The Gallup poll people do disagree with Obama issue by issue by issue.
The New York Times says there is support for Obama's agenda but dissatisfaction with the way the country's going. See, those are two separate things. This is what we are going to have to learn to understand. Obama's agenda doesn't have anything to do with the country's direction. As far as the low-information voter is concerned, they're two separate things: support for Obama's agenda but dissatisfaction with the country's direction.
Now, you and I might say, "Well, wait a second now. The country's direction is precisely related to Obama's agenda." But no! We would be terribly wrong. Obama's agenda has nothing to do with the country's direction. Obama's agenda is about fixing it, and people support it. Now, this is also a mendacious media at work because this is exactly the opposite of what Gallup reported the day before that we discussed.
According to Gallup, the American public disapproves of every Obama policy except for his handling of defense. But the New York Times has this story that's just the exact opposite. Polls show dissatisfaction with country's direction but support for Obama's agenda. Two separate things. The Frank Luntz focus group was pretty much the same thing. They pretty much disagreed with what they heard last night in policy, but they liked the speech and they like what Obama said.
They like that somebody's working on it and they want everybody to work together. The Obama claim that the Affordable Care Act is already slowing health care costs? Now, you and I would hear something like that that the president said that last night... "Already the Affordable Care Act is helping to slow the growth of health care costs." I know your reaction was probably the same as mine when you heard that. It's just another bald-, bold-faced lie. The truth of the matter is that Obamacare has not even been fully implemented!
How can you give credit to Obamacare for slowing health care costs when it's yet to be enacted? What is slowing health care costs, to the extent that they're slowing down, is the recession -- and that's even debatable. But, you know, in a couple of isolated areas, not very many, you can see where health care costs a little bit less than it has been costing. But that's due to the recession. It has nothing to do with Obama. But this is way too much information to the low-information voter. You can't persuade them with that.
So what I decided to do, ladies and gentlemen, is we got hold of Paul Shanklin and we decided to do a condensed version of last night's State of the Union. This is an honest, condensed version of last night's State of the Union...
JOHNNY DONOVAN: (Hail to the Chief) And now, the honest, condensed version of President Obama's State of the Union Address.
PAUL SHANKLIN AS OBAMA: My fellow Americans, fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy said something profound at his State of the Union. I... will not. Thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, there isn't enough progress to my agenda. Corporate profits are evil, and we need a middle class to tax. It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country: The idea that if you work hard, you can get ahead no matter whatcha look like or how you sneaked in or who you love in a cheap motel -- or whether you have a thing for feathers, high heels, or wigs with bangs.
Now, the American people don't expect us to solve every problem. I haven't solved any, so don't worry. But they do expect us to put the nation's interests before our party. You first! In 2011, Congress passed my plan to have sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts called a "sequester" that would jeopardize our military readiness, and would most certainly slow our recovery and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs. So let's set party interests aside, and work to pass a solution to end the sequester crisis I manufactured right here in America.
The biggest driver of our long-term debt is old people. The Unaffordable Care Act is slowing their access to medical care, but not fast enough. We must do more! Now, our government shouldn't make promises we can't keep, but we must keep the ones we already made -- unless it was to turn a budget in on time after four years. Every day I ask myself three questions about this nation: "How do we attract more jobs to our shores?" "How do we equip our people with skills they need to get those jobs?" and "How to do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living?"
Well... Well, how do we?
We now produce more oil and gas right here in America, so we must do more to combat climate change -- and if Congress won't act, I will do what I want, whenever I want. Why does Congress even exist? We need more infrastructure like roads and bridges! (Sorry. Heh, heh. I couldn't help myself.) Today, too many families with solid credit are being turned down for home loans because of unnecessary regulation, and I just now noticed.
So, uh, free pre-school for everybody! Now... Now, we all know what needs to be done. Send me a comprehensive immigration bill, in Spanish, and I will sign it. There are still places in America where you can't get ahead, like Chicago. America will run away in Afghanistan and declare victory no matter what happens. Today, the organization that attacked us on 9/11 -- no, not Benghazi; the other 9/11 -- is a shadow of its former self.
Cyber attacks are bad. There are many places where people live on little more than a dollar a day. Ask my brother George. Now, women deserve combat duty. And honestly, people: Just give up your guns and we'll protect you about as well as we can protect a small child on a playground in Chicago where they have plenty of gun control already. In closing, my fellow Americans, we are citizens. Honest. I have the birth certificates for both of us! God bless you, and God help the United States of America, because I won't.
(Hail to the Chief)
Thank you.
RUSH: And there you have it, my friends, our State of the Union condensed version for those of you who missed it last night. (interruption) No, I'm being entirely serious. Snerdley is scratching his head, saying, "What are you up to?" I'm not up to anything. I'm telling you exactly how the speech was perceived last night. A majority of Americans, depending on where you look, either do or don't like Obama's policies.
But they really liked the speech and they liked that he's working on this stuff. They like that he's attacking the deficit. They like that he's fixing health care. They like that he's doing all this and they hope everybody works together on it. That's what they really want. They want everybody to join hands. I saw it in the Luntz focus group. They want everybody to work together -- everybody come together -- get along and fix these problems, because we have a debt problem.
Obama's working on it, and that's good. We've got a health care problem and Obama's working on it. We've got a unemployment problem. Obama's working on it. He's got a program for it. But the thing that you gotta take away, the thing that you must understand about last night that defines everything: There is massive dissatisfaction with the country's direction. The vast majority of the American people do not like the direction in which the country is going, while at the same time there is overwhelming support for Barack Obama's agenda.
Which means that, to the vast majority of American voters, there is no relationship whatsoever between Obama's agenda and the direction of the country.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I realize in the opening segments of the broadcast that I had a little fun with this, but I do want to tell you something here that has been sort of an eye opener for me. Now, it may have been something that you understood long ago. It may have been something you put together long ago. I must confess that I only just realized this today. And it's about trying to understand how could so many people say they disagree with Obama's policies and yet reelect him. I know that you and I have expressed our puzzlement and our curiosity over the great disconnect there is in this country. The people that vote for Obama don't like where we're going, the direction of the country, the policies of Obama, yet he wins elections.
So we've all been taking our stabs at trying to explain why. Well, he won reelection because he did such a good job of demonizing Romney that he made everybody afraid to vote for Romney and they settled and just voted for Obama, vote for the guy who's already there, at least he's a known quantity. But the New York Times story today finally opens my eyes to what we're dealing with, at least for me. And, as I say, you may have understood this long ago. "Polls Show Dissatisfaction With Country's Direction, but Support for Obama's Agenda."
Now, you and I, in what I would call the high-information voter sector, understand what a giant disconnect that is. How in the world can people be dissatisfied with the country's direction while at the same time support the very agenda that's causing it? This just doesn't compute to you and me. We recognize that it is Obama's agenda which is leading to the problems this country has and thus the dissatisfaction that people have regarding the country's direction. But the majority of people who vote, there is no connection of those two things whatsoever. They support Obama's agenda, and they are terribly unhappy about the direction of the country, and, therefore, they do not associate Obama's agenda or his policies with the direction of the country.
They do not associate Obama's policies with what has happened to the country. They don't associate all the spending and all the debt with the lack of jobs. They don't make that connection, they don't see any connection, they don't see it at all. Now, to me this is an eye-opener, and it's going to force me to assess exactly how to go forward here in dealing with these people. The idea is to persuade them. I mean, they are the low-information voters.
Now, if they're unhappy with the economy, if they're unhappy with jobs, if they're unhappy with the debt, if they're unhappy with the housing market and yet support Obama's agenda, then they obviously do not connect Obama's policies as being in any way related to or responsible for the country's direction that they don't like, which means a number of things. It means that they see Obama as working really hard to try to fix everything, rather than Obama as the reason for things worsening. They just do not see that. And to you and me it's a slam dunk. It's one plus one is two. These are people, outcome-based education, two plus two is five and we'll give 'em an A for trying. They don't see it.
So Obama is not at all connected to the tragic destruction of this country. He is seen as somebody who wants to fix it. It's the same thing as people seeing Colonel Sanders as a guy running a hospital to save chickens. Wouldn't compute. It wouldn't make any sense. But that's how he's viewed. Now, maybe one reason is that he's successfully blamed Bush all these years and the exit polling data last November, vast majority of people still do blame Bush for the economy, but it's more than that. It's that Obama never, ever, allows himself to be seen as governing. He is constantly campaigning.
Obama is constantly seen as in competition with what's happening in Washington. It is though there are straw men. There are men behind curtains. There are invisible, evil people doing all this to the country. He's trying to expose them and he's working very hard. Romney is one of them. Bush was one of them. There are a bunch of other people, we don't know who they are. But Obama is trying to find them. He's trying to expose them and trying to fix all this. Obama is not seen as the guy behind the curtains pulling the levers. Obama is not seen as the guy who does not like the way the country was founded and is trying to take this country in a different direction. He's not seen at all in the way he really is. It can't all be because of the media.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: You may have figured this out long ago, but it just hit me -- and if you figured it out long ago and you've been trying to get through here and tell me, I wish you'd have gotten through. For those of you who figured it out and I didn't, I'm just now getting to it. I apologize for being a late arrival to the party, but now -- now -- it all makes sense. For five years Obama has never once allowed himself to be seen as governing.
He is constantly campaigning against mysterious forces who have ill intentions trying to harm you and this great country. There are these figures behind the screen, behind the curtain. Romney was one. Bush was one. There are others. Obama's trying to expose them. Throughout history dictators, for example, have never really been blamed for the bad things that happened in their countries. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, none of them were blamed by the rank-and-file citizenry.
They were, instead, the leaders of the revolution!
They were the great figures trying to change all the evil that was happening to everybody. Here's Obama. Let me prove this to you. I have for you a little sound bite, 36 seconds, of people from the Frank Luntz focus group on Fox last night. Every one of these people voted for Mitt Romney. These are swing voters in Santa Monica. Now, Santa Monica's a liberal hotbed, but every one of these people that you hear voted for Mitt Romney, and they are talking about their perception of last night's State of the Union speech.
LUNTZ: From the Romney people, what did you like about Barack Obama's State of the Union Address? A couple of you...
WOMAN: I liked his immigration that he talked about putting people at the back of the line and so that they didn't get preferential treatment just because they were here.
MAN: I think education, the reform he was talking about -- affordability and making it efficient -- I think that's gonna... Education all starts from education, really.
LUNTZ: One more...
WOMAN: I like how he spoke of bipartisanship and working with Congress and moving the country forward by working together.
LUNTZ: Does he mean it?
WOMAN: I believe he means it.
LUNTZ: How many of you believe he means it, that he's gonna be more bipartisan this term than he was before?
WOMAN: He means it!
RUSH: Those people all voted for Romney, and they -- even the people that voted for Romney -- do not associate Obama with any of the problems in the country. This is what you and I are gonna have to learn and learn fast. No matter what is said, no matter what evidence happens, no matter what's reported, it will not be possible to connect Obama to the negativity that's happening in the country today because he's campaigning against it himself. That's the reason for the perpetual, never-ending campaign. It is why, in eight years, he will never allow himself for even one day to be seen as actually governing or presiding over any of this.
He's always going to be running against the very things he's doing.
If you missed President Obama’s State of the Union address last night, you didn’t miss much – especially if you watched any of his past four State of the Union addresses.
We heard the same recycled rhetoric, and we heard his Orwellian declaration that the cornucopia of new federal programs he proposed, as well as his intention to eradicate world poverty, wouldn’t “increase our deficit by a single dime.”
Of course, he glossed over the inconvenient facts. He boasted about job creation, but didn’t mention that real unemployment is higher today than when he took office. He touted all those still undiscovered “clean energy” jobs without mentioning the tens of thousands of real jobs the Keystone Pipeline will create if he would simply allow it to be built. He sang of new energy development, but didn’t mention that new offshore leases for oil and natural gas drilling have declined a decimating 61% under his administration.
He talked about “helping” to build “a thriving middle class,” but didn’t address how the middle class is actually faring under his economic stewardship. This is important – his deception must be addressed: under his leadership, middle class families have seen the average price per gallon of gas increase 96%, the average cost of family health care premiums rise 24%, the annual cost per household from federal regulations rise to over $15,000, and real median household income decline $4,520. If this is what happens when he “helps” the middle class, then please, Mr. President, we implore you to stop “helping” us.
He talked about a “balanced approach to deficit reduction” without mentioning that $5.9 trillion has already been added to the debt since he took office. We’re $16.5 trillion in debt and he keeps digging the hole deeper! He didn’t mention his record trillion dollar deficits or the fact that his last proposed budget would add $9.2 trillion to the debt through 2022. His Democrat-controlled Senate hasn’t passed a budget in four years. That’s obviously not “responsible” or “balanced.” He said, “We can’t cut our way to prosperity.” Well, we definitely can’t get there by borrowing and spending money we don’t have on his “investments” that don’t work. If indiscriminately borrowing and spending money led to prosperity, then bankruptcy would be a sign of economic strength. But it isn’t.
A State of the Union address should give us a true picture of the direction in which we are headed. But we didn’t get the truth last night. And it WAS Orwellian.
What is the true state of our union? Though this may sound harsh, I’ll speak the truth here. We are a country going bankrupt to fund a bloated, distant, and often corrupt federal government led by venal politicians more concerned with paying off their campaign cronies and consolidating their own power than in preserving the constitutional republic that so many have fought and died for (including our brave men and women in uniform who were barely mentioned last night).
We are a country with an economy being stifled under the weight of a bankrupt and voracious federal machine demanding more taxes and burdensome regulations. Job creators are the ones stuck with the bill when Obama calls for “new revenue.” Their businesses bear the brunt of the nearly 87 million paperwork hours imposed by federal regulations in 2012 – annually costing them $1.75 trillion. And I haven’t even mentioned Obamacare yet, which looms like the dark cloud it is over our private sector. Is it any wonder why our economy is stagnant or why job growth is so anemic? President Obama’s “solution” to these problems is to make the federal government more intrusive, bankrupt, and controlling.
If we continue down the path Barack Obama has us on, the long-term forecast of the state of our union is not a pretty picture. Yet he merrily rolls along it, deceiving too many Americans into thinking that these are intelligent, economic, and ethical proposals.
Our President wasn’t candid with Americans about our forecast, but, interestingly, in a Q&A session last week, Paul Krugman, one of President Obama’s economic cheerleaders at the New York Times, was remarkably candid about where we’re headed.
When asked about our federal debt, he admitted that “eventually we do have a problem” especially because “the population is getting older” and “health care costs are rising.” So, what does he see as the solution to pay for all this? He admits that your taxes will rise. And worse:
“Surely in the end it will require some middle class taxes as well. We won’t be able to pay for the kind of government the society will want without some increase in taxes, not a huge one, but some increase in taxes on the middle class, maybe a value added tax. And we’re also going to have to make decisions about health care – not pay for health care that has no demonstrated medical benefits. So, the snarky version I use, which I shouldn’t even say because it gets me in trouble, is death panels and sales taxes is how we do this.” (But wait, I thought there’d be no such thing as “death panels,” liberal liars?)
Mr. Krugman tried to portray this brave new world in the gentlest possible light, but it’s going to take quite a lot of “sales taxes” to meet the payments on the ever-increasing multi-trillion dollar debt we’re burying our kids and grandkids under. And with health care costs rising under Obamacare, obviously a lot of care will be rationed and even flat out denied by panels of faceless bureaucrats making life and death decisions for you and your loved ones. This is the long-term forecast for the state of America under Obama’s failed policies: middle class taxes and death panels.
Does that sound good to you? It doesn’t to me. So, we better get motivated to do something about it. We’d better get out of our post-election funk and wake up to the radicals’ reality being created as America gets “fundamentally transformed.”
Here’s the good news: President Obama is in many ways a lame duck president. None of his ridiculous ideas will come to pass via the legislative process. Of course, he may try to force them down America’s throat by imposing them through other means. But they can be undone if the right people are in position to undo them. He is very bold right now – some would say cocky – because of his November win, but there is another election around the corner, and we can check his boldness at the ballot box by electing constitutional conservatives. We must continue to affirm the fact that growing our bankrupt federal government is NOT the solution. Most of what the federal government does could be handled better on the individual, local, and state levels.
Our country didn’t weather a Revolution, two World Wars, a Civil War, a Great Depression, and countless other political and economic storms, just to be sunk by the dangerous policies of this current administration. We’re stronger than this. As President Reagan said, “I do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing.”
So, do something. 2014 is just around the corner. Get motivated! Get organized. America, don’t retreat. In the words of yet another White House program, “Let’s move.”
Breitbart News: The Senate has failed, 40-58, to pass a motion by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to close debate on the nomination of Chuck Hagel to the post of Secretary of Defense. A Republican filibuster held, as Democrats failed to muster the 60 votes necessary to pass cloture and move to a full vote on Hagel's confirmation.
New evidence emerged Thursday of speeches that Hagel had given in 2007 and 2008. The former included endorsement for a U.S. consulate in Iran, and allegedly also included a comment accusing Israel of controlling the State Department. The latter, a speech to the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) in 2008, was not disclosed to the Senate Armed Services Committee as requested, and was produced by the ADC today.
Update: Why the Pope retired For Real: Kevin Annett: European Governance issued an arrest warrant: and Closure and seizure of Vatican assets: Here are all the notices and dates Also See: Pope Benedict to seek immunity and protection from Italian President Giorgio Napolitano on February 23 Being a former Catholic as they were selling, trying to sell, us on the fact the Pope Benedict was retiring due to health reasons and how this was such an honorable thing to do… possibly setting a new precedent for modern times, something just didn’t feel right. And as usual the church and the ever so complicit and/or lazy U.S. media wasn’t doing their job… at least not the job of being the watchdog for the people. Ask Marion~ – h/t to MJ and Anne
VATICAN CITY (TheBlaze/AP) — Pope Benedict XVI announced Monday that he would resign on Feb. 28 because he was simply too infirm to carry on – the first pontiff to do so in nearly 600 years. The decision sets the stage for a conclave to elect a new pope before the end of March.
TheBlaze: The 85-year-old pope announced his decision in Latin during a meeting of Vatican cardinals on Monday morning.
He emphasized that carrying out the duties of being pope – the leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics worldwide – requires “both strength of mind and body.”
“After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths due to an advanced age are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry,” he told the cardinals. “I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only by words and deeds but no less with prayer and suffering.
“However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the barque of St. Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary – strengths which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me.”
This file picture taken on December 31, 2012 shows Pope Benedict XVI arriving to pray in front of the nativity crib in Saint Peter’s Square after celebrating the Vespers and Te Deum prayers in Saint Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican. Pope Benedict XVI on February 11, 2013 announced he will resign on February 28, a Vatican spokesman told AFP, which will make him the first pope to do so in centuries. Credit: AFP/Getty Images
The last pope to resign was Pope Gregory XII, who stepped down in 1415 in a deal to end the Great Western Schism among competing papal claimants.
Benedict called his choice “a decision of great importance for the life of the church.”
The announcement did come as a surprise to many, including New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan. He was interviewed about it on the “Today” show and detailed his initial thoughts. He revealed that he wondered at first if it was just a rumor after getting a call from NBC’s Matt Lauer. That quickly gave way to confirmation:
“We did have fair warning, but at the same time since it is something that hasn’t happened in centuries, it always does comes as a surprise,” former Fox News reporter and Vatican spokesman Greg Burke told “Today.”
The move sets the stage for the Vatican to hold a conclave to elect a new pope by mid-March, since the traditional mourning time that would follow the death of a pope doesn’t have to be observed.
There are several papal contenders in the wings, but no obvious front-runner – the same situation when Benedict was elected pontiff in 2005 after the death of Pope John Paul II.
When Benedict was elected pope at age 78 – already the oldest pope elected in nearly 300 years – he had been already planning to retire as the Vatican’s chief orthodoxy watchdog to spend his final years writing in the “peace and quiet” of his native Bavaria.
Contenders to be his successor include Cardinal Angelo Scola, archbishop of Milan, Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, the archbishop of Vienna, and Cardinal Marc Ouellet, the Canadian head of the Vatican’s office for bishops.
Longshots include Dolan. But while Dolan is popular and backs the pope’s conservative line, the general thinking is that the Catholic Church doesn’t need a pope from a “superpower.” You can read TheBlaze’s detailed story on that from when Dolan was first named Cardinal here.
All cardinals under age 80 are allowed to vote in the conclave, the secret meeting held in the Sistine Chapel where cardinals cast ballots to elect a new pope. As per tradition, the ballots are burned after each voting round; black smoke that snakes out of the chimney means no pope has been chosen, while white smoke means a pope has been elected.
Popes are allowed to resign; church law specifies only that the resignation be “freely made and properly manifested.”
Only a handful have done so, however and there’s good reason why it hasn’t become commonplace: Might the existence of two popes – even when one has stepped down – lead to divisions and instability in the church? Might a new resignation precedent lead to pressures on future popes to quit at the slightest hint of infirmity?
Benedict himself raised the possibility of resigning if he were simply too old or sick to continue on in 2010, when he was interviewed for the book “Light of the World.”
“If a pope clearly realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically and spiritually capable of handling the duties of his office, then he has a right, and under some circumstances, also an obligation to resign,” Benedict said.
The former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had an intimate view as Pope John Paul II, with whom he had worked closely for nearly a quarter-century, suffered through the debilitating end of his papacy.
You can read the full text of the resignation announcement to the Cardinals below:
Dear Brothers,
I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church. After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry. I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering. However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the barque of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.
Dear Brothers, I thank you most sincerely for all the love and work with which you have supported me in my ministry and I ask pardon for all my defects. And now, let us entrust the Holy Church to the care of Our Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and implore his holy Mother Mary, so that she may assist the Cardinal Fathers with her maternal solicitude, in electing a new Supreme Pontiff. With regard to myself, I wish to also devotedly serve the Holy Church of God in the future through a life dedicated to prayer.
As Pope Benedict XVI prepares his exit, the natural question observers are asking is: Who’s going to replace the pontiff? Speculation is already running rampant, with Irish bookmaker Paddy Power placing online bets on the results of the impending conclave. While there’s no definitive way to tell who will inevitably be selected by the cardinals to succeed Benedict, some key figures are being highlighted as good fits for the job. One can only wonder if the Pope is suffering from a condition or disease that is more serious than he or the Vatican is saying. Or is it truly the weight of the ongoing pedophilia trials in America, the changes in the world and demographics in the church, or is the spiritual war heating up needing a younger and stronger Supreme Pontiff?
This morning, TheBlaze reported that, throughout the church’s recent history, papal resignations are virtually non-existent. In fact, Benedict is the first pope in 600 years to abdicate the position and the first known Catholic leader in history to do so for health reasons. Whoever is chosen (we highlight the complex process here) will end up serving with the papal predecessor still living and remaining involved, at least to some degree, in the church — yet another factor that serves as an anomaly.
Prince and Grand Master of the Order of Malta, Fra Matthew Festing stands near Pope Benedict XVI during a mass given to mark the 900th anniversary of the official recognition of the Order of Malta by Pope Pascal II on February 9, 2013 in the Vatican City, Italy. His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI addressed over 4,000 members of the Order of Malta who have travelled from across the world to Rome to celebrate this event. The mass was presided over by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of State of the Holy See. Credit: Getty Images
Among the Catholic leaders who are being pinpointed by media as potential replacements are Canadian Cardinal Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Cardinal Peter Kodwo Appiah Turkson of Ghana, and Cardinal Leonardo Sandri of Argentina, among others. These options, alone, show the geographic and ethnic diversity present within the potential pool. But Paddy Power lists many others who the company believes could be under consideration. Here’s what the group says of some of the top contenders’ chances of being selected:
Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet is 5/2 market leader to be elected as the next Pope. He is Prefect of the congregation for Bishops which is seen as a powerful position within the Vatican, it seems. According to one of the Paddy Power lads who has his finger on the Catholic pulse, Cardinal Marc has experience of working in Latin in America, is a friend of Benedict and is apparently outgoing and charismatic. [...]
Cardinal Peter Turkson is 7/2 and speaks six languages. The Ghanaian can understand Latin and Greek and has seen plenty of support early doors.
Cardinal Francis Arinze of Nigeria at 7/2. If either Cardinal Francis Arinze or Cardinal Peter Turkson are elected it would be the first time in history there would be a black Pope.
Early steamers in the market are CardinalKeith O’Brien from Scotland who has been trimmed from 40/1 into 33/1, and Ireland’s Archbishop Diarmuid Martin who has seen his price slashed from 150/1 in to 80/1.
While many of these names may seem unfamiliar to you (after all, these men are Catholic leaders from across the globe), we’ll take a brief look at at least a few of the key men who are mentioned above and in ongoing media speculation.
Cardinal Marc Ouellet holds a mass in celebration of The Pilgrimage of the Holy Robe at the Cathedral of St Peter on April 13, 2012 in Trier, Germany. The Pilgrimage of the Holy Robe runs from April 13 to May 13, during which hundreds of thousands pilgrims are expected to view the Holy Robe. The robe, said to have been worn by Jesus Christ leading up to his crucifixion, is housed by the cathedral and rarely displayed for public viewing. Credit: Getty Images
Oullet, 68, is the Archbishop of Quebec. Having expressed a hesitation at prospects of being elected pope in the past, it’s unclear whether he would accept the position (it is permissible to decline if one does not feel called to the papacy). Considering that he speaks six languages, Oullet would certainly be an attractive candidate. After all, he’d be able to communicate with a diverse subset of the global populace (see his Business Insider (BI) profile here).
Then there’s Turkson, 64, from Ghana who serves as the president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. As BI notes, he’s well-liked among the cardinals, a rising star, an excellent communicator and the face of an emerging church populace in Africa. With Europe and the West the central focus of Catholicism, his election would mean that eyes are also being set on other areas of potential growth across the globe (read more about him here).
Cardinal Peter Kodwo Appiah Turkson (Photo Credit: AP)
Of course, Oullet and Turkson are only two of the many options for potential replacements. In fact, BI has profiled 17 men who could be chosen for the top spot. Among the names not previously mentioned in this article is Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the 63-year-old Archbishop of New York. Last year, TheBlaze explored whether Dolan could become the first American pope. While such prospects are entirely possible, he isn’t currently faring well on Paddy Power’s web site (however, that’s not indicative of actual success or failure).
While BI doesn’t weigh too fervently either way, the outlet does mention that an American in a heavily-Italian Vatican would be a potentially-bad mix. This would thus be a strike against Dolan’s chances in the eyes of some critics.
Visit BI for all 17 profiles on potential papal replacements. TheBlaze will continue to cover these prospects as we move closer to the conclave.
WND: Seems 'Final pope' authors predicted Benedict would resign
Although a Roman Catholic pope had not stepped down in nearly 600 years, the startling resignation of Pope Benedict XVI was predicted by the co-authors of a book published last spring about a medieval prophecy that the next pontiff will be the last.
In Petrus Romanus: The Final Pope Is Here co-authors Tom Horn and Cris Putnam examine St. Malachy’s “Prophecy of the Popes,” said to be based on his prophetic vision of the next 112 popes, beginning with Pope Celestine II, who died in 1144. Malachy presented a description of each pope, culminating with the “final pope,” “Peter the Roman,” whose reign would end with the destruction of Rome and judgment.
Horn explained to WND in an interview today that his conclusion Benedict would resign rather than die in the papacy was based not only on St. Malachy but also on a host of historical and current information.
“We took ‘The Prophecy of the Popes,’ we took what was happening in Italian media, and we determined, based on a great deal of information, that Pope Benedict would likely step down, citing health reasons, in 2012 or 2013,” he said.
Pope Benedict XVI was not a Benedictine priest, yet he chose the name of Benedict, the founder of the Order of Saint Benedict, which also is known as the Olivetans
The symbol of the Benedictine order includes an olive branch.
Benedict, speaking Monday morning in Latin to a small gathering of cardinals at the Vatican, said that after examining his conscience “before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise” of leading the Roman Catholic Church.
Peter the Roman
Horn and Putnam discuss the evidence pointing to a Benedict resignation on pages 74 and 486 of their April 2012 book, and Horn has made the prediction on a number of radio programs in recent months, including Jan. 13.
Malachy described the last Pope as “Petrus Romanus,” or “Peter the Roman,” writing: “In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock among many tribulations; after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people.”
Horn and his co-author have created their own list of 10 candidates to succeed Benedict and become “Peter the Roman.”
Interestingly, a leading candidate is Cardinal Tarcisio Pietro Evasio Bertone, the Cardinal secretary of state, who was born in Romano, Italy. His name could, therefore, be rendered Peter the Roman.
Another Peter on the list is a black African, Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana, the current president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.
In any case, Horn noted, Catholics believe the pope inhabits the “Petrine office” as a successor of the apostle Peter.
Other candidates on Horn’s list are Francis Arinze, Angelo Scola, Gianfranco Ravasi, Leonardo Sandri, Ennio Antonelli, Jean-Louis Tauran, Christoph Schönborn and Marc Quellet.
O’Brien believed Malachy was declaring that the reign of the pope identified as Petrus Romanus would culminate with the end of the world and the return of Jesus Christ.
O’Brien describes Malachy’s vision occurring while the saint was in Rome for a month, visiting and praying at the Eternal City’s many historical and holy sites.
The sight of the ruins of Pagan Rome, the tombs of the Apostles, the thought of so many thousands of martyrs, the presence of [Pope] Innocent II, who had been obligated to wander so many years in France and elsewhere on account of the anti-pope Anaclete – all this, I say, filled the mind of St. Malachy with deep and sad reflections and he was forced to cry out in the words of the old prophets: “Usquequo, Domine non misereberis Sion?” – “How long, O Lord! wilt Thou not have mercy on Sion?”
And God answered: “Until the end of the world the Church will be both militant and triumphant. Until the end of time the sufferings of my passion and the mysteries of my cross must be continued on earth, and I shall be with you until the end of the world.” And then was unfolded before the gaze of the holy bishop of Armagh the long line of illustrious pilots who were to guide the storm-tossed bark of Peter until the end.
Malachy gave his manuscript to Innocent II, who was pontiff from 1130 to 1143. The document was placed in the Vatican archives, where it remained unknown until its discovery in 1590.
‘Amazingly accurate’
Through the past 900 years, various critics have questioned the authenticity and the accuracy of St. Malachy’s prophecies, often arguing the methods used by some of his interpreters to apply his epithets to certain popes have been tortuous.
Horn told WND he and Putnam took a critical view of “The Prophecy of the Popes” and determined that the first part of it, the first 70 or so predictions, probably was altered in the late 16th century.
“It appears that somebody had altered the original medieval document from 1590 backward to promote a particular cardinal to the College of Cardinals to be the fulfillment of what at that time was still a secret list of popes,” Horn explained.
An advocate for Cardinal Girolamo Simoncelli, Horn said, likely “tinkered with the document to make it look like it was pointing toward Simoncelli.”
In “Petrus Romanus,” Horn said, he and Putnam “disregard everything pre-1595, as partly or fully tainted.”
After 1595, however, “The Prophecy of the Popes” was open to public scrutiny.
Cardinale wrote “it is fair to say the vast majority of Malachy’s predictions about successive Popes is amazingly accurate – always remembering that he gives only a minimum of information.”
Horn noted Benedict’s brother, Georg Ratzinger, also a priest, suggested last year that the pontiff might retire at age 85, arguing Catholic law would allow for him to step down if his health wouldn’t allow him to continue.
Benedict, himself, made a case for papal resignation in a book-length interview, “Light of the World.”
Asked if he thought it appropriate for a pope to retire, he said, “If a pope clearly realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically and spiritually capable of handling the duties of his office, then he has a right and, under some circumstances, also an obligation to resign.”
Petrus Romanus: The Final Pope Is Here: For more than 800 years scholars have pointed to the dark augury having to do with “the last Pope.” The prophecy, taken from St. Malachy’s “Prophecy of the Popes,” is among a list of verses predicting each of the Roman Catholic popes from Pope Celestine II to the final pope, “Peter the Roman,” whose reign would end in the destruction of Rome. First published in 1595, the prophecies were attributed to St. Malachy by a Benedictine historian named Arnold de Wyon, who recorded them in his book, "Lignum Vitæ." Tradition holds that Malachy had been called to Rome by Pope Innocent II, and while there, he experienced the vision of the future popes, including the last one, which he wrote down in a series of cryptic phrases. According to the prophecy, the next pope (following Benedict XVI) is to be the final pontiff, Petrus Romanus or Peter the Roman. The idea by some Catholics that the next pope on St. Malachy’s list heralds the beginning of “great apostasy” followed by “great tribulation” sets the stage for the imminent unfolding of apocalyptic events, something many non-Catholics would agree with. This would give rise to a false prophet, who according to the book of Revelation leads the world’s religious communities into embracing a political leader known as Antichrist. In recent history, several Catholic priests – some deceased now – have been surprisingly outspoken on what they have seen as this inevitable danger rising from within the ranks of Catholicism as a result of secret satanic “Illuminati-Masonic” influences. These priests claim secret knowledge of an multinational power elite and occult hierarchy operating behind supranatural and global political machinations. Among this secret society are sinister false Catholic infiltrators who understand that, as the Roman Catholic Church represents one-sixth of the world’s population and over half of all Christians, it is indispensable for controlling future global elements in matters of church and state and the fulfillment of a diabolical plan they call “Alta Vendetta,” which is set to assume control of the papacy and to help the False Prophet deceive the world’s faithful (including Catholics) into worshipping Antichrist. As stated by Dr. Michael Lake on the front cover, Catholic and evangelical scholars have dreaded this moment for centuries. Unfortunately, as readers will learn, time for avoiding Peter the Roman just ran out.
This is a developing story. Updates will be added.
For those that missed Obama’s SOTU, after all it was Lincoln’s Birthday, Fat Tuesday and then there was the whole Christopher Dorner drama or if you just couldn’t sit through another Obama speech:
AP Photo: Charles Dharapak. State of the Union: Vice President Joe Biden applauds as President Barack Obama gives his State of the Union address during a joint session of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday. IMAGE
The text of President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, released by the White House as prepared for delivery:
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, fellow citizens:
Fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy declared to this chamber that "the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress. ... It is my task," he said, "to report the state of the Union — to improve it is the task of us all." Interestingly… he did not mention the fact that John F. Kennedy then went on to talk about tax cuts in that speech to help the economy…
Tonight, thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, there is much progress to report. After a decade of grinding war, our brave men and women in uniform are coming home. After years of grueling recession, our businesses have created over 6 million new jobs. We buy more American cars than we have in five years, and less foreign oil than we have in 20. Our housing market is healing, our stock market is rebounding, and consumers, patients and homeowners enjoy stronger protections than ever before.
Together, we have cleared away the rubble of crisis, and can say with renewed confidence that the state of our union is stronger.
But we gather here knowing that there are millions of Americans whose hard work and dedication have not yet been rewarded. Our economy is adding jobs - but too many people still can't find full-time employment. Corporate profits have rocketed to all-time highs — but for more than a decade, wages and incomes have barely budged.
It is our generation's task, then, to reignite the true engine of America's economic growth — a rising, thriving middle class.
It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country — the idea that if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can get ahead, no matter where you come from, what you look like, or who you love.
It is our unfinished task to make sure that this government works on behalf of the many, and not just the few; that it encourages free enterprise, rewards individual initiative, and opens the doors of opportunity to every child across this great nation.
The American people don't expect government to solve every problem. They don't expect those of us in this chamber to agree on every issue. But they do expect us to put the nation's interests before party. They do expect us to forge reasonable compromise where we can. For they know that America moves forward only when we do so together; and that the responsibility of improving this union remains the task of us all.
Our work must begin by making some basic decisions about our budget — decisions that will have a huge impact on the strength of our recovery.
Over the last few years, both parties have worked together to reduce the deficit by more than $2.5 trillion — mostly through spending cuts, but also by raising tax rates on the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. As a result, we are more than halfway towards the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction that economists say we need to stabilize our finances.
Now we need to finish the job. And the question is, how?
In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if both parties couldn't agree on a plan to reach our deficit goal, about a trillion dollars' worth of budget cuts would automatically go into effect this year. These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness. They'd devastate priorities like education, energy and medical research. They would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs. That's why Democrats, Republicans, business leaders and economists have already said that these cuts, known here in Washington as "the sequester," are a really bad idea.
Now, some in this Congress have proposed preventing only the defense cuts by making even bigger cuts to things like education and job training, Medicare and Social Security benefits.
That idea is even worse. Yes, the biggest driver of our long-term debt is the rising cost of health care for an aging population. And those of us who care deeply about programs like Medicare must embrace the need for modest reforms — otherwise, our retirement programs will crowd out the investments we need for our children, and jeopardize the promise of a secure retirement for future generations.
But we can't ask senior citizens and working families to shoulder the entire burden of deficit reduction while asking nothing more from the wealthiest and most powerful. We won't grow the middle class simply by shifting the cost of health care or college onto families that are already struggling, or by forcing communities to lay off more teachers, cops and firefighters. Most Americans — Democrats, Republicans and independents — understand that we can't just cut our way to prosperity. They know that broad-based economic growth requires a balanced approach to deficit reduction, with spending cuts and revenue, and with everybody doing their fair share. And that's the approach I offer tonight.
On Medicare, I'm prepared to enact reforms that will achieve the same amount of health care savings by the beginning of the next decade as the reforms proposed by the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission. Already, the Affordable Care Act is helping to slow the growth of health care costs. The reforms I'm proposing go even further. We'll reduce taxpayer subsidies to prescription drug companies and ask more from the wealthiest seniors. We'll bring down costs by changing the way our government pays for Medicare, because our medical bills shouldn't be based on the number of tests ordered or days spent in the hospital — they should be based on the quality of care that our seniors receive. And I am open to additional reforms from both parties, so long as they don't violate the guarantee of a secure retirement. Our government shouldn't make promises we cannot keep — but we must keep the promises we've already made.
To hit the rest of our deficit reduction target, we should do what leaders in both parties have already suggested, and save hundreds of billions of dollars by getting rid of tax loopholes and deductions for the well-off and well-connected. After all, why would we choose to make deeper cuts to education and Medicare just to protect special interest tax breaks? How is that fair? How does that promote growth?
Now is our best chance for bipartisan, comprehensive tax reform that encourages job creation and helps bring down the deficit. The American people deserve a tax code that helps small businesses spend less time filling out complicated forms, and more time expanding and hiring; a tax code that ensures billionaires with high-powered accountants can't pay a lower rate than their hard-working secretaries; a tax code that lowers incentives to move jobs overseas, and lowers tax rates for businesses and manufacturers that create jobs right here in America. That's what tax reform can deliver. That's what we can do together.
I realize that tax reform and entitlement reform won't be easy. The politics will be hard for both sides. None of us will get 100 percent of what we want. But the alternative will cost us jobs, hurt our economy, and visit hardship on millions of hardworking Americans. So let's set party interests aside, and work to pass a budget that replaces reckless cuts with smart savings and wise investments in our future. And let's do it without the brinksmanship that stresses consumers and scares off investors. The greatest nation on Earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufactured crisis to the next. Let's agree, right here, right now, to keep the people's government open, pay our bills on time, and always uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America. The American people have worked too hard, for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials cause another.
Now, most of us agree that a plan to reduce the deficit must be part of our agenda. But let's be clear: Deficit reduction alone is not an economic plan. A growing economy that creates good, middle-class jobs — that must be the North Star that guides our efforts. Every day, we should ask ourselves three questions as a nation: How do we attract more jobs to our shores? How do we equip our people with the skills needed to do those jobs? And how do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living?
A year and a half ago, I put forward an American Jobs Act that independent economists said would create more than 1 million new jobs. I thank the last Congress for passing some of that agenda, and I urge this Congress to pass the rest. Tonight, I'll lay out additional proposals that are fully paid for and fully consistent with the budget framework both parties agreed to just 18 months ago. Let me repeat — nothing I'm proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime. It's not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth.
Our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing.
After shedding jobs for more than 10 years, our manufacturers have added about 500,000 jobs over the past three. Caterpillar is bringing jobs back from Japan. Ford is bringing jobs back from Mexico. After locating plants in other countries like China, Intel is opening its most advanced plant right here at home. And this year, Apple will start making Macs in America again.
There are things we can do, right now, to accelerate this trend. Last year, we created our first manufacturing innovation institute in Youngstown, Ohio. A once-shuttered warehouse is now a state-of-the art lab where new workers are mastering the 3D printing that has the potential to revolutionize the way we make almost everything. There's no reason this can't happen in other towns. So tonight, I'm announcing the launch of three more of these manufacturing hubs, where businesses will partner with the Departments of Defense and Energy to turn regions left behind by globalization into global centers of high-tech jobs. And I ask this Congress to help create a network of fifteen of these hubs and guarantee that the next revolution in manufacturing is Made in America.
If we want to make the best products, we also have to invest in the best ideas. Every dollar we invested to map the human genome returned $140 to our economy. Today, our scientists are mapping the human brain to unlock the answers to Alzheimer's; developing drugs to regenerate damaged organs; devising new material to make batteries 10 times more powerful. Now is not the time to gut these job-creating investments in science and innovation. Now is the time to reach a level of research and development not seen since the height of the Space Race. And today, no area holds more promise than our investments in American energy.
After years of talking about it, we are finally poised to control our own energy future. We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years. We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas, and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar — with tens of thousands of good, American jobs to show for it. We produce more natural gas than ever before — and nearly everyone's energy bill is lower because of it. And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.
But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change. Yes, it's true that no single event makes a trend. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires and floods — all are now more frequent and intense. We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science — and act before it's too late.
The good news is, we can make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth. I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won't act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.
Four years ago, other countries dominated the clean energy market and the jobs that came with it. We've begun to change that. Last year, wind energy added nearly half of all new power capacity in America. So let's generate even more. Solar energy gets cheaper by the year — so let's drive costs down even further. As long as countries like China keep going all-in on clean energy, so must we.
In the meantime, the natural gas boom has led to cleaner power and greater energy independence. That's why my administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits. But I also want to work with this Congress to encourage the research and technology that helps natural gas burn even cleaner and protects our air and water.
Indeed, much of our newfound energy is drawn from lands and waters that we, the public, own together. So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good. If a nonpartisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we. Let's take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we've put up with for far too long. I'm also issuing a new goal for America: let's cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses over the next 20 years. The states with the best ideas to create jobs and lower energy bills by constructing more efficient buildings will receive federal support to help make it happen.
America's energy sector is just one part of an aging infrastructure badly in need of repair. Ask any CEO where they'd rather locate and hire: a country with deteriorating roads and bridges, or one with high-speed rail and internet; high-tech schools and self-healing power grids. The CEO of Siemens America — a company that brought hundreds of new jobs to North Carolina — has said that if we upgrade our infrastructure, they'll bring even more jobs. And I know that you want these job-creating projects in your districts. I've seen you all at the ribbon-cuttings.
Tonight, I propose a "Fix-It-First" program to put people to work as soon as possible on our most urgent repairs, like the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country. And to make sure taxpayers don't shoulder the whole burden, I'm also proposing a Partnership to Rebuild America that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most: modern ports to move our goods; modern pipelines to withstand a storm; modern schools worthy of our children. Let's prove that there is no better place to do business than the United States of America. And let's start right away.
Part of our rebuilding effort must also involve our housing sector. Today, our housing market is finally healing from the collapse of 2007. Home prices are rising at the fastest pace in six years, home purchases are up nearly 50 percent, and construction is expanding again.
But even with mortgage rates near a 50-year low, too many families with solid credit who want to buy a home are being rejected. Too many families who have never missed a payment and want to refinance are being told no. That's holding our entire economy back, and we need to fix it. Right now, there's a bill in this Congress that would give every responsible homeowner in America the chance to save $3,000 a year by refinancing at today's rates. Democrats and Republicans have supported it before. What are we waiting for? Take a vote, and send me that bill. Right now, overlapping regulations keep responsible young families from buying their first home. What's holding us back? Let's streamline the process, and help our economy grow.
These initiatives in manufacturing, energy, infrastructure and housing will help entrepreneurs and small business owners expand and create new jobs. But none of it will matter unless we also equip our citizens with the skills and training to fill those jobs. And that has to start at the earliest possible age.
Study after study shows that the sooner a child begins learning, the better he or she does down the road. But today, fewer than 3 in 10 4-year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program. Most middle-class parents can't afford a few hundred bucks a week for private preschool. And for poor kids who need help the most, this lack of access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their lives.
Tonight, I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America. Every dollar we invest in high-quality early education can save more than $7 later on - by boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing violent crime. In states that make it a priority to educate our youngest children, like Georgia or Oklahoma, studies show students grow up more likely to read and do math at grade level, graduate high school, hold a job, and form more stable families of their own. So let's do what works, and make sure none of our children start the race of life already behind. Let's give our kids that chance.
Let's also make sure that a high school diploma puts our kids on a path to a good job. Right now, countries like Germany focus on graduating their high school students with the equivalent of a technical degree from one of our community colleges, so that they're ready for a job. At schools like P-Tech in Brooklyn, a collaboration between New York Public Schools, the City University of New York and IBM, students will graduate with a high school diploma and an associate degree in computers or engineering.
We need to give every American student opportunities like this. Four years ago, we started Race to the Top — a competition that convinced almost every state to develop smarter curricula and higher standards, for about 1 percent of what we spend on education each year. Tonight, I'm announcing a new challenge to redesign America's high schools so they better equip graduates for the demands of a high-tech economy. We'll reward schools that develop new partnerships with colleges and employers, and create classes that focus on science, technology, engineering and math — the skills today's employers are looking for to fill jobs right now and in the future.
Now, even with better high schools, most young people will need some higher education. It's a simple fact: the more education you have, the more likely you are to have a job and work your way into the middle class. But today, skyrocketing costs price way too many young people out of a higher education, or saddle them with unsustainable debt.
Through tax credits, grants and better loans, we have made college more affordable for millions of students and families over the last few years. But taxpayers cannot continue to subsidize the soaring cost of higher education. Colleges must do their part to keep costs down, and it's our job to make sure they do. Tonight, I ask Congress to change the Higher Education Act, so that affordability and value are included in determining which colleges receive certain types of federal aid. And tomorrow, my administration will release a new "College Scorecard" that parents and students can use to compare schools based on a simple criteria: where you can get the most bang for your educational buck.
To grow our middle class, our citizens must have access to the education and training that today's jobs require. But we also have to make sure that America remains a place where everyone who's willing to work hard has the chance to get ahead.
Our economy is stronger when we harness the talents and ingenuity of striving, hopeful immigrants. And right now, leaders from the business, labor, law enforcement and faith communities all agree that the time has come to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
Real reform means strong border security, and we can build on the progress my administration has already made — putting more boots on the southern border than at any time in our history, and reducing illegal crossings to their lowest levels in 40 years.
Real reform means establishing a responsible pathway to earned citizenship — a path that includes passing a background check, paying taxes and a meaningful penalty, learning English and going to the back of the line behind the folks trying to come here legally.
And real reform means fixing the legal immigration system to cut waiting periods, reduce bureaucracy and attract the highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow our economy.
In other words, we know what needs to be done. As we speak, bipartisan groups in both chambers are working diligently to draft a bill, and I applaud their efforts. Now let's get this done. Send me a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the next few months, and I will sign it right away.
But we can't stop there. We know our economy is stronger when our wives, mothers and daughters can live their lives free from discrimination in the workplace, and free from the fear of domestic violence. Today, the Senate passed the Violence Against Women Act that Joe Biden originally wrote almost 20 years ago. I urge the House to do the same. And I ask this Congress to declare that women should earn a living equal to their efforts, and finally pass the Paycheck Fairness Act this year.
We know our economy is stronger when we reward an honest day's work with honest wages. But today, a full-time worker making the minimum wage earns $14,500 a year. Even with the tax relief we've put in place, a family with two kids that earns the minimum wage still lives below the poverty line. That's wrong. That's why, since the last time this Congress raised the minimum wage, 19 states have chosen to bump theirs even higher.
Tonight, let's declare that in the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one who works full-time should have to live in poverty, and raise the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour. This single step would raise the incomes of millions of working families. It could mean the difference between groceries or the food bank; rent or eviction; scraping by or finally getting ahead. For businesses across the country, it would mean customers with more money in their pockets. In fact, working folks shouldn't have to wait year after year for the minimum wage to go up while CEO pay has never been higher. So here's an idea that Gov. Romney and I actually agreed on last year: let's tie the minimum wage to the cost of living, so that it finally becomes a wage you can live on.
Tonight, let's also recognize that there are communities in this country where no matter how hard you work, it's virtually impossible to get ahead. Factory towns decimated from years of plants packing up. Inescapable pockets of poverty, urban and rural, where young adults are still fighting for their first job. America is not a place where chance of birth or circumstance should decide our destiny. And that is why we need to build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class for all who are willing to climb them.
Let's offer incentives to companies that hire Americans who've got what it takes to fill that job opening, but have been out of work so long that no one will give them a chance. Let's put people back to work rebuilding vacant homes in run-down neighborhoods. And this year, my administration will begin to partner with 20 of the hardest-hit towns in America to get these communities back on their feet. We'll work with local leaders to target resources at public safety, education and housing. We'll give new tax credits to businesses that hire and invest. And we'll work to strengthen families by removing the financial deterrents to marriage for low-income couples, and doing more to encourage fatherhood — because what makes you a man isn't the ability to conceive a child; it's having the courage to raise one.
Stronger families. Stronger communities. A stronger America. It is this kind of prosperity — broad, shared and built on a thriving middle class — that has always been the source of our progress at home. It is also the foundation of our power and influence throughout the world.
Tonight, we stand united in saluting the troops and civilians who sacrifice every day to protect us. Because of them, we can say with confidence that America will complete its mission in Afghanistan, and achieve our objective of defeating the core of al-Qaida. Already, we have brought home 33,000 of our brave servicemen and women. This spring, our forces will move into a support role, while Afghan security forces take the lead. Tonight, I can announce that over the next year, another 34,000 American troops will come home from Afghanistan. This drawdown will continue. And by the end of next year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.
Beyond 2014, America's commitment to a unified and sovereign Afghanistan will endure, but the nature of our commitment will change. We are negotiating an agreement with the Afghan government that focuses on two missions: training and equipping Afghan forces so that the country does not again slip into chaos, and counter-terrorism efforts that allow us to pursue the remnants of al-Qaida and their affiliates.
Today, the organization that attacked us on 9/11 is a shadow of its former self. Different al-Qaida affiliates and extremist groups have emerged — from the Arabian Peninsula to Africa. The threat these groups pose is evolving. But to meet this threat, we don't need to send tens of thousands of our sons and daughters abroad, or occupy other nations. Instead, we will need to help countries like Yemen, Libya and Somalia provide for their own security, and help allies who take the fight to terrorists, as we have in Mali. And, where necessary, through a range of capabilities, we will continue to take direct action against those terrorists who pose the gravest threat to Americans.
As we do, we must enlist our values in the fight. That is why my administration has worked tirelessly to forge a durable legal and policy framework to guide our counterterrorism operations. Throughout, we have kept Congress fully informed of our efforts. I recognize that in our democracy, no one should just take my word that we're doing things the right way. So, in the months ahead, I will continue to engage with Congress to ensure not only that our targeting, detention and prosecution of terrorists remains consistent with our laws and system of checks and balances, but that our efforts are even more transparent to the American people and to the world.
Of course, our challenges don't end with al-Qaida. America will continue to lead the effort to prevent the spread of the world's most dangerous weapons. The regime in North Korea must know that they will only achieve security and prosperity by meeting their international obligations. Provocations of the sort we saw last night will only isolate them further, as we stand by our allies, strengthen our own missile defense, and lead the world in taking firm action in response to these threats.
Likewise, the leaders of Iran must recognize that now is the time for a diplomatic solution, because a coalition stands united in demanding that they meet their obligations, and we will do what is necessary to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon. At the same time, we will engage Russia to seek further reductions in our nuclear arsenals, and continue leading the global effort to secure nuclear materials that could fall into the wrong hands — because our ability to influence others depends on our willingness to lead.
America must also face the rapidly growing threat from cyber attacks. We know hackers steal people's identities and infiltrate private e-mail. We know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. Now our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions and our air traffic control systems. We cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and our economy.
That's why, earlier today, I signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect our national security, our jobs and our privacy. Now, Congress must act as well, by passing legislation to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks.
Even as we protect our people, we should remember that today's world presents not only dangers, but opportunities. To boost American exports, support American jobs and level the playing field in the growing markets of Asia, we intend to complete negotiations on a Trans-Pacific Partnership. And tonight, I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union — because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.
We also know that progress in the most impoverished parts of our world enriches us all. In many places, people live on little more than a dollar a day. So the United States will join with our allies to eradicate such extreme poverty in the next two decades: by connecting more people to the global economy and empowering women; by giving our young and brightest minds new opportunities to serve and helping communities to feed, power and educate themselves; by saving the world's children from preventable deaths; and by realizing the promise of an AIDS-free generation.
Above all, America must remain a beacon to all who seek freedom during this period of historic change. I saw the power of hope last year in Rangoon — when Aung San Suu Kyi welcomed an American president into the home where she had been imprisoned for years; when thousands of Burmese lined the streets, waving American flags, including a man who said, "There is justice and law in the United States. I want our country to be like that."
In defense of freedom, we will remain the anchor of strong alliances from the Americas to Africa; from Europe to Asia. In the Middle East, we will stand with citizens as they demand their universal rights, and support stable transitions to democracy. The process will be messy, and we cannot presume to dictate the course of change in countries like Egypt; but we can — and will — insist on respect for the fundamental rights of all people. We will keep the pressure on a Syrian regime that has murdered its own people, and support opposition leaders that respect the rights of every Syrian. And we will stand steadfast with Israel in pursuit of security and a lasting peace. These are the messages I will deliver when I travel to the Middle East next month.
All this work depends on the courage and sacrifice of those who serve in dangerous places at great personal risk — our diplomats, our intelligence officers, and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. As long as I'm commander in chief, we will do whatever we must to protect those who serve their country abroad, and we will maintain the best military in the world. We will invest in new capabilities, even as we reduce waste and wartime spending. We will ensure equal treatment for all service members, and equal benefits for their families — gay and straight. We will draw upon the courage and skills of our sisters and daughters, because women have proven under fire that they are ready for combat. We will keep faith with our veterans — investing in world-class care, including mental health care, for our wounded warriors; supporting our military families; and giving our veterans the benefits, education and job opportunities they have earned. And I want to thank my wife, Michelle, and Dr. Jill Biden for their continued dedication to serving our military families as well as they serve us.
But defending our freedom is not the job of our military alone. We must all do our part to make sure our God-given rights are protected here at home. That includes our most fundamental right as citizens: the right to vote. When any Americans - no matter where they live or what their party — are denied that right simply because they can't wait for five, six, seven hours just to cast their ballot, we are betraying our ideals. That's why, tonight, I'm announcing a nonpartisan commission to improve the voting experience in America. And I'm asking two longtime experts in the field, who've recently served as the top attorneys for my campaign and for Gov. Romney's campaign, to lead it. We can fix this, and we will. The American people demand it. And so does our democracy.
Of course, what I've said tonight matters little if we don't come together to protect our most precious resource — our children.
It has been two months since Newtown. I know this is not the first time this country has debated how to reduce gun violence. But this time is different. Overwhelming majorities of Americans — Americans who believe in the Second Amendment — have come together around commonsense reform — like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun. Senators of both parties are working together on tough new laws to prevent anyone from buying guns for resale to criminals. Police chiefs are asking our help to get weapons of war and massive ammunition magazines off our streets, because they are tired of being outgunned.
Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress. If you want to vote no, that's your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun.
One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house.
Hadiya's parents, Nate and Cleo, are in this chamber tonight, along with more than two dozen Americans whose lives have been torn apart by gun violence. They deserve a vote.
Gabby Giffords deserves a vote.
The families of Newtown deserve a vote.
The families of Aurora deserve a vote.
The families of Oak Creek, and Tucson, and Blacksburg, and the countless other communities ripped open by gun violence — they deserve a simple vote.
Our actions will not prevent every senseless act of violence in this country. Indeed, no laws, no initiatives, no administrative acts will perfectly solve all the challenges I've outlined tonight. But we were never sent here to be perfect. We were sent here to make what difference we can, to secure this nation, expand opportunity and uphold our ideals through the hard, often frustrating, but absolutely necessary work of self-government.
We were sent here to look out for our fellow Americans the same way they look out for one another, every single day, usually without fanfare, all across this country. We should follow their example.
We should follow the example of a New York City nurse named Menchu Sanchez. When Hurricane Sandy plunged her hospital into darkness, her thoughts were not with how her own home was faring — they were with the twenty precious newborns in her care and the rescue plan she devised that kept them all safe.
We should follow the example of a North Miami woman named Desiline Victor. When she arrived at her polling place, she was told the wait to vote might be six hours. And as time ticked by, her concern was not with her tired body or aching feet, but whether folks like her would get to have their say. Hour after hour, a throng of people stayed in line in support of her. Because Desiline is 102 years old. And they erupted in cheers when she finally put on a sticker that read "I Voted."
We should follow the example of a police officer named Brian Murphy. When a gunman opened fire on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, and Brian was the first to arrive, he did not consider his own safety. He fought back until help arrived, and ordered his fellow officers to protect the safety of the Americans worshiping inside — even as he lay bleeding from twelve bullet wounds.
When asked how he did that, Brian said, "That's just the way we're made."
That's just the way we're made.
We may do different jobs, and wear different uniforms, and hold different views than the person beside us. But as Americans, we all share the same proud title:
We are citizens. It's a word that doesn't just describe our nationality or legal status. It describes the way we're made. It describes what we believe. It captures the enduring idea that this country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another and to future generations; that our rights are wrapped up in the rights of others; and that well into our third century as a nation, it remains the task of us all, as citizens of these United States, to be the authors of the next great chapter in our American story.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
The text of the Republican response to President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, as prepared for delivery by Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida Republican, and provided by the press office of the speaker of the House.
Good evening. I'm Marco Rubio. I'm blessed to represent Florida in the United States Senate. Let me begin by congratulating President Obama on the start of his second term. Tonight, I have the honor of responding to his State of the Union address on behalf of my fellow Republicans. And I am especially honored to be addressing our brave men and women serving in the armed forces and in diplomatic posts around the world. You may be thousands of miles away, but you are always in our prayers.
The State of the Union address is always a reminder of how unique America is. For much of human history, most people were trapped in stagnant societies, where a tiny minority always stayed on top, and no one else even had a chance.
But America is exceptional because we believe that every life, at every stage, is precious, and that everyone everywhere has a God-given right to go as far as their talents and hard work will take them.
Like most Americans, for me this ideal is personal. My parents immigrated here in pursuit of the opportunity to improve their life and give their children the chance at an even better one. They made it to the middle class, my dad working as a bartender and my mother as a cashier and a maid. I didn't inherit any money from them. But I inherited something far better — the real opportunity to accomplish my dreams.
This opportunity — to make it to the middle class or beyond no matter where you start out in life — it isn't bestowed on us from Washington. It comes from a vibrant free economy where people can risk their own money to open a business. And when they succeed, they hire more people, who in turn invest or spend the money they make, helping others start a business and create jobs.
Presidents in both parties — from John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan — have known that our free enterprise economy is the source of our middle-class prosperity.
But President Obama? He believes it's the cause of our problems. That the economic downturn happened because our government didn't tax enough, spend enough and control enough. And, therefore, as you heard tonight, his solution to virtually every problem we face is for Washington to tax more, borrow more and spend more.
This idea — that our problems were caused by a government that was too small — it's just not true. In fact, a major cause of our recent downturn was a housing crisis created by reckless government policies.
And the idea that more taxes and more government spending is the best way to help hardworking middle-class taxpayers — that's an old idea that's failed every time it's been tried.
More government isn't going to help you get ahead. It's going to hold you back.
More government isn't going to create more opportunities. It's going to limit them.
And more government isn't going to inspire new ideas, new businesses and new private sector jobs. It's going to create uncertainty.
Because more government breeds complicated rules and laws that a small business can't afford to follow.
Because more government raises taxes on employers who then pass the costs on to their employees through fewer hours, lower pay and even layoffs.
And because many government programs that claim to help the middle class, often end up hurting them instead.
For example, Obamacare was supposed to help middle-class Americans afford health insurance. But now, some people are losing the health insurance they were happy with. And because Obamacare created expensive requirements for companies with more than 50 employees, now many of these businesses aren't hiring. Not only that; they're being forced to lay people off and switch from full-time employees to part-time workers.
Now does this mean there's no role for government? Of course not. It plays a crucial part in keeping us safe, enforcing rules, and providing some security against the risks of modern life. But government's role is wisely limited by the Constitution. And it can't play its essential role when it ignores those limits.
There are valid reasons to be concerned about the president's plan to grow our government. But any time anyone opposes the president's agenda, he and his allies usually respond by falsely attacking their motives.
When we point out that no matter how many job-killing laws we pass, our government can't control the weather — he accuses us of wanting dirty water and dirty air.
When we suggest we strengthen our safety net programs by giving states more flexibility to manage them — he accuses us of wanting to leave the elderly and disabled to fend for themselves.
And tonight, he even criticized us for refusing to raise taxes to delay military cuts — cuts that were his idea in the first place.
But his favorite attack of all is that those who don't agree with him — they only care about rich people.
Mr. President, I still live in the same working-class neighborhood I grew up in. My neighbors aren't millionaires. They're retirees who depend on Social Security and Medicare. They're workers who have to get up early tomorrow morning and go to work to pay the bills. They're immigrants, who came here because they were stuck in poverty in countries where the government dominated the economy.
The tax increases and the deficit spending you propose will hurt middle-class families. It will cost them their raises. It will cost them their benefits. It may even cost some of them their jobs.
And it will hurt seniors because it does nothing to save Medicare and Social Security.
So Mr. President, I don't oppose your plans because I want to protect the rich. I oppose your plans because I want to protect my neighbors.
Hard-working middle-class Americans who don't need us to come up with a plan to grow the government. They want a plan to grow the middle class.
Economic growth is the best way to help the middle class. Unfortunately, our economy actually shrank during the last three months of 2012.
But if we can get the economy to grow at just 4 percent a year, it would create millions of middle class jobs. And it could reduce our deficits by almost $4 trillion dollars over the next decade.
Tax increases can't do this. Raising taxes won't create private-sector jobs. And there's no realistic tax increase that could lower our deficits by almost $4 trillion. That's why I hope the president will abandon his obsession with raising taxes and instead work with us to achieve real growth in our economy.
One of the best ways to encourage growth is through our energy industry. Of course solar and wind energy should be a part of our energy portfolio. But God also blessed America with abundant coal, oil and natural gas. Instead of wasting more taxpayer money on so-called "clean energy" companies like Solyndra, let's open up more federal lands for safe and responsible exploration. And let's reform our energy regulations so that they're reasonable and based on common sense. If we can grow our energy industry, it will make us energy independent, it will create middle-class jobs and it will help bring manufacturing back from places like China.
Simplifying our tax code will also help the middle class, because it will make it easier for small businesses to hire and grow.
And we agree with the president that we should lower our corporate tax rate, which is one of the highest in the world, so that companies will start bringing their money and their jobs back here from overseas.
We can also help our economy grow if we have a legal immigration system that allows us to attract and assimilate the world's best and brightest. We need a responsible, permanent solution to the problem of those who are here illegally. But first, we must follow through on the broken promises of the past to secure our borders and enforce our laws.
Helping the middle class grow will also require an education system that gives people the skills today's jobs entail and the knowledge that tomorrow's world will require.
We need to incentivize local school districts to offer more advanced placement courses and more vocational and career training.
We need to give all parents, especially the parents of children with special needs, the opportunity to send their children to the school of their choice.
And because tuition costs have grown so fast, we need to change the way we pay for higher education.
I believe in federal financial aid. I couldn't have gone to college without it. But it's not just about spending more money on these programs; it's also about strengthening and modernizing them.
A 21st century workforce should not be forced to accept 20th century education solutions. Today's students aren't only 18-year-olds. They're returning veterans. They're single parents who decide to get the education they need to earn a decent wage. And they're workers who have lost jobs that are never coming back and need to be retrained.
We need student aid that does not discriminate against programs that non-traditional students rely on — like online courses, or degree programs that give you credit for work experience.
When I finished school, I owed over $100,000 in student loans, a debt I paid off just a few months ago. Today, many graduates face massive student debt. We must give students more information on the costs and benefits of the student loans they're taking out.
All these measures are key to helping the economy grow. But we won't be able to sustain a vibrant middle class unless we solve our debt problem.
Every dollar our government borrows is money that isn't being invested to create jobs. And the uncertainty created by the debt is one reason why many businesses aren't hiring.
The president loves to blame the debt on President Bush. But President Obama created more debt in four years than his predecessor did in eight.
The real cause of our debt is that our government has been spending $1 trillion more than it takes in every year. That's why we need a balanced budget amendment.
The biggest obstacles to balancing the budget are programs where spending is already locked in. One of these programs, Medicare, is especially important to me. It provided my father the care he needed to battle cancer and ultimately die with dignity. And it pays for the care my mother receives now.
I would never support any changes to Medicare that would hurt seniors like my mother. But anyone who is in favor of leaving Medicare exactly the way it is right now, is in favor of bankrupting it.
Republicans have offered a detailed and credible plan that helps save Medicare without hurting today's retirees. Instead of playing politics with Medicare, when is the president going to offer his plan to save it? Tonight would have been a good time for him to do it.
Of course, we face other challenges as well. We were all heart broken by the recent tragedy in Connecticut. We must effectively deal with the rise of violence in our country. But unconstitutionally undermining the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans is not the way to do it.
On foreign policy, America continues to be indispensable to the goal of global liberty, prosperity and safeguarding human rights. The world is a better place when America is the strongest nation on earth. But we can't remain powerful if we don't have an economy that can afford it.
In the short time I've been here in Washington, nothing has frustrated me more than false choices like the ones the president laid out tonight.
The choice isn't just between big government or big business. What we need is an accountable, efficient and effective government that allows small and new businesses to create middle class jobs.
We don't have to raise taxes to avoid the president's devastating cuts to our military. Republicans have passed a plan that replaces these cuts with responsible spending reforms.
In order to balance our budget, the choice doesn't have to be either higher taxes or dramatic benefit cuts for those in need. Instead we should grow our economy so that we create new taxpayers, not new taxes, and so our government can afford to help those who truly cannot help themselves.
And the truth is every problem can't be solved by government. Many are caused by the moral breakdown in our society. And the answers to those challenges lie primarily in our families and our faiths, not our politicians.
Despite our differences, I know that both Republicans and Democrats love America. I pray we can come together to solve our problems, because the choices before us could not be more important.
If we can get our economy healthy again, our children will be the most prosperous Americans ever.
And if we do not, we will forever be known as the generation responsible for America's decline.
At a time when one showdown after another ends in short-term deals that do little or nothing about our real problems, some are starting to believe that our government leaders just can't or won't make the right choices anymore.
But our strength has never come from the White House or the Capitol. It's always come from our people. A people united by the American idea that, if you have a dream and you are willing to work hard, nothing should be impossible.
Americans have always celebrated and been inspired by those who succeed. But it's the dreams of those who are still trying to make it that sets our nation apart.
Tonight, all across this land, parents will hold their newborn children in their arms for the first time. For many of these parents, life has not gone the way they had planned.
Maybe they were born into circumstances they've found difficult to escape. Maybe they've made some mistakes along the way. Maybe they're young mothers, all alone, the father of their child long gone.
But tonight, when they look into the eyes of their child for the first time, their lives will change forever. Because in those eyes, they will see what my parents saw in me, and what your parents saw in you. They will see all the hopes and dreams they once had for themselves.
This dream — of a better life for their children — it's the hope of parents everywhere. Politicians here and throughout the world have long promised that more government can make those dreams come true.
But we Americans have always known better. From our earliest days, we embraced economic liberty instead. And because we did, America remains one of the few places on earth where dreams like these even have a chance.
Each time our nation has faced great challenges, what has kept us together was our shared hope for a better life.
Now, let that hope bring us together again. To solve the challenges of our time and write the next chapter in the amazing story of the greatest nation man has ever known.
Thank you for listening. May God bless all of you. May God bless our president. And may God continue to bless the United States of America.
Full Text of Rand Paul's Tea Party Response to State of the Union
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul delivered the Tea Party rebuttal to Obama's State of the Union speech
Photo: Senate Foreign Relations member Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. questions Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 24, 2013, during Kerry's confirmation hearing before the committee to replace Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
These are the prepared remarks of Rand Paul's Tea Party rebuttal to President Obama's State of the Union Speech.
I speak to you tonight from Washington, D.C. The state of our economy is tenuous but our people remain the greatest example of freedom and prosperity the world has ever known.
People say America is exceptional. I agree, but it’s not the complexion of our skin or the twists in our DNA that make us unique. America is exceptional because we were founded upon the notion that everyone should be free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.
For the first time in history, men and women were guaranteed a chance to succeed based NOT on who your parents were but on your own initiative and desire to work.
We are in danger, though, of forgetting what made us great. The President seems to think the country can continue to borrow $50,000 per second. The President believes that we should just squeeze more money out of those who are working.
The path we are on is not sustainable, but few in Congress or in this Administration seem to recognize that their actions are endangering the prosperity of this great nation.
Ronald Reagan said, government is not the answer to the problem, government is the problem.
Tonight, the President told the nation he disagrees. President Obama believes government is the solution: More government, more taxes, more debt.
What the President fails to grasp is that the American system that rewards hard work is what made America so prosperous.
What America needs is not Robin Hood but Adam Smith. In the year we won our independence, Adam Smith described what creates the Wealth of Nations.
He described a limited government that largely did not interfere with individuals and their pursuit of happiness.
All that we are, all that we wish to be is now threatened by the notion that you can have something for nothing, that you can have your cake and eat it too, that you can spend a trillion dollars every year that you don’t have.
I was elected to the Senate in 2010 by people worried about our country, worried about our kids and their future. I thought I knew how bad it was in Washington. But it is worse than I ever imagined.
Congress is debating the wrong things.
Every debate in Washington is about how much to increase spending – a little or a lot.
About how much to increase taxes – a little or a lot.
The President does a big “woe is me” over the $1.2 trillion sequester that he endorsed and signed into law. Some Republicans are joining him. Few people understand that the sequester doesn’t even cut any spending. It just slows the rate of growth. Even with the sequester, government will grow over $7 trillion over the next decade.
Only in Washington could an increase of $7 trillion in spending over a decade be called a cut.
So, what is the President’s answer? Over the past four years he has added over $6 trillion in new debt and may well do the same in a second term. What solutions does he offer? He takes entitlement reform off the table and seeks to squeeze more money out of the private sector.
He says he wants a balanced approach.
What the country really needs is a balanced budget.
Washington acts in a way that your family never could – they spend money they do not have, they borrow from future generations, and then they blame each other for never fixing the problem.
Tonight I urge you to demand a new course.
Demand Washington change their ways, or be sent home.
To begin with, we absolutely must pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution!
The amendment must include strict tax and spending limitations.
Liberals complain that the budget can’t be balanced but if you cut just one penny from each dollar we currently spend, the budget would balance within six or seven years.
The Penny Plan has been crafted into a bill that millions of conservatives across the country support.
It is often said that there is not enough bipartisanship up here.
That is not true.
In fact, there is plenty.
Both parties have been guilty of spending too much, of protecting their sacred cows, of backroom deals in which everyone up here wins, but every taxpayer loses.
It is time for a new bipartisan consensus.
It is time Democrats admit that not every dollar spent on domestic programs is sacred. And it is time Republicans realize that military spending is not immune to waste and fraud.
Where would we cut spending; well, we could start with ending all foreign aid to countries that are burning our flag and chanting death to America.
The President could begin by stopping the F-16s and Abrams tanks being given to the radical Islamic government of Egypt.
Not only should the sequester stand, many pundits say the sequester really needs to be at least $4 trillion to avoid another downgrade of America’s credit rating.
Both parties will have to agree to cut, or we will never fix our fiscal mess.
Bipartisanship is not what is missing in Washington. Common sense is.
Trillion-dollar deficits hurt us all.
Printing more money to feed the never-ending appetite for spending hurts us all.
We pay higher prices every time we go to the supermarket or the gas pump. The value of the dollar shrinks with each new day.
Contrary to what the President claims, big government and debt are not a friend to the poor and the elderly. Big-government debt keeps the poor poor and saps the savings of the elderly.
This massive expansion of the debt destroys savings and steals the value of your wages.
Big government makes it more expensive to put food on the table. Big government is not your friend. The President offers you free stuff but his policies keep you poor.
Under President Obama, the ranks of America’s poor swelled to almost 1 in 6 people last year, reaching a new high as long-term unemployment left millions of Americans struggling and out of work.
The cycle must be broken.
The willpower to do this will not come from Congress. It must come from the American people.
Next month, I will propose a five-year balanced budget, a budget that last year was endorsed by taxpayer groups across the country for its boldness, and for actually solving the problem.
I will work with anyone on either side of the aisle who wants to cut spending.
But in recent years, there has been no one to work with.
The President’s massive tax hikes and spending increases have caused his budgets to get ZERO votes in both houses of Congress. Not a single Democrat voted for the President’s budget!
But at least he tried.
Senate Democrats have not even produced a budget in the time I have been in office, a shameful display of incompetence that illustrates their lack of seriousness.
This year, they say they will have a budget, but after just recently imposing hundreds of billions in new taxes, they now say they will include more tax hikes in their budget.
We must stand firm. We must say NO to any MORE tax hikes!
Only through lower taxes, less regulation and more freedom will the economy begin to grow again.
Our party is the party of growth, jobs and prosperity, and we will boldly lead on these issues.
Under the Obama economy, 12 million people are out of work. During the President’s first term 800,000 construction workers lost their jobs and another 800,000 simply gave up on looking for work.
With my five-year budget, millions of jobs would be created by cutting the corporate income tax in half, by creating a flat personal income tax of 17%, and by cutting the regulations that are strangling American businesses.
The only stimulus ever proven to work is leaving more money in the hands of those who earned it!
For those who are struggling we want to you to have something infinitely more valuable than a free phone, we want you to have a job and pathway to success.
We are the party that embraces hard work and ingenuity, therefore we must be the party that embraces the immigrant who wants to come to America for a better future.
We must be the party who sees immigrants as assets, not liabilities.
We must be the party that says, “If you want to work, if you want to become an American, we welcome you.”
For those striving to climb the ladder of success we must fix our schools.
America’s educational system is leaving behind anyone who starts with disadvantages.
We have cut classroom size in half and tripled spending on education and still we lag behind much of the world.
A great education needs to be available for everyone, whether you live on country club lane or in government housing.
This will only happen when we allow school choice for everyone, rich or poor, white, brown, or black.
Let the taxes you pay for education follow each and every student to the school of your choice.
Competition has made America the richest nation in history. Competition can make our educational system the envy of the world.
The status quo traps poor children in a crumbling system of hopelessness.
When every child can, like the President’s kids, go to the school of their choice, then will the dreams of our children come true!
Washington could also use a good dose of transparency, which is why we should fight back against middle of the night deals that end with massive bills no one has read.
We must continue to fight for legislation that forces Congress to read the bills!
We must continue to object when Congress sticks special interest riders on bills in the dead of night!
And if Congress refuses to obey its own rules, if Congress refuses to pass a budget, if Congress refuses to read the bills, then I say:
Sweep the place clean. Limit their terms and send them home!
I have seen the inner sanctum of Congress and believe me there is no monopoly on knowledge there.
If they will not listen, if they will not balance the budget, then we should limit their terms.
We are the party that adheres to the Constitution. We will not let the liberals tread on the Second Amendment!
We will fight to defend the entire Bill of Rights from the right to trial by jury to the right to be free from unlawful searches.
We will stand up against excessive government power wherever we see it.
We cannot and will not allow any President to act as if he were a king.
We will not let any President use executive orders to impinge on the Second Amendment.
We will not tolerate secret lists of American citizens who can be killed without trial.
Montesquieu wrote that there can be no liberty when the executive branch and the legislative branch are combined. Separation of powers is a bedrock principle of our Constitution.
We took the President to court over his unconstitutional recess appointments and won.
If necessary, we will take him to court again if he attempts to legislate by executive order.
Congress must reassert its authority as the protector of these rights, and stand up for them, no matter which party is in power.
Congress must stand as a check to the power of the executive, and it must stand as it was intended, as the voice of the people.
The people are crying out for change. They are asking for us to hear their voices, to fix our broken system, to right our economy and to restore their liberty.
Let us tonight let them know that we hear their voices. That we can and must work together, that we can and must re-chart our course toward a better future.
America has much greatness left in her. We will begin to thrive again when we begin to believe in ourselves again, when we regain our respect for our founding documents, when we balance our budget, when we understand that capitalism and free markets and free individuals are what creates our nation’s prosperity.
Thank you and God Bless America.
Responses:
Charles Krauthammer: Obama thinks free enterprise is the cause of our problems and bigger government is the answer.Ronald Reagan said, “Government is not the solution! Government is the Problem!
Michael Reagan: (To Marco Rubio) My father would have been proud!
WND: Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., charged by Republicans with delivering a GOP response to Barack Obama’s 2013 State of the Union, said in prepared remarks the president probably needs first to understand the problems of the nation.
He said Obama actually blames the free enterprise economy, which has made America for generations the biggest economy in the world, as the problem.
“This opportunity – to make it to the middle class or beyond no matter where you start out in life – it isn’t bestowed on us from Washington. It comes from a vibrant free economy where people can risk their own money to open a business,” he said.
“And when they succeed, they hire more people, who in turn invest or spend the money they make, helping others start a business and create jobs. Presidents in both parties – from John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan – have known that our free enterprise economy is the source of our middle class prosperity. But President Obama? He believes it’s the cause of our problems.”
He also said the president’s policies have failed to protect the poor and middle class wage-earners as Obama has claimed.
“Mr. President, I still live in the same working class neighborhood I grew up in. My neighbors aren’t millionaires. They’re retirees who depend on Social Security and Medicare. They’re workers who have to get up early tomorrow morning and go to work to pay the bills,” Rubio said.
“They’re immigrants who came here because they were stuck in poverty in countries where the government dominated the economy. The tax increases and the deficit spending you propose will hurt middle class families. It will cost them their raises. It will cost them their benefits. It may even cost some of them their jobs. And it will hurt seniors because it does nothing to save Medicare and Social Security. So Mr. President, I don’t oppose your plans because I want to protect the rich. I oppose your plans because I want to protect my neighbors.”
Rubio noted that under Obama’s leadership, the American economy “actually shrank during the last three months of 2012.”
That’s going the wrong direction, he said, because the nation needs growth of 4 percent a year to “create millions of middle class jobs.”
A byproduct would be reducing the nation’s deficits by some $4 trillion over 10 years, he said.
“Tax increases can’t do this. Raising taxes won’t create private sector jobs. And there’s no realistic tax increase that could lower our deficits by almost $4 trillion. That’s why I hope the president will abandon his obsession with raising taxes and instead work with us to achieve real growth in our economy.”
He said Obama simply needs to shut down the government checkbook for awhile.
“The real cause of our debt is that our government has been spending $1 trillion more than it takes in every year. That’s why we need a balanced budget amendment. The biggest obstacles to balancing the budget are programs where spending is already locked in. One of these programs, Medicare, is especially important to me. It provided my father the care he needed to battle cancer and ultimately die with dignity. And it pays for the care my mother receives now. I would never support any changes to Medicare that would hurt seniors like my mother. But anyone who is in favor of leaving Medicare exactly the way it is right now, is in favor of bankrupting it,” he said.
Rubio clearly stated his pro-life position, that “every life at every stage is precious.”
But he blasted Obama. “His solution for virtually every problem is for Washington to tax more, spend more…”
Rubio said Obamacare already is costing Americans their health insurance, their raises and even their jobs.
He also suggested an update immigration plan, a balanced budget, and more help for kids to pay for schools.
Talk-radio icon Rush Limbaugh said, too, that Washington needs to get a grip.
“It’s not the State of the Union. It’s the Misstatement of the Union. … It’s an absurd sight, folks, to sit there and watch our government stand and applaud itself as it’s ruining our economy. They’re gonna sit there and applaud themselves all night long, and for what? Ruining the country, bringing the private sector to its knees, exploding the deficit, Obamacare, bye-bye freedom here, bye-bye freedom there,” he said.
He cited Obama’s nominations of Chuck Hagel and John Brennan for secretary of defense and CIA director.
“Just in the last week, their performance in front of the committees that have to confirm them has been pretty poor,” he said. “And that’s, you know, not my judgment. That’s the judgment, as well, of senators on both sides of the aisle.”
Cheney said Obama’s choices would make for a “second rate” national security team.
“I think the administration’s policies are terribly flawed. I think the president’s performance, by my standards, in the international arena, the Middle East and so forth, is worse than many of my friends and colleagues deem his domestic policies,” he said.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who delivered the response from the tea party, said in prepared remarks Congress simply is out of control – and failing to following the laws of the land.
“Washington acts in a way that your family never could – they spend money they do not have, they borrow from future generations, and then they blame each other for never fixing the problem,” he said.
“If Congress refuses to obey its own rules (the Democrat-led Senate hasn’t produced a budget in years, in violation of the law), if Congress refuses to pass a budget, if Congress refuses to read the bills, then I say: Sweep the place clean. limit their terms and send them home!”
He said unless the deficit is cut by trillions, America’s credit again could be downgraded.
Paul also called for work on the nation’s existing immigration system, where laws are not enforced and borders not secured.
“The path we are on is not sustainable, but few in Congress or in this administration seem to recognize that their actions are endangering the prosperity of this great nation,” he said.
He pleaded for common sense, suggesting the U.S. should end “all foreign aid to countries that are burning our flag” and that Obama should “stop giving F-16s and Abrams tanks to Islamic radicals in Egypt.”
“Big government debt keeps the poor poor and saps savings of elderly,” Paul said. “The president offers you free stuff but his policies keep you poor.”
He said he will propose a five-year balanced budget soon. Lower taxes and less government are the keys to a revitalized economy, he said.
Obama’s speech called for an amnesty program for illegal aliens, he boasted that Obamacare already is cutting health care expenses, he called for a boost in the minimum wage, he called for more jobs being created, said the nation must do more on global warming, and asked for expanded preschool offerings to reduce violent crime and strengthen families.
An instant tracking poll by Bing showed any unity message that Obama may have intended about working together clearly fell far short of its mark. The graf shows members of the GOP and independents tracking their responses virtually in unison throughout the speech, while Democrats were isolated in another part of the spectrum.
John McCain and Lindsay Graham Sat with Uber-liberal Chuck Schumer… Will they make Schumer an honorary RINO? (WZ)
(CNN) – In a show of bipartisanship, Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham sat with Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer during Tuesday night’s State of the Union address.
The seating arrangement raised the question: Could the trio be dubbed the next “Three Amigos?”
thecommunists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists, I did not protest; I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, I did not protest; I was a Protestant.
Then they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew.
When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
Election 2014 - What Is Really At Stake
Help Stop Voter Fraud!! Stand for the Constitution and God
Time to remember that: "We Surround Them", not the other way!
Stand Up Against Voter Fraud... Demand Re-Counts and Verification Until It is Right!! A Little Ink Goes a Long Way Toward Honesty... 1 Person 1 Vote... No More Mickey Mouse or Dead People Voting
"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about IT! --Albert Einstein
Call Congress Today and Tell Them To Vote Against Cap and Trade
The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality -- Dante Alighieri / Often Quoted by Mark Twain
Thanks for calling the Congressional switchboard. Keep up the pressure: "NO on Cap and Trade"!!! "NO Vote on Obamacare", NO on another Stimulus Bill, NO to the never ending parade of "Power Grab Bills", and ABSOLUTELY NO on the Climate Change Treaty in Copenhagen!!
"No" on Cap and Trade and "No" on Government Controlled Healthcare!!! And Keep up the good fight! Keep up the Pressure on both the House and Senate! These are 2-fights the American People cannot afford to lose!!!
If you choose not to go this route… call and fax your Senator and as many of them on the list yourself, but don’t sit idly by!!
United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121
We apologize in advance for any Videos or links that are not functioning in these or other older posts. Internet information... like 'true' history in our student's textbooks are under constant attack by the Progressive Movement and even more so under the present administration. Try to save what you can to your own computer.
"...there comes a time, ladies and gentlemen, when ideology can cause death. I am so tired, so tired, of zealots, primarily on the left, putting their insane personal agendas above the safety of fellow Americans. Do you think the brave soldiers and Marines operating in dangerous areas right now want [unreleased photos of alleged abuse of prisoners] all over al-Jazeera and the terror websites? So let's look out for the military, OK? Nancy Pelosi has an obligation to get the loons in her party under control. If the Speaker can't do that, she doesn't deserve her position." ... Bill O'Reilly
Updated:If you'd like to contact Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, here's the contact information that you'll need.
![B1672[1]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-i8-PtCQTsd7n72oJ_9BbaCyDGwg4gwpv_oRD5LRha34CmKeA0s7Rs0oVZ1IgGZpd0QPVrBCzJCT1HryMti2dFH3h84S70HuI0By0cGQfhy_hQghfE5R-rso5fTiNhvCKiDFk2RjbrYVW/?imgmax=800 "B1672[1]")
Petrus Romanus: The Final Pope Is Here
![Rubio10[1]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9WaeWWbIrFD01oxVx82OZ-JmhpWjET452y_gQF1vCjI4KpjKZ35of0mYIyQ_BC_ZhVL4M4-oBWbJUR6DatDtrKLOxcljwXo4-4QqZpsgkgb5-CTZ60VUib-8a4dDGqqEsQWh0KFhNGZyD/s1600-h/Rubio10%25255B1%25255D%25255B6%25255D%25255B2%25255D.jpg "Rubio10[1]")
