"I'm 63 and I'm Tired"

by Robert A. Hall

I'm 63. Except for one semester in college when jobs were scarce and a six-month period when I was between jobs, but job-hunting every day, I've worked, hard, since I was 18. Despite some health challenges, I still put in 50-hour weeks, and haven't called in sick in seven or eight years. I make a good salary, but I didn't inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get where I am. Given the economy, there's no retirement in sight, and I'm tired. Very tired.

I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth" to people who don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy to earn it.

I'm tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to "keep people in their homes." Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I'm willing to help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the left-wing Congress-critters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them with their own money.

I'm tired of being told how bad America is by left-wing millionaires like Michael Moore, George Soros and Hollywood entertainers who live in luxury because of the opportunities America offers. In thirty years, if they get their way, the United States will have the economy of Zimbabwe , the freedom of the press of China , the crime and violence of Mexico , the tolerance for Christian people of Iran , and the freedom of speech of Venezuela .

I'm tired of being told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every day I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and daughters for their family "honor"; of Muslims rioting over some slight offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren't "believers"; of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims to death for "adultery"; of Muslims mutilating the genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur'an and Shari'a law tells them to.

I think it's very cool that we have a black president and that a black child is doing her homework at the desk where Lincoln wrote the Emancipation Proclamation. I just wish our black President was Condi Rice, or someone who believes more in freedom and the individual and less arrogantly of an all-knowing , all-intrusive federal government.

I'm tired of a news media that thinks Bush's fundraising and inaugural expenses were obscene, but that think Obama's, at triple the cost, were wonderful; that thinks Bush exercising daily was a waste of presidential time, but Obama exercising is a great example for the public to control weight and stress; that picked over every line of Bush's military records, but never demanded that Kerry release his; that slammed Palin, with two years as governor, for being too inexperienced for VP, but touted Obama with three years as senator as potentially the best president ever. Wonder why people are dropping their subscriptions or switching to Fox News? Get a clue. I didn't vote for Bush in 2000, but the media and Kerry drove me to his camp in 2004.

I'm tired of being told that out of "tolerance for other cultures" we must let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund mosques and madrassa Islamic schools to preach hate in America, while no American group is allowed to fund a church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia to teach love and tolerance.

I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight man-made global warming, which no one is allowed to discuss or debate. My wife and I live in a two-bedroom apartment and carpool together five miles to our jobs. We also own a three-bedroom condo where our daughter and granddaughter live. Our carbon footprint is about 5% of Albert Gore's, and if you're greener than Gore, you're green enough.

I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses while they tried to fight it off? I don't think Gay people choose to be Gay, but I damn sure think druggies chose to take drugs. And I'm tired of harassment from cool people treating me like a freak when I tell them I never tried marijuana.

I'm tired of illegal aliens being called "undocumented workers," especially the ones who aren't working, but are living on welfare or a life of crime. What's next? Calling drug dealers, "Undocumented Pharmacists"? And, no, I'm not against Hispanics. Most of them are Catholic, and it's been a few hundred years since Catholics wanted to kill me for my religion. I'm willing to fast track for citizenship any Hispanic person, who can speak English, doesn't have a criminal record and who is self-supporting without family on welfare, or who serves honorably for three years in our military ... Those are the citizens we need.

I'm tired of latte liberals and self-absorbed journalists, who would never wear the uniform of the Republic themselves, or let their entitlement-handicapped kids near a recruiting station, trashing our military. They and their kids can sit at home, never having to make split-second decisions under life and death circumstances, and bad mouth better people than themselves. Do bad things happen in war? You bet. Do our troops sometimes misbehave? Sure. Does this compare with the atrocities that were the policy of our enemies for the last fifty years and still are? Not even close. So here's the deal. I'll let myself be subjected to all the humiliation and abuse that was heaped on terrorists at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo, and the critics can let themselves be subject to captivity by the Muslims, who tortured and beheaded Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, or the Muslims who tortured and murdered Marine Lt. Col. William Higgins in Lebanon, or the Muslims who ran the blood-spattered Al Qaeda torture rooms our troops found in Iraq, or the Muslims who cut off the heads of schoolgirls in Indonesia, because the girls were Christian. Then we'll compare notes. British and American soldiers are the only troops in history that civilians came to for help and handouts, instead of hiding from in fear.

I'm tired of people telling me that their party has a corner on virtue and the other party has a corner on corruption. Read the papers; bums are bipartisan. And I'm tired of people telling me we need bipartisanship. I live in Illinois , where the "Illinois Combine" of Democrats has worked to loot the public for years. Not to mention the tax cheats in Obama's cabinet.

I'm tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of both parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught. I'm tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or middle-class or poor.

Speaking of poor, I'm tired of hearing people with air-conditioned homes, plasma color TVs and two cars called poor. The majority of Americans didn't have these things in 1970, but we didn't know we were "poor." The poverty pimps have to keep changing the definition of poor to keep the tax dollars flowing to their causes.

I'm real tired of people who don't take responsibility for their lives and actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination or big-whatever for their problems.

Yes, I'm damn tired. But I'm also glad to be 63. Because, mostly, I'm not going to have to see the world these people are making for the rest of us. I'm just sorry for my young, beautiful granddaughter.

Robert A. Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served five terms in the Massachusetts State Senate

Old Boxing Matches

What about the quality of the fighters themselves? There have been great fighters in both earlier and later times. Mike Tyson's one-round knockouts electrified many boxing fans but Joe Louis still holds the record for one-round knockouts in heavyweight championship fights.

The only way you can be sure who hit harder would be to be on the receiving end of their punches-- and none of the boxing pundits ever agreed to do that.

Louis' punches tended to be short and quick, but guys went down like they had been struck by lightning. When Louis knocked out Jimmy Braddock-- the "Cinderella Man"-- to win the championship, Braddock lay face down on the canvas without moving while he was counted out, and afterwards his handlers had to come out from his corner to get him back on his feet.

It was much the same story when Rocky Marciano won the championship from Jersey Joe Walcott. After a right to the jaw from Marciano, Walcott fell limp. As he fell, his arm got tangled in the ropes, so that Walcott fell forward, with the top of his head resting on the canvas. He was counted out in that position without moving a muscle-- and his handlers too had to come get him and revive him, before they could take him back to his corner.

How would the fighters of the past do against the bigger and heavier fighters of a later era? We will never know. What we do know is that Rocky Marciano, who was strictly a knockout fighter, never fought as heavy as 190 pounds and Joe Louis was at his best at no more than 200 pounds.

It is much easier to compare the referees. The old-timers didn't keep issuing warning after warning, for round after round. They penalized violations. More lax officiating may be why so many fights in recent times have had so many clinches and so much wrestling and dirty fighting.

That too is unfortunately a reflection of the general trends of our time.

ave been great fighters in both earlier and later times. Mike Tyson's one-round knockouts electrified many boxing fans but Joe Louis still holds the record for one-round knockouts in heavyweight championship fights.

The only way you can be sure who hit harder would be to be on the receiving end of their punches-- and none of the boxing pundits ever agreed to do that.

Louis' punches tended to be short and quick, but guys went down like they had been struck by lightning. When Louis knocked out Jimmy Braddock-- the "Cinderella Man"-- to win the championship, Braddock lay face down on the canvas without moving while he was counted out, and afterwards his handlers had to come out from his corner to get him back on his feet.

It was much the same story when Rocky Marciano won the championship from Jersey Joe Walcott. After a right to the jaw from Marciano, Walcott fell limp. As he fell, his arm got tangled in the ropes, so that Walcott fell forward, with the top of his head resting on the canvas. He was counted out in that position without moving a muscle-- and his handlers too had to come get him and revive him, before they could take him back to his corner.

How would the fighters of the past do against the bigger and heavier fighters of a later era? We will never know. What we do know is that Rocky Marciano, who was strictly a knockout fighter, never fought as heavy as 190 pounds and Joe Louis was at his best at no more than 200 pounds.

It is much easier to compare the referees. The old-timers didn't keep issuing warning after warning, for round after round. They penalized violations. More lax officiating may be why so many fights in recent times have had so many clinches and so much wrestling and dirty fighting.

That too is unfortunately a reflection of the general trends of our time.

by Thomas Sowell - a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.

Percy Sutton dies; His Obama revelation omitted from obituaries Thomas Lifson

Legendary lawyer and politician Percy Sutton has died at the age of 89, and the major media are omitting mention of one of his most notable acts. The former Borough President of Manhattan, Sutton had a long and distinguished career as a lawyer (he was Malcolm X's attorney) and media mogul, who purchased radio stations in New York and other cities, making them into high rated black-oriented outlets. He also purchased and renovated (thereby saving from the wrecking ball) New York's legendary Apollo Theatre in Harlem. To top it off, Sutton was a member of the Tuskegee Airmen, one of the most celebrated groups in military aviation circles. A man of great accomplishment, whatever else one might think about his politics, and a man worthy of great respect.

However, one of Sutton's most notable moments is absent from the media hagiographies I have seen: he stated on television that he knew that an Islamic supremacist, Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and advisor to a wealthy Saudi, had paid for Barack Obama's education at Harvard Law School.

Exactly how young Barack Obama, a man of slender means, managed to pay for a Harvard Law degree has long been a mystery, and the President has not been forthcoming about any details of his elite education.

See for yourself, Sutton's remarkable statement, which has been consigned to the Memory Hole, by the major media. Not even a reference to a "controversial contention" or other such euphemism. It simply never happened as far as the media are concerned.

Islamic Supremacist Paid Obama’s Law School Education – Video

Fascinating Related Article: Is Obama Malcolm X’s Long Lost Son?

Australia's Whiskey and Gunpowder on Climate and the Fate of Mankind

Casey on Climate and the Fate of Mankind

L: [Phone rings. It’s Doug Casey, whose gravelly, “Lobo, let’s talk!” always makes me smile.] Hi Doug! What’s on your mind?

Doug: Global warming. People like my fanatical neighbors here in Aspen seem perfectly willing to undo centuries of progress because they are completely delusional about global warming. The People’s Republic of Aspen is an epicenter of political correctness.

L: Don’t hold back, Doug, tell me what you really think.

Doug: [Chuckles] Global warming is the most prominent form of mass hysteria raging across the world today. Kids in school these days are almost afraid to breathe, because it will “increase their carbon footprint.” It’s quite amazing, the way carbon, the element all life is based on, has replaced plutonium as the enemy-element. It’s as if the chattering classes are making war on the periodic table of the elements.

Meanwhile, they’ve been changing the cry from “global warming” to “climate change” because there’s so little evidence there’s actually any warming going on. I believe that as little as a decade from now, global warming will be recognized as one of the greatest swindles in world history. It has so little scientific basis, it can only rationally be considered a political scam.

L: If that’s true, will the scam ever be revealed? There was a silly movie — I believe it was called “The Day After Tomorrow” — in which global warming caused the world to suddenly freeze over. If people are willing to think that’s possible, and the only thing certain is that things will change, and any change can be blamed on people, perhaps the con job can be maintained indefinitely. It could become a perpetual guilt trip aimed at the population, just as useful as the one certain churches used for centuries to control people.

Doug: Yes. I think Roseanne Rosannadanna of Saturday Night Live said it best: If it’s not one thing, it’s another. It’s always something.
There’s a professional class of hysterics in the world. They are the same type of people who were walking around in the Middle Ages in sack-cloth, throwing ashes on themselves, saying that the world was going to come to an end.

The world will come to an end, of course, maybe even before the sun dies in about five billion years. But these people have no perspective at all. They don’t realize that the earth is just an insignificant ball of dirt, in a nothing/nowhere star system, in a nothing/nowhere galaxy — of which there are billions, each containing billions and billions of stars. And that’s just in this universe. There’s reason to believe that there’s an almost infinite number of universes like ours, with new ones being created virtually every second.

And these people are worried about changes in the biosphere of this one, tiny little planet. To me, it makes no sense. But dropping from the sublime, cosmic scale down to the local level, it’s still completely ridiculous.

L: Okay, let’s talk about that. What are the facts? How ridiculous is fear of climate change?

Doug: Contrary to the blatantly untrue statements these people make about the science being “settled,” if the science indicates anything at all, it indicates that anthropogenic global warming is not significant. Remember, the question is not so much whether there is any warming — which is another question — but whether human activity is a major, or even significant, contributing factor to global warming.

Of course men can have an effect on the planet. We have wiped out numerous species that we know about, just in historic times, like the dodo, the passenger pigeon. And we almost did in the North American bison. Of course we have an impact, and people do make mistakes. It’s unfortunate. And because of the butterfly effect (because of quantum effects, tiny changes can have huge consequences, such as a butterfly flapping its wings on one side of the world resulting in a hurricane on the other side), humans could have a big effect on climate change — but so could everything else.

The point is that there are other factors that have orders of magnitude greater impacts on the earth’s climate, things that are tens, hundreds, and thousands of times more important to the climate than anything mankind can do — perhaps even including a major nuclear war.

Fear is being used by the political class as an excuse to accumulate more power and self-importance — and collect a lot more taxes to support their agenda. Instead of being stampeded into the dark fantasy, we should focus on increasing our wealth and our knowledge. Eventually, mankind’s fate will depend on our technological advancement. Nature teaches us — not that many environmentalists listen — that we need to colonize the rest of the solar system, and beyond. Mankind must diversify, so all our eggs aren’t in one planetary basket.

But as an aside, I have to say I’m not sure I care if mankind is going to survive — I’m not sure why anyone should care, since most of us aren’t going to live more than three score and ten years anyway. Perhaps the world ends when we end… Mankind’s future seems beyond any individual’s concern, at least beyond the lifespan of your immediate friends and family. Too much worrying about things beyond your control can turn you into a busybody.

L: You’re speaking as one with no children. Having children, I have a different view on that.

Doug: How about your great-great-grandchildren, whom you’ll probably never meet?

L: I’m not so sure about that. Life is already longer than it has ever been in history, and medical technology keeps advancing. And that’s not even getting into nanotechnology. I believe my generation may live for centuries, aside from violent death and acute, fatal illnesses.

Doug: Well, I’m sympathetic to that view. But the morality of caring for one’s posterity is a philosophical issue we can perhaps discuss another day. For now, I’ll say that I don’t like to think of myself as a survival machine for my genes — so I don’t give a damn what happens to my genes. I have my own plans. The consideration I would have for my children, if I did have any, would be reserved for those who earned it as individuals, not just because they’re my children.

FEATURE VIDEO: Al Gore's Bare Faced Lies
This Man Has NO SHAME

The Great Man-Made Global Warming Swindle

Arctic Sea Ice Video (Jan 2000 - May 2009)

The biggest unrealities are Al Gore’s lies. The fact that the Copenhagen Conference was held in freezing temperatures and that Obama had to leave their to make sure he could land in DC before one of the biggest storms in DC and East Coast history ever hit, really kind of says it all. There have been record low temperatures all over the US throughout the late Fall and the Christmas Season of 2009. Thanks to all who have prayed for God to intercede to stop the Copenhagen Treaty. I don’t think He could be yelling much louder.

So when do we stop the circus, stop these ridiculous UN sponsored meetings and stop throwing money that we don’t have at a problem that doesn’t exist… manmade global warming???

Health Care, Barack Obama, and the U.S. Constitution

Who cares about the U.S. Constitution, when Barack Obama’s vision for America is weighing in the balance?

Don’t count on the U.S. Congress to care.

In the aftermath of the Senate’s passage of an Obamacare bill, Attorney’s General from multiple states have begun to announce that they are launching investigations into the legality, and constitutionality of the Senate legislation. Chief among their concerns is the possibility that that the bill places Americans outside the state of Nebraska at a significant disadvantage, financially and otherwise, to residents of the state of Nebraska.

South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster, along with the Attorneys General in the states of Washington, Michigan, Texas, Colorado, Alabama and North Dakota – have joined forces to consider, among other things, if the Obamacare bill in the U.S. Senate violates the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The 10th Amendment stipulates that powers not granted to the national government nor prohibited to the states by the constitution of the United States , are reserved to the states or the people.

As such, the 10th Amendment may pose constitutional challenges to the Obamacare bill itself. Does the constitution grant to the federal government the “power” to provide healthcare? More curiously, does the constitution grant to the federal government the “power” to mandate that people buy anything - including health insurance (the Senate version of the healthcare reform legislation stipulates both)?

Additionally, state Attorneys General should also be concerned about Obamacare for another reason: it could be in violation of the “equal protection” clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Concerns over the Fourteenth Amendment appear to be present (this is based on what we know of the legislation, which, because of Pelosi and Reid’s secretiveness, is not a lot) in the portion of the Obamacare bill that grants special (and expensive) privileges to residents of the state of Nebraska. In the Senate’s Obamacare bill, the state of Nebraska is afforded special financial advantages from the federal government - to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars every year – for the funding of Medicaid. The reason this provision appears in a Senate healthcare bill, as many readers of this column are aware, is because the bill could not be passed without the vote of Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska .

Obamacare is strongly opposed by roughly two-thirds of American voters. And according to a survey published less than two weeks ago by the Tarrance Group polling firm, sixty-seven percent of Nebraskans oppose Obamacare, while ninety percent of Nebraskans are happy with the heatlhcare they currently receive and don’t want it to change.

Additionally, the Senate Obamacare bill is vague, at best, as to when and where it funds abortion procedures – and Nebraskans overwhelmingly find the aborting of unborn children to be abhorrent. And for all these reasons, Senator Ben Nelson had every reason to vote against the Obamacare bill.

So, given Senator Nelson’s incentives to oppose the Obamacare bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid crafted a special deal to incentivize Nelson to vote in favor of the bill. The “incentives” included special economic incentives for the state of Nebraska , incentivizes that people in the other 49 states don’t receive.

Using the law to single-out certain individuals, or certain groups of individuals, and impart to them either special privileges or penalties that don’t apply to other Americans, is, well – Un-American. And it may very well prove to be un-constitutional in court.

Residents in the other forty-nine states pay taxes according to the same federal taxation structure as do Americans in Nebraska. Furthermore, in as much as we are U.S. citizens, we are all deserving of the same “protections” under the law to which Nebraskans are subject.

But the Senate Obamacare bill sets aside Nebraskans, and makes a special privileged class of them. If this bill becomes law, Nebraskans will be entitled to subsidies from the federal government that those of us who belong in the category called “non-Nebraskans” are not.

This disregard for the U.S. Constitution and matters of “equal protection” do not begin and end with Senator Ben Nelson. Earlier this winter, Senator Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana) was asked a simple question by reporter Nicholas Ballasy of CNSNews.Com: “What part of the Constitution do you think gives Congress the authority to mandate that individuals have to purchase health insurance?”

In response, Senator Landrieu (who, much like Senator Nelson of Nebraska did, essentially “sold” her vote in the Senate despite opposition to Obamacare in her home state of Louisiana) replied “we’re very lucky as members of the Senate to have constitutional lawyers on our staff, so I’ll let them answer that.”

Yes, of course – “the lawyers clean up all details” as American poet (and “classic rock” star) Don Henley once lamented about his country. The fact is, however, that Senator Landrieu couldn’t answer the question if she tried.

But just like the legal profession itself, our current President and Congress have little regard for the U.S. Constitution, and for the rights of the human individual. Just as it is with the practice of law, the process of “law making” revolves around “leverage” – what can one individual or group force another individual or group to do? What does it take to accomplish what we, the politicians, want to accomplish?

Will any more among the 535 elite Americans in Congress dare to raise any constitutional concerns about this? And how about the Attorneys General of the other 43 states? Does the Constitution matter any more?

By: Austin Hill - a Talk Show Host At Boise, Idaho's 580 KIDO Radio, and a frequent Guest Host on the Fox Newstalk Radio Network. He is the Author of "White House Confidential: Revised and Expanded Edition," And Co-Author of the forthcoming title "The Virtues Of Capitalism: A Moral Case For Free Markets" (Northfield/Moody Press, 2010).

Source: TownHall

Seniors Are America's New Jews

They are objects of derision. Influential government officials refer to them as unproductive, of less value than others in society. The political party running the government aggressively denies them access to health services while putting in place bureaucracies devoted, in effect, to ending their lives.

The Jews in Nazi Germany? In the Soviet Union of Stalin? In a socialist paradise set up by the rabidly anti-Semitic United Nations? No...seniors in a United States governed by the party of President Barack Obama and his allies on the Democratic left.

The Democratic Senate health care bill makes it official: Seniors are America's new Jews.

An exaggeration? Yes and no. In no way do I wish to trivialize the horrific slaughter of Europe's Jewish population by the Nazis, nor the systematic oppression of Jews in history. However, Obama and the Democratic Party have embraced a worldview that allows them to go after seniors in much the same manner that tyrants (and the United Nations) have used Jew-bashing as a tool to accumulate power and steal wealth.

Seniors are the new go-to group for this radical president and Democratic congress as they pursue power, wealth, and the cultural transformation of the United States. Every version of the Democrat health care bill -- with all senate Republicans opposing this war against seniors -- relies on drastically reduced access to the services for which seniors have paid through taxes over a lifetime, or upon which they may choose to spend personal resources.

The party and government of Barack Obama is astonishingly brutal about the value of that lifetime. A "senior moment" should be just that, they say: a brief period rarely extending beyond the 60s (for us, of course, not them).

This is government by those who consider themselves the intellectual elite, thinkers who insist that a free-market economy that has enabled the elderly to live longer violates the rights of the younger by disproportionate consumption of health care resources.

The president's health care czar views the optimal age for societal worth as somewhere south of sixty years. The Democrat approach is philosophically founded upon the work of Ivy League academic Dr. Daniel Callahan, who mentored Obama health policymaker Ezekiel Emanuel and who advocates medical resource rationing as a simple and powerful solution to the "dilemma" -- lack of usefulness in the community -- posed by market-enabled longer lives.

Simply put, the utility of a citizen's life to an Obama government is defined by the amount of one's work that can be taxed versus the resources consumed, and the government-defined value of the group to which the individual belongs. Seniors are just not useful, says Tom Daschle, the prominent Obama Democrat who continues to play a key role in shaping Obamacare, and it is time for them to accept the "pain" of less access to health care.

Too many Jews...uh, seniors? Okay -- let 'em die.

What Sarah Palin termed "dealth panels" are only a small part of a new bureaucracy that will stand between seniors and life. Small wonder The Wall Street Journal characterized Obamacare as an "assault" on seniors, while a British newspaper, surveying events across the pond, starkly stated that "the elderly might as well have a bull's eye painted on their backs. ... Creepy, right? It's totalitarian, it's ugly, and it's not the American way."

But it is the American way in a nation governed by Obama, who has a vision that requires some to have less so that others may be given more. And the vast middle class of seniors -- almost forty million strong with a lifetime of work and paid taxes behind them -- are the ideal scapegoats to fund a radical Democrat vision.

James Lewis describes the Obama team's approach with devastating clarity: they have perfected scapegoating, an "emotional high explosive that you can direct at will." And not just Will -- we're talking Bernice, Fred, and Gladys, the fifteen percent of the population who have the audacity -- an Obama word -- to age.

Seniors now find themselves the official go-to group for a president intent on taking both life and property and giving to those who are younger, to people who are more diverse, to illegal immigrants, and to Democratic Party allies. Consequently, the Obama-led Democrats, with the help of intellectual and media elites, have declared open season on grandma and grandpa, with Newsweek going so far as to feature a cover detailing "The Case for Killing Granny."

In Obama's America, wrinkles are about as trendy as white belts and polyester slacks, and gray is the new Jew.

Democrat health care is one of many "audacious visions," a Georgetown University professor wrote, to replace a Judeo-Christian culture with a statist worldview. The founders were wrong, Obama says, when they unashamedly founded a nation based, as Thomas Jefferson put it, upon the belief in the dignity of each individual -- regardless of age -- possesses "personal liberty" given "by the Author of nature."

Newsweek president and editor Evan Thomas, who called Obama "sort of God," takes issue with the view of seniors dictated by the "Author of nature," that rock of Judeo-Christian culture who demands in His Word (in Deuteronomy) that humanity "Honor your father and your mother as the Lord your God has commanded you, that your days may be long..."

The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob views long life and respect for seniors as a blessing. But the Democratic Party health care bill is no Deuteronomy. Long life is viewed as a market-driven curse, and for Barack Obama -- the god of Harry, Nancy, and Evan -- seniors are expendable.

It is not hard to imagine President Obama standing at a window of the White House, watching the Tea Parties and streams of protesters. He observes the multitude of seniors in the crowds, smiles a smug smile, and quietly whispers in their direction:

"If the Jew fits, wear it."

by: Stuart H. Schwartz - on the faculty at Liberty University in Virginia

Posted: America’s Thinker – Cross-Posted on the Daily Thought Pad & Knowledge Creates Power

Teaching America as 'hellhole' called 'brainstorming' – Brave New Schools

University confirms proposal hasn't been adopted for use

Posted: December 26, 2009
11:30 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A lawyer for the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities campus has confirmed to an educational rights organization that a plan described by a critic as teaching America as a "hellhole" hasn't been adopted, and came about because of brainstorming efforts by the education department.

(Photo: University of Minnesota president Robert Bruininks)

The issue of the program at University of Minnesota-Twin Cities was raised by officials with The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

The group questioned President Robert Bruinicks about the legality of the program. The proposal included the suggestion of examinations of teacher candidates on "white privilege" as well as "remedial re-education" for those who hold the "wrong" views.

The FIRE today announced that in response to its pressure on the university, officials there are backing away from their plans "to enforce a political litmus test."

"The plans from its College of Education and Human Development involved redesigning admissions and the curriculum to enforce an ideology centered on a narrow view of 'cultural competence," the FIRE announced.

"Those with the 'wrong' views were to receive remedial re-education, be weeded out, or be denied admission altogether," the group said.

However, a letter to FIRE from General Counsel Mark B. Rotenberg said those plans, while recommendations, were not adopted.

"Freefall of the American University": How our colleges are corrupting the minds and morals of the next generation

"Neither the university nor CEHD has adopted or implemented any 'new policies' discussed in the particular … task force report submitted in July 2009 from which you quoted extensively," his letter to the organization said. "The task force report at issue was one of seven separate task force reports; none of them has been adopted as CEHD policy…

"The various task group reports reflect the creative thinking of many faculty members charged with exploring ideas to improve P-12 education and student achievement," he continued. "CEHD Dean Jean Quam has characterized the various task froup reports as 'faculty brainstorming' on how best to accomplish this curricular redesign."

Further, he said, "no university policy or practice ever will mandate any particular beliefs, or screen out people with 'wrong beliefs.'"

"We are relieved that the University of Minnesota has finally committed itself to upholding the freedom of conscience of its students," said FIRE President Greg Lukianoff. "Prospective teachers will keep the right to have their own thoughts, values, and beliefs."

He promised FIRE would continue to watch the university's actions.

Adam Kissel, director of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program, said the college's next version of the plan "must reflect" the school's newest commitment.

The plan from the college's Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group had suggested requiring every future teacher to accept theories of "white privileges, hegemonic masculinity, heteronormativity and internalized oppression;" "develop a positive sense of racial/cultural identity;" and "recognize that schools are socially constructed systems that are susceptible to racism ... but are also critical sites for social and cultural transformation," according to the documentation.

The plans had been targeted by Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten, too.

She wrote the recommendations would require teachers to "embrace – and be prepared to teach our state's kids – the task force's own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic."

She said the plan from the university's Teacher Education Redesign Initiative – a multiyear project to change the way future teachers are trained – "is premised, in part, on the conviction that Minnesota teachers' lack of 'cultural competence' contributes to the poor academic performance of the state's minority students."

"The first step toward 'cultural competence,' says the task group, is for future teachers to recognize – and confess – their own bigotry. Anyone familiar with the re-education camps of China's Cultural Revolution will recognize the modus operandi," she said.

"What if some aspiring teachers resist this effort at thought control and object to parroting back an ideological line as a condition of future employment?" she posed. "The task group has Orwellian plans for such rebels: The U, it says, must 'develop clear steps and procedures for working with nonperforming students, including a remediation plan.'"

FIRE had cited the U.S. Supreme Court's 1943 decision, West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, as one that "invalidated mandatory allegiances to political ideologies."

Justice Robert Jackson then wrote, "Freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch theheart of the existing order. If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

"To learn about other cultures is one thing, but to say someone with the 'wrong' political views should not be allowed to teach is unacceptable," said Kissel. "We would defend the University of Minnesota professors who proposed this program if they were censored or punished for expressing their points of view, but they have gone too far by demanding that everyone in the program share their views."

Among the issues discussed in the plans are requirements that teachers would be able to instruct students on the "myth of meritocracy" in the United States, "the history of demands for assimilation to white, middle-class, Christian meanings and values," and the "history of white racism."

The demands appear to be similar to those promoted earlier at the University of Delaware.

As WND reported, the Delaware university's office of residential life was caught requiring students to participate in a program that taught "all whites are racist."

School officials immediately defended the teaching, but in the face of a backlash from alumni and publicity about its work, the school decided to drop the curriculum, although some factions later suggested its revival.

FIRE, which challenged the Delaware plan, later produced a video explaining how the institution of the university pushed for the teachings, was caught and later backed off:

Think What We Think… Or Else:  Thought Control

Source:  WND

Related Resources:

Previous stories:

Teaching plan: America 'an oppressive hellhole'

Video exposes 'all whites are racist' teachings

'All whites racist' plan won't die

'All whites racist' indoctrination revived!

University drops 'whites are racist' plan

University defends teaching students all whites 'racist'

University to students: 'All whites are racist'

The Dumbing Down of America Series

Special offers and books (related to this subject):

The corrupt state of U.S. colleges exposed

"The Marketing of Evil" by David Kupelian is available now. Get your copy autographed and personalized (at no extra charge) – only from Shop.WND.com!

"Fish out of Water"

Is free speech 'dead on arrival'? How our broken national dialogue has killed truth and punished those who step out of line

"Christianity and the American Commonwealth"

The corrupt state of U.S. colleges exposed

"The Marketing of Evil" by David Kupelian is available now. Get your copy autographed and personalized (at no extra charge) – only from Shop.WND.com!

"Fish out of Water"

Is free speech 'dead on arrival'? How our broken national dialogue has killed truth and punished those who step out of line

"Christianity and the American Commonwealth"

How the Left Swiftboated America

White Guilt

The Underground History of American ...

The Language Police

One-Party Classroom

Expelled

Indoctrination U.

30 Ways in 30 Days to Save Your Fami...

We the People… Ray Stevens

 

Barney Franks introduced a Financial Services/Govt Takeover Bill (Michele Bachmann explains)

Rally in DC

Update From Senator Jim DeMint

Health Care Fight is Not Over Senate Democrats passed President Obama's health care takeover on Thursday by a vote of 60-39. The bill now goes to the House where many of the Democrats who supported the House bill say they won't support the Senate's version. If changes are made in the House, Senate Democrats will have to pass the bill again and cannot afford to lose a single vote. Americans must continue to put pressure on Senate Democrats throughout the month of January so we can keep this bill from reaching President Obama's desk. SCF will be working to defeat several key Senators based on Thursday's vote. Their support for this health care takeover is unacceptable and SCF will do everything it can to replace them with true conservative leaders as soon as possible. We've broken down the list of Democrat Senators who voted for the bill to show you when they are up for re-election and which races we are targeting. Click here to see the SCF Health Care Target List. Rubio Now Tied with Crist Great news! Rasmussen Reports released a new poll last week showing that former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio has pulled even with Governor Charlie Crist. The poll shows Crist with 43% and Rubio with 43%. This is a remarkable accomplishment that speaks to the power of Rubio's conservative message and the hard work of thousands of activists in Florida and across the nation. Please take a moment to read our updated FL-SEN Timeline and then make a contribution to Marco Rubio's Senate campaign. If we all work together, we can help Rubio continue to surge in the polls and win this important Senate race. Contribute to Marco Rubio's Senate campaign. Earmark Vote-Trading Will Continue Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) -- chairman of SCF -- offered an amendment to the health care bill this week to stop the practice of using earmarks to buy votes for legislation. Unfortunately, the Senate voted 53-46 to kill DeMint's measure. Every Republican and seven Democrats supported DeMint's measure. One of the seven Democrats who voted to stop earmark vote-trading was none other than Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) who traded his vote on the health care bill for a Nebraska earmark. Not only was Nelson for vote-trading before he was against it, RedState.com reports that Nelson actually voted against DeMint's amendment before he voted for it. Click here to read Sen. DeMint's statement following the vote.

Payoffs for states get Harry Reid to 60 votes – Progressive Dems Pass HC With Buyoffs and Bribes Against People’s Wishes

In the world the average American lives in, the tactics used by Pelosi, Reid and the Obama Administration to pass the most destructive bill to the American way of life ever are called bribes, cheating, pimping and extortion and those who accept or cave to them are called whores, traitors, and liars and all would be prosecuted.  In Washington it is called doing business and under the Obama Administration it has been elevated to a new low, a Culture of Corruption more devious, crass and modeled after the street thuggary  in Chicago where Obama and his cronies come from.

Ben Nelson’s “Cornhusker Kickback,” as the GOP is calling it, got all the attention Saturday, but other senators lined up for deals as Majority Leader Harry Reid corralled the last few votes for a health reform package.

Nelson’s might be the most blatant – a deal carved out for a single state, a permanent exemption from the state share of Medicaid expansion for Nebraska, meaning federal taxpayers have to kick in an additional $45 million in the first decade.

But another Democratic holdout, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), took credit for $10 billion in new funding for community health centers, while denying it was a “sweetheart deal.” He was clearly more enthusiastic about a bill he said he couldn’t support just three days ago.

Nelson and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) carved out an exemption for non-profit insurers in their states from a hefty excise tax. Similar insurers in the other 48 states will pay the tax.

Vermont and Massachusetts were given additional Medicaid funding, another plus for Sanders and Sen.Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Three states – Pennsylvania, New York and Florida – all won protections for their Medicare Advantage beneficiaries at a time when the program is facing cuts nationwide.

All of this came on top of a $300 million increase for Medicaid in Louisiana, designed to win the vote of Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu.

Under pressure from the White House to get a deal done by Christmas, Reid was unapologetic. He argued that, by definition, legislating means deal making and defended the special treatment for Nelson’s home state of Nebraska.

“You’ll find a number of states that are treated differently than other states. That’s what legislating is all about. It's compromise," he said.

It was Nelson who proved that he who plays hardest to get, gets the most.

He forced Reid to redraft the bill’s restrictions on federal funding of abortion. And while most insiders were focused on that deal, Nelson was quietly ensuring that his state would never have to pay for the Medicaid expansion being written into the bill – an agreement that had been in the works for weeks.

Medicaid is usually paid for with a mix of federal and state funding, but Nelson's carve out means that any Medicaid beneficiaries who join the program under the bill will be fully paid for by the federal government.

It's an important deal considering that many governors are worried that the Medicaid expansion will further strain already stressed state budgets – and one that came after Nebraska Gov.Dave Heineman called on Nelson to vote against the bill.

"The State of Nebraska cannot afford an unfunded mandate and uncontrolled spending of this magnitude,” the governor wrote to Nelson.

Nelson deferred all questions on the provision to Reid, saying only that he was “comfortable” the deal took care of Nebraska.

But Nelson’s deal could be a pittance compared to where the Nebraska compromise might ultimately lead – to 49 other states demanding that the feds pick up their share of health reform’s new Medicaid burden when it kicks in during 2017.

"When you look at it, I thought well, God, good, it is going to be the impetus for all the states to stay at 100 percent [federal funding]. So he might have done all of us a favor," Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said of Nelson’s dealings.

Nelson and Levin also pushed a provision that exempts non-profit insurers in Nebraska and Michigan from an annual multi-billion dollar excise tax on insurance companies.

Not surprisingly, both states are home to non-profit insurers who control a high-percentage of the industry’s profits. In Michigan, non-profit insurers control 76 percent of the industry’s profits – one of the highest percentages in the nation – while Nebraska non-profits control 46 percent of their state’s profits.

And in an example of how closely senators guarded details, Levin’s office did not answer any questions about the proposal when asked about it on Friday.

Republicans, meanwhile, expressed outrage at the wheeling and dealing, as if their party had never cut a legislative deal in its 150-year history.

“This bill is a monstrosity, a 2,100-page monstrosity full of special deals for people who are willing to vote for it,” said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. “And they’re playing these kind of games with the nation’s health care. This is an outrage.”

But Sanders didn’t sound outraged when he talked about the extra Medicaid funding Vermont will get for six years. Massachusetts, meanwhile, received three years worth of additional Medicaid funding. Under the original bill, neither state had qualified for the money.

Republican Sen. Mike Enzi accused Democratic leaders of favoring Medicare Advantage beneficiaries in Pennsylvania, New York and Florida at the expense of seniors in other parts of the country.

“The Democrats are playing ‘Let’s make a deal’ with trillions of your hard-earned tax dollars. You and all the American people should know that the majority leader is buying his votes with your money,” said Enzi (R-Wyo.) “The Reid bill gives sweetheart deals to a few states and the rest of the country will foot the bill. Making unfair deals like this is the wrong way to legislate and the American people know it.”

And while there were plenty of state-specific deals, some of the changes were clearly aimed at pleasing specific Democratic factions. For instance, tightened insurance regulations went a long way toward putting a smile on the faces of liberal senators who have lost their much-loved public option.

The amendment mandates that insurers spend no less than 80 percent of their premium revenues providing medical care. Currently, insurers spend about 70 percent of their premiums paying for health care. The bill also eliminates insurers’ ability to cap annual coverage amounts.

In brief remarks at the White House, President Barack Obama also highlighted some new provisions, including penalties for insurers who “arbitrarily jack up rates” and an immediate prohibition on insures’ ability to deny children coverage.

Obama, too, talked of the deals as just the cost of doing business in Washington.

“As with any legislation, compromise is part of the process,” Obama said. “But I'm pleased that recently added amendments have made this landmark bill even stronger.”

Bad Healthcare, Loss of Freedom, Higher Costs, More Government Control and the Joke is on You America.  Your government and its elected officials do not care what you want of think…

Not only were 66%+ of the American people against it,but in the end so was MoveOn.org and SEIU, for different reasons… so we are probably close to 80% of the people who don’t want this bill or plan. 

Does anyone remember Obama saying that he would not sign a HC Bill that increased costs to the American People or added to the debt by even one penny?!?  When are we going to start holding him to his word and promises?

“Where the people fear the government you have tyranny.  Where the government fears the people, you have democrat.  Every day the American people their government more and more.  The scale tips when that fear is turned into focused anger.”

Carrie Budoff Brown and Jake Sherman contributed

IF YOU THOUGHT YOUR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS WAS SAFE, THINK AGAIN!!!

In the same way the Copenhagen Treaty is dragging us into a new world government or order, our "non-representing representatives" are tampering with our gun laws. Since they cannot take our guns through the front door, they are using international treaty to take them away. The American people are asleep and gun owners of America need to take heed. Make this video viral please and share it with all your gun loving friends ASAP!!

“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." --Thomas Jefferson

STOP Lautenberg's Attorney General Gun Grab

Select Here to Reject AG Gun Ban and Fax All 99 Senators

Full Article: Obama Lies: Supports Lautenberg Gun Ban

Related:

It Is Not About Duck Hunting... It is About All of Our Rights to Protect Ourselves From All of You (Talking to the Congressional Committee) Up There!! ... Suzanna Gretia-Hupp – Video

NRA Alert: UN Doomsday Treaty With Ginny Simone - Viedo

Gun Rights Alert

Great Deal From Glenn Beck

OathKeepers – Not On Our Watch!

So please click here to sign the petition to your U.S. Senators before it’s too late!

Remember, “One man with a gun can control 100 without one.”
Vladimir Lenin - Make sure the man with the gun is you!!

Year of Youth: Project 2012 to Save the Republic

The idea is to expand youth involvement in the political process, train young liberty-minded activists on the campaign trail in 2010

Over this past year it has been my privilege to work with some outstanding young people in the fight for freedom. Considering that most have come through a public school system that teaches them next to nothing about America’s unique liberties, it’s quite surprising to hear their passion for the Constitution and their ability to articulate it.

We need these young people to be active and effective in coming campaigns. Now there is a movement organizing to do just that. It’s called Year of Youth: Project 2012.

In American politics one seldom sees political movements which advocate limited government positions targeting the youth. Just as rare are movements that work from the ground up, focusing on local campaigns and allowing federal involvement to grow up from the local level. This is precisely what is being attempted in Year of Youth: Project 2012. The idea is to expand youth involvement in the political process, train young liberty-minded activists on the campaign trail in 2010, and then run hundreds of youth campaigns for local offices nationwide in 2012.

Year of Youth recognizes that America’s leaders from both parties have done nothing to halt the expansion of the federal government or the increase of the enormous national debt. With this in mind, the organization focuses on three core tenets: localism, individual liberty, and fiscal responsibility.

The idea of localism, of course, comes from the observation that “the closer a government is to its people, the better the people are represented.” Local government, in Thomas Jefferson’s view, was the best way to protect freedom from federal oppression. Like Jefferson, Year of Youth states that governance is more effective at the local level, and therefore the focus of the youth’s campaigns should be upon local positions. Control by young people (who advocate the principles of freedom) in City Council, State Legislature, Board of Education, and so on can have a major influence on the lives of that area’s constituents. Specifically the organization’s manifesto states: “The likelihood of you achieving that goal, or any goal for that matter, is much more likely when it is voluntary, peaceful, and truly grassroots, at the local levels of society.”

The second issue of focus is individual liberty. Generally speaking, Year of Youth promotes the idea that each individual is free to live according to their own ends as long as that person does not violate the liberty of another. Government should stay out of our personal lives.

The third and final tenet in the “youth manifesto” is fiscal responsibility. It is unacceptable that trillions of dollars of debt are being accumulated by the current leaders to be thrust upon future generations without consent. Government should never commit to any spending which it cannot fund. The state cannot spend society into prosperity, especially on the backs of future generations

If there is to be a halt in the expansion of America’s leviathan government, the youth must take responsibility to stop it.
These positions are all the basic foundation for a free society and the Republic our founders created. These young people involved in the Year of Youth are being trained to promote such ideals and take local action to make them reality. Every American who loves our unique freedoms and have worried about their possible demise should support the Year of Youth: Project 2012.

Congressional candidate Adam Kokesh says, “This will be the largest youth movement our country has ever seen.” In order to achieve these lofty goals Year of Youth needs to spark youth involvement nationwide. A large team of grassroots youth activists is essential to accomplishing this. All young people passionate about liberty are invited to apply for Year of Youth’s core team at yearofyouth.org  and join the youth revolution.
I highly recommend that every freedom loving parent get their children involved. And if you can help support them financially, do that too. Year of Youth: Project 2012 is a major necessary step if we are to take America back.

U.S to Contribute to $100B Climate Fund to Help Developing Countries

Does anybody really think that any of this money is going to the intended cause or the the people of these developing countries???

That money will come out of your pocket and into the coffers of tyrants and dictators or go toward buying weapons to be used against us.

Legally Non-Binding Climate Deal (That Cost Us Billions) Struck in Copenhagen

Hundreds Gather to Protest Global Warming

Help Mike Huckabee Stop Ben Nelson and Stop ObamaCare

I am sorry to send you this email so late this evening but things are moving quickly and I need your help to stop the Senate Health Care bill. First, in case you haven't heard, Nebraska Democrat, Senator Ben Nelson has caved in his opposition to the Senate Health Care bill. Nelson's surrender paves the way for Senate passage of the bill sometime this week. Tomorrow morning I am headed to Omaha, Nebraska to headline a rally later in the day demanding Senator Nelson switch his vote back to NO. The rally will be held at the Omaha Music Hall, 17th and Capitol. Doors open at 2 PM. Rally starts at 3 PM. Other participants will include Congressman Terry, Auditor Foley, Senators McCoy, Fulton, Krist, Price and Lautenbaugh. RSVP to kurt.hammond@afphq.org If you live nearby or have friends or family that do, please tell them about the rally. I am sending this email to my entire list and I know that most of you reading it do not live anywhere near Omaha but are fighting mad about this and want to do something. Here is an immediate way to help. Tomorrow when I attend the rally I want to be able to say to everyone there that overnight 25,000 Americans signed my petition to Senator Nelson asking him to JUST SAY NO and that they are standing together with everyone at the rally. My hope is that we will collect a total of 100,000 signatures before the final Senate vote. Will you sign this petition now? And then forward this email to your contacts list and ask them to do the same? Help me collect 25,000 signatures overnight. I will post updates from tomorrow from Nebraska at www.huckpac.com. In the meantime, please sign my petition today. Fighting to stop Obama-care, Mike Huckabee Sign My Just Say No Senator Nelson Petition here:  http://www.huckpac.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Petitions.Home&Petition_id=11

Looks Like Ben Nelson Has Sold His Vote On ObamaCare Too – Sen DeMint and Rep Stupak Fight On – Please Join Them

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Remember the $300 million in our tax Harry Reid is spending to buy Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana's vote on Obamacare? It is being reported that Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska is falling in line after being offered his own $300 million in Medicaid funds deal.

Fox News reported:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., ripped the compromise bill, accusing Democrats of trying to deceive Americans by "jamming" a bill full of special deals to win over reluctant senators.

"This is an outrage," he said, adding that if the bill was popular, Democrats "wouldn't be passing it the weekend before Christmas and in the middle of the night."

The compromise didn't seem to do much better at appeasing liberal groups, like Planned Parenthood, which issued a statement saying it "strongly opposes the new abortion language."
Reid and other party leaders engineered a last-minute compromise on parts of the legislation to win the support of the lone Democratic holdout, Sen. Ben Nelson.

Marathon negotiations among the White House, Senate Democratic leaders and Nelson, a conservative Democrat from Nebraska, produced fresh concessions that will mean additional abortion restrictions in the legislation and funding to cover poor people for Nelson's state and others.

"I know this is hard for some of my colleagues to accept and I appreciate their right to disagree. But I would not have voted for this bill without these provisions," Nelson said at a news conference in the Capitol. He said he reserves the right to vote against the final bill if substantial changes are made by House and Senate negotiators.

Democratic leaders offered Nelson a deal similar to the $300 million in Medicaid assistance Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana got for her support, numerous sources told Fox News.
There seems to be some hope that Stupak is working with the GOP to stop Harry's Bill

Rep. Bart Stupak called the Senate’s bill’s abortion position "unacceptable." One of his staffers actually collaborated by email with Senate minority Leader McConnell.

Politico reported:
An aide to Rep. Bart Stupak (D. Mich.) coordinated opposition to the Senate health bill’s abortion compromise this morning with the Republican Senate leadership, according to a chain of frantic emails obtained this morning by POLITICO.

Stupak, in an interview with POLITICO, called the Senate’s bill’s abortion position "unacceptable" – but disavowed his staffer’s collaboration with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
“I never talked to McConnell about the health care bill,” said Stupak, adding that that “I did not authorize the email [which] “was sent without my knowledge.”

Stupak said that he has discussed the Senate’s abortion position with conservative Democratic senators Ben Nelson (Neb.) and Robert Casey (Penn.).

Stupak's continued opposition to the Senate plan, despite those conversations and intense pressure from the White House, suggests that reconciling it with the House bill may prove politically challenging.

The National Organization for Women is also working to defeat the compromise.

DeMint plans to delay vote by any means...