No one wants to cut spending and as a result another credit downgrade coming

The Price of a U.S. Credit Rating Downgrade

Uploaded by on Aug 5, 2011

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org

The federal government’s debt may soon be downgraded by major credit rating agencies. What would that mean?

Video produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg

__________

Looks like the politicians in Washington better cut spending or another downgrade will be coming soon.

U.S. rating likely to be downgraded again: Merrill

ReutersBy Walter Brandimarte | Reuters – 15 hrs ago

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The United States will likely suffer the loss of its triple-A credit rating from another major rating agency by the end of this year due to concerns over the deficit, Bank of America Merrill Lynch forecasts.

The trigger would be a likely failure by Congress to agree on a credible long-term plan to cut the U.S. deficit, the bank said in a research note published on Friday.

A second downgrade — either from Moody’s or Fitch — would follow Standard & Poor’s downgrade in August on concerns about the government’s budget deficit and rising debt burden. A second loss of the country’s top credit rating would be an additional blow to the sluggish U.S. economy, Merrill said.

“The credit rating agencies have strongly suggested that further rating cuts are likely if Congress does not come up with a credible long-run plan” to cut the deficit, Merrill’s North American economist, Ethan Harris, wrote in the report.

“Hence, we expect at least one credit downgrade in late November or early December when the super committee crashes,” he added.

The bipartisan congressional committee formed to address the deficit — known as the “super committee” — needs to break an impasse between Republicans and Democrats in order to reach a deal to reduce the U.S. deficit by at least $1.2 trillion by November 23.

If a majority of the 12-member committee fails to agree on a plan, $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts will be triggered, beginning in 2013.

Those automatic cuts, mostly in discretionary spending, would weigh further on a fragile U.S. economy, Merrill said. In the same report, the bank reduced its 2012 and 2013 growth forecasts for the United States to 1.8 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively.

If there were a downgrade, it was not clear which ratings agency would move first.

Moody’s Investors Service, which has a negative outlook on the United States’s Aaa rating, said it is looking at several other factors, including the results of presidential elections and the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts late in 2012, to decide on the rating.

“It’s not that we’re waiting just for this committee to decide on the rating,” Steven Hess, Moody’s lead analyst for the United States, told Reuters in an interview last week.

Failure by the committee to come up with an agreement, he said, “would be negative information but it is not decisive in our view about the rating.”

To be sure, Hess did not rule out the possibility of an early move on U.S. ratings if the country’s economy slips into recession. So far, however, the economic performance “is certainly not super positive but not a disaster either,” he said.

Fitch Ratings, on the other hand, still has a stable outlook on its AAA rating on the United States, meaning it is more likely to revise that outlook to negative before actually downgrading the rating.

In its latest report on the United States, Fitch says a “negative rating action,” which could be only an outlook revision, could result from a weaker-than-expected economic recovery or by failure by the bipartisan committee to reach agreement on at least $1.2 billion in deficit-reduction measures..

(Editing by Leslie Adler)

President Obama’s Statement on Credit Downgrade

Uploaded by on Aug 8, 2011

The President assures Americans that, “we will always be a triple-A country.” August 8, 2011.

______________________________________

Related posts:

Projected Federal spending caused U.S. credit downgrade

Everyone wants to blame the Tea Party for the downgrade, but a Tea party approach is needed to get on the right tract.   The Debt Ceiling and the Balanced Budget Amendment Posted by David Boaz The Washington Post editorializes: A balanced-budget amendment would deprive policymakers of the flexibility they need to address national security […]

Tea Party representatives claim debt deal responsible for downgrade because it did not cut enough (Part 5)

Tea Party representatives claim debt deal responsible for downgrade because it did not cut enough (Part 5) The Tea Party members in the Republican Party voted against the debt deal and have even claimed that the debt deal did not cut enough out of the budget and that is why the USA got a downgrade […]

What is the cause of the U.S. credit downgrade? (Part 3)

Born in The USA – John Candy – Canadian Bacon What is the cause of the U.S. credit downgrade? (Part 3)   7 January 2011 © 1995 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved. Titles: Canadian Bacon Names: Alan Alda, John Candy, Kevin Pollak, Rip Torn, Michael Moore, Rhea Perlman Still of Alan Alda, John Candy, […]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 1)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 1) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, […]

President Obama taking orders from Michael Moore? (Part 2 of series “What is the cause of the U.S. credit downgrade?”)

7 January 2011 © 1995 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved. Titles: Canadian Bacon Names: Alan Alda, John Candy, Kevin Pollak, Rip Torn, Michael Moore, Rhea Perlman Still of Alan Alda, John Candy, Kevin Pollak, Rip Torn, Michael Moore and Rhea Perlman in Canadian Bacon Michael Moore is a liberal movie director and his films […]

Heritage foundation on debt deal

It was a sad day when this dumb debt deal was signed. Morning Bell: Our Work Has Only Begun Ed Feulner August 2, 2011 at 9:30 am My fellow conservatives, Americans are disappointed. They are disappointed that the debate over our debt limit was about the needs of politicians instead of the needs of the country. […]

What is the cause of the U.S. credit downgrade? (Part 1)

Movie Clip Canadian Bacon Prt 1 What is the cause of the U.S. credit downgrade? (Part 1)   7 January 2011 © 1995 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved. Titles: Canadian Bacon Names: Alan Alda, John Candy, Kevin Pollak, Rip Torn, Michael Moore, Rhea Perlman Still of Alan Alda, John Candy, Kevin Pollak, Rip Torn, […]

Cutting spending is the way to balance the budget despite what liberals say

President Obama really believes that we must raise taxes in order to balance the budget. Nevertheless, conservatives argue that the bloated federal spending should come down to a level where he can balance the budget. Take a look at the excellent article “Unbalanced,” by Michael D. Tanner  Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the […]

Tea Party representatives claim debt deal responsible for downgrade because it did not cut enough (Part 2, Tom Cotton weighs in)

The Tea Party members in the Republican Party voted against the debt deal and have even claimed that the debt deal did not cut enough out of the budget and that is why the USA got a downgrade in the  credit rating. Below I have the comments on the downgrade from two of those representatives. […]

Tea Party representatives claim debt deal responsible for downgrade because it did not cut enough (Part 1)

  The Tea Party members in the Republican Party voted against the debt deal and have even claimed that the debt deal did not cut enough out of the budget and that is why the USA got a downgrade in the  credit rating. KINGSTON STATEMENT ON S&P ANNOUNCEMENT       Washington, D.C., Aug 5-Congressman […]

October 24, 2011 – 5:44 am Categories: Cato Institute, spending out of control | Post a comment

Tagged , , , , |

Death toll to 264 in Turkey, How can a good God allow evil and suffering?

Sad news from Turkey.

 

Turkey earthquake: 264 confirmed dead amid fears toll could rise to more than 1,000

At least 264 people have been killed in eastern Turkey and up to 1,300 more injured after a 7.2 magnitude earthquake hit the region on Monday. There are fears the death toll could reach up to 1,000.

Many have asked during this tough time: How can a good God allow evil and suffering?

 
Their thinking is that either God is not powerful enough to prevent evil or else God is not good. He is often blamed for tragedy. “Where was God when I went through this, or when that happened.”  God is blamed for natural disasters, Even my insurance company describes them as “acts of God.” How to handle this one-  (O.N.E.)
a. Origin of evil— man’s choice- God created a perfect world…
b. Nature of God—He forgives, I John 1:9—He uses tragedy to bring us to Himself, C.S. Lewis, “God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains:  it is His megaphone to arouse a deaf world.”
c. End of it all—Bible teaches that God will one day put an end to all evil, and pain and death. “God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying.  There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away” (Rev. 21:4).As Christians we have this hope of Heaven and eternity. Share how it has made a tremendous difference in your life and that you know for sure that when you die you are going to spend eternity in Heaven. Ask the person, “May I ask you a question? Do you have this hope? Do you know for certain that when you die you are going to Heaven, or is that something you would say you’re still working on?”How could a loving God send people to Hell?
(O.N.E.)
a. Origin of hell—never intended for people. Created for Satan and his demons. Jesus said, “Depart from Me, you cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt 25:41). Man chooses to sin and ignore God. The penalty is death (eternal separation from God) and, yes, Hell. But God doesn’t send anyone to Hell, we choose it by refusing or ignoring God in attitude and action. b. Nature of God—“ God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). He is so loving that He sent His own Son to die and pay the penalty for our sin so that we could avoid Hell and have the assurance of Heaven. No one in Hell will be able to blame God. He doesn’t send people there, it’s our own choice. We must choose to repent, to stop ignoring God in attitude and action, accepting His salvation and yielding to His leadership.c. End of it all—Bible teaches that God will one day put an end to all evil, pain, death, and penalty of Hell. “God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying.  There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away” (Rev. 21:4).As Christians , we need not worry about Hell. The Bible says, “these things have been written . . . so that you may know you have eternal life” (1 John 5:13).  I have complete confidence that when I die, I’m going to Heaven.  May I ask you a question?___________________________-

  Print E-mail
 

Answers the problem of evil and a good God… puts the issue squarely in the lap of the skeptic asking the question (where it belongs).

_________________________________________

In his article “A Conversation with an Atheist,” Rick Wade notes:

The problem of evil is a significant moral issue in the atheist’s arsenal. We talk about a God of goodness, but what we see around us is suffering, and a lot of it apparently unjustifiable. Stephanie said, “Disbelief in a personal, loving God as an explanation of the way the world works is reasonable–especially when one considers natural disasters that can’t be blamed on free will and sin.”{17}

One response to the problem of evil is that God sees our freedom to choose as a higher value than protecting people from harm; this is the freewill defense. Stephanie said, however, that natural disasters can’t be blamed on free will and sin. What about this? Is it true that natural disasters can’t be blamed on sin? I replied that they did come into existence because of sin (Genesis 3). We’re told in Romans 8 that creation will one day “be set free from its slavery to corruption,” that it “groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.” The Fall caused the problem, and, in the consummation of the ages, the problem will be fixed.

Second, I noted that on a naturalistic basis, it’s hard to even know what evil is. But the reality of God explains it. As theologian Henri Blocher said,

The sense of evil requires the God of the Bible. In a novel by Joseph Heller, “While rejecting belief in God, the characters in the story find themselves compelled to postulate his existence in order to have an adequate object for their moral indignation.” . . . When you raise this standard objection against God, to whom do you say it, other than this God? Without this God who is sovereign and good, what is the rationale of our complaints? Can we even tell what is evil? Perhaps the late John Lennon understood: “God is a concept by which we measure our pain,” he sang. Might we be coming to the point where the sense of evil is a proof of the existence of God?{18}

So,… if there is no God, there really is no problem of evil. Does the atheist ever find herself shaking her fist at the sky after some catastrophe and demanding an explanation? If there is no God, no one is listening.

October 24, 2011 – 5:27 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Tagged , , , , |

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 118)

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

On May 11, 2011,  I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:

Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner.  I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.

Therefore, I went to the website and sent this email below:

Here are a few more I  emailed to him myself.

Senator Rand Paul on Feb 7, 2011 wrote the article “A Modest $500 Billion Proposal: My spending cuts would keep 85% of government funding and not touch Social Security,” Wall Street Journal and he observed:

Here are some of his specific suggestions:

Repeal Davis-Bacon: Saves $6 billion
The Davis-Bacon Act requires employers to pay workers at least the locally prevailing wage and fringe benefits on
federal construction projects of more than $2,000. The Department of Labor publishes Davis-Bacon prevailing wages
in four types of construction: residential, building, highway, and heavy construction. In 2008, for metropolitan areas,
Davis-Bacon prevailing wages rates for all projects were 62.4 percent higher than the average hourly wages reported
by the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES).
Davis-Bacon forces government contractors to pay wages that are higher than they normally would. These wages
increase the cost of the federal construction project, without increasing the labor productivity, quality, or timeliness in
completing the project.

October 24, 2011 – 12:43 am Categories: spending out of control | Post a comment

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (Part 17 Thirsty Thursday, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (Part 17 Thirsty Thursday, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

Dear Senator Pryor,

Why not pass the Balanced  Budget Amendment? As you know that federal deficit is at all time high (1.6 trillion deficit with revenues of 2.2 trillion and spending at 3.8 trillion).

On my blog www.HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com I took you at your word and sent you over 100 emails with specific spending cut ideas. However, I did not see any of them in the recent debt deal that Congress adopted. Now I am trying another approach. Every week from now on I will send you an email explaining different reasons why we need the Balanced Budget Amendment. It will appear on my blog on “Thirsty Thursday” because the government is always thirsty for more money to spend.

Hultgren Statement On Opposition To Budget Control Act

Monday August 01, 2011

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Rep. Randy Hultgren (IL-14) released the following statement after voting against the Budget Control Act.

“Tonight, I voted against a flawed bill that doesn’t go far enough,” said Hultgren. “I’ve been clear from the very beginning I would not support any effort to increase our nation’s debt ceiling if the proposal does not hold true to the values of Cut, Cap, and Balance, as well as enact serious structural changes.

“It is my opinion that the proposal approved by the House tonight falls short of what we need to do to put our country back on the right track. By failing to require Congress to approve a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) prior to any further increases in the debt ceiling, this bill does not provide the structural changes that I stated were necessary to earn my support.

“When leadership changed the bill on Thursday night to strengthen the BBA provision, that change earned my support; in failing to keep that strong language, I could not, in good conscience, support this bill.”

October 24, 2011 – 12:29 am Categories: spending out of control | Post a comment

Tagged , , , |

Ron Paul on healthcare (Republican debate of 10-18-11 part 3)

Ron Paul on healthcare (Republican debate of 10-18-11 part 3)

Ron Paul sets the liberals straight on the solution for our healthcare problem in this video clip above during one of the presidential debates.

Despite Flaws, U.S. Health Care the Best

by Michael D. Tanner

Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, and the co-author of Healthy Competition: What’s Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It.

Added to cato.org on October 18, 2011

This article appeared in USA Today on October 18, 2011.

Similarly, when Canadian Human Resources Minister Belinda Stronach needed treatment for breast cancer, she had it done at a California hospital. And, when then-Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams needed to have a leaky heart valve repaired, he had it done at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in Florida.

These high-profile patients were following in the footsteps of tens of thousands of patients from around the world who come to the United States for treatment every year.

We aren’t perfect, but if you’re sick, the United States is still the place you want to be.

They come here because they know that despite its flaws, the U.S. health care system still provides the highest quality care in the world. Whether the disease is cancer, pneumonia, heart disease or AIDS, the chances of a patient surviving are far higher in the U.S. than in other countries.

According to a study published in the British medical journal The Lancet, the U.S. is at the top of the charts when it comes to surviving cancer. For example, more than two-thirds of women diagnosed with cancer will survive for at least five years in the U.S. That’s 6 percentage points better than the next best country, Sweden.

Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, and the co-author of Healthy Competition: What’s Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It.

 

More by Michael D. Tanner

Moreover, the U.S. drives much of the innovation and research on health care worldwide. Eighteen of the last 25 winners of the Nobel Prize in medicine are either U.S. citizens or work here. U.S. companies have developed more than half of all new major medicines introduced worldwide over the past 20 years. And Americans played a key role in 80% of the most important non-pharmaceutical medical advances of the past 40 years.

Does U.S. health care cost too much? Sure. But on a year-to-year basis, the cost in other countries is rising about as fast. Do we need to expand coverage? Certainly. But at least we’ve avoided the government-imposed rationing that afflicts so many countries. We aren’t perfect, but if you’re sick, the United States is still the place you want to be.

October 24, 2011 – 12:24 am Categories: Healthcare | Post a comment

Tagged , , , , |

“Music Monday”:Coldplay’s best songs of all time (Part 7)

Coldplay

“Music Monday”:Coldplay’s best songs of all time (Part 7)

This is “Music Monday” and I always look at a band with some of their best music. I am currently looking at Coldplay’s best songs. Here are a few followed by another person’s preference:

My son Hunter Hatcher’s 14th favorite song of Coldplay is Politik.

Uploaded by on Dec 19, 2007

From the live 2003 DVD.
This video is (c) 2003 EMI Records Ltd

______________________

Well, hey, they can always change their names when they grow up.

So back the music. This band is described as rock, but I have to frown at that categorization. I’d say they’re more alternative or adult something or other. This music doesn’t make me think sex, drugs or rock and roll, therefore I take issue with that labeling. I do, however, this is great music. The lyrics are sometimes strange, but always interesting. There’s nothing predictable in the patterns, it’s all very original. Chris Martin’s voice isn’t particularly amazing, but he does have that something special quality – I can’t name it, I don’t think there’s a word for it.

But the boy can emote. You can feel the pain he must have been feeling when he wrote the songs, and that is what moves people to buy records like this. Feeling depressed? Whip these songs out and you’ll either feel better, or even more depressed before it’s done, because his stuff can be pretty moving. Still worth having on the iPod though, and you needn’t be miserable to appreciate it. It’s very calming and relaxing, so if you’re slightly neurotic like me and need background noise when you’re writing or working on the computer, these are wonderfully unobtrusive songs that can still make you feel good, somehow.

 
X & Y
  • Fix You

From the X & Y album, this is one of those songs for people who are “stuck in reverse” in any number of ways. It’s a sweet melody, nothing harsh, delicate piano scattered about and thoughtful lyrics expressing the empathy anyone in a depressed state would appreciate.

  • The Scientist

This one is from the album A Rush of Blood to the Head. One of my favorites, I love the lyrics here. Sounds to me like the story of a man who’s screwed up with a woman and has now realized his mistake and is ready to fix it. Lots of angst here, gotta love it.

 
A Rush of Blood to the Head
  • In My Place

Also from A Rush of Blood to the Head. I love, love, love the opening guitar melody here. It’s so damned catchy it’s amazing. Another depressing love song, lots of angst, more about how he’s screwed up – though I don’t hear him trying to fix much in this one.

  • Yellow

From the album Parachutes. I admit, I thought this was a fairly stupid song when I first heard it. It wasn’t until I saw the video that I changed my mind. Don’t ask me why, that’s just how it was. Now I love this little ditty. Still not sure why everything’s yellow, but hey, I don’t need to get it in order to like the song.

  • Clocks

This is from the Rush of Blood to the Head album. This is also the big grammy winner. And it was worth it, very catchy. Great melody, great riff, great lyrics, great phrasing. Just a great song, even if it is slightly over played.

© Stephen Dewall/Retna
  • Speed of Sound

From X & Y. Very good song asking how long it will take to get what you’re after. Well, that’s what it seems like to me. And it seems like he’s talking about getting a specific woman for the most part. Hard to tell with these pop types, you know. It’s a nice song, whatever it means.

  • Till Kingdom Come

I love this one. Also from X & Y. It’s very different from the other songs and has a darker melody. It seems to be a declaration of love, but somehow moody. It’s not cheery, yet it definitely seems to be about having fallen in love.

  • Twisted Logic

The melody here is very cool. Again, from the X & Y album. I can’t help feeling in a trance when this one is on. Just don’t pay too close attention to the lyrics, they get a little strange. Computers looking for life on earth.. gotta wonder what kind of brownies he was eating. Still, very good song.

 
Parachutes
  • Sparks

From Parachutes. Fantastically mellowing melody. Makes me feel very relaxed, even though the lyrics seem to be depressing as anything. Then again, he also seems to be saying he’s always going to take care of whomever he’s singing about. I love the bridge very nice falsetto work.

  • Daylight

Great song from A Rush of Blood to the Head album. The riff is excellent and will stay with you all day. I love the melody, love the way it sounds slightly middle eastern somehow too. That could just be my imagination, though. Lyrics don’t really make a lot of sense to me.. but hey.. who cares? It sounds good. With all these depressing love songs, etc, you have to wonder who inspired them. Was Gwyneth the woman behind all of these?

xx Isabella

Related posts:

“Music Monday”:Coldplay’s best songs of all time (Part 4)

Dave Hogan/ Getty Images This is “Music Monday” and I always look at a band with some of their best music. I am currently looking at Coldplay’s best songs. Here are a few followed by another person’s preference: For the 17th best Coldplay song of all-time, Hunter picks “42.” He notes, “You thought you might […]

Documentary on Coldplay (Part 2)

The best band in the world. Below I have linked some articles I have earlier about the search for meaning in life the band seems to involved in. Chris Martin, Jonny Buckland, Guy Berryman, and Will Champion formed Coldplay in 1996 while going to University in London. The young band quickly established themselves in the […]

Review of New Coldplay song with video clip

I am presently involved in the counting down of the best Coldplay songs of all time, but I am also in a series here reviewing the upcoming songs on Coldplay’s new cd that will be released soon. Here is a review from Rolling Stone: Coldplay Debut new song ‘Charlie Brown’ June 6, 2011 Coldplay debuted […]

Documentary on Coldplay (Part 1, the song “Yellow” featured)

Great documentary on Coldplay. I have written a lot on Coldplay the last few years and I see something spiritually happening with the group as they continue to search for a deeping meaning in life. Coldplay Max Masters – Part 1 of 7 Uploaded by thepostbox on May 6, 2009 The ASTRA Award winning music documentary […]

“Woody Wednesday” Will Allen and Martin follow same path as Kansas to Christ?

Several members of the 70′s band Kansas became committed Christians after they realized that the world had nothing but meaningless to offer. It seems through the writings of both Woody Allen and Chris Martin of Coldplay that they both are wrestling with the issue of death and what meaning does life bring. Kansas went through […]

“Music Monday”:Coldplay’s best songs of all time (Part 3)

 This is “Music Monday” and I always look at a band with some of their best music. I am currently looking at Coldplay’s best songs. Here are a few followed by another person’s preference:   Hunter has chosen the song “Viva La Vida” as his number 18 pick. Hunter noted, “The violin synth is a […]

Review of New Coldplay songs (video clip too)

Coldplay – Every Teardrop Is A Waterfall Published on Jun 28, 2011 by ColdplayVEVO The new single, taken from Every Teardrop Is A Waterfall EP (featuring two more new tracks). Download it from http://cldp.ly/itunescp Music video by Coldplay performing Every Teardrop Is A Waterfall. (P) 2011 The copyright in this audiovisual recording is owned by […]

 

October 24, 2011 – 12:02 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

A Christian Manifesto by Francis Schaeffer (Part 8) (Schaeffer Sundays)

Part 1

Part 2

Below is a summary of “A Christian Manifesto” which is a very important book written by Francis Schaeffer just a couple of years before his death in 1984.

A Christian Manifesto
by Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer

This address was delivered by the late Dr. Schaeffer in 1982 at the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. It is based on one of his books, which bears the same title.

We must absolutely set out to smash the lie of the new and novel concept of the separation of religion from the state which most people now hold and which Christians have just bought a bill of goods. This is new and this is novel. It has no relationship to the meaning of the First Amendment. The First Amendment was that the state would never interfere with religion. THAT’S ALL THE MEANING THERE WAS TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT. Just read Madison and the Spectator Papers if you don’t think so. That’s all it was!

Now we have turned it over and we have put it on its head and what we must do is absolutely insist that we return to what the First Amendment meant in the first place — not that religion can’t have an influence into society and into the state — not that. But we must insist that there’s a freedom that the First Amendment really gave. Now with this we must emphasize, and I said it, but let me say it again, we do not want a theocracy! I personally am opposed to a theocracy. On this side of the New Testament I do not believe there is a place for a theocracy ’till Jesus the King comes back. But that’s a very different thing while saying clearly we are not in favor of a theocracy in name or in fact, from where we are now, where all religious influence is shut out of the processes of the state and the public schools. We are only asking for one thing. We are asking for the freedom that the First Amendment guaranteed. That’s what we should be standing for.

Now, I come toward the close, and that is that we must recognize something from the Scriptures, and that’s why I had that Scripture read that I had read tonight. When the government negates the law of God, it abrogates its authority. God has given certain offices to restrain chaos in this fallen world, but it does not mean that these offices are autonomous, and when a government commands that which is contrary to the Law of God, it abrogates its authority.

Throughout the whole history of the Christian Church, (and again I wish people knew their history. In A Christian Manifesto I stress what happened in the Reformation in reference to all this) at a certain point, it is not only the privilege but it is the duty of the Christian to disobey the government. Now that’s what the founding fathers did when they founded this country. That’s what the early Church did. That’s what Peter said. You heard it from the Scripture: “Should we obey man?… rather than God?” That’s what the early Christians did.

Occasionally — no, often, people say to me, “But the early Church didn’t practice civil disobedience.” Didn’t they? You don’t know your history again. When those Christians that we all talk about so much allowed themselves to be thrown into the arena, when they did that, from their view it was a religious thing. They would not worship anything except the living God. But you must recognize from the side of the Roman state, there was nothing religious about it at all — it was purely civil. The Roman Empire had disintegrated until the only unity it had was its worship of Caesar. You could be an atheist; you could worship the Zoroastrian religion… You could do anything. They didn’t care. It was a civil matter, and when those Christians stood up there and refused to worship Caesar, from the side of the state, they were rebels. They were in civil disobedience and they were thrown to the beasts. They were involved in civil disobedience, as much as your brothers and sisters in the Soviet Union are. When the Soviet Union says that, by law, they cannot tell their children, even in their home about Jesus Christ, they must disobey and they get sent off to the mental ward or to Siberia. It’s exactly the same kind of civil disobedience that’s represented in a very real way by the thing I am wearing on my lapel tonight.

Every appropriate legal and political governmental means must be used. “The final bottom line”– I have invented this term in A Christian Manifesto. I hope the Christians across this country and across the world will really understand what the Bible truly teaches: The final bottom line! The early Christians, every one of the reformers (and again, I’ll say in A Christian Manifesto I go through country after country and show that there was not a single place with the possible exception of England, where the Reformation was successful, where there wasn’t civil disobedience and disobedience to the state), the people of the Reformation, the founding fathers of this country, faced and acted in the realization that if there is no place for disobeying the government, that government has been put in the place of the living God. In such a case, the government has been made a false god. If there is no place for disobeying a human government, what government has been made GOD.

Caesar, under some name, thinking of the early Church, has been put upon the final throne. The Bible’s answer is NO! Caesar is not to be put in the place of God and we as Christians, in the name of the Lordship of Christ, and all of life, must so think and act on the appropriate level. It should always be on the appropriate level. We have lots of room to move yet with our court cases, with the people we elect — all the things that we can do in this country. If, unhappily, we come to that place, the appropriate level must also include a disobedience to the state.

If you are not doing that, you haven’t thought it through. Jesus is not really on the throne. God is not central. You have made a false god central. Christ must be the final Lord and not society and not Caesar.

May I repeat the final sentence again? CHRIST MUST BE THE FINAL LORD AND NOT CAESAR AND NOT SOCIETY.

October 23, 2011 – 12:47 am Categories: Francis Schaeffer | Comments (1)

Romney wants to eliminate Capital Gains Tax for everyone except those who are real job creators

Obama: Raise Taxes, Capital Gains – “For Purposes of Fairness”

Everyone knows that if you eliminate the capital gains tax then those who are wealthy will put more money into creating jobs. However, Mitt Romney feels so guilty about being wealthy that he has proposed eliminating the capital gains for everyone except for those making over 200,000 dollars.

  • OCTOBER 21, 2011, 7:08 P.M. ET

Romney’s Guilty Republican Syndrome

A leading GOP contender defines ‘rich’ as $200,000 in income. Funny. So does President Obama.

As the GOP casts about for a response to Occupy Wall Street, at least one prominent Republican isn’t sweating it. In the war over class, Mitt Romney is already waving a white flag. And therein lies one of his chief liabilities as a Republican nominee or president.

The Occupy masses don’t have a unified message, though the Democrats embracing them aren’t making that mistake. President Obama helpfully explained that the crowds in New York and elsewhere are simply expressing their “frustrations” at unequal American society. The answer to their protests is, conveniently, his own vision for the country. If wealthier Americans and corporations are just asked to pay their “fair share,” if “we can go back to that then I think a lot of that anger, that frustration dissipates,” said the president.

Associated PressGOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney on the trail

This is a campaign theme in the making, and one with which Mr. Obama has already had plenty of practice. Congressional Democrats, too, see the value of pivoting off Occupy Wall Street to build an election-year class-warfare argument.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s latest answer to any spending proposal is a “millionaire’s surtax,” which he intends to make Republicans vote against ad nauseam. Labor unions, liberal activist groups—all see an Occupy opportunity to refocus the blame for a faltering economy away from President Obama and to greedy, rich America.

But here’s the other big prize, from the White House’s perspective: The man they most expect to become the Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, is already running from this debate. Mr. Romney, they see, is in the full throes of Guilty Republican Syndrome.

It’s a curious illness, even if its source is clear: success. Mr. Romney is a multimillionaire, and through his own hard work. It’s a great American story, yet the Republican is paralyzed at the thought of what his opponents might do with it in a 9% unemployment economy. Democrats have already pounced on his time at Bain Capital, accusing Mr. Romney of “stripping down” companies and “laying off” employees for profit. The press has run exposés on his privileged upbringing, his “oceanfront” vacation home, his use of private jets.

Even his Republican opponents, who should know better, are lobbing anti-wealth pot shots. Herman Cain has taken to comparing his own “Main Street” business experience to Mr. Romney’s “Wall Street” past. Rick Perry is running an ad that hits Mr. Romney on his state health-care plan but ends with this bit of class: “Even the richest man can’t buy back his past.”

Having initially fought these caricatures, Mr. Romney has since begun to exhibit all the syndrome’s symptoms. He’s put forth a 59-point economic plan that eliminates the capital gains tax—but only for people who earn less than $200,000 a year. He’s declared, at a New Hampshire town hall (and at every other opportunity): “I’m not running for the rich people. Rich people can take care of themselves. They’re doing just fine.” He’s developed a form of Tourette’s that causes him to employ the term “middle class” in nearly every sentence.

Related Video

James Taranto on how Mitt Romney’s guilt as a millionaire feeds Democratic class warfare.

Mr. Romney is clearly hoping that his own passive form of class warfare will head his opponents off at the blue-collar pass. Really? The 2012 election is shaping up to be a profound choice. Mr. Obama is making no bones about his vision of higher taxes, wealth redistribution, larger government.

Mr. Romney has generally espoused the opposing view—smaller government, fewer regulations, opportunity—but only timidly. This hobbles his ability to go head to head with the president, to make the moral and philosophical case for that America. How can Mr. Romney oppose Mr. Obama’s plans to raise taxes on higher incomes, dividends and capital gains when the Republican himself diminishes the role of the “top 1%”? How can he demonstrate a principled understanding of capital and job creation when latching on to Mr. Obama’s own trademark $200,000 income cutoff?

At a town hall in Iowa Thursday, Mr. Romney took it further: “For me, one of the key criteria in looking at tax policy is to make sure that we help the people that need the help the most.”

These are the sort of statements that cause conservative voters to doubt Mr. Romney’s convictions. It also makes them doubt the ability of a President Romney to convince a Congress of the need for fundamental tax reform. If anything he owes a debt to Newt Gingrich, who in a recent debate gave him a taste of how politically and intellectually vulnerable he is on this argument, asking Mr. Romney to justify the $200,000 threshold.

Mr. Romney’s non-responsive response included five references to the “middle” class and another admonition that the “rich” are “doing just fine.” Mr. Obama can’t wait to agree, even as he shames Mr. Romney over his bank account.

Mr. Romney isn’t the first Republican to develop Guilty Syndrome, and one option would be to form a support group with, say, George H.W. Bush. A better cure might be the tonic of Ronald Reagan, who never let his own wealth get in the way of a good lower-tax argument. Reagan’s message, delivered with cheerfulness and conviction, was that he wanted everyone in American to have the opportunity to be as successful as he had been. If Mr. Romney is looking for a way to connect with an aspiring American electorate, that’s a start.

Write to kim@wsj.com

October 22, 2011 – 9:14 am Categories: Taxes | Post a comment

Tagged , , , , |

Ron Paul’s opinion of Fed

I really like Ron Paul a lot.

  • OCTOBER 20, 2011

Blame the Fed for the Financial Crisis

The Fed fails to grasp that an interest rate is a price, the price of time. Attempting to manipulate that price is as destructive as any other government price control.

By RON PAUL

To know what is wrong with the Federal Reserve, one must first understand the nature of money. Money is like any other good in our economy that emerges from the market to satisfy the needs and wants of consumers. Its particular usefulness is that it helps facilitate indirect exchange, making it easier for us to buy and sell goods because there is a common way of measuring their value. Money is not a government phenomenon, and it need not and should not be managed by government. When central banks like the Fed manage money they are engaging in price fixing, which leads not to prosperity but to disaster.

WSJ’s Danny Yadron discusses Ron Paul’s proposal for $1 trillion in budget cuts with “Mean Street” host Evan Newmark. Paul’s cuts would come in large part as a result of cutting several cabinet positions. AP Photo.

The Federal Reserve has caused every single boom and bust that has occurred in this country since the bank’s creation in 1913. It pumps new money into the financial system to lower interest rates and spur the economy. Adding new money increases the supply of money, making the price of money over time—the interest rate—lower than the market would make it. These lower interest rates affect the allocation of resources, causing capital to be malinvested throughout the economy. So certain projects and ventures that appear profitable when funded at artificially low interest rates are not in fact the best use of those resources.

Eventually, the economic boom created by the Fed’s actions is found to be unsustainable, and the bust ensues as this malinvested capital manifests itself in a surplus of capital goods, inventory overhangs, etc. Until these misdirected resources are put to a more productive use—the uses the free market actually desires—the economy stagnates.

BloombergFed Chairman Ben Bernanke

The great contribution of the Austrian school of economics to economic theory was in its description of this business cycle: the process of booms and busts, and their origins in monetary intervention by the government in cooperation with the banking system. Yet policy makers at the Federal Reserve still fail to understand the causes of our most recent financial crisis. So they find themselves unable to come up with an adequate solution.

In many respects the governors of the Federal Reserve System and the members of the Federal Open Market Committee are like all other high-ranking powerful officials. Because they make decisions that profoundly affect the workings of the economy and because they have hundreds of bright economists working for them doing research and collecting data, they buy into the pretense of knowledge—the illusion that because they have all these resources at their fingertips they therefore have the ability to guide the economy as they see fit.

Nothing could be further from the truth. No attitude could be more destructive. What the Austrian economists Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek victoriously asserted in the socialist calculation debate of the 1920s and 1930s—the notion that the marketplace, where people freely decide what they need and want to pay for, is the only effective way to allocate resources—may be obvious to many ordinary Americans. But it has not influenced government leaders today, who do not seem to see the importance of prices to the functioning of a market economy.

The manner of thinking of the Federal Reserve now is no different than that of the former Soviet Union, which employed hundreds of thousands of people to perform research and provide calculations in an attempt to mimic the price system of the West’s (relatively) free markets. Despite the obvious lesson to be drawn from the Soviet collapse, the U.S. still has not fully absorbed it.

The Fed fails to grasp that an interest rate is a price—the price of time—and that attempting to manipulate that price is as destructive as any other government price control. It fails to see that the price of housing was artificially inflated through the Fed’s monetary pumping during the early 2000s, and that the only way to restore soundness to the housing sector is to allow prices to return to sustainable market levels. Instead, the Fed’s actions have had one aim—to keep prices elevated at bubble levels—thus ensuring that bad debt remains on the books and failing firms remain in business, albatrosses around the market’s neck.

The Fed’s quantitative easing programs increased the national debt by trillions of dollars. The debt is now so large that if the central bank begins to move away from its zero interest-rate policy, the rise in interest rates will result in the U.S. government having to pay hundreds of billions of dollars in additional interest on the national debt each year. Thus there is significant political pressure being placed on the Fed to keep interest rates low. The Fed has painted itself so far into a corner now that even if it wanted to raise interest rates, as a practical matter it might not be able to do so. But it will do something, we know, because the pressure to “just do something” often outweighs all other considerations.

What exactly the Fed will do is anyone’s guess, and it is no surprise that markets continue to founder as anticipation mounts. If the Fed would stop intervening and distorting the market, and would allow the functioning of a truly free market that deals with profit and loss, our economy could recover. The continued existence of an organization that can create trillions of dollars out of thin air to purchase financial assets and prop up a fundamentally insolvent banking system is a black mark on an economy that professes to be free.

Mr. Paul, a congressman from Texas, is seeking the Republican presidential nomination

October 22, 2011 – 8:45 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Tagged , , , , |

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 21)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 21)

This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but from a liberal.

Rep. Emanuel Clever (D-Mo.) called the newly agreed-upon bipartisan compromise deal to raise the  debt limit “a sugar-coated satan sandwich.”

“This deal is a sugar-coated satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see,” Clever tweeted on August 1, 2011.

Westmoreland Opposes Debt Ceiling Increase

 
 
Feel Free To Share This Page

Slashdot
Del.icio.us
Google
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Yahoo
Facebook
 

Washington, Aug 1 –

WASHINGTON, D.C. – After months of debate, tonight the House of Representatives passed S.365, the Budget Control Act of 2011, to raise the debt ceiling and enact some spending reforms.  Specifically, it would reduce deficits by $917 billion over ten years by capping spending levels and in return raise the debt ceiling $900 billion.  In addition, it requires a vote on a balanced budget amendment in both the House and the Senate after October 2, 2011 but before the end of the year.  It then establishes a commission tasked with finding an additional $1.2 to $1.5 trillion in spending cuts by November 23, 2011.  A second debt ceiling increase of $1.5 trillion would be permitted at the beginning of next year if the balanced budget amendment is sent to the states for ratification, or if the commission proposal includes cuts equal to or greater than $1.5 trillion and those cuts are passed into law.  If neither happens, a $1.2 trillion debt limit increase would be attached to across the board spending cuts that would equal the difference between $1.2 trillion and the cuts enacted by the commission’s proposal.  Congressman Westmoreland did not support the legislation.

“When these negotiations began in January, I made a promise that I would not vote for any legislation that didn’t include significant spending cuts and absolutely no tax increases.  Unfortunately, the final plan did not include significant enough cuts and left open the possibility for tax increases through this bipartisan commission.  In addition, it does not require a balanced budget amendment be sent to the states for ratification.  Without that constitutional restraint placed on this Congress and future Congresses, we can never guarantee real spending reforms will happen.

“House Republicans also made a promise to the American people that we would bring back an open process here in Congress.  Up until now, we have stuck with that promise.  We’ve posted legislation on the internet and given the American people and Members of Congress 72 hours to review it.  We’ve brought back open rules on appropriations bills, allowing Republican and Democrat members alike to offer amendments.  But now, after this deal was crafted behind closed doors with only a few members of leadership at the table, we were given less than 12 hours to read and review this extremely important legislation.  More time is needed to make an informed decision about legislation of this size and scope.  Unfortunately, once again, Congress has waited until the last minute to act, pushing us up against this artificial August 2nd deadline and forcing a decision on a bill it seems no one actually likes.

“I and other Republicans in the House stuck by our leadership in the hopes we could keep Cut, Cap and Balance alive and negotiate a deal we could support.  And while I know they worked hard to get the best deal possible, at the end of the day, it’s just not a deal I can support.  I commend their efforts though.  If you will recall, up until a few months ago, President Obama was still calling for a ‘clean’ debt ceiling increase and last night was still pushing for immediate tax increases on job creators.  So we came a long way during these negotiations.  Unfortunately, Senate Democrats and the White House stalled any attempt at real spending reform, resulting in this unpopular deal,” stated Westmoreland.

October 22, 2011 – 8:31 am Categories: spending out of control | Post a comment