Need we say more about the liberal mind set on the United States and it’s citizens.  This is what Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) stated in a radio interview on the Don Wade and Roma show on WLS 890 AM this morning.

Radio Host: So Jan Schakowsky, out of every dollar that I earn, how much do you think I deserve to keep?

Schakowsky: What is really your question here? Do you think you should not contribute to firefighters?

Radio Host: No, no, it’s a very simple question. Out of every dollar I earn, how much do you, Jan Schakowsky, think I deserve to keep?

Schakowsky:  I’ll put it this way. You don’t deserve to keep all of it and it’s not a question of deserving because what government is, is those things that we decide to do together. And there are many things that we decide to do together like have our national security. Like have police and fire. What about the people that work at the National Institute of Health who are looking for a cure for cancer.

Radio Host: Okay, so let me ask you again.  Out of every dollar I earn, how much do you think I deserve to keep?

Schakowsky: I am not going to give you a percentage.  I don’t know how what your income is.

Radio Host:  What does my income have to do with it.

Schakowksy:  I think you need to pay your fair share.  In order to do the things that we’ve decided are national priorities.

 

This is it folks.  This is how liberals view the people in this nation.  To them, “you don’t deserve to keep” the money that you worked hard for.  Of course most everyone understands that some taxes need to be paid to cover services provided by the government, but to what extent?  Liberals want to take your money because “you don’t deserve” to keep it and conservatives believe that you DO deserve to keep it and that the government doesn’t have the right to take more and more of it.  You can go to the WLS 890 AM website and listen to the whole interview.

I am happy that my first post to PIN in a long time is to honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice in defending what this wonderful country stands for.  From the time when the seeds of America where first planted and the idea that freedom and liberty where deserved by all, there have been those willing to die in defense of it.  As a country, we need to make sure that we do not forget the price paid by these wonderful men and women and their families.  These were the words of Ronald Reagan on Memorial Day in 1983:

Memorial Day is a time to take stock of the present, reflect on the past, and renew our commitment to the future of America.

Today, as in the past, there are problems that must be solved and challenges that must be met. We can tackle them with our full strength and creativity only because we are free to work them out in our own way. We owe this freedom of choice and action to those men and women in uniform who have served this nation and its interests in time of need. In particular, we are forever indebted to those who have given their lives that we might be free.

I don’t have to tell you how fragile this precious gift of freedom is. Every time we hear, watch, or read the news, we are reminded that liberty is a rare commodity in this world.

This Memorial Day of 1983, we honor those brave Americans who died in the service of their country. I think an ancient scholar put it well when he wrote: “Let us now praise famous men . . . All these were honored in their generation, and were the glory of their times. Their bodies are buried in peace; but their name liveth for evermore.” As a tribute to their sacrifice, let us renew our resolve to remain strong enough to deter aggression, wise enough to preserve and protect our freedom, and thoughtful enough to promote lasting peace throughout the world.

Lets make sure this weekend as we barbecue, gather with friends and enjoy the extra day off, to remember those who made it possible.  As I wrote in a post a while ago titled “These Colors Never Run”, these American patriots proved that.  We must now honor their legacy and sacrifice by understanding that freedom is not free, evil does exist and the fight changes, but always continues.

Wednesday, September 01, 2010
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer

 (CNSNews.com) – Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu said requests by Arizona law enforcement personnel and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) for 3,000 National Guard troops along the state’s border with Mexico have been answered so far with 1 percent of that number deployed there this week.
 
“We have a whopping 30 [National Guard troops] this week that are showing up,” Babeu told CNSNews.com. “It’s less than a half-hearted measure designed to fail.”
 
But the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has placed 15 signs along a 60-mile stretch of Interstate 8 that links San Diego with Phoenix and Tucson warning travelers of drug cartels and human trafficking operations.
 
“DANGER – PUBLIC WARNING, TRAVEL NOT RECOMMENDED,” read the signs placed along Interstate 8. “Visitors May Encounter Armed Criminals and Smuggling Vehicles Traveling at High Rates of Speed. Stay Away From Trash, Clothing, Backpacks, and Abandoned Vehicles.”
 
“BLM Encourages Visitors To Use Public Land North of Interstate 8,” the signs say.
 
“I think the American people are outraged that we can fight wars half-way around the world, send our nation’s treasury and our most precious resources – our American heroes that serve in the military — and yet here in our own country somehow they believe it’s okay  for us not to have a secure border,” Said Sheriff Babeu.
 
“And that it’s okay to put up signs in my county and parts of America to surrender parts of our country to foreign born criminals,” Babeu added, “warning our own American citizens to stay out.” In May, President Barack Obama said he would deploy 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to help quell the violence there, which is less than half of the 3,000 troops requested by Babeu, Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever, Sen. McCain and Sen. Kyl for Arizona’s border during a press conference on Capitol Hill in April.

The Obama administration has said it will deploy National Guard troops to the southern border incrementally to eventually have 1,500 troops in place. In addition, $600 million in “emergency border protection funding” was approved in legislation the president signed into law in August.
 
Babeu said the warning signs are 70 to 80 miles from the border and just 30 miles from Phoenix, the fifth largest city in the United States. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/72068

I recently went on a field trip with my son’s elementary school to Washington, D.C.  We took them to the National Archives to see the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  They went to the Capitol and learned a little about how Congress works and to the Supreme Court building to see where our highest courts sits and interprets our laws.  We then moved onto the Vietnam, Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials.  It was so exciting to watch all these young minds take in what is so absolutely astounding about how our country came together and how it works today.  So much eagerness to hear and learn about the important threads that have been weaved together to make this such a special place to live.  They all learned and recited the phrase E Pluribus Unum and the translation.  It was such a great thing to hear young voices say.

From many, one.  This is a phrase that Barack Obama may have seen, but clearly doesn’t care to understand it.  Three little words represent so much about this country.  Our president is supposed to understand this.   Our President is supposed to understand that he is the leader of our country and as it he should listen to the people that he represents.  E Plubis Unum does not mean from many, one to do what he wants.  Yet, this is the way that Barack Obama operates.  He has taken the great stature and privilege of being the leader of the United States of America down to a level that has never been seen before.   The blaming, the arrogant flippant remarks about those that disagree with him, the name-calling, the forcing of legislation that the majority in the country clearly does not want, the constant use of a crisis as a chance to push his agenda, his desire to force his will on states that have a right to protect themselves, his indifference to states that are in need of government help, the lack of understanding he has of our enemies, his “chip on the shoulder” approach to our allies, the rewarding of his buddies and ideological friends with positions high in his administration, and his complete inability for even one second to understand the mind, beliefs and daily struggles of everyday Americans are examples of his disdain for this country and the people who live in it.

I have yet to see anything that I would be proud of that he has done as our President.  I did not vote for him, but he is our President, and I have tried to find something that I can stand with him on.  I have nothing.  I am not the only one who feels this way and this feeling is not only in those that did not vote for him, but now in many that did.  What makes this so sad, and such a dark time for our country is Barack Obama doesn’t care about that.  What he wants is all that matters to him and he will get it however he can, even if he destroys the United States in the process.

We must remember E Pluribus Unum.  From many, one great nation was formed.  Now we must understand from many, one great nation can be saved.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.): I might ask have you had a chance to review the new law that was passed by the state of Arizona?

Secretary Janet Napolitano: I have not reviewed it in detail. I certainly know of it, senator.

Sen. McCain: So you’re not prepared to make a judgment on it?

Secretary Napolitano: Senator, that is – not a law – let me just say this, as you know, and are well aware, that’s not the kind of law I would have signed.

Sen. McCain: For what reason?

Secretary Napolitano: Well because I believe that it’s a bad law enforcement law. I believe it mandates and requires local law enforcement – it puts them in a position many do not want to be placed in. When I was dealing with laws of that ilk, most of the law enforcement organizations in Arizona — at that time — were opposed to such legislation

Sen. McCain: Well, I’d be pleased – maybe in writing – to hear what specific aspect of the law would impede or harm law enforcement, since the majority of law enforcement in Arizona strongly supports this legislation, and unfortunately, both the president of the United States and – the president of the United States portrayed it as a – that someone can’t even go out for ice cream without being harassed, which is one of the more outrageous statements I’ve ever heard. And now our own attorney general has, after condemning the law, said that he hadn’t even read it. This is an important issue not just in Arizona, but around this country. I would hope that we would at least have a decison on whether the Guard is going to be sent to the border and I would like to have specifics, if you get time, and I know that it’s not in your area of expertise anymore, but I know also, as the former governor of the state, you have a specific interest in what particular aspects of that law that you would find objectionable. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

She hasn’t read the bill. It doesn’t matter if it is a 10 page bill, a 2 page bill or a 2000 page bill, if Obama and his friends don’t like it, they will portray it however they want without reading one word of it. We once again see the true colors of those serving Obama and of Obama himself.

In television interviews over the weekend, Attorney General Eric Holder warned that Arizona’s new anti-illegal immigration law could lead to racial profiling and might prompt Latinos to stop cooperating with police. However, it emerged at a House hearing Thursday that Holder hasn’t actually read the statute.

“I have not had a chance to. I’ve glanced at it. I have not read it,” Holder acknowledged in response to questions from Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas).

“It’s ten pages. It’s a lot shorter than the health care bill, which was 2,000 pages long. I’ll give you my copy of it, if you would like to — to have a copy,” Poe quipped during the House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing.

The Arizona law passed last month calls for checks on individuals’ immigration status after any “lawful contact” with police if there is reasonable suspicion they’re not legally in the country. President Barack Obama, Holder and other administration officials have expressed concern that the law could lead to Americans of Hispanic descent being stopped by police. Latino groups are organizing boycotts of the state.

“The concern I have about the law that they have passed is that I think it has the possibility of leading to racial profiling and putting a wedge between law enforcement and a community that would, in fact, be profiled,” Holder said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet The Press.” “People in that community are less likely then to cooperate with people in law enforcement, less likely to share information, less likely to be witnesses in a case that law enforcement is trying to solve.”

Holder said Thursday he’s asked a team of advisers from Justice and the Department of Homeland Security to review the law for him. He said he expects to issue a pronouncement on the Arizona law “relatively soon.”

“I would hope that there’s one thing that we can do working together as we go forward that speaks to what the Bible tells us about the dignity and worth of every person and that is on the subject of immigration, because I think the Church is going to have to play a very major role in how we, in how people are treated.

The cardinals, the archbishops, the bishops that come to me and say ‘We want you to pass immigration reform’, and I say but I want you to speak about it from the pulpit.

I want you to instruct your, whatever the communication is — the people, some of them, oppose immigration reform are sitting in those pews and you have to tell them that this is a manifestation of our living the gospels. Our patron saint of San Francisco, St. Francis of Assisi, he said, ‘preach the gospel –sometimes use words.’ We need the words to be said because it isn’t being picked up automatically.”

So the Speaker of the House is currently soliciting church leaders to help the government pass immigration reform. She wants them to instruct and tell their church members who don’t agree with her that it is a “manifestation of our living the gospels” for them to back her immigration reform.

Those in the churches who aren’t picking up “automatically” the Pelosi/Obama stand on immigration reform need to have their minds changed by way of the gospels. Maybe she took her cue from the President and the conference call he had with hundreds of religious leaders to convince them to help him pass health care reform.

Perfect examples of a couple of opportunist at their best.

Remember during the Presidential campaign in 2008, there was a question and answer session between Obama, McCain and Pastor Rick Warren.  Obama went first and answered questions one on one with Warren and he was asked about abortion, “At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?”.  I, like many, was shocked to hear this answer from Obama, “Well I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade”.  I will never forget that quote for the rest of my life and immediately thought, he was toast.  Surely the American people would not vote for a man who would come up with an answer like that.  Well, here we are.

So it is not above his pay-grade to force all Americans to answer to the government on choices for their health care; to bow down to every leader he feels deserves it; to ridicule, dismiss and refer childishly to Republicans or any one that publicly opposes his policies; to turn NASA into a fourth rate space program that will now need to ask for and buy seats from the Russians to travel to low earth orbit and the International Space Station; to declare to the world that you can attack us with your biological and chemical weapons and we won’t retaliate with nuclear weapons; to ignore the threat of Iran and insist that “based on mutual interests and mutual respect” he can talk Ahmadinejad into giving up the nuclear bomb pursuit and if not, just use the ever effective sanctions; to completely destroy the relationship between the U.S. and Israel with utter disrespect to Prime Minister Netanyahu; to take over car companies and banks; and to constantly use class warfare to gain credibility for his tax hikes, increased government spending and intrusion in our lives.

We know why he answered the life question with that most ridiculous answer, because he didn’t want to show the American people who he really was and still is.  Those that were informed knew that he walked hand in hand with the National Organization for Women, NARAL, Planned Parenthood and every other left leaning pro-choice group out there.  You know the groups that support government run health-care that pays for abortions, yet at their abortion rallies they hold up signs that say “Keep your laws off my body” .  Now that just makes so much sense doesn’t it?

If he said a baby gets human rights at conception, then abortion would be murder.  If he said at birth, then the live babies that survived botched late term abortions  left to die in hospital rooms would be murder and in Illinois, Obama voted to kill the bill that would have required medical facilities to provide care to babies in those circumstances.  He also stated that if one of his daughters were to make a “mistake” he did not want her to be “punished” with a baby.

So this is how he views life.  Can’t say when he thinks it begins, but he sure as heck knows that if a baby was a ”mistake” then a woman should be able to take care of the “problem”.   What I find unbelievable about all this is he claimed while campaigning for the highest office of our nation that it was above his pay grade to answer when he thought life began, yet he was voted into an office where he can and will continue to change the lives of all the living in the United States.

If one can’t understand what is precious about life, when it starts, and doesn’t understand the freedoms and liberties that a life needs to be successful, then they have no business being the leader of those of us living it.  The self-involved, egotistical, elitists running our country right now want to transform it into a government run catastrophe because they believe they know what is best for you, the individual.  They want tell you how to live, learn, eat and work.  They want to slowly erode away your freedoms for their restrictions and rules.  The only choice they want you to have is the option to abort a baby.

I read this article by Sally Jenkins in the Washington Post and thought it was a good one to share.  If you take away the angry drumming beat of the feminists, you get some common sense.  Enjoy the Super Bowl!!

Tebow’s Super Bowl ad isn’t intolerant; its critics are

By Sally Jenkins
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 2, 2010

I’ll spit this out quick, before the armies of feminism try to gag me and strap electrodes to my forehead: Tim Tebow is one of the better things to happen to young women in some time. I realize this stance won’t endear me to the “Dwindling Organizations of Ladies in Lockstep,” otherwise known as DOLL, but I’ll try to pick up the shards of my shattered feminist credentials and go on.

As statements at Super Bowls go, I prefer the idea of Tebow’s pro-life ad to, say, Jim McMahon dropping his pants, as the former Chicago Bears quarterback once did in response to a question. We’re always harping on athletes to be more responsible and engaged in the issues of their day, and less concerned with just cashing checks. It therefore seems more than a little hypocritical to insist on it only if it means criticizing sneaker companies, and to stifle them when they take a stance that might make us uncomfortable.

I’m pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I’ve heard in the past week, I’ll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the “National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time.” For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

Tebow’s 30-second ad hasn’t even run yet, but it already has provoked “The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us” to reveal something important about themselves: They aren’t actually “pro-choice” so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell. She got pregnant in 1987, post-Roe v. Wade, and while on a Christian mission in the Philippines, she contracted a tropical ailment. Doctors advised her the pregnancy could be dangerous, but she exercised her freedom of choice and now, 20-some years later, the outcome of that choice is her beauteous Heisman Trophy winner son, a chaste, proselytizing evangelical.

Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn’t be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikinis selling beer is the right one. I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn’t.

There’s not enough space in the sports pages for the serious weighing of values that constitutes this debate, but surely everyone in both camps, pro-choice or pro-life, wishes the “need” for abortions wasn’t so great. Which is precisely why NOW is so wrong to take aim at Tebow’s ad.

Here’s what we do need a lot more of: Tebows. Collegians who are selfless enough to choose not to spend summers poolside, but travel to impoverished countries to dispense medical care to children, as Tebow has every summer of his career. Athletes who believe in something other than themselves, and are willing to put their backbone where their mouth is. Celebrities who are self-possessed and self-controlled enough to use their wattage to advertise commitment over decadence.

You know what we really need more of? Famous guys who aren’t embarrassed to practice sexual restraint, and to say it out loud. If we had more of those, women might have fewer abortions. See, the best way to deal with unwanted pregnancy is to not get the sperm in the egg and the egg implanted to begin with, and that is an issue for men, too — and they should step up to that.

“Are you saving yourself for marriage?” Tebow was asked last summer during an SEC media day.

“Yes, I am,” he replied.

The room fell into a hush, followed by tittering: The best college football player in the country had just announced he was a virgin. As Tebow gauged the reaction from the reporters in the room, he burst out laughing. They were a lot more embarrassed than he was.

“I think y’all are stunned right now!” he said. “You can’t even ask a question!”

That’s how far we’ve come from any kind of sane viewpoint about star athletes and sex. Promiscuity is so the norm that if a stud isn’t shagging everything in sight, we feel faintly ashamed for him.

Obviously Tebow can make people uncomfortable, whether it’s for advertising his chastity, or for wearing his faith on his face via biblical citations painted in his eye-black. Hebrews 12:12, his cheekbones read during the Florida State game: “Therefore strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees.” His critics find this intrusive, and say the Super Bowl is no place for an argument of this nature. “Pull the ad,” NOW President Terry O’Neill said. “Let’s focus on the game.”

Trouble is, you can’t focus on the game without focusing on the individuals who play it — and that is the genius of Tebow’s ad. The Super Bowl is not some reality-free escape zone. Tebow himself is an inescapable fact: Abortion doesn’t just involve serious issues of life, but of potential lives, Heisman trophy winners, scientists, doctors, artists, inventors, Little Leaguers — who would never come to be if their birth mothers had not wrestled with the stakes and chosen to carry those lives to term. And their stories are every bit as real and valid as the stories preferred by NOW.

Let me be clear again: I couldn’t disagree with Tebow more. It’s my own belief that the state has no business putting its hand under skirts. But I don’t care that we differ. Some people will care that the ad is paid for by Focus on the Family, a group whose former spokesman, James Dobson, says loathsome things about gays. Some will care that Tebow is a creationist. Some will care that CBS has rejected a gay dating service ad. None of this is the point. CBS owns its broadcast and can run whatever advertising it wants, and Tebow has a right to express his beliefs publicly. Just as I have the right to reject or accept them after listening — or think a little more deeply about the issues. If the pro-choice stance is so precarious that a story about someone who chose to carry a risky pregnancy to term undermines it, then CBS is not the problem.

Tebow’s ad, by the way, never mentions abortion; like the player himself, it’s apparently soft-spoken. It simply has the theme “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.” This is what NOW has labeled “extraordinarily offensive and demeaning.” But if there is any demeaning here, it’s coming from NOW, via the suggestion that these aren’t real questions, and that we as a Super Bowl audience are too stupid or too disinterested to handle them on game day.

Other articles of interest:

The Super-Sized Census Boondoggle

Look who’s opposing EPA’s war on carbon now

Landrieu to Republicans: Shut up about my Louisiana Purchase

Video: If famous filmmakers directed the Super Bowl

THE OBVIOUS DEFICIT-CLOSERS