Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Texans boot Planned Parenthood

Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 12/30/2008 8:00:00 AM

Planned Parenthood has been shut down in the Texas panhandle.

American Life League's (ALL) Stop Planned Parenthood, or Stopp International, says it took a long time, but their campaign against Planned Parenthood finally got some results. "For 12 years in the Texas panhandle, there has been a fight against Planned Parenthood," he notes. "Planned Parenthood, in 1997, operated 19 clinics in the Texas panhandle."

Then the state reduced funding for the organization, and pro-life workers also continued in their efforts to shut Planned Parenthood's doors. "And as of December 31, there will no longer be any Planned Parenthood offices in the Texas panhandle," Sedlak explains. "They will all be gone."

The two remaining clinics in Amarillo have disaffiliated with the national organization. Sedlak says other cities can accomplish the same goal if they are determined, and information on that is available on the Stopp website.

Ammunition Accountability Act

Well... they can't take our guns because they are Constitutionally protected, but they are useless without the non-protected ammunition.  Apparently, ammo, isn't protected by the Constitution.  Please start writing to legislators and Congressmen to get them to stop this invasive Act.  It's just one more freedom taken away.  This is the sample legislation from California that is also being considered by 18 other states, so far.

Ammunition Accountability Act
SAMPLE LEGISLATION

An ACT relating to firearms and ammunition; requiring [AGENCY] to establish a statewide
database to track coded ammunition manufactured and sold for handguns and assault rifles.

Section 1. Legislative Findings.
The State Legislature hereby finds the following:
Each year in the United States, more than 30% of all homicides that involve a gun go
unsolved.
Handgun ammunition accounts for 80% of all ammunition sold in the United States.
Current technology for matching a bullet used in a crime to the gun that fired it has
worked moderately well for years, but presupposes that the weapon was recovered by
law enforcement.
Bullet coding is a new and effective way for law enforcement to quickly identify persons
of interest in gun crime investigations.

Section 2. Definitions.
For purposes of this chapter, “coded ammunition” means a bullet carrying a
unique identifier that has been applied by etching onto the base of the bullet projectile.

Section 3. Prohibition on possession or sale of non-coded ammunition.
1. All handgun and assault weapon ammunition manufactured or sold in the state after
January 1, 2009, shall be coded by the manufacturer.
a. The calibers covered by the coding requirement shall include: [LIST
CALIBERS].
2. No later than January 1, 2011, all non-coded ammunition for the calibers listed in this
chapter, whether owned by private citizens or retail outlets, must be disposed.

Section 4. Authority to establish an Ammunition Coding Database.
1. [AGENCY] shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining an Ammunition Coding
Database (ACD) containing the following information:
a. Manufacturer registry – Manufacturers shall:
i. Register with [AGENCY] in a manner prescribed by the department
through rule; and
ii. Maintain records on the business premises for a period of seven
years concerning all sales, loans, and transfers of ammunition, to,
from, or within the state.
b. Vendor registry – Vendors shall
i. Register with [AGENCY] in a manner prescribed by the department
through rule; and
ii. Record the following information in a format prescribed by the
[AGENCY]:
a. The date of the transaction.
b. The name of the transferee.
c. The purchaser’s driver’s license number or other
government issued identification card number
d. The date of birth of the purchaser.
e. The unique identifier of all handgun ammunition or
bullets transferred.
f. All other information prescribed by [AGENCY].
iii. Maintain records on the business premises for a period of three
years from the date of the recorded purchase.
2. To the greatest extent possible or practical, the ACD shall be built within the framework
of existing firearms databases. The ACD shall be operational no later than January 1,
2009.
3. Privacy of individuals is of the utmost importance. Access to information in the ACSD is
reserved for key law enforcement personnel and to be released only in connection with a
criminal investigation.

NEW SECTION: Section 5. Penalties
1. Any vendor that willfully fails to comply with, or falsifies the records required to be kept
by this bill is guilty of a public offense punishable by imprisonment not to exceed one
year, and a fine of $1,000.
2. Any manufacturer that fails to comply with the provisions of this section shall be liable for
a civil fine of not more than one $1,000 for a first violation, not more than five $5,000 for
a second violation, and not more $10,000 for a third and subsequent violation.
3. Any person who willfully destroys, obliterates, or otherwise renders unreadable, the
serialization required pursuant to this bill, on any bullet or assembled ammunition is
punishable by imprisonment not to exceed one year, and a fine of $1,000.

NEW SECTION: Section 6. Funding.
1. Establishing and maintaining the ACD shall be funded by an end-user fee not to
exceed [COST NUMBER, ESTIMATED AT $0.005 PER BULLET OR ROUND
OF AMMUNITION].
2. There is hereby established the Coded Ammunition Fund for deposit of the end-
user fees described in this section. Moneys in the fund, upon appropriation, shall
be available to the [AGENCY] for infrastructure, implementation, operational,
enforcement, and future development costs of this chapter.
3. Ammunition manufacturers based within this state may submit a one-time tax
credit application for cost of purchasing ammunition coding equipment. All
applications must be submitted by January 1, 2009.


-- END --


NOTE: To view a more detailed version of Ammunition Coding Database legislation that was proposed in other
states, visit www.ammunitionaccountability.org. Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs can also
provide drafting guidance. Contact Briahna Taylor at (253) 620-6640 or btaylor@gth-gov.com

Sunday, December 28, 2008

Interesting Opinion Article About Obama and Election

A plan to survive the Obama years
By Z. DWIGHT BILLINGSLY

Here is the story.

As Jack Buck once said, "I don't believe what I just saw!" Americans on
Nov. 4 turned over control of the United States of America to a management
team possessing no executive experience, having never run, as I liked to
put it, nothing.

Well, Americans usually get the government they deserve, and I urge you all
to get ready for this 21st century version of amateur hour. It's going to
be an embarrassing and dangerous time for America and American ideals.
There won't be much, I'm afraid, to be thankful for.

Bill Kristol, writing in The Weekly Standard, reminded me that every 16
years we get a Democrat president with no experience in national security
or international affairs who's elected after Republican presidents have
made and kept America safe: After Eisenhower, we got Kennedy; after
Nixon/Ford, we got Carter; after Reagan/Bush, we got Clinton. And after
Bush II, we get Barack Obama.

Every strong Republican president who succeeded in protecting America has
allowed Americans to become complacent about national security, thereby
opening the door for weak Democrats who allowed enemies to threaten and
attack America without penalty. Obama will be no different, and Americans
will have to learn again that there can be no economic security without
national security.

That's not to say that Obama's election doesn't come with a couple of
interesting side effects. For example, henceforth no black man in America
may be called unqualified for any job that he might seek, no matter his
prior education or experience level. Want to be a nuclear scientist but
lack a Ph.D. in physics? If the applicant is a black man, it's no problem.
Just offer hope to the profession and promise change from all those stuffy
theorems that have given the discipline its structure over the years, and
you're in.

That's on a par with throwing out the fact that tax cuts lead to more
investment, job creation and increasing government revenues, just because
the black man, that transcendent agent of change, says it's OK.

Another side effect has been white people contacting me to say that I
should be proud to see a black man become president. Could there be a
comment that is more condescending, more insulting, than that? If I
believed that in America a black man could not be president, then I would
be proud to see any black man elected president. But because I always have
believed that nothing in America prevents a black man from becoming
president or anything else he wants to be, I can be embarrassed, not proud,
to see someone as unqualified and inexperienced as Obama become president.

Jackie Robinson, the first black man in modern-day major league baseball,
illustrates my point. He was the right man with the right combination of
talent, temperament and character at the right time to be successful for
that important "first." Obama? An empty suit who will fail.

I'm going to approach the Obama years the same way liberals handled the
Iraq war. Just as they claimed to support our troops while opposing the
war, I'm going to support my country while opposing Obama and what he
stands for in every way that I can. It's only four years and with the
astute Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky as Senate minority leader,
Republicans can stop the Obama extremists for two years until mid-term
elections in 2010 give Republicans the boost in Congress that inevitably
will come.

And in 2012, we'll have Sarah Palin to clean up Obama's mess and remind us
again of America's exceptionalism.

Z. Dwight Billingsly is a principal of Branford Gateway Investment Co. and
a financial services industry specialist for the Missouri Department of
Economic Development. He serves as co-chair of the Missouri Spectrum
political action committee, an auxiliary of the Missouri Republican Party.

E-mail: zdbcomment@gmail.com

U.S. sides with traditional marriage...for now

Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 12/26/2008 9:30:00 AM

The United States has refused to sign on to a United Nations declaration on sexual orientation.

In all, 67 nations have signed the declaration submitted by France. Piero Tozzi of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, or C-FAM, explains the document's assertions. "It basically called upon recognition of two new categories in human rights, one based on sexual orientation and the other one on gender identity," he notes.

Tozzi says the statement's purpose is to decriminalize homosexual conduct. For now, he contends there is no cause for alarm, but the situation could change in the future.

"There is no binding impact. It is purely a moral statement, but once it's in the UN system as it were, it will likely be referenced by advocates," he points out. "And the statements from the French government official Rama Yade said that this is not the end; it is only the beginning."

In spite of homosexual marriage being illegal in 70 nations, Tozzi believes it will achieve international acceptance eventually. He adds that while the United States did not sign on to the declaration, the incoming Obama administration might think differently.

Sunday, December 21, 2008

Obama planning billion-dollar 'bailout' for abortion industry

Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 12/18/2008 6:00:00 AM

A pro-life group in Washington has launched a campaign to oppose what it calls president-elect Barack Obama's planned $1.5 billion "bailout" of the abortion industry.

Last week, the Obama-Biden Transition Project posted a report on its website that calls for dramatic policy reversals on abortion, including $1 billion in taxpayer money for international abortion groups like Planned Parenthood. The report, titled "Advancing Reproductive Rights and Health in a New Administration," also calls for a 133-percent increase in funding for the Title X program, which funds Planned Parenthood clinics across the country.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, is hoping a Republican-led effort in the Senate will block Obama's plan to substantially increase taxpayer funding of the abortion industry.

"This billion-dollar bailout of the abortion industry comes at a time, number one, when the economy is suffering dramatically with true need. And number two, it communicates an incredible depth of arrogance, especially when you consider that the vast majority of Americans -- men and women, no matter who you talk to -- they don't believe that people who don't believe in abortion should be funding it," she contends. "Most Americans don't believe that we should be funding abortions, especially in a time of economic crisis."

The Susan B. Anthony List has started a "Stop the Abortion Bailout" campaign designed to recruit thousands of activists to send letters to their senators "with the goal of securing the 41 votes necessary to sustain a Senate filibuster of the abortion bailout."

Jerry Brown is at it again... California Attorney-General turns against Prop 8

Lisa Leff - Associated Press Writer - 12/20/2008 7:05:00 AM

SAN FRANCISCO - California's attorney general has changed his position on the state's new same-sex marriage ban and is now joining forces with homosexual activists to overturn the results of Proposition 8.

In a dramatic reversal, Attorney General Jerry Brown filed a legal brief saying the measure that amended the California Constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman is itself unconstitutional because it deprives a minority group of a fundamental right. Earlier, Brown had said he would defend the ballot measure against legal challenges from gay marriage supporters.

But Brown said he reached a different conclusion "upon further reflection and a deeper probing into all the aspects of our Constitution.

"It became evident that the Article 1 provision guaranteeing basic liberty, which includes the right to marry, took precedence over the initiative," he said in an interview Friday night. "Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote."

Brown, who served as governor from 1975 to 1983, is considering seeking the office again in 2010. After California voters passed Proposition 8 on Nov. 4, Brown said he personally voted against it but would fight to uphold it as the state's top lawyer.

He submitted his brief in one of the three legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought by same-sex marriage supporters. The measure, a constitutional amendment that passed with 52 percent of the vote, overruled the state Supreme Court decision last spring that briefly legalized gay marriage in the nation's most populous state.

Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, called the attorney general's change of strategy "a major development."

"The fact that after looking at this he shifted his position and is really bucking convention by not defending Prop. 8 signals very clearly that this proposition can not be defended," Minter said.

The sponsors of Proposition 8 argued for the first time Friday that the court should undo the marriages of the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters banned gay marriage at the ballot box last month.

The Yes on 8 campaign filed a brief telling the court that because the new law holds that only marriages between a man and a woman are recognized or valid in California, the state can no longer recognize the existing same-sex unions.

"Proposition 8's brevity is matched by its clarity. There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions or exclusions," reads the brief co-written by Kenneth Starr, dean of Pepperdine University's law school and a former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.

Both Brown and gay rights groups maintain that the gay marriage ban may not be applied retroactively.

Starr's co-counsel Andrew Pugno said Brown's decision to challenge the voter-approved measure and the argument advanced by the attorney general was "totally unprecedented."

"His legal duty as attorney general of the state is to defend initiatives passed by the voters," he said.

The state Supreme Court could hear arguments in the litigation in March. The measure's backers announced Friday that Starr had signed on as their lead counsel and would argue the cases.

What news is your child getting at school?

Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 12/20/2008 5:20:00 AM

Parents Television Council is discussing the strengths and pitfalls Channel One news.

Channel One, a television network targeting teens, has been pumped into middle and high schools across America since 1990. Schools enter contracts with Channel One in exchange for media equipment, and those contracts require the network to be aired throughout the school.

Gavin McKernan, a spokesperson with the Parents Television Council (PTC), says although Channel One delivers important news to students, it often adds inappropriate content to its program.

"Unfortunately this station, a lot of times, has been marketing things that are not appropriate for youth," he contends. "And...on their website, for instance, [they] have been marketing for shows like 90210 and Gossip Girl and these [types of shows]."

McKernan also notes Channel One is heavy on advertising and even promotes some things that parents might not want their children to see.

According to McKernan, PTC does not receive many complaints because parents, as well as the PTC, are barred from monitoring the station's content. He adds that PTC has asked to monitor Channel One, but has been denied.

The company that owns Channel One also owns Bus Radio. Bus Radio offers a similar contract in that bus drivers are required to have the station on at all times. McKernan says some bus drivers have complained that they do not like the music or ads, but are forced to keep it on because of the contract.

He believes both Channel One and Bus Radio represent a perversion of the school system in that they basically use a captive audience in order to increase market share. McKernan says parents need to have more control over what their children are exposed to at school.