Pray for The President, and Adopt a Troop

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

"It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of
Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits,
and humbly to implore his protection and favors." --George
Washington

From PresidentialPrayerTeam.org's information page:

ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL PRAYER TEAM

Many across America and Americans in other countries are heeding the call to pray for our President. In a short time since the September 11 terrorist attacks, well over a million people have registered their promise to pray daily for the President. That number is increasing by the thousands of new team members every month. News of The Presidential Prayer Team is spreading rapidly throughout America as people march to the tempo of an almost forgotten tune, "God Bless America."

The independent, nonprofit organization behind The Presidential Prayer Team, has a singular purpose: to encourage Americans to pray daily for the President.

There is no fee or obligation for joining. Members receive a handsome free window decal and prayer updates by email. Anyone choosing to remember the President in daily prayer is urged to sign up.

The Presidential Prayer Team has now grown to more than 2.8 million members, and its mission has never been more important. Americans should remember that our nation exists at God's sufferance. Our enemies did not use nuclear weapons on 9-11 for one reason alone: they did not have them. When they obtain these weapons, only divine intervention, and divine guidance for our leaders, will prevent their eventual use. That's why prayers of wisdom and courage for President Bush, and his successors, are sorely needed.

You can join the team by clicking on "Join PPT" at the Presidential Prayer Team Website.

You can also adopt an individual U.S. troop from the site's database of military members who have requested prayer.

Weakness is Provocative, Part 2
Topic: World War IV
(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

In an insightful piece in National Review Online, Barbara Lerner reveals why the State Department should not be running the Iraq occupation, and why the military should:

Rumsfeld's War, Powell's Occupation

The latest post-hoc conventional wisdom on Iraq is that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld won the war but lost the occupation. There are two problems with this analysis (which comes, most forcefully, from The Weekly Standard). First, it's not Rumsfeld's occupation; it's Colin Powell's and George Tenet's. Second, although it's painfully obvious that much is wrong with this occupation, it's simple-minded to assume that more troops will fix it. More troops may be needed now, but more of the same will not do the job. Something different is needed and was, right from the start.

A Rumsfeld occupation would have been different, and still might be. Rumsfeld wanted to put an Iraqi face on everything at the outset -- not just on the occupation of Iraq, but on its liberation too. That would have made a world of difference.

Rumsfeld's plan was to train and equip -- and then transport to Iraq -- some 10,000 Shia and Sunni freedom fighters led by Shia exile leader Ahmed Chalabi and his cohorts in the INC, the multi-ethnic anti-Saddam coalition he created. There, they would have joined with thousands of experienced Kurdish freedom fighters, ably led, politically and militarily, by Jalal Talabani and Massoud Barzani. Working with our special forces, this trio would have sprung into action at the start of the war, striking from the north, helping to drive Baathist thugs from power, and joining Coalition forces in the liberation of Baghdad. That would have put a proud, victorious, multi- ethnic Iraqi face on the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and it would have given enormous prestige to three stubbornly independent and unashamedly pro-American Iraqi freedom fighters: Chalabi, Talabani, and Barzani.

Jay Garner, the retired American general Rumsfeld chose to head the civilian administration of the new Iraq, planned to capitalize on that prestige immediately by appointing all three, along with six others, to head up Iraq's new transitional government. He planned to cede power to them in a matter of weeks not months or years and was confident that they would work with him, not against him, because two of them already had. General Garner, after all, is the man who headed the successful humanitarian rescue mission that saved the Kurds in the disastrous aftermath of Gulf War I, after the State Department-CIA crowd and like thinkers in the first Bush administration betrayed them. Kurds are not a small minority and they remember. The hero's welcome they gave General Garner when he returned to Iraq last April made that crystal clear.

Finally, Secretary Rumsfeld wanted to cut way down on the infiltration of Syrian and Iranian agents and their foreign terrorist recruits, not just by trying to catch them at the border -- a losing game, given the length of those borders -- but by pursuing them across the border into Syria to strike hard at both the terrorists and their Syrian sponsors, a move that would have forced Iran as well as Syria to reconsider the price of trying to sabotage the reconstruction of Iraq.

None of this happened, however, because State and CIA fought against Rumsfeld's plans every step of the way. . . .

Men like Chalabi, Talabani, and Barzani have nothing but contempt for [U.N. envoy] Mr. Brahimi, the U.N., and old Europe. They know perfectly well who their real enemies are, and they understand that only decisive military action against them can create the kind of order that is a necessary precondition for freedom and democracy. They see, as our State Department Arabists do not, that we will never be loved, in Iraq or anywhere else in the Middle East, until we are respected, and that the month we have wasted negotiating with the butchers of Fallujah has earned us only contempt, frightening our friends and encouraging our mortal enemies.

The damage Brahimi will do to the hope of a new day in Iraq and in the Middle East is so profound that it would not be worth it even if empowering him would bring in a division of French troops to reinforce ours in Iraq. In fact, it will do no such thing. Behind all the bluster and moral preening, the plain truth is that the French have starved their military to feed their bloated, top-heavy welfare state for decades. They couldn't send a division like the one the Brits sent, even if they wanted to (they don't). Belgium doesn't want to help us either, nor Spain, nor Russia, because these countries are not interested in fighting to create a new Middle East. They're fighting to make the most advantageous deals they can with the old Middle East, seeking to gain advantages at our expense, and at the expense of the oppressed in Iraq, Iran, and every other Middle Eastern country where people are struggling to throw off the shackles of Islamofascist oppression.

Use our Take Action page to send President Bush, Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld a link to the Lerner piece. And be sure to excerpt the last paragraph:

It is not yet too late for us to recognize these facts and act on them by dismissing Brahimi, putting Secretary Rumsfeld and our Iraqi friends fully in charge at last, and unleashing our Marines to make an example of Fallujah. And when al Jazeera screams "massacre," instead of cringing and apologizing, we need to stand tall and proud and tell the world: Lynch mobs like the one that slaughtered four Americans will not be tolerated. Order will restored, and Iraqis who side with us will be protected and rewarded.

S. 2056 Stalled
Topic: Legislation
(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

From the Parents Television Council:

We urgently need your help. As you know, Congress is considering legislation that would severely punish broadcasters who violate indecency laws. Unfortunately that legislation has stalled in the US Senate. If the Senate doesn't vote on this bill, S. 2056, in the next few days, it will likely die.

We need you to take immediate action to tell your Senators and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to vote on S. 2056 now! The public is outraged over the Super Bowl halftime show, the F-word on television broadcasts, and the graphic sexual content on morning drive-time radio. If we are to be successful in our efforts to reduce the obscene, indecent, and profane broadcasts from the public airwaves, then the FCC must have the power to impose meaningful fines and/or revoke station licenses of broadcasters who break the law. Don't let the broadcasters sweep our national outrage under the rug.

The alert includes links to talking points, and to contact information for all senators.

The Adoption Information Act, H.R. 1229
Topic: Legislation
(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

From the Family Research Council:

Pro-abortion advocates constantly scream about protecting women's health through access to "family planning services," although what they really mean is access to abortion. There does not seem to be real concern on behalf of abortion advocates to giving women real choices with real information.

Women seeking family planning services in federally funded health clinics rarely receive all the information necessary for them to make an informed decision. Information on adoption and referrals for adoption services are rarely discussed at all, and when they are, that information is often inaccurate and incomplete.

To remedy this and help women be educated on the resources available to them Congresswoman Jo Ann Davis (R-VA) has introduced the Adoption Information Act, H.R. 1229. This bill would require all family planning clinics that accept Title X funds to provide a detailed pamphlet of adoption information to all people seeking family planning services.

Specifically, this pamphlet must include comprehensive contact information for all adoption centers in the appropriate state. The legislation aims to ensure that women are provided with accurate and complete information to make informed decisions.

The alert links to the FRC's congressional directory, or you can use our Take Action page to ask your Representative to support this bill.

And on the same topic . . .

Wanna know if your favorite celebrity marched in support of sucking the brain out of a nine month old fetus? Click here.

Become Mega-Informed With MegaVote

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

Capitol Advantage's Congress.org site offers an absolute essential for any political devotions practitioner:

Track your senators' and representative's votes by e-mail!

Each week (that Congress is in session) you will receive:

Key votes by your two Senators and U.S. Representative.

Links to send e-mail to your members of Congress using pre-
addressed forms.

Upcoming votes for your review and links to offer e-mail input before
they vote.

Go thou now therefore and sign up!

Weakness is Provocative
Topic: World War IV

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

As is so often the case, a Wall Street Journal editorial is spot-on in assessing a crisis:

The Fallujah Stakes

The insurgents understand guns, not diplomacy.

. . . Sooner or later the Baath remnants, jihadists and criminals who have used Fallujah as a sanctuary have to be killed. They can't be bargained with, they can't be reasoned with, because for them a peaceful transition to Iraqi control after June 30 means defeat. If the estimated 2,000 or so insurgents decide to allow Marine patrols, it will be because they have concluded it is safer to melt away to kill Americans another day rather than fight to the death in Fallujah now.

The killers facing Marines in Fallujah are those who melted away a year ago as coalition forces closed on Baghdad. Rather than fight and die then, they retreated to the Sunni heartland to regroup, rearm and organize the murder of both coalition soldiers and the Iraqis who are cooperating with us. The U.S. didn't pursue those Saddamists at the time, and it decided in later months to let Fallujah more or less alone. We now know this was a mistake, and the Marine presence is a recognition that the city can no longer be tolerated as a terror sanctuary. . . .


By the way, it hardly helps to have United Nations envoy Lakhdar Brahimi publicly warning the U.S. not to defeat insurgents who are killing Americans. He repeated again yesterday that "In this situation, there is no military solution," and portrayed any U.S. attack in Fallujah as unjustified. This rhetoric, amplified by al-Jazeera, will only make it more likely that any offensive in Fallujah would be misinterpreted by other Iraqis.

Mr. Brahimi is the man Mr. Bremer and National Security Council staffer Robert Blackwill have sold to President Bush as the key to a sound political transition in Iraq. But three times in the past two weeks he has made public remarks damaging to coalition progress and U.S. interests in the region.

He told French radio last Wednesday that, "There is no doubt that the great poison in the region is this Israeli policy of domination and the suffering imposed on the Palestinians, as well as the perception by the body of the population in the region, and beyond, of the injustice of this policy and the equally unjust support of the United States for this policy." U.S. "poison?" Is Condoleezza Rice paying attention?

The danger with delay in Fallujah and Mr. Brahimi's comments is that they will be interpreted by Iraqis as a sign that the U.S. is losing its resolve and simply wants out. Perhaps caution in Fallujah makes sense at this moment, but sooner or later the insurgents have to be defeated, and at the point of a gun, not by diplomacy. If we're not prepared to do that, Mr. Bush might as well order the troops home now.

Use our Take Action page to communicate to President Bush, Dr. Rice and Donald Rumsfeld that, as the WSJ asserts, "sooner or later the insurgents have to be defeated, and at the point of a gun, not by diplomacy."

The Pro-Abortion Feminist Scouts

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

Back in February, Hans Zeiger penned a great piece on the Girl Scouts' transformation into what he termed "a pro-abortion, feminist training corps." Recently the Family Research Council set up a CapWiz action alert focusing on the Girl Scouts' relationship with Planned Parenthood and the distribution of sexually explicit materials to girls as young as ten:

Over the past few weeks, parents have been furious after learning of a cozy alliance between the Girl Scouts and Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest provider of abortions.

The Girl Scouts have been giving their seal of approval to an explicit sex ed pamphlet, distributed by Planned Parenthood, to children as young as 10 years-old. The literature includes information on masturbation as well as diagrams of adults having sex and a boy putting on a condom.

Planned Parenthood is not only the nation's most prolific provider of abortions, they are inundating young children with graphic information about sex that has no place in the hands of a 10 year-old. Fifth-grade girls do not need Planned Parenthood telling them about sex, condoms and diseases.

Send an email to Girl Scouts' CEO Kathy Cloninger and tell her to end the Girl Scouts-Planned Parenthood alliance!

STOPP International also has a page to help you contact your local Girl Scout council to determine if it has a relationship with Planned Parenthood.

Punditry and News

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

Charles Krauthammer exposes John Kerry as a man with no plan: Going Back to the UN? For What?:

No one can understand how, with the president being pummeled daily on the front pages by Richard Clarke, the Sept. 11 hearings, the Woodward book, and the eruption of Iraq into open warfare again, Bush nonetheless has gained over Kerry on the issue of national security.

The answer is simple: Americans are a serious people, war is a serious business, and what John Kerry is offering is simply not serious. Americans may be unsure whether Bush has a plan for success in Iraq. But they sure as hell know that going to U.N. headquarters, visiting foreign capitals and promising lots of jaw-jaw is no plan at all.

The "This is London" section of the Evening Standard takes a revealing -- and revolting -- look at Terror On The Dole:

Four young British Muslims in their twenties - a social worker, an IT specialist, a security guard and a financial adviser - occupy a table at a fast-food chicken restaurant in Luton. Perched on their plastic chairs, wolfing down their dinner, they seem just ordinary young men. Yet out of their mouths pour heated words of revolution. "As far as I'm concerned, when they bomb London, the bigger the better," says Abdul Haq, the social worker. "I know it's going to happen because Sheikh bin Laden said so. Like Bali, like Turkey, like Madrid - I pray for it, I look forward to the day."

"Pass the brown sauce, brother," says Abu Malaahim, the IT specialist, devouring his chicken and chips. "I agree with you, brother," says Abu Yusuf, the earnest-looking financial adviser sitting opposite. "I would like to see the Mujahideen coming into London and killing thousands, whether with nuclear weapons or germ warfare. And if they need a safehouse, they can stay in mine - and if they need some fertiliser [for a bomb], I'll tell them where to get it."

Oppose California A.B. 1967

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

The Campaign for California Families has set up a comprehensive "take action page" for opposing California A.B. 1967:

April 20, 2004: Today, at an early morning hearing at the State Capitol in Sacramento, the Assembly Judiciary Committee passed AB 1967, which would create full-blown homosexual "marriage" and reject 4.6 million Californians who voted for Proposition 22, the Protection of Marriage Initiative, just four years ago. AB 1967 advances to the Appropriations Committee.

The vote in the Democrat-controlled committee was 8 to 3 to pass the "gay marriage" bill. Voting "yes" on AB 1967 were all 8 Democrats present, including four Democrats who are termed-out of office: Ellen Corbett of San Leandro (chair), Hannah-Beth Jackson of Santa Barbara, John Laird of Santa Cruz, Lloyd Levine of Van Nuys, Sally Lieber of San Jose, John Longville of San Bernardino, Cindy Montanez of San Fernando, and Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento. Democrat Loni Hancock of Berkeley was absent. Voting "no" on AB 1967 were all three Republicans on the committee: Tom Harman of Huntington Beach, Patricia Bates of Laguna Niguel, and Ken Maddox of Costa Mesa.

Testifying against AB 1967 in the 90-minute hearing were representatives from Campaign for California Families, Traditional Values Coalition, Capitol Resource Institute, Responsible Citizens, and the California Catholic Conference.

Randy Thomasson, Executive Director of Campaign for California Families, was questioned by and sparred with pro-homosexual-marriage Democrats Darryl Steinberg and Lloyd Levine. Holding up a blue-and-yellow Proposition 22 yard sign to remind the committee that 61.4 percent of Californians voted in March 2000 to demand marriage be protected, Thomasson told the committee, "AB 1967 is illegal, unconstitutional and immoral. This bill turns marriage upside down and utterly rejects the vote of the people to protect marriage for a man and a woman. This should have never been introduced or even had a hearing. AB 1967 is corrupt and any legislator who votes for AB 1967 is corrupt too."

The Alert has all the information necessary to call, fax, e-mail or snail mail every California legislator, each legislator on the Assembly Judiciary Committee, the Assembly Speaker and Governor Schwarzenegger.

Support The Troops Central

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

The Department of Defense's DefendAmerica.mil site has a page aggregating the various military support programs:

How You Can Help

Thousands of Americans are asking what they can do to show their support for service members, especially those serving overseas in this time of war.

Listed here are Web sites for several organizations that are sponsoring programs for members of the armed forces overseas. While it would be inappropriate for the Defense Department to endorse any specifically, service members do value and appreciate this support.

The page includes a nice collection of organizations worthy of your time and financial contributions. At a minimum, be sure to add your electronic signature to the thank you note to the troops.


Quality Punditry

More fine Dennis Prager analysis: People Are Beautiful, The World Stinks

News

A warning from Family News in Focus: Hollywood Readies Liberal Film Blitz

A least there is a new weapon for parents who want to keep graphic violence, sexual content and objectionable language off their TV screens: ClearPlay. Too bad it doesn't filter out left-wing propaganda.

California Gas Tax Hike

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

Bad news for Californians from the National Taxpayers Union:

. . . [S]ome members of the California Legislature are seeking to add yet another ten cents per gallon by raising your gas taxes. That's a 55.5% increase in the taxes you currently pay. Of course, when the measure is debated on the floor of the Legislature, they could decide to increase the tax even more!

The politicians in Sacramento claim that they need more of your money to pay for transportation needs, which should have been funded under the terms of Proposition 42. Proposition 42, enacted through referendum in March 2002, sets aside a special transportation account which is supposedly funded from the present 18 cents per gallon tax.

Unfortunately for you and other California motorists, the Legislature concealed an escape clause in Proposition 42's fine print. Upon recommendation of the Governor and a 2/3 vote of both houses, Proposition 42's requirements can be suspended and the gasoline tax monies collected can be diverted into the General Fund. Former Governor Gray Davis proposed, and both Houses approved, a partial suspension of Proposition 42 in the two years since the measure was enacted.

State Senator Tom Torlakson (D-Antioch) is the proponent and driving force behind the new gas tax hike. He claims that nine of the ten cents collected will be used to build and maintain highways and city streets, while the remaining penny will be used for transportation-related environmental air impact programs.

But you and I know better. With the pols in Sacramento continually raiding voter-established transportation funds, you're still stuck in traffic jams while they claim they don't have enough money to solve the problems that they've made worse... Give them even more money and they'll simply waste that, too.

The NTU has set up an online petition, and you can also contact your California state legislators at the using the following links:

For All Assembly Members Websites and Emails please go to: http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/acsframeset7text.htm

To find your Assembly Member or Senator directly click this link and then enter your zip code: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html

New Nukes
Topic: Nuclear Terrorism

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

The Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com reports on canny analysis by the Defense Science Board:

Rethinking Armageddon - The Case for Low-Yield Nukes

No one likes to consider the possibility of nuclear war. But somebody's got to do it, and that sober duty fell recently to a special task force of the Defense Science Board, which has just recommended useful changes to the U.S. strategic arsenal to fit our post-September 11 world.

First we should note what the task force does not want to change--the high threshold for use of nuclear weapons. "It is, and will likely remain, American policy to keep the nuclear threshold high and to pursue non-nuclear attack options whenever possible. Nothing in our assessment or recommendations seeks to change that goal," the panel writes. "Nevertheless, in extreme circumstances, the president may have no choice but to turn to nuclear options."

The scenarios the task force envisions aren't, regrettably, all that extreme. High on the list would be eliminating an enemy's weapons of mass destruction before it has a chance to use them on us. (Think rogue states and assorted terrorist groups.) Or removing an adversary's regime while saving a country (North Korea). Or ending a WMD war quickly (India-Pakistan).

The task force argues that we need a better nuclear doctrine than the mutually assured destruction, or MAD, of the Cold War. Current plans to refurbish the nation's stockpile of nuclear weapons from the 1970s and '80s "will not meet the country's future needs," the report says. Large, high-fallout nuclear weapons designed to obliterate cities won't deter terrorists who might doubt that a President would use them in response to an attack.

Rather, the task force wants to see the U.S. nuclear arsenal expanded to include more precise, lower-yield weapons--especially those that could penetrate targets buried deep underground where conventional weapons can't reach. The idea is to give a President the option of incinerating enemy weapons, leaders and command-and-control systems with as little damage as possible to civilians. Having the option of highly precise nuclear weapons with greatly reduced radioactivity would also make the threat of their use more believable to terrorists contemplating attacks on the U.S. or allies.

WSJ notes there are critics in Congress who deem any proposed change in nuclear policy provocative, and who are already on record as opposing the Bush Administration's push for development of new, low-yield nuclear weapons. That these new weapons are designed to save innocent lives doesn't seem to impress them. Use our Take Action page to ask your elected representatives for their position on the Board's recommendations.

H.R. 2671 - The CLEAR Act

(What are "political devotions"? Click here.)

Agape Press reports on important immigration reform legislation:

Proposed Bill Lets Local Police In on Enforcing Immigration Law

A Colorado congressman says it's time to stop playing politics, pointing fingers, and passing the buck when it comes to addressing the illegal alien crisis. The Republican lawmaker wants to see state and local law enforcement agencies do more to help address the situation.

Congressman Tom Tancredo, chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus, says the United States should not be in the business of "in-sourcing" criminals. That is why he is working hard on a bill called the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act of 2003, or the CLEAR Act.

The representative from Colorado says the CLEAR Act, which was introduced last year to address the illegal alien problem, is gaining momentum in Congress. He feels the bill, if passed, would make it clear that state and local law enforcement agencies have jurisdictional authority to enforce the law.

While the U.S. Border Patrol reports it has a workforce of 9,500, Tancredo says there are only about 2,000 Border Patrol agents in the United States. "That means at any given time, you've got about 650 people on the job throughout the nation, pitted up against the 15 million people who are here illegally and the 500,000 that are already convicted felons who have walked away from the courtroom," he says. . . .

The proposed CLEAR Act would mandate that state and local police investigate and enforce civil immigration laws, and authorize them to investigate, apprehend, detain or remove aliens in the U.S., including transporting them across state lines to detention centers.

The bill currently has 120 cosponsors. Use our Take Action page to make sure your representative is one of them. For more on the threat of open borders in a time of terror, see our March 3, January 23 and January 8 entries.

Federal Non-Discrimination Policy - Race, Religion, . . . Sexual Practices?

The latest alert from the Family Research Council focuses on an under-publicized, unhealthy instance of mission creep in federal policy:

"Sexual Orientation" Should Not Be a Protected Class

During the previous administration, President Clinton issued an executive order making "sexual orientation" a protected class in the federal government's discrimination policy. Clinton's order went way beyond any act of Congress or U.S. law and raised "sexual orientation" to the level of race and religion. This was clearly a move to satisfy the homosexual political lobby.

When Scott Bloch took over as new head of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for the Bush Administration, he accurately pointed out that "sexual orientation" is not a protected class and directed the OSC to start removing the Clinton-imposed regulation from federal documents.

However, the current White House didn't have the stomach for the public relations battle that would likely ensue. The homosexual lobby began putting pressure on Bloch and eventually forced him to retreat.

Send the White House an email today, and tell them to drop "sexual orientation" from the list of protected classes.

You can find this alert, plus a list of all the Family Research Council alerts here. All include the handy CapWiz form for communicating with the relevant elected officials.


Quality Punditry

Charles Krauthammer offers a workable plan in Iraq is Vietnam not on the ground, but in our heads:

The first George Bush once said he thought the Gulf War would cure America of the Vietnam syndrome. He was wrong. There is no cure for the Vietnam syndrome. It will only go away when the baby-boom generation does, dying off like the Israelites in the desert, allowing a new generation, cleansed of the memories and the guilt, to look at the world clearly once again.

It was inevitable that Iraq would be compared to Vietnam. Indeed, the current comparisons are hardly new. During our astonishingly fast dash to Baghdad, taking the capital within 21 days, the chorus of naysayers was already calling Iraq a quagmire on Day 8! It was not Vietnam then. It is not Vietnam now. . . .

This is no time for despair. We must put down the two rebellions -- Fallujah's and Sadr's -- to demonstrate our seriousness, then transfer power as quickly as we can to those who will inherit it anyway, the Shiite majority with its long history of religious quietism and wariness of Iran. And antagonism toward their former Sunni oppressors. If the Sunnis continue to resist and carry on a civil war, it will then be up to the Shiites to fight it, not for Americans to do it on their behalf.

Hardly the best of all possible worlds. But it is a world we could live with.

The Heritage Foundation has an interesting analysis of How Washington Spends Your Taxes.

(If you find this site useful and would like to help make political devotions a mass movement, please tell others about PoliticalDevotions.com or place a link to it on your website. Then when you've done so, be sure to e-mail me so I can thank you personally! - Tim.)

More on California AB 1925

A TVC alert:

AB 1925 UPDATE: VOTE EXTENDED TO APRIL 16th!!

AB 1925 MAY BE THE TARGET OF LAST MINUTE EFFORT TO KILL OUR BILL!!!

PHONE CALLS, EMAILS AND FAXES ARE A MUST TO ENSURE AB 1925 PASSES THE STATE ASSEMBLY!!

DUE TO LAST MINUTE NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE LEGISLATURE AND GOV. SCHWARZENNEGER ON WORKER'S COMP REFORM, THE SCHEDULED VOTE FOR OTHER BILLS HAS BEEN MOVED TO FRIDAY, APRIL 16th!!
WE NOW HAVE ONE MORE DAY TO FLOOD THE CAPITOL WITH PHONE CALLS, FAXES AND EMAILS IN SUPPORT OF AB 1925.

AB 1925 NEEDS A WAVE OF PUBLIC SUPPORT TO ENSURE IT PASSES THE STATE ASSEMBLY!!

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ENTIRE TVC ALERT:

http://capwiz.com/traditional/issues/alert/?alertid=5526446

YOUR ACTION IS NEEDED IMMEDIATELY
Thank you and God bless!

While TVC's "We WILL stop others from harming themselves" rhetoric grates against my sort-of-libertarian leanings, I do like some of the bills they sponsor. This is one of them.

Bias

The White House correspondents ought to offer a Richard Clarke-like apology to the nation for their behavior at President Bush's April 13 press conference, but don't hold your breath waiting for it. It was as if the president were being questioned by the Committee to Elect John Kerry, and for all practical purposes, it was. Fully nine of the 15 questions were attempts to harvest a sound bite of Bush admitting failure, either as to Iraq or 9-11. The offenders included reporters from the New York Times, CBS, NBC, ABC, Time Magazine, the AP and, of course, NPR.

The media research center summarized it this way:

White House Press Pound Bush to Admit Errors, Apologize for 9/11

At Tuesday night's presidential news conference, White House corespondents for major national news outlets pounded away at President Bush in an effort to get him to identify errors he's made either before 9/11 or in going to war in Iraq, and urged him to follow Dick Clarke's lead and apologize for the September 11 terrorist attacks. New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller delivered the most obnoxious question of the evening, demanding in an accusatory manner: "Do you feel any sense of personal responsibility for September 11th?" Similarly, John Roberts of CBS News recalled how Clarke offered "an unequivocal apology to the American people for failing them prior to 9/11" and queried Bush: "Do you believe the American people deserve a similar apology from you, and would you be prepared to give them one?"

If you would like to call the news outlets on the carpet for their blatant partisan bias in questioning President Bush, the Media Research Center has a comprehensive database of news and media contact information, available here.

(If you find this site useful and would like to help make political devotions a mass movement, please tell others about PoliticalDevotions.com or place a link to it on your website. Then when you've done so, be sure to e-mail me so I can thank you personally! - Tim.)

California's AB 1925

California's parental rights education bill is to be voted on by the full assembly on April 15. Traditional Values Coalition lobbyist Ben Lopez reports:

AB 1925 NEEDS A WAVE OF PUBLIC SUPPORT TO ENSURE IT PASSES THE STATE ASSEMBLY!!

Currently, I am in Sacramento at the State Capitol testifying and lobbying on a variety of critical bills. However, I have been privately briefed about a potential effort from some liberal Democrats in the Assembly to kill our bill, stopping the progress we made on AB 1925.
You may recall that we reported last week that AB 1925 passed the Assembly Education Committee on March 31st. Ten of the 11 members of the committee voted for our parental rights bill. We were successful in getting 7 liberal Democrats, including Committee Chair Jackie Goldberg (a lesbian and Democrat from Los Angeles) to support of our bill. Unfortunately because the bill received one no vote in Committee, AB 1925 will not be placed on the Assembly's consent file but rather must now go through a formal debate and vote by the entire Assembly.

Because of this, some of the more liberal Democrats will likely conduct debate against the bill. Attempts to even amend the bill to change it might even be attempted. We cannot let this happen!
A lot of time and negotiating went into passing AB 1925 from the Education Committee. You may recall that Senate Bill 71 was signed into law and took effect January 1, 2004 and it removed from law four parental rights provisions regarding schools and education. Our first attempt to restore those provisions back into law was through AB 950, which was killed by the Assembly Education Committee back on January 7th. AB 1925 seeks to restore the one deleted provision we mentioned above.

At the suggestion and promise of committee Chair Jackie Goldberg, I spent weeks working with Goldberg's staff, Senator Sheila Kuehl's staff (Kuehl wrote SB 71) and aides from Assemblyman Ray Haynes office on language that would give us what we were asking for and the votes needed to pass our bill. An agreement was reached which resulted in groups like the ACLU removing their opposition to our bill and got the votes of 7 liberal Democrats on the committee who had voted against our first bill AB 950 but now voted for AB 1925. This agreement must be respected by all other Democrats in the Assembly.

If all 32 Republicans support our bill being carried by Assemblyman Ray Haynes, and the same 7 Democrats who voted for the bill in the Committee vote for it on the floor as well, we will have 39 votes. It takes 41 to pass bills from the entire Assembly so they can move to the Senate. That is why we need you to contact your Assembly Member without delay.

I am personally meeting with as many staff members, legislative directors and Chiefs of Staffs of Assembly Democrats in an effort to get the votes we need to pass AB 1925. But I need you to help me and reinforce the work I am doing her on your behalf.

AB 1925 would still require that schools first notify parents at the beginning of the school year identifying guest speakers or organizations coming into the classroom to address students on HIV/AIDS education and related sexual issues. The notice must list the name of the speaker and the group they are affiliated with. If the school changes the speakers after the start of the school year, they must inform parents of the change no less than 14 days prior to give parents a chance to remove their child from the lecture or assembly.

Remember, schools currently do not have to notify parents about who comes into the classroom to give lectures, show films or talk about sexual issues. AB 1925 seeks to have schools give parents fair notice before speakers and organizations address their child in the classroom.

TVC needs your help in ensuring AB 1925 passes. This is a vital and simple measure that must be restored into law.

Please do not assume others will act for you. We need YOU to take action without delay.
This is a battle we can win. I just need you to support our direct efforts here in the Capitol. Please take action today.

YOUR HELP IS NEEDED!
SPECIAL ACTION TO TAKE TODAY!!!

For All Assembly Members Websites and Emails please go to: http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/acsframeset7text.htm

To find your Assembly Member directly click this link and then enter your zip code:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html

TVC also has a CapWiz form for the bill here.

To sign up for California TVC action alerts or to receive the complete AB 1925 alert, which includes fax and phone numbers for the relevant legislators, contact Ben Lopez at blopez@traditionalvalues.org.

(If you find this site useful and would like to help make political devotions a mass movement, please tell others about PoliticalDevotions.com or place a link to it on your website. Then when you've done so, be sure to e-mail me so I can thank you personally! - Tim.)

The "Support The Troops" Project

Freedom Alliance is offering a way to express tangibly your thanks to the troops:

Last year on Veteran's Day, we had more reason to reflect on the bravery of our soldiers and their families than ever before. Historically, we remembered them with parades and ceremonies, but Freedom Alliance, which honors and encourages military service, launched "Support the Troops," and asked Americans to remember our vets particularly the active duty injured soldiers by sending donations of phone cards, gift certificates and magazines to the Freedom Alliance headquarters in Dulles, VA.

"We had the opportunity to tour the amputee facility of Walter Reed Hospital, and while there was no doubt in our minds that these soldiers were receiving fantastic treatment, it was obvious that donations were needed," said Tom Kilgannon, President of Freedom Alliance. "While America has pledged to 'never forget' what our heroic soldiers, firefighters and police did on 9/11, many are unaware of the injuries sustained in Afghanistan and Iraq since then."

A news article was published (November, 2003) that said all but 20 of the 250 beds at Walter Reed were taken up with casualties of the war. Fifty of them had lost limbs, often more than one. The newspaper also said that during the course of the Iraq War, more than 1,875 U.S. soldiers received treatment at Walter Reed, which works out to an average of about 10 a day, 300 a month.

We are currently collecting:

Phone Cards: Soldiers at Walter Reed Army Hospital are from all over the United States, and Walter Reed staff says phone cards are always needed and appreciated.

Clothing Gift Certificates: Many soldiers are admitted with only the clothes on their backs. Please send certificates to clothing stores such as Old Navy or national department stores volunteers will shop for the wounded troops.

Cash Donations are also accepted and are used to meet the special needs of our service members.

Thank you in advance for your support of our men and women in uniform.

You can mail your contribution to:

Freedom Alliance
Support the Troops Campaign
22570 Markey Court, Suite 240
Dulles, VA 20166-6919

Quality Punditry:

Still another superb Victor Davis Hanson piece: The Fruits of Appeasement

Imagine a different November 4, 1979, in Teheran. Shortly after Iranian terrorists storm the American embassy and take some 90 American hostages, President Jimmy Carter announces that Islamic fundamentalism is not a legitimate response to the excess of the Shah but a new and dangerous fascism that threatens all that liberal society holds dear. And then he issues an ultimatum to Teheran's leaders: Release the captives or face a devastating military response.

When that demand is not met, instead of freezing Iran's assets, stopping the importation of its oil, or seeking support at the UN, Carter orders an immediate blockade of the country, followed by promises to bomb, first, all of its major military assets, and then its main government buildings and residences of its ruling mullocracy. The Ayatollah Khomeini may well have called his bluff; we may well have tragically lost the hostages (151 fewer American lives than the Iranian-backed Hezbollah would take four years later in a single day in Lebanon). And there may well have been the sort of chaos in Teheran that we now witness in Baghdad. But we would have seen it all in 1979 and not in 2001, after almost a quarter-century of continuous Middle East terrorism, culminating in the mass murder of 3,000 Americans and the leveling of the World Trade Center.

The twentieth century should have taught the citizens of liberal democracies the catastrophic consequences of placating tyrants. British and French restraint over the occupation of the Rhineland, the Anschluss, the absorption of the Czech Sudetenland, and the incorporation of Bohemia and Moravia did not win gratitude but rather Hitler's contempt for their weakness. Fifty million dead, the Holocaust, and the near destruction of European civilization were the wages of "appeasement" a term that early-1930s liberals proudly embraced as far more enlightened than the old idea of "deterrence" and "military readiness."

(If you find this site useful and would like to help make political devotions a mass movement, please tell others about PoliticalDevotions.com or place a link to it on your website. Then when you've done so, be sure to e-mail me so I can thank you personally! - Tim.)

Check The "No" Box

At CNSNews.com, Peter Flaherty shows us why the presidential campaign fund is just one more government spending fiasco:

Tell the Taxman No to Subsidizing Politicians

You may think that checking "no" on your tax return for the presidential campaign fund means your tax money won't go to candidates with whom you disagree on the issues. Think again. The tax form clearly states that checking "yes" does not increase one's tax or reduce one's refund. So the money has to come from somewhere. That somewhere is the general fund of the U.S. Treasury, financed by all U.S. taxpayers. Those who check yes are simply telling the government to allocate more U.S. taxpayer money to the presidential campaign fund than would otherwise be the case. . . .

True to form, many members of Congress now want to raise the check-off amount to as much as $10. And into what kind of campaigns would this enlarged pot of money go?

This year, both George W. Bush and John Kerry have opted out of the taxpayer funding system, releasing them from the spending limits that comes with it. That leaves candidates like conspiracy theorist Lyndon LaRouche, who has received more than $5 million over the years. Among other things, LaRouche blames the September 11 attacks on "Jewish gangsters" and "Christian Zionists."

Lenora Fulani, an avowed Marxist whose New Alliance Party the FBI deemed "armed and dangerous," has collected $2.9 million. John Hagelin of the Natural Law Party has cashed in to the tune of $1.6 million. Hagelin advocated achieving peace in Kosovo entailed dispatching "Yogic flyers" to generate a "quantum-mechanical consciousness field."

Al Sharpton received $100,000 this year, which he seems to have quickly blown on fancy hotel stays and limo rides. Based on a complaint from my organization, the Federal Election Commission recently announced that Sharpton may have to give back the $100,000 amid allegations that he was ineligible to receive it.

Why should Americans be forced to subsidize the political speech of a bunch of nuts and hustlers?

To qualify for funding, all these fringe candidates have to do is raise over $5,000 in each of 20 states in contributions of $250 or less. The resulting federal matching funds enable them to disseminate their zany notions even farther and wider.

Taking minimum action on this issue is easy -- check the "No" box. But let's not stop there. Use our Take Action page to ensure that your representatives are not among the "many members of Congress" who want to raise the check-off amount to as much as $10. Tell them to nix the question instead.


Quality Punditry:

At OpinionJournal's Political Diary (subscription required), Holman Jenkins highlights the cruel consequences of being "nice" in Iraq:

It will be a long time before the average Iraqi does not believe he risks death or imprisonment for choosing the losing side in any political dispute. The only political judgment Iraqis have been conditioned for decades to make is "Who's stronger?" There's no "good will" that can be won that can solve our problem for us. What we offer--prosperity, democracy and rule of law--may be things most Iraqis desire, but Iraqis will fall into line with our plans not from idealism but from conviction that we are the stronger force. If he's serious about our mission, [President] Bush should seize the opportunity to show with finality that the U.S. military intends to remain the arbiter in Iraq. If not, he might as well figure out who the next Saddam is and hand the place over to him.

At the Washington Times, Pete Du Pont offers some historical perspective: A Bargain at the Pump -- Gasoline is $1 Cheaper Than in 1920.

(If you find this site useful and would like to help make political devotions a mass movement, please tell others about PoliticalDevotions.com or place a link to it on your website. Then when you've done so, be sure to e-mail me so I can thank you personally! - Tim.)

Commend Condoleezza

In this week's column, the always clear-headed Victor Davis Hanson observes:

After eight years of appeasement that saw repeated attacks on Americans, Pakistani acquisition of nuclear weapons under Dr. Khan, and Osama's 1998 declaration of war against every American, we are suddenly grilling, of all people, Condoleezza Rice -- one of the few key advisers most to be credited for insisting on using our military, rather than the local DA, to defeat these fanatics.

Over the last two years, each time a U.S. senator in panicked and wild-eyed passion screamed that we could not win in Afghanistan, she proved resolute and confident. On every occasion that an ex-general, a dissatisfied bureaucrat, or a wannabe journalist-strategist pontificated about what the United States could not do, she was unwavering in her determination to take the war to rogue regimes in the Middle East with a history of hostility against Americans and a record of providing easy sanctuary for terrorists. This present charade would be like holding public hearings on the eve of the 1944 election about the breakdown of intelligence and missed opportunities before Pearl Harbor -- and then blaming Harry Hopkins and Secretary Stimson for laxity even while the country was in the very midst of a two-front war.

If you would like to commend Dr. Rice for yesterday's dignified and professional performance in the face of partisan, rude, smug, harassing questioning by Democrat poseurs, you can contact her by fax at (202) 456-2883 or by phone at (202) 456-9491.

(If you find this site useful and would like to help make political devotions a mass movement, please tell others about PoliticalDevotions.com or place a link to it on your website. Then when you've done so, be sure to e-mail me so I can thank you personally! - Tim.)