Sunday, January 13, 2013

Colin Powell: Hagel ‘Knows What War Is’ This comes from a man without credibility!

newsmax ^ | 1/13/13 | a woods

Insisting that he is still a Republican, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that Chuck Hagel is “superbly qualified” to be the next secretary of state and he is confident that the former Nebraska senator “will do a great job.”
“I think he gets confirmed,” Powell asserted. “He’s superbly qualified based on his overall record, based on his service to the country, based on how he feels about troops and veterans and their families.”
Powell, who supported President Barack Obama in each of his election bids, spoke at length about Hagel’s accomplishments, going through them chronologically beginning with the two-time senator’s military duty in Vietnam. He noted that the president's nominee has a “very, very distinguished public-service record that he can stand on.”
“It might be useful just to stand back and take a look at this man overall,” Powell said. “This is a guy who knows veterans, knows the troops, knows the USO. I’ll tell you who thinks that makes him a good candidate for secretary of defense — the men and women in the Armed Forces of the United States and their parents, who know that this is a guy who will be very careful putting their lives at risk because he put his life at risk. He knows what war is.”
Regarding the controversial comments about Iran and Israel that have politicians questioning Hagel's fitness to serve, Powell said “he is a fellow who speaks his mind. He sometimes gets in trouble with those who think he should not speak his mind. He says what he believes, and he sticks with it.”!
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...

American Socialism Working – 1 in 4 Kids on Food Stamps!

political outcast ^ | 1-12-13 | Dave Jolly

Many of the same tactics used to weaken the Christian influence also worked to weaken the family. They introduced the ideas of divorce made easy instead of working out the problems or turning to Scripture. They taught situation ethics in schools where kids learned to blame their parents for all of their problems and then resent them for it. In the 1960s and 70s, the openness of sexual promiscuity flooded the families. Adultery and pre-marital sex permeated through the Church like yeast in a batch of dough. Even Christian leaders fell to the temptations that were hurled at them, causing them to fall in disgrace. The number of pregnancies to unwed mothers also spiked as did the use of illegal drugs.
The socialists infiltrated the public schools early on and began changing what was being taught. Today, kids aren’t taught anything about family values. Instead, they are being taught how to subvert the authority of their parents and do their own thing. Planned Parenthood even teaches teenage girls how to get an abortion and work around parental notification laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicaloutcast.com ...

Crunching the numbers of the 2013 tax increases (It's official - the rich now pay their fair share)

WTOP ^ | 1/02/13

WASHINGTON - The prospect of the American economy careening off a cliff overshadowed a tax increase that takes effect immediately, rich or not.

Even with the deal on Capitol Hill, the so-called payroll tax is scheduled to bounce back up to 6.2 percent from 4.2 percent in 2011 and 2012.

In practical terms, this amounts to a $1,000 tax increase for someone earning $50,000 a year and a $2,200 tax increase for someone earning $150,000.

Even workers taking home less than $20,000 annually will be impacted, paying roughly $100 more.

"I think it will have a negative effect," says Neil Buchanan, a law and economics professor at George Washington University.
(Excerpt) Read more at wtop.com ...

Hobby Lobby Forced to Change Health Insurance to Avoid Mandate Fines

Life News ^ | January 11, 2013 | Steven Ertelt

Hobby Lobby, the Christian craft company, has been forced to alter its employee health insurance plan in order to avoid millions of dollars in fines each and every day it refuses to comply with the HHS mandate.
The mandate compels religious employers to pay for birth control and drugs that may cause abortions for their employees in their health insurance plan. Late Thursday, in a statement, Hobby Lobby attorney Peter Dobelbower said the company will shift the plan year for employee health insurance that will delay the implementation date of the plan from January 1, so it does not coincide with the HHS mandate.
Following a decision by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor denying Hobby Lobby’s request for an exemption from the Obama administration’s HHS mandate, the Christian retail company said it will defy the mandate.
As LifeNews reported, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has refused to act favorably on an emergency appeal Hobby Lobby stores filed to stop enforcement of the HHS mandate against it.
After a federal court denied a request to temporarily stop enforcement of the abortion pill mandate against the Christian-operated business Hobby Lobby, it took its HHS mandate lawsuit to the Supreme Court. Sotomayor denied its request to block the mandate and the millions of dollars in fines it will be subjected to starting January 1 for not complying.
Sotomayor said Hobby Lobby did not show it met the legal standard for blocking enforcement on an emergency basis, but said the company can continue with its lawsuit in lower court.
Kyle Duncan, an attorney for the pro-life legal group Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said in a statement that hobby Lobby doesn’t plan to offer its employees insurance that would cover the drug while its lawsuit is pending.
“The company will continue to provide health insurance to all qualified employees,” Duncan said. “To remain true to their faith, it is not their intention, as a company, to pay for abortion-inducing drugs.”
The most recent polling data from December 2012 shows Americans support a religious exemption to the mandate.
In December, a federal appeals court ruled that the Obama administration can force the Christian-owned-and-operated business to obey the HHS mandate that compels it to pay for birth control and drugs that may cause abortions for its employees.
Duncan says the family that runs Hobby Lobby is upset the appeals court did not support its case against the HHS mandate, which it says would force the Christian-owned-and-operated company to provide the “morning-after pill” and “week-after pill” in its health insurance plan, or face crippling fines up to $1.3 million per day.
“The Green family is disappointed with this ruling,” said Duncan. “They simply asked for a temporary halt to the mandate while their appeal goes forward, and now they must seek relief from the United States Supreme Court. The Greens will continue to make their case on appeal that this unconstitutional mandate infringes their right to earn a living while remaining true to their faith.”
He said the 10th Circuit judges denied the motion calling the religious burden to the Green family “indirect and attenuated.”
“It is by God’s grace and provision that Hobby Lobby has endured,” said David Green, founder and CEO. “Therefore we seek to honor God by operating the company in a manner consistent with Biblical principles.”
Earlier, a different federal appeals court reinstated two of the top legal challenges to the mandate. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals handed Wheaton College and Belmont Abbey College a major victory in their challenges to the HHS mandate. Previously, two lower courts had dismissed their lawsuits as premature because the Obama administration is expected to revise the mandate next year. However, the appellate court reinstated those cases.
The ruling also rdered the Obama Administration to report back every 60 days—starting in mid-February—until the Administration makes good on its promise to issue a new rule that protects their religious freedom. The Obama administration was ordered to rewrite the mandate by March 2013.
Following a new ruling by the 8th Circuit federal appeals court granting temporary relief from the HHS Mandate to a Missouri business, the 10th Circuit denied Hobby Lobby’s request for identical relief in their appeal. The company is concerned about crippling fines of up to $1.3 million per day if they do not comply with the HHS mandate against their religious beliefs.
The lower court, which, in November, denied Hobby Lobby emergency relief, relied heavily on the lower court’s dismissal of the O’Brien Business’ case on its ruling. When a federal appeals court reversed the lower court decision in the Missouri case, Hobby Lobby’s attorneys hoped the 10th circuit will reverse in its case as well.
The privately held retail chain with more than 500 arts and crafts stores in 41 states filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration over its HHS mandate. The company says it would face $1.3 million in fines on a daily basis starting in January if it fails to comply with the mandate, which requires religious employers to pay for or refer women for abortion-cause drugs that violate their conscience or religious beliefs.
“Today’s shocking decision from the 10th Circuit is an utter rebuke of religious freedom. Hobby Lobby now faces fines of up to 1.3 million dollars a day if it’s owners refuse to violate their consciences by paying for and providing abortion-causing drugs for its employees. This is a dereliction of duty of the part of the courts to protect IRS citizens from bureaucratic bullies who care little for the First Amendment,” said Ashley McGuire, Senior Fellow with The Catholic Association, after the appeals court ruling in that case.
The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma and U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton issued a ruling rejecting Hobby Lobby’s request to block the mandate. Judge Heaton said that the company doesn’t qualify for an exemption because it is not a church or religious group.
“Plaintiffs have not cited, and the court has not found, any case concluding that secular, for-profit corporations such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion,” the ruling said.
Heaton wrote that “the court is not unsympathetic” to the company’s desire to not pay for abortion-causing drugs but he said the Obamacare law “results in concerns and issues not previously confronted by companies or their owners.”
The appeals brief reads in part: “[I]n less than six weeks, [the Green family] must either violate their faith by covering abortion-causing drugs, or be exposed to severe penalties—including fines of up to $1.3 million per day, annual penalties of about $26 million and exposure to private suits.”
“The district court accepted that the Green family engages in a religious exercise by refusing to cover abortion-causing drugs in their self-funded health plan. There was thus no question that the Green family engages in ‘religious exercise,’” it adds. “[T]he Supreme Court has long rejected any distinction between “direct” and “indirect” burdens in evaluating whether regulations infringe religious exercise.”
Duncan said the judge’s decision did not question that the Green family has sincere religious beliefs forbidding them from providing abortion-causing drugs. The court ruled, however, that those beliefs were only “indirectly” burdened by the mandate’s requirement that [Hobby Lobby] provide free coverage for specific, abortion-inducing drugs in [the company’s] self-funded insurance plan.
Duncan previously talked about what the Obama administration told the court:
The administration’s arguments in this case are shocking. Here’s what they are saying: once someone starts a “secular” business, he categorically loses any right to run that business in accordance with his conscience. The business owner simply leaves her First Amendment rights at home when she goes to work at the business she built. Kosher butchers around the country must be shocked to find that they now run “secular” businesses. On this view of the world, even a seller of Bibles is “secular.” Hobby Lobby’s affiliate, Mardel, sells Bibles and other Christian-themed material, but because it makes a profit the government has now declared it “secular.”
The administration’s position here — while astonishing — is actually consistent with its overall view of the place of religion in civil society. After all, this is the administration who argued in the Hosanna-Tabor case last year in the Supreme Court that the religion clauses of the First Amendment offered no special protection to a church’s right to choose its ministers — a position that the Court rejected 9-0. This is the administration which has taken to referring to “freedom of worship” instead of “freedom of religion” — suggesting that religious freedom consists in being free to engage in private rituals and prayers, but not in carrying your religious convictions into public life. And this is the administration who crafted a “religious employer” exemption to the HHS mandate so narrow that a Catholic charity does not qualify for conscience protection if it serves non-Catholic poor people.
As you point out, the administration is trying to justify its rigid stance against religious business owners by saying otherwise they would become a “law unto themselves,” and be able to do all sorts of nasty things to their employees — like force them to attend Bible studies, or fire them if they denied the divinity of Christ. Nonsense. Hobby Lobby isn’t arguing for the right to impose the Greens’ religion on employees, nor for the right to fire employees of different religions. There’s already a federal law that protects employees from religious discrimination and that’s a very good thing. This case is about something entirely different: it’s about stopping the government from coercing religious business owners. The government wants to fine the Greens if they do not violate their own faith by handing out free abortion drugs, and now it’s saying they don’t even have the right to complain in court about it.
There are now 40 separate lawsuits challenging the HHS mandate, which is a regulation under the Affordable Care Act (aka “Obamacare”). The Becket Fund led the charge against the unconstitutional HHS mandate, and along with Hobby Lobby represents: Wheaton College, East Texas Baptist University, Houston Baptist University, Belmont Abbey College, Colorado Christian University, the Eternal Word Television Network, and Ave Maria University.

Hobby Lobby is the largest and the biggest non-Catholic-owned business to file a lawsuit against the HHS mandate, focusing sharp criticism on the administration’s regulation that forces all companies, regardless of religious conviction, to cover abortion-inducing drugs. It has faced a small boycott from liberals upset that it would challenge the mandate in court.
The Obama admin says there is an exemption in the statute but Duncan says that is not acceptable.
“The safe harbor’s protection is illusory,” said Duncan. “Even though the government won’t make religious colleges pay crippling fines this year, private lawsuits can still be brought, schools are at a competitive disadvantage for hiring and retaining faculty, and employees face the specter of battling chronic conditions without access to affordable care. This mandate puts these religious schools in an impossible position.”
Recently, a federal court stopped enforcement of the Obama administration’s abortion pill mandate against a Bible publisher which filed a lawsuit against it — the third such victory.

Permission Granted

Personal | January 12, 2013 | 41Thunder

I posted a letter a short while back that I sent to my State Senators and Congresswoman. I've received several email requests for permission to use the text. Therefore to all: Permission Granted! Stay united and defend the Second Amendment. Here's the text of the letter.


The Honorable *insert name*
The Honorable *insert name*
The Honorable *insert name*

Washington, DC.

Subject: Pending Federal Gun Control Legislation

The Second Amendment of the US Constitution clearly establishes the limits of the Government concerning gun control. It was established by our founding fathers to give “We the People” an equal footing with the Government should our Government ever become tyrannical. We are at, or very near that point today.


I, as an American citizen, will not be disarmed! I will not give up my guns to the Government. I will not surrender my Rights to an out of control, despotic government, whose agenda is the destruction of this great nation as we once knew it.


The killings at Sandy Hook by a lunatic were tragic, but it pales in comparison to the murder of more than 3000 children per day to government sanctioned abortion. It pales in comparison to the number of innocent people that were killed in Mexico due to Operation Fast & Furious. It pales in comparison to Waco and Ruby Ridge. Our Government is complicit to murder in the first degree, willful and mindful of the very facts.


I urge you to consider carefully your actions in the forthcoming deliberations on the new Assault Weapons Ban. Magazines, clips, flash suppressors, thumbhole grips, folding stocks, night vision sites, lasers and lights do not make a firearm dangerous. A firearm is no more dangerous than a screwdriver. In the hands of a deranged human being, they are both deadly weapons.


Remember these four words as you cast your votes, “Shall Not Be Infringed”.


Sincerely,

Pedaling Peddlers

self | January 12, 2013 | Revolting cat!

If you happen to care about grammar and spelling, then in these post-literate times you can expect to be considered a pedant by the semi-literate, and a "grammar nazi" by the illiterate. My blood pressure rises when I see misuses of the apostrophe, pluralization with an apostrophe, "impact" as a verb, "pro-active" in all its uses, "there is a lot" and "there is many", "He would have if he would have", among other errors familiar to the readers among whom I don't expect to see makers of such errors. Still, I realize that the battle has been lost now. Here and elsewhere. Pidglish rules, and only foreigners speak proper English. I've known semi-literate CEOs who had graduated from Stanford.
A teacher told me once that people who make common grammatical and spelling mistakes tend to be non-readers, simply because we first learn to write by, gasp, reading. Do I want to read opinions of non-readers?
I have trouble with commas, commaizing too often or too little (hey, I can verbize as well as anybody!), but I was happy to read recently that my favorite author and conservative Mark Hel prin himself engages in battles with the editor of his books over commas.
I was less happy the other day reading the fifth or sixth novel of my new favorite author, recommended to me last year by the WSJ's mystery editor Tom Nolan, who (the author) writes literary mysteries, and has written over two dozen of them, while still remaining pretty much in the shadows, as my visits to the bookshelves of local Goodwill stores confirm where the Lee Childs rule. I hear he's more popular in Europe, even in translation, and at least one of the reader reviews on Amazon complains about his writing being too literary (!) (You guess his name!) By the way, is Cormac McCarthy's blood and gore "literary"? I'm asking because I haven't read him and refuse to watch the blood and gore movies made from his novels.
But I digress. In the mystery I am reading, in three places (so far) my new favorite published author uses the verb "to peddle" when he clearly means "to pedal", as he describes a boy riding a bicycle. What the heck? I've seen this error here more than once, just as I see daily "boarder" for "border" and "your" for "you're", among other beauties of our post-literacy, but a published author, edited by a professional editor?
Should I then write the man a hate mail?



Married people are THREE times more likely to survive middle age!

Daily Mail (UK) ^ | 11:15 EST, 11 January 2013 | (Daily Mail Reporter)

Being married could be the key to a longer life—by improving your chances of surviving middle age, claim scientists.

People who never married were almost three times as likely to die early than those who had been in a stable marriage throughout their adult life, US researchers found.

The new research suggests for the first time that not having a spouse in midlife increases the risk of dying during those years.

Being single after 40, or losing a partner without marrying again, increased the risk of early death during middle age and cut the chances of getting to 60.

Even when personality and risky behaviors such as smoking and drinking were accounted for, married people were still 2.3 times more likely to survive. …

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...

What are your odds when you are a homosexual man in a sham marriage?


Sodom and Gomorrah condemned for homosexual behavior

Virtue Online ^ | 1-11-13 | David W. Virtue

It is now standard wisdom, held by most Episcopalians and not a few liberal Protestant denominational fellow travelers, that an all loving God would never judge people with any degree of harshness (if at all) and that His love, in fact, rules out such a possibility, over-ridden by His all embracive inclusive love.
But Scripture declares that God is both judge and lover. The two cannot be divorced from each other. "God is not at odds with himself, however much it may appear to us that he is. He is 'the God of peace', of inner tranquility not turmoil. True, we find it difficult to hold in our minds simultaneously the images of God as the Judge who must punish evil-doers and of the Lover who must find a way to forgive them. Yet he is both, and at the same time," wrote the late Anglican preacher John R.W. Stott. God's righteousness and love are inextricably intertwined.
For we mere mortals, judgment is for those who judge others we are told. Verses like "Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you," haunt the lips of any would be judgmental person.
Yet God's love does not override his judgment. We are told that judgment begins FIRST with the household of God (1 Peter 4:17), and that He will come again to judge the living and the dead (Apostles Creed).
A friend of VOL and regular reader recently made a trip to Gomorrah, which is on either side of the road that leads to Masada. It had no signs indicating its location, probably because it is virtually impossible for police to cordon off visitors, he told VOL.
Then he wrote, "However, when one gets to the top of Masada by cable car the contrast between the ash ziggurats of Gomorrah and the surrounding area is very obvious. I wandered among the ash covered ziggurats and dug into the walls with my pen knife. After about a 20 minute search I dug out some small pieces of 'brimstone' and took them home to test. They duly gave off a blue flame and a strong sulphur smell.
"Interestingly, another searcher had done the same and had his samples analyzed by an industrial chemist who was surprised at the purity % of the samples. Apparently, sulphur on earth is rarely more than 60 to 65% pure, but the Gomorrah and Sodom samples were 95% +.
"It seems that the Biblical report in Genesis 19 is, in fact, correct.
"It will amuse VOL readers to note that when I show my 'brimstone'. to people, there are varying reactions: Most change the subject quickly because they cannot handle the possibility that Genesis 19 is an accurate report or fascination that Genesis 19 is true."
His point is that God does judge and Sodom and Gomorrah is a case in point.
And what was the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah? In light of Leviticus 18:22, the most common response to the question "What was the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?" is that it was homosexuality. That is how the term "sodomy" came to be used to refer to anal sex between two men, whether consensual or forced. Clearly, homosexuality was part of why God destroyed the two cities. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to perform homosexual gang rape on the two angels (who were disguised as men). At the same time, it is not biblical to say that homosexuality was the exclusive reason why God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were definitely not exclusive in terms of the sins in which they indulged.
Ezekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me..." The Hebrew word translated "detestable" refers to something that is morally disgusting and is the exact same word used in Leviticus 18:22 that refers to homosexuality as an "abomination." Similarly, Jude 7declares, "...Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion." So, again, while homosexuality was not the only sin in which the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah indulged, it does appear to be the primary reason for the destruction of the cities.
Those who attempt to explain away the biblical condemnations of homosexuality claim that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality. This is certainly what Bishop Gene Robinson says in his efforts to explain away the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and to justify his behavior. He is wrong. Dead wrong.
The men of Sodom and Gomorrah were certainly being inhospitable. There is probably nothing more inhospitable than homosexual gang rape. But to say God completely destroyed two cities and all their inhabitants for being inhospitable clearly misses the point. While Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of many other horrendous sins, homosexuality was the reason God poured fiery sulfur on the cities, completely destroying them and all of their inhabitants. To this day, the area where Sodom and Gomorrah were located remains a desolate wasteland. Sodom and Gomorrah serve as a powerful example of how God feels about sin in general and homosexuality specifically.
Now I wonder what the LORD might decide to do to a cathedral in which a sodomite bishop is enthroned...will He do as He did to the masonic chapel in the south transept of York Minster when David Jenkins was made Bishop of Durham...and strike it with lightning on an evening when there was no rain near York?
Whatever He does, I suspect that He will not just sit and watch without taking some action. Woe to those who call evil good and good evil (Isa. 5:20).
The Edict of Justinian to the people of Constantinople about debauchery contrary to nature. Justinian Novel 141

Commercial flight uses fuel produced from natural gas!

Fuel Fix ^ | January 11, 2013 | Zain Shauk

Qatar Airways completed the first commercial flight this week using fuel produced from natural gas, the company said.
The flight used fuel from the Pearl GTL plant in Qatar, through a partnership between the airline and the plant, jointly owned by Qatar Petroleum and Shell.
The fuel was made from a blend of gas-to-liquids kerosene and conventional oil-derived jet fuel. It powered an Airbus A340-600 on a flight from Doha to London, the companies said in a statement.
Shell says its gas-to-liquids products have fewer emissions than conventional jet fuel and are more environmentally friendly. The gas-to-liquids kerosene can comprise up to half of a fuel blend to power a commercial airliner, Shell said.
Qatar Airways CEO Akhbar Al Baker said in a statement that the airline is attempting to lead the industry into cleaner fuels.
“As the world talks and preaches environmentally friendly skies, we at Qatar Airways are setting the bar high for others to follow,” Al Baker said. “We are shifting the goalposts. We are setting an example by doing our part, by committing ourselves to be at the forefront of innovative research.”
The Pearl GTL complex in Qatar is the world’s largest plant capable of transforming natural gas into other fuels and is the largest single asset in Shell’s portfolio, involving more than $18 billion in investment, according to the statement. It made its first commercial shipment in 2011.
Because of the abundance of low-priced natural gas in the United States, Shell is exploring the possibility of building a GTL plant on the Gulf Coast.
Shell has invested more than $21 billion in Qatar over the last six years, making it the country’s largest foreign investor, according to the announcement.

21 Things Your Burglar Won’t Tell You

Modern Survival Blog ^ | June 8, 2011 | Ken (MSB)

1. Of course I look familiar. I was here just last week cleaning your carpets, painting your shutters, or delivering your new refrigerator.
2. Hey, thanks for letting me use the bathroom when I was working in your yard last week. While I was in there, I unlatched the back window to make my return a little easier.
3. Love those flowers. That tells me you have taste... and taste means there are nice things inside. Those yard toys your kids leave out always make me wonder what type of gaming system they have.
4. Yes, I really do look for newspapers piled up on the driveway. And I might leave a pizza flyer in your front door to see how long it takes you to remove it..
5. If it snows while you're out of town, get a neighbor to create car and foot tracks into the house. Virgin drifts in the driveway are a dead giveaway.
6. If decorative glass is part of your front entrance, don't let your alarm company install the control pad where I can see if it's set. That makes it too easy.
7. A good security company alarms the window over the sink. And the windows on the second floor, which often access the master bedroom - and your jewelry. It's not a bad idea to put motion detectors up there too.
8. It's raining, you're fumbling with your umbrella, and you forget to lock your door - understandable. But understand this: I don't take a day off because of bad weather.
9. I always knock first. If you answer, I'll ask for directions somewhere or offer to clean your gutters. (Don't take me up on it.)
10. Do you really think I won't look in your sock drawer? I always check dresser drawers, the bedside table, and the medicine cabinet.
11. Here's a helpful hint: I almost never go into kids' rooms.
12. You're right: I won't have enough time to break into that safe where you keep your valuables. But if it's not bolted down, I'll take it with me.
13. A loud TV or radio can be a better deterrent than the best alarm system. If you're reluctant to leave your TV on while you're out of town, you can buy a $35 device that works on a timer and simulates the flickering glow of a real television.
14. Sometimes, I carry a clipboard. Sometimes, I dress like a lawn guy and carry a rake. I do my best to never, ever look like a crook.
15. The two things I hate most: loud dogs and nosy neighbors.
16. I'll break a window to get in, even if it makes a little noise. If your neighbor hears one loud sound, he'll stop what he's doing and wait to hear it again. If he doesn't hear it again, he'll just go back to what he was doing. It's human nature.
17. I'm not complaining, but why would you pay all that money for a fancy alarm system and leave your house without setting it?
18. I love looking in your windows. I'm looking for signs that you're home, and for flat screen TVs or gaming systems I'd like. I'll drive or walk through your neighborhood at night, before you close the blinds, just to pick my targets.
19. Avoid announcing your vacation on your Facebook page. It's easier than you think to look up your address.
20. To you, leaving that window open just a crack during the day is a way to let in a little fresh air. To me, it's an invitation.
21. If you don't answer when I knock, I try the door. Occasionally, I hit the jackpot and walk right in.
Here’s an idea…
Put your car keys beside your bed at night.
If you hear a noise outside your home or someone trying to get in your house, just press the panic button for your car. The alarm will be set off, and the horn will continue to sound until either you turn it off or the car battery dies. This tip came from a neighborhood watch coordinator. Next time you come home for the night and you start to put your keys away, think of this: It’s a security alarm system that you probably already have and requires no installation. Test it. It will go off from most everywhere inside your house and will keep honking until your battery runs down or until you reset it with the button on the key fob chain. It works if you park in your driveway or garage. If your car alarm goes off when someone is trying to break into your house, odds are the burglar/rapist won’t stick around. After a few seconds all the neighbors will be looking out their windows to see who is out there and sure enough the criminal won’t want that. And remember to carry your keys while walking to your car in a parking lot. The alarm can work the same way there. This is something that should really be shared with everyone. Maybe it could save a life or a sexual abuse crime.

Obama should swear on Marx's 'Das Kapital' instead of Bible!

Examiner ^ | 1-12-03 | Joe Newby

Catholic League president Bill Donohue said in a press release that Barack Obama should use Karl Marx's "Das Kapital" instead of the Bible when he takes his oath of office later this month, the Huffington Post reported Friday.
"Given Obama’s ideology, perhaps it would make more sense for him to swear on Das Kapital," Donohue wrote.
Donohue issued his release in response to comments made by MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell, who suggested that Obama should not use the Bible in his swearing-in ceremony.
"O’Donnell starts his rant by focusing on Atlanta Pastor Louie Giglio; the evangelical minister bowed to pressure from homosexual activists by agreeing not to give the benediction at President Obama’s inaugural. Pastor Giglio’s crime? He’s a Christian," Donohue said.
"Practicing Christians, along with observant Jews, Mormons, Muslims and millions of others, accept the biblical teachings on the sinfulness of homosexuality. In the 1990s, Giglio addressed this subject, citing Christian teachings, and that was enough to set off the alarms in gay quarters," he wrote.
"Over the past few decades, many homosexuals and theologians have tried to argue that the Bible’s passages condemning homosexuality should not be read as condemning homosexuality. In their postmodern mind, they say that interpretation is wrong. O’Donnell, to his credit, knows these savants are delusional. While he readily admits that the Bible condemns homosexuality, his level of cognitive development does not allow him to discern the difference between behavior and status, which is why he falsely claims the Bible condemns 'gay people,'” Donahue added.
Donohue went on to say that O'Donnell has a problem with the Bible, not Giglio. He also said that O'Donnell's point about Obama not using the Bible is "not without merit" since the president has embraced the gay agenda.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...

It’s a War Zone! More Murders in Chicago in 2012 Than Allied Losses in Afghanistan!

The Gatway Pundit ^ | 1/13/13 | Jim Hoft

There were 405 Coalition deaths in Afghanistan in 2012. 310 of the 405 deaths were Americans.
Meanwhile in Chicago… There were 532 homicides in 2012.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel attributes the rise in homicides, in part, to the broader problem of illegal guns.

(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...