Thursday, March 5, 2009

Pray For Phyllis Schlafly

Monday, March 02, 2009

News about Phyllis

American Daily reports:
Berkeley, California-AGN-TCL Wire Release 9/27/09 Shocked Berkeley students and adults, Tuesday evening, February, 24, witnessed the legendary Phyllis Schlafly fall as she was leaving the stage after delivering a well received and motivating speech about “Conservatism vs Feminism.“ Through the pain of a fractured hip, the 84 year old Mrs. Schlafly was as courageous and gracious waiting for medical assistance as she has been throughout her 40 years as a political activist.

Friday, February 27, 2009

Prayers for Phyllis Schlafly

Michelle Malkin reports:
If Phyllis Schlafly were a liberal, she’d already have buildings and holidays named after her, MacArthur genius grants, countless women’s magazine covers, and the unending admiration of the media elite.

At 85, this mother, grandmother, and political icon remains a tireless activist, prolific author, and frequent lecturer. But because she is an unapologetic and outspoken conservative, she is demonized instead of lionized.

... The California Eagle Forums’ Orlean Koehle reports that while coming off the podium after giving her speech, she missed a step and fell and broke her hip. ...

Please keep Mrs. Schlafly and her family in your prayers. She was scheduled to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute at CPAC on Saturday.
She will have to miss that award. Please don't send flowers; she has too many already.

Please pray for this leader of Conservative Christian Women. She is a giant among us. Pray for her speedy recovery. We need her now more than ever. Pray that her pain be taken away and that she regains her strength and health very, very soon. God bless this wonderful woman.

Below is just one example of Mrs. Schlafly's Eagle Forum Report. It is about Executive Orders.

Power Grab Through Executive Orders
  • Clinton's War in Yugoslavia
  • Was It All "According to Plan"?
  • Does Sovereignty Still Matter?
  • Power Grab Through Executive Orders
    Not only does President Clinton not feel any shame about his impeachment (as he told Dan Rather), Clinton now feels stronger than ever, able to override the U.S. Constitution and ignore Congress. He has been exercising extraordinary new powers -- never asserted by any prior President -- both through Executive Orders (EO) and abuse of his title of Commander in Chief. Rep. Jack Metcalf (R-WA) says that Clinton has "made himself a super-legislator by issuing executive orders that require the appropriation of funds."

    Clinton's good friend and defender of Oval Office misbehavior, Paul Begala, put it like this: "Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool." No, it isn't cool; it's hot with disdain for the constitutional rules that "all" legislative powers belong to Congress and that "all bills for raising revenues shall originate in the House." James Madison called the accumulation of executive and legislative powers in the same branch "the very definition of tyranny."

    Clinton will be President for another year and a half. By what the press has variously called a "blizzard" or a "blitz" of Executive Orders, Clinton has grabbed new powers for the executive branch, made broad public policy changes, spent non-appropriated taxpayers' money, and even tried to restructure our governmental system. Clinton's Executive Orders are in awesome tandem with his other power grabs through phony "peacekeeping" expeditions, unauthorized bombing of four sovereign countries, plans to create a "Homelands Defense Command" to use the Army for domestic law enforcement, monitoring of our bank accounts, and databasing of our health records.

    The term Executive Order does not appear in the Constitution. The Executive Order authority derives from the President's Article II, Section 3 power to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." However, "laws" must mean laws that are already passed, not laws that an Executive Order purports to create. The validity of particular Executive Orders has often been questioned, but neither Congress nor the Supreme Court has ever defined the extent of their power, and courts have rarely invalidated or even reviewed EOs.

    President Franklin D. Roosevelt proclaimed a national emergency and issued wide-reaching Executive Orders, notably his 1933 bank holiday and prohibition on private possession of gold, but those orders were subsequently ratified by Congress. The notorious EO 9066, under which some Japanese-Americans were interned during World War II, was subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court under FDR's war powers. In 1952, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Harry Truman's EO 10340 to seize the nation's steel mills.

    In 1996, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit invalidated Clinton's EO 12954, which attempted to prohibit federal agencies from doing business with companies that had permanently replaced strikers.

    Clinton has issued 279 Executive Orders, but many others are not numbered. The Presidential Decision Directives (PDD) have a different sequence of numbers, and many of them are kept secret, such as the notorious PDD 25, by which Clinton presumed to give himself the power to assign U.S. troops to serve under foreign commanders and under foreign rules of engagement.

    Some of Clinton's Executive Orders are federal land grabs over property that belongs either to the states or to private landowners. Land use and zoning are quintessentially matters of state or local, not federal, jurisdiction.

    By Executive Order 13061, the American Heritage Rivers Initiative , Clinton purported to give himself the power to take over 10 rivers a year (later amended to 20 by EO 13093, of which 14 have been named), whose adjacent lands will be put under the control of Clinton-appointed River Navigators, each with a salary of $100,000. Congress never authorized this land grab or appropriated any money for it, so Clinton says he will divert funds from 12 departments. This EO on rivers takes governing authority away from states and localities, and threatens private property rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. (For details on EO 13061, see the Phyllis Schlafly Report, April 1998, p.4)

    Clinton's surprise grab of 1.7 million acres of Utah land for a national park in 1996 just happened to include a trillion dollars' worth of clean-burning, low-sulfur hard coal. Clinton's removal of this huge natural resource from commercial availability tremendously enhanced the value of the world's second largest source of environmentally-safe coal, which just happens to be owned by Clinton's Indonesian friends the Riadys, who gave millions of dollars to Clinton's presidential campaigns in 1992 and 1996.

    For the Mexican and Brazilian bailouts, Clinton used executive authority to raid a U.S. Treasury Department fund set up in the 1930s for the specific purpose of being available to stabilize the U.S. dollar. The President certainly was not authorized to give this money to foreign governments so they could make their loan payments due to Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin's old firm, Goldman Sachs.

    Clinton's EO 13107 on Implementation of Human Rights Treaties attempts to bypass the constitutional requirement that treaties, to be valid, must be ratified by the Senate. This EO sets up a framework to implement our alleged "obligations" under UN treaties on human rights "to which the United States is now or may become a party in the future."

    The first treaty listed in EO 13107 is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was ratified by the Senate during George Bush's Administration in 1992. Aggressive implementation of this treaty can open up a can of worms in regard to our First Amendment rights, criminal law, our unique system of federalism, and sex discrimination. The treaty's Article 23 even binds governments "to ensure equality of rights and responsibilities of spouses during marriage," one of the UN "rights" to be monitored by the Article 28 "Human Rights Committee" on which the United States may have only one out of 18 members.

    There are several unratified UN human rights treaties that could be "implemented" under EO 13107:

    1. The International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights was rejected by the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush Administrations because it refuses to recognize one of the most fundamental American economic rights, the right to own property. This UN treaty tries to bind us "to take steps," including "legislative measures," to the "maximum" of our resources in order to achieve "full realization" of "adequate food, clothing and housing" for everyone in the world. It would obligate us "to ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need."

    2. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child would bring about massive UN interference in family life, education, daycare, health care, and standard of living. Article 43 sets up a committee of ten UN "experts" to monitor the raising of children and our "progress" in complying with the treaty's "obligations."

    3. The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) would require us to follow UN/feminist dictates about "customs and practices," "social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women," "family education," and even revision of textbooks. It's easy to see that Clinton's EO on UN treaties is a payoff to the radical feminists who stuck by him during his Paula, Monica and Juanita scandals, as well as a pursuit of his own global agenda.

    Other Clinton Executive Orders include his EO 12919 of June 3, 1994, entitled National Defense Industrial Resources Preparedness, which asserts plenary and dictatorial authority over citizens, food, transportation, energy, health, contracts, materials and resources to be exercised by the National Security Council and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). Many wonder if this EO's real purpose is to grab emergency powers if we are bitten by the Y2K bug.

    Clinton's EO 13083 on Federalism of May 14, 1998, which was a transparent attempt to rescind the Tenth Amendment (as well as President Reagan's EO on Federalism), did give Congress a wake-up call. After congressional protest, Clinton said he would suspend it, but it's still viable and Congress should pass legislation to render it inoperative. (For details on EO 13083, see the Phyllis Schlafly Report, July 1998, p.4)

    Congress and the American people must call a halt to Clinton's assault on our separation-of-powers form of government by his unprecedented use of Executive Orders. One constructive step would be to pass Rep. Jack Metcalf's bill, H.Con.Res. 30. It provides that any Executive Order that "infringes on congressional powers and duties," or requires spending federal funds "not specifically appropriated for the purpose of the executive order," would be advisory only and have no effect.

    How about them apples? Rotten!!!!!!!

    No comments:

    Post a Comment