Paul Ryan, Joe Biden, and Heritage Foundation Facts

Heritage Foundation offers Calm Assessment over Noise of Biden-Ryan Debate

Here are some facts about issues discussed in the debate to help serve as an Election Guide for you 

Vice President Biden and Representative Paul Ryan squared off (Thursday) night for a spirited and intense 90-minute debate at Centre College in Danville, KY. Topics ranged from foreign to domestic, touching on serious issues that Heritage policy experts grapple with every day.
While many commentators were critiquing style, a team of 19 Heritage experts cut through the malarkey and focused on substance. They reacted instantly to the debate last night, providing policy research on the multitude of questions raised by moderator and ABC News correspondent Martha Raddatz. Below are some of the highlights of our experts’ reactions to the major issues addressed.

We will be discussing the debate in our first-ever Google Hangout today at noon ET. Follow us on Google+ to join the conversation.

Don’t Blame Budget Cuts for Libya Embassy Attack

Biden claimed that Ryan’s budget is partly responsible for the failures of security that led to the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, saying that “The Congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for.”

As Heritage expert Brett Schaefer pointed out on The Foundry: “Overall funding for those programs has increased sharply over the past decade. Indeed, Worldwide Security Protection is more than double what it was a decade ago. … Moreover, the State Department has considerable latitude in allocating security funds based on current events and intelligence on possible threats. Why that latitude was not applied in Libya deserves further scrutiny.”
It’s also worth noting that the U.S. Senate has not actually adopted a budget in more than three years. So it is hard to see how the appropriations process is the appropriate place to start looking for the failures that led to the death of Stevens and his colleagues. The problems run deeper than that.
–Ted Bromund, Senior Research Fellow in Anglo-American Relations, The Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom

A Not-So-Balanced Approach on Spending

Biden echoed the all-too-familiar mantra that a so-called “balanced approach” is necessary to fix our spending and debt issues. Sounds fair, right? Except that the policy prescription he and President Obama advocate consists of more stimulus spending – disguised as critical investments, of course — plus massive tax hikes on high-income earners and small businesses, for starters. That’s a double whammy guaranteed to harm the economy.
Ryan rightly points out the sluggish economic growth the United States has experienced recently. The unemployment rate is still outlandishly high, and GDP has grown at a crawling rate. It is hardly the recovery Americans were assured would result from federal stimulus spending. That’s all the more reason not to double down on tax hikes on Americans or propose even more government spending. The economy needs to be free from the threat of Taxmageddon and other tax hikes, and Washington needs to curb its spending problem.
–Emily Goff, Research Associate, Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

The Transnational Terrorism Threat
The debate took a quick tour over the landscape of transnational terrorism from Libya to Iraq to Afghanistan to Iran. It was so quick that no one bothered to explain where the war against transnational terrorism stands today.

The case in Libya is tragically all too clear. Al-Qaeda affiliates have established a base in the country. In Iraq, the AP recently reported that since the United States “ended” the war, the number of al-Qaeda in the country has doubled. Iran remains one of the world’s most notorious state sponsors of terrorism. The Taliban and other affiliates are threatening the stability of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Whoever holds the Oval office in January is going to have to deal with a significant transnational terrorism threat. The current U.S. strategy is just not up to the task.
–James Jay Carafano, Deputy Director, The Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, and Director, Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies

Obama Tax Hike Would Devastate Jobs

Biden discussed President Obama’s plan to raise the top two marginal tax rates. If that were to occur, the economy would create 710,000 fewer jobs, according the accounting firm Ernst & Young. Jobs would suffer badly because, even though the Vice President said only 3 percent would pay those higher rates, those 3 percent are the biggest, most successful small businesses that do all the hiring. The Ernst & Young study found the Obama tax hike would devastate jobs because those businesses that would pay the higher rates employ 54 percent of the private workforce.

On the other hand, tax reform like Governor Mitt Romney and Ryan propose would lower rates to encourage growth and do so without reducing revenue or shifting the tax burden from high income taxpayers to middle income families. Even the Tax Policy Center, which is the group Obama and Biden cite to criticize the Romney tax plan, does not claim the Romney plan would reduce revenue — never mind by $5 trillion.
–Curtis Dubay, Senior Policy Analyst, Tax Policy, Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

The $6,400 Question on Medicare

Continued

President Obama, Abortion, and Infanticide

Obama not only supported Abortion, but Voted 4 times for Infanticide

Abortion Survivor Asks: What Will You Answer?

Ad by Susan B. Anthony List

Trust, Newspapers, News and Media

 Low trust— Government and Media

News Clips from American Family Association (Christian media)

Recent surveys from two major polling agencies indicate that Americans have a growing distrust in basic institutions such as government and media.  

A slim majority (51%) now view the U.S. government as a threat to individual liberties rather than a protector of those rights, according to a Rasmussen poll released in June. Only 34% saw the government as a protector of rights, while 15% were undecided. (See story, "Beware the camel's nose.")  

Another Rasmussen poll released last fall revealed that 20% of likely U.S. voters thought the government was operating with the consent of the governed, while 63% believed it was not. 

That poll found that the majority of likely voters felt the federal government had "lost touch with the people it represents," according to Rasmussen.   

According to Gallup's most recent annual Confidence in Institutions survey, 21% of Americans have much confidence in television news. Only 25% have confidence in news reporting of newspapers. The confidence in television is down seven points from last year and has continued in a steady decline of viewers who believe what the mainstream news is saying.

Some things aren't as large as they seem

Perhaps all those homosexual characters on television are paying off for the gay community. 

Less than 2% of the U.S. population self-identifies as gay or lesbian, according to the most reliable estimates. But a recent Gallup poll found that Americans significantly overestimate that figure. 

Gallup found that more than a third of adults believe that more than 25% of Americans are homosexual, with another 17% saying they think the percentage of homosexuals is in the 20-25% range.

                        www.gallup.com, 5/27/12

Study: Fear of hell lowers crime

 

There is a relationship between a society's religious beliefs regarding heaven and hell and how much crime exists, or so says a psychologist from University of Oregon.  

Professor Azim F. Shariff said that his research indicated that a strong cultural belief in a God who punishes sin results in lower crime rates, while stressing a forgiving God tends to increase crime.

"It seems like there is a case to be made for the causal direction that religious punishment does actually lower unethical behavior, whereas forgiveness does seem to license people," Shariff told a local ABC news affiliate.

The study examined attitudes and actions of people in 67 countries over a 26-year period.

                        www.christianpost.com, 6/20/12

 [Global Warming Hoax]

Global what?

Climate change 'deniers' not so dumb after all

The current environmental paradigm assumes that those who don't believe in man-made climate change are less scientifically savvy, while those who do are scientifically smarter.

According to one study, however, those assumptions just aren't true. 

"Seeming public apathy over climate change is often attributed to a deficit in comprehension. The public knows too little science, it is claimed, to understand the evidence or avoid being misled," said a report published in May in the journal Nature Climate Change. The study added: "We conducted a study to test this account and found no support for it."

Instead, the researchers found just the opposite: Those with the highest degrees of scientific understanding were less concerned about climate change, while those who were the most concerned scored slightly lower on tests of scientific knowledge.

"As respondents' science literacy scores increased, their concern with climate change decreased," the paper said. 

Rather than scientific literacy, the researchers said it was ideology that was driving the cultural battle over man-made climate change. Those who believed in individual interests were less concerned about climate change and its causes, while those who believed in pushing for social equality were more concerned.

The study was funded by the National Science Foundation.

                        www.nature.com, 5/27/12; www.foxnews.com, 5/28/12

Islamist promises Israel's destruction …

Islam still promotes terrorism

A radical Muslim preacher predicted that the new president of Egypt would construct a new Muslim caliphate - a single Islamic dominion - over the Arab world with its capital in Jerusalem.

  

In a May speech at a soccer stadium in Cairo, Muslim cleric Safwat Higazi told thousands of Muslim Brotherhood supporters, "The capital of the caliphate - the capital of the United States of the Arabs - will be Jerusalem, God willing."

  

He then led the crowd in chanting, "Millions of martyrs march toward Jerusalem," according to the Jerusalem Post.

  

Higazi claimed this would be accomplished by then-candidate Mohamed Mursi, who eventually won the Egyptian presidency in a controversial election victory. Mursi agreed with Higazi's sentiments regarding Israel.  

"Yes, Jerusalem is our goal," Mursi told the crowd. "We shall pray in Jerusalem, or die as martyrs on its threshold." 

Mursi has also said that Egypt-s Coptic Christian population must "convert [to Islam], pay tribute or leave" the country. The statement was made privately to a journalist but was publicized by the Egyptian news website El Bashayer.   

… and then the Vatican

The Middle East Media Research Institute released a video and translation of an interview with a prominent Muslim professor in which he predicted the Islamic re-conquest of Andalusia (Spain) and the subjugation ofz the Vatican, home to the Catholic Church. 

"The conquest of Andalusia is an old dream, something Muslims proudly hope for and will continue to hope for in the future," Dr. Subhi Al-Yaziji said in a May 25 interview on Al-Aqsa TV. He added: "We place our hopes in Allah and trust that the day will come when our triumph will not be restricted to Palestine. Our hopes go beyond that - to raise the banner of the caliphate over the Vatican, the 'Rome' of today, in accordance with the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad: 'Constantinople shall be conquered, and then Rome.'"  

According to MEMRI, Al-Yaziji is dean of Koranic studies at Islamic University of Gaza and former department head at the Ministry of Religious Endowments for Hamas. 

                        www.christianpost.com, 5/31/12;  www.jpost.com, 5/8/12; www.memri.org, 6/8/12;  www.theblaze.com, 6/12/12

 

Obama Birth Certificate, Social Security Number, a Fraud?

You be the Judge: Is President Obama's Social Security Number a Fraud?

Fraud Investigation

Someone did some research on this from public sources and a little history. The documentation links are listed below. What do you think? If there is no fraud involved, why has there been such an ongoing Cover-Up?

A MUST READ for every US Citizen

Patriots.....THIS IS SIMPLY FIRST CLASS EASY TO READ, EASY TO

UNDERSTAND, DETECTIVE WORK....AND IT INCLUDES THE

LINKS TO DOCUMENTATION

HOW NO ONE GETS
A REASSIGNED SS NUMBER


An intensive investigation has revealed the identity of the man whose Social Security number (SSN) is being used by President Obama: Jean Paul Ludwig, who was born in France in 1890, immigrated to the United States in 1924, and was assigned SSN 042-68-4425 (Obama's current SSN) on or about March 1977.
Ludwig lived most of his adult life in Connecticut . Because of that,
his SSN begins with the digits 042, which are among only a select few reserved for Connecticut residents.
Obama never lived or worked in that state! Therefore, there is no
reason on earth for his SSN to start with the digits 042. None
whatsoever! Now comes the best part! Ludwig spent the final months of his life Hawaii , where he died.
Conveniently, Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, worked part-time in the Probate Office in the Honolulu Hawaii Courthouse, and therefore had access to the SSNs of deceased individuals. The Social Security Administration was never informed of Ludwig's death, and because he never received Social Security benefits there were no benefits to stop and therefore, no questions were ever raised. The suspicion, of course, is that Dunham, knowing her grandson was not a U.S. Citizen, either because he was born in Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia upon his adoption by Lolo Soetoro simply scoured the probate records until she found someone who died who was not receiving Social Security benefits, and selected Mr. Ludwig's Connecticut SSN for Obama.

Although many Americans do not understand the meaning of the term "natural born" there are few who do not understand that if you are using someone else's SSN it is a clear indication of fraud.
Let's all get this information out to everybody on our mailing lists..
If the voters of this great nation can succeed in bringing this lying, deceitful, cheating, corrupt, impostor to justice it will be the
biggest and best news in decades for our country and the world.

****************************************************************************************************
Very Interesting Bit of Detective Work:
1.
Back in 1961 people of color
were called 'Negroes.' So how can the
Obama 'birth certificate' state he is
'African-American when
the term wasn't even used at that time?

2.
The birth certificate that the
White House released lists Obama's birth
as August 4, 1961. It also lists Barack
Hussein Obama as his father.
No big deal, right? At the time of Obama's birth,
it also shows that his
father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama's
father was born in
" Kenya , East Africa ". This wouldn't
seem like anything of concern,
except the fact that Kenya did not even
exist until 1963, two whole years
after Obama's birth, and 27 years after his
father's birth. How could
Obama's father have been born in a country that
did not yet exist? Up
and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was
known as the " British East
Africa Protectorate".

3.
On the birth certificate
released by the White House, the listed place of
birth is "Kapi'olani Maternity
Gynecological Hospital ". This cannot
be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961
were called "KauiKeolani
Children's Hospital" and "Kapi'olani
Maternity Home", respectively.
The name did not change to
Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital
until 1978, when these two hospitals merged.
How can this particular
name of the hospital be on a birth certificate
dated 1961 if this name had
not yet been applied to it until 1978?

Resources:
http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx
Post-colonial history (from Wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Kenya
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya
Why hasn't this been discussed in the major
media?????

Paul Ryan: Facts about Health Care, Budget

3 things every voter needs to know about Paul Ryan’s Medicare reform plan–in 100 words

By James Pethokoukis |

 

In his most excellent post on the Paul Ryan vice presidential pick, AEI’s Andrew Biggs highlights some key facts about Ryan’s approach to saving Medicare. 

These are clip and save:

1. No one over the age of 55 would be affected in any way.

2. Traditional Medicare fee-for-service would remain available for all. “Premium support”—that is, government funding of private insurance plans chosen by individuals—is an option for those who choose it. No senior would be forced out of the traditional Medicare program against his will.

3. Overall funding for Medicare under the Ryan-Wyden plan is scheduled to grow at the same rate as under President Obama’s proposals. Is this “gutting Medicare” and “ending Medicare as we know it”? In reality, it’s the market giving seniors cheaper, higher quality choices they can take if they wish, with the traditional program remaining an option.