Concealed Weapons Bill Closer To Reality In Arizona

Concealed weapons bill closer to reality in Arizona Lawmakers in the Arizona House of Representatives have adopted a bill that, if signed by the state’s governor, will allow people to carry concealed weapons without a permit, making the currently required background checks and classes unnecessary.

The bill was passed in a 36-19 vote, and if Governor Jan Brewer signs it, as some commentators expect she will, Arizona will join Alaska and Vermont as the only three states that do not require permits to carry concealed weapons. Two states ban them altogether, and the remaining 45 require such permits.

In response to critics who say this may increase access to guns for law-breakers, Republican Representative David Gowan, one of the sponsors of the bill, said that "what’s dangerous is when they’re [only] in criminals’ hands, not citizens’ hands."

The vote comes as Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), a support organization, is winding down its week-long protest against laws and policies banning licensed concealed guns on school premises.

According to SCCC, during the five-day event college students across America strapped on empty holsters in an act of silent protest.
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19713932-ADNFCR

Rocked By Scandals, Republicans Fall Behind Democrats In Fundraising Efforts

Rocked by scandals, Republicans fall behind Democrats in fundraising efforts Even though the Republican Party raised more money than the Democrats in February, the pattern seemed to reverse in March, leading some to wonder if this situation had anything to do with the recent scandals that rocked the GOP.

As the primary election season gets under way, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) raised at least $13 million last month, while the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) total was $11.4 million, according to media reports.

The figures were revealed at a time the Republican leadership was trying to recover from allegations that RNC Chairman Michael Steele spent thousands of dollars on private jets and that a mid-level RNC official charged nearly $2,000 at a lesbian strip club in California.

Still, the chairman chose to look on the bright side, noting the March haul was among the best on record for the GOP, and was "a testament of America’s opposition to the Democrats’ government-run healthcare legislation."

Meanwhile, Democratic leaders have used the March numbers to argue that supporters of the reform were more generous than its opponents, according to Market Watch.
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19713938-ADNFCR

Greenspan Gets Grilled By Financial Crisis Panel

Greenspan gets grilled by financial crisis panelWhile admitting that he did make some mistakes during his tenure, Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan defended his record last week, arguing that his policy of keeping interest rates low did not contribute to the financial collapse.

Testifying before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, Greenspan, who was chairman of the Fed from 1987 to 2006, was bombarded with questions from panel members who were highly critical of his lack of response concerning irresponsible mortgage lending.

"Very simply, Mr. Chairman, why…did you not act to contain abusive, deceptive subprime lending?" asked panel chairman Phil Angelides. "Why did you allow it to become such an infection in the marketplace?"

In response, Greenspan noted several steps that the Fed took under his leadership to prevent irresponsible lending, and claimed that he made the correct decisions 70 percent of the time, according to Fox News. He refused to mention the specific failures that he felt he was responsible for.

Greenspan also indicated that the Federal Reserve helped to temper the economic recession through the decision he made in the early 2000s, CNN.com reports.

"We did do almost all of the things that you are raising," Greenspan told the panel. "And the consequence of that, I think, is that things were better than they could have been."
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19712993-ADNFCR

National Tea Party Federation Arrives On The Political Scene

National Tea Party Federation arrives on the political scene A coalition of national and regional Tea Party groups has announced the formation of the National Tea Party Federation (NTPF). Its proclaimed goal is to send a unified message and media response on behalf of key leaders and its affiliates.

The NTPF will also act to promote the Tea Party movement’s objectives of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government and free markets, its founders have stated.

"The combination of the Tea Party leadership and a strong network of alliances brings together activists with the resources to get our message out while coordinating across many groups," said Mark A. Skoda of the Memphis Tea Party.

His counterpart from Richmond, Jamie Radtke, added that the new federation understands "the importance of standing together while enhancing the ability to frame the discussion and realize gains amongst this approach to collaboration."

Among the founding members of the National Tea Party Federation are the American Grassroots Coalition, the Tea Party Express and the organization called DC Works for US. Meanwhile, its broader alliance includes Americans for Tax Reform, FreedomWorks and the Institute of Liberty. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19711665-ADNFCR

Secretary Geithner Due For Currency Talks In Beijing

Secretary Geithner due for currency talks in Beijing As the dispute continues between the United States and China over the latter’s alleged attempts to keep its currency undervalued, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner will visit Beijing April 8 for talks with the Chinese vice premier for economic affairs.

Although details of the talks have not been released, media reports suggests the meeting with Wang Qishan will focus on settling the currency dispute, which has threatened to overshadow economic cooperation between the two countries.

The U.S. government has complained that the artificially low exchange rate is giving China’s exporters an unfair advantage and has led a huge trade surplus with the U.S. In fact, some lawmakers have called for the imposition of punitive tariffs on Chinese imports, if Beijing fails to make the yuan more flexible.

However, not everyone is happy with the administration’s approach. For example, the National Inflation Association (NIA) recently said that America should not "upset" China, since the domestic consumption has been made possible by China’s weak currency that has artificially boosted the dollar’s value. NIA experts have expressed their fear that the appreciation of the yuan would lead to a hyperinflation in the U.S.

"It’s absurd for Congress to say they are going to penalize China, when China has the power to make the U.S. dollar collapse overnight," NIA has said. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19711452-ADNFCR

Court Overrules Government On ‘Net Neutrality’

Court overrules government on 'net neutrality'The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has backed the cable company Comcast in its dispute with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which accused the company of slowing some Internet traffic on its network. The ruling is seen as a blow to the government’s efforts to push through "net neutrality" regulations.

The proposed regulations would prevent companies such as AT&T, Verizon and Comcast from restricting access to Internet content, applications and services offered by competitors. Analysts say applications such as Google, Skype and Facebook would be among the biggest beneficiaries of such regulations.

In the court’s opinion, the FCC exceeded its authority when it sanctioned Comcast in 2008 for preventing some subscribers from using peer-to-peer file-sharing services to download large files, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The ruling was welcomed by the American Legislative Exchange Council, whose public sector co-chair Representative Bill Hamzy (R-Conn.), said that "the FCC’s order was an unprecedented attempt by government to patrol private broadband networks."

However, the FCC has vowed to continue to push for net neutrality, with its spokeswoman Jen Howard saying that the court did not "[disagree] with the importance of preserving a free and open Internet, nor did it close the door to other methods for achieving this important end," quoted by the Journal.ADNFCR-1961-ID-19711453-ADNFCR

Essential Oil Could Be Used To Combat MRSA

Thyme essential oil could be used to combat MRSA, study says Individuals who develop an infection but would prefer to use a natural medication instead of a pharmaceutical drug may be interested to learn that essential oils have been shown to have anitbacterial properties.

Greek scientists have studied these natural ingredients and found that the essential oils obtained from thyme were the most effective in almost completely killing bacteria such as meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), which is responsible for extremely difficult to treat hospital infections.

Lead researcher professor Yiannis Samaras from the Technological Educational Institute of Ionian Islands, said that these results are important not only because essential oils are cheaper than standard drugs, but also because "decreased use of antibiotics will help minimize the risk of new strains of antibiotic resistant micro-organisms emerging."

Essential oils have been recognized for hundreds of years for their therapeutic properties. For example, Australian aborigines used tea tree oil to treat colds, sore throats, skin infections and insect bites.

Today, these products can be obtained with other natural and dietary supplements in health stores across the country. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19711455-ADNFCR

Tea Parties vs. Socialist Redistributionists

Although President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and their elite socialistic foot soldiers cast it in pleasant, humanitarian terms as a means of providing healthcare to those who couldn’t otherwise afford it, the majority of Americans recognized Obamacare for what it was: a transfer of wealth to Big Pharma, trial lawyers, unions and other special interests and a power grab over society’s producers.

Hence, the growth of the Tea Party movement across the United States.

The Tea Party took root early in 2009 in response to the massive government spending policies and takeover of two-thirds of the American automobile industry and all of the financial industry by the redistributionists—carrying both the Democrat and Republican labels—seeking to turn America into Karl Marx’s dream state. The Tea Party grew stronger and louder as Obama—the Liar-in-Chief—denied his socialistic tendencies and looked down on them with an arrogant disdain and dismissiveness.

Tea Partiers found their voices as 2009 turned into 2010 and the power grab reached its zenith when Obama’s dream came true and the House and Senate overrode the will of the majority of Americans and passed into law Obamacare on March 21. They turned out by the thousands in Washington, D.C., that day and the day before—traveling there from all over the country on a couple of days notice—to protest, and those who couldn’t go flooded the Capitol switchboard with calls and the Capitol email servers with correspondence.

The arrogant elitists who occupy Washington, D.C., laughed in the faces of the Tea Partiers once the passage of Obamacare was assured. Pelosi grabbed her gavel and, along with a group of her lackeys, marched boldly through the crowd of Tea Party protesters on the day the voting began, hoping above hope to incite some incident that would allow them to paint the protesters as radicals and racists.

When no one took the bait the arrogant elitists made up an incident, with one congressman saying he was slurred by a racial epithet from Tea Partiers and another claiming he was spat upon. Despite those claims no arrests were made, no video or audio evidence of any slurs have turned up and the congressman who claims spittle flew his way was unable to make any kind of identification of a culprit. And Andrew Breitbart’s $100,000 reward to the United Negro College Fund for evidence of a slur remains unclaimed.

Capitol police escorting the group of elected elitists through the crowd of Tea Party peasants saw no evidence of anything untoward and sensed no danger for those they were charged with protecting.

That’s because Tea Partiers aren’t violent sociopaths as the Left and liberal media would have you believe. They are ordinary, everyday Main Street Americans—49 percent Republican and 51 percent either independent or Democrat; 70 percent conservative, but 22 percent moderate; 55 percent male; and 45 percent with annual income below $50,000, 55 percent above $50,000. In age, education, employment status and race the Tea Party supporters break down statistically almost exactly like the general population, according to Gallup polls.

They’re people who would rather be at home or at work than having to stand outside their capitol building holding signs and demonstrating. They are people who, three or four years ago, would not have dreamed they would have to stand up to a government that is spending away the future of their children and grandchildren and making an unconstitutional power grab.

And make no mistake: That’s what the elected elitists are doing. That group of Ivy League educated lawyers and political scientists that walk the halls of Congress—and one who now resides in the White House and refuses to travel sans teleprompter—has been attempting to pull a bait and switch on the American people, telling them Obamacare had nothing to do with socialism or redistribution of wealth or power over the people but only in helping the less fortunate.

Some fell for it. But, despite Obama’s eloquent teleprompter and long windedness, most haven’t. Indeed, 52 percent still oppose Obamacare four weeks after its passage. But now that it has passed the elites are no longer hiding their true intent: socialist redistribution.

In their own words:

  • “It’s a simple proposition to us: Everyone is entitled to adequate medical health care. If you call that a ‘redistribution of income’—well, so be it. I don’t call it that. I call it just being fair—giving the middle class taxpayers an even break that the wealthy have been getting.”—Vice President Joe Biden
  • “(Health reform is) an income shift. It is a shift, a leveling, to help lower-income, middle-income Americans. … [T]he maldistribution of income in America has gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind. (The new health care legislation) will have the effect of addressing that maldistribution of income in America.”—Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.)
  • “I don’t worry about the Constitution on this. … What I care more about, I care more about the people dying every day that don’t have health care.”—Rep. Phil Hare (D-Ill.)
  • “Let me remind you this (Americans allegedly dying because of lack of universal healthcare) has been going on for years. We are bringing it to a halt. The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 (million) American people in different ways it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”—Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.)

To their credit, Republicans in Congress opposed Obamacare. It seems the GOP plans to run on a platform of “Repeal the Bill” as we head into the midterm elections this fall. However, Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), in typical Republican style of surrendering before the battle has been enjoined, has already lost his backbone and is saying repeal is not going to happen. The surrender came three weeks after he said Republicans would and should run on a platform of repeal.

Senate candidate Mark Kirk of Illinois has also backed off his repeal the bill stance. Rep. Mike Castle, (R-Del.) is running for the state’s open Senate seat and he is also avoiding a pledge to repeal. Expect other Republicans to follow.

As I pointed out last week in Don’t Pin Your Hopes On The Party Of Lincoln, the GOP can’t be trusted to fight for smaller government. Big government is in their genes. Thankfully, Kirk and Castle have opposition.

Remember in 1994, after a bruising fight with President Bill Clinton over universal healthcare, Republicans ran on their Contract with America which would have, in their minds, streamlined government, required a balanced budget, created jobs, set term limits and produced other reforms. Some elements did not pass in Congress and others were vetoed by Clinton and the Republicans moved on to other things, like growing government under George W. Bush.

So if you want to take back your government—take back your country—from the Obama regime and his Marxists redistributionists, don’t think you’re going to do that by selecting just any Republican candidate. He or she may be a Bob Corker, Mike Castle or Mark Kirk—maybe a socialist, maybe a progressive or maybe just a spineless, deceitful politician—with no intention of shrinking government.

The Tea Parties will give you some idea of the worth of a candidate. But it’s up to each individual voter to check out a candidate’s record if he has one, or his words and deeds if he doesn’t, before the vote and to hold his feet to the fire after the election.

That’s the only way you’re going to be able to take your country back. The elitist redistributionists are feeling invincible, and their special interests promise generous campaign contributions when the campaign begins.

It’s your job as a voter—as a citizen—to show that your vote is more important than cash from corporatists, trial lawyers, unions and their other johns.

What Is A Good Way To Store Gold Coins?

Dear Bob,

I want my son to get some coins each month, but where can he hide them in an apartment that is not in a safe or lock box that someone can pick up and carry away? What is a good way to store them?

JZ

Dear JZ,

First of all, tell no one that you have gold on the premises. That goes for friends and relatives. Any slip of the tongue can alert a thief to your valuables who would be more diligent in a search than would a burglar who picked your home at random.

After that, there are some simple tricks you can use depending upon the way your apartment is constructed. If there are voids in closets (ceilings or walls) you can buy a small—preferably fireproof—safe and secure it in the void. Be sure the void is covered in such a way that it doesn’t look different from its surroundings. If you have large baseboards you can remove one section and cut a small hole in the drywall and place your gold behind the baseboard, securing the baseboard with just a couple of nails for easy removal. You can purchase a package of frozen vegetables or fruit or a container of ice cream, remove the contents and put your coins in the container and the container in the freezer. Most burglars won’t look there. You can also place a few coins at a time in envelopes and tape them inside your cabinets to the underside of the countertop. If you use a little bit of imagination you can thwart most common thieves.

Best Wishes,
Bob

SOCKDOLAGER—A Tale of Davy Crockett, Charity and Congress

A "sockdolager" is a knock-down blow. This is a newspaper reporter’s captivating story of his unforgettable encounter with the old "Bear Hunter" from Tennessee.

From "The Life of Colonel David Crockett", by Edward S. Ellis
(Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)


CROCKETT was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.

I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support—rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:

"Mr. Speaker—I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it.

We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount.

There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt.

The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity.

Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.

Previous engagements preventing me from seeing Crockett that night, I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table.

I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:

"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."

He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said: "Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."

I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:


SEVERAL YEARS AGO I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.

The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.

The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.

So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don’t be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."

He replied: "I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."

I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and…"

"’Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’

This was a sockdolager… I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."

"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."

"No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"

"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with."

"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"

Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:

Davy Crockett"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government.

So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.

No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give.

The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."

I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:

"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."

I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."

He laughingly replied:

"Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."

"If I don’t," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."

"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday a week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."

"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye… I must know your name."

"My name is Bunce."

"Not Horatio Bunce?"

"Yes."

"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."

We shook hands and parted.

It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.

I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him—no, that is not the word—I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

But to return to my story: The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted—at least, they all knew me.

In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

"Fellow citizens—I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."

I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

"And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."

He came upon the stand and said:

"Fellow citizens—It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."

He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

"NOW, SIR," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.

"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week’s pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men—men who think nothing of spending a week’s pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased—a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

Research Finds Beneficial Compounds In Pure Maple Syrup

Study finds pure maple syrup contains antioxidants that are beneficial for healthNew research suggests that pouring pure maple syrup on your next order of pancakes will do much more than just give you a sugar high.

University of Rhode Island researcher Navindra Seeram, who specializes in medicinal plant research, has found more than 20 compounds in maple syrup from Canada that have been linked to human health, 13 of which are newly discovered in maple syrup.

During his maple syrup research, Seeram and his research team found phenolics, the beneficial class of antioxidant compounds also found in berries. These antioxidants are known to have anti-cancer, anti-bacterial and anti-diabetic properties.

“We know that plants must have strong antioxidant mechanisms because they are in the sun throughout their lives,” Seeram said. “We already know that berries, because of their bright colors, are high in anti-oxidants. Now we are looking at maple syrup, which comes from the sap located just inside the bark, which is constantly exposed to the sun.”

Previous research has found that maple syrup is full of naturally occurring minerals such as zinc, thiamine and calcium.

“Maple syrup is unique in that it is the only commercial product in our diet that comes from a plant’s sap. Canada is the biggest producer of maple syrup and the U.S. is the biggest consumer,” Seeram said.ADNFCR-2035-ID-19682759-ADNFCR

Mediterranean Spices Are Among The World’s Most Potent Antioxidants

Mediterranean spices are among the world's most potent antioxidants Those searching for a healthy diet regimen may try Mediterranean cuisine, as Spanish scientists have determined that spices used in that region have powerful antioxidant properties.

Researchers from Miguel Hernandez University (UMH) in Catalonia determined that cloves contain high levels of phenolic compounds, which give them the highest capacity to give off hydrogen and allow them to reduce lipid peroxidation well. In addition, cloves were found to be among the best iron reducers.

"The results show that use of the natural oxidants occurring in spices used in the Mediterranean diet, or their extracts, is a viable option for the food industry, as long as their characteristics of the food product are not affected," Juana Fernandez-Lopez, an author of the study and a researcher at the UMH.

"These substances exhibit high antioxidant capacity, and could have beneficial effects for health," says the researcher," she added.

Essential oils from other spices used in the Mediterranean diet, including oregano, thyme, rosemary and sage, were also evaluated by the team, and found to be valuable natural sources of antioxidants.

For busy individuals who may not be getting enough nutrients from their food, dietary supplements may be a great option. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19708871-ADNFCR

Harry Reid Mocks Sarah Palin As He Launches Campaign

Harry Reid mocks Sarah Palin as he launches campaign Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) kicked off his re-election campaign in his home state on April 5 by making a joke at the expense of Sarah Palin, who rallied voters in his hometown of Searchlight a few weeks ago.

At that event, the former Alaska governor said she hoped that the big government politics and the big spending promoted by the Democratic leaders in Congress will come to an end in November, and that Nevada voters will "fire" Reid.

As he was opening his speech on Monday, Reid said he "was going to give a few remarks on the people who were over here a week ago Saturday … but I couldn’t write it all on my hand."

Repeating Palin’s now-famous catch phrase, he added "You betcha!" to general laughter from the audience.

However, despite a rare display of a sense of humor, most commentators believe Reid may face an uphill battle as he campaigns for a fifth term in office.

A new Rasmussen Poll found that Reid has just 39 to 42 precent of the Nevada vote when matched against three Republican opponents. Two of his potential opponents now top the 50 percent level of support.ADNFCR-1961-ID-19708400-ADNFCR

As Top GOP Aids Resign In Wake Of Scandal, Calls For Steele To Step Down Intensify

As top GOP aids resign in wake of scandal, calls for Steele to step down intensify Embattled Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Steele has been trying to reassure party members that the GOP will be ready for the midterm elections, but he is increasingly facing calls to resign.

Rocked by scandals—including allegations that young members of the party entertained guests at the party’s expense at a strip club—the GOP leadership appears to be increasingly shaky. This was exemplified by the recent resignation of a committee member Sean Mahoney, who accused Steele of spending donor’s money with "reckless disregard."

Mahoney’s resignation followed that of RNC Chief of Staff Ken McKay.

And although Steel has tried to reassure the party and its followers that he took the responsibility seriously and would not tolerate misuse of funds, voices calling for him to vacate his job have been growing.

Among those calling for Steele to step aside was Republican strategist Alex Castellanos, who questioned the chairman’s ability to lead the party into November’s elections in a commentary on CNN.

"I think a change in the direction now, at this point, would do the party good," Castellanos said.

However, former New York Mayor and presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani was among those supporting Steele. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19708409-ADNFCR

Davy Crockett and the U.S. Constitution

When you hear the name “Davy Crockett,” what do you think of?

If you’re of “a certain age,” as the more diplomatic among us like to say, you probably think of Fess Parker wearing a coonskin cap. The incredibly popular television program in which he starred had every boy in America (and a few girls, too) clamoring for their own buckskin jacket and coonskin cap.

A few years later John Wayne played Davy Crockett in the film The Alamo, laying down his life at the Alamo for the cause of Texas’ independence. About the same time the Kingston Trio had a hit with a song called “Remember the Alamo.” I can still remember most of the lyrics.

But before the events portrayed in the movie and the television show, the famed frontiersman served for a couple of terms in the United States Congress—from 1827 to 1831 and again from 1833 to 1835.

After his defeat in the 1834 election he said, “I told the people of my district that I would serve them faithfully as I had done; but if not… you may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas.” He eventually did, and died on March 6, 1836, when the Alamo finally fell to Mexican troops after an 11-day siege.

It is an episode from his time in Congress that I want to tell you about today. Davy himself first told the tale, in a speech on the floor of the House that he later reprinted under the title “Sockdolager!”

A “sockdolager” is one of those slap-your-forehead moments, when something suddenly becomes blindingly clear to you. That’s how Davy felt when he came to realize that his understanding of the U.S. Constitution was sadly lacking. Here’s what happened.

Near the end of his first term, Davy decided to visit the western edge of his district to see how much support he’d get if he decided to seek reelection. To appreciate how different campaigning was back then, let me quote the beginning of Davy’s tale:

“So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddle-bags and put out. I had been out about a week, and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence.”

Can you believe it? No fancy entourage, no public relations flacks paving the way, no reporters covering the scene. Not even a buggy with a suitcase or two; it was just Davy, a horse, and a couple of saddle-bags. Life sure was different back then, wasn’t it?

Davy introduces himself to the farmer and says, “I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and ….”

Before he could continue, the man interrupted and said, “Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before and voted for you the last time you were elected. I supposed you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.”

Needless to say, the young congressman is surprised and asks the man why on earth not. The farmer replies, “You gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case, you are not the man to represent me.”

As Davy says, when he later related the story on the floor of Congress, “This was a sockdolager!” I told the man, “There must be some mistake, for I do not remember that I gave my vote last winter upon any constitutional question.” The man replies, “No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the back woods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?”

Crockett replies, “Certainly it is. And I thought that was the last vote for which anybody in the world would have found fault with.”

Then comes the classic denouement: “Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?”

Let me pick up the rest of this part of the story, exactly as Davy Crockett told it on the floor of Congress: “Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:  ‘“Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.’

I’d love to share the farmer’s entire response with you, but I don’t have room here. Instead, let me do two things. First, let me direct you to Davy Crockett’s complete speech. Personal Liberty Digest has created a special link to “Sockdolager!” by Davy Crockett. To see it, just click here. (And while you’re there, why not send it to a few dozen of your friends?)

Second, let me go right to the farmer’s concluding remarks. He told the congressman, “When Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people.”

Davy has no choice but to acknowledge the truth of what he’s heard. He tells the man, ‘“Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard.

“If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote, and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.”

What are the chances, ladies and gentlemen, that your congressman would ever make such an admission—or such a speech—today?

You really should read the rest of the story. You’ll be delighted to learn that when Congressman Crockett gets back to Washington, the House has taken up a bill to appropriate money for the wife of a distinguished naval officer. Everyone who has spoken about it has declared himself in favor. It looks like it will pass unanimously when Davy Crockett takes the floor.

To read what he says, and what happens next, please click here to enjoy Davy Crockett’s “Sockdolager!”

And remember the story the next time your congressman votes to take your money for some government activity that is nowhere to be found in our Constitution.

Until next Friday, keep some powder dry.

—Chip Wood

Pro-business Obama, Expensive Refreshments, Immigration And The Census

*Obama said what about being pro-business? At first I thought it was an April Fool’s joke, but this happened in February. In an interview with Business Week magazine, President Obama said that he and his top officials are all “fierce advocates for a thriving, dynamic free market.” In fact, the president claimed, his administration has promoted a “fundamentally business-friendly agenda.” Sure, if raising taxes, increasing rules and regulations, taking over of medical care and increasing dependence on subsidies are good for business, I guess you can call him pro-business.

*How much would you pay for a cookie and a Coke? USA Today reports that during a three-day conference for its procurement officials (these are the folks whose job it is to buy things at the lowest possible price); NASA paid $62,611 for the 317 attendees to snack on “light refreshments.” That works out to $66 a day for coffee, soft drinks, bagels and cookies. This is just one more example of how careless bureaucrats can be when it comes to spending your money instead of their own.

*At least they don’t all want to come here. The Pew Hispanic Center conducted a survey of how many citizens of Mexico would prefer to live in the United States. Guess what? The report says 46 percent of the population would move north if they could. Gee, that’s only another 49 million immigrants. I expected the number to be higher. Are we sure they asked the question in Spanish?

*Can we outsource the census? The U.S. Census Bureau reports that it will spend $14 billion to count all of the people in the U.S. this year. With a total population of around 309 million, that works out to $45 a head. India, meanwhile, is also conducting a census of its population. With a total population of around 1.2 billion people, they expect it to cost $1.2 billion to count them all, or about $1 a head. Next time can we outsource our count to them?

—Chip Wood

Florida Doctor: Supporters Of Obama Should ‘Seek Care Elsewhere’

Florida doctor: Supporters of Obama should 'seek care elsewhere'A Florida doctor who strongly condemns the recently passed healthcare reform bill is encouraging Obama supporters to seek medical care at another physician’s office. Dr. Jack Cassell, a Mount Dora urologist and registered Republican, posted a message on his office door late last week stating, "If you voted for Obama…seek urologic healthcare elsewhere."

Despite Representative Alan Grayson’s (D-Fla.) threats to file a formal ethics complaint against the urologist, Cassell is standing by his political statement, and is encouraging doctors around the country to take a stand against a piece of legislation that he thinks will adversely affect patient care.

"I got a little discouraged when I found that most of the ancillary services and nursing homes and diagnostic imaging, all these things start to fade away," he told Fox News.

Specifically, Cassell objects to the Medicare cuts in the current bill that will effectively put a stop to hospice services and end of life care.

"Not only do they want you to die at a younger age, but they want you to die a slow and painful death as well," he noted.

Cassell said he will not take the sign down despite mounting opposition from liberals around the country.
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19706495-ADNFCR

Exercise May Help Reduce Symptoms Related To Depression, Anxiety

Exercise may help reduce symptoms related to depression, anxiety Patients who are suffering from depression or anxiety disorders and who are not interested in traditional therapy options may be in luck. According to a recent analysis of numerous published studies, exercise may be a viable treatment alternative for those looking to improve their mental health.

Jasper Smits, director of the Anxiety Research and Treatment Program at Southern Methodist University in Dallas and lead author of the review, found that patients who exercise on a regular basis report significantly lower levels of anger and stress as well as fewer symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Specifically, Smits and his colleagues found that exercise positively affects neurotransmitter systems in the brain and reduces feelings of a racing heart or rapid breathing—two symptoms commonly reported by those suffering from severe anxiety.

"Exercise can fill the gap for people who can’t receive traditional therapies because of cost or lack of access, or who don’t want to because of the perceived social stigma associated with these treatments," said Smits.

"Exercise also can supplement traditional treatments, helping patients become more focused and engaged," he added.

For most patients, the researchers recommend a minimum of 150 minutes of moderate-intensity activity each week.
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19706497-ADNFCR

FAIR Report Cautions Against Democrats’ Amnesty Plans

FAIR report cautions against Democrats' amnesty plans As the Democrats are turning their sights towards immigration reform, a prominent advocacy organization has warned that an amnesty for illegal immigrants would be detrimental to American workers’ prospects.

According to the report from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) entitled Amnesty and the American Worker, record levels of immigration during the 2000s have added new workers to the labor force faster than the economy has been able to create new jobs.

That is why the organization has criticized the amnesty idea supported by many Democrats, saying that at a time when some 25 million Americans are either unemployed or involuntarily working part-time, amnesty would entitle the estimated 7.5 million illegal aliens to keep their current jobs, and compete with American workers for any new jobs.

"It is unconscionable that at a time of devastatingly high unemployment, our nation’s leaders seem determined to forge ahead with legislation without even considering the harm it might cause," said Dan Stein, president of FAIR.

He also disputed assertions that the move would boost the U.S. economy, saying the benefits would accrue almost entirely to the amnestied aliens and their direct employers.

The latest figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics suggest the unemployment rate in March remained unchanged at 9.7 percent. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19706445-ADNFCR

Government Announces Changes To Airport Screening Policies

Government announces changes to airport screening policies The United States government has announced a new security screening system designed to improve on the controversial directive to conduct mandatory screening of travelers from 14 countries, which was implemented following the failed Christmas Day bombing in Detroit.

The new system will rely on an intelligence-based approach to stop suspected terrorists from entering the country by airliners, and was announced after the completion of a three-month security review ordered by President Obama.

Officials have said security screeners will now determine which passengers require a secondary screening based on traits of known terror suspects, including name, physical description and travel patterns, according to Voice of America (VOA).

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley was quoted by the news source as saying that airport screenings will also incorporate multiple random layers of security, such as explosives trace detection, advanced imaging technology, canine teams and pat downs.

The new approach has received praise from many quarters, including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), whose national executive director Nihad Awad said that "we applaud the [new] policy because it does what security experts and civil libertarians have always asked for — it screens passengers based on actual suspicious behaviors or actions, not on national origin or religion." ADNFCR-1961-ID-19706449-ADNFCR