Quiner’s Diner announces a subscription drive 1

By Tom Quiner

This humble blog has dished up 300 posts since its inception.

If you find these posts thought-provoking, illuminating, or perhaps even irritating, spread the word!

E-mail your favorite posts to your friends and enemies. Encourage them to subscribe. Encourage them to join the conversation.

I have appreciated the response from my readers, the vast majority of whom have responded with intelligence and civility.

Here are a few nuggets from Quiner’s Diner archives that your friends, family, and foes will truly appreciate:

Why the Tea Party is Weird

A Modest Proposal to Save Iowa

The Summer of Hope

 

The Mysterious Benefits of Marriage

 

Help us expand our reach. Forward your favorite posts to your friends and encourage them to sign up for a FREE subscription to Quiner’s Diner.

If you haven’t subscribed yet, NOW is the time!

Thanks for reading!  I appreciate it!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The debt limit issue at a glance Reply

By Tom Quiner

The chart above quickly tells the story.

If Congress fails to raise the debt limit, will we have enough money to make interest payments on the national debt?

Yes.

If Congress fails to raise the debt limit, will we have enough money to cover social security?

Yes.

Medicare?

Yes.

Essential defense?

Yes.

After these areas are paid for in August, that will leave the Treasury another $388 Billion to “play with” the rest of the month. Perhaps they can begin furloughing federal employees until spending is brought in line with the new debt ceiling reality.

Many from the Left side of the aisle seem insistent that we implement a “balanced” approach in solving our debt problem. In other words, raise taxes.

That would be the worse thing we could possibly do if history is any guide. Two researchers from the University of Ohio, Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway, wrote a famous paper in the 1980s that revealed that every new dollar in taxation led to $1.58 in new spending.

More taxes emboldened Congress to spend more.

These researchers updated their data comparing different eras and the effect tax increases had on spending.

Increases in taxes ALWAYS led to increases in spending, the increase ranging from $1.05 to $1.88 in new spending for every new tax dollar.

Republicans must hold the line and insist on spending restraint. Tax increases, whether they’re on the rich or the poor, will only make things worse based on history.

Spending is the problem.

The federal must reign in its spending appetites before it’s too late.

Why the Tea Party movement is weird 6

By Tom Quiner

This is the way our system works:

Teachers want more money for schools (and salaries, of course).

Defense contractors want more money for defense.

Social justice advocates want more money for welfare and society’s safety net.

Planned Parenthood wants more money for abortions.

Senior citizens want more money for Social Security and Medicare.

AIDs advocates want more money for AIDs research.

Lovers of the Tipton Kangaroo Rat want more money for enforcement of the Endangered Species Act.

We have created a system of governance in America with an endless list of groups with their hands out asking taxpayers for money for their causes.

Some of them are very good.

Some of them are very bad. It depends on your perspective, I guess.

That’s why the Tea Party movement is so weird. They don’t want anything.

They don’t want taxpayers to hand out money for their pet project. In fact, they want taxpayers to hand out less money to these causes.

They want government to live within its means.

They want government to be governed by the Constitution rather than special interests.

No wonder the Democratic Party tries to portray them as being weird.

No wonder our Founding Fathers would love them.

The new Emancipation Proclamation 1

By Tom Quiner

Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and a president who was a member of the Democratic Party signed it into law.

Years later, another Democratic Party President said he simply didn’t like the law, so he refused to enforce it.

End of story.

James Clyburn

Today, a Congressman from South Carolina, James Clyburn, had a simple solution to the debt ceiling crisis: ignore Congress. He said the President should just ignore the co-equal branch of government and sign an Executive Order raising the debt ceiling:

“I’ve said time and time again, if the President gets up to August 2nd, without a piece of legislation, he should not allow this country to go into default. He should sign an Executive Order invoking the 14th Amendment and send that to all the governmental agencies for us to continue to pay our bills. He could do that with a stroke of a pen.

“We’ve seen many big things done in history that way. I’ve joked with my staff the other day, ‘tell me what was the bill number of the Emancipation Proclamation.’ It was an Executive Order. We integrated the armed services by Executive Order. We integrated public schools by Executive Order. Sometimes executives must order that things get done.”

It’s an interesting thought, isn’t it, from Mr. Clyburn who is African American.

I propose that a new Emancipation Proclamation be signed on January 20th, 2013 by the hypothetical new President of the United States, Herman Cain.

Herman Cain

The  minimally revised rhetoric would boldly state:

“That on the first day of February, in the year of our Lord two-thousand thirteen, all pre-born persons within any State or designated part of a State, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.”

President Cain would be doing more than making a proclamation. His would be a proud STATEMENT of justice and emancipation for society’s unborn.

History would quickly recognize this statement as the Justice & Emancipation for Society’s Unborn Statement (JESUS).

JESUS would be a godsend for the African-American community, over half of whom are aborted each year.

It’s gotten so bad that the replacement birth rate for African-Americans has plummeted below replacement level.

The African-American community is literally dying off, exacerbated by an orgy of abortion on their pre-born.

JESUS would immediately end the carnage.

JESUS would immediately restore the principles of social justice to their proper place by proclaiming that “peace begins in the womb.”

Two African-American politicians, Barack Obama and James Clyburn, both denigrate the role of Congress in making critical decisions for America.

Following their lead, another African-American politician, Herman Cain, could quickly undo a generation of human right abuse toward a voiceless constituency in America, the pre-born, much as Abraham Lincoln did for the slaves.

JESUS could be the savior of African-Americans come 2013.

JESUS would be the savior of the pre-born everywhere.

Evidently, all it takes is an Executive Order.

John the Baptist. Barack Obama. Melissa Ohden. Rick Santorum. 1

By Tom Quiner

John the Baptist and Jesus

Do you know who John the Baptist is?

The Catholic Church considers him the greatest and last in the line of the prophets.

He was the voice in the wilderness paving the way for Jesus, the Christ.

He did something interesting while still in his mother’s womb. I quote the King James Bible, the book of Luke 1:41:

“And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost.”

Scripture suggests personhood for the Baptist even when he was in the womb, that he had an awareness of another person, Jesus, while He was still in his Mother Mary’s womb.

Contemporary Americans in this political cycle should contemplate these two historical figures, both of whom are “giants” in the world of Christianity.

Consider the possibilities:

1. A baby leaping in the womb at the precise moment another fetus is present may be just a fluke of timing.  Let’s face it, babies are moving and kicking in the Mom’s womb at six months. John may have let out a kick at just the moment the pregnant Mary walked up. No big deal, right?

2. The writer may have romanticized the whole encounter or made it up.

3. John and Jesus were portrayed as persons while in the womb, their human potential revealed as immediately significant.

It is this third possibility that is at issue today.

My question to you contemporary Americans is: is the human potential of the baby in the womb significant?

Pastor Rick Warren asked then-candidate Barack Obama: ”At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?” The future President was evasive:

“Well, you know,” he said, “I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”

In other words, Mr. Obama suggested that human rights are subjective, not inalienable, a view not unlike those held in communist China.

Human rights are conditional and determined by people in power.

Mr. Obama was put to the test on this issue while a state senator in Illinois. The legislature was attempting to pass a law that would require health care workers to save the life of a baby “born alive,” one that survived an abortion.

Without that law, the fetus (now a baby) would be left to die without treatment or comforting, something we wouldn’t even do to a dog.

This is what happened to Melissa Ohden as Quiner’s Diner recounted on Monday. Ms.

Abortion survivor, Melissa Ohden with her little girl

Ohden was aborted when she was a 5-month old fetus.

She survived.

Iowa law demanded medical treatment, which she received.

Mr. Obama would not have provided that treatment. He recognized the pitfalls of “Born Alive” legislation. He recognized that it would put his pro-abortion political supporters at some risk, because it would become rather challenging to offer human rights to the Melissa Ohdens of the world only if she could survive the abortionist’s assault on her little body.

What is the difference between Melissa Ohden in the womb and Melissa Ohden lying on a table fighting for breath five minutes later?

Tough call. Let’s face it, there is no difference. Mr. Obama said:

“(T)he Equal Protection Clause does not allow someone to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute.”

There you have it.

By characterizing a statute as “anti-abortion,” Mr. Obama revealed that his political ties to a powerful (and financially supportive) political lobby trumped Melissa Ohden’s life.

Human rights are conditional to this, America’s first African-American, President.

Rick Santorum

This is where presidential candidate, Rick Santorum comes in. Mr. Santorum has displayed a great deal of courage during his political career in defense of life.

He stakes out politically unpopular positions, and sticks to them, no matter how much it costs him politically.

Mr. Santorum staked out a position similar to one Martin Luther King Jr. stated while the latter was in a Birmingham jail. Mr. King said a law is just if comports with natural law, and it was unjust if it didn’t. He said segregation was unjust because it didn’t comport with natural law.

Mr. Santorum sees a similarity when considering human rights for the pre-born:

“Every person, every child conceived in the womb has a right to life from the moment of conception,” said Santorum. “Why? Because they are human, genetically human, at the moment of conception … so it’s a human life. I don’t think you’ll find a biologist in the world who will say that that is not a human life. The question is — and this is what Barack Obama didn’t want to answer — is that human life a person under the Constitution? And Barack Obama says no. Well, if that person, human life, is not a person, then I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say: No, we are going to decide who are people and who are not people.”

Melissa Ohden shared a rather unpleasant experience when speaking to a woman’s group. A representative from a well-known abortion provider was present. Melissa went up to her after speaking and extended her hand. The abortion provider refused to take it, turned her back on her, and walked away.

Ms. Ohden should have been dead. She had no right to be there talking, did she?

The president demurred when questioned by Rick Warren on when does a baby get human rights.

He wasn’t shooting straight with us.

It is up to him, he is saying in a sense. It’s up to men and women like him to determine when human rights shall be dispensed based on politics, not natural law.

On the other hand, Rick Santorum says human rights occur at conception, that it is not up to man, that it is not up to the Party to determine these things. He says that human life is immediately significant regardless of where it resides.

As I wrote in my post yesterday, courageous leaders are a rare commodity. Rick Santorum has it in spades.