This letter was published in the Nov. 1, 2010, issue of The News-Sentinel
By Donna Volmerding
We have watched as our country voted in the most leftwing Congress and the most leftwing president in history. We are appalled by out-of-control spending, unsustainable debt and a massive government usurpation of our rights and our God-given liberties guaranteed to "we the people" in the Constitution. We are witnessing monstrous corruption, colossal voter fraud and an elitist class that refuses to listen to the concerns of its voters. We are disgusted by the government takeover of private businesses, banks and insurance companies. We are outraged with Obamacare and government-run healthcare, with a financial reform law that doesn't even address the original problem(s) (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) and with the arrogance that our leaders display toward us.
In my lifetime, this election may be the most important one in which we have ever participated. If you don't know the issues, you have no excuse for your ignorance. For those who understand the tenuous place our constitutional republic is in, I implore you, please vote. Don't sit on the sidelines. The future of our children and grandchildren depends on what we do now. God will hold us accountable for what we do and for what we don't do.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Was Pearl Harbor just a crime that should have been sent to a court?
This article was published in the June 23, 2010, issue of The News-Sentinel.
By Donna Volmerding
Dean Frantz’s June 9th guest column in The News-Sentinel deeply saddened me but also angered me. Frantz said, “The terrible tragedy of 9/11 was not an act of war, but a horrible crime. It was the act of a handful of crazy fanatics who wanted to strike at America’s symbols of power and military might.”
This statement is not just ludicrous; it displays a profound ignorance of freedom and its cost.
Was Pearl Harbor “a horrible crime” perpetrated by a handful of people in Japan? Were Hitler’s aggressive acts of war merely “a horrible crime” that a few demented Nazis committed?
Frantz added that “The planners and executors of this crime should have been tracked down, convicted and punished like other criminals, but their crime should not have become the excuse for gearing up to a war on terror.”
Should we have declared war against Japan? Should we have gotten into World War I, even though there was no act of war committed against America? Should we have gotten into World War II, even though Hitler did not commit “a horrible crime” against us?
Frantz says that those who died in Iraq didn’t die for their country; “they died for … Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.”
Perhaps Frantz has forgotten that a Democrat got us into World War I (Wilson), a Democrat got us into World War II (Roosevelt) and a Democrat (Truman) dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese, killing about 70,000 innocents immediately and another 70,000 from radiation within five years.
Does Frantz discount all of these war dead? Did they die for Democrats?
Frantz rightly decries the death of innocent civilians in Afghanistan, by his account numbering more than 3,000. Does he understand, however, that the Taliban and insurgents use children and civilians as cover? That they purposely hide near homes, schools and mosques so that they can hypocritically accuse American forces of terrorism when civilians are killed?
In an astonishing display of double-think, Frantz says that if you “see bombs falling on you … that looks like terrorism.” Do airplanes flying into buildings look like terrorism? How about explosives detonated in our cities and on our aircraft?
“Let us be clear,” Frantz says, “our government is not the same as our country. There is a vast difference …” He adds, “I love my country, but I am ashamed of many things our government has done and continues to do.”
On this, we can agree. I love my country, too, but I am alarmed by the direction it is taking. This administration has offended our allies, such as Israel and England, and apologized to those who wish us harm. It has spent excessive taxpayer money on bailouts, payoffs and union corruption, putting our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren in great economic peril. It is constructing a central government so tentacled and so powerful that we may not be able to return to the constitutional republic our Founding Fathers gave us.
The election this November may be the most important election in my lifetime. My prayer is that voters will not be deluded by smooth talk and glib speeches.
By Donna Volmerding
Dean Frantz’s June 9th guest column in The News-Sentinel deeply saddened me but also angered me. Frantz said, “The terrible tragedy of 9/11 was not an act of war, but a horrible crime. It was the act of a handful of crazy fanatics who wanted to strike at America’s symbols of power and military might.”
This statement is not just ludicrous; it displays a profound ignorance of freedom and its cost.
Was Pearl Harbor “a horrible crime” perpetrated by a handful of people in Japan? Were Hitler’s aggressive acts of war merely “a horrible crime” that a few demented Nazis committed?
Frantz added that “The planners and executors of this crime should have been tracked down, convicted and punished like other criminals, but their crime should not have become the excuse for gearing up to a war on terror.”
Should we have declared war against Japan? Should we have gotten into World War I, even though there was no act of war committed against America? Should we have gotten into World War II, even though Hitler did not commit “a horrible crime” against us?
Frantz says that those who died in Iraq didn’t die for their country; “they died for … Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.”
Perhaps Frantz has forgotten that a Democrat got us into World War I (Wilson), a Democrat got us into World War II (Roosevelt) and a Democrat (Truman) dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese, killing about 70,000 innocents immediately and another 70,000 from radiation within five years.
Does Frantz discount all of these war dead? Did they die for Democrats?
Frantz rightly decries the death of innocent civilians in Afghanistan, by his account numbering more than 3,000. Does he understand, however, that the Taliban and insurgents use children and civilians as cover? That they purposely hide near homes, schools and mosques so that they can hypocritically accuse American forces of terrorism when civilians are killed?
In an astonishing display of double-think, Frantz says that if you “see bombs falling on you … that looks like terrorism.” Do airplanes flying into buildings look like terrorism? How about explosives detonated in our cities and on our aircraft?
“Let us be clear,” Frantz says, “our government is not the same as our country. There is a vast difference …” He adds, “I love my country, but I am ashamed of many things our government has done and continues to do.”
On this, we can agree. I love my country, too, but I am alarmed by the direction it is taking. This administration has offended our allies, such as Israel and England, and apologized to those who wish us harm. It has spent excessive taxpayer money on bailouts, payoffs and union corruption, putting our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren in great economic peril. It is constructing a central government so tentacled and so powerful that we may not be able to return to the constitutional republic our Founding Fathers gave us.
The election this November may be the most important election in my lifetime. My prayer is that voters will not be deluded by smooth talk and glib speeches.
Monday, May 3, 2010
No guilt about taking Social Security
This article was published in the April 29, 2010, issue of The News-Sentinel newspaper.
By Donna Volmerding
The letter from Dave and Becky Cooper in the April 14th paper piqued my interest because of its misunderstanding of “government aid.” To avoid any appearance of hypocrisy and contradiction, let me say that, as members of the Tea Party movement, neither my husband nor I receive unemployment benefits, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans benefits or college financial aid. We also do not receive any pension funds.
However, when the time comes for me to sign up for Social Security, I will not feel hypocritical in any way. I won’t even feel a tinge of guilt. Why? Because I will be receiving MY MONEY!
When I first began working, I wanted to opt out of Social Security because I knew I could do better with a private savings account. I was not allowed to do that, so the government took my money, denying me a choice, and put it in the Social Security account.
If the government had not repeatedly raped that account to make up for profligate spending, the account would be solvent. And the Coopers want to make me and others like me feel guilty for accepting OUR MONEY?
The government doesn’t generate income or wealth; it simply takes income from those who earn it, then mollifies a sleeping electorate by calling it “government aid.” And we should feel fortunate that our benevolent “sugar daddy in the sky” bestows its crumbs of generosity on us.
For those who believe in the “redistribution of wealth,” I have this to say: We’ll start with your stuff first.
By Donna Volmerding
The letter from Dave and Becky Cooper in the April 14th paper piqued my interest because of its misunderstanding of “government aid.” To avoid any appearance of hypocrisy and contradiction, let me say that, as members of the Tea Party movement, neither my husband nor I receive unemployment benefits, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans benefits or college financial aid. We also do not receive any pension funds.
However, when the time comes for me to sign up for Social Security, I will not feel hypocritical in any way. I won’t even feel a tinge of guilt. Why? Because I will be receiving MY MONEY!
When I first began working, I wanted to opt out of Social Security because I knew I could do better with a private savings account. I was not allowed to do that, so the government took my money, denying me a choice, and put it in the Social Security account.
If the government had not repeatedly raped that account to make up for profligate spending, the account would be solvent. And the Coopers want to make me and others like me feel guilty for accepting OUR MONEY?
The government doesn’t generate income or wealth; it simply takes income from those who earn it, then mollifies a sleeping electorate by calling it “government aid.” And we should feel fortunate that our benevolent “sugar daddy in the sky” bestows its crumbs of generosity on us.
For those who believe in the “redistribution of wealth,” I have this to say: We’ll start with your stuff first.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
America’s founding based on Judeo-Christian principles
By Donna Volmerding
This article was published in the Feb. 9, 2010, issue of The News-Sentinel
In his Jan. 27 article, B.J. Paschal states that America’s Founding Fathers “came together to forge a new national secular compact.” I am certain he believes this, but he is misinformed. He has often stated that our Constitution is “Lockean,” based on the teachings of philosopher John Locke.
Not true.
Political science professors at the University of Houston collected 15,000 writings from the founding era, isolating 3,154 direct quotes made by the Founding Fathers.
Thirty-four percent of the quotes came directly from the Bible! Other sources were French philosopher Baron Charles de Montesquieu, 8.3 percent; Sir William Blackstone (18th-century English judge, author, professor and lecturer of law at Oxford University), 7.9 percent; and John Locke, 2.9 percent.
Paschal says that “the Constitution does not acknowledge our people’s dependence on God or their past.”
Here’s some quotes from our Founding Fathers, who wrote the Constitution.
Benjamin Franklin:
“The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: ‘that God governs in the affairs of men.’ And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?” (June 28, 1787, at the Constitutional Convention)
“Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature.”
“A nation of well informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins.”
George Washington:
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. … Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. … It is impossible to govern rightly without God and the Bible.”
John Adams:
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
James Madison:
“We have staked the future of all of our political institutions … upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
Thomas Jefferson:
“No nation has ever existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man, and I, as Chief Magistrate of this nation, am bound to give it the sanction of my example.”
In 1800, Congress approved the use of the Capitol as a church building for Christian worship services. As president, Jefferson attended these services and employed the military band to play for them, at taxpayer expense!
Author Jerry Newcombe says that “Without exception, the constitutions of all 50 states refer to ‘the Almighty God of the universe, the Author and Sustainer of our liberty.’”
Almost every Ivy League school was established primarily to train ministers of the gospel. Harvard College’s first presidents insisted that there could be no true knowledge or wisdom without Jesus Christ.
In 1892, the Supreme Court stated that “Our lives and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise … our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian … This is a religious people … This is a Christian nation.” (Holy Trinity Church vs. U.S.)
There are thousands of sources that refute Paschal’s statements, including books and articles by Bill Federer, Jerry Newcombe, David Gibbs Jr., David Barton and Gary DeMar.
I do agree with Paschal’s statement that “America is becoming more secular,” but this is to our shame.
President John Quincy Adams said, “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: that it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of Christianity with the principles of civil government.”
Our Founding Fathers gave us an invaluable gift — the greatest, richest, most free, most powerful nation that ever existed, one that has been exceedingly blessed by God.
Please, my fellow Americans, don’t throw it away.
This article was published in the Feb. 9, 2010, issue of The News-Sentinel
In his Jan. 27 article, B.J. Paschal states that America’s Founding Fathers “came together to forge a new national secular compact.” I am certain he believes this, but he is misinformed. He has often stated that our Constitution is “Lockean,” based on the teachings of philosopher John Locke.
Not true.
Political science professors at the University of Houston collected 15,000 writings from the founding era, isolating 3,154 direct quotes made by the Founding Fathers.
Thirty-four percent of the quotes came directly from the Bible! Other sources were French philosopher Baron Charles de Montesquieu, 8.3 percent; Sir William Blackstone (18th-century English judge, author, professor and lecturer of law at Oxford University), 7.9 percent; and John Locke, 2.9 percent.
Paschal says that “the Constitution does not acknowledge our people’s dependence on God or their past.”
Here’s some quotes from our Founding Fathers, who wrote the Constitution.
Benjamin Franklin:
“The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: ‘that God governs in the affairs of men.’ And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?” (June 28, 1787, at the Constitutional Convention)
“Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature.”
“A nation of well informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins.”
George Washington:
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. … Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. … It is impossible to govern rightly without God and the Bible.”
John Adams:
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
James Madison:
“We have staked the future of all of our political institutions … upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
Thomas Jefferson:
“No nation has ever existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man, and I, as Chief Magistrate of this nation, am bound to give it the sanction of my example.”
In 1800, Congress approved the use of the Capitol as a church building for Christian worship services. As president, Jefferson attended these services and employed the military band to play for them, at taxpayer expense!
Author Jerry Newcombe says that “Without exception, the constitutions of all 50 states refer to ‘the Almighty God of the universe, the Author and Sustainer of our liberty.’”
Almost every Ivy League school was established primarily to train ministers of the gospel. Harvard College’s first presidents insisted that there could be no true knowledge or wisdom without Jesus Christ.
In 1892, the Supreme Court stated that “Our lives and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise … our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian … This is a religious people … This is a Christian nation.” (Holy Trinity Church vs. U.S.)
There are thousands of sources that refute Paschal’s statements, including books and articles by Bill Federer, Jerry Newcombe, David Gibbs Jr., David Barton and Gary DeMar.
I do agree with Paschal’s statement that “America is becoming more secular,” but this is to our shame.
President John Quincy Adams said, “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: that it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of Christianity with the principles of civil government.”
Our Founding Fathers gave us an invaluable gift — the greatest, richest, most free, most powerful nation that ever existed, one that has been exceedingly blessed by God.
Please, my fellow Americans, don’t throw it away.
Friday, January 8, 2010
The religion of environmentalism
This article was published in The News-Sentinel on January 1, 2010.
By Donna Volmerding
In 1543, scientist Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) stated that the earth and other planets rotate around the sun. Because his “heliocentric” theory defied 1,500 years of scientific tradition, his book was banned by the Vatican until 1835.
Astronomer and mathematician Galileo (1564-1642) believed the Copernican theory to be correct and stated so in 1632. He was tried before the Inquisition (a tribunal of the Roman Catholic Church to suppress heresy), declared guilty, forced to renounce his beliefs and placed under house arrest until his death.
As the world becomes more secular, the platitudes of the New Age religion of the far left — environmentalism — have replaced America’s origin in Judeo-Christianity. The environmental movement has gone way past its exemplary original intent — clean water, clean air, don’t pollute. Today, scientists who refuse to toe the line of global warming or climate change are ostracized, mocked and dismissed by the present-day equivalent of the Inquisition — the climate change true believers who will tolerate no other ideas.
Tens of thousands of scientists around the world have expressed doubts concerning the accuracy of climate change. “Climate changers” are befuddled by their inability to explain why the earth is not warming; 1998 was the last “warmest year on record.” And the polar bears? Their number has increased by five times since Al Gore first postulated their extinction. The earth has normal cycles of warming and cooling, just as it has for eons.
As thousands of e-mails from a British research center (the Hadley Climatic Research Unit) prove, climate changers have suppressed other voices, manipulated data, engaged in secrecy, threatened, lied and bullied.
Robert Tracinski, in “Climate Gate: The Fix is In,” reports that a prominent global-warming alarmist admits to using a statistical “trick” to “hide the decline” in temperatures.
“Confirming the earlier scandal about cherry-picked data,” Tracinski says, “the e-mails show CRU scientists conspiring to evade legal requests, under the Freedom of Information Act, for their underlying data.” The “peer review” process, having scientific papers reviewed by other scientists for publication in professional journals, has been corrupted, too. Tracinski warns of “a mechanism for an entrenched establishment to exclude legitimate challenges by simply refusing to give critics a hearing.”
However, the dangers of this intolerance have more ramifications than mere pontificating by true believers. Auto companies are fighting for their lives, constricted by draconian rules on emissions. Our clean coal-fired plants will be closed or taxed so excessively they can’t compete. Because almost 90 percent of Indiana’s electric power comes from coal, Hoosier taxpayers will suffer greatly if President Obama’s “cap and trade” bill passes.
We don’t have to do this. The United States has the largest energy reserves on Earth, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service, including oil, natural gas and coal.
“‘Our overwhelming coal, natural gas and oil resources represent tens of trillions of dollars in wealth and millions of American jobs,’ said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), released the report. ‘Government policies that unnecessarily restrict or prevent our ability to responsibly produce these domestic resources are threatening, and could eventually undermine, our nation’s economic and national security.’”
“Climategate” has been dubbed by many as “a scam of biblical proportions.” If this is true, it has cost us billions of dollars and will cost trillions more. Let’s step back, take a deep breath and think things through. It will take time, so let’s not rush into global treaties, cap and trade legislation or any other climate-change bills until all voices can be heard. America’s future is at stake.
By Donna Volmerding
In 1543, scientist Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) stated that the earth and other planets rotate around the sun. Because his “heliocentric” theory defied 1,500 years of scientific tradition, his book was banned by the Vatican until 1835.
Astronomer and mathematician Galileo (1564-1642) believed the Copernican theory to be correct and stated so in 1632. He was tried before the Inquisition (a tribunal of the Roman Catholic Church to suppress heresy), declared guilty, forced to renounce his beliefs and placed under house arrest until his death.
As the world becomes more secular, the platitudes of the New Age religion of the far left — environmentalism — have replaced America’s origin in Judeo-Christianity. The environmental movement has gone way past its exemplary original intent — clean water, clean air, don’t pollute. Today, scientists who refuse to toe the line of global warming or climate change are ostracized, mocked and dismissed by the present-day equivalent of the Inquisition — the climate change true believers who will tolerate no other ideas.
Tens of thousands of scientists around the world have expressed doubts concerning the accuracy of climate change. “Climate changers” are befuddled by their inability to explain why the earth is not warming; 1998 was the last “warmest year on record.” And the polar bears? Their number has increased by five times since Al Gore first postulated their extinction. The earth has normal cycles of warming and cooling, just as it has for eons.
As thousands of e-mails from a British research center (the Hadley Climatic Research Unit) prove, climate changers have suppressed other voices, manipulated data, engaged in secrecy, threatened, lied and bullied.
Robert Tracinski, in “Climate Gate: The Fix is In,” reports that a prominent global-warming alarmist admits to using a statistical “trick” to “hide the decline” in temperatures.
“Confirming the earlier scandal about cherry-picked data,” Tracinski says, “the e-mails show CRU scientists conspiring to evade legal requests, under the Freedom of Information Act, for their underlying data.” The “peer review” process, having scientific papers reviewed by other scientists for publication in professional journals, has been corrupted, too. Tracinski warns of “a mechanism for an entrenched establishment to exclude legitimate challenges by simply refusing to give critics a hearing.”
However, the dangers of this intolerance have more ramifications than mere pontificating by true believers. Auto companies are fighting for their lives, constricted by draconian rules on emissions. Our clean coal-fired plants will be closed or taxed so excessively they can’t compete. Because almost 90 percent of Indiana’s electric power comes from coal, Hoosier taxpayers will suffer greatly if President Obama’s “cap and trade” bill passes.
We don’t have to do this. The United States has the largest energy reserves on Earth, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service, including oil, natural gas and coal.
“‘Our overwhelming coal, natural gas and oil resources represent tens of trillions of dollars in wealth and millions of American jobs,’ said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), released the report. ‘Government policies that unnecessarily restrict or prevent our ability to responsibly produce these domestic resources are threatening, and could eventually undermine, our nation’s economic and national security.’”
“Climategate” has been dubbed by many as “a scam of biblical proportions.” If this is true, it has cost us billions of dollars and will cost trillions more. Let’s step back, take a deep breath and think things through. It will take time, so let’s not rush into global treaties, cap and trade legislation or any other climate-change bills until all voices can be heard. America’s future is at stake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)