Caffeinated Thoughts

Clearing Up Clayworth’s Confusion, You Can Support An Organization Without Taxpayer Money
Astroturf Occupy Iowa Movement Finds Another Target
Christians United for Israel Withholds the Very Blessing They Claim to Want For Israel
Extended School Calendar in Iowa for High-Risk Students An Unnecessary Mandate
3 Things I Have Learned as a New Iowa GOP Delegate
A Delegate’s Perspective: Iowa GOP State Convention

Clearing Up Clayworth’s Confusion, You Can Support An Organization Without Taxpayer Money

Posted: 19 Jun 2012 04:30 AM PDT

Jason Clayworth of The Des Moines Register is perplexed. I can understand this the progressive media usually are. Because of this I'm not surprised that his progressive slant showed through on his blog post title about Iowa Lt. Governor Kim Reynolds promotion of the Food Bank Association of Iowa's food drive at the Administration's press conference yesterday. The title of his blog post reads "Lt. Gov promotes food drive despite veto that stripped $500K from the effort." The story published for the online and print versions which is the same story verbatim has this headline – "Veto of food bank appropriations defended."

It was almost as if Clayworth was saying, "I can't believe her nerve for promoting this after Governor Terry Branstad vetoed the allocation! She doesn't care about the ~~poor~~ food insecure!" Perhaps he thought she should be ashamed by the decision because He "yanked," "Yanked!" the allocation. Clayworth also alluded to what he evidently thought was cowardice on the part of Governor Branstad when he wrote, "Branstad did not attend the event, leaving questions to Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds."

How dare he not defend his decision!

I believe Lt. Governor Reynolds clearly stated a ~~conservative~~ common sense position as it relates to allocations of this nature.

She said private donations are the best way to support the Food Bank. "It really needs to be driven by the private sector. Sometimes when the government takes over and starts putting in place an appropriation, other people kind of step back and think the need is not there to continue to help and support the effort," Reynolds said.

I can attest to that having worked for a nonprofit organization that received several federal grants. When the grants came in private funding went down. It's part of the two-edged sword of government funding. Also to help clear things up for Jason you can still support an effort privately without believing it should receive government funds. It's called donating your own money instead of being generous with taxpayer money. I know that is confusing for you Jason, but trust me many, many organizations are funded this way.

Astroturf Occupy Iowa Movement Finds Another Target

Posted: 19 Jun 2012 03:45 AM PDT

occupy-iowa This time it is The World Food Prize:

Occupy leader Frank Cordaro said the group's plans during the weeklong Food Prize event are still being put together, but "there will be opportunities for arrest."

The Occupy movement will target what Cordaro called "the corporate ownership of the World Food Prize, especially its dominance by genetically modified seed interests."

"Our goal is to get rid of GMOs," said Cordaro, referencing the term for genetically-modified corn and soybean seeds now in widespread use in Iowa and elsewhere in the U.S.

I have to wonder do most of the people involved really know what they are protesting? Probably not. Also don't think for a moment that Occupy was a grassroots movement. A new documentary, Occupy Unmasked, premiered at RightOnline last Friday night. This documentary by filmmaker Stephen Bannon and produced by Citizens United, which features the late Andrew Brietbart, debunked that meme pretty convincingly as they went through the timeline and presented the players involved behind the scenes, for instance, the first Occupy rally initially brought people out with a false promise of a concert. Was that something reported by the press? Did the press discuss how the "movement" was bolstered by Big Labor? The film brings to light aspects about the "movement" that were never reported on by the press.

Here's the trailer below:

It was an excellent film, and I encourage you to watch it.

Christians United for Israel Withholds the Very Blessing They Claim to Want For Israel

Posted: 18 Jun 2012 11:49 PM PDT

Initially, let me tell you what I believe about the nation of Israel, so that I will not be misunderstood. (I've been called an anti-Semite twice in my life, both times for suggesting that people of Jewish descent need to hear the gospel.) I support the right of the nation of Israel to exist. I recognize that many Muslim nations and other anti-Semites deny that right and would like to wipe Israel off the map (and literally do so in children's textbooks).

I believe Israel should aggressively defend herself against her enemies. I want justice to be done, and we should hold politicians accountable to behave righteously. Israel is an ally of the United States and should be treated accordingly. There is no question that many do target Israel because they think they are attacking God himself. The Holocaust occurred, and is worse than we thought.

Also, I try to be very careful about utilizing third party testimony against a brother or sister in Christ (or any other person for that matter). Accusations better be well-founded and from original and relevant sources. Most everything I want to say in this article is in response to the actual CUFI website or sources from within Christians United for Israel. I believe the goals and methods of CUFI are counter to the gospel and are draining resources from the only means of truly blessing the people of Israel: the preaching of the gospel. CUFI claims a membership of over a million people. How do I see the organization?

First, CUFI is devoid of the Christian gospel. Like many Christians in America, CUFI has replaced preaching with politics. In the end, they get everything backwards. Here is just a sampling:

Christians are called upon by CUFI to

"Learn, Pray and Share about Israel every day."

"Therefore, CUFI On Campus equips and trains Christian students to become effective advocates for Israel on their campus, in their church, and in their community."

"We hear over and over again from attendees who tell us that they never understood the Biblical mandate to support Israel and the Jewish people until they came to one of our events. Now, they write, the dots have been connected and they have a new focus and a new mission. (emphasis mine)"

It appears that CUFI has replaced "Go and preach the gospel…first to the Jew" with "go tell everybody about Israel."

CUFI's goal is to teach Americans about Israel, but there is NOTHING about teaching the people of Israel about Jesus. The Savior’s name is not mentioned once, even though He is the only true Hope of Israel. I did find the name Jesus mentioned once: one of the speakers for an event was named Jesus Infante (pronounced Hay-soos), and he was of Hispanic heritage.

Sadly, all of this is in keeping with the heretical doctrine that Pastor John Hagee (founder of CUFI) promotes, that the Jewish race can be saved apart from hearing and believing the gospel of Jesus Christ. He thinks Jews are saved by keeping the Law(!!), which they never were, not even during the Old Testament era. Abraham and David, like all other believers was saved by faith, according to Romans 4.

Here is Hagee's viewpoint, according to the Houston Chronicle:

“I’m not trying to convert the Jewish people to the Christian faith,” he said….

In fact, trying to convert Jews is a “waste of time,” he said. “The Jewish person who has his roots in Judaism is not going to convert to Christianity. There is no form of Christian evangelism that has failed so miserably as evangelizing the Jewish people. They (already) have a faith structure.”

Everyone else, whether Buddhist or Baha’i, needs to believe in Jesus, he says. But not Jews. Jews already have a covenant with God that has never been replaced by Christianity, he says.

“The Jewish people have a relationship to God through the law of God as given through Moses,” Hagee said. “I believe that every Gentile person can only come to God through the cross of Christ. I believe that every Jewish person who lives in the light of the Torah, which is the word of God, has a relationship with God and will come to redemption.

“The law of Moses is sufficient enough to bring a person into the knowledge of God until God gives him a greater revelation. And God has not,” said Hagee, giving his interpretation of Romans 11:25. “Paul abandoned the idea (of Jews knowing Christ). In the book of Romans, he said, `I am now going to go to the Gentiles from this time forward.’ Judaism doesn’t need Christianity to explain its existence. But Christianity has to have Judaism to explain its existence.”

His position is a little unusual for evangelicals, who believe that the new covenant does supersede the old. Those who disagree with him are scathingly termed as “replacement theologians.” The San Antonio pastor says such persons are anti-Semitic.

At its website, CUFI suggests 10 ways to bless Israel. Not one of them even hints at the gospel.

But the Bible teaches that Jews (and Gentiles) can be blessed today:

1. By not being offended at the gospel:

Romans 11:26 And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me

2. By turning from their sins

Acts 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

3. By hearing the gospel.

Romans 15:29 And I am sure that, when I come unto you, I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ.

4. By being seated in heavenly places with Jesus.

Ephesians 1:3b Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ.

5. By reading the book of Revelation:

Revelation 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

6. By dying in faith.

Revelation 14:13 Blessed [are] the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth:

Finally, I ask. If this is a Christian organization, and not simply a secular political organization hiding behind religious nomenclature, why is there no mention of Jesus, evangelism or the gospel? What kind of hope is there for anybody apart from Jesus? How does this bless Israel?

___________________________

In his book, With Christ in the Voting Booth, Shedlock addresses at length the relationship between nations, governments, and the gospel.

Extended School Calendar in Iowa for High-Risk Students An Unnecessary Mandate

Posted: 18 Jun 2012 10:30 PM PDT

Mary Stegmeir of The Des Moines Register wrote an article about the possibility of an extended school calendar. This is something that has been discussed before, and the idea, Stegmeir reminds us, was repudiated in an Iowa Poll where only a third of Iowans supported extending the school calendar or school day. So instead they are backing off and focusing on kids who are struggling academically as Mike Cormack, the Iowa Department of Education Policy Liaison states:

A state task force designated to study the length of the school day and year is tentatively scheduled to gather for the first time July 26. The names of the panel members have not yet been released, but Cormack said between 12 to 15 Iowans will serve on the advisory group.

The task force will meet at least three times and will issue a report with suggestions for legislators on Oct. 15.

Extending the amount of time children spend in class has been periodically debated by Iowans for more than two decades. The issue came to the forefront again last fall when several attendees at town hall meetings hosted by the governor suggested lengthening the school day or year could boost student test scores.

It's unlikely, however, that the governor's 2013 education reform package will call for more schooling for all children, Cormack noted. Instead, he predicts that any extended-day or extended-year initiatives would be aimed at high-risk populations, including immigrant students and children who live in poverty.

I find it interesting that the names for this advisory committee hasn't been announced yet. If past history is any indicator they will all be of the same mind and likely resonate with the Branstad Education Echo Chamber that currently exists. Additional problem with this suggestion is now it will mandate a longer school day or school year for high-risk populations. Shouldn't that be a parents choice? Also where will the money come from? They suggest a model:

One possible model for Iowa's foray into extended learning is the 21st Century Community Learning Centers initiative, which uses federal funds to support dozens of before- and after-school programs throughout the state.

The effort targets high-poverty schools, and harnesses the know-how of certified teachers to offer enrichment activities that are based on what students learn in the classroom. Schools in the program typically offer three hours of additional academic programming each day.

"We use our own staff who already know our students and who know how to build programs and make connections," said Heidi Brown, who oversees the Des Moines school district's 11 Community Learning Centers. "It's not repeating what has already been taught, it's showing students different ways to approach the same topic."

The district has seen steady increases in the math and reading scores of program participants, Brown said.

Teacher surveys indicate that children who take part in the program have better attendance and fewer discipline problems in the classroom. They are also more likely to complete homework assignments.

Having worked with high-risk kids, especially those who are latchkey kids, I don't doubt that have additional structured time after school can be a benefit, as well as, summer activities. Does it have to be the public school who does it? How about partnering with community organizations? Also this seems to me to be another way the Feds can weasel their way into education in Iowa. Strings are always attached to federal money.

This plan will further erode local control, provides a state mandate for parents, and increase state spending (or will have us going hat in hand to the federal government). School districts should instead partner with organizations who are already doing after school programs and provide referrals. Let's not recreate the wheel; especially when it increases the scope of our state government to do it.

3 Things I Have Learned as a New Iowa GOP Delegate

Posted: 18 Jun 2012 11:36 AM PDT

I am a conservative Republican. I believe that I have voted ever since I have been old enough to do so, wanting to do my part and to exercise my right to vote. Much more recently I have become a caucus goer, further exercising my right and responsibility to influence who I vote for. This year is the first year that I have ever served as a delegate to the county central committee, as well as the county, district, and state GOP conventions. Though I came in naïve and optimistic, I am no longer either. The entire process has been an amazingly eye-opening experience from which I can say I have learned several things. Here are a few lessons I have gleaned from my experience so far.

Few Get Involved in the Real Process of Influence, and Even Fewer Run the Show

People across the country complain about Iowa having an inordinate amount of sway and influence as the first-in-the-nation caucus (which I am still heartily for), they would be shocked at how few of the caucus goers do anything beyond casting a vote at the caucus. A huge number of my fellow caucus goers vote for their candidate, and then flee into the night. Most, I would guess, would not even have an idea what goes on after they leave. Delegates to the county central committee are elected, and delegates to the county convention are elected (which most likely will become the delegates to the District and State if they so desire). Platform changes are introduced. Very, very few people actually go through the entire caucus process. Further, judging by the attendance at central committee meetings, most of those chosen as delegates either never bother to attend at all, or soon give up once they realize how utterly tedious the business of the party is.

What remains is the few that become the true determiners of the party at every level. These extreme few determine who become the delegates upstream to state and national conventions. This extremely small group chooses even fewer to oversee the credentials validation of future delegates, creation and maintenance of platform planks, and the rules by which business is conducted. This tiny number of people hold the influence of the entire state party in reality.

The “O” in GOP Does Not Stand for “Organization” (and There’s No “E” for “Efficiency” Either)

I understand that most of those involved are self-funded volunteers. However, I see no reason for the continual and amazing lack of organization and efficiency at any GOP meeting that I have attended to date. Time and again I have attended meeting where sound equipment was forgotten or late. Time and again I have been to meetings where the minutes of the previous meeting were not yet available to be read and approved. In some of the meetings the indecisiveness is breath-taking. The sometimes comical chaos of “stop-go-wait-change that” could be alleviated with just another thirty minutes of meaningful planning. We can and must do better at doing our business with excellence and with foresight.

Further, the amount of time wasted in meetings is phenomenal. Nominations for positions are taken, usually with an allowed speech by each one making a nomination. Then each of those nominated are allowed to make speeches. If ten are nominated, there can be twenty minutes spoken by those doing the nominating, and another forty minutes by those that have been nominated. This is for one of many elections to the several positions. This is all necessary, I guess. However, when they take the ballot votes and then wait for forty or more minutes to tally them before conducting the usually necessary second vote, that makes no sense.

There are ways to keep things moving without long breaks of inactivity. If you cannot conduct business, then use the time to further educate, train, influence those in attendance. Plan our down times to leverage time, rather than wasting it. Why not, for example, take all the nominations at once, and then let speeches take place as the various phases of votes are counted. As another example, instead of having those making the nominations spell out names of those being nominated, why not just require a written sheet to be handed to the secretary with the name written on it (or use one of the hundreds of political flyers lying all around for the same candidate)?

Attention has to be given to make the necessary processes as organized and efficient as possible. The present processes are just too cumbersome for the time allotted for each meeting. Such poor business practices lead more to abandon their posts early or to give up altogether.

It’s About Power, Not the Platform

People voting at the grassroots level are conservative and assume that ideals are what the election process is all about. We vote to advance the candidates holding our ideals. Wrong.

At every level, from the precinct caucus to the county, district, and state conventions, the platform receives the least priority. The articles that define the GOP as a party are relegated to the last item on the agenda. This means that most attendees (at the caucus) and many delegates (at the conventions) depart before the platform is ever discussed. People vote on their candidate (at the caucus) or those people that they want in influential committee or delegate positions, and then they go home. A small number of hard core people stay for various reasons and wrestle with the platform.

This focus on the power rather than the platform is reflected in the decisions and actions of those elected by the party, who mildly or greatly ignore the stated platform for the party in which they had been selected. Whether the issue is abortion, agriculture, marriage or any of the 25 platforms, those elected often just ignore what is clearly stated. Once in power, they ignore the platform. The entire Iowa GOP process seems to be focused on being elected, not to further the established written ideals of the party. (This is shameful. We either area party driven by ideals or we are not a party at all. Those elected need to be required to hold to the established platform.)

I saw this in full force at the GOP State Convention this year. Those few that did get involved were elected to these few influential positions and effectively captured or hijacked the party (as I see it), even though they in no way have been in the majority. Their choices, instead of representing the ideals and desires of the broad group, resulted in people who will represent Iowa at the national convention who do not represent the GOP of Iowa, nor the platform decided by the GOP of Iowa.

The Bottom Line

In the end, we need more people willing to get involved and to stay involved at every level. We need to attend our caucuses, yes, but we need to stay and vote for delegates that we trust to follow through on our votes and our ideals (even better, volunteer to be one who does just that). It takes time, money, and endurance to attend meetings and conventions. It is a lot of work, even frustrating effort, but each person involved helps to create strong informed support from the voters, rather than just being unknowing victims of the process that now exists.

A Delegate’s Perspective: Iowa GOP State Convention

Posted: 18 Jun 2012 10:00 AM PDT

By Megan Stuhr

Saturday was the 2012 Iowa GOP State Convention. It also was the Democratic State Convention but judging by the crowd there, no one got the memo. On the GOP agenda was electing the National Committeeman and Committeewoman, election of At-Large National Convention Delegates, Alternative Delegates and Presidential Electors, a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the RPI and the platform. It took less than an hour for the first firework display.

The first commotion was over Rule 28. Rule 28 states that 'the person receiving the highest number of votes for the election of National Committeeman and Committeewoman shall be elected'. After debate, the rule was changed from the highest vote getter in the first ballot to the person reaching a 50 percent threshold and being the highest vote getter. This played a role in the National Committeewoman election.

The next brouhaha was over Rule 25b. Rule 25 states that 'separate amendments from the floor for delegate-at-large, or presidential elector-at-large shall be subordinate to a single vote up or down on the report as a whole'. The original amendment (25b) would allow for a vote on individuals for the national delegates who would have to be present to be nominated. There were amendments, amendments to the amendments, amendments to the amendment's amendment, calls for point of order, calls for division, voice votes, standing votes, written ballots and the threat of removal for disrespectful behavior. Best line of the day was the suggestion that anyone wanting to be a delegate to the National Convention should go to the cage (located down the hall for UFC fights) and work it out. Eventually (and after lunch, yes we broke for lunch with only one, single item resolved) 25b failed.

The next debate was over the proposed amendment to the RPI Constitutional Article IV State Central Committee. The amendment read 'no member or officer of the Republican State Central Committee, including Iowa's representatives to the Republican National Committee, shall publicly endorse a candidate or candidate's committee in a Republican primary or caucus. Neither shall they publicly denounce any Republican candidate'. This discussion went better as they adhered to the rules allowing only three speakers in favor and three opposed. The amendment failed.

The last debate was over the election of the slate of delegates chosen to attend the National Convention. This caused quite a flurry as the majority of those chosen were Ron Paul supporters. Tension was high but was highly entertaining (in the way bad reality tv is entertaining). After a few votes, the slate of candidates was accepted and I would anticipate a Ron Paul vote in Tampa.

Speeches

I'm not sure what was in Governor Branstad's coffee, but that was the most energetic I've heard him. I wasn't impressed with the content of his speech, but kudos to him for the spectacular energy level. Chuck Grassley, Matt Schultz (I love voter ID too), Kim Reynolds, Tom Latham, Linda Upmeyer, Kraig Paulsen, Jerry Behn, John Archer and Ben Lange all spoke as well. Steve King was the most well received speaker by far. He spoke about the President's fiat decision to grant amnesty to millions. His threat to bring suit against the President of the United States to block the executive order brought the most cheers. I will credit the Congressman with being one of the few that didn't try to sell me the "Romney will save the day" line. He said, "I trust Mitt Romney to do the right thing, some of you may not but you can trust Barack Obama to do the wrong thing." I wish more politicians would take a cue from Congressman King – on a lot of things. Another speaker that resonated with me was Brad Zaun. He has been doing some noteworthy work on education and banning traffic cams. His call to find out where our candidates stand and hold them accountable was on the money. His line about Boswell being a desperate old man made me laugh out loud.

The best speech of the day, in my opinion, came from a junior delegate, Benjamin Dirks. He spoke of the ideas set forth in the Declaration of Independence being what makes America great (and he's right on that). He left with the caution that we are only as strong as we the people. The adults(ish) then debated weather we would adopt the 3 planks the junior delegates offered to the platform. Guess that speech fell on deaf ears….

National Committeeman

I had heard much talk about this race prior to the convention. The Iowa Republican, Jan Mickelson and Steve Deace all discussed allegations of misconduct on the part of Steve Scheffler this past week. In his speech, Scheffler discussed the "elephant in the room" implying he was wrongfully accused because he fought for social issues the past 25 years when doing so was an unpopular stance to take. He claimed his integrity is well established. David Chung, Robert Cramer and Judd Saul also ran for the RNC post. Chung said integrity was the primary criteria for job, Cramer spoke about creating a movement to teach conservatism and Saul said he was running, in part, because of the allegations against Scheffler. In the end, Scheffler was re elected after a run off vote against David Chung 889 to 781. This was one debate that I did not find entertaining and how he secured the backing of Ron Paul people I'll never understand. Seeing as I have nothing kind to offer here, I will simply suggest you visit the links above for information regarding Mr. Scheffler.

National Committeewoman

This position was being vacated by Kim Lehman and was another hotly debated election. Margaret Stoldorf, Tamara Scott, Judy Davidson and Kim Pearson were nominated. Stoldorf spoke about focusing on the grassroots and not just fundraising, Davidson spoke of 3 reasons to vote for her – experience, proven results and commitment to excellence. Tamara Scott spoke of her assets in media, her ability to network and coming together as a party. She promised not to waiver in her principles as she worked the process. Her resume for the position is quite impressive. Kim Pearson spoke about the hit piece the Iowa PAC put out (they forgot to mention that she was to the right of the Republicans on the votes listed on the flier). She also spoke of unwavering principles noting that Truth divides. She noted that as a party we should unite around principles. She asked which God given rights should she be willing to negotiate away to get a deal done (and she's right on that). Her speech received a standing ovation. In the first ballot, Pearson received 755 votes and Scott received 514. There is some 'discussion' as to what happened behind the scenes during the run off vote between Scott and Pearson but Tamara Scott won the election 826-782. Congratulations to her.

Some other noteworthy issues came from Kim Lehman. She spoke of her concern over Agenda 21 and the growing popularity of the national vote compact. She urged delegates to stay on top of these issues. I stayed for a few of the platform debates but it was time to go when the delegation needed reminding that it would be another two hours before another vote on a quorum could be called.

Horoscop

marți, 19 iunie 2012

Caffeinated Thoughts

Caffeinated Thoughts

Un comentariu: