Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Rep. Frank asks to bring beau on House floor
By Betsy Rothstein of The Hill

Even if House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) had access to spousal privileges, he would not be allowed to bring the man known as his boyfriend, Jim Ready, 39, a surfing enthusiast, to the House floor. Last week Frank approached the Speaker’s Lobby with Ready, who was spotted wearing a green blazer and the traditional congressional spouse pin, and asked to bring him into the Chamber. He was told no.

The rules are that no spouse or life partner — gay, straight, male, female — is allowed on the floor. Only a lawmaker’s children are allowed to accompany a parent into the chamber. Frank took the news in stride and didn’t make any trouble. After being told why he could not bring Ready onto the floor, he reacted amiably, saying he understood the reasoning. Why such stringent rules? Envisioning the sheer number of spouses who would convene on the floor makes many Capitol employees roll their eyes. “Spouses aren’t allowed in here,” remarked a Capitol employee, explaining, “Kids aren’t a pain in the a-- on the floor.”

Frank has given the spouse pin to his partners before. He said in the mid-’90s he gave it to his then-partner Herb Moses. He said other gay lawmakers also have given pins to significant others such as Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)’s domestic partner, Lauren Azar. It’s “up to you,” Frank said, explaining that he gets to decide to whom to give his spouse pin. “In much of the country there is no way for a same sex couple to do anything officially,” he said. He added, it “isn’t any of your business” if he and Ready will have a commitment ceremony.

While House rules have extended the spouse pin to domestic partners, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood stresses to new members at the beginning of each Congress that the pin be given out with great care for security precautions. He also asks that spouses request the spouse ID card for secondary security. “It’s got to be a serious relationship,” said a spokeswoman for the House Sgt. at Arms office. “If something goes bad then we lost a pin. We’re not in a process of supplying pins for every girlfriend or boyfriend a member has. He wants to make sure it’s a serious, committed relationship.”

After this item was published, Frank's office released this statement to ITK: "Rep. Frank strongly disagrees with The Hill's 'sources' that he was trying to bring his partner onto the House floor, which Rep. Frank knows is not allowed. The unnamed source that incorrectly reported the interaction between Rep. Frank and the Sergeant of Arms personnel -- who was not a party in the conversation -- was wrong. The truth is that Rep. Frank was asking for clarification from the staff of the rules for access to the Speaker's Lobby, which is located behind the chamber."
Cherokee councilors not aware of
$50,000 donation
by Clifton Adcockof The Tulsa World
Published: 12/30/2008 2:01 PM
A $50,000 donation made by the business arm of the Cherokee Nation to the inauguration fund of President-elect Barack Obama did not receive authorization by the tribe’s council and many council members were unaware of the donation until seeing news accounts of it or after receiving phone calls from constituents, the Tulsa World has learned.The donation is the maximum amount, and the largest donation from an Oklahoma entity, records show. It was contributed to the fund by Cherokee Nation Businesses.
Most donations of a political nature go through the Tribal Council’s PAC Committee, which consists of tribal council members and determines the amount of money to be given before sending the measures on to the full council where, if passed, the measure goes to the principal chief to sign or veto. Councilman Bill John Baker told the Tulsa World that the PAC Committee was set up a few years ago after a similar action happened with Cherokee Nation Enterprises donating money. Baker said the donation did not come before the PAC Committee or the full council. “I read it in the paper and council people started getting phone calls asking why would we do this?,” Baker said. “Well, we didn’t. I wish the council would have been made aware of it.” Cherokee Nation spokesman Mike Miller said the donation was authorized by Cherokee Nation Businesses CEO Brad Carson from a fund designed for such donations, and that CNB officials had attempted to alert council members to the donation, but there had been a breakdown in communication.
Carson, a former two-term Democratic congressman, left his position as CEO just before Christmas after giving the donation. He was called up as an armed forces reservist, reportedly the U.S. Navy Reserve, for out of state deployment. The donation was different than those given during a political race because it was to the inauguration fund and not to a political campaign, Miller said.“This is not supporting one side over another side,” Miller said.

Monday, December 29, 2008

Weekly Opinion/Editorial
by Steve Fair

The popular tradition of making new years resolutions has origins in Ancient Babylon and Rome. The Babylonians would typically return farm equipment that they had borrowed during the year, while in Caesar's time Janus, a mythical god, became the symbol for resolutions because he had two faces that could look to the past and into the future. Today we make New Years Resolutions to try to improve some aspect of ourselves in the coming year. Popular resolutions include quitting smoking, losing weight and getting out of debt. This sounds good but the sad truth is that most of us break them well before the year is out. In fact, Pew Research found that 22% of people give up on their resolution in the first week and by the end of March more than half of New Years resolvers have fallen off the bandwagon.

That was not the case for Jonathan Edwards, the first President of Princeton University. Edwards, who was a Presbyterian minister and the grandfather of Vice President Aaron Burr, is famous for preaching a sermon entitled “Sinners in the hands of an angry God.” The sermon was preached on July 8, 1741 in Enfield, Connecticut and continues to be the leading example of a Great Awakening sermon. It is still used in religious and academic settings today. But Edwards was a man who made resolutions and kept them.

For Edwards, resolutions were neither pious hopes, romantic dreams, nor legalistic rules. They were instructions for life, tenets to be followed in all respects. Edwards depended on the sustaining strength of God to enable him to live up to them. Edwards laid out the resolutions in a matter-of-fact style, treating them much like scientific principles. At the ripe old age of nineteen, he made seventy resolutions, the first one written on December 18, 1722, amd the last on August 17, 1723. You can read them at
Drawing up resolutions was a standard practice for educated people in the eighteenth century. Scholars have long compared Edwards’ and Benjamin Franklin’s resolutions.
Around 1730, while in his late 20s, Benjamin Franklin listed thirteen virtues that he felt were an important guide for living. These virtues consisted of temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanliness, tranquility, chastity, and humility. Franklin divided the virtues into two categories—personal behavior and those related to social character traits. Franklin tried to follow these guides in his life, although he often went astray. You can read Franklin’s resolutions at

Franklin’s resolutions stand in interesting comparison with Edwards’. Both men agreed on the value of making resolutions, evaluating their effectiveness and making a lifelong commitment to keeping resolutions, but Edwards were more dependent upon a sovereign Creator whereas Franklins’ were dependent upon the present world and the preparation of a good citizen. Both sets of resolutions merit study and consideration.

How do you make good resolutions? According to Alexander Harlamov, there are a few practical ways to set resolutions and follow them. He lists three simple steps: identifying the right goals, adding action to the goal, and reminding yourself regularly of the resolutions as a way to set and accomplish resolutions.

Business management guru Stephen Covey says about resolutions. “The start of a new year is often accompanied by a renewed energy around self-improvement and goal-setting in the form of resolutions.” “Resolutions are only important if accompanied by a deep personal sense of mission.” “People often make resolutions, break them, and allow this to become their habit pattern until the process itself eventually becomes rather meaningless.” “Until people think really deeply about what is truly most important to them, this rather discouraging pattern is likely to continue.”

Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, says the most effective New Year resolutions list is the “stop doing” list. Collins says, "The "stop doing" list became an enduring cornerstone of my annual New Year resolutions—a mechanism for disciplined thought about how to allocate the most precious of all resources: time.”

Whether one resolves to start or stop doing something, New Year is a traditional time for introspection and reflection. May our goals be ones reflective of Edwards’ first two resolutions- Resolution One: I will live for God. Resolution Two: If no one else does, I still will. Have a safe and happy New Year!

Monday, December 22, 2008


The date was July 10, 1861. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, his wife Fanny, and their five children lived in the historic Craigie House in Cambridge, Massachusetts, overlooking the Charles River. The day before, Fanny had recorded in her journal, "We are all sighing for a good sea breeze instead of this stifling land one filled with dust."

Seven-year-old Edith complained of her long hair and Fanny decided to cut off some of her curls and to preserve them in sealing wax. As she melted a bar of sealing wax with a candle, a few drops fell unnoticed on her light summer dress. The sea breeze they longed for suddenly gusted through the open window, billowing her dress into the flame and immediately wrapping her in fire. Henry frantically tried to extinguish the flames with a nearby undersized throw-rug. When that did not work to smother the flames, he threw his arms around his wife and was severely burned on his face, arms, and hands. Fanny died the next morning. And too ill from his burns and his grief, Henry did not attend her funeral.

Earlier in 1861, on April 10, Confederate General Pierre G. T. Beauregard fired the opening shots of the American Civil War, and Charles, the son of Henry and Fanny Longfellow, enlisted in the Army of the Potomac. Then in 1863 Charles was seriously wounded with a bullet passing under his shoulder blades.

The war, Fanny's death, then Charles' severe injuries. The first Christmas after Fanny's death, Longfellow wrote in his journal, "How inexpressibly sad are all holidays." A year later he wrote, "I can make no record of these days. Better leave them wrapped in silence. Perhaps someday God will give me peace." And on Christmas Day 1862 he wrote, "A merry Christmas say the children, but that is no more for me."

After Charles was wounded in war, the Christmas of 1863 was silent in Longfellow's journal. But finally on Christmas Day in 1864 he wrote the words of the poem "Christmas Bells" – a poem about the Civil War but also about faith in the midst of tragedy. The fives stanzas of the poem without reference to the war became the text of the familiar carol, "I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day." Listen to the words and think about the theology wrapped in them:

I heard the bells on Christmas DayTheir old familiar carols play,And wild and sweet the words repeatOf peace on earth, good will to men.

And thought how, as the day had come,The belfries of all ChristendomHad rolled along the unbroken songOf peace on earth, good will to men.

Till ringing, singing on its wayThe world revolved from night to day,A voice, a chime, a chant sublimeOf peace on earth, good will to men.

And in despair I bowed my head,"There is no peace on earth," I said,"For hate is strong and mocks the songOf peace on earth, good will to men."

Then peeled the bells more loud and deep:"God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;The wrong shall fail; the right prevailWith peace on earth, good will to men."

Originally aired on Discover the Word radio December 19, 2008. Full transcript and MP3 at

Weekly Opinion/Editorial
by Steve Fair

The American Tort Reform Association released their annual report this week and Oklahoma is on the “watch” list. The ATRA has been around since 1986, and is dedicated to reforming the civil justice system through tort reform. This is the fifth year Oklahoma has been cited as a state that needs lawsuit reform. ATRA acknowledges that Oklahoma has a “bright side,” because more supporters (Republicans) of true tort reform were elected to the state legislature last month.

When Republicans took control of the State Senate for the first time in state history last month, it gave rise to the possibility we will finally get true lawsuit reform in the Sooner state. A lot however will depend on whether Governor Henry will sign what he says he wants in tort reform. Last year, he vetoed a bill with most of the provisions he said he supported on tort reform. Then five months later, he took a fishing trip to Brazil with several trial lawyers, including three past Presidents of the Oklahoma Trial Lawyers Association. When questioned about it, Henry said, “They were old family friends.”

The Trial lawyer lobby did all they could to keep the GOP from taking the State Senate this year. They contributed thousand of dollars to political candidates with three of every four dollars going to Democrats. Most of the money contributed to Keith Erwin and Daisy Lawler’s failed races against GOP incumbents in southwest Oklahoma—Don Barrington and Dennis Johnson—came from the trial lawyer lobby. Seventy percent of the money contributed to Nancy Riley’s race came from trial lawyers. Riley was the Democrat Senator who switched parties in the middle of her term because she lost the Lt. Governor’s GOP primary race. A staggering $865,000 was spent by the two candidates in that Senate race, with most of it coming from outside the Senate district. Riley’s contributions were slightly more than Dan Newberrry, who beat her easily.

A PAC known as the Working Oklahomans Alliance PAC has contributed over one million dollars in the past decade to dozens of House and Senate members and candidates—mostly Democrats. In August, The Oklahoman ran a story that stated many of the “working Oklahomans” were unaware they were contributing to a political action committee. According to Elsa Tewolde, who is listed as giving $80 to the WOA PAC, “They didn’t tell me.” “It makes me very upset because it’s deceptive.” Another client Rose Smith of Oklahoma City said she got a Working Oklahomans Alliance card after her attorney took a political donation out of her workers' comp settlement. "I didn't know about it until I got there,” she said. "I didn't like it.” Reportedly, the State Ethics Commission is investigating the WOA PAC.

Our country’s $246 billion civil justice system is the most expensive in the industrialized world. Aggressive personal injury lawyers target certain professions, industries, and individual companies as profit centers. They systematically recruit clients who may never have suffered a real illness or injury and use scare tactics, combined with the promise of awards, to bring these people into massive class action suits. They effectively tap the media to rally sentiment for multi-million-dollar punitive damage awards. This leads many companies to settle questionable lawsuits just to stay out of court.

These lawsuits are bad for business; they are also bad for society. They compromise access to affordable health care, punish consumers by raising the cost of goods and services, chill innovation, and undermine the notion of personal responsibility. The personal injury lawyers who benefit from the status quo use their fees to perpetuate the cycle of lawsuit abuse. They have reinvested millions of dollars into the political process and in more litigation that acts as a drag on our economy. Some have compared the political and judicial influence of the personal injury lobby to a fourth branch of government.

Opponents of Tort Reform say the issue is a very elaborate, and successful, propaganda war being financed by those who maim and kill others and yet do not want to be held responsible for their actions. They say there is no evidence that tort reform helps the average person. That is simply not true. Tort reform directly results in decreased insurance premiums for both health care professionals and individuals. Tort reform is not a release from liability, but a common sense approach to accountability. Tort reform will not benefit ambulance chasing trial lawyers and that is the primary reason they are fighting tooth and nail to stop it in Oklahoma. If we plan to move Oklahoma forward, we must have meaningful tort reform and soon.

The key will be Governor Henry and his stance on this important issue. Contact Governor Henry by phone at 405.521.2342 or by email through his website at Urge him to stop fishing and start helping Oklahoma by working with Republicans on meaningful tort reform.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Clinton Foundation releases list of donors
By Kevin Bogardus from The Hill
Posted: 12/18/08 01:04 PM [ET]
Former President Bill Clinton has raised millions of dollars for his foundation from foreign governments across the Middle East and Europe that his wife may end up negotiating with as the next secretary of state.The Clinton Foundation released a list of its donors Thursday as part of its agreement surrounding the nomination of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) to President-elect Obama's Cabinet. The ex-president agreed to disclose the donors due to the potential of his expansive foundation work conflicting with his wife’s new role in the incoming Obama administration.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia gave at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. Kuwait and Qatar have given at least $1 million to the group, along with the sultanate of Oman and the government of Brunei.European countries have also pitched in. Norway donated at least $5 million to the foundation while Italy’s Ministry for Environment and Territory gave at least $500,000.Beyond foreign governments, the list is heavy with well-known Democratic donors and major corporations.
For example, the Wal-Mart Foundation and the foundation of the retail giant’s founder, Sam Walton, gave at least $1 million each to the foundation. Sen. Clinton sat on the company’s board from 1986 to 1992 when her husband was governor of Arkansas. The corporation is based in Bentonville, Ark.Other companies that have donated to the foundation include Duke Energy, Hewlett Packard and the Citi Foundation, affiliated with Citigroup, one of several financial services firms that have received rescue funds from the federal government this year.
Big contributors to the Democratic Party are also littered throughout the list. For example, movie producer Stephen Bing and media mogul Fred Eychaner both gave at least $10 million. Robert Johnson, founder of Black Entertainment Television, donated at least $1 million. In addition, George Soros’s Open Society Institute also gave $1 million.Disclosing the foundation’s donors is part of a tough ethics regime for the former president. Clinton will have to disclose future donors as well as submit his paid speeches and foundation activities to ethics officials at the State Department for review while his wife is at Foggy Bottom.
Obama’s presidential campaign often pushed Clinton to disclose donors to her husband’s foundation during their Democratic primary battle this year. Founded in 1997, this is the first time the Clinton Foundation has released its donors publicly, which is not required by law.Funds raised by the former president have financed several different foundation initiatives around the world, such as supplying medicine to those living with AIDS and developing programs for child nutrition in Latin America.“I want to personally express my deepest appreciation to our many contributors, who remain steadfast partners in our work to impact the lives of so many around the world in measurable and meaningful ways,” said former President Clinton in a statement Thursday.The full list of donors is available on the Clinton Foundation's website,
Red-State Army?
By Danielle Allen
The Washington Post
Monday, December 15, 2008; Page A21
In Hopewell Township, N.J., the veterans of American Legion Post 339 have put their building up for sale. "Today's vets don't come out," 82-year old Jim Hall told The Times of Trenton last month. The post is down from 425 paying members in the 1960s and '70s to 202 this year; only about a dozen regularly attend. But it's America that has changed, not vets.

Since 1970, the population of the United States has grown by about 50 percent, from roughly 200 million to 300 million. Over the same period, the number of active-duty armed forces has fallen approximately 50 percent, from 3 million to 1.4 million. A far smaller percentage of the citizenry now serves in the military. Whereas in 1969 13 percent of Americans were veterans, in 2007 only 8 percent of us were.

Even more important than these general demographic shifts is the change wrought by the end of the draft in 1973. Until then, military service was distributed pretty evenly across regions. But that is no longer true. The residential patterns for current veterans and the patterns of state-level contributions of new recruits to the all-volunteer military have a distinct geographic tilt. And tellingly, the map of military service since 1973 aligns closely with electoral maps distinguishing red from blue states.
In 1969, the 10 states with the highest percentage of veterans were, in order: Wyoming, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, California, Oregon, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Ohio, Connecticut and Illinois.
In 2007, the 10 states with the highest percentage of post-Vietnam-era veterans were, in order: Alaska, Virginia, Hawaii, Washington, Wyoming, Maine, South Carolina, Montana, Maryland and Georgia.
Over the past four decades, which states have disappeared from the top 10? California, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Illinois, all big blue states that have voted Democratic in the past five presidential elections. These states and another blue state, New York, which ranked 12th in 1969, are among the 10 states with the lowest number of post-Vietnam vets per capita. New Jersey comes in 50th of the 50 states; just 1 percent of current residents have served in the military since Vietnam. Little wonder Jim Hall's American Legion post is fading away.

This is not simply an issue of people retiring to warm states such as Florida, Georgia and Texas. A 2005 Heritage Foundation analysis of Defense Department and census data on enlistments found that Montana, Alaska, Florida, Wyoming, Maine and Texas send the most young people per capita to the military. The states with the lowest contribution rates? Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York.
What's clear from the data is that a major national institution, the U.S. military, now has tighter connections to some regions of the country than others.

And we can't simply treat the uneven pattern of military service as an insignificant reflection of the cultural differences that characterize different regions of this diverse country. Military institutions across nations and throughout time have always been important creators of culture. They strive to develop unbreakable bonds of solidarity among their members based on shared values, experiences and outlooks. In this country, the military's leadership role in racial integration has been understood in just this way.
The issue now is not racial integration but cultural separation. If young people from different regions and social backgrounds either enter or steer clear of the armed forces, military service will become, over time, an experience that doesn't ease but exacerbates preexisting cultural differences. Is the all-volunteer military already having this effect?
I spotted the link between military service and regional partisan divisions when I was researching not military history but Internet political communication. After spending time on political Web sites of the right and left, I noticed that posts on right-leaning sites often employed military lingo -- habits of developing monikers and jingles and of using the vocabulary of military tactics and strategy. Left-leaning sites, in contrast, mostly lacked any easily recognizable features of military language.
This is one sign that our public sphere already suffers from a division between military and non-military cultures. The division is not trivial, and without institutional change it is likely to be durable.
During the recent presidential campaign, bothBarack Obama and John McCain called for restoring idealism and rededicating citizenship to service. Doing so would require paying attention to the fact that the all-volunteer military has dramatically segmented American experience.

It is time to think seriously about a structure for national service -- both military and non-military -- that could successfully integrate young people from different regions of the country so that they will come, at least, to understand each other. We need to weave a fabric of shared citizenship anew.

The writer is the UPS Foundation Professor of social science at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J.

Friday, December 12, 2008


Jonathan Edwards was just nineteen when he wrote his seventy(70) resolutions. He read them every day. With the new year right around the corner and everyone "making resolutions," you might find these profitable. Click on the link to view the resolutions:

~U.S. Senator Tom Coburn
by Steve Fair
“If I lose an election because I did the right thing- fine,” U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, R-OK, said on Friday morning during a blogger news conference. “The problem in Washington is that we have career politicians who don’t get it,” Coburn continued. “They have no perspective outside of politics.”

Responding to a variety of questions from selected bloggers throughout the United States, Coburn said he projected the Gross Domestic Product will be down 5% in the 4th quarter. The Senator stated next year’s federal budget deficit will be 1.6 trillion dollars. Current estimates of the total budget are 2.9 trillion, which is an 8% increase over the previous year. If the budget deficit is more than 50% of the total budget, it will be the first time since 1945 that has happened.

“I want to give you a tasting of the stupidity that goes on in Washington,” Coburn said. “We have a multitude of empty federal buildings that are not being used, yet we can’t sell them.” “The maintenance costs on those buildings alone is $5-6 billion annually,” Coburn exclaimed. “Are you aware that less than one percent of federal agencies has a metric that measures their effectiveness?” Coburn asked.

Coburn outlined three things that would trim 25% of the expected deficit. First, he proposed that all federal agencies take a 10% cut in their budget next year. “That would save $160 billion dollars.” “They know it’s there and they can do it, but they won’t willingly,” Coburn said. Second 350 billion could be saved on the waste that is in government every year. Third, the Senator said up to eliminating earmarks could save $25 billion.

When asked about the failure of last night’s Big Three bailout bill, Coburn said he did not blame the United Auto Workers. “They did not get them into this mess.” “The car companies got here because they had management in place who was unwilling to risk a strike on their watch,” Coburn said. “Last night’s bill failure was solely because the UAW was unwilling to come to the table and give us a timeline on when they would be wage competitive.” When asked if using the Bank Bailout monies to help the automakers would be a good idea, Coburn said, “It would be a giant mistake.” “You would set a precedence and then every industry or company that is in trouble would expect government help.” “Pilgrims Pride, the countries largest chicken processor, just filed bankruptcy.” “If we help the one industry, then we would have to help all of them,” Coburn said.

Calling the Community Reinvestment Act, “social engineering,” Coburn said it forced banks and lending institutions to make loans they knew were risky and not good business. “But what are you to do, when the bank examiner is threatening to pull your charter if you aren’t compliant with the CRA,” Coburn asked.

When asked by a blogger how Americans can change Washington, Coburn’s passion bubbled to the surface. “We need a different farm team,” he said. “We need to recruit people who get it.” “We need people who are not career politicians and who have the character, integrity and guts to make tough decisions and take tough stands,” Coburn said. When their constituents call elected officials into account that is a powerful tool according to Coburn. “I do a lot of town meetings and when you are questioned in front of 150 people about a vote you made and you have to justify the way you voted, it will make you think when you go back to vote,” Coburn said. “Shame is a powerful tool.”

Coburn said we need citizen legislators and should not be looking to career politicians to fix our countries problems. “What can you do?” “In everything you do, you can put out a clarion call that Americans can change Washington, but they have to do it by sending a different type of person to represent them,” Coburn concluded.

Coburn’s candor is refreshing in politics. So often we have politicians tell us what we want to hear so they can get our vote. Coburn is bluntly honest and his “I don’t care if I stay up here or not” attitude is what makes him so effective and irritating to members of the Senate in both parties. Because of his resolve, it’s critical we implore him to serve another term in the Senate. He is the one member of Congress who could change Washington for the better.

Monday, December 8, 2008

A Remarkable Story of God's Grace
by Nick Vujicic

It says in James 1:2, "Consider it pure joy, my Brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds." It seemed like a tall order to “count” hurt, pain and struggle as nothing but “pure joy” when my birth date arrived. My parents were Christians; my Dad was even a Pastor of our church, so that verse was quite familiar to them. However, on the morning of December 4th , 1982, in Melbourne, Australia, the last two words on the minds of my parents was "Praise God!". Their firstborn son had been born without limbs! There were no warnings or time to prepare themselves for it. Having no answers at all, the doctors were completely shocked and taken off guard!The whole church mourned over my birth and my parents were absolutely devastated. "If God is a God of love, “ they questioned, “Then why would He let something like this happen, and especially to committed Christians?" My Dad did not think I would survive for very long. But, tests proved that I was a healthy baby boy with just one hitch, I’d been born without any limbs. Understandably, my parents had strong concern and evident fears of what kind of life I would be able to lead. The first big hurdle was for my parents to be at peace, trusting that God was still fully in control. It took a number of months and a lot of tears, questions and grief before coming to terms within their own hearts. God provided them with the strength, wisdom and courage they would need through those early years. Soon after that, I was old enough to go to school. School was really enjoyable for me and I really tried to live life like everyone else. But, it was in my early years of school where I encountered uncomfortable times of feeling rejected, weird and bullied because of my physical difference. It was very hard for me to get used to. In spite of this, with the support of my parents, I started to develop attitudes and values which helped me overcome these challenging times. Though I knew I was different, on the inside, I was just like everyone else. There were many times when I felt so low that I wouldn't go to school in order to avoid all the negative attention. With encouragement from my parents, I began to ignore the bullies and tried to start making friends by just talking with some of the kids. Soon the students realized that I was just like them. Starting there, God began to bless me with new friends! Many times I felt depressed and angry because I couldn't change the way I was, or blame anyone for that matter. In Sunday school, I learned that God loves us all and that He cares for us deeply. At that stage in my childhood, I could understand His love to a point. But, as you can imagine, I still got hung up on that fact that if he really loved me, why did He make me like this? I wondered if I’d done something wrong and began to feel certain that this must be true. Otherwise, I thought, God wouldn’t have made me the only weird one out of all the kids at school. Feeling I was a burden to those around me, I sensed the sooner I’d just go away altogether, the better it would be for everyone. So, at a young age, I wanted to end my pain and my life. But I am thankful, once again, for my parents and my family who were always there to comfort me and lend me their strength. Thankfully, a real turning point arrived!Due to the emotional struggles I had experienced with bullying, self-esteem and loneliness, God began to instill a passion of sharing my story and experiences to help others cope with whatever challenge they might have in their lives. Turning my struggles into something that would glorify God and bless others, I realized my purpose! The Lord was going to use me to encourage and inspire others to live to their fullest potential and not let anything get in the way of accomplishing their hopes and dreams. As I grew older, God continued to prepare my heart and teach me to seek Him. One of the first lessons that I have learned was not to take things for granted. With a wake-up call around the age of twelve, I realized just how much God had blessed me. My foot, what I’ve termed “my little chicken bone” I had been taking for granted. But it serves me well. God had freely given to me and so much with my loving family, and so many other blessings, I realized “Why should I still complain?” God directed me to Romans 8:28 and there I found this, "And we know that in all things God works for the best for those who love Him." Wow! That verse really spoke to my heart. It convicted me to the point where I’m confident that there’s no such thing as luck, chance or coincidence and that these "bad" things happen in our life to make us more like Christ. In James 1:3 & 4, it reads, "...know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything." Enlightened through God’s Word, I felt complete peace rush in, knowing that God will not let anything happen to us unless He has a good purpose for it. At the age of 15, I completely gave my life to Christ after reading John 9. In this chapter, Jesus said that the reason the man was born blind was "so that the works of God may be revealed through Him." I truly believed that God would heal me so I could be a great testimony of His awesome power. As I grew in Christ and in spiritual maturity, the Lord gave me the wisdom to understand that if we pray for something within His will, it will happen, but in His timing…not ours. And likewise, if our prayers are not within God's will, then I know that He has something better. His purpose became clearer to me and now I’m fully convinced and understand that His glory is revealed as He uses me just the way I am. And even more wonderful, He can use me in ways others can't be used. Now twenty-five years old, I’ve completed a Bachelor’s Degree in both Financial Planning and Accounting. Also, I’m active as a motivational speaker. Again, my number one passion is for souls. I just love to go out and share my story and testimony wherever opportunities become available. Over time, I’ve developed messages that relate to and encourage students through topics that challenge today's teenagers. The Lord has used me to speak in the corporate sector as well. For more information on Nick's presentations, go to "Nick's Ministry". In recent years, I’ve learned to become independent and can now take care of all my personal needs. I’m able to do everything from brushing my teeth and combing my hair to dressing up and taking care of my personal hygiene, including shaving. I get around the house by jumping around and, outside the house; an electric wheelchair assists me. For recreation, I enjoy swimming, fishing and playing soccer.Passionate for reaching out to the youth, I’m constantly ministering in schools from elementary to high school. Ultimately, I make myself available for whatever God wants me to do, and wherever He leads, I follow, for I’ve learned to trust Him fully. Achieving goals and pursuing dreams is something I’m actively pursuing on a regular basis. Some of these include becoming the best witness I can be of God's love and hope, to become an international inspirational speaker and to be used as a vessel in both Christian and non-Christian venues. These goals are, even now, being realized. Other aspirations of mine yet to be realized is my desire to modify a car that I can drive, to be interviewed on the "Oprah Winfrey Show" and share my story, and to write several books. With anticipation, I look forward to starting on the first of these this year. Not surprisingly, the title will be, "No Arms, No Legs, No Worries!" Many would think these goals were too far-fetched. However, I believe that if you have the desire and passion to do something, and it's within God's will, you will achieve it in good time. As humans, we continually put limits on ourselves for no reason at all! What's worse is putting limits on God, who is well able to do all things! We put God in a "box". The awesome thing about the power of God is that if we want to do something for God, we must refocus. Instead of concentrating on our capability, our attention needs to shift to our availability. For, the Word of God is clear; it is God working through us. Without Him, we aren’t capable of doing anything on our own. Once we make ourselves available for God's work, guess whose capabilities we rely on? God's! Philippians 4:13 highlights this point well, "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me." God has a truly great purpose for your life!As far as your unanswered prayers, remember that God is Faithful. What are we to do when we are seeking but not finding? Jeremiah 29:12 states, "Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. I will be found by you," declares the Lord. Take courage my friend for the Battle is the Lord's. Let me urge you to keep striving for the truth. The truth, found in Jesus Christ, is what will set you free. It’s His peace, reigning in your heart, that will give you true freedom from the fear and doubt that has previously resided there. May the Lord bless you as you diligently seek Him and grant you Godly wisdom and strength through your journey. Nick's website is:
A four(4) minute video can be accessed at

Lawrence Livermore Laboratories has discovered the heaviest element yet known to science. The new element, Governmentium (Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312. These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert; however, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete. Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2- 6 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of morons promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass. When catalysed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.
Weekly Opinion/Editorial
Bill levels the playing field!
by Steve Fair

State Representatives Mike Reynolds, R, OKC, and Sally Kern, R, OKC, are introducing a bill in the 2009 Oklahoma legislative session that would allow Oklahoma students voluntary expression of a religious viewpoint. The bill would allow a student to express a religious view on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner as a secular or other viewpoint. "There's a great deal of confusion out there," said Kern, who taught Government at public schools for nearly 20 years. "Any time a student says something about God or Jesus, they're immediately censored."

“Oklahoma families need to know their children will not be persecuted for exercising their constitutional rights and expressing religious beliefs at school," Reynolds said. "While students and guest speakers can't proselytize, they have every right to express their personal beliefs and should be given the same protections afforded nonreligious or even anti-religious officials."

Last session, Kern authored HB 2633 that stated "students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions." Because of the supposed “vague” language in the bill, Governor Henry vetoed it. The session died before a veto override vote could be taken. Reynolds says he and Kern have written the Governor and said they would work with him on the language in the bill.

Last session’s bill had some controversy when Kern asserted that in a lengthy phone conversation, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Sandy Garrett "assured me that she was in favor of it." But Rep. Ray McCarter, D-Marlow--the poster boy for term limits-- disputed that and said he talked to Lealon Taylor, chief of staff for the Department of Education, who said the department did not support the bill. Garrett never took a definite public stand on the bill and McCarter, who opposed the bill, was termed out in November.

Not surprisingly Jim Huff, a retired teacher and the executive secretary of the Oklahoma Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State—code for atheist—is not for the bill. Huff says, “I fail to see what the purpose is other than simply trying to drum up an issue that doesn’t exist.” But Huff is seeing the playing field from his perspective where secularism is the accepted practice.

This year’s bill will be patterned after a law Texas passed in June 2007 called the Schoolchildren’s Religious Liberties bill and passed both houses with wide margins. It went into effect in September. According to Houston attorney Joe Reynolds—no relation to Mike Reynolds—a 16-year member of the Texas A&M Board of Regents, who has represented more Texas school districts than any other attorney said, “This is the best piece of legislation for school districts that has been introduced in the past 50 years.”

Kelly Coghlan, the legal architect of the Texas legislation said, “This bill does not require or suggest that any child express a religious viewpoint, it just protects them if they do. Religious children do not receive special rights, preferential treatment or extra protection, just equal rights, equal treatment and equal protection.”

"This law is a victory for freedom and non-discrimination for every young Texan," said Rep. Charlie Howard who introduced the bill. “It is win-win for students, school administrators and teachers.”

Who would have thought in the United States that students would be attacked for expressing their faith, but that is how far we’ve come in America. Recently in New York 5-year-old Kayla Broadus was in the news for joining hands and saying grace with her three friends over their cupcakes and milk. She was stopped by her kindergarten teacher. School officials maintained the spoken prayer violated the separation of church and state. Kayla's parents had to take the school to court to get a restraining order.

In a country where 85% of the population claim to be Christians and 95% believe in God, how could we have fallen so far from our nation’s roots? During the recent presidential race, GOP Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin was repeatedly attacked because of her Christian faith. Robert Reyes, a Los Angeles Times columnist, said that because of her faith in creationism, Palin was a “religious fanatic with a Neanderthal faith who thinks that The Flintstones is a reality show." The real fanatic is Robert Reyes who is a tireless evangelist for secular humanism.

Freedom of speech is under attack in our country and particularly the freedom to express one’s religious viewpoint. In the name of political correctness, indidivual student rights have been trampled on. This bill will level the playing field for students of faith and protect school districts. It deserves bi-partisian support.

Friday, December 5, 2008

Illustrating Government Missteps
by J.C. Watts Jr.

The federal government’s crisis response and oversight capabilities have taken quite a beating lately. Its reaction, or lack thereof, to Hurricane Katrina confirmed for many that the federal government was asleep at the switch in the aftermath of a terrible natural disaster. More recently, the meltdown in the financial services sector has exposed severe weaknesses in the federal government’s ability to recognize and act expeditiously to confront a major economic crisis. No wonder there is apprehension among many over the government’s stepping in with a massive $700 billion bailout, necessary though it might be.

The government’s belated and disjointed attempts to "fix" problems can result in unintended if not detrimental consequences. One such example is the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA). Enacted in 1982, the USFSPA permits state courts to include a military service member’s retirement/retainer pay as common property in a divorce proceeding thereby making it subject to garnishment. The government’s well intended purpose was to afford some security for ex-spouses, most of whom were women, after a divorce from the breadwinner.

As often is the case, however, when government intervenes, well intended does not necessarily mean well thought out. The USFSPA remedy served its purpose, but it did not anticipate the greater opportunities women would achieve through the years both within and outside the military. As the ranks of women in the armed services have swelled, more and more female soldiers, sailors, and airmen have experienced the consequences of the USFSPA by having their retirement/retainer pay garnished in a divorce settlement. A law that in large measure was supposed to protect women has been siphoning away an income source that many women, as well as men, expected to be there as promised in return for their service to their country.

The USFSPA is demoralizing to many service men and women whose marriages have undergone the stresses and strains common to a life of sudden deployments and prolonged separations. Many find themselves fighting a "two-front war" -- one far from home in the defense of their country and another on the home front to protect a benefit they have worked hard to earn for years of dedicated service. Some of the USFSPA provisions are puzzling and contribute to a perception that the government creates more problems than it solves. For example, a soldier’s retirement/retainer pay is awarded to a former spouse, yet when the ex-spouse remarries, gets a job, or otherwise achieves financial security after the divorce, they still continue to receive the service member’s pay. This skews the original intent of the law when the Act becomes a mechanism to gain a second or even third income source in addition to the ex-spouse’s own salary and that of their new spouse. In these instances the law can facilitate the decision to divorce since it allows for a financially attractive alternative to keeping the marriage intact.

Another peculiar aspect of the USFSPA involves how garnished retirement/retainer to a former spouse is calculated. The amount is figured not on the length of the marriage (what seems logical) but generally on the service member’s rank and time in grade at retirement. This means, for instance, that a service member, say, a first lieutenant, who divorces after a three-year marriage and retires 17 years later as a colonel will have retirement/retainer pay garnished at the level of his or her rank at retirement, not at the rank when the marriage ended nearly two decades earlier.

Compounding these frustrations are the uncertainty and inconsistency in the way the law is applied. When can a service member expect to stop making payments? Well, the law provides no sunset date so payments continue in perpetuity until the service member or former spouse dies. Uniform implementation is another problem. State divorce laws are as varied as the judgments rendered by state courts. Courts often award payments greater than what is allowed by the USFSPA because of a complete lack of federal oversight standards to ensure that state courts abide by the restrictions in the law.

Government actions, whether focused on a natural catastrophe, an economic crisis, or the welfare of our men and women in uniform, sometimes prove to be shortsighted. Like the USFSPA, they can unintentionally end up hurting people. The USFSPA at the very least ought to be reexamined. Perhaps it needs to be scrapped altogether with an eye towards crafting a measure more in tune with the times -- something better conceived and fair to all which mitigates the monthly net increase of 364 veterans between April and October of this year that had their retirement/retainer pay garnished for life. This represents just another example of government’s good intentions gone awry.
J.C. Watts Jr. is a former Member of Congress. He represented the 4th District of Oklahoma for eight years. This column will appear in newspapers throughout the U.S. on Saturday December 6, 2008.

Monday, December 1, 2008

by Dr. Forrest L. Keener
And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth? And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God. (Luke 12:15-21)

Please understand that the following article is not intended to be political at all. I do not feel that I am addressing a political problem, though most people think our problem is political. I believe our problem is moral and spiritual, and that is why I address here. During the last few months we have seen a dreadful move in the economy, which has had many terrible effects. Housing values have plummeted, Businesses have had terrible earnings reports, and many are closing. Stock values have dropped dramatically. Foreclosures are up, and we could go on with many other catastrophic reports. The blame game is the biggest game in town, and the sad thing is that people accept the accusations as being the reason for our trouble. Some claim “It is the Bush
administration; It is the congress; It is the fat cats on Wall Street; It is exported jobs, It is the oil industry: It is the upper class, as opposed to the middle class; and on we could go blaming someone else. Constant comparative references are made to the great depression, and the same silly causes are given for that catastrophe, nearly eighty years ago. Acclamations then, were as they are now. “Republicans caused it,” “Herbert Hoover” caused it, “FDR solved the problem,” “FDR prolonged the problem.” etc., etc.

So much blame, all with enough truth to deceive us, but never do we face real truth or confess the real reason. History would teach us, if we would listen, that prosperity and recession is always cyclical, and to a reasonable extent, if not totally, each brings about the other. External government, by which I mean any force outside of our own personal discipline, whatever that
government may be, may somewhat stall the cyclical change, and if so, will, consequently, allow the ultimate effect to deepen. It will also aid us in placing blame, and hoping for remedy, outside our own personal conduct. Sometimes, societies muddle through the problem, as the USA has done during the last seventy five years, survive the collapse, as the economy heals itself, by forcing us to make the necessary adjustments, and still we do not learn what happened to us, or why. They blame one party, or administration, or the other, which is probably always a mistake, and also the reason they will repeat the same mistake until they finally self destruct, and die. I expect that the great prosperity, and the accompanying conduct, such as the USA enjoyed, and reveled in during the “Roaring 20's,” was the real cause of the great depression, and will usually, if not always, have the same effect on any human society. History seems to demonstrate that societies repeat the same mistake, without ever seeing it, until they blindly destroy themselves.
If I am right, the question that forces itself upon us is WHY? I know the answer I give, will make me a fool in the sight of the great majority of Americans. None the less, as God’s minister of the Gospel I must and will give the answer which I am sure is true. I give this answer because my Lord gave it. “Take heed and beware of covetousness.”

The word beware implies that covetousness will destroy surprisingly and suddenly. “This night thy soul shall be required of thee, then whose shall these things be which thou hast provided?” We can always find someone else to blame, but we have done it to ourselves. We have trapped ourselves, and may well have destroyed ourselves, in our own lust for the possession of desirable things. For instance, the rush to buy bigger and better houses, which we covet so greedily, has inflated the housing industry, thus causing a surplus of houses, and thereby creating a recession in the industry. The financial industry, desiring to make huge profits on loans, has artificially propped up the house building industry, causing more overbuilding, resulting in a drop in house values, until it has, at least, temporarily, depressed that entire industry. That destroys the market, thus driving down home values, thus destroying personal wealth, thus the financial institutions, and on it goes. This is true of houses, as well as business buildings, and it has created a nationwide domino effect, which has echoed across our nation, and now even around the world. This same domino effect is true in the case of the automotive industry, and while each effects the other, a thousand other industries across this land. The sad fact is this: Instead of rejoicing in The Lord, who has loaded us with all these benefits, and spending much time in thanksgiving, we have consumed His blessings upon our own lusts, and scrambled for more and better possessions.

Whether we squander our wealth on recreation and luxuries, or hoard it for future bank balances, the motivation and the result is the same. We have forgotten, and in many cases, denied the Lord who gave us all these things to enjoy. Therefore, those blessings have become a curse, and they are the very thing that we have used to destroy ourselves. Many people who profess Christ as Lord and Savior, live as if there were no God. Instead of daily gathering around the table, taking a moment for worship, and thanking God for their food, they grab a TV tray, or a hand full of junk food, and rush to their own favorite TV program, or gaming spot. By example, they teach their children exactly as much about God, as do pigs. They spend more money on restaurants and recreation than they do on world evangelism. When we, as a society, live like this, how can we expect the world around to have any respect for Christianity. Indeed, how can we expect that God would suffer us to continue very long in such energetic covetousness. May
God, in His mercy, forgive once more, and call us to repentance! If He does not, we may well see the first worldwide famine.

Let’s, at least, have the sense of the people of Nineveh. (Jonah 3:6-10)

Forrest Keener is an evangelist out of Sherwood Baptist Church in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. He was pastor of Bethel Baptist Church in Lawton, Oklahoma for over forty years. He can be reached by email at
by Steve Fair

The late Ronald Reagan defined the taxpayer as, “someone who works for the federal government, but doesn't have to take the civil service examination.” Reagan also said, “Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15.” The late British Prime Minister Winston Churchill once said, “There is no such thing as a good tax.”

My all time favorite quote about taxation is from Jean Baptiste Colbert, who was Louis XIV’s tax collector. He said, “The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to get the most feathers with the least hissing." Republicans are like the hissing goose—they hate taxes!

I am a great admirer of Sir Winston but I must disagree with him about all taxes being bad. It is rare you will find a Republican supporting a tax, because Republicans by definition are “against” excessive taxes. I haven’t researched it, but it’s likely a guy named Fair was involved in the Boston Tea Party.

Next Tuesday, Duncan voters will consider the renewal of one half-cent sales tax to fund economical development in our area. The “tax” is renewed every five years. It was created back in 1995 to create an economic development fund that could be used to help existing business grow and attract new industry to Duncan and Stephens County. The “tax” generates about 1.2 million annually and has proven itself to be a good investment and spend of taxpayer dollars.

For example, since the DAEDF begin collecting the tax, the labor force in Duncan has increased by over four thousand jobs—a twenty percent increase. The per capita income for families has increased, and the hourly wages have jumped by over a third in just the past seven years. The DAEDF desires a great deal of the credit for those increases.

Ronald Reagan was an advocate for “supply side” economics. Supply-side economics is a school of macroenomic theory that argues that economic growth can be most effectively created using incentives for people to produce (supply) goods and services, such as adjusting income tax and capital gain tax rates. Reagan wasn’t the first Presdient to advocate such a theory. Democrat John F. Kennedy used much the same economic philosphy in 1961. Kennedy cut taxes and famously said, “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Some scaratically call the theory “trickle down economics,” but it’s a proven fact that any action taken economically doesn’t just stop with the first receiver—it multiples, often several times.

The DAEDF tax is a tide that lifts all boats, because it benefits everyone. Because of the economic development within our community, there are less social ills. Unemployment and welfare benefits in communities with high employement rates are lower. Real estate values increase because the demand for property is high. Muncipal and county governments have more revenue because of increased sales volume in local retail outlets. The value doesn’t just “trickle” down—it often flows down rapidly to benefit everyone.

On November 13th, at the regular monthly meeting of the Stephens County GOP, DAEDF foundation President, Lyle Roggaw was our guest speaker. Speaking before a group of political activists that can be best described as “extremely” fiscally conservative and skeptical of all taxes, Roggaw had the challenge of convincing them to support the renewal of the tax. He did an outstanding job of explaining what the DAEDF foundation’s objectives are and what the DAEDF does with the money the sales tax generates. He also highlighted a number of the success stories—local companies that had expanded, businesses that relocated to Duncan.

After a question and answer session in which Mr. Roggaw answered a number of tough questions, a motion was made and seconded. After some additional discussion, the Stephens County Republican Party voted unanimously to support the renewal of the DAEDF sales tax. It’s rare that Republicans agree on anything unanimously, much less a tax, but the local GOP recognizes this tax is an investment.

Sometimes taxes are a good thing. They remind us that we live in a society, that we have collective responsibilities, that we need to pool our thoughts and energies to make progress on certain issues. The DAEDF tax is one of those taxes. It partners with private industry to create jobs which in turn growsour community. Don’t think of this as a tax—think of it as an investment in your children and grandchildren’s future. Vote yes for jobs on Tuesday.

Weekly Opinion/Editorial
Madam Secretary?
By Steve Fair

Senator Hillary Clinton, D-NY, has been announced as President elect Obama’s Secretary of State designate. The Secretary of State serves as the President's principal adviser on U.S. foreign policy, conduct negotiations relating to U.S. foreign affairs, and a lot more. The office was created in 1789 and while it hasn’t expanded, our changing world has made it arguably one of the most powerful jobs in our government.

So this is a promotion for Hillary. To insure the NY? Senator doesn’t face the same intense scrutiny Secretaries Rice and Powell did in Senate confirmation hearings, Former President Clinton has agreed to disclose the full list of contributors to his Presidential library foundation. Because the Senate is now in Democrat control and also has a history of giving their “colleagues” an easier time in hearings than they do other appointments, Hillary’s confirmation is virtually a lock. But it shouldn’t be.

President Clinton’s ties to foreign governments have been a concern of Americans for years. During the Democrat primary Hillary faced questions about the source of the money for her husband's presidential library. During a September debate, moderator Tim Russert asked the Senator whether her husband would release a donor list. Clinton said she was sure her husband would "be happy to consider that," though the former president later declined to provide a list of donors. The Washington Post confirmed numerous seven-figure donors to the library through interviews and tax records of foundations. According to a December 2007 in The Post, “Several foreign governments gave at least $1 million, including the Middle Eastern nations of Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, as well as the governments of Taiwan and Brunei.” “The Saudi Royal family gave Clinton ten million,” The Post concluded.

New York Daily syndicated columnist, Michael Goodwin says, “I think the issue of Bill Clinton still isn't resolved.” “And, you know, this is something Obama raised on the campaign trail, Bill Clinton's disclosure of the contributors to his presidential library and to his foundation and to the paid speeches that he gives around the world.” “Bill Clinton has raised $500 million and we generally do not know where that money has come from.”

In an April 2008 story, The LA Times wrote, “ The former president's charity has raised more than $500 million over the last decade.” “His reliance on influential foreign donors and his foundation's refusal to release its list of donors have led to repeated questions about the sources and transparency of his fundraising -- even as Hillary Clinton has talked on the campaign trail about relying on him as a roving international ambassador if she is elected president.”

It was clear that in 1996 that Communist China was trying to funnel money to the Clinton/Gore campaign. Charlie Trie, one of Bills trusted DNC fundraisers, attempted to funnel this money. When faced with indictment he fled to China for refuge. Another money funneler for the communists and Clinton campaign, Johnny Chung, is now in jail. The funds came from divisions of the Chinese army, one of which had been caught only months earlier while attempting to smuggle AK-47's to LA street gangs. The Chinese are not an ally of the U.S.

The Cox Report was issued in 1998 and headed by Congressman Chris Cox, R, CA. It revealed that China was actively spying on the United States and had been stealing top-secret nuclear weapons plans for two decades. Worse, Clinton was informed of the espionage problem months and years in advance of it breaking to the public yet did absolutely nothing about it and even continued to transfer other technology and pursue close relations with China.

Two of the U.S. companies named in the report – Loral Space and Communications, headed by Clinton donor Bernard Schwartz and Hughes Electronics, headed by Clinton donor Michael Armstrong, were successfully prosecuted by the federal government for violations of U.S. export control law, resulting in the two largest fines in the history of the Arms Export Control Act. Loral paid a $14 million fine in 2002, and Hughes paid a $32 million fine in 2003.

Since he left office, Clinton has continued to make money from his foreign government contacts. It’s been reported that two-thirds of the former president's income from speeches—more than $27 million, including $6.6 million in 2006—has been for speaking engagements overseas.
Is Hillary Clinton qualified to be Secretary of State? I don’t think so. Her husband’s involvement with foreign governments has placed the security of our nation in jeopardy. One of Hillary’s most effective campaign ads was the 3am ad. In the ad, she asks, "Would he be ready for crises around the world?" Perhaps she should ask—where is Bill? Making a speech for seven figures in China? That’s more destructive than his playing around with an intern and it impacts all Americans!