Monday, January 29, 2007

Microwave ovens...and why I don't use them!

One of my readers, Theresa, writes to ask about why I gave away my microwave oven:


Could you comment further about your concerns re using a microwave? I have heard that they give off “something” that’s not good to be around when in use, but what about the effect on the food? I’ve also heard dishwashers give off something that’s not good for you too. Would like to clarify my thinking so I can better decide where to draw the line on these things. Thanks!

Although I haven't heard anything about dishwashers (so please inform me!), I'd like to share what I know about microwave ovens.  First of all, I encourage you to do your own might try googling "dangers of microwave ovens" and see what you come up with.  I, personally, have read several studies that gave me great concern.  Although I used my microwave mainly for the convenience of melting, re-heating leftovers and heating water, I felt the dangers were great enough to give it up completely.  Some of the following information you can find at and some of it is from various studies and papers I have read over the years.

First of all - do you know how they work?  Microwaves are a form of electromagnetic energy.  Microwaves are used in many more things than cooking (tv.,long distance phone use, computers). A microwave oven has a magnetron - this is a tube in which electrons are affected by magnetic and electric fields so that it produces microwave length radiation.  This radiation interacts with the molecules in food.  Food molecules (and water!) have a positive and negative end just like a magnet has north and south polarity.  Microwaves cause the polar molecules to rotate which creates friction which heats up the food.  It also causes damage to the surrounding molecules.  Microwaving changes the taste and texture of food. 

It also damages some key components in food and can actually change certain beneficial properties into toxic properties according to Dr. Lee (12/9/89) who said:

Microwaving baby formulas converted certain trans-amino acids into the synthetic cis-isomers.  Synthetic isomers, whether cis-amino acids or trans-fatty acids are not biologically active.  Further one of the amino acids, L-proline was converted to its d-isomer, which is known to be neurotoxic (poisonous to the nervous system) and nephrotoxic (poisonous to the kidneys).  It is bad enough that many babies are not nursed, but now they are given fake milk (baby formula) made even more toxic via microwaving."


Now, I am not a scientist and don't understand all of the trans-amino acids/cis-isomers etc.  But I DO understand neurotoxic and nephrotoxic just fine.  I also know that I don't want to be eating them or feeding them to my children.  And I am sure you all remember the newspaper accounts of blood that was warmed in a microwave before being given to a patient having hip surgery...Norma Levitt died from that transfusion.  The microwaving of the blood altered it enough to be deadly.

In Comparative Study of Food Prepared Conventionally and in the Microwave Oven, published by Raum & Zelt in 1992, at 3(2): 43, it states

"A basic hypothesis of natural medicine states that the introduction into the human body of molecules and energies, to which it is not accustomed, is much more likely to cause harm than good.

Microwaved food contains both molecules and energies not present in food cooked in the way humans have been cooking food since the discovery of fire. Microwave energy from the sun and other stars is direct current based.

Artificially produced microwaves, including those in ovens, are produced from alternating current and force a billion or more polarity reversals per second in every food molecule they hit.

Production of unnatural molecules is inevitable. Naturally occurring amino acids have been observed to undergo isomeric changes (changes in shape morphing) as well as transformation into toxic forms, under the impact of microwaves produced in ovens.

One short-term study found significant and disturbing changes in the blood of individuals consuming microwaved milk and vegetables. Eight volunteers ate various combinations of the same foods cooked different ways.

All foods that were processed through the microwave ovens caused changes in the blood of the volunteers. Hemoglobin levels decreased and over all white cell levels and cholesterol levels increased. Lymphocytes decreased.

Luminescent (light-emitting) bacteria were employed to detect energetic changes in the blood. Significant increases were found in the luminescence of these bacteria when exposed to blood serum obtained after the consumption of microwaved food."

If that isn't enough to make you loose your is what research has shown happens to food processed in a microwave....from thawing to cooking!

The following is a summary of the Russian investigations published by the Atlantis Raising Educational Center in Portland, Oregon. Carcinogens were formed in virtually all foods tested.

Microwaving prepared meats sufficiently to insure sanitary ingestion caused formation of d-Nitrosodienthanolamines, a well-known carcinogen.

Microwaving milk and cereal grains converted some of their amino acids into carcinogens.

Thawing frozen fruits converted their glucoside and galactoside containing fractions into carcinogenic substances.

Extremely short exposure of raw, cooked or frozen vegetables converted their plant alkaloids into carcinogens.

Carcinogenic free radicals were formed in microwaved plants, especially root vegetables.

Decrease in nutritional value

Russian researchers also reported a marked acceleration of structural degradation leading to a decreased food value of 60 to 90% in all foods tested. Among the changes observed were:

Deceased bio-availability of vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotropics factors in all food tested.

Various kinds of damage to many plant substances, such as alkaloids, glucosides, galactosides and nitrilosides.

The degradation of nucleo-proteins in meats.

I also read a long and detailed study of what microwaved food does to your blood.  Dr. Hans Ulrich Hertel, now retired, worked as a food scientist with one of the major Swiss food companies.  He carried out a clinical study, with Dr. Bernard H. Blanc of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and the University Institute for Biochemistry, on the effects microwaved nutrients had on the blood and physiology of the human body.  It was enough to chill my blood!  They tested the volunteers blood before eating (empty stomach), after consuming raw milk, milk cooked conventionally, pasteurized milk, and raw milk cooked in a microwave, raw vegetables from an organic farm, same veggies cooked conventionally, same veggies frozen and defrosted in a microwave oven and the same veggies cooked in the microwave oven.  Blood samples were taken before eating and at defined intervals after eating.

Significant changes were found in the blood samples from the intervals following the microwaved foods.  Including: a decrease in all hemoglobin and cholesterol values, especially the ration of HDL and LDL values.  Lymphocytes showed more distinct short-term decrease after eating the microwaved food.  This along with some of the previously mentioned changes which showed pathogenic effects on the living system....such as poisoning and cell damage.

The study was interesting, although long and sometimes difficult to wade was interesting to me that Dr. Hertell lost his job and was issued a gag order....which he fought and finally suceeded in winning so that his findings could be made publicly known. 

I hope this is enough information for you to begin your own study on microwaves and whether you want to expose yourself and your children to what it does to your food.  And we haven't even begun to talk about what it can do to  your body just being in proximity of a working microwave....more for another day.

I found that I missed my microwave terribly for about a month, and now I don't miss it at all.  I might have a few more pots to wash when heating up leftovers but what a small price to pay for health.  So here's to your good health and all the money you can make at the yard sale when you get rid of the radiation machine!

Monday, January 22, 2007

My readers ask....

I have had a lot of questions come in over the last few weeks and I am going to attempt to answer some of them here.  Hopefully this will "kill a lot of birds with one stone" Innocent  So, here goes:

Jeff asks: "Thanks, Cheri. I guess limiting you to one book was not fair. So let me try again. For a well equipped agrarian homestead, which 5 books on herbs would you recommend with Balch’s being at the top of the list?"

Jeff, and others who have asked this is really hard for me to recommend books - mainly because I know I will be recommending something that is most likely filled with pagan garbage and I just HATE that. It is also hard because there are books that specialize in certain areas (men's health, women's health, children...etc.) and perhaps that is what you need in your family situation.  it is also hard to limit yourself to 5 authors but I will give it a whirl.  I am warning you though, I may go a bit over 5 if you will bear with me.  Also, these are referencing only books on using herbs medicinally - using them in cooking is another thing...and much easier to recommend!

My first recommendation is my own Medicinal Herb Course .  I like this course because I can guarantee that you won't find any pagan teachings, because it gives simple and easy to follow directions on making herbal remedies from teas to poultices to tinctures (and everything in between!) and because it addresses the most  commonly needed plants in family care (based on my own experience of raising 4 little ones and treating them with herbs for the last 25 years). There is a color picture of each herb being discussed with instructions on cultivation, parts used, how they are used and what they are used for....with contra-indications listed in bold after each herb.

My next favorite books would be Prescription for Herbal Healing by Phyllis A. Balch, CNC closely followed by Prescription for Nutritional Healing by Phyllis A. Balch, CNC and James F. Balch, M.D.  I like the Balch's books because there is little pagan nonsense, contra-indications are clearly pointed out and they are easy to use for research or reading.  I like books that are based more on science than folklore, although some folklore is wonderful.  The Balch's books meet this need for me. They have researched and presented information in a clear and easy to understand manner.  They can be purchased through the Amazon link on the right side of my blog as can most of the other books listed below.

My fourth recommendation would be The Complete Medicinal Herbal by Penelope Ody.  Great book - wonderful color pictures, good instructions at the back for making herbal remedies.  What I don't like about this book is that all herbs are listed alphabetically by Latin, if you can't remember that Self-heal is really Prunella vulgaris then you have to use the index in the back of the book each time you want to look up an herb.  Ms. Ody is from England so all the measurements given in the "how to make it" section are in metric units....another drawback for me.  The pictures are wonderful but I also wish there were more information on each herb.

On to #5...Herbal Antibiotics by Stephen Harrod Buhner.  Great book on learning more about how to fight bacterial infections naturally.  I like that he emphasizes building your own immune system.  He is careful to list contra-indications for herbs.  However, there are no color pictures to help with identification, which I think is very important.

#6...Therapeutic Herb Manual by Ed Smith.  This is one of my favorite books and costs a whopping $3.95.  Ed Smith is the owner of Herb-Pharm in Oregon.  The first half of this book lists and describes uses for different herbs.  The second half gives many recipes for tinctures and compounds that you can actually purchase from Herb-Pharm.  If I needed to purchase a compound, I would go to Herb-Pharm before I went anywhere else. I don't know if Amazon carries can get it at Herb-Pharm's website but you will have to search for it....

#7...Natural Health Encyclopedia of Herbal Medicine by Andrew Chevallier published by DK books.  Great for beginners - some color pictures, description of parts used along with traditional and current uses. It has a small herbal remedies section in the back. Not a strong emphasis on contra-indications. 

This was a hard job take well over 100 herb books and narrow my choices down to just 5.  When I am researching something you will find me with dozens of books open and covering my dining table....after enough notes are taken, those will be exchanged for more books off of the shelf.  But I think I have given you a good starting point to begin building your own home library for herbal studies.

Now, I'd like to hear from ya'll.....what are YOUR favorite books on herbal medicine? 

Authentic Agriculture Makes Its Debut!

Good Farmer John has written a wonderful post over on Northern Farmer's blog.  I encourage all of you to take the time to pop over and read this post. This is one of the best ideas I have heard in a long time.  It always irritated me that the government stole the organic label from us and then began to require us to pay to use it...along with requiring  yards of paperwork.  Whenever the governement gets involved you can be sure of several WILL cost you money and it will become a nightmare of red tape.  And in the case of the term will become watered down or have so many loop holes for the BIG guy that it doesn't mean anything anymore.

Good Farmer John has decided to take "take back the land that the enemy has stolen"!  All I want to know is where do I sign up?!

Sunday, January 21, 2007

You WON!

I received this last night!

"Last night, the Senate voted to remove Section 220 from the lobby reform bill. This dangerous provision would have crippled the ability of grassroots lobbying groups  to effectively communicate with its supporters and to lobby Members of Congress.

Without your action, Bennett Amendment 20 would not have succeeded.  This was a major victory for First Amendment rights.  Thank you for contacting your Senators.

Please take time today to thank your Senator if he or she voted in favor of Bennett Amendment 20 to strip Section 220 from the lobby reform bill."

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Silence the Citizens Act of 2007

This is hard to imagine I know but sad to say it is true. I can not emphasize enough the importance of contacting your Senators about this legislation.  This is Gary North's column on this subject.  It is long but I think it is well worth reading.  Please read and make phone calls or write letters before we are silenced!  For my readers in TN you can call Senator Alexander at 202-224-4944 and Senator Corker at 202-224-3344.  Insist on knowing your Senators' position BEFORE he votes.  Ask when you might call back to learn that position.  Senator Corker's office told me to call in the morning.  Senator Alexander's office was disdainful, arrogant and evasive.... remind them that they are representing YOU!

                Gary North's REALITY CHECK
Issue 618                                  January 16, 2007


     I write this as a former Capitol Hill staffer.  I have been there, done that.

     I am reporting on this matter because, if Democrats (and Trent Lott and Mitch McConnell) in the United States Senate get their way, it may be illegal for me to say this or anything like this beginning on January 1, 2008. If you want to know what is the highest priority of the new Congress, don't watch TV.  Don't listen to the posturing of politicians in high places regarding the war in Iraq, the safety of Americans from terror, and the plight of the poor.  As Attorney General John Mitchell said, before he went to jail: "Watch what we do, not what we say." 

     I can tell you what the highest priority of Democrats in the United States Senate is.  How do I know?  Because the Senate has labeled the following piece of proposed legislation, Senate Bill S1.  That's numero uno.  The bill's title: "To provide greater transparency in the legislative process." When you see a high-falutin title like this, you can be certain of one thing: Its promoters intend the opposite.

     The proposed bill is long and detailed.  It is not the product of some immediate national crisis.  It is the product of many months of careful crafting in the shadows.  It received no publicity, before or after it was submitted.  The Democratic leadership in the Senate has entered this bill as its top priority.


     What is this bill all about?  Simple: taking heat off of Congress. From Congress's point of view, there is a growing problem.  That problem is the Internet.  It allows people to communicate with each other almost free of charge. An email can be sent to a million people at little or no marginal cost.  A mailing list becomes a tool of instant education and motivation.

     All over the wired world, politicians are finding that every government leak gets to a large audience within hours.  I call this the Drudge-Lewinsky factor.  Every audience has a hot button.  Politicians today cannot pass any bill, short of a national emergency, in which they do not inevitably press some special-interest group's negative hot button.

     If people on an email list are alerted to what the politicians are planning to do to them, they will in turn send an email, phone their representatives, or even -- I am not making this up -- sit down, write a letter of protest, put it in an envelope, stamp the envelope, and mail it to their political representative.  (Yes, such things are still done.  Or so I'm told.) Worse, from the politicians' point of view, the Internet allows organizations to remind people on their mailing lists which politicians voted the wrong way.  The subscribers would normally forget within six months, but not if they keep getting reminded.The Internet makes it cheap to remind them. The Internet is therefore a tool of voters to impose heir will on recalcitrant politicians.  So far, the politicians have been powerless to stop this. This is about to change.


     You know the term "grassroots."  It is one of the traditional terms of endearment in American democracy.  (It does not resonate in Arab oil nations, where there is neither democracy nor grass.)  "Grassroots" means "back home, where the voters are."  It means, above all, OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY.

     Inside the beltway, the free ride has officially ended for the adjective, "grassroots."  The term is being re-defined by Democrats in the Senate . . . and Trent Lott and Mitch McConnell.  It now means, "special-interest lobbying." We all know what incumbent politicians think of the special interests, at least the special interests that vote rather than set up Political Action Committees (PACs) to hand out money to politicians.  Senator Snort is always ready to denounce the special interests -- those narrow- minded, single-issue, red hot-button special pleaders, those ideological fanatics who cannot be bought off with pork barrel largesse. 

     The special-interest groups that provoke the ire of politicians are the ones that do not write checks but who instead send emails to their representatives.  These groups are mobilized into action, more often than not, by negative reactions.  Their subscribers are negative single-issue voters.

     Special-interest groups that set up PACs are part of the Capitol Hill club.  They get lots of money from well-organized beneficiaries of special legislation.  They hire lots of lawyers.  They hire former Congressmen.  This offers lifetime income prospects for incumbent politicians who lose elections.  (Yes, this still occasionally happens, despite Gerrymandering.)  They have staffs to fill out Federally mandated forms.  They write checks.  Do they ever write checks!  They are not grassroots special interests.  They are inside-the-beltway special interests.  So, they are not defined as special interests.  They are defined as "sources of expert information, which is vital to the legislative process."

     Congress's problem with grassroots negative special-interest groups is two-fold: (1) they can inflict pain on election day on any politician who has voted the wrong way; (2) they rarely send money to the re-election campaign committees of those who voted the right way.  They are all pain, no pleasure.  In the eyes of incumbent politicians, they are a menace to society, a cancer on the body politic, a mockery of democracy as we have come to know it. They must be stopped!   


     Here are a few highlights.  First, a definition:  The term 'grassroots lobbying' means the
voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same. You know the types: people who conclude that a piece of legislation is against their interests, and who then try to defeat the legislation by communicating their hostile views to their elected representatives.  Vicious!

     Millions of these people have signed up to receive emails from donor-supported organizations that help alert them when Congress submits a bill for consideration.  They do not usually join these organizations.  They probably do not donate money.  They are classic free riders.  But the organizations need them, because these people will take action to stop a proposed piece of legislation.

     These organizations attempt to coordinate the efforts of non-member, non-donating email subscribers -- called "the general public" -- by keeping them informed by email.  In the eyes of Democrats in the Senate (and Trent Lott and Mitch McConnell), such organizations are not quite criminal conspiracies, but they are close . . . very close.  You see, these organizations get paid to keep the general public informed.  Paid!  Can you imagine this?

     The term 'paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders. This wording says that they may communicate to their members without being defined as grassroots lobbying organizations, but not to the general public. 

     This bill says that before any such organization communicates to the general public, it must fill out Federal forms.  It must fill out even more forms after it communicates to the general public. If it fails to honor this law, if enacted, a donor-supported entity can be hauled into court by an Executive agency and fined $100,000 if it cannot prove that a particular email alert was never intended to persuade members of "the general public" to contact members of Congress.  The costs of hiring the defense lawyers will probably exceed the fine.  If your group is small, there is no problem.  Small groups are politically impotent and do not constitute a threat to incumbents.  Therefore. . . .

     OR SEGMENTS THEREOF- The term 'paid attempt to
     influence the general public or segments thereof'
     does not include an attempt to influence directed
     at less than 500 members of the general public.

     So, if your email list has under 500 people, your organization is safe.  For now.  But you may have to prove that you have fewer than 500 non-member names on your list. The Executive will insist that its has the legal authority to demand that you turn over that list, just to make sure it is under 500 names.  It will then have to compare this list with the names of your members.  You will hand all this over or be fined for contempt.There is another problem.  A Web site is aimed at thegeneral public.  It may not be not members-only. I operate a Web site,, that has a public section and a members-only section.  According to this bill, I am allowed to communicate my concern about a proposed bill to my site's members.  But what if I try to communicate the same message on the open-access portion of my site?  How could I prove that I am not trying to influence over 500 members of the general public?     

     I get paid by site members.  So, if I ever mention a piece of legislation on the "general public" part of my site, does this payment by members make me a grassroots lobbyist?  How much will it cost me in legal fees to prove that I'm not?You are reading this letter.  You are probably not a member of my Web site.  You are not my employee.  You are not an officer or a shareholder in my corporation (unless you are my wife).  But I have now sent you a warning about a proposed bill.  I strongly suggest that you contact both of your Senators to tell them that you oppose S1. 

     They pay more attention to letters than to emails. So, here is the address:

                     Senator XXX YYYY
                  Senate Office Building
                  Washington, D.C. 20510

     A low-level staffer will then send you a polite form letter assuring you how much the Senator appreciates hearing from you, and how he will consider your opinion very carefully before he votes. Rest assured, there is a computer data base that records YES and NO letters on each bill.  Your opinion regarding S1 is very important to your Senator if there is a large majority in the data base of voters in your state who share your opinion.  If the form letter tells you that you have misinterpreted the bill, that means something else entirely -- which means that your Senator plans to vote for it --  remember this: An Executive agency can enforce a law any way it sees fit. 

     Congress has no direct power over Executive agencies.  This is part of the separation of powers principle of the U.S. Constitution.  A law that is crystal clear, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which said explicitly that there would be no government-enforced racial quotas, will be interpreted however an "administrative law judge" (in-house agency prosecutor) wants to interpret the law in your case. This law is anything but crystal clear.

     If an organization spends money to run an ad in a newspaper in order to influence the general public, it is clearly at risk under the terms of this law.  It must report the expenditure to the Federal government.  No organization is excluded from having to send reports on its actions.

     (B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed
     $10,000, the registrant shall include a statement
     that income or expenses totaled less than $10,000
     for the reporting period.

     Of course, this law is specifically designed to increase the ethics of incumbent politicians and their staffs.


     (a) Training Program- The Select Committee on
     Ethics shall conduct ongoing ethics training and
     awareness programs for Members of the Senate and
     Senate staff.

     Stop that giggling.  You hear me?  Stop it this instant!  This is serious.

     You can read the entire section here:



     So far, this bill has received little attention by the thousands of special interest groups that will become its potential victims if it is signed into law.  The mainstream media have said nothing, but this is not surprising.  This is "buried deep in a bill" material, and the mainstream media rarely report on most of the hundreds of bills that are introduced each year.

     A few conservative activist groups have issued warnings.  Here is the assessment of the bill by the American Family Association.  As you read it, think of this: What would it cost the organization to track all this?"

     Under Senate Bill 1, AFA would have to report the
     issues, employees, contractors and dollars spent
     in what is called "paid efforts to stimulate
     grassroots lobbying" (that phrase is not
     defined). This reporting requirement is triggered
     by two actions:  (1) a lobbying "contact" -- a
     personal or written communication with an
     individual in the executive or legislative branch
     of the federal government concerning public
     policy issues, from legislation to nominations;
     and (2) communications with grassroots (that's
     you) that "influence" them to contact the
     executive or legislative branches ("influence" is
     not defined, but it apparently doesn't even have
     to include a specific "call to action.") There is
     no minimum dollar spending requirement that
     triggers the reporting requirement by AFA for our
     efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.

     Once AFA identifies a "lobbying contact" that it
     has had (e.g., We talk with a senator about a
     Supreme Court nomination), then AFA will have to
     track all internal expenditures on that issue:
     AFA Journal articles, printing costs, payments to
     authors, etc.; AFA Online e-mailing costs;
     special website creations; broadcast expenses;
     and issue advertising (creative costs, ad buys,
     etc.). Cost of trips, speeches, and fundraising
     letters will have to be allocated to the correct
     "issue." (We could be dealing with a half-dozen
     issues, and we will have to keep tract and
     expense of every issue we deal with.)  The
     compliance costs alone will be heavy, with the
     hiring of perhaps as many as 8-10 new employees
     to track both accounting and legal oversight
     involved and all the paperwork required.


     Here is the assessment by the conservative Family
Research Council.

     Family Research Council President Tony Perkins
     said Section 220 would subject such groups to
     miles of red tape and greatly increase their
     costs -- difficulties that could critically
     hamper their ability to rally constituents to
     contact their elected officials.

     "This should be called the 'Silence the Citizens
     Act of 2007,' " Perkins said.

     The bill is so complex that, even though it
     appears to exempt churches from its provisions,
     it might not actually do so.

     "Even pastors who would encourage the members of
     their congregation to call their senators, their
     congressmen, about marriage, about life issues,"
     Perkins said, "could theoretically fall under the
     provisions of this measure."

     Amanda Banks, federal policy analyst for Focus on
     the Family Action, said the provision would apply
     if a group called on people to take action or

     "Any time that we send out a CitizenLink e-mail,
     or we write an article for Citizen magazine or
     Dr. Dobson goes on his broadcast and talks about
     legislation -- like he did today -- we would have
     to record and report to the government four times
     a year," Banks said. "If we did not meet those
     guidelines, we would be subject to fines of



     The Democrats in the Senate (and Trent Lott and Mitch McConnell) do not want to hear from you.  They want to go about their business -- and it IS a business! -- in a quiet, orderly, and undisturbed manner.  *-Whether it's Iraq or the minimum wage, whether it's homeland security or the latest piece of pork for the contractors back home, they don't want to hear from you.  They want your vote every six years.  They do not want youropinion in between.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Freedom of Speech is about to disappear!

Attention all bloggers, churches, internet users and others listed are about to loose your freedom of speech....yes those scoundrels on Capitol Hill are at it again!  Well, you will still have freedom of speech as long as you have filled out all the proper forms and submitted them to Uncle Sam....can anyone say 1984?  Please read this from Traditional Values Coalition and make some phone calls to your Senators and ask them to support the Bennet ammendment to S1, The Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act if you want to retain fredom of speech for yourself, your churches and others.  By the way, this post would be illegal if this passes without the Bennet amendment and I haven't submitted all the proper forms with Uncle Sam...

For Immediate Release
January 12, 2007   Contact April Waugh:
(202) 547-8570
Lobbying Bill Will Violate Free Speech And The Right To Freely Petition Government

Washington, DC – “The Traditional Values Coalition is deeply concerned about the grassroots lobbying requirements in Section 220 of S.1, Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act,” said TVC Chairman Rev. Louis P. Sheldon today. “Section 220 is a direct assault on the First Amendment and the right of citizens to freely petition their government for a redress of grievances!

“This legislation will place onerous reporting requirements on individuals and organizations that lobby our national leaders on issues of importance to them. And, it will impose draconian fines – including potential criminal penalties – for failure to obey these new lobby restrictions.”

Rev. Sheldon points out that Section 220 will target any organization with more than 500 supporters or if a communication reaches 500 or more individuals. Those affected include every blogger, every church, every non-profit or any group that uses direct mail, telephone calls, newspaper or print ads, paid organizers, radio and TV ads and Internet communications.

“The reporting requirements and penalties in Section 220 will place incredible financial and time burdens on grassroots groups as well as potential fines – thus making it less likely that these groups risk communicating with their members on important issues. This cleverly-written section doesn’t directly assault free speech, but it creates a climate of fear that chills free speech,” said Rev. Sheldon. “Will a small grassroots group speak out if it fears being fined for failing to file the correct reports to Congress? This legislation is a subversion of our First Amendment rights.”

Rev. Sheldon notes that this will have a serious impact on pastors! “A pastor, for example, who uses the church bulletin to oppose an anti-Christian bill, will be considered a lobbyist and must register his church as a lobbying firm! This is unacceptable!

The curious thing about this legislation is that it exempts labor unions, corporations and even foreign companies from these reporting requirements. Yet, these are the entities that are most likely to engage in unethical lobbying activities – not small grassroots groups,” said Rev. Sheldon.

“TVC is calling on the U.S. Senate to support the Bennett amendment to remove the grassroots provisions from S. 1.   This section clearly tramples on our First Amendment rights to free speech and the right of every citizen to petition his government!

Traditional Values Coalition is an inter-denominational public policy organization speaking on behalf of over 43,000 churches. For more information or to arrange an interview, call (202) 547-8570. TVC 139 C. Street SE, Washington, DC 20003. Web site address:

Friday, January 12, 2007

H.R. 1...another erosion of American Freedom

Here is a very important column by Chuck Baldwin.  I highly suggest subscribing to his newsletter if you really want to know what those scoundrels on Capitol Hill are doing....we are loosing our freedoms right and left in the name of "safety" and I for one never want to be that safe...remember what Benjamin Franklin said: 

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin

And don't forget Samuel Adams:

"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men." Samuel Adams

 And now here is Mr. Baldwin!

H.R. 1 Puts America In A Giant Bird Cage
By Chuck Baldwin
January 12, 2007
This column is archived at

The very first bill passed by the House of Representatives this year was H.R. 1 named, "Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act." The vote was 299 Ayes, with 68 Republicans voting with the majority, and 128 Noes.

Drafted by the 9/11 Commission following the terrorist attacks on Washington, D.C., and New York City, the report proffered 41 recommendations to the federal government ostensibly for the purpose of making the United States more secure against future terrorist attack. The implementation of this report was new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's first priority for the 110th Congress. She succeeded. The House of Representatives easily passed it. The Senate is expected to do the same, and President Bush will doubtless sign it into law. But what, exactly, does this bill accomplish? Does it make America more secure? And if so, at what cost?

I well remember my father telling me, "A bird in a cage is safe, but it is not free." That proverb pretty much summarizes H.R. 1. When fully implemented, the new law will create a federal police leviathan that will place the American people into a giant bird cage.

As many have already observed, a close analysis of the 9/11 report reveals the creation of Homeland Security identity checkpoints on America's roads and highways. Mandatory biometric iris and finger scanning systems at all American airports and seaports. The creation of a national I.D. card. The expansion of "no-fly" and "watch" lists. The implementation of special screening for all airline passengers, which paves the way for invasive body scanners. The federal takeover of publicly owned communications networks and increased government surveillance of Americans' financial records and activities.

In addition, H.R. 1 mandates that America becomes increasingly meddlesome in the internal affairs of foreign nations, thereby pushing the United States further down the road of international governance. For example, one recommendation requires that the U.S. "defends Muslims against tyrants and criminals . . ."

Of course, nowhere in the 9/11 Commission Report is there a call to defend Christians against tyrants and criminals. And the truth is, the most rampant and bloodthirsty acts of tyranny and criminality are committed against Christians. In The Sudan alone, Marxist and Muslim warriors have tortured, murdered, and enslaved more than two million people, mostly Christians, over the past twenty years. However, their suffering is mostly ignored by the international community and by our own government.

Yet, back to the issue. How many nations must we invade and how many governments must we overthrow in order to "defend Muslims"? Furthermore, are we also obligated to defend Buddhists and Shintoists?

Another recommendation wants the United States to "generously [support] a new International Youth Opportunity Fund" for the purpose of "building and operating primary and secondary schools in . . . Muslim states . . ." How many billions and even trillions of taxpayer dollars will be required to build and operate Muslim schools? Schools that will no doubt teach Muslim doctrine. There is certainly no shrill cry against the separation of Mosque and state heard here, Martha.

Yet another recommendation requires "global border security" using "extensive international cooperation." What the heck is this all about? What, pray tell, is "global border security"? Does this mean using foreign troops to guard our borders?

Are we supposed to believe that our own National Guard and Border Patrol are unable to protect our borders, and, therefore, we need foreign troops to do the job? Balderdash! The fact is, the Bush administration simply does not allow our forces to protect our borders. Perhaps this recommendation in the 9/11 Commission Report helps explain why.

Still another recommendation requires the federal government to "set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification, such as drivers licenses." In other words, a national, or maybe even international, I.D. card or computer chip.

One of the most egregiously extreme recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Report is this next one. Without specifically naming it, this recommendation calls for the implementation of President Bill Clinton's former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott's brainchild. It is called Continuity of Government (COG). COG has strong support from many notables such as former GOP Senate Whip Alan Simpson, Clinton's former Secretary of HHS Donna Shalala, former House Speakers Democrat Tom Foley and Republican Newt Gingrich, former GOP Minority Leader Robert Michel, and Kweisi Mfume, President and CEO of the NAACP.

In a nutshell, proponents of COG envision a terrorist attack that would precipitate the suspension of the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, COG would authorize Congress to appoint its own members, including those in state legislatures, without a vote of the people. COG even envisions the enactment of such authority for reasons of "incapacitation" (whatever that is) even if no emergency exists.

As one should easily be able to see, the passage of H.R. 1 simply continues the policies of both Democrat and Republican administrations to put the bird in its cage. Of course, the bird is the American people and the cage is a national, even international, curtain of total control.

Aldous Huxley called it a "Brave New World." George Orwell outlined it in his book "1984." Bible theologians call it the "Revived Roman Empire." Whatever one calls it, both George W. Bush and the Democrats in Congress are pushing hard and fast to implement it. And unless the American people offer the strongest resistance quickly and loudly, our children and grandchildren will find the cage locked shut with no chance of escape.

The American people need to heed the warning of Winston Churchill who said, "If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

America, are you listening?

(c) Chuck Baldwin


Please visit Chuck's web site at

As always, please write, email or call your representatives to express your opinion.

Thursday, January 11, 2007

The Danger Lurking in Your Grocery Store!

As I travel around our region, I speak on herbs and how to live a healthier life with them.  One of the things that amazes me is how very few people have heard of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) or are aware that they ARE eating them. And they have absolutely no idea how dangerous they are to our health.  Most people don't know that we are being forced (because they will not allow us to have knowledge of what contains a GMO) to eat foods that are replete with bacteria and viuses...that we are eating living organisms that have NEVER been part of the food chain before...which makes us THE GUINEA PIGS for a vast global medical experiment whether you want to be a part or not.  I try to educate people about the dangers of GMOs (along with chemicals,  microwaves, aluminum, fluoride and plastic).  I purchased The Future of Food from the Kansas Milkmaid and I highly recommend you get a copy to pass around among your friends and family.  You can also view this movie online.  It is 90 minutes long and you can see it here.

I wanted to share what Dr. Mercola had to say about this movie and about Monsanto, a company that I believe (read opinion here!) represents the ultimate in corporate evil with their consuming desire for profit and the greed that they demonstrate.  I am posting Dr. Mercola's message here because I think it is so important, I will however make a small disclaimer that I don't agree with everything Dr. Mercola believes or states on his site but I do think he is completely correct on this subject.  Here is his column:

Dr. Mercola's Comment:

Without a doubt this is one of the best documentaries I have ever viewed. It will help you understand the very real threat that ALL future generations face as a result of genetic engineering.

Please schedule 90 minutes and watch this film with your family.

Also pass the link to your friends and family, who you should be seeing over the holidays; they also need to see this! It could be one of the best investments of your and their time -- ever.

Your jaw will drop to the floor when you find out how Monsanto has manipulated the Supreme Court and how they are risking the very future of our civilization for their own corporate greed.

Monsanto has succeeded in first patenting their own GMO seeds, and then slapping patents on a huge number of crop seeds, patenting life forms for the first time without a vote of the people or Congress ... thus letting new life forms loose on the land without long-term testing of the health effects and real government controls, especially labeling of foods.

The film questions why the U.S. government hasn't required GMO foods to undergo the rigorous testing required of medicines created by recombinant DNA technology, and why it has resisted efforts to require GMO labeling on foods, as Europe does.

Suggesting an answer, the film ticks off all the government officials who have links to Monsanto, including Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld and Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Terminator technology may be one of the greatest threats to humanity. If it is used by Monsanto on a large-scale basis, it will likely inevitably lead to famine and starvation on a worldwide basis. Billions of people on the planet are supported by farmers who save seeds from the crops and replant these seeds the following year.

Seeds are planted. The crop is harvested. And the seeds from the harvest are replanted the following year. Most farmers cannot afford to buy new seeds every year, so collecting and replanting seeds is a crucial part of the agricultural cycle. This is the way food has been grown successfully for thousands of years.

What is most concerning is that the traits from genetically-engineered crops can get passed on to other crops. Once the terminator seeds are released into a region, the trait of seed sterility could be passed to other non-genetically-engineered crops, making most or all of the seeds in the region sterile.

If that is not bad enough, consider this:

Phytochemicals (free-radical and anti-oxidants) are substances that plants naturally produce to protect themselves against viruses, bacteria, and fungi and are essential for the next generation of seeds. The plant creates phytochemicals as it comes to its peak ripeness on the vine.

The foods we eat today are already lacking in these essential elements due to the fact that the majority of our foods are picked before peak ripeness for transportation means. The reason it is recommended that we eat several servings of fruits and vegetables a day is because of the health-providing benefits of these phytochemicals.

If the terminator seed prevents the plant from germinating the vegetable or fruit itself will not contain any of these essential nutrients and our bodies and immune systems will be left open for attack from all viruses and bacteria. We will be defenseless, as plants are our only way of getting these essential nutrients.

On Vital Votes, biochemist Dr. Russ Bianchi from Soquel, California weighs in:

"The food chain folks is totally corrupted by the GREED and PROFIT factor, with little, or no oversight, or real policing, despite official representations to the contrary, unless you kill a couple of dozen folks in a junk or fast food joint, in a pattern that can not be denied, or litigated with a gag order and sealing or records, out of court.

"'The Future Of Food' IS this century's version of Upton Sinclair's expose 'The Jungle', which exposed the horrid conditions of the meat and poultry industry in America, at the turn of the 20th century.

"After watching this important video, you will think more than twice about consuming ANYTHING remotely near genetic modification, for yourselves, your family, or your friends!!!

"Remember, the European Union has already BANNED GMO, for good reason, it is unhealthy, NOT safe, and DEADLY!!!

"So why is the FDA allowing GMO to move forward in the USA? ...  Simple, as the line from Watergate suggested from the shadowy informer called Deep Throat: 'follow the money' ?

"Here is a chance, though be it a remote one, considering the media PR blitz pushing GMO in the USA, to help yourselves and your health, by not falling for a total con job from Big GMO pushers.

"Just Say 'NO!' ... if you do not purchase GMO products, they will be unable to sell them.

"Pressure your retailers (local markets, produces sellers, dairies, Supermarket and Big Box Store or specialty and natural health food chains) to have FULL disclosure if genetically modified ... an economic response is the ONLY true counter-balancing force left to stop this incarnate EVIL.

"Also read Greg Critser's 'Fat Land' that explains in detail how these MONSTERS pushing GMO think they can trick YOU by keeping the prices low ..."

Other responses to this article can be viewed at Vital Votes, and you can add your own thoughts or vote on comments by first registering at Vital Votes.

What to do?  Write, visit, email or call your representatives and explain to them that YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW and that you are being DENIED YOUR RIGHT TO MAKE CHOICES about your food because of the lack of labeling requirements!  Insist that your government require the labeling of products containing GMOs, as so many other governments have done.

So, pour a cup of your favorite herbal tea and sit down to watch this will change your life!

Monday, January 8, 2007

A visit to Sodom...or was it Gomorrah?

I will warn you now - this post will offend people.  If you offend easily, just skip today's post and come back another day!

Many people think that the only problem with  Sodom and Gomorrah was the homosexual lifestyle.  I thought so for many years, yet when you begin to study you find that their sins went even further - these were cities that had given up any vestige of godliness and were involved in every kind of vice imaginable.  The Word says that they were "sinners exceedingly"in the sight of God. These were cities that I think reflect a lot of modern American cities today...and last week I visited one....oh my!

My mother likes to shop - I however did not inherit those genes (somehow my brother got them!) although I do love a good farm supply storeMoney mouth  Last week my Mom asked me to take her to Knoxville.  It is quite a drive for us and the traffic is horrific and is a bit more than my Mom wants to tackle at age 80.  So...we bit the bullet and went.  She had been given a gift certificate for Christmas to a store in the Knoxville mall.  It had been over a year (maybe two) since I have been to Knoxville except for picking up people at the airport.  And many years since I had been to the mall there.  Boy was I in for a surprise shock.

We were headed for Dillards, an upscale department store here in TN.  When we entered the store the background music (Dillards: it is supposed to be in the background!) was so loud that I had to shout for my Mom to hear was also a horrible choice of music.  I felt sorry for the people required to work in such an environment - surely this would damage hearing over time!  We left Mom shopping for shoes and made a quick trip out in the mall - my boys were looking for two things; a Christian bookstore (which we never found) and a game store.  The boys and I play a lot of board games and love to go to game stores.  We found one called the Gameboard which, unfortunately was on the other end of the mall!

We proceeded in that direction and I marveled at the things I saw....note:  I was not marveling in a "Oh my isn't that adorable" manner....perhaps I should say I was horrified at the things I saw.  I spent a good deal of my time telling the boys - "keep your eyes to the floor", "look to the left", "look straight ahead"....I just couldn't believe the window displays - as far as I am concerned Victoria's Secret is purveying pornography!

Twenty years ago, Victoria's Secret was a place to buy tasteful, feminine, elegant (and yes - sexy!) lingerie - truly a woman's delight.  I shopped there and most of the women in my church did also - women of ALL ages.  What I saw in their window displays last week reminded me of a catalog I saw in high school called Frederick's of Hollywood - nothing but trash.  And the photos used to "sell" - I am shocked that they are allowed to display them - I thought things like that needed brown covers on them in public....Abercrombie and Fitch was just as bad.  And there were others.

And the way the people in the mall were dressed uncovered!  Clolthing (what there was of it) looked like it had been sprayed on, bellies were bare, pants were so low that if you sneezed....well.....And what is the deal with piercing all available body parts?  Even women in their 50s and 60s....I was aghast!  And MUST we show those available body parts to the entire world - note to the world:  "I really don't want to see your latest navel piercings!"  And don't get me started on tattoos for women - when I grew up tattoos were for men. My Mom and I were probably one of the few women not sporting a tattoo - perhaps I am way behind the times...and perhaps I can even understand (not agree with mind you) a young person's desire but why are women in their 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s getting tattooed? I suggested to my Mom that we stop in at the local tattoo parlor and get matching tattoos - I think mine should read NO NAIS! and I will place it right across my forehead Surprised Perhaps this is the newest thing in body jewelry - but you don't get to change it...and I wonder....when you get old, gain weight or get a little saggy  does the tattoo change with you - increase in size or relocate as our body parts tend to do?  Will that cute little butterfly turn into MOTHRA when you are 65?  No offense to my tattooed and pierced readers but I guess I am from a different generation.  And I still think private parts should remain just that - private!  So, if you place a tattoo on your derriere, or pierce your belly button - please keep those parts covered - just because you decorated them does not mean we all want to suddenly see them - they are still private parts Embarassed

And lastly, the public displays of affection that I witnessed between girl couples and boy couples and boy/girl couples....well - here is my take on it - the things that I saw, whether you are heterosexual or homosexual, belong at home behind closed doors and windows. "Some things just aren't done in public" as Grandma used to say (although I think she was talking more about spitting!)

I was thankful when we saw the game store....well for about a minute I was.  Although this store was full of wonderful and yes, even educational, games, it had at least as much pagan based garbage on display.  Truly the enemy has infiltrated every portion of society.  We got what we came for and quickly departed.  As we returned to Dillards to get Grandma we again had to run the gauntlet of obscenity - "look down, look right"  what I really wanted to do was scream "CLOSE YOUR EYES!",  grab their hands and run for the safety of my car!   What must God think when he looks down on this sea of unrighteousness?  How sad we must make our Saviour....who died for us so that we could avoid Satan's traps.

We picked up Grandma, made a few other stops (safe ones!) and headed for home. What a great feeling to return to our little farm in the hills.  So, Aunt a favor to me, how 'bout next year you get Mom a gift card to a store a little closer to home because I don't think I ever want to go to Knoxville again!

Friday, January 5, 2007

And the winners are.....

I want to thank everyone who submitted names - it was a great contest - my boys and I had a lot of fun!   You all made it hard to come to a decision!  We read them over and over, we even printed out labels for the names we liked the best to see how they looked on the bars of soap.  We consulted with Grandma and finally we came to a decision!


The first winner is Emily who submitted lots of wonderful names for both soaps!  Emily suggested Coffee Bean for my new soap made with Kahlua and coffee!

Thanks Emily for a great submission!  I'll be sending you a bar of Coffee Bean Soap and one other soap of your choice! Be sure to email me and let me know which soap you would like :)  You can see them all here!

This soap is sure to satisfy the sniffers of coffee lovers everywhere. I don't drink coffee myself but I do love the smell of freshly ground coffee beans...and I certainly like the smell of this soap! 

But this soap is not just for coffee is a "must have" for those who love to cook.  Coffee has the ability to remove odors from your hands - so when you are finished working with fish, garlic or other smelly foods - wash with "Coffee Bean" to remove those lingering odors!

Now for our second winner - this choice was really hard - we had more suggestions for my new chocolate and peppermint soap than we did for Coffee Bar!  There were so many good ones that I wish I had more chocolate and mint varieties of soap. Surprised


 But since that isn't practical, we had to pick a name....and the winner is......Emily....again!  We absolutely LOVED Emily's suggestion of Chocolate Ice!  It was perfect....

THANKS EMILY! So....Emily will receive a bar of Chocolate Ice and one other bar of her choice - just drop me a line Emily and let me know!

As soon as I have some pictures of the new varieties coming out, I will hold another contest. 

Both of these soaps are now available on my website.

Thanks again to all those who participated!

Related Posts with Thumbnails