Do you read The Heritage Foundation?

I heard about this on Sean Hannity, then saw the updates posted on our Read My Lipstick Network main blog (I think, either there or another one of our blogs), so I went and signed up. Here's today's update:

Mixed Signals on Missile Defense

President-elect Barack Obama is sending mixed signals on America’s planned missile defense sites in Europe following Russia’s heated rhetoric last week. An Obama adviser said this weekend America’s next commander in chief hadn’t decided if he would continue work on the U.S. missile shield. Although Obama is still months away from taking office, now is not the time to reverse course.

This is nothing new from Obama. Throughout the presidential campaign, he shifted his views on missile defense. For instance, a video he recorded for the Priorities Action Fund flatly stated, “I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.” When asked about that statement by a TV reporter in August, Obama said he simply wanted to make sure missile defense actually worked:

I think it makes perfect sense to deploy a system that works. But we have to make sure that the technology works. And without having reviewed the technological capabilities of the system that’s being deployed in Poland, I’ve said that Congress should review it. But there is no doubt that after the Russian invasion of Georgia that NATO allies like Poland need to know that they are going to be protected if there is encroachment on their territory.

When he was pressed to say whether the investment is a good idea for the United States, Obama answered: “I think there’s no doubt we should make the investment. I think the capacity of Iran or North Korea to send a rouge missile is one that we have to take very, very seriously.”

The Bush administration this year signed agreements to put 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic. Now, in the wake of Russia’s threat to deploy short-range surface-to-surface missiles within reach of NATO allies, Obama is keeping quiet on his intentions for the missile shield in Europe. Following a call with Lech Kaczynski, the Polish president came away with the impression the U.S. would move forward with the plan . But later in the day, Obama foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough said, “His position is as it was throughout the campaign, that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable.”

Obama’s insistence on a “system that works” is understandable. But he should know the system being tested by the Missile Defense Agency does work. It’s hard to dispute the near-perfect results since 2005. Secondly, punting missile defense to Congress shows a lack of leadership and sets up the program for failure. Ardent liberal opponents would no doubt attempt to strip the agency of funding.

The threat to missile defense is one of the reasons The Heritage Foundation will release a documentary early next year that tells the story of the danger hostile nations and rogue dictators now pose to the world. A trailer of the film, “33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age,” is being released today. (Click here to watch.)

After inking the deal with Poland in August, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice summed up its importance: “Missile defense, of course, is aimed at no one. It is in our defense that we do this.” Obama would be wise to follow that logic and build on the success as president.

QUICK HITS

Obama will to move forward with his plan to raise taxes on couples earning more than $250,000, said Rahm Emanuel, incoming chief of staff.

Emanuel says the president-elect opposes inclusion of the Colombia Free Trade Agreement in the Democrats’ economic stimulus package.

Obama aides are plotting how they can use the campaign’s e-mail database of more than 10 million supporters to achieve legislative goals.

China will spend $586 billion by 2010 on national infrastructure and social welfare projects in hopes of bolstering its weakening economy.

The bailout for troubled insurer AIG keeps getting bigger. Taxpayers are now on the hook for $150 billion, up from the original $85 billion loan.

ACORN Commercial Paid for by YOU

ACORN is now spending $50,000 to air an ad attacking John McCain and the Republican Party. This from a group that is supposed to be "non-partisan". They are using OUR tax dollars to fund a political ad. How can they legally do this? Shouldn't all funding be pulled? Can you imagine what would happen if any agency receiving money from the government put out an ad attacking Democrats?

The commercial is clearly a rip and about as stupid an accusation as you can make. It might have flown 20 years ago, but only idiots believe the Republican Party is out there trying to suppress the black vote or the Hispanic vote. My gosh, the Party bends over backwards to try and attract black and Hispanics into the conservative fold.

The only votes that the Republican Party has tried to suppress are the illegal votes propagated by ACORN, Project Vote and similar groups that want to steal the election for Obama. It's not just Obama who's going to benefit from this one, it's the numerous House and Senate seats that are currently contested.

Get your friends and neighbors and go vote!!! Don't let the Democrats steal the election on Tuesday (if they haven't already). If the so-called "silent majority" gets out to vote on Tuesday we'll become a vocal majority and win.