Whadya know?

Hoffa Jr. Declares Himself a General for Obama

2011-10-28T11:24:00.000-04:00

Things that make you go hmmm…

The campaign promise:

Promise kept???

Just Who is Occupying Wall Street???

2011-10-25T17:41:00.003-04:00

Hey America!

Just in case you think this whole Anti-Capitalism America Hating movement is something you might have sympathy with, take a look at whose ring your hat would be thrown into.

First check out the O.W.S. website and notice the clenched fist at the upper left hand corner – a long time symbol of leftist radicals.

Now if that doesn’t disturb you enough, be aware that your Occupy Wall Street pals are former Ku Klux Klan Grand Pooh Bah David Duke, the Communist Party of the United States of America, the military, religious and political leadership of Iran, Venezuelan Communist dictator Hugo Chavez, the American Nazi Party, and Communist North Korea.

Now look at from whom in our own government is showing “solidarity” with O. W. S.:

President Barack Hussein Obama

Vice-President Joe Biden

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

Socialist Vermont Junior Senator Bernie Sanders

DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Congressional Progressive Caucus

In other words, it’s the leftists, socialists, Marxists, communists, racists, and even anarchists who aren’t trying to improve this country but trying to destroy it – a la Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and ”The Coming Insurrection” by the Invisible Committee.

And don't forget that there are other cities being "occupied" around the world. And it is the same people doing the occupying there.

Let these lefty loons know that they are certainly free to leave America to Americans and try to occupy the rest of the world instead.

This should be a wake up call to REAL America – It’s time for a rebirth of the Silent Majority. Stand up for America! Stand up for the United States Constitution! Let the rest of the world know that America is the paradise of liberty again!

180 MOVIE

2011-09-26T09:21:00.000-04:00

A Parable of Success or Submission

2011-09-21T21:20:00.002-04:00

It’s story time!

Once upon a time, there was a man who was hiking in the hills and he came upon a piece of parchment folded and nailed to an old pine tree. He grabbed it and opened it up. It was a map called “Climb Your Way to Fortune.”

The man began to study the map. To his astonishment, he saw that there was an enormous treasure of $5 Million dollars at the end of the path shown on the map. However, the end was at the top of a mountain. There were rivers and valleys he had to cross, but the most daunting thing in the way of that treasure was that tall mountain to climb. There was also one warning on the map: “Beware of the demon, Big G!”

Not wanting to pass up a good thing, the man began to follow the map over those hills and through the valleys, crossing rivers and crags along the way. He was getting tire but finally, he reached the base of the tall mountain.

Just as he was about to start his daring climb, he noticed a line of people to his left. He decided to investigate. He stuffed the map in his pocket and went to one of the people in line and asked, “What is this line for?”

The person, who seemed rather jaded to what was going on around him, answered in a rough voice, “It’s the money line.”

“Money line?” queried the man.

“Yup,” responded another person in line. This one looked a little more enthusiastic. “All you have to do is stand in line until you make it to the front of the line and you get free money!”

The man was seriously intrigued. Why should he struggle and risk his life to climb a mountain to get a treasure when all he has to do is stand in line?

“How much money do you get?” he asked.

“$500!” exclaimed the enthusiastic person.

The man then asked, “What then?”

“Well then,” the person replied, “you stand in line again to get another $500.”

“How long does it take to get to the front of the line?” the man asked.

“About a month,” said the person.

“That doesn’t sound very exciting or rewarding…” the man started, but the first one he spoke to, the jaded person, interrupted him.

“IT’S NOT!” said the jaded person, “I have been standing in this line, over and over for years, and all I get is $500 a month.”

“You just don’t see how good this is?” the enthusiastic person chided in, “All you have to do is get back in line and a sweet $500 is yours. Even if you get sick, there is another line for you to wait in that will take care of you AND make sure you get your $500!”

The man began to get even more curious, “What about food?”

“Provided for you just little bit further along the line,” the enthusiastic person answered.

The man was quite curious so he walked up along the line to see what was really at the head. As he walked he saw all sorts of people; some happy, some sad, some strong and some barely clinging on to life. He even saw the place for food and thought to himself that it seemed a rather boring commissary with nothing to excite the palate. But at least the basic staples are there.

He finally reached the head of the line where, sure enough, there was a tall and large man, sitting at a desk, reaching into his right pants pocket and handing out cash in increments of $500. And when each person received their cash, they seemed to have a small show of relief in their eyes.

Just then, the man noticed the name plate on the desk of the big man. It said: “Mr. Big G.”

The man pulled the map from his pocket and looked at the warning he remembered from earlier to confirm his fear: “Beware of the demon, Big G!” He quickly crammed the map back into his pocket.

The man started to back away, but just then Big G called out to him, “Sir, I will help you if you go back to the end of the line and wait your turn.”

“I was just looking around to see what all this was,” the man responded shakily.

Big G retorted, “Aw, you don’t have to worry about any of this. Just let me do everything so you can get in line to get your fair share.”

“Aren’t you worried about running out?” asked the man, pointing to Big G’s right pocket.

“Not at all,” motioned Big G to his left pocket where he pulled out a large number of bills and put them into his right pocket. “I’ll never run out as long as you people continue to swear an allegiance to me when you get your cash. Now get to the back of the line, sir. NOW!”

Not wanting to get into a conflict with a demon, the man walked to the back of the line. As he neared the back, the jaded person grabbed the man’s arm and pointed to his pocket, “What is that paper you have in your pocket?”

The man told him about coming across the map earlier in his travels. He showed it to the person.

“Ah…” sighed the jaded person, “I used to have a map like that too, but when I got up to the mountain and noticed the line, I decided to try the line out. But after I received my first $500, I lost the map and haven’t seen it since. So I had no choice but to keep getting back in line to survive. But it’s not too late for you! Stay out of this line and follow that map to fortune! You can do it…. But even if you don’t get the treasure right away, keep trying for it and never give up.”

The man was saddened by the jaded person’s circumstances and promised himself that he would do his best to help if and when he could.

He walked toward the mountain again and pulled out the map. Just as he was about to climb, POOF! The demon, Big G. showed up.

“Where are you going?” he asked the man.

“I am going to climb to try to get my treasure.”

Big G laughed in a haughty manner and said,” You don’t need to do that. Don’t you know that if you stand in that line over to the left, you will get $500 a month and free healthcare?” He paused, but realizing that the man wasn’t interested, Big G tried another tactic. “Besides, if you try to climb and get a treasure, I can’t help you, it may take years, you may lose footing and fall, even just a little bit. And NO ONE who is already at the top wants you there…. So why don’t you get in line and let me take care of you?”

The man thought and looked up the mountain, noticing that there were definitely obstacles and even risks and dangers on the way to the top. But then he remembered that the jaded person said “your treasure” to him. There was treasure that was his waiting on him. No one else could have it.

“Sorry Mr. Big G, I don’t believe you and from what I can tell, you have no power over me unless I get in line. I’ll take my chances,” said the man sternly.

“You’ll be sorry…” sang Big G in a taunting tone and he vanished from the man’s sight.

The mountain waited on him, so the man read his map and began to climb. He got about a third of the way up fairly easily by studying and doing odd jobs here and there for a little bit of money. He then noticed that others, who are also trying to reach the top, had opened stores and shops to help themselves and others obtain resources to better their chances of reaching the summit. The man knew that he would never survive this arduous journey unless he could make a better wage. He asked one of the shop owners for a job but had to keep asking shop owners until he found work. After his first month of working, he made $300. He immediately thought of the money line, especially when he realized he would have to spend some of his money on medicine for the cold he was catching.

After a year at his job, the man got a raise to $550 and started to get benefits through his job to take care of some of his healthcare costs. A few more years and a few more raises later, he decided that he wanted to run his own shop. He began to invest some of his money and started earning dividends and interest. Soon he actually had enough to start his own business. He opened his shop by himself and really struggled at first – only $250 a month for his take home pay. After a little while at the job, he got more customers and was even able to hire someone else on the path to treasure to help them out. He was making about $5000 a month – 10 times as much as those in the money line were getting.

Just then Big G showed up on the mountain and told the man that the bottom third of the mountain had sworn allegiance to the demon. And in order for the man to continue his business, he needed to pay Big G $3500 per month.

Suddenly our man realized where Big G was getting all that money to pay out those in the money line.

So, the man worked even harder to be able to make his business profitable, on top of what Big G took. He lad to let go of one of his employees and reduce his take home pay just to break even for a while. Soon, the man was able to hire that one person back and make a decent profit again. But each time he made more, Big G showed up to take more.

He then decided that he wanted to continue his journey up the mountain. So he sold his business for a nice profit, paid his share to Big G, and started to climb again.

Along the way, he used part of his money to survive and part to invest in other businesses to help them survive. His investments continued to pay off.

About three-fourths of the way to the top of the mountain, the man realized that he was making $500,000 a month! That equals $6 million a year! Knowing that he still had $5 million waiting on him, he began give some of his earnings to charity and started a foundation. He then remembered the promise he made himself about the jaded person at the bottom of the mountain.

The man found a few others like him who were interested in helping others out. One man owned a large helicopter so they decided to travel to the bottom of the mountain. Once there a few of them went to the money line. The jaded person was still there, a few years older, and the enthusiastic person was there as well – but he didn’t look that enthusiastic any more.

“Do you remember me?” the man asked the jaded person.

The person nodded then bowed his head and asked, “So you made it to the top?”

“Not yet,” replied the man, “But the treasure is nothing compared to what I am earning now. Wouldn’t you like to get out of this line?”

“I am stuck here,” answered the person, “Big G will never let me out.

“You CAN leave the line,” stated the man, “but you will have to give up your monthly income and healthcare.”

“I need to survive,” panicked the man. “How will I get food and other things I need?”

The man had the answer, “Get out of line and have faith in yourself. You can climb the mountain from the bottom on your own or come work for one of my shops. You will not make as much pay at first but my foundation will provide the difference for a limited time. By then you will start to earn enough.” He paused and then stated, “You told me I could do it and I did. I am telling you that you can do it…. And you will. You can either freely work for your treasure or submissively scrape by for the rest of your life.”

Some others in the line overheard the man and gathered around. “What about the rest of us?” another person asked. Another chortled, “That’s easy for you to say, you have money and don’t need to worry about surviving.”

“It wasn’t easy, but I did start out with no money,” replied the man. “Now, I can only take a few of you as we only have a certain number of seats available, but if you don’t come with us, I suggest you leave this line and start your climb to your treasure,” the man responded. “If you want to work for me, let’s go.”

About four others followed the man and jaded person. And a few more actually left the money line and went to the base of the mountain.

POOF! Big G appeared. “WHAT ARE YOU DOING? WHERE ARE YOU ALL GOING?”

“Some with me and some on their own,” replied the man. “They no longer wish to be controlled by you.”

“Controlled???” Big G shot back. “I am helping them survive. They have money, food and healthcare.”

“But no freedom to earn more doing something they like to do, no freedom to try and enjoy more exciting and exotic foods, and no freedom to control their own healthcare needs,” retorted the man. “I can help them start on that path to get those things themselves.”

Big G huffed, “But only I know what’s best for them! They don’t even know. I am giving them an equal pay, food, and healthcare and all they have to do is stay in my line and swear allegiance to me.” He then turned to the people in line and told them that these rich people didn’t really care about them and only wanted them to be poor. He told them that they would be slaves to the rich.

The man proudly stated, “I made it without you because I know what’s best for me. I was able to earn pay that well rewarded my efforts. I chose my own house, buy as much of the food I like to eat, and pay for my own healthcare where I don’t have to wait on anyone’s approval to be treated. When I started my climb, a wealthier person than I hired me to get me started. I was a slave to no one!” he turned to everyone in line, “This is a demon! Big G has no real power over anyone who doesn’t give that power to him.”

Big G knew that he couldn’t win so he walked along the line to his desk, telling those that stayed in line that if they stayed with him, he would double the monthly pay to $1000. Many people were excited about that and there were many who just resigned themselves to the line not wanting to try to make it on their own.

The man was saddened for those that stayed, but proud that others would start the climb to their success, which would even help him better his businesses and be able to help more people.

The man continued his climb and was glad that there were others climbing up behind him. When he finally reached the top, the man found the treasure waiting on him. But he was already doing so well, he donated it to charity!

I would rather be free to pursue what I wanted how I wanted that to have to keep going back to the Big Government for a trifle here and there and just barely scraping by.

It's About the Gospel, PERIOD.

2011-08-21T13:18:00.001-04:00

Yes, Jesus was a great man who walked the earth, healed the sick, loved the poor, and set the example of how each of us needs to live out lives.

The liberal, progressive idea of Christ as one who came for social justice pretty much says just that.

However, social justice “christians” either deny or forget the truth of Who, What and Why Jesus Christ really came for.

While the bible gives plenty of examples of how Jesus gave consideration for the poor, the blind, the lame, etc., it also gives the truth of Christ Jesus in His own words:

“[B]ut he said to them, ‘I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns as well; for I was sent for this purpose.’” - (Luke 4:43 ESV)

Jesus came not just to heal the sick and care for the poor but to preach and teach the good news (Gospel). He said this after healing the sick because He knew that people would use them for healing rather than longing for His real purpose – eternal salvation. We see that Jesus himself speaks of spreading the gospel as a MUST, emphasizing the necessity of God's providential plan being fulfilled. When Jesus is speaking of preaching the “kingdom of God,” a proper dynamic interpretation of “kingdom” actually refers to and means “reign.” Jesus was sent by God to tell the good news of salvation through repentance and faith with the understanding that all that Jesus said and did was about the reign of God in this universe.

And while the bible is full of examples of Jesus performing miracles of healing and caring, those miracles were not meant to be an example of social justice. They were so that when Jesus and His disciples spoke the good news, they would be taken seriously as representatives of the One True God.

Moreover, there are plenty of verses that show that the good news is reason people speak of Jesus – Acts 8:35; 10:36; 13:32; 14:15; Romans 10:15; 1 Thessalonians 3:6; Hebrews 4:2; 1 Peter 1:12; 1;25.

Roman occupied Israel had many social problems that needed to be addressed for sure. But Jesus made no mention or demand of the occupying government or the puppet government solving things through social justice. Jesus came to this world, and specifically to Israel, to show people God’s healing and care for the human soul.

One more point to ponder – Were Stephen, Peter, Bartholomew, James, Andrew, Thomas, Philip, Matthew, Thaddeus, and Simon martyred because they wanted social justice?

And even today, in countries where even the staunchest conservative would seriously question his or her stance of social justice and wealth redistribution, there are plenty of martyrs who willingly get tortured and murdered because of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not because they are protesting inadequate healthcare, the wealthy, or even civil rights.

That video says two things to me – 1. In America, even though Christianity is hated and persecuted by millions, we don’t have to go through that. 2 – The violence in the video was not caused because those martyrs wanted social justice.

Forget about rich and poor. Forget about young and old. Forget about white and black. Forget about sick and well. Those things mean absolutely NOTHING when compared to the knowledge that an eternity awaits those who repent and trust in Jesus Christ as the ONLY way to God.

IT MAY NOT BE WHAT YOU THINK….

2011-07-21T21:36:00.001-04:00

When it comes to true salvation…
You may believe but so does Satan.
You never found Jesus for He was always there.
You don’t accept Christ. He accepts you.
Asking Jesus into your heart won’t do anything.
Saying that you are saved only counts if you know from what you were saved.
Saying a prayer won’t change you but repentance and trust in Jesus will
Calling yourself a Christian isn’t the same as being a Christian.

It may not be what you think…. So, think agaiu.

HEALTHCARE - Easy Enough for Liberals To Understand

2011-06-30T01:11:00.003-04:00

When it comes to the Health Care debate in this nation, one great quote always comes to mind:

“Nobody spends somebody else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else’s resources as carefully as he uses his own. So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, if you want knowledge to be properly utilized, you have to do it through the means of private property.” – Milton Friedman, economist

When shopping, one of the factors you consider when deciding where to shop is the price that stores charge for items. If a shop closer to you charges a higher price than a store farther away charges for the same item, you will probably go to the store farther away, with the consideration that the difference is worth your time and expense to shop there. If an item is of higher quality than similar ones you are considering, you might pay more for it; but if it is exactly the same item offered at different prices, you will likely want to pay the lowest price available. However, if someone else – say the government for instance – tells you just to buy the item wherever you wish and they will pay for it, you will likely go to the closest store to you and pay whatever price they have, even a higher one, since you are not spending your own money for it.

Before the mid-1960s, payment for health care was largely a private matter between the patient and the healthcare provider (doctor or hospital) - HCP. Health insurance was available, but it was not the major topic of concern that it is today. People paid their medical bills the same way they paid other bills. Those who could not afford to pay either did not go to the doctor or received some kind of charitable assistance (the doctor or hospital wrote off the expense or charged less, or the patient received help from a church or other group).

But the rules of the game drastically changed when the Federal government entered the health care field with the Medicare and Medicaid programs. For people over 65 who pay a small monthly premium, Medicare provides government payments for health care services. Medicaid is a Federally-funded program administered by the states that pays health care costs for the poor and others who cannot afford or cannot obtain traditional health insurance coverage. People covered by Medicare and Medicaid receive heath care, and the government pays for most of it. When the government began paying a large percentage of health care costs, those costs skyrocketed. Exorbitant medical charges, mismanagement, and corruption became common. Efforts to reform Medicare and Medicaid have been going or since shortly after the programs began, with little more happening than either elongated debate or worse – added bureaucracy!

In 1960, Americans paid about $28 billion for health care. By 1970, the total had almost tripled to $75 billion. Twenty years later still, the total had increased over nine times more, so that in 1990 the national health care tab was $717 billion. The rate of increase has slowed since 1990, but the figures are still astounding. In 2004, national health care costs totaled two trillion dollars. Health care now accounts for 16% of the country’s GDP. This share of the GDP is three times greater than it was in 1960. Health care costs consistently rise each year at a rate higher than the annual overall increase in the cost of living.

Prescriptions are a larger percentage of health care costs and hospitalization is a lower portion than in previous years. Providers have learned that it is cheaper to prescribe medication than it is to build and maintain a hospital, pay a staff, and incur all of the other costs of a facility. Prescription costs have also risen rapidly, and drug companies now have large advertising and marketing budgets to encourage patients and doctors to use their medicines.

Today local, state, and Federal governments pay one-half of all health care bills in the United States. Overseeing and paying for health care has become a major function of government. This fact helps to push the cost of health care higher for all Americans, including those who have private insurance and who pay their own medical expenses.

The United States does have an excellent health care system. We have good medical schools, good hospitals, great doctors and nurses, and a higher than average level of availability of drugs and medical tests. I would rather have a medical need in the U.S. than anywhere else in the world. Generally speaking, if you need medical attention in the U.S., you CAN get it.

The problem is paying for it. The costs are too high and the administration of health care involves too much bureaucracy. It is a complicated problem, and all of the parties in the system usually blame the other players for the situation.

Greed is a major component. Whether it be the insurance providers, the HCPs, the drug companies, other factions of the industry, or even health patients themselves, nobody wants to give up their money for things if they don’t have to.

Doctors play a part by wanting everything they do to be above question. This factor shouldn’t be the problem it is because most doctors are ethically bound to provide the best care to the benefit of the patient. But there are a few doctors who fight against the system which is designed to benefit both doctor and patient. Sometimes this is good, because the patient may need treatment that an insurance company doesn’t want to cover and the doctor has to fight for the benefit of the patient. Yet there are other doctors who are more concerned with fighting insurance companies while ignoring or forgetting the real need of the patient.

Insurance companies want to call the shots. As mentioned above, most insurance companies, who are trying to protect their bottom line, only let a HCP treat based on what the insurance company sees as a necessary treatment… this can sometime be to the detriment to the patient. But, in the United States, the insurance company does have outlets where a HCP can appeal to be able to fully treat a patient.

Medical malpractice insurance is terribly expensive, but doctors pay for it because they do not want to be ruined by a lawsuit, however frivolous it might be. This is one of the biggest travesties in the medical industry. Doctor’s are human and can sometimes make mistakes… but rarely there are HCPs who are negligent who need to be held accountable. However, until serious tort reform happens, doctors will have to pay malpractice insurance which will, in turn, raise the overall cost of healthcare!

Pharmaceutical companies want as much profit as possible. In the free market system we live in, this is an understandable desire to have as a business. And with the incredibly high cost of research and development of prescription drugs, high costs can’t be avoided. However, some of these companies merely develop drugs JUST to make a profit and that leaves little availability for full testing and keeps overall costs high.

Government oversight can be unreasonable and complicated. For example, when prescription coverage was added as a Medicare option, it was difficult for many users to understand. Waste and neglect were a side effect.

With all of these factors happening, consider the way that charges are calculated. When someone has a medical bill, say a test or an office visit, the charge is submitted to the payer, which is usually Medicare or an insurance company. The charge for the service is usually ridiculously high: perhaps $60.00 or $75.00 for a brief office visit, several hundred dollars for a test, or several thousand dollars for a hospital stay. The payer then uses a standard known as the “usual and customary” charge for such a service. Using that standard, Medicare or the insurance company approves a portion of the bill and pays the provider on behalf of the covered person. The provider says thank you for that partial payment and goes on to the next patient.

If a person does not have insurance, he is stuck with that inflated bill and has to either pay it, negotiate a lower price, or risk damaging his credit rating or declaring bankruptcy by not paying it (it is estimated that as many as HALF OF ALL personal bankruptcies involve at least some medical debt). One reason for the high medical charges is to cover the expense incurred by providers by those who do not pay. Doctors who receive government payments, which has come to be just about all of them, have their billing practices for all patients critiqued by the government.

All of this adds up to a system that is way too complex, way too costly, and extremely inefficient.

One thing to remember is that in most cases, when a procedure, like Lasik Eye Surgery, isn’t covered by insurance, the HCPs who offer the procedure compete to offer the lowest price. If an insurance company were involved, the cost would be much higher.

The health care delivery system needs fixing, but developing a completely government-run system of socialized medicine is not the answer. The goal of such tax-supported systems, which are used in the United Kingdom and Canada and some other countries, is to make health care equally available to all regardless of one’s ability to pay. The result, however, has been that less health care is available for everyone. Care becomes not more available but more limited and rationed. The system is inefficient, and it is not unusual for people to wait months and sometimes years for procedures that would take place within a few days in the United States. The government bureaucracy has no motivation to do a thorough or efficient job since it has no competition. Socialized medicine is driven by the bureaucracy and by the government’s desire to control health care.

A better approach is for health care to be patient-centered and driven by competition, with government’s role being to enable and encourage effective serving of health care needs. Some steps toward this goal have included the following:

• The ability of workers to carry their health insurance coverage with them when they change jobs has given people more freedom. Continuing medical coverage through an employer is one reason why many people continue to work for a company or are reluctant to retire.
• Medical savings accounts allow individuals to set aside a certain amount of their income tax-free to pay for medical costs.
• Insurance companies are currently regulated by the states, but national competitiveness would give consumers more choices that would force the companies to be even more consumer centered rather than only profit driven.

It is a humane and compassionate policy for people to be able to receive an adequate level of health care even if they cannot afford to pay for all of it. However, recipients of such care should also be expected to pay some of the cost. They need to bear the responsibility for a co-payment and for making lifestyle changes when that is needed. It is not right for taxpayers to bear all of the responsibility for the medical bills of people who do not take care of themselves. It is also a good policy to provide local clinics for those who receive subsidized care. This is more cost-efficient than simply having them go to an emergency room, which is the most expensive way to deliver health care. Ideally, Christians, among other charities, should be willing to help pay the medical expenses of those who need assistance.

But what about those programs that have already been run by states???

In 1994 the state of Tennessee initiated TennCare, a public health care system that was a trial program to replace Medicaid. TennCare uses Managed Care Organizations (MCOs, which are mostly private health insurance companies) to pay for services that patients get from doctors, hospitals, pharmacies, and other providers who participate in the program. The state government reimburses the MCOs for what they pay to providers. TennCare provides coverage for the poor and for those considered uninsurable by private insurance companies. Most TennCare recipients do not pay anything for the services they receive, although a small percentage of those covered by TennCare pay premiums and co-payments for office visits and other services. Payments for medical services under TennCare are usually LESS than what providers receive from regular insurance companies, and because of the TennCare bureaucracy, payments to providers are often SLOW in coming.

TennCare has seen the same explosion of costs that has characterized American health care as a whole. As of 2005, 1.35 million Tennessee residents were covered, out of a state population of almost 6 million. Just under one-half of those covered were children under the age of twenty-one. The program cost $8.7 billion in 2005, which means that the program paid out an average of over $6,400.00 per covered person that year. Two-thirds of the funding for TennCare came from the Federal government, while the other third was paid for by the state. The total TennCare bill included a ridiculously high amount that went for bureaucratic expenses in the state government and in the MCOs. Of the $8.7 billion, $2.9 billion went to the MCOs. $2.55 billion went for pharmaceuticals, $1.7 billion for long-term care, and $455 million for mental health services.

The program has experienced HIGH COSTS, CHARGES OF MISMANAGEMENT, and COMPLAINTS from both health care providers and patients. TennCare has had more than five different directors, and the original director who lasted just over a year in 1994-1995 returned in 2002 to head the program again. Counting acting and interim directors, TennCare had eight leadership changes between 1995 and 2002. In 2005 several thousand TennCare patients were dropped from the program in an effort to save money. All of those cut from the program were over nineteen. No coverage for children was eliminated.

So, in an attempt by a state to assume the costs for even some of its citizens, TennCare ended up dropping coverage because it is just too expensive and inefficient to work.

In April 2006, the state of Massachusetts became the first state to require all citizens to have health insurance coverage. Several different plans and levels of coverage were offered, and the state helped to pay the premiums of those who could not afford to do so themselves. The plan enabled the government to help some of the people but kept health care delivery in the private sector. And like TennCare, the bureaucracy, lack of efficiency and high cost has forced Massachusetts to drop coverage for some residents.

The American health care system has grown in piecemeal fashion, and all of the players want more of the pie. In order to continue to have the best healthcare system in the world, the U.S. government will need to minimize its involvement. To make the needed changes, everyone will have to give up something; but with proper planning and execution, individuals and organizations in the health care field will still be able to earn a comfortable living and more people will be able to get the medical care they need.

"I WIll Remember"

2011-05-30T14:50:00.002-04:00

“I Will Remember”
Scott Ashley Kingsmore
5/31/11

You answered a call to serve,
Beginning with sweat and dust and nerve.

The trials you endured to prove,
That your resolve couldn’t be moved.

I will remember.

The uniform you donned with pride,
With others, side by side.

With shining buttons and sharply pressed,
Like you, waiting for the test.

I will remember.

On land, on sea or in air,
“First to Fight…,” “Always Ready…,” you’ll be there.

“Rolling Along…,” “Off We Go…,” “Anchors Aweigh…,”
You charge bravely into the fray.

I will remember.

All it took inside an eternity of strife,
Was a fragment of a moment to end your life.

Your courage was met with destiny,
Because of your sacrifice I remain free!

I will remember!

I pray that you know my deep appreciation,
For the price you've paid for our great nation.

I WILL REMEMBER!

A Warning From 50 Years Ago!

2011-05-10T00:30:00.003-04:00

In 1961, an episode of Rod Serling's Twilight Zone aired that has such a ring of truth to it that I had to blog it here. Actually, my fascination with it now started one night a few years ago while discussing it on Blog Talk Radio with the Political Postachio himself, Douglas V. Gibbs. It was his revelation and fascination that has rekindled my love for this episode. We had a remarkable discussion that lasted until about 1:30am for me and they were still going when I signed off. Running the board for Doug was our good buddy, Josh Allem. Wild Phil, Andrea, and Brian were there as well. The most remarkable thing came when we actually started talking about the things of God. This led to some impromptu witnessing in which God was absolutely glorified.

The episode, "The Obsolete Man," Aired in 1961. The presentation here is from a group of actors who perform the Twilight Zone live. Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Read the opening narrative as it is spoken by Serling: You walk into this room at your own risk, because it leads to the future; not a future that will be, but one that might be. This is not a new world: It is simply an extension of what began in the old one. It has patterned itself after every dictator who has ever planted the ripping imprint of a boot on the pages of history since the beginning of time. It has refinements, technological advancements, and a more sophisticated approach to the destruction of human freedom. But like every one of the super states that preceded it, it has one iron rule: Logic is an enemy, and truth is a menace. This is Mr. Romney Wordsworth, in his last forty-eight hours on Earth. He's a citizen of the State, but will soon have to be eliminated, because he's built out of flesh and because he has a mind. Mr. Romney Wordsworth, who will draw his last breaths in the Twilight Zone.

Now read the closing narrative as it is spoken by Serling: The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete, but so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of man, that state is obsolete. A case to be filed under "M" for mankind—in the Twilight Zone.

You can also view the original episode HERE

The references to Nazi Germany and the Soviet State are all throughout. The wardrobe reckons back to the drab brownshirts of the Nazis. In fact, the Chancellor even mentions Hitler and Stalin by name as men of vision who are to be reveered. Serling new how to write and new that words...and names MEAN things. Let's look at the title of "chancellor." We can relate it to the head of state or leader. However, because of the Christian overtones, I believe this is more in reference to the Old English definition which is based on a chancellor in Roman times. >cancellarius< - "keeper of the barrier, secretary, usher of a law court," so called because he worked behind a lattice at a basilica or law court. In the Roman Empire this was a sort of court usher. This makes more sense in terms of the character in the show. After all, it wasn't a palace or office room but a court room that is the judgement placed in the episode. I believe that Serling intended this to be a reference to the courts of the Pharisees that seem to be the model for the one world government and religion prophesied in the New Tastament. And that goes along with the liberal trends of our society and activist judges.

As far as the main character, Serling really put it perfectly in the name. Romney Wordsworth says enough by his name alone. Wordsworth is a perfect name for a librarian and even better for a religious man who finds WORTH in the WORDS of the bible. The first name, Romney is a Welsh name which mean "dwells by the river." This can mean one or both of two things. The river refers to the river Jordan in which Jesus was baptized, or in Revelation 22, it refers to the River of Life.

In a nutshell, this episode really cries against fascism, authoritarianism, and the atheist state. This is harkened in Jonah Goldberg's book, "Liberal Fascism" that lays out the best relation between modern liberalism and the example of the totalitarian government of the episode. Furthermore, Wordsworth was killed for his convictions which he held to the last. This is a solid homage to the Christian martyrs who are tortured and die for their beliefs.

Just for the record, the bible verses Wordsworth read are: Psalm 23, Psalm 59, Psalm 14, and Psalm 130

I find it fitting that the condemned man willingly showed that he was NOT obsolete through his mercy in releasing the chancellor, who then became obsolete by his dependence on the mercy of the obsolete. Truly a biblical lesson.

Thanks to Doug, and the guests of his show. but most of all, praise God for His love for all of us.

Presuppositional Apologetics AKA logic does not apply to humanism.

2011-04-20T21:29:00.002-04:00

So, atheists like to use logic when it comes to matters of faith but then CONTRADICT logic when addressing the laws of science. And I’m crazy for believing in something I can’t see???

FOUL LANGUAGE WARNING

Presuppositional Apologetics

“The Atheist (Mike) went from being angry and foul mouthed to listening intently as Chad went through the Gospel message. I can only speculate that it was the "Law of God" that stopped his mouth. - "that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God." (Romans 3:19).
As for the apologetics. They were superbly used by Chad. Mike may be an intelligent person, but his educational accomplishments failed to support him in this debate. Great job Chad.”

Your ObamaCare Dollars at Work!

2011-04-14T19:20:00.000-04:00

Should we Christians BEWARE OF AN ALIEN ATTACK!!!!!!! ??? (UPDATED)

2011-03-17T23:47:00.020-04:00

BEWARE OF AN ALIEN ATTACK!!!!!!!

Yes, a Christian is going to inform you about an impending alien attack. But it probably isn’t what you think.

Starting in June, 1947, the modern era of UFO sightings started with flying craft described by a pilot as “saucers” that seemed to skip across water. And then the infamous “Roswell Incident” took place that next month.

But what exactly is a UFO? Are they literally the “flying saucers” glamorized by the pop culture of the 1940s and 1950s? The initials themselves stand for Unidentified Flying Object. This literally means that something is observed travelling through the sky with an undetermined identification of what it specifically is. However, in today’s pop culture terms, a UFO is a craft is termed as one of extra-terrestrial (not from the Earth) origin.

Millions of people have reported seeing these UFOs for many years. Are they crazy? Many used to think so. But I am not so sure that I would disregard those reports as just people who are nuts or even those that just make stuff up. What’s more is that there are of millions of people who have described being abducted (kidnapped) by beings from these UFO craft.

Again, there are those who totally believe without questions that aliens are visiting Earth and kidnapping its inhabitants. And there are those who seem just as crazy to dismiss all of these folks who claim abduction.

I can’t dismiss any of this when people are so adamant and thorough in their description of the events surrounding and directly involved with these incidents. But as a Christian, what is being described is far more disturbing and unsettling than simply hearing “Gort! Klaatu barada nikto!,” “live long and prosper,” from Mr. Spock, “This means something,” from Roy Neary, or even just “Take me to your leader.”

An alarming fact is that many Christians have bought into the idea of extra-terrestrial alien life. But for Born-Again Christians, is this idea truly biblical? The one source that God provided for us to receive knowledge and wisdom from Him is the Holy Bible. A God loving Christian should believe, without question, in the concept of Sola Scriptura – that is, the bible stands alone as a source for living, loving and learning. Christians should believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and authoritative Word of God. And we Christians should continuously examine ideas in the Light of Scripture and take “every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ (2 Corinthians 10:5).”

The point here is not to point out the obvious physical and scientific impossibilities of extra-terrestrial travel, and there are TOO MANY to debate in one lifetime, but to point out that, in trusting the bible, the idea of alien life is incompatible with Scripture.

Let’s start with a basic biblical fact.

The earth is unique. God designed the earth for life:

For thus says the Lord,
who created the heavens
(he is God!),
who formed the earth and made it
(he established it;
he did not create it empty,
he formed it to be inhabited!):
“I am the Lord, and there is no other. - Isaiah 45:18.

The other planets have an entirely different purpose than does the earth because God created them to be that way.

In Genesis 1 we read that God created:
- plants on Day 3
- birds and marine life on Day 5
- land animals on Day 6
- Human beings were also made on Day 6 and were given dominion over the animals.
But where does the Bible discuss the creation of life on the “lights in the expanse of the heavens (Genesis 1:14-15)?” There is no such description because the lights in the expanse were not designed for life. God gave care of the earth to man, but the heavens are the Lord’s:

The heavens are the Lord's heavens,
but the earth he has given to the children of man. - Psalm 115:16

He made the stars, planets, and moons “to divide the day from the night; and ...for signs and seasons, and for days and years; and... for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth (Genesis 1:14–15)”. When we look at what the Bible teaches, extraterrestrial life does not seem reasonably compatible with Scripture.

If alien life were discovered, what would be its significance in the universe? Science fiction movies show many different races of beings who supposedly evolved on other worlds. Although very entertaining, such alien races present a problem. And that problem comes back to the focus of and on Jesus Christ. The hypothetical question thus arises: when aliens sin, can they have their sins forgiven?

The Bible teaches that the first man, Adam, rebelled against God (Genesis 3). As a result, sin and death entered the world. It doesn’t say the world and heavens or even the worlds. It says WORLD. Biblically, this refers to the dominion God has created for man.

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned - Romans 5:12

Again, the bible speaks in terms of this world by stating “all men.” It doesn’t say all men and animals or all creatures of the universe. It says ALL MEN as in all mankind or human beings. We are all descended from Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:20) and have inherited from them a sin nature.

We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. - Romans 6:6

This is a problem: sin is a barrier that prevents man from being right with God.

but your iniquities have made a separation
between you and your God,
and your sins have hidden his face from you
so that he does not hear. - Isaiah 59:2

But God loves us despite our sin and provided a way to be reconciled with God. Christ is a blood relative of ours since He and we are descended from Adam, all human beings are of “one blood” (Acts 17:26). Furthermore, since Christ is God, His life is of infinite value, and thus, His death can pay for all the sins of all people. That is why ONLY the Lord Himself could be OUR Savior.

Declare and present your case;
let them take counsel together!
Who told this long ago?
Who declared it of old?
Was it not I, the Lord?
And there is no other god besides me,
a righteous God and a Savior;
there is none besides me. - Isaiah 45:21

Therefore, Christ died once for all.

He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. – Hebrews 7:27

He entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. - Hebrews 9:12

And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. - Hebrews 10:10

God’s plan of redemption is only for human beings, descended from Adam. Christ is called the “last Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45).” Therefore since aliens are not related to Jesus by blood or to us by worldly sin, they have no plan for their salvation. They are not blood relatives of Jesus, so Christ’s blood cannot pay for their sin.

Many wonder if Christ could have gone to the aliens’ planet and lived a sinless life as one of them and then died for them. Could He not then have done the same exact thing for every planet inhabited by aliens? No, for the simple fact that the Bible tells us that Christ died once for all.

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, - 1 Peter 3:18

The bible also tells us that when Christ ascended into heaven, He would be preparing a place for us and return to take us back with Him.

And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. – John 14:3

From the day His mother gave birth to Him, Jesus is and forever will be both God and man. He was raised from the dead in His glorified human body to live forevermore at the right hand of God the Father (Mark 16:19, Luke 22:69, Acts 2:33, 5:31, 7:56, Romans 8:34, Colossians 3:1). He is definitely not an alien from another planet.

The bible makes it clear that Christ was there in the Trinity at creation (Genesis 1:3, John 1:1-4). And God made the earth unique in His universe. It is here that God placed mankind only on earth when we were created. It is here on the earth that Christ became man, lived a sinless life, died once and for all for our sins, and was resurrected. It is from here that Christ promised to prepare a place for us. And it is from here that Christ went to sit at the right hand of God the Father. It is here that Christ promises to return to gather us up to Him.

Conclusively, Christ in the flesh, as one part of the Holy Trinity, was involved with humankind on Earth alone. Therefore, one of the reasons God created the universe is for this world and its people. There is nothing biblical about God having anything to do with “aliens” or other worlds outside of His creation of those worlds for their purposes to this world.

The arrogance is NOT that man is the only life in the universe. The true arrogance is for us to ascribe to God the linear limitations of what we think of Him and what He is capable of. For even if we proclaim that God can do anything, we base that judgment on our own limited linear understandings of the way things are. Since God’s nature is to be outside of time and space as we understand it (and even beyond), the static laws of science and nature that we understand do NOT apply to His abilities since His abilities are beyond any law of science and nature that we could comprehend.

But then, if it isn’t Gort or Ming the Merciless, what’s going on?

We can’t simply just say something is not happening, especially with the evidence and testimony of millions. If all of these “alien encounters” and the like are happening, the question is, “If they aren’t extra-terrestrial in origin, then exactly what are they?”

For thousands of years people have been aware of celestial beings “from above” who have appeared to them in the skies, descend to the earth, and even involve themselves with mankind. A few of which:
- Bring an esoteric knowledge to mankind
- Involve sexual interests (experimentation, reproduction)
- Abductions
- Interact with mankind via supernatural ways (ESP, telekinetics, telepathy, etc)

In ancient times these beings were known as angels, fallen angels, demons, gods, spirits, etc. But with our advancements in technology in recent years, which have increased our understanding and awareness of our universe, along with the notions of air and space travel, it is through a modern understanding that the current generations of man have attempted to understand these beings and their agendas... even in the context of pop culture and science fiction. And to limit our understanding to only a modern perspective is to disregard thousands of years of information, evidence, and experience in place of a mere few decades of tainted comprehension.

Jacques Vallee is a world renowned Ufologist and researcher of the occult for over 35 years - and has addressed the UN on the UFO phenomenon. He is the inspiration behind the French scientist, Claude LaCombe, in the movie, “Close Encounters of the Third Kind.” In his book, ‘Messengers of Deception’ he describes “…an impressive parallel between UFO occupants and the popular conception of demons.” And in his book ‘Confrontations’ he writes, “the medical examinations to which abductees are said to be subjected, often accompanied by sadistic sexual manipulation, is reminiscent of medieval tales of encounters with demons.” He also made this statement, “I believe that when we speak of UFO sightings as instances of space visitations we are looking at the phenomenon on the wrong level. We are not dealing with successive waves of visitations from space, we are dealing with a control system.” And he states, “UFOs are the means through which man’s concepts are being rearranged. They are engaging in a world wide enterprise of subliminal seduction.” He also made the statement, “UFOs are real but they are not physical. They are messengers of deception.”

Those educated in demonology & the occult (both ancient and contemporary) who have examined the behavior patterns of these beings, consistently identify them as fallen angels/demons. If you are lacking knowledge in these areas, then the parallels in behavior and historically aligned facts, and therefore the identities of these beings, may not be so evident to you. Take a glimpse at what such experts have discovered:
Superhuman Intelligence
Probably the most commonly known characteristic of these beings is their advanced knowledge in many areas (i.e.: technology, psychic principles, and physics). The word “demon” in Greek comes from the root word meaning ‘knowledge’ or ‘intelligence’ meaning that demons have access to knowledge and information denied to ordinary mortals.
Telekinesis, Telepathy & Poltergeisting
UFO abductees and those who have encountered these beings have consistently reported these three abilities being manifested. These are also three of the most commonly known traits of demons – as described by theologians, occultists, psychics, ghost-hunters, & ufologists alike. Telekinesis is the ability to manipulate a physical object with physical contact with the object. Telepathy is basically communication without spoken word or other physical means of communication. A poltergeist is a “spirit” that focuses its repeated “haunting” on one person or physical object.
Invisibility
This is obviously a well-known characteristic of demons/fallen angels but not many are aware of the latest discoveries in this area concerning the so-called “aliens”. It has been recently discovered that high-end night vision apparatuses can see the infrared signatures given off by these UFOs and beings, even if invisible to the naked human eye. This physical record has been very well documented over the last few years.
Interest in Human Sexuality
One thing that has been highly publicized is the sexual interest these beings often take in the reproductive systems of those they abduct. This is a striking parallel to that which is described in the book of Genesis.
When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God (angels) saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose… The Nephilim (giants born by the sons of God and the human women they impregnated) were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown. – Genesis 6:1-4
Also, in the Apocrypha book of Enoch (which is quoted by Peter and Jude in the New Testament and is in the Ethiopian canonized Bible today), we read about fallen angels lusting after women and descending to impregnate them.
Further, occult & Satan worship (both past and present) is rich with accounts of such behavior being manifested by the demonic spirits the practitioners work with. This is one of the well-known pillars of demonic/fallen angel worship known to people throughout the world and throughout history.
Thought-Planting, Mind Control, & Possession
The scriptures speak of such experiences being attributed to the work of demons (Matthew 4, 8; Luke 8). Further, millions of modern occultists, parapsychologists, & demonologists are well aware of the fact that these demonic beings are known to plant thoughts, control the minds of their victims, & even possess them. What is interesting is that the testimonies of tens of thousands of UFO/alien abductees and contactees have experienced the EXACT SAME phenomena, and in the same ways. This is beyond obvious.
Known To Be Liars
Those who have claimed extensive contact with these beings such as Whitley Strieber, recurring UFO “contactees,” and alleged clandestine governmental agencies have repeatedly reported how these beings are known to lie and deceive almost compulsively. Notably this is also known to be one of the main characteristics of the beings in the “demonic realm”. Scriptures closely associate fallen angels and/or demons with the creation and perpetuation of lies – and therefore of being of the very essence of lies.
Engaged in Controlling Direction of Mankind
The famous Whitley Strieber, author of the best selling book ‘Communion’ and a repeat “abductee” said, “after the communion experiences I decided it might be a good idea to accept the idea of the Devil just in case that’s what I saw. If you look closely at the world you see the workings of evil in the world. There seems to be a sort of machinery behind it that is far beyond just the accident of human life”. These are compelling words considering;
1) That he isn’t making it up and really has been in contact with these beings extensively over a long period of time
2) This man is a self-described agnostic and yet his views perfectly line up with that of the Biblical message that speaks of the demonic realm controlling the affairs of mankind from behind the scenes.
They Have Been Spotted Warring In The Air
These beings have been spotted hundreds of times, in ancient times and modern, warring overhead in the atmosphere, as if there were two opposing groups. This is extremely interesting because the Bible speaks about “Principalities”, angels, and demonic beings warring in the heavenly realms and/or in the “air” (Ephesians 6:12). One example is when Daniel prayed for 21 days and eventually an angel showed up and told him he would have been there sooner but the Prince/Angel of Persia resisted him for 21 days (Daniel 10). Also, those who host UFO safaris with high-end night vision equipment, have frequently reported that these entities they view were warring in the sky above them.

Throughout time and geographic locale it has been found that these entities often times had close ties with spiritual belief systems and political systems. There is much evidence showing that these beings in times past played, and in times to come will play, significant roles in the affairs of mankind.

- UFO researcher John Weldon said, “How creditable is it to think that literally thousands of genuine extraterrestrials would fly millions of light years simply to teach new age philosophy, deny Christianity, and support the occult? And why would the entities actually possess and inhabit people just like demons do if they were really advanced extraterrestrials?”
- Based on over 40 years of research, famed occult researcher Dave Hunt said, “They seem to be preparing us, psychologically setting us up for some ultimate delusion that is too horrible even to imagine as yet”. Note: this lines up with the Biblical prophecies of the demonic realm creating a grand deception in the “end times”

The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12).

Some people believe these “aliens” found our planet in the course of intergalactic, or even extragalactic, “space exploration”. A problem with this hypothesis is laid out in three points below:
1. It is universally understood by the world’s major religions and the occult, alike, that demons/fallen angels have been here as long as mankind - and even before. The historical records from every continent and culture throughout time overwhelmingly verify this to be a consensus.
2. Thousands of ancient cave drawings, sculptures, journal entries, and paintings from every continent on earth, and dating back thousands of years, have been discovered which conclusively prove the ancients had experiences with these UFOs and “aliens” just as we have today. Recordings of UFOs and ‘aliens’ have been found crudely painted in ancient cave murals, cut into Egyptian stones, mentioned in the journals of ancients such as Alexander the Great, and even noted in Christopher Columbus’ ship log.
3. The descriptions and characteristics of these so-called “alien” beings align almost perfectly with that of demons/fallen angels.

The conclusion of the above three points could not be clearer:
i. Ancients and contemporaries alike have known of demons/fallen angels being here since before the creation of mankind.
ii. Ancients and contemporaries alike have known of so-called “aliens"
iii. The behavior and characteristics of the two groups – demons/fallen angels & “aliens” are known to be practically identical
iv. “Aliens” ARE demons/fallen angels.

"There seems to be no evidence yet that any of these craft or beings originate from outer space." -Gordon Creighton, Official 1992 Flying Saucer Review Policy Statement

Try as one may, there is no substantial evidence revealing that these beings originate from “outer space.” But it just doesn’t reason that these are beings from another planet when they have;
1) Shown a propensity to deceive & lie to those they communicate with
2) Support known occult principles that have existed for thousands of years
3) Deny true, biblical Christianity
4) Mimic sexual behavior reminiscent of the fallen angels in Genesis 6 and in the book of Enoch
5) Been reported to parallel a plethora of other demonic methods and known agendas such as mind control, intense mental torture, possession, manipulation, and even murder

By all accounts these are the fallen angels and/or demons spoken of in the scriptures. The evidence is overwhelming and the proof extremely compelling.

So, if those who hold expert-level knowledge in the relevant areas agree (Christian and other theologians; occultologists; psychologists; and world-class level ufologists) that these are demons/fallen angels, the following has to be overwhelmingly obvious:
If all cultures are aware of beings known as demons/fallen angels
AND
All cultures are aware of beings that have come to be known as “aliens”
AND
The behavior and characteristics of both groups are identical
THEN
Why blindly disregard the idea that “aliens” are demons/fallen angels and instead choose to adopt a hypothesis involving a group of beings we have never verified even exist (intergalactic “aliens”). Doing so is foolish and is the epitome of ignorance and truly presumptuousness to overlook a known group of beings who share the exact same methods, characteristics, and traits – and whom are also known to dwell in a dimension of earth and the immediate surrounding areas.

Now, the question must be begged as to why this is happening and why it would be important to Christians.

Our society has been inundated with an explosion in pop-culture of many things “extra terrestrial.”

From H.G. Wells’ “War of the Worlds” to “Star Trek” to “Star Wars” to “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” to “The X-Files” to “Independence Day” to the reboot of “V,” Science Fiction has become very mainstream and its fans are not thought of as just geeky wackos in strange clothing anymore. Even the American icon Superman is an alien from the planet Krypton. And for the most part, with a few exceptions, benevolence is a theme regarding aliens in science fiction. Therefore, it is natural for secular society to regard the possibility of extra-terrestrials as a way to enlightenment and peace.

Two examples in modern movies showing the deceptiveness of “aliens” are “Signs” and “The Fourth Kind.” “Signs” certainly showed the creatures as demonic looking and had quite a few “Biblical” interpretations from Holy Water to the wood of a tree being used to defeat them. Even though “The Fourth Kind” was a work of pure fiction, the demonic elements and aspects regarding the torment of abductees is quite evident. The speech of the recorded “alien” language is given as Sumerian. In both movies, attribution to extra-terrestrial involvement is only really hinted at and never confirmed.

However, the majority of entertainment media regarding “aliens” has been on the order of “Men in Black” where extra-terrestrials live and work among us or have our well-being as their motis operandi as in “2001:A Space Odyssey” or “The Day the Earth Stood Still.” Or even as comic foil like that of “My Favorite Martian” or “Mork and Mindy.”

Furthermore, most of secular society believes that Christians’ attitudes will be like those of Joseph, the Jake Busey character in “Contact.” But a true God fearing Christian does not answer the unknown with violence but will let evidence in the Light of Scripture speak for itself. And even Sagan, in the novelization, brings to light evidence that there is a Creator.

And when you couple the movie goers’ attitude regarding “aliens” with the following mainstream news articles, it should really cause a Christian to focus of obeying the greatest commandment by fulfilling the Great Commission:

“Photo in the News: Alien Appears in Duck X-Ray?” by Blake de Pastino, Tuesday, 30 May 2006

“Proof We're Not Alone? Judge for Yourself” By DAVID SCHOETZ, Friday, 30 May 2008

Those could be considered tongue-in-cheek, but here’s one that should catch your attention:

“Former Air Force members: Aliens concerned about nuclear weapons on earth” WisTV.com, Monday, 27 September 2010

That article shows that secular ideal of benevolent extra-terrestrials looking out for us and leading us to peace. And now a rather sobering news article to make you do a double take:

“UN prepares for 'first contact' with alien life” By Steve Connor, Monday, 27 September 2010

That’s right! The United Nations is now joining the delusions.

These so called “aliens” that will be contacted through the UN will be legitimized as factual extra-terrestrials without one ounce of skepticism from the “unofficial” world government and its member nations.

So, if “aliens” ever do contact or make themselves “known” to the Earth, there will be even more souls lost to the pop-culture cult of alien worship. Groups like the Raeliens and Scientologists will presume to be validated and Christians will have an even harder time in spreading the Gospel without the true knowledge of who these beings really are.

And just what is the agenda of the demons/fallen angels?

If Satan and demons are actually behind the “alien” and “UFO” activities, How would he use those actions to deceive people into trusting him?

Scripture repeatedly mentions Satan being the father of lies and that he can also disguise himself as an angel of light. The bible also mentions those who follow him, whether human or otherwise, that can appear as beings of lights as well. – John 8; 2 Thessalonians 2; 2 Corinthians 11

And in the disguise of “enlightened” extraterrestrials, Satan and his demons now look to deceive, attack and destroy those who follow and worship God. – 1 Peter 5; 2 Corinthians 12

And because there are those who are not Christians or do not worship the God of the Bible, Satan and his demons will take actions to deceive the world. – 2 Corinthians 4

And once the secular world is won over, it will be easier for Satan to conduct his war by combating the holy angels… even though he will lose. – Revelation 12:4-9

As long as he can keep the truth from the world about God, he will fight and deceive. The more lives he can keep from being saved by Christ, he will fight and deceive. The reason for the deception of “UFOs” and “aliens?”

Satan’s goal is to keep our focus off of God and to try and deny Him glory through our salvation through Jesus Christ. – Isaiah 14

“But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.” – 2 Corinthians 11:3

And I am afraid that people will welcome the “Reticulans,” “Nordics” and “Reptilians” as benign superior being who seemingly want to show us a better “way” when in fact they are minions of Satan trying to usurp the Glory of God!

Consider it a very real thing that this can and will happen as Jesus said in Luke 17:26 “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man.” Those is the “days of Noah” were warned in many ways from God about the judgment to come yet they became so involved in their own lives – eating, drinking and focusing on marrying and giving away in marriage – that they were unprepared for that judgment. Also, since the nephilum and other paranormal activities described in Genesis 6 were in the “days of Noah.”

I invite you to watch the following video by L.A. Marzulli for further evidence:

So yes, Christians, beware of an alien attack. More importantly, prepare for what it really is by studying the scriptures, praying and spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ. And if you are not a Christian, please, please find a Christian and ask about the free gift of salvation through Jesus Christ, who has died for your sins and paid the price that is owed by you.

Praise God for His Son, Jesus. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Light in all of this and I, for one, am humbled, blessed and grateful for His Glorious Gift of Grace!

Credit must go to Joshua P. Allem, Chuck Missler, Answers In Genesis, Living Waters Ministries and Nephilum Skulls International for the inspiration behind this article. But ultimately, all credit, honor and glory goes to God Almighty!

An Atheist Gets Schooled

2011-01-20T09:40:00.002-05:00

"Atomic Shakespeare"

2011-01-14T00:22:00.001-05:00

William Shakespeare as only Bruce Willis can do Shakespeare...

A Star Is Born (The Reason for the Season)

2010-12-14T21:44:00.002-05:00

Paul Brandt – “A Star Is Born”

(Click the link above for the audio)

There is so much to write about that is supposed to remind us all the Jesus is the reason for the season. But instead of boring you with another long blog, I figured I’d send this song out and provide the lyrics so you could read/sing along.

All Glory to Christ our Lord and Savior!

A Star Is Born by Paul Brandt (1999)

Christmas time again
The perfect end, to a not-so-perfect year
At last it's here
Hustle bustle to and fro
From store to store, to get one more
Of whatever is in style this year

On the marquis sign at 5 and 9
The latest movie shows, and it starts to snow
Children look into the sky
To see if reindeer really fly
Who knows
But when it comes down to the season
Above it all there's still a reason
To just look up

A star is born tonight
Come to make things right
Angels singing, anthems ringing
Glory to the King
A star is born tonight

Silent holy night, heaven's sacred light
Shines all around
And joy resounds
In manger hay the baby Jesus came to seek
And save the lost
Until they're found
Peace on earth a new beginning
He's the gift that keeps on giving
To all of us

A star is born tonight
(Glory hallelujah, glory to the King of Kings)
Come to make things right
(Merry Christmas to you all the joy the season brings)
Angels singing, anthems ringing
Glory to the King
A star is born tonight

Angels singing, anthems ringing
Glory to the King
A star is born tonight

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TODAY IS NOVEMBER 2, 2010 - ELECTION DAY!

2010-11-02T01:55:00.005-04:00

As you head to the polls today...

Here comes the REAL change!

November 2010

Borders:
Closed.

Language:
English.

Culture:
The U.S. Constitution,
The Bill of Rights
And
The BIBLE!

NOVEMBER 2010
REAL "CHANGE" IS COMING!

We the people are coming!

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG,
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS,
ONE NATION UNDER GOD,
INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL!

Pro Choice Progressive = Anti Life Aggressive!

2010-10-05T14:24:00.003-04:00

In the following article, the hatred of God comes through loud and clear in this ill-guided woman. She speaks of caring for a suffering baby or child, but it seems more likely that she, as well as most abortion advocates, is more interested in putting babies out of HER misery.

For a fair perspective on the truth in the abortion debate, click here

-----------------------------------------------------

UK Pundit to Shocked TV Host: Suffering Children Should Be Smothered
Posted on October 4, 2010 at 8:17am by Scott Baker at TheBlaze.com

Advice columnists in Britain are known as “agony aunts” (or uncles). Virginia Ironside is one. Her latest bit of advice has drawn outraged reaction from television viewers who caught her comments on the BBC yesterday. She appeared during a segment called, “Can abortion be a kindness?” Here’s the Daily Mail account of her Comments

-Miss Ironside said: ‘If a baby’s going to be born severely disabled or totally unwanted, surely an abortion is the act of a loving mother.’ She added: ‘If I were the mother of a suffering child – I mean a deeply suffering child – I would be the first to want to put a pillow over its face… If it was a child I really loved, who was in agony, I think any good mother would.’-

Disability rights advocates called her pro-eugenics approach “despicable.” Even the host seemed stunned

-Programme host Susanna Reid appeared visibly shocked by her comments during the live debate, gasping: ‘That’s a pretty horrifying thing to say, that you would put a pillow over a suffering child.’-

In the past, Ironside has said she believes doctors should not try to save the lives of “very premature babies.”

Letter to L. A. by Joe Ely - A Genius Piece of Music!

2010-07-03T22:45:00.002-04:00

This song has been one of my favorites for years! It’s one of those nighttime highway cruising songs that just seem to make the night rock that much harder! I just found this video and love the fact that it has one of the greatest rock and roll saxmen of all time – Bobby Keys! I categorize this one as a perfectly constructed song! And for sure, David Grissom’s fretwork makes that guitar an incendiary of emotion. I hope you enjoy it as much as I.

It’s Not About Speeches Any More. It’s About Leadership!

2010-06-16T14:11:00.000-04:00

Everyone has been talking about how this current BP oil spill is Obama’s Katrina. The similarities involved are not practical but geographical. But I want to avoid that particular comparison.

The point I’d like to make is one about someone elected to lead. Obama has NOT been that person… especially in this crisis.

As of today’s date, June 16, 2010, it has been 58 days since this whole thing started. Our government has been doing nothing but offering platitudes. 58 days is just ridiculous.

NO, I don’t think Obama caused the disaster.
NO, I don’t think Obama could physically plug the leak himself.
NO, I don’t think Obama should hold blame for the disaster.

But, 58 days?!!?!??!!?!?!!

The Cuban Missile Crisis lasted from October 15, 1962 to October 28, 1962. That's just 13 days!!!!

When America faced its most tense moment in the Cold War, and many were sure that a nuclear conflict was inevitable, President Kennedy LED to a FAST resolution that not only protected Americans, but also established to the world that we were not going to take any crap from ANYONE!

Can we say that about America today based on what Obama has done and is doing?

Why hasn’t he accepted the help from the various nations, corporations and entrepreneurs who have come forward with plans and equipment? Why has he continued to talk about this and how much of a victim we are of big oil?

Look at what this president has done in the face of disaster, tragedy, and even matters of locality.

He wants to have BP divert funds away from fixing this leak by positioning the Attorney General to file lawsuit after lawsuit against BP and the other companies involved.

He wants to blindly throw money our government doesn’t have to bring into fruition something that is neither practical or cost-worthy, while disrupting the lives of millions in America and the world involved in an industry that has been a VITAL part of the American economy and way or life for over 100 years.

He wants to have very unrealistic “shiny-happy people” relationships with countries who want nothing more than to destroy us or at the very least want us to ignore their atrocities against their own people and/or the people of other nations.

He wants to make vocal judgments on state laws without reading them.

He wants to criticize local authorities without knowing all the facts.

Ask yourself… How would Barack Hussein Obama lead America in situations like Shay’s Rebellion, The Mexican-American War, Assisting the Republic of Texas, The Civil War, the Gadsden Purchase, The Spanish-American War, The San Francisco Earthquake, WWI, The Depression, WWII, Dropping the Atomic bombs on Japan, The Korean War, The Space Race, The Cuban Missile Crisis, Viet Nam, Apollo 13, The Iran Hostage Crisis, Three Mile Island, Beirut Bombings, Libya, Grenada, The Challenger disaster, Noriega and Panama, Desert Storm, The collapses of the Soviet Union, Somalia, the Balkans, Katrina, and any terrorist attack?

I was willing to give the guy a shot as there are great American leaders who were involved in almost all those situations mentioned. But more importantly, there were leaders of action, for right or wrong.

Mr. President, there is an old saying – Lead or follow, just get out of the way! And right now, you are in the way of American prosperity and greatness.

There is another old saying – If you ain’t the lead sled dog, the scenery never changes. Man am I tired of the lead dog right now.

Are The Vegetarians Right?

2010-06-11T07:51:00.000-04:00

I’ve seen some debate among some of you about vegetarians and meat eaters. SO, before this gets out of hand, let try to avoid a holy war about vegetarianism. And, as a grateful eater of meat, I find myself needing to help clear up some things.

First of all, Vegetarianism is NOT a sin, nor is eating meat. I WILL NOT place any judgment on anyone based on their Godly directed eating habits.

The Bible actually says that up until after the great flood, all men and animals were vegetarian. God told Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden –

“I have provided all kinds of fruit and grain for you to eat. And I have given the green plants as food for everything else that breathes. These will be food for animals, both wild and tame, and for birds.” (Genesis 1:29-30)

However, after the flood –

“The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.” (Genesis 9:2-3)

Some people wonder if it is sinful to eat meat. The Bible clearly states that we CAN eat meat. The prime example is –

“They gave Jesus a piece of fish that had been cooked and some honey. He took it and ate it…” (Luke 24:42-43)

Many vegetarians refrain from eating meat because some of the meat industry seems cruel and exploitive to animals. And yes, God gets very angry at this type of treatment of His creation. However, most of the meat industry is providing a service to customers that is no different than any other commercial industry. If your conscience haunts you about eating commercial industry meat, then don't eat it. However, if it doesn't bother you, eat without fear or guilt. And there should be no ill feelings among vegetarians and meat-eaters as each must do what he or she feels is best for them. The bible advises us in this, even specifically about this topic. (Please understand that even though it says that one who only eats vegetables is weak in faith, it doesn’t make them any less a guest at Christ’s table) –

“The faith of some people allows them to eat anything. But others eat only vegetables because their faith is weak. People who eat everything must not look down on those who do not. And people who don't eat everything must not judge those who do. God has accepted them.” (Romans 14:2-3)

Therefore, all you vegetarians should understand that we meat eaters are going to keep eating meat the way we always have and we should let you eat as you desire. Sending out those things from PETA and the like are only going to cause meat eaters to eat meat and really enjoy it even more.

Finally, if you are a Christian or are on a path seeking after God –

“God's kingdom has nothing to do with eating or drinking. It is a matter of being right with God. It brings the peace and joy the Holy Spirit gives." (Romans 14:17)

Who I like in South Cackalacky on Primary Day!

2010-05-31T16:32:00.001-04:00

My Endorsements for the South Carolina GOP Primary Elections held June 8th.

Governor - Nikki Haley
Bauer means business as usual. Barrett is a progressive spender. And even though I personally like AG McMaster, I am not so sure he is right for the state’s highest seat.

Lt. Governor - Bill Connor
You can’t go wrong with this guy. He is a warrior through and through!

Adjutant General – Bob Livingston
The only conservative running…. AAAAANNDD, who wants a liberal in charge of the state’s military?

Attorney General - Alan Wilson
What’s not to like? This guy cuts ‘em and guts ‘em like an AG should.

Commissioner of Agriculture – Hugh Weathers
I tend to agree that the election of the ComAgri. Can interfere with goals of the Commissioner and Governor to truly promulgate, expand and make successful the agricultural needs of the state.

Comptroller General – Mike Meilinger
In this case, change would be good.

Secretary of State – Mark Hammond
The only conservative running has done an adequate job…if it ain’t broke…

Superintendent of Education – Kelly Payne
I am truly excited about Kellye Payne. Not only is she immensely qualified and loaded with experience for the position, I have also seen her personally take an opportunity to reach out to those who can’t vote for her but for whom it will be her job to protect and advance.

Treasurer – Curtis Loftis
In this time of government overspending, we need someone who will not lose track of Millions of dollars. Our current treasurer’s office is full of doofi!

Congressional Distrcit 2 – Joe Wilson
Even though it may not have been polite, the guy from SC was right about Obama’s denial of universal healthcare for criminal invaders.

Senate – Jim DeMint
Just plainly the right guy for this job. I pray he keeps up the good work!

Is America A Christian Nation?

2010-05-30T12:08:00.000-04:00

Is America A Christian Nation?
From In Touch Ministries

The History of American Founders and Patriots You Aren’t Supposed to Know About

2010-05-29T11:26:00.001-04:00

The History of American Founders and Patriots You Aren’t Supposed to Know About

One of the things that has always hacked me off is when truth is hidden from those who can benefit from it the most. From religion to politics, this has happened time and again… especially in history. It is often said that the winners of battles and wars write the history books, and in the case of the topic of African-American history, it was the losers who have done the writing – to the shameful detriment of the truth.

How many of us have been taught in school about Frederick Douglas, Harriet Tubman and Booker T. Washington? And then nothing until Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. (I didn’t even get Malcolm X when I was in school). And what’s worse is the VITAL role blacks have played in the founding of this nation has been denied or written out of American history. The only black’s name we hear from that period is Crispus Attucks. But do we Americans of all colors know who Benjamin Banneker, Richard Allen, Oliver Cromwell (not the British Lord Protector) or even Wentworth Cheswell were? Cheswell was a part of Paul Revere’s Midnight Ride, but you have to look long and hard to find a connecting reference when reading anything about Paul Revere.

Because I love American History, I have been able to learn the truth through various sources about those Americans of African ancestry who were fundamental in the founding and continuing prosperity of this great nation. Washington, Jefferson and Franklin are all important figures who contributed greatly to the birth and start of America. But it was Salem, Estabrook, Whipple, and Armistead who gives the founding of this nation its true character.

This revisionist history is virtually criminal to African-Americans, and ALL Americans for that matter. It denies something that has always been vital to the lifeblood of this country – TRUTH.

Of course we cannot remove or deny the horrible crime of slavery and involuntary servitude placed on blacks in our history. After all that is truth as well. But we have got to stop looking at our American history based on race or politics.

Below is the video from Glenn Beck’s May 28th “Founders’ Fridays” TV show. Whether you like him or not or whether you disagree with him or not, please watch. This show is not about politics, it’s about the truth.

At the bottom is included the aftershow Q&A that is really awesome!

The United States Constitution is Alive, But Not as a “Living, Breathing Document.”

2010-05-18T12:48:00.000-04:00

The United States Constitution is Alive, But Not as a “Living, Breathing Document.”

“The debate between interpretivists and non-interpretivists over how to give meaning to the Constitution is often framed in the following terms: Is the Constitution a ‘living’ document, in which judges ‘update’ its provisions according to the ‘needs’ of the times? Or is the Constitution an enduring document, in which its original meanings and principles are permanently maintained, subject only to changes adopted in accordance with its amending clause? I believe that it is better described in the latter sense. It is beyond dispute, of course, that the principles of the Constitution must be applied to new circumstances over time — the Fourth Amendment on searches and seizures to electronic wiretaps, the First Amendment on freedom of speech to radio and television and the Internet, the interstate commerce clause to automobiles and planes, etc. However, that is distinct from allowing the words and principles themselves to be altered based upon the preferences of individual judges.

“Our Constitution would be an historical artifact—a genuinely dead letter—if its original sense became irrelevant, to be replaced by the views of successive waves of judges and justices intent on ‘updating’ it, or replacing what some judges view as the ‘dead hand of the past’ with contemporary moral theory. This is precisely what the Founders sought to avoid when they instituted a ‘government of laws, not of men.’

“There is no charter of government in the history of mankind that has more wisely set forth the proper relationship between the governed and their government than the American Constitution. For those of us who are committed to constitutional principles and fostering respect for that document, there is no better homage that we can pay it than to understand clearly its design and to take care in the manner in which we describe it.” – “Constitutional Myths and Realities (Myth or Misconception 8: The Constitution is a living document.)” by Michigan Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Markman, August, 2005 Inprimis

American Exceptionalism Is Humility, Not Arrogance!

2010-05-18T12:22:00.004-04:00

American Exceptionalism Is Humility, Not Arrogance!

The influence of this work is from David Barton’s American Heritage Series: The Ideas That Birthed a Nation episode and ”We Hold These Truths” edited by Ray Notgrass.

American Exceptionalism is the theory that the United States of America occupies a special niche among the nations of the world in terms of its unifying national credo, historical evolution, political and religious institutions, and its being built by immigrants. The roots of the belief are attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville, who claimed, in his work, Democracy in America, that the United States held a special place among nations, because it was the first modern democracy.

But let’s carry this to today’s world and see if that belief hold’s true. Or is America merely an arrogant flash in the pan? We should start with the vocabulary:

What is exceptionalism?

Exceptionalism comes from the word exception which is rooted in the Latin word exceptionem, or in better etymology, exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis; "the exception proves the rule in cases not excepted;" The context of American Exceptionalism means that all other nations are not unique from each other. In Tocqueville’s time it was even truer. But even in today’s time The United States of America is still very much unique (at least for now).

The stability provided by the U.S. Constitution is most exceptional and politically stable when compared to other nations of the world today.

France, 10 years younger than the U.S., is governing with their FIFTEENTH Constitution.

Brazil has had SEVEN constitutions since 1822.

Russia has had FOUR constitutions since 1918.

Poland has had SIX constitutions since 1921.

Afghanistan has had FIVE constitutions since 1923.

America has had only two governing documents since its independence and only ONE constitution since its ratification in 1788. Our Constitution has been a solid rock of a governing document to withstand and make possible what no other nation in the history of the world has been able to do. If you pay attention to the membership of the United Nations, you will notice that the number of nations rises and falls each year. That is a distinction that promulgates American Exceptionalism when compared to the political instability of the rest of the world.

What is America’s unifying National Credo?

Credo is Latin for “I believe.” The English derivative is the word creed. Etymologically, this means a statement of belief. So, what is our national credo? Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address states it best. The United States of America is a nation "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal". In this view, America is indistinguishably connected with liberty and equality. Yes, the struggle to live up to this credo has been hard fought and fraught with selfishness and even hatred. However, the thought processes from Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. have consistently espoused the self evident truth that all men are created equally.

Has American government had a Historical Evolution?

Evolution comes from the Latin term evolutionem which translates into “an opening of what was rolled up.” Evolution’s meaning even came to be known as a growth into maturity. But had our nation grown into maturity, governmentally speaking, by the time of “Democracy in America?” Or are we, as some will attest, never going to reach that maturity? The fact that our Constitution has endured for over 230 years, seems to promote the former above the latter.

Has American government had a Historical Evolution?

Evolution comes from the Latin term evolutionem which translates into “an opening of what was rolled up.” Evolution’s meaning even came to be known as a growth into maturity. But had our nation grown into maturity, governmentally speaking, by the time of “Democracy in America?” Or are we, as some will attest, never going to reach that maturity? That fact that our Constitution has endured for over 230 years, seems to promote the former above the latter.

When independence was declared in 1776, the Continental Congress struggled to create a form of government that would endure. The first national document of government was the Articles of Confederation. This was about as close to anarchy as a nation could have while still having a ruling government. It didn’t work and was replaced by the current Constitution of articles we know today.

Historically, America has politically, geographically, religiously and socially has collectively grown into a maturity that no other nation has been through. Politically is covered above. Geographically, from a small strip of land on the east coast, across a continent to lands separated by great distances, this nation has done nothing but physically grow in size. Religiously, America, with a foundation in Judeo-Christian principles has grown to so embrace the freedom of religion without physical conflict to include religions and faiths never known of thought of by the Founders. Yet they knew back then, the importance of that particular freedom. Socially, we have had our greatest growth. From the hard fought abolition of slavery, to the suffrage of women, minorities and young adults, to the struggle to ensure civil rights, America has long since come of age.

What is unique about America’s political and religious institutions?

No etymology here as there is no need to define the departments of government nor places of worship and philanthropy. Politically, this is where we are the most immature. Our Founders strived to create a government that had just enough power to fulfill the claims of the Constitution’s Preamble. Yet continually and consistently, American government has grown to where it has such an involvement in individuals’ lives, it has made the constitution about itself rather than “[w]e the people.” This is leading the nation into potential socialism and toward communism. The fact is that socialism/communism has been tried at least 44 times in the history of the world and has FAILED EVERY SINGLE TIME!!! A mature government is one that involves and adheres to the consent and importance of the governed. That includes the states as well as the people. Hopefully, the voters of this nation will realize how close they are to not being able to vote anymore.

America’s religious facets are the most unique in the world. This nation is full such a myriad of diverse beliefs and faiths that peacefully coexist and, in some cases, even work with each other to better the lives of many Americans. The influence that religion has had on ethics and morality in America has exponentially affected the society enough that laws are changed or created to match. Under our Constitution, America (not the government proper) has promoted the belief in religion (or the practice of not believing) that influences and affects the rest of the world more than any other entity (except God Almighty Himself).

Are immigrants the architects of America?

The land that is now America had no inhabitants until nomadic people – immigrants – from Asia migrated to the American continents so many years about. Over the generations, from the Inca in South America to the Mississippians in North America, the building of the western hemisphere started with immigrants. This tradition continued with European immigrants who brought their culture to build a free nation based on the Laws of “Nature’s God.” Even after the nation was founded, Immigrants (free and forced) from the rest of the world had a part in building this nation. Being a child of the Mayflower may hold social importance to some, but is has been immigrants and their descendants who have been the most influential pioneers in industry, agriculture and innovation. The peacefully coexisting ‘melting pot” of immigrants in this great country is the most unique and diverse in the world. Why? Because, as explained by Ronald Reagan in 1985 speaking of our forefathers who were immigrants or descendants of immigrants, “The idea of freedom impelled them; it intoxicated them. And it is freedom that impels us still.”

Does America reach the claim of American Exceptionalism? Yes! But again, as proud of that as we can be, we should absolutely be humbled by it. The one consistent proclamation among the Founding Fathers is that American Exceptionalism is exceptionalism credited to God Almighty and should bring Him honor and glory.

And yet so many denounce American Exceptionalism as “self-serving and jingoistic” arrogance. However, our founding fathers knew and believed that their governance was something of humility rather than pride. This is mainly due to the founders’ acknowledgement of God as their Providence in government. And even though Tocqueville calls America a modern democracy, that word just doesn’t apply, even if he used it in a positive way.

When our political leaders apologize for America and proclaim arrogance, the damage they do isn’t just to our nation, but to the worldly perception of where that exceptionalism comes from. It is time again to see “morning in America again!"

It’s time to be Americans again! It’s time to lead the world again! It’s time to be that “shining city on a hill” again! It’s time! It’s time! It’s time!

During this election season, search your convictions as an American and vote accordingly. Cast your vote behind someone who will serve, yes SERVE, his or her constituents rather than continue to promote the current trend of governing without serving. Forget political party. Forget seniority. Forget ethnicity. REMEMBER AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM!!!

"Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!" - Psalm 33:12

Yes Christians Do Fail, And That Is Why Christ Is Perfect!

2010-05-10T21:25:00.002-04:00

My wife forward Ten Ways Christians Tend to Fail at Being Christian by John Shore today and it took a while for the steam to settle, but Now I would like to deconstruct this guy liberal Christian babble.

He gives ten points that, on the surface, seem reasonable regarding the ways Christians fail. But when he elaborates, it is extremely clear that Mr. Shore doesn’t read the context when he surgically pulls verses to make his points. The ten are:

1) Too much money.
2) Too confident God thinks we're all that and a leather-bound gift Bible.
3) Too quick to believe that we know what God really means by what he says in the Bible.
4) Too action-oriented.
5) Too invasive of others generally.
6) Too invasive of others personally.
7) Too quick to abandon logic.
8) Too fixated on homosexuality.
9) Too insular.
10) Too uneducated about Christianity.

In point one, Mr. Shore uses Luke 12:33, Matthew 19:21; 6:24 to claim that Christians shouldn’t earn wealth. The context of those versus has NOTHING to do with money, other than the mention of it. The same ruler could have sold everything he had, given it to the poor, and yet dishonored his parents. Jesus’ point was to show the man how wretched he was in God’s eyes because he loves something more than God. If he would have looked further and read Matthew 19:24 (Mark 10:25; Luke 19:25), he would have discovered that a rich person CAN enter the kingdom of God. It’s just not as easy as if he were not wealthy. If we read Proverbs 3:9-10, we learn that God will bless us with wealth AS LONG AS we also understand Luke 12:34 in that our wealth must honor God first. While these verses do not quantify what wealth is, it recognizes that every individual has his own personal wealth in which God has blessed him and his stewardship. God doesn’t hate rich people; He hates what those rich people sometimes do.

I actually do agree with point two; hopefully for the same reasons. The first thing we Christians must understand is that we are wretched, filthy sinners because we have broken God’s Law (The Ten Commandments). Once we are humbled in knowing that we are doomed to an eternity in hell, we then can receive salvation by faith alone, through grace alone, in Jesus alone, God as man, had himself punished and killed to pay the price for our sins so that we wouldn’t have to. God is everything and we Christians are blessed to have a God that loves us so much, He would make the ultimate sacrifice.

In point three, Mr. Shore uses Luke 8:9-10 to convey how confusing the Word of God is and that we shouldn’t believe the literate words of the bible. Well, yes, there are mysteries that only God can know, i.e. Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32, but the parables are easily understood if you read and study what Jesus says. The Parable of the Sower in Luke 8 wouldn’t still be a mystery if he READ ON THROUGH THE REST OF THE CHAPTER (in fact the exact answer starts only one verse further in v. 11. And if the bible should be so blindly followed, why does Mr. Shore bother to use any verses at all? 2 Timothy 3:16 settles the matter by using the world “ALL.”

In regards to point four, Mr. Shore seems to forget that Christians are commanded and commissioned to do things in the Name of Christ. But specifically, Matthew 5:16; John 3:21; 7:3; 8:39; 9:4; 10:37; Acts 2:11; and 2 Thessalonians 3:6 mention doing works. And these are to be done in God’s name. The Great Commission can’t be fulfilled if we are just sitting around being Christians.

The separation of church and state is brought up in point five. And while I agree that it is extremely dangerous for a state to tell people they have to worship a certain way, it is just as dangerous for the state to tell people not to worship at all. The concept of the separation of church and state wasn’t born in political circles, but in the Christian Reformation. During the Protestant Reformation of the 1500s-1600s, The Catholic Church had gained a great deal of political power and was promoting, allowing and commanding things contrary to biblical teaching. One of those was the concept of “Divine Right” which is the foundation of Monarchism. Monarchism allowed kings in Europe to maintain bloodline and totalitarian in their perception of power as given by God. However, once biblical understanding became prominent over obedience to church, it was the Reformation movement that came up with the concept of an authentic separation of church and state that still honored God. This is not the modern anti-religious argument being debated today, but a fundamental understanding of how God expects us to govern ourselves. If the Christians of the past had been less invasive of others and things, the world might still live under monarchies and even slavery!

In point six, it becomes clear that Mr. Shore doesn’t understand the key to salvation or the gospel itself. Christians are commanded to do one thing above all others that can be physically done and that is to evangelize by telling others about Jesus and the whos, whats, and whens involving His life and Sacrifice. And as a matter of note, this is where that parable from above comes into play. I pray that the seeds sown by Mr. Shore end up in good soil.

Again Mr. Shore is promulgating how unworthy the scriptures and their doctrine are for modern times. I challenge anyone to produce an archaeological or anthropological discovery that contradicts the bible. God offers logic that is the simplest to understand and follow. It’s when people create their own understanding of logic that clouds their desire to follow God’s.

Homosexuality is just a sore spot for non-Christians that it seems that point eight it true. The fact is that sin is sin and all sin is equally detestable in God’s eyes. But unlike theft, lying, and killing, which are committed in secret. Homosexuality is practiced openly. As Christians, we should be able to fixate on sin as sin when we share the gospel. And remember that God doesn’t want thieves, liars, and murderers or homosexuals. He wants sinner who have repented and trusted in Jesus as their salvation.

In point 9, Mr. Shore speaks of Christians spend time with only Christians. He says Christians stop doing that to spend time with non-Christians. This seems to contradict, one of many in his piece, points four and six. And while we should be spreading the gospel to unbelievers, the bible does command us to group together as Christians – 2 Corinthians 6:14. While it is fine to socialize with non-Christians, we should be willing, as Christians, to witness at a moments notice. If our focus is on the socializing alone, God doesn’t get glory unless we can witness or do works in His name.

On point ten, I can basically agree. However, not for the same reasons. Secular society, pop-culture, politics and several other factors have become such distractions that people don’t willingly pay much attention to the bible. And since neither the Great Schism nor the Diet of Worms have anything to do with the gospel, they don’t really matter when it comes to witnessing. And since Robert Duvall and a rock band have nothing to do with the gospel, they are irrelevant when it comes to talking about Jesus.

Mr. Shore has taken upon himself to desire ChINOs – Christians in name only. He wants Christians that suit his expectations and disregards the commands of God. His sketchy understanding of biblical context denotes his lack of Christian understanding. I pray that he will delve into the covenants of the bible and truly learn the love he should share with others because of the love God showed him.

Animaniacs Tribute to Duck Soup!

2010-04-11T13:35:00.000-04:00

A top notch homage to one of my favorites, Duck Soup!

Vezi mai multe din Desene animate pe 220.ro

Vezi mai multe din Desene animate pe 220.ro

Health Care and the Constitution

2010-04-07T20:47:00.014-04:00

Health Care and the Constitution

After a year of contentious debate, it became clear that the House intended to pass the health care bill by whatever means necessary, even if it required the use of a "deem and pass" procedure whereby Members would not vote directly on the bill. After a massive public outcry arose against that unconstitutional proposal (Article I, § 7, ¶ 2, and § 5, ¶ 3 direct that "the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays" on a measure rather than just "deeming" it passed), Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD), head of the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee, urged Democrat House Members to remain quiet and avoid talking about the unconstitutional process in an attempt to lessen the political backlash (1).

That procedure ultimately was not used, but once the health care bill passed, voters demanded of congressional leaders the constitutional provision that authorized the federal takeover of health care. In answering that question, Rep. John Conyers (MI) replied: "Under several clauses – the Good and Welfare Clause and a couple others. All the scholars – the constitutional scholars that I know (I'm chairman of the Judiciary committee, as you know) – they all say that there's nothing unconstitutional in this bill." (2)

Of course, there is no Good and Welfare Clause in the Constitution, but assuming that Conyers simply made an honest mistake, he likely was referring to the General Welfare Clause, which appears in two locations (emphasis added):

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote THE GENERAL WELFARE, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. - PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and GENERAL WELFARE of the United States. - ART. 1, SEC. 8, PAR. 1

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (MD) agreed that "Congress has 'broad authority' to force Americans to purchase" health care "so long as it was trying to promote 'the general welfare'." (3)

(Rep. James Clyburn – the No. 3 ranking Democrat in the House – did not invoke the General Welfare Clause but instead candidly admitted, "Most of what we do down here is not authorized by the Constitution." (4)

The attempt by congressional leaders to invoke the General Welfare Clause as a cover for an unconstitutional act is nothing new. In 1792 when New England was suffering a crisis in one of its most important economic industries (fishing), some Congressmen proposed that federal funds be used to subsidize that troubled industry. James Madison quickly asserted that such a proposal was unconstitutional, explaining:

Those who proposed the Constitution knew, and those who ratified the Constitution also knew that this is... a limited government tied down to specified powers.... It was never supposed or suspected that the old Congress could give away the money of the states to encourage agriculture or for any other purpose they pleased (5).

Madison then warned about the consequences of allowing Congress to expand the narrow meaning of the "General Welfare Clause":

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the "general welfare," and are the sole and supreme judges of the "general welfare," then they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the United States; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police would be thrown under the power of Congress, for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the "general welfare." (6)

According to Madison, if the original intent of the General Welfare Clause were ever expanded, then Congress would begin an unbridled intrusion into areas that were deliberately designed by the Constitution to be under the control of the state and local governments. Two specific aspects of the Constitution were intended to prohibit such federal encroachments: (1) the Enumerated Powers Doctrine, and (2) the Bill of Rights – specifically the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

Concerning the first, the Constitution authorizes Congress to address only eighteen specifically enumerated (that is, individually listed) areas and responsibilities; this is called the Enumerated Powers Doctrine. As affirmed by Thomas Jefferson:

Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but is restrained to those specifically enumerated, and... it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers (7).

Many other Founders were equally outspoken about Congress' limitations under the Enumerated Powers Doctrine. In fact, this doctrine was so well understood that in America's first several decades, presidents had only four cabinet level departments: the Secretary of State, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Attorney General (occasionally there was also a separate Secretary of the Navy, but many presidents often placed him under the Secretary of War). Today, however, there are almost four times as many cabinet level positions, including a Secretary of Agriculture, Labor, Commerce, Housing, Education, Transportation, Energy, and many others (8). Each of those areas was also very important two centuries ago, but because the Constitution had placed these areas under the jurisdiction of state governments, there was no federal presence involved in them.

Concerning the second point (the Bill of Rights), the Founding Fathers – dedicated students of history, government, and human nature that they were – knew that the federal government would invariably try to step beyond its enumerated powers; they therefore added the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution, directly stipulating that all areas not specifically listed in the Constitution were to remain under the jurisdiction of the states and local governments, which thus included areas such as education, criminal justice, energy, agriculture, and many others. As Thomas Jefferson affirmed:

I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: that "all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people" [the Tenth Amendment].... To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition (9).

James Madison agreed:

I declare it as my opinion that [if] the power of Congress be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations... of the limited government established by the people of America (10).

Jefferson further explained:

Our country is too large to have all its affairs directed by a single government. Public servants at such a distance and from under the eye of their constituents... will invite the public agents to corruption, plunder, and waste.... What an augmentation of the field for jobbing, speculating, plundering, office-building, and office-hunting would be produced by an assumption of all the state powers into the hands of the federal government (11)!

As Jefferson summarized it:

The states can best govern our home concerns, and the [federal] government our foreign ones (12).

Significantly, health care issues often arose in early America – as when various dangerous fevers would periodically appear, ravaging American cities and killing scores of citizens. Concerning health care issues, the Founders specifically placed domestic health care into the hands of the state governments, leaving issues of international health care in the hands of the federal government. As Thomas Jefferson affirmed, the federal government was "to certify with exact truth, for every vessel sailing from a foreign port, the state of health respecting this fever which prevails at the place from which she sails," but that "the state authorities [are] charged with the care of the public health (13)." Under the Constitution, states were to handle domestic health care issues, and the federal government foreign ones.

– – – ♦ ♦ ♦ – – –

Notwithstanding the fact that a majority of Congressmen voted for the recent passage of the unconstitutional health care bill, there are many in Congress who do understand the constitutionally limited powers of Congress. Dozens of these Congressmen formed the Constitution Caucus, chaired by Rep. Scott Garrett (NJ), and many of its Members have made outstanding efforts to return Congress to its constitutional role; two such measures are highlighted below.

Rep. John Shadegg (AZ)

Every session since John has been in Congress, he has introduced "The Enumerated Powers Act" which would require "that all bills introduced in the U. S. Congress include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which the law is being enacted (14)." As Shadegg explains, "The Enumerated Powers Act will help slow the flood of unconstitutional legislation and force Congress to reexamine the proper role of the federal government (15)."

Not surprisingly, leaders of Congress have not allowed this bill to move forward, nevertheless, what a refreshing idea that Congress should provide constitutional authority for the actions it takes and the bills it passes!

Rep. Mike Conaway (TX)

Federal law establishes September 17 (the day the Constitution was signed in 1787) as Constitution Day, requiring that on that day every school receiving federal funding spend time studying the Constitution. Despite the law, a recent survey found that the majority of high school students had never heard of Constitution Day, and only ten percent could recall any such school celebration the prior year (16).

However, Congressman Conaway believed that not just school students but also Members of Congress and their staff should also study the Constitution on that day, so he introduced a congressional resolution to that effect. When the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee heard the resolution, he told Mike, "That's the stupidest idea I've ever heard!" – an attitude far too common among many in Congress.

Nonetheless, Mike (and many other Congressmen like him) continues to study the Constitution regularly. In fact, Mike always carries a pocket Constitution with him and each time he reads through it, he writes the date on the flyleaf of the booklet – a practice he began even before he became a Member of Congress.

– – – ♦ ♦ ♦ – – –

Founding Father John Jay wisely advised:

Every member of the State ought diligently to read and to study the constitution of his country.... By knowing their rights, they will sooner perceive when they are violated and be the better prepared to defend and assert them (17).

The only way that more Congressmen will begin to study the Constitution is if "We The People" study it first and then, through the power of our voice, calls, letters, and votes, insist that our elected officials also know and observe it.

________________________________________
Credit goes to David Barton at Wallbuilders.com

notes

1. "Van Hollen memo lays out time line and messaging," Politico.com, March 12, 2010

2. Kerry Picket, "Conyers fabricates constitutional law citing 'good and welfare' clause," Washington Times, March 23, 2010

3. Matt Cover, "Hoyer Says Constitution's General Welfare Clause Empowers Congress to Order Americans to Buy Health Insurance," CNSNews.com, October 21, 2009

4. David A. Patten, "Napolitano: Supreme Court to Strike Down Obamacare," Friday, 26 Mar 2010, Newsmax.com

5. Jonathan Elliott, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution (Washington: 1936), Vol. 4, pp. 428, James Madison on "The Cod Fishery Bill," February 7, 1792.

6. Jonathan Elliott, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution (Washington: 1936), Vol. 4, pp. 429, James Madison on "The Cod Fishery Bill," February 7, 1792.

7. Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XV, p. 133, Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, June 16, 1817.

8. "The Cabinet," WhiteHouse.gov (accessed March 30, 2010)
”Cabinet Level Departments," National Defense Industrial Association (accessed March 30, 2010)

9. Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1903), Vol. III, p. 146, Jefferson's opinion against the constitutionality of a National Bank, February 15, 1791.

10. Jonathan Elliott, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution (Washington: 1936), Vol. 4, p. 429, James Madison on "The Cod Fishery Bill," February 7, 1792.

11. Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1903), Vol. X, pp. 167-168, Thomas Jefferson to Gideon Granger, August 13, 1800.

12. Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XV, pp. 450, Thomas Jefferson to Judge William Johnson, June 12, 1823.

13. Journal of the Senate of the United States of America, 1789-1873, Message by President Thomas Jefferson "To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America," on Tuesday, December 3, 1805.; see also, Thomas Jefferson, "Fifth Annual Message," The American Presidency Project, December 3, 1805

14. "Text of H.R. 450: Enumerated Powers Act," Govtrack.us, January 9, 2009

15. John Shadegg, "Enumerated Powers Act," JohnShadegg.com (accessed March 24, 2010).

16. David Yalof and Ken Dautrich, survey conductors, "New Constitution Day Survey," John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, September 20, 2007, (for the full survey, go to www.firstamendmentfuture.org).

17. John Jay, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1890), Vol. I, pp. 163-164, from his Charge to the Grand Jury of Ulster County, September 9, 1777.

And Why Doesn't Universal Healthcare Cover Extra-Terrestrial Aliens???

2010-03-26T16:06:00.002-04:00

Okay, so you finally got government involvement in the healthcare system. Congratulations! But did you know about this?

Ah…jungle gyms and child molesters… I guess the kids will need the jungle gyms to keep in shape to run from the molesters…. NOW it makes sense.

And why then can't we assume that Estra-terrestrials would get coverage as well?

And now, since AT&T is having to pay more for the healthcare coverate of its employees, my phone bill is going to go up!!!!

Thanks again, liberals!

More Proof That Obamacare Is Unconstitutional

2010-03-19T23:03:00.001-04:00

This is interesting…

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1
The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=199&invol=437
U.S. Supreme Court - STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA v. U S, 199 U.S. 437 (1905)
199 U.S. 437 - Argued April 11, 1905. Decided December 4, 1905.

If the opinion of this ruling is still supposed to applied today in the context that the currently proposed healthcare payer reform will be taxed, wouldn't that mean that all of the kickbacks, bribes, exemptions, etc. would make it unconstitutional since: "When South Carolina embarked upon the business of dispensing alcoholic beverages, its agents were held to be subject to the national internal revenue tax, the ground of the holding being that in 1787 such a business was not regarded as one of the ordinary functions of government."

I support any state Attorney General and/or Governor who upholds the enumerated rights of each state by suing the Federal government and its tyrannical designs on our lives.

Commitment Is About You, Surrender Is About HIM!

2010-02-21T08:26:00.002-05:00

When I bow my head
Are the words I've said
Alive or dead

Do I surrender
To all the splendor
That His love does render

When He does forgive
To Him will I give
And begin to live

Do I live for God
Or is beneath a façade
Hiding a fraud

Yet beneath this doubt
Within and without
My heart does shout

To my God above
Who is the perfection of
Holy grace and love

Through Him I win
From my depths within
Victory over sin

I often do a lot of introspection regarding my relationship with God. And I have recently learned a lesson that has hit me very, very hard. I hope I can adequately express this to you to help you further strengthen your relationship with God.

I have taken the word commitment for granted. This word is a modern era word. It is almost a PC word.

During one of my men's bible study, we were working together in "The Incredible Power of Kingdom Authority" by Adrian Rogers. In his interviews with Romanian Evangelist Josef T'son, it is discussed that the word commitment didn't become regularly used until the 1960s. In fact, when a word becomes popular in society, it usually replaces and old word. Research shows that the word replaced by commitment is surrender.

What's the difference?

It's in the control and this has been where my personal conflict has been keenly focused in my past.

When you commit to something, great or small, you are still in control. You can very easily be committed to doing things. You can commit to praying, reading your bible, spending more time with your family, New Year's resolutions, etc. Being in control of them means that you can choose not to do them. YOU CAN CHOOSE! If you think about it, how many things that you commit to are actually fulfilled? Whether it's losing weight or giving more time, most people don't fully follow through on their commitments. And I am just as guilty.

Surrender is a very different thing! Think about things that you would be obligated to surrender to: a burglar holding a gun to your head or a knife to your throat, an airplane you are on that plummets from the sky, or a surgical procedure being performed on you. In those cases, you have absolutely no choice but to surrender to their particular circumstances.

When I really looked at this, I began to ache. Even though there are things I have unconditionally surrendered to God, I found myself in an almost panic about the things that I have only committed to God. Yes, they may have been very noble and worthwhile things, but by only committing them, I maintained the control. Who am I to think that I actually have the right to control? ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE THINGS OF GOD!!!! I even arrogantly thanked God for leading me to commit things to Him!

I began to take inventory of my physical and spiritual life to see what I should be surrendering to God. My prayer life is improving, my marriage is improving, my relationships with family and friends are improving. I find it much more satisfying to be in His Holy Word. My desire to follow Jesus grows deeper and deeper every day

I am still taking inventory, still aching, and yet still praising and thanking God because even through all of this, He loves me unconditionally. To Him be all the honor and glory. Amen.

(revised from a previously posted blog of 5/30/2008)

Didn’t They Get The Clue the First Time???

2010-02-17T09:12:00.000-05:00

This will probably be one of the least politically biased blogs I will ever write. It’s just that there is something really grating my nerves lately.

Even BEFORE Indiana Senator Evan Bayh announced that he would not seek reelection, there have been a lot of former office holders on both sides of the aisle that have declared their intention to run for their former office.

Now while I take the conservative position that the Liberal/Progressive Democrats from Obama on down have taken this nation to new low, I think it is potentially disastrous for the Republicans who lost their office in a fair election are seeking that office back. They had their chance to make this nation and its people a serious priority…AND THEY BLEW IT!

There is a reason they lost their office and I absolutely think that their former constituents would be very disappointed, and even disenchanted to have them right back in the office where they couldn’t perform their duty well enough to be reelected.

There is a movement ever growing to replace ALL of the incumbents in Congress COMPLETELY with new personnel. While I do see and appreciate the initiative behind it, I am personally not in total agreement with that because I do think there are a few member of Congress who ARE fulfilling their responsibilities to their constituents AND who have only been in for one term.

One of the priorities of the new Congress should be to institute term limits on themselves that will lead to the Constitution officially being amended to officially confirm that into law. The era of big government will never begin to be over until we can eliminate PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS! And yes, I do include conservatives in that as well. When the people of this nation make it clear that one should not seek public office as a career, maybe those that do seek it will actually be of strong character that the people will be the ones who determine whether they go on to new or higher office.

On a somewhat unrelated side note, since Congress required corporate executives to take a salary of ONE DOLLAR per year without bonuses, why is it unreasonable for the American people to demand the same of their elected officials until this nation gets out of debt? Financial advantage should NEVER be a reason for ANY American to ascend to public office. Congress has so many benefits that any employee in the public sector would seriously envy.

One of the reasons that we look at our Founders with admiration is that they willingly and responsibly stepped down for their positions of power when they could have remained virtually indefinitely.

My charge to all of you is that when you look at your upcoming ballots in your various state and congressional primaries, whether you are Democrat, Republican or other, DO NOT vote to reelect someone who has lost an election for the same office and certainly DO NOT vote for an incumbent who has served a total of twelve years or more. This will be a responsible start at getting Washington to WORK FOR US rather than to go there to gain power, money and fame and RULE over us!

Come on wannabe professional politicians, GET A CLUE, right now they are free and untaxable!

Tim Tebow Could Have Been a "pedophile Rapist"...

2010-02-05T15:04:00.001-05:00

And Joy Bejar could have just as easily been funny…

Check out this appalling piece of bloviating from The View’s most distorted and disturbed panelist:

If she doesn’t have a problem with the morality of murdering an unborn child, why should she have any moral authority to discuss the negativity of a “pedophile rapist?”

And if she is for killing babies BEFORE they have become pedophile rapists, is she for killing them after they become pedophile rapists?

Surely, being a Jew, she should understand how detestable genocide is. But I guess she isn’t a student of history, or truth for that matter.

The concept of abortion is not new. And, like it or not, the bible DOES speak of the evil that abortion is:

“Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward.” – Psalm 127:3

Why would the “fruit of the womb” be potentially bad if God tells us to consider it a reward?

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” – Jeremiah 1:5

God is speaking to and of Jeremiah. But it isn’t meant to be only about him. This is how God thinks of everybody in His Creation.

“Your hands fashioned and made me, and now you have destroyed me altogether.
Remember that you have made me like clay; and will you return me to the dust?
Did you not pour me out like milk and curdle me like cheese?
You clothed me with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and sinews.
You have granted me life and steadfast love, and your care has preserved my spirit.” – Job 10:8-12

When Job has asked “Why was I born,” he is able to elaborate with magnificent language signifying that life does begin at conception.

“Did not he who made me in the womb make him? And did not one fashion us in the womb?” – Job 31:15

Here, Job is reassuring those around him of his understanding of the value of life and Who creates that life.

“Thus says the Lord who made you, who formed you from the womb and will help you” – Isaiah 44:2a

Here God is reaffirming His complete commitment to His people by telling them that His commitment STARTED long before they were in to womb.

“But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace” – Galatians 1:15

In this verse, Paul is explaining that it is by God’s initiative that created Paul and placed him to be an apostle. It was not by anything Paul did. Furthermore, it signifies that Paul was chosen By God even before he was born.

The point of all of this is that LIFE is so valuable to God, who created it, that He even cherishes it before birth.

Miss Bejar, and others of her ilk, seems to only place value on life based on what that life contributes or removes from society. This is progressivism at its core.

Talk a look at the following from one of history’s most cited Supreme Court Judges:

BUCK v. BELL, Superintendent of State Colony Epileptics and Feeble Minded, 274 U.S. 200 (1927).
Supreme Court of the United States. (No. 292.) Argued April 22, 1927. Decided May 2, 1927.

Mr. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court.

“…We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. ... Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

Now, consider if it weren’t Justice Holmes, but Adolph Hitler writing about the Jews. Or Mao Tse Dung writing about political dissenters. Would your attitude be the same as saying that society is better off by killing potential drains on society? If it is, then you have some serious issues to deal with that should preclude you spending time of the web reading this blog.

Now consider that another hero of liberal feminists is Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. But I will bet that most, if not all of those female activists will not coincide or reconcile that FACT that Margaret Sanger was one of the biggest racists in American history. This hero of “pro-choice” women everywhere was not interested in looking out for the rights of women. She was looking out for the “well-being” of society. She wanted to eliminate the human life that would eventually put a drain on society. Specifically, Sanger wanted to eliminate the ”negro race” from creating the undesirable ills of society. Before you call me crazy, look up where the abortion clinics are in your town. Are they in the upper-class, gated residential neighborhoods, or in the middle of the financial districts?

NOPE

You will find virtually ALL Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion related services right in the inner city among those in or close to poverty. They were placed there by design to kill Black and Brown children under the guise of giving women a choice. The women under these living conditions will find it easy to make a “choice” to kill a child-to-be if it will save her, her family, and/or her community some hardships. Again, before you think I am crazy, ask yourself how many Pro-choice activists spend time among the wealthy to convince them that abortion is a choice?

Now, let’s take this back to Miss Bejar and her assertion that the argument FOR abortion is that a child can grow up to be a “pedophile rapist.”

One “choice” I am sure Joy is okay with is the choice that Ann Dunham made. After all, that choice led to a man becoming president.

But let’s look at choices. The following is from The Evidence Bible

An Interesting Quiz

How would you respond in these situations?
1. A preacher and his wife are very, very poor. They already have 14 kids. Now she finds out she’s pregnant with the 15th. They’re living in tremendous poverty. Considering their poverty and the excessive world population, would you consider recommending she get an abortion?

2. The father is sick with sniffles, the mother has TB. Of their four children, the first is blind, the second has died, the third is deaf, the fourth has TB. She finds she’s pregnant again. Given this extreme situation, would you consider recommending abortion?

3. A white man raped a 13-year-old black girl and she’s now pregnant. If you were her parents, would you consider recommending abortion?

4. A teenage girl is pregnant. She’s not married. Her fiancé is not the father of the baby, and he’s upset. Would you recommend abortion?

Based on these circumstances, Sanger, Holmes, and even Bejar would have advised abortion to prevent hardship and drain on society. But keep reading…

In the first case, you would have killed John Wesley, one of the great evangelists in the 19th century.
In the second case, you would have killed Ludwig van Beethoven.
In the third case, you would have killed Ethel Waters, the great black gospel, jazz and blues singer.
If you said yes to the fourth case, you would have declared the murder of Jesus Christ!

We do have a choice, Miss Bejar – The choice to murder innocents or not.

Internet archaeology???

2010-01-26T06:57:00.001-05:00

Ah...this may be humorous...but it sounds eerily like the "real" scientific language of evolutionists to me...

Internet Archaeologists Find Ruins Of 'Friendster' Civilization

When You Vote, Remember That "We the People" Have the Power

2010-01-19T08:50:00.001-05:00

I know, I know… I have been neglecting my blog, but do to various necessities; I just wasn’t able to post anything. So, I apologize to those few of you who actually pay attention to my tiny, insignificant corner of the world.

There has been SO much to write about, I feel like an idiot for not at least reposting stories and other blogs. But cest la vis…

So, what to write about…?

The political races that took place last year? Nah. The Christmas Terrorist Attempt? Nope. The New Year? No. Although I still wonder why people ask me if I had a great new year. Wouldn’t it be more logical to ask if I had a good Old Year? Anyway, I am not going to even really comment on the earthquake in Haiti or the Massachusetts (add another “e” for you Martha/Marsha Coakley fans) Senatorial race.

So, why even break my creative fast?

The one thing that has been occupying my thoughts lately is this following:

At what point in the history of our nation did the fourth, AND MOST IMPORTANT, branch of government lose its power?

It’s more of a rhetorical thought as there are just too many things that have been done by the other three branches to contribute to the loss of power by the fourth. And yet it shouldn’t be.

From the date forward after “We the people” was put to parchment, the three branches that were created by the fourth began to start seizing more and more self importance. I am not decrying the Constitution at all, because as it was intended and written by its framers, it is the best form of any government that has or will be established. But most of those who have pursued and been ELECTED to SERVE have treated their service as a job with a title and power.

Let me say that there are those out there who do pursue the service and yet don’t pursue power. But doesn’t the distinction between power and service say enough.

George Washington is probably the most famous leader whose career was more about service than power. And yes, there have been a few others. But if you look at the history of the politicians in this nation, the majority of them have done things to seize power rather that to keep the power with WE THE PEOPLE.

John Adams was the first with the Alien and Sedition Act to place the government as more important than the people. The others include Jackson, Taylor, Polk, Lincoln, Grant, Hayes, both Roosevelts, Taft, Wilson, LBJ, Carter, Clinton and “Dubya” Bush. In fact ALL presidents really belong on the list but none as much as Wilson, FDR, Johnson, and now Obama.

The next question is WHY? Well, the truth isn’t that all politicians pursue power, but that “We the people” have let them.

Yes, I have endorsed candidates before and will do so again, as long as they look to the Constitution and the rule of law. But, from this moment forward, any candidate who campaigns themselves or promotes a platform of larger government will not get my support. Look at it this way. If the only choices of food I have to eat for one day are rotten chicken or rotten pork, I will fast.

The Democrats have historically been the party whose elected have seized more power for men than support the powers of the Constitution and yet there are plenty of Republicans who, even though they campaign to “not increase the size of government,” do just that. These politicians all spend like crazy and write legislation that makes government more important than the people. Ronald Reagan was the last president to campaign and serve with the platform of reducing spending, taxation, AND bureaucracy.

The Obama/McCain race was very reminiscent of the FDR/Landon race in that the losers basically campaigned with the platform ideology of, “me too, just not as much.” Many conservative voters saw right through McCain and stayed home in 2008 giving Obama the win.

Well, no more! It stops now. The complacency of the people is waning after so many years of waxing. The deification of politicians is being scrutinized. The American Idol mentality will no longer be a part of political races. The people, nation and states will be the focus of politicians rather than the government.

IF…

The only way those factors will change if something VERY important happens:

Americans have got to once again realize that the only time to support a candidate is during an election with the premise that, once elected, the winner will SERVE the people rather than use the people to further the winner. One way to ensure this is to establish term limits for elected officials. Why is it that the president is restricted by term limits and the Congress is not? One reason is that the Congress writes the laws, but the main reason is that people who pursue power through service forget about the service and are not willing to give up that power.

It’s time again for Americans to understand the issues of the platforms and especially the NEEDS of the nation. Americans should take the chance to research the candidates’ history and opinions. And Americans should vote with the assurance that they have the most important power in politics – The ability to hire and fire those who are in politics.

So, as the election season comes near, get to know the candidates and the issues thoroughly. Do NOT vote because you like the R or the D, but vote because you believe the integrity of and desire to serve by a candidate match up with what the people NEED and not what you want. And, I cannot stress this enough, do NOT vote for any candidate who promises something tangible to you. That is called a bribe, or “buying a vote,” or political prostitution. They cannot guarantee what they promise to individuals. And be very weary of those who promise things to groups to get their support. The ONLY special interest concern a politician should have is for his or her individual constituents who he or she SERVES.

In closing, it’s time for the fourth branch of government – the people – to believe in itself again and put trust in the Constitution rather than the candidates.

ABCNews Exclusive: Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts That Don't Exist

2009-11-16T19:49:00.002-05:00

Exclusive: Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts That Don't Exist
Recovery.gov Lists Millions Spent and Hundreds of Jobs Created in Districts Not on Map
By JONATHAN KARL, ABC News
Nov. 16, 2009

Here's a stimulus success story: In Arizona's 9th congressional district, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that's what the Web site set up by the Obama administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says.

There's one problem, though: There is no 9th congressional district in Arizona; the state has only eight congressional districts.

There's no 86th congressional district in Arizona either, but the government's recovery.gov Web site says $34 million in stimulus money has been spent there.
In fact, Recovery.gov lists hundreds of millions spent and hundreds of jobs created in congressional districts that don't exist.

In Oklahoma, for example, the site lists more than $19 million in spending -- and 15 jobs created -- in congressional districts that don't exist. In Iowa, it shows $10.6 million spent – and 39 jobs created -- in non-existent districts.

In Connecticut's 42nd district (which also does not exist), the Web site claims 25 jobs created with zero stimulus dollars.

The list of spending and job creation in fictional congressional districts extends to U.S. territories as well.

$68.3 million spent and 72.2 million spent in the 1st congressional district of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
$8.4 million spent and 40.3 jobs created in the 99th congressional district of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
$1.5 million spent and .3 jobs created in the 69th district and $35 million for 142 jobs in the 99th district of the Northern Mariana Islands.
$47.7 million spent and 291 jobs created in Puerto Rico's 99th congressional district.

Interesting facts and figures, but none of these districts exist.

The recovery.gov Web site was established as part of the stimulus bill "to foster greater accountability and transparency" in the use of the money spent through the stimulus program. The site is a well-funded enterprise; the General Services Administration updated it earlier this year with an $18 million grant.

Affordable Health Care???

2009-10-30T11:56:00.001-04:00

10/30/09

Three things to know about the 'Affordable Health Care for America Act'

By Bryan Riley

Although Nancy Pelosi’s health care bill is over 1,900 pages long, there are only three things Members of Congress need to understand before they vote on it:

1. Americans would no longer be able to choose their own health insurance:

The bill would create a “Health Benefits Advisory Commission” to help the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) determine an “essential benefits package.” (Page 105.) Families would no longer be able to choose their own insurance benefits. Instead, they would be stuck with whatever the HHS Secretary decided to offer them.

2. The proposed tax subsidy for the federal “public option” would eliminate private health insurance options.

The bill would create a “public health insurance option” run by the government to compete with private insurance companies. (Page 211.) Unlike the public plan, private insurance companies pay corporate income taxes, which according to the Tax Foundation, average 39.1 percent. There is no way private companies could compete in this environment, and the only health insurance “option” remaining would be the one run by the federal government.

3. At least 86 percent of businesses would no longer have any reason to offer health insurance to their employees.

Businesses with payrolls below $500,000 would not be required to offer health insurance. (Page 276.) As a result, the logical business decision would be for these firms to quit offering health insurance and instead allow their employees to get coverage through the new federal Health Insurance Exchange. According to the bill’s proponents, 86 percent of businesses would not be required to offer health insurance or contribute to employee premiums.

The proposed legislation would empower the federal government at the expense of American families. A legitimate solution to our country’s health care problems would do the opposite.

"ANITA"

2009-10-22T01:19:00.002-04:00

“Anita” by Scott from South Cackalacky
To the tune of “Elvira” by the Oak Ridge Boys.
(Dedicated to my favorite Maoist, White House Communications Director, Anita Dunn)

Anita, Anita
Mao starts her fire up, Anita

Lies about a red herring of a news channel during prime time
That girl can sure enough make waves with a little whine
She looks to Mao Tse Tung for pointers most of the time
'Cause Mao sure makes her liberal heart just shine

So I'm singin'
Anita, Anita
Mao starts her fire up, Anita
Fire her up - Ooh Lala Ooh Chairman Mao Mao
Fire her up - Ooh Lala Ooh Chairman Mao Mao
Like Obama, Yay, Yay!

She likes Mao and Mother Theresa, and she knows they’re no quite the same
And boy it sure did make her point seem lame
She may fake a wiggle and squirm 'cause she got caught lovin’ that worm
I’m glad I get my news from that fair and balanced team!

So I'm singin'
Anita, Anita
Mao starts her fire up, Anita
Fire her up - Ooh Lala Ooh Chairman Mao Mao
Fire her up - Ooh Lala Ooh Chairman Mao Mao
Like Obama, Yay, Yay!
Like Obama, Yay, Yay!

Christianity and Religion Have Caused More Deaths Than Anything Else in History

2009-10-17T00:02:00.002-04:00

Christianity and Religion Have Caused More Deaths Than Anything Else in History

Whenever I am evangelizing to non-Christians, one objection comes up that seems to be a barrier for them to hearing the Gospel. They seem to think that it’s hypocritical for Christians to talk about the love of Christ when Christians have done so much killing. Some of them even think that Christians are the most murderous of the religions. I figured I should do some research to actually have an answer in apologetics.

Yes, man has used religion for political gain. Nazi Germany had "God with us" engraved in German on the belts of Nazi soldiers. Americans have said, "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition."

Jesus even tells us in John 16:2-3 that there will be some who, in their error, commit atrocities and murder in the name of God: "the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God." However, He informs us that these are not true believers: "And they will do these things because they have not known the Father, nor me."

Jesus did tell His followers to love their enemies. So if a man kills another man in the name of Christianity (or any other religion), something obviously isn’t right. If WE can detect it, don’t you think that God can? Don’t forget that He will deal with that on Judgment Day.

So, we can all agree that killing in the name of religion isn’t a good thing. And now the obligatory, “Exactly, and Christians have killed more than any other religion.”

Au Contraire!

The main argument blaming those murderous Christians is based on the deaths of those in the Crusades and the Inquisition. I actually added another situation that can be used as well.

Deaths Caused by Christians:

1562-1598 – French Wars of Religion – France – 4 million
1095-1291 – Crusades to the Holy Land – Middle East, Spain, Africa – 1.5 million (This does include all sides of the conflict)
1184-c. 1860 – Various Christian Inquisitions – Europe – 17,500

We’ll round this up (for the sake of liberals) and say 6 million deaths caused by Christians. And that IS a bunch! 6 million is way too many!

Now, here is something that even shocked me! I had assumed that the tolls were fairly even.

Deaths caused by non-Christians:

184-205 – Yellow Scarves Rebellion (Taoists) – China – 7 million
1300s-1521 – Human Sacrifices (Aztecs) – Mexico – 1 million
1855-1877 – Panthay Rebellion (Muslims) – China – 12 million
1932-1933 – Holodomor (communist atheists) – Ukraine – 10 million
1941-1945 – Nazi Genocides (statist atheists) – Germany – 11 million
1959-1962 – Great Leap Forward famine (communist atheists) – China – 43 million
1971 – Bangladesh Atrocities (Islamists) – East Pakistan – 3 million
1975-1979 – Khmer Rouge Repression (communist atheists) – Cambodia – 3 million
September 11, 2007 – Terrorist attacks (Muslim Jihadists) – USA – 5,000

The deaths caused by non-Christians – approximately 90 MILLION! And this is actually a conservative number.

In other words, even if you could attribute deaths to Christians, which we established at the beginning of this piece is not really the case, they are only responsible for 1/15 the deaths as non-Christians.

Don’t let this issue be one that keeps you from the salvation offered through Jesus Christ. Because the actual number of murderers in this world today comes closer to the whole population of 6 BILLION when you understand that God’s standard of murder is much, much higher!

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. – Matthew 5:21-22 Jesus from the Sermon on the Mount.

Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. – 1 John 3:15

It’s not just the physical act of taking someone’s life that is murder. It’s the actions based on what is in the heart that God sees.

“But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur...” – Revelation 21:8

The justice we all deserve is hell. But God provided a way for us to not go to hell. Jesus, God as man in the flesh, lived a perfect life and was punished, tortured and hung on a cross for crimes He did not commit. He took the punishment upon Himself and paid the price for our sins so that we wouldn’t have to.

If you have not done so, repent (turn away from) your sins, ask forgiveness of God for those sins and be specific. Receive the gift that God gave through Christ on the Cross and trust in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” – John 3:16

ENDOWED BY OUR CREATOR… WITH A DUTY TO PROCLAIM IT

2009-10-10T18:23:00.000-04:00

ENDOWED BY OUR CREATOR… WITH A DUTY TO PROCLAIM IT

[The majority of the following information comes from David Barton’s American Heritage Series.

Early in American history, Americans were very open, almost naked, about their faith. Even the Founding Fathers didn’t keep religious proclamations, prayer meetings and prayer sittings private. They were done publicly.

Over the last fifty years, Americans have been taught to compartmentalize many aspects about their life – especially faith. Starting in the 1960s, the US Supreme Court made a few decisions that proclaimed how important the First Amendment was to America and that the freedom of religion was something to be cherished. But then they stated that it was something that should be done at home or church and not to be seen in public. If Americans wanted to pray, it was more appropriate to do it at home or church and before and after school. But prayer was not to be included with education or the extra-curricular activities involved with it. Even the Ten Commandments were seen as very important to Americans… as long as they were posted at home. The court system didn’t need them posted there. And Nativity Scenes were beautiful, as long as they were at home or church. Parks or public places didn’t need them anymore. So, for the last fifty years, we’ve been told that faith IS important, but only in a private arena.

Compare that to the times of our Founding Fathers.

God was SO IMPORTANT to our Founding Fathers, that when they met in Congress for the first time in September of 1774, the very first thing they did was open with prayer. It wasn’t just a little run of the mill, routine prayer like we might hear at a public meeting today. According to those who were there, that time of prayer in Congress was momentous as well as extended. John Adams recalls that not only did they pray, but the delegates covered FOUR chapters of the bible in Congress that first day.

That particular bible study was so memorable and had such an enormous effect, that John Adams wrote to his wife Abigail, “I never saw a greater effect on an audience. It seemed as if Heaven had ordained that Psalm to be read on the morning… I must beg you to read that Psalm… [R]ead this letter and the 35th Psalm to [your friends]. Read it to your father.”

Psalm 35 shows how the faithful should pray when they know that malicious people are seeking to harm them. The prayer recounts the evil schemes of the persecutors and asks God to fight on behalf of His faithful ones. By the way, Abigail Adams’ father was William Smith, the pastor of the local church. Silas Deane, another delegate, said that this time of prayer and scripture reading in Congress was SO powerful that “[E]ven the Quakers shed tears.”

Now let’s consider John Hancock. After serving as President of Congress during the Revolution, he was elected Governor of Massachusetts where he issued several proclamations calling the state to prayer and Thanksgiving.

In one proclamation dated October 15, 1791, he wrote, "And pray especially that universal happiness can be established in the world and that all may bow to the scepter of our Lord Jesus Christ and that the whole Earth may be filled with his glory." This one proclamation of many is evident of Hancock’s evangelistic nature and is reflective of his own Christian beliefs.

Another Founding Patriot, Samuel Adams, participated as a leader in the Boston Tea Party and as one of the Sons of Liberty. He has been titled the “Father of the American Revolution.” After the Revolution, Adams remained active in politics. He was even one who was actively advocating and then involved in composing the Bill of Rights. He eventually ended up as Governor of Massachusetts where he issued a 1795 proclamation for prayer, fasting and thanksgiving. Throughout the proclamation is very strong evangelical tones: “...That the Peaceful and Glorious Reign of our Divine Redeemer may be known and enjoyed throughout the whole Family of Mankind." He even repeated these evangelical sentiments in a 1797 Proclamation: “…speedily bringing on the Holy and Happy Period when the Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and all the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.”

The Declaration of Independence itself proclaimed to the world they had a “firm reliance on Divine Providence.” In fact, during the Revolution, the Continental Congress issued at least 15 proclamations of national prayer. They were from different committees, by various founders, all with strong Biblical language.

There is NO doubt that America has been a successful nation with a stable and successful government BECAUSE OF the Foundation on which it was built; a Foundation unlike any other nation in the world – a Biblical Foundation.

George Washington, in his famous farewell address in 1796, reminded us why our government and its policies were so successful. He declared, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable support.”

In Washington’s first FEDERAL Proclamation of Prayer in 1789, he wrote, ”WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness." This proclamation was delivered directly after the First Amendment was written. Washington, along with his fellow Founders knew that they had to stop and give thanks to God for guiding them in the creation of that First Amendment.

A famous prayer proclamation that John Adams wrote in 1789 stated, “AS the safety and prosperity of nations ultimately and essentially depend on the protection and blessing of Almighty God; and the national acknowledgment of this truth is not only an indispensable duty which the people owe to Him, but a duty whose natural influence is favorable to the promotion of that morality and piety, without which social happiness cannot exist, nor the blessings of a free government be enjoyed.” The Founders believed that it is our DUTY, a NATIONAL DUTY, to acknowledge and worship God.

These are just two of the 1,500 OFFICIAL proclamations for prayer issued in America between 1622 and 1815. Of those, 300 are issued by churches and 1,200 are issued by the government. After 1815, there are thousands more issued by the federal government. Again, these proclamations announced a NATIONAL DUTY, not a private one as we are directed to do today.

Thomas Jefferson seemed to be even more poignant on the matter. In the very first book that he ever wrote in 1781, “Notes on the State of Virginia,” he wrote, “God is who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we remove their only firm basis? A conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God, and that they are not to be violated but with His wrath. Indeed, I tremble for my country when a reflectant God is just and His justice won’t sleep.” In other words, we cannot have NATIONAL liberties if there is no conviction in our minds that these liberties are the gift of God. If we lose sight of this, then we also lose those liberties.

In Benjamin Franklin’s most famous speech, dated Thursday, June 28, 1787 at the Constitutional Convention, he reminded the delegates that they needed God to be America’s friend and ally, and to keep God’s “concurrent aid.” He also warned, “If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without [H]is notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without [H]is aid? We’ve been assured in the sacred writing that, ‘Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.’” Franklin called for regular, daily prayer to make sure that they kept God in the midst of what they were doing in the nation.

Many of the Founding Fathers who were a part of writing the US Constitution were also instrumental in writing the constitutions of their respective states. Samuel Adams and John Adams helped write the Massachusetts constitution; Benjamin Rush and James Wilson helped write Pennsylvania’s constitution; George Read and Thomas McKean helped write Delaware’s constitution; the same was true in other States as well. In fact, the Supreme Court used to point to these State constitutions as precedents in their rulings to demonstrate the Founders’ intent.

Look at the DEFINITIVE LANGUAGE in the following excerpts from those respective constitutions:

DELAWARE: Every person, who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust…shall…make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit: “I do profess faith in God the father, and in Jesus Christ, his only son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed forever more, and I do acknowledge the Holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration.”

PENNSYLVANIA: And each member [of his legislature], before he takes his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz: “I do believe in one God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and the punisher of the wicked, and I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration.”

MASSACHUSETTS: [All persons elected must] make and subscribe the following declaration, viz. “I do declare that I believe the Christian religion and have firm persuasion of its truth.”

NORTH CAROLINA: No person, who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the [Christian] religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office, or place of trust or profit in the civil department, within this State.

These were not merely suggestions but constitutional REQUIREMENTS from the respective states about the role of God IN THE STATE. One had to believe that God’s principles applied to civil government. If not, he or she couldn’t be in any public office. At that time, it was seen as a DUTY, but compared to today, teachers, judges, government officials, etc. are NOT allowed to proclaim there faith openly. They wouldn’t be allowed to hold that position if they did.

As stated above, Americans have been taught to compartmentalize their faith in the last 50 years. We have learned to place faith in one corner separate from education, business, and government in other separate corners of our lives. And it has been the court system that has had a major part in this – even to the point of inflicting penalties for public displays of faith. Our modern media is very discriminating in that it shows several aspects of what the courts do, and yet very little of the courts involvement with matters of faith – unless it goes against faith.

We have had public education in America since 1647. We have had prayer in schools since 1647. Suddenly, after more than 300 years, the courts tell us that we have to pray at home or church and not in schools or even at a graduation commencements. There are still many, many schools in this nation where the students and faculty WANT to have prayer in school.

In a Texas based federal court ruling, dealing with one of those schools, the federal judge decides to let the school have prayer, but HE gets to tell them how to pray. He says, “This court will allow prayer if it’s a typical non-denominational prayer. The prayer can refer to God or the Almighty, but the prayer must not refer to Jesus. And make no mistake. This court is going to have a United State Marshall in attendance at graduation. If any student offends this court [and mentions Jesus in the prayer], that student will be summarily arrested and face 6 months incarceration in the Galveston County Jail.”

The courts have determined to tell the American people what religion means, and this is what they have gotten into with the First Amendment – “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” Rather than allowing it to say the words that are written, in the context of which they were written, the courts base their rulings on a phrase that is no where in the Constitution – Separation of Church and State.

Logically, the words of the First Amendment mean that Congress cannot make a law, not that children cannot pray. So, how did “Congress” come to mean “children” and how did “law” come to mean “pray?” Unfortunately, it’s because the courts said it did. This reasoning is based on an unconstitutional philosophy that was introduced into the courts by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes that said “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is.” That philosophy lives on in the courts today!

The Founding Fathers did not intend for any branch of the federal government to behave in this manner. The 90 or so Founders who were involved in the debate over the First Amendment made it clear that they did not want a national, federal denomination. They did not want the federal government to tell the citizens that they had to be a certain denomination and practice their religion based on the doctrines of that specific denomination. There was NOTHING about separating God from government or public life. That is why freedom of religion is partnered with freedom of speech and also to the right to peaceably assemble anywhere in public. Therefore when it comes to practicing our faith, Congress can’t stop it AND we can practice it WHEREVER we want to.

We have been given unalienable rights…. And it is out DUTY proclaim them for the Glory of God!

Kanye on the Nobel

2009-10-09T15:52:00.002-04:00

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794

WHY?

2009-10-09T10:18:00.000-04:00

Barack Hussein Obama is “humbled” for being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Why?

I know, I know. It’s because he may be America’s first internationally born president. Nope. That just hasn’t been proven yet.

I know, I know. It’s because he was educated abroad. No, no, other people have done that.

I know, I know. It’s because he was a community organizer in Chicago. Uh, uh. That could really only get him to the American Presidency.

I know, I know. It’s because he served 143 days of 4 years in the US Senate. Can’t be, many more people have done that and much more. Besides, he spent a lot those four years campaigning for US President.

I know, I know. It’s because he has utilized environmental and labor standards in trade agreements. Not yet.

I know, I know. It’s because he created a protective international tax haven watch list. Nada.

I know, I know. It’s because he has created a way to allow imported prescription drugs in the US. Hadn’t happened.

I know, I know. It’s because he worked to provide $50 billion by 2013 for the global fight against HIV/AIDS. Hasn’t done anything on this yet.

I know, I know. It’s because he has recognized the Armenian Genocide. Nothing on this yet.

I know, I know. It’s because he has closed the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. Couldn’t get this done yet.

I know, I know. It’s because he doubled the size of the Peace Corps. Not so far.

I know, I know. It’s because he invested in foreign language training for the military and other human intelligence personnel. Nyet.

I know, I know. It’s because he has worked with Russia to move nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert. Nope. In fact, more countries are getting closer to being ON a hair-trigger stance.

I know, I know. It’s because he has worked to end NATO restrictions on forces in Afghanistan. Nothing done on this yet. He hasn’t even ended restrictions on US forces… Even though his top general in the area needs more troops.

I know, I know. It’s because he repelled invasion forces into US allies. Not THIS president.

I know, I know. It’s because he will get the rest of the world too follow US standards on “green” living. Ain’t gonna happen.

I know, I know. It’s because he has overthrown a military dictator and promoted liberty in that newly free nation. Not this president.

I know, I know. It’s because he brought the Olympics to the US. Not this time.

I know, I know. And I think this may actually be it. It has to be that greatly successful ‘Beer Summit,” at the White House.

Even though Barack Hussein Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," I can’t find a solidly good reason what he has done to be awarded the prize.

So I decided to look up the qualifications.

“The candidates eligible for the Nobel Peace Prize are those nominated by qualified individuals. See Qualified Nominators. No one can nominate him- or herself.” Okay, since Obama isn’t a “Qualified Nominator,” he couldn’t nominate himself. Good.

It starts in September when Invitation letters are sent out by The Nobel Committee to individuals qualified to nominate. At this point, Obama is a member of the US Senate and a candidate for the US Presidency.

In February is the deadline for submission. The Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than February 1st. A two-week presidency at this point.

Next in February-March the Committee assesses the candidates' work and prepares a short list.
From March through August the short list is reviewed by permanent advisers and advisers specially recruited for their knowledge of specific candidates.

At the beginning of October, the Nobel Committee chooses the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates through a majority vote. The decision is final and without appeal. The names of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates are then announced.

On December 10th, Nobel Laureates receive their prize at The Nobel Peace Prize Award Ceremony in Oslo, Norway, where the Nobel Laureates receive their Nobel Prize, which consists of a Nobel Medal and Diploma, and a document confirming the prize amount.

But these really aren’t qualifications. So, let’s look at the people who do the nominating – the so-called “Qualified Nominators.”

According to the official website:

The right to submit proposals for the Nobel Peace Prize shall, by statute, be enjoyed by:
1. Members of national assemblies and governments of states;
2. Members of international courts;
3. University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes;
4. Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
5. Board members of organizations who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
6. Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee
7. Former advisers appointed by the Norwegian Nobel Institute.
.
My responses to each:
1. The majority of these being, at the very least, quasi-socialistic.
2. Where Sharia Law has penetrated.
3. Like the “Marxist Professors” he sought out in college and those international organizations funded by George Soros.
4. Hmm… Jimmy Carter and Al Gore.
5-7. Okay, I really don’t know anything about these folks, other than their association with those listed in 1-4.

But WHAT are the qualifications?

These days, it doesn’t matter. Barack Hussein Obama wasn’t awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for anything he has done. In the most shiny-happy, feel-good liberalistic fashion, Obama was awarded what used to be considered one of the most prestigious international awards for what he has YET TO DO!

Doesn’t this mean that we are all eligible for the Nobel Peace Prize?

No thanks, at my age, I’d rather have a talking frog!

Taxing EVERYTHING, YAY!!!!!!

2009-10-08T07:53:00.002-04:00

Most of the folks who voted for Pelosi, don't watch Charlie "Snoozer" Rose on late night PBS... especially when they have such ludicrous lefties like letterman to laugh at. But, in case you missed it, here is the Nana Po herself on Rose's show, talking about a VAT (Value Added Tax).

For those of you who think that what she said sounds reasonable, what she is talking about is taxing EVERYTHING available for purchase. BUT it's not just that simple.

Let's say you wanted to purchase a new dining room set, for example. The retailer of that table has to pay a tax on everything it uses to market that table. And the manufacturer of the table will have to pay taxes on the following: the wood, the hardware, the stain and/varnish, etc.

Now apply that same standard to a medical provider who has to buy an x-ray machine and all the taxes along the line being paid to market and manufacturer.

With all the extra taxes being paid, should we really believe that the cost of those taxes will not show up in the final price of the product or service? Of course it will.

Be smarter than our government gives you credit for. Contact your Representative and let him or her know that you do NOT want the Value Added Tax!

'The Providence Effect': Astonishing Educational Achievement, 'The Way It Should Be Done'

2009-10-04T13:14:00.002-04:00

'The Providence Effect': Astonishing Educational Achievement, 'The Way It Should Be Done'
By Donald Douglas at AMERICAN POWER

I took my oldest son to Santa Monica last night to see The Providence Effect. The movie is playing this week at Laemmle's Monica 4-Plex (the next block down from the 3rd Street Promenade). Kenneth Turan's review is here. And note this:

- The person behind this heartening achievement is the school's president, Paul Adams III, a formidably charismatic individual who is determined to change the culture of American education, to break the cycle of poverty and give poor children the same opportunities as wealthy ones.

- A veteran of the civil rights movement, Adams started at Providence St. Mel as a guidance counselor.

- When the Chicago Archdiocese threatened to close the institution, he began a fundraising movement that enabled him to buy the building, take the school private, and run it so successfully that President Reagan came to visit. Twice.

- Adams says he runs the school the old-fashioned way. Discipline is key for him; he and his staff enforce zero tolerance for drugs. Without discipline, he says, you can't get a student's attention.

- Once that attention is assured, Adams counts on his inspired faculty to excite the kids about learning, and judging by the interviews with current and former students and glimpses inside selected classrooms, the method seems to work.

President Reagan's at 1:45 at the trailer above. He praises the students with open arms, exhorting them in triumph, "This is the way it should be done." To see him there, speaking to that school -- an all black school during the 1980s when the social welfare state had reached epic proportion, and when crime poverty and crime had destroyed the inner-cities -- is incredibly uplifting.

And what struck me, from the perspective of a teacher, was the no BS approach to instruction. There's no sign of progressive education throughout the entire film (and thus no mind-crushing leftist indocrtination). It's straight learning, with in-your-face instructors and administrators that spend time with the kids and in the classroom. Things go so well it seemed almost antiseptic. But as the early minutes of the film show, Chicago had been overrun by gang violence and much of the Westside had been razed in a far-from-finished scheme of urban redevelopment. Interviews with graduates -- kids who grew up to be doctors and bankers, etc. -- illustrated that the school was truly a life-saving institution, and education became the central focus of the child and the child's family.

The Providence Effect website is here. The Providence St. Mel school website is here. The school boasts a 100 percent college entrance acceptance rate, and the homepage states that "The School That Refused to Die - Now a Model for Urban Education."

And I was thinking exactly that after learning of the death of Derrion Albert in Chicago this week. The Los Angeles Times has a report, "Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan Attend Chicago Teen's Funeral." And from the Chicago Tribune, "Derrion Albert Funeral: There Is No Simple Fix For Problems, Pastor Says; Parents Urged to Reclaim Their Children, City Urged to Educate Kids Closer to Home"

- In death, the 16-year-old became the latest high-profile name on the long list of young Chicagoans who have died violently. The teen's brutal beating with two-by-fours was recorded Sept. 24. The attack captured the nation's attention and elicited a response from the White House.

- President Barack Obama is sending Attorney General Eric Holder and Education Secretary Arne Duncan to Chicago this week in the wake of the fatal beating. Obama's spokesman has indicated the administration is preparing an initiative to address the national issues of youth crime and violence.

It's almost tragic that the president's not spending time on these issues -- the crisis in American education -- rather than the year-long ObamaCare fiasco. This is the modern equivalent of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. And while I'm tempted to say something like "I can't see how the president has ignored these issues," that's not true. I know exactly how. The corrupt Cook County Democratic Party machine, thoroughly infiltrated with crooked cronies, all the way down to union hacks, progressive education activists, and community organizing thugs, has consigned to city's poor to perpetual poverty. Michelle Malkin's book, CULTURE OF CORRUPTION, discusses how Michelle Obama milked her connections to lucrative jobs while crying racism all the way to the top. These people are a joke, and the Democratic political establishment is the last entity that's going to solve the crisis of the city's -- and America's -- urban poor.

That's why seeing Reagan in the film was so riveting for me last night. President Reagan was excoriated by the black community in the 1980s for cutting welfare programs, but it's going to be conservatives with the vision to match Reagan's who will lift the hope for America's youth again. And it's going to be the traditional educational methods found at Providence St. Mel that will be the vehicle for greater advancement for those now held back by institutional malfeasance and progressive political corruption.

See also, WitnessLA "The Providence Effect: A Murder & An Answer." There's an interview there with Paul Allen, and this part illustrates my point:

- WLA: With all your success, you must have a lot of people coming to you from the Chicago Public School system wanting advice as to how what you’ve done can be replicated in a public school setting.
- PA: Actually no one has come
- WLA: What do you mean no one? Like not one person from the Chicago School District has come to visit St. Mel’s?
- PA: Never. Not one.
- WLA: You’re kidding. I’m sorry to press this, but not one as in zero people?
- PA: Zero.
- WLA: Wow. That is completely nuts.
- PA: I think so.

See what I mean?

Sesame Street Wisdom???

2009-10-04T11:46:00.000-04:00

New Obama Song

2009-10-02T17:33:00.002-04:00

With Chicago getting pwned by Rio... AND THE OTHER CITIES IN THE RUNNING... in the bid for the 2016 Olympics, A new theme song has been written in honor of the impotent diplomat Obama.

“Obama Failed It After All”
To the tune of the Mary Tyler Moore Show Theme
("Love is All Around" by Paul Williams)

Who just can’t charm the world with his smile?
Who wasted another day, trying to make it all seem worthwhile?
It’s Obama, and you should know it
With each speech and every apology he shows it

Crises all around, no need to waste them
He can try to lead, but he just fakes it
Obama failed it after all
Obama failed it after all

How will he try to save his skin?
This world is awfully big, and you can’t seem to win
So it's time you started leading
Unemployment’s up and America is pleading

Crises all around, no need to waste them
He can try to lead, but he just fakes it
Obama failed it after all
Obama failed it after all

Chi-Town Got Turned Down!

2009-10-02T16:07:00.001-04:00

I say that not to gloat or rub it in, but that I think it is the best thing for America at this time.

I stayed up to watch the Americans' presentation to the I.O.C., including Obama's speech. I'll have to admit that he gave one heck of an oratory.

The only negative I found was that the president wasn't representing the nation as much as he was gushing about Chi-town. I realize that that was the point, but Obama doted over Chicago and threw the rest of us under the bus.

How?

For the first time, Barack Hussein Obama actually spoke with pride about Chicago AND America. He didn't apologize and he didn't kowtow to the other leaders there.

The problem is that it was too little, too late.

When you spend your time abroad criticizing your nation and apologizing, the world isn't going to take you as seriously.

I actually thought that his involvement would have guaranteed that Chicago would get it.

I guess the world is starting to see through his transparent facade.

To the IOC, I say this: THANK YOU FOR SAVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE A TON OF MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!

The List of 45: REVISITED

2009-10-02T01:36:00.002-04:00

This is revised based on The List of 45: Something You Should Consider As You Choose Your Elected Officials by ~Snooper~ (From 1/9/08)

Thanks, Snooper! This one's for you!

This is still an important detail of information that people just aren’t taking seriously. WAKE UP AMERICA!

The List of 45: REVISITED

Years ago, a brave soul or two tried to bring to the attention of the American People that the Communist take over of America was well under way. They were chattered down and pretty much ignored through space and time. Much like today. Yet, we see every day or, at least which are tuned into reality, our political machinations stripping away at our freedoms time and time again.

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate 1940, 1944 and 1948

Below is a revisited “List of 45” with new links.

The communist goals were entered into the Congressional record by Albert Herlong, Jr. (a Floridian who served in Congress from 1949-69).

1) US acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2) US willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3) Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the US would be a demonstration of "moral strength."

4) Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5) Extension of long term loans to Russia and Soviet Satellites.

6) Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination. (It’s called the United Nations)

7) Grant recognition of Red China, and admission of Red China to the UN. On September 30, 2009, The Empire State Building celebrated that anniversary of Red China's 60th year by lighting the building with red and yellow light.

8) Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the Germany question by free elections under supervision of the UN.

9) Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the US has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress. (A standard liberal practice)

10) Allow all Soviet Satellites individual representation in the UN. (Even though there is no USSR, the allowance is still happening in the UN today)

11) Promote the UN as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one world government with its own independent armed forces. (The UN has been placed in an almost ideological ex post facto dictatorial role by so many nations)

12) Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party. (Free Speech really answers this one.)

13) Do away with loyalty oaths. (It’s happening more and more)

14) Continue giving Russia access to the US Patent Office.

15) Capture one or both of the political parties in the US. (With one of Barack Obama’s former “Czars” is a known self professed Communist…”

16) Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights. (ACLU)

17) Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism, and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in text books. (This happened because of a national education department)

18) Gain control of all student newspapers. (There are practically no unbiased or conservative papers at any major American college)

19) Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack. (Bill Ayers comes to mind)

20) Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions. (Notice how most major media outlets critique things from a decidedly left hue)

21) Gain control of key positions in radio, TV & motion pictures. (The main stream media comes to mind)

22) Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. (An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings" and substitute shapeless, awkward, and meaningless forms.

23) Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24) Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press. (Notice all the cursing getting by the censors on the main networks?)

25) Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography, and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.

26) Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as "normal, natural, and healthy."

27) Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

28) Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29) Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30) Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man".

31) Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of "the big picture": Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32) Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture - - education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc. (Look at the Federal Departments and Czars of the Executive Branch.)

33) Eliminate all laws or procedures, which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34) Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities. (Done in 1975)

35) Discredit and eventually dismantle the F.B.I. (or usurp the FBI’s administration as the liberals have done. Also look at Nancy Pelosi’s controversy with statements about the C.I.A., she probably feels the same way about the F.B.I.)

36) Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37) Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38) Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand or treat.

39) Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40) Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. (With the teen pregnancy rate up and people wanting to marry anyone and anything… and be able to divorce as easily as a breath…)

41) Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. (“It Takes a Village” comes to mind)

42) Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special interest groups should rise up and make a "united force" to solve economic, political, or social problems. (Student protests starting getting violent in the 60s)

43) Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government. (look at the socialist regimes in third world countries)

44) Internationalize the Panama Canal. (Carter completed that in 1977)

45) Repeal the Connally Reservation so the US can not prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike. (Continuously happening to this day)

The goals that he read were taken from "The Naked Communist" by Cleon Skousen, which can be purchased from AMAZON.COM.

Listed below are 10 key "laws" which have become part of the every day life of the American populace. "The American people have truly been 'buried in Communism'" and they do not even know it or not aware of it. Not one "main stream" political party is to blame. Both Democrat and Republican parties are to blame with the majority of socialistic yearning members being in the DNC and a great number in the GOP...we call them RINOs and I now dub the socialist Democrats DINOs.

Each of the Ten Planks is noted below with annotations of laws passed in the US Legislative Processes. Be afraid and wake up.

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.
The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
We call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
We call in government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive Order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
We call it the Federal Reserve which is a credit/debt system nationally organized by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State.
We call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) mandated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive Orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
We call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture. As well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Evironmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.

8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
We call it the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920's, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive Order 11000.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. We call it the Planning Reorganization act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public "law" 89-136.

10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.
People are being taxed to support what we call 'public' schools, which train the young to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based "Education".

Not only are we in a war; a Global War On Terror, we are in a war right here in the Continental United States.

What are your freedoms worth?

Church of Obama???

2009-09-29T10:34:00.001-04:00

Even the biggest Clinton or Bush koolaid drinkers weren't like this, folks! This is terrifying! However, Since they seem to be praying to Obama, wouldn't that be like a church? And if it is, wouldn't President Obama, as the spiritual leader of this church be in conflict with that so-called separation of church and state? Hmm....

Not my kind of change!

2009-09-27T10:48:00.002-04:00

The United States of America Is NOT a Democracy

2009-09-25T17:33:00.001-04:00

The United States of America is NOT a democracy.

The republican form of government is a characteristic of a Christian nation. Now please understand that this has NOTHING TO DO with the REPUBLICAN PARTY. This is talking about a fundamental form of government.

“Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens.” - Exodus 18:21

That verse shows how the one or the few were just as important as the many – A REPRESENTATIVE OR REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT.

A little history…

During the Protestant Reformation of the 1500s-1600s, The Catholic Church had gained a great deal of political power and was promoting and allowing things countrary to biblical teaching. One of those was the concept of “Divine Right” which is the foundation of Monarchism. Monarchism allowed kings in Europe to maintain bloodline and totalitarian power as given by God. Yes, in Romans 13, the bible addresses the responsibility of Christians to governing authorities. They are to “be subject to” – which generally means to obey – the government because it has been ordained by God. Paul is speaking here of the general principle of submission to government. There are several other passages that show that God approves of Christians DISOBEYING government, but ONLY WHEN OBEDIENCE TO GOVERNMENT WOULD MEAN DISOBEYING GOD (Exodus 1:17- 21; 1 Kings 18:4–16; Ester 4:16; Daniel 3:12–18 & 6:10; Matthew 2:12; Acts 5:29; Hebrews 11:23). There were even times when God raised up leaders to REBEL against the government and deliver his people from evil rulers (Exodus 1–14; Judges 2:16; Hebrews 11:32–34). However, once biblical understanding became prominent over obedience to church, it was the Reformation movement that came up with the concept of an authentic separation of church and state that still honored God. This is not the modern anti-religious argument being debated today, but a fundamental understanding of how God expects us to govern ourselves.

It was also the Reformation the promulgated the concept of Freedom of Conscience. In general, this is the freedom of an individual to hold or consider a fact, viewpoint, or thought, independent of others' viewpoints. This was very revolutionary to the church because subjects were supposed to hold the same viewpoint as the church and in most cases, the king. To have your own ideas or thoughts, no matter how benign they were, was actually illegal and even seen as heretical in some cases.

And now to the new world…

The concepts of a separation of church & state and freedom of conscience were integral to the pilgrims that first settled in the new world. Biblical understanding and obedience to God above obedience to the church was their motivation for setting out on their own to truly experience religious freedom.

“You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.” – Matthew 5:14.

The pilgrims saw themselves as disciples and Matthew 5:14 is speaking to Jesus' disciples who have the kingdom life within them as a living testimony to those in the world who do not yet have the light of Christ in their lives. The civilization they wanted to build in the new world was going to be a shining “city set on a hill.” They wanted their new lives to glorify God first and foremost.

This perpetuated through the generations until the Monarchy in England usurped the role of God in determining the rights of man. That is why Thomas Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independence, wrote about man being “endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights.” The Reformation had not been forgotten. God was the Creator and Divine Providence of the new nation, NOT the king.

Now that the foundations of the ideology of the US government were established, a type of government was needed to govern over the nation. The Founding Fathers had an opportunity to establish a democracy and chose not to. We were not and never to become a democracy. A democracy is majority rule, or as a friend coins it – two wolves and a sheep deciding on dinner.

AND MANY OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS UNDERSTOOD THAT:

“A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way” - Fisher Ames

“A simple democracy is the devil’s own government” - Benjamin Rush

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” - John Adams

The first government set up, under the Articles of Confederation, was actually as close to right-wing anarchy as it could be and still be an effective national government. It didn’t work.

The framers met to create a document that allows for the best form of government consistent with the attributes exemplified in the one true authoritative document in existence – the bible. And in the Constitution, a REPUBLICAN form of government was guaranteed. To see just how Godly our Constitution is, CLICK HERE.

Article IV, Section 4 of Constitution prevents a democracy. “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government.” Again, don’t think of the political party, but representative government.

Once ratified, the Constitution, and the government, was challenged again and again. The Constitution won.

So, why do we even have democratic politics these days?

It was during the Election of 1828 that the Republicans split to form the National Republicans and the DEMOCRATIC Republicans. This is the birth of the Democratic Party. For years before, a democracy was feared, but at the time this election, the word didn’t seem to bother people, whose generation had been displaced from that of the time of the Constitution, as much. Andrew Jackson campaigned as a champion of the common man and then, once elected, used his high-handed military command style to transform the Executive Branch to have as much power as the Legislative Branch. He usurped powers that weren’t necessarily his to take. In essence he really was the FIRST DEMOCRAT.

What is the true difference between a democracy and a republic?

“[O]ur citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles in the Bible, particularly the New Testament, or the Christian religion.” - Noah Webster

The difference between a democracy and a republic is the source of its authority.

In a democracy, whatever the people desire is what becomes policy. If the people decide that murder is no longer illegal, then that will be the law.

In a true republic, the authority rests on the authority of God and the Christian principles promulgated in the bible. Because God proclaims murder to be a crime, it will always be a crime in our republic. The rights and wrongs revealed in the Bible have been the guidelines for the laws of our nation.

The reason America has a constitution is because God does not direct us to have a theocracy, because those are too corruptible by man. The reason to avoid the theocracy was because it is different to obey God’s commands voluntarily, giving glory to God, than to force people to obey them because they are the federal laws. The obedience would go to the government rather than to God. And therefore the state gets the worship rather than God.

As far as the concept of separation of church and state, America has a “free market” approach to religions. It welcomes pretty much any kind of worship by anyone who wants to worship. It also allows those who wish not to practice religion or worship anything to do just that. This is consistent with the concept of freedom of conscience as well. The point of this is not to deny or remove the Christian God from government, but to show that only a real and almighty God could allow a voluntary freedom of religion by His people.

Democracy allows for progressivism and eventual socialism where THE STATE is worshiped. That would also change the source of the government.

It seems that over the last 20 years, Our Constitution has been mangled, omitted, and bifurcated to meet the agenda of a certain entity. If the Constitution is, life the liberals and progressives say, a living document, it’s on its last breath. To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, we have a republic, if we can keep it.

McDonald's Obviously Needs a Bailout

2009-09-24T15:40:00.002-04:00

This was taken of Harbison Blvd. In COlumbia, SC by a friend of mine.

Another Elected Offcial...... MORON!

2009-09-22T23:01:00.001-04:00

SC Mayor Stops Police Chases

Wellford, SC (WSPA) -The Mayor of Wellford is defending her policy which bans police officers in that city from chasing suspects. Sallie Peake says the policy also includes vehicle chases along with pursuits on foot.

A memo issued on September 2nd from Peake to all Wellford officers reads:

"As of this date, there are to be no more foot chases when a suspect runs. I do not want anyone chasing after any suspects whatsoever."

WSPA first reported the mandate on Wednesday after an anonymous citizen faxed a copy of the memo to our newsroom. Peake was out of town and unavailable for comment. On Friday, reporter Chris Cato caught up with her in her office and questioned her about the origin of the policy. Peake says she issued the mandate because several officers have been injured during chases, driving up insurance costs for the town.

"The officers are costing us more money on insurance than most citizens here in the city of Wellford are even earning," says Peake.

She says the city is paying out $20,000 annually in workers' compensation claims, much of it due to the police force. In July, two officers wrecked their cruisers while chasing suspects and had to go to the hospital for minor treatment. The police chief says three officers have been injured during foot chases in the last two years.

Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright says the policy prevents police from upholding the law-a direct violation of their constitutional oath.

"If a bank robber or a drunk driver or a shoplifter or somebody with a warrant runs on foot, it's our obligation to do what we can do to bring them to justice," says Wright.

But when we asked Peake about her order impeding an officer from stopping a crime in progress, she became defensive and irate. The conversation went as follows:

Reporter: "Are you telling your officers if they witness a crime - they witness someone commit a crime on someone else and they're ten yards away - they can't go stop that person?"
Peake: "Is that in there?" (referring to policy)
Reporter: "It says no chases whatsoever."
Peake: "Well, that's what I said, no chases, didn't I? I didn't say nothing about a crime. If you see a crime, this that and the other -"
Reporter: "Well, that's what a chase is - "
Peake: "Well, I told them no chase on foot, and (the police chief) know exactly what I mean, so you're trying to twist what I -"
Reporter: "No, I'm not. You said no chases. No chases means no chases."
Peake: (claps hands) "You got you a story, thank God! You are so sweet! You got you a story on a woman in Wellford! Hallelujah! I'm so proud of you, Mr. Cato!"

Click here to see the entire interview.

Wellford Police Chief Chris Guy has told his officers to abide by the policy. He says they can still protect the public.

"Just because a suspect may run does not mean we can't identify them, sign warrants, and catch them later," says Guy.

But Sheriff Wright says when a suspect gets away, there is always the chance he could hurt someone before officers catch up with him.

Peake says that won't happen in Wellford.

Here's hoping the arm of the law really is long.

Click here for the VIDEO.

Kanye in North Georgia

2009-09-22T14:40:00.001-04:00

Scientists try to map AMERICAN VICE

2009-09-22T13:49:00.009-04:00

“Righteousness Exalts a Nation, but Sin Is a Reproach to any People” – Proverbs 14:34

I quote the above verse because I really do think these scientists truly understand what sin is. And y the maps below, Alaska and Hawai’I must be A-Okay!.

Greed is not based on what one makes compared to another.
Envy is not based on what you take.
Wrath is not a violent act.
Sloth is not leisure.
Gluttony is not eating fast-food.
Lust is not determined by what happens because of sex.
Pride is not all encompassing.

I suggest these scientists get to know Jesus… AND FAST!

American Vice: Mapping the 7 Deadly Sins
By Kristina Shevory of WIRED - 08.24.09

We're gluttons for infographics, and a team at Kansas State just served up a feast: maps of sin created by plotting per-capita stats on things like theft (envy) and STDs (lust). Christian clergy, likely noting the Bible Belt's status as Wrath Central, question the "science." Valid point—or maybe it's just the pride talking.

Greed - Average income compared with number of people living below the poverty line

Envy - Total thefts (robbery, burglary, larceny, and grand theft auto) per capita.

Wrath - Number of violent crimes (murder, assault, and rape) per capita.

Sloth - Expenditures on art, entertainment, and recreation compared with employment.

Gluttony - Number of fast-food restaurants per capita.

Lust - Number of STD cases reported per capita.

Pride - Aggregate of the other six offenses—because pride is the root of all sin.

Obama on Letterman... funny, but in a bad way.

2009-09-22T10:18:00.000-04:00

In a somewhat entertaining conversation with President Obama on The Late Show with David Letterman, this segment consisted of things like discussion over healthcare (There were even some “Canadians” in the audience who apparently LOVE their country’s healthcare system – Yeah, Riiiiiight!), foreign policy, slumber parties, and heart-shaped potatoes (did you notice how great the band sounded on “Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off?” Yeah, that was really an impromptu moment). But what was striking was the conversation regarding Jimmy Carters accusations of American racism toward Obama.

Letterman opened up the topic talking about the “vitriol” at the various town hall metting and Carter “SPECULATING” that “PERHAPS” the “unease or poor decorum” was “rooted in racism.”

On an NBC News interview, Carter actually said, “I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity towards President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man – that he’s African American… And I think it’s bubbled up to the surface because of a belief of many white people, not just in the South but around the country, that African Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It’s an abominable circumstance…” That may have been his stated opinion, but the language did not come across as “speculation.”

To the President’s credit, I really think he started out well in response by responding (I removed all the “uhs” from Obama’s responses), “Well, first of all, think it’s important to realize that, I was actually black before the election. So, the… This is true, so… So the American people, I think, gave me this extraordinary honor and that tells you, I think, about where the country’s at.”

I though that was a great response to diffuse the argument and move on. Kudos to Obama for that!

It could have stopped there… BUT…

He had to keep going on…

“I actually think that what’s happened is that whenever a president tries to bring about significant changes, particularly in times of economic unease, then there is a certain segment of the population that gets very riled up”

It amazing me that he doesn’t remember that the policies and programs he supported and participated in ACTUALLY put us in “times of economic unease.”

“F.D.R. was called a socialist and a communist.”

Franklyn Delano Roosevelt WAS VERY socialistic in his policies and it was in spite of those programs that the United States survived the Great Depression and became prosperous again.

“J.F.K., there are all kinds of names hurled at him.”

John Fitzgerald Kennedy was a conservative in just about every aspect where Obama is a radical leftist. The only derogatory fact you can apply to Kennedy was stated in the movie ‘Rat Pack.” – “He’s a bootlegger’s kid that likes to &^%$ `em two at a time.”

“Ronald Reagan, when he came into office, he was moving in a different direction, people were sure that he was bringing the country down.”

I can only imagine that he got this idea when he was in college and he didn’t want to be known as “a sellout” from those friends he chose carefully. “The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The MARXIST professors and structural FEMINISTS and punk-rock performance poets.” (Dreams of My Father, p. 100). Or was it from his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis? Nonetheless, comparing himself to Reagan proved nothing but non sequitor.

“One of the things you sign up for in politics is folks yell at you.”

Glad he is a realist here because, if he keeps on the track he is on, there will be a lot more yelling!

“But I think that what has been missing from the conversation is that an overwhelming majority of people, republican or democrat, I think they just want to see some common sense. They want to see some honesty and integrity in Washington.”

I guess when you watch MSNBC or read the New York Times, you miss the fact that all those people yelling at town halls and rallies around the nation are not hearing “common sense” or “honesty and integrity” from you, and your ilk in Washington. And yes, you weren’t the start of this mess, but you ARE president NOW.

“I think they’re turned off by the shouting and the yelling. And they expect more from the public elected officials.”

The reason why they are shouting and yelling is because they aren’t getting “more from the public elected officials.”

This exchange proved that he again missed the TOTUS (teleprompter) and forgot the memorized drivel he spewed out to the Sunday show goons this weekend.

The rest of the show was basically nothing but Obama trying to be charming about his positions and Letterman overtly displaying his man-crush on the president.

One last point. Why in the HELL is our president on Letterman? Enough with the superfluous campaigning and do the job you were elected to!

Law & Order: UK

2009-09-19T11:50:00.001-04:00

Just saw the pilot episode and since I know there are fellow L&O fans out there, I thought I'd share!

So, you think Obama has too many czars?

2009-09-18T17:50:00.003-04:00

- By Scott Stantis at Creators.com

The Myth of Tolerance

2009-09-17T13:56:00.003-04:00

The Myth of Tolerance by Gregory Koukl

This article first appeared in the Practical Apologetics column of the Christian Research Journal, volume 24, number 4 (2002). For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to: http://www.equip.org.

One word can stop you in your tracks when you seek to “give an account for the hope that is in you” as an ambassador for Christ. That word is “tolerance.”

This idea is especially popular with postmodernists — that breed of radical skeptics whose ideas command unwarranted respect in the university today. Their rallying cry, “There is no truth,” is often followed by an appeal for tolerance.

The tolerant person allegedly occupies neutral ground, a place of complete impartiality where each individual is permitted to decide for him or herself. No judgments allowed. No “forcing” personal views. That all views are equally valid is one of the most entrenched assumptions of a society committed to relativism; but it’s a myth!

For all their confident bluster, the relativists’ appeal actually asserts two principles or “truths,” one rational and one moral. The first is the rational “truth” that there is no truth. The second is the moral “truth” that one ought to tolerate the viewpoints of others. Their stand, contradictory on at least two counts, serves as a warning that the modern notion of tolerance is seriously misguided.

The Tolerance Trick. As it turns out, by the modern definition of tolerance no one is tolerant, or ever can be. It’s what my friend Francis Beckwith calls the “passive-aggressive tolerance trick.” Returning to the classic understanding of tolerance is the only way to restore any useful meaning to the word. Allow me to give you a real-life example.

CONTINUE READING

Faith-Based Double Standards

2009-09-15T16:58:00.003-04:00

"Faith-Based Double Standards" by MOLLIE ZIEGLER HEMINGWAY at the Wall Street Journal

In 2001, President Bush issued his first executive order as president. He created a program to encourage religious organizations to receive taxpayer funds to perform social services. The Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, as it was called, infuriated many. Civil libertarians said it violated the separation of church and state, liberals suggested that the office was paying off political supporters, and even Christian conservatives worried about the tentacles of government regulation.

The Village Voice fretted over Mr. Bush's "plan to let churches run the government's welfare system" and his "march toward turning the U.S. into a religious state." Former Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal wrote an article on Salon.com about the faith-based efforts with the subtitle: "By pandering to Christian zealots, Bush has come close to establishing a national religious party."

Now that Mr. Bush is gone, however, no one seems particularly worried about the entanglement of the federal government with religious organizations. A recent study sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trusts found that President Obama's "faith-based initiative has so far generated little of the contentious press coverage associated with Bush's effort."

According to Pew, the media ran nearly seven times as much coverage of President Bush's faith-based initiative during his first six months in office as President Obama's. And the stories on Mr. Bush's initiative were almost 50% more likely to be on the front-page, emphasizing the controversial nature of the program. The stories on Mr. Obama's initiative were buried deeper in the paper and focused on procedure. Few, if any, stories questioned whether the current president would use his office to advance a religious agenda, a major theme of coverage during the Bush administration.

This scant media attention is all the more incredible given that, as Americans United for Separation of Church and State has noted, Mr. Obama has left "the entire architecture of the Bush Faith-Based Initiative intact—every rule, every regulation, every executive order." More controversially, the office has become a major hub of political outreach. In frequent conference calls, the administration informs faith-based leaders of its policy initiatives, as when it recently asked rabbis around the country to give sermons on health-care reform during the coming high holiday season. Representatives from politically important religious groups have been appointed to a 25-member religious advisory council. The office was also involved in drafting President Obama's June speech delivered from Cairo calling for alliances with Muslims.

Even The Nation magazine complains that Mr. Obama's faith-based office "is plagued by a lack of transparency and accountability and has seemingly already been exploited as a tool for rewarding religious constituencies with government jobs."

The political-outreach emphasis of Mr. Obama's office is particularly well-suited to the Rev. Josh Dubois, the 27-year-old campaign operative and Pentecostal minister who heads the show. Mara Vanderslice, who pioneered faith outreach for the Democrats following their 2004 losses and later launched a pro-Obama political action committee, runs the advisory council. By contrast, two of Mr. Bush's appointments to head the office, John DiIulio and Jay Hein, were steeped in social-science research and public policy, while another, Jim Towey, had worked as a lawyer for Mother Teresa.

There is some confusion about the purpose of the faith-based office. It does not distribute federal funds. Instead, the office works with the White House Office of Management and Budget to set goals and "best practices" for each federal agency that distributes grant money.

The legacy of Mr. Bush's effort was to "level the playing field" for religious groups. The Bush administration rewrote 16 federal rules to help faith-based organizations compete for federal grants, set aside $300 million to help small organizations apply for grants, trained more than 100,000 personnel at nonprofits about working with the federal government, and encouraged 36 states and more than 100 cities to create faith-based offices.

When President Obama campaigned for office, he promised a new name signifying a new mission. His Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships office would allegedly differ because it would train larger faith-based groups to mentor smaller religious groups and it would work with state and local governments. But "Taking Stock: The Bush Faith-Based Initiative and What Lies Ahead," a June report from the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute, said that neither aim was new as "both were significant elements in the Bush administration's program."

If the claimed mission and structure of the office are the same, the pivotal difference between the two presidents' approaches was supposed to be hiring policy. President Bush advocated exempting religious organizations that accept taxpayer funding from regulations forbidding religious discrimination in hiring. President Obama said he would overturn that policy.

"If you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help, and you can't discriminate against them—or against the people you hire—on the basis of their religion," he said on the stump. But when he rolled out his office in February, he tabled that issue, sending it to the Justice Department for review. The Bush administration also asked Justice to handle the issue.

Barry Lynn, head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, was a vocal critic of Mr. Bush's faith-based office. Now, under Mr. Obama, he serves on the advisory council's task force to improve the functioning of the office. Explaining his turnaround, he said he doesn't view Mr. Obama's office as partisan—the way Mr. Bush's was. But acknowledging that there was no substantive difference between the offices yet, Mr. Lynn said: "We have a guarded optimism that when the advisory council, Justice and the White House act and get down to the nitty gritty, they will make this a constitutionally protected program. However, we have no proof of that and no guarantee."

Now that is the audacity of hope.

On Mission, Changing the World, and Not Being Able to Do It All

2009-09-13T11:35:00.001-04:00

“[W]e need to make sure our exhortations to do more rise to the level of God’s glory and sink deep into the gospel. If the exhortations don’t culminate in the glory of God then the youth people and the evangelism people and the poverty people are not really after the same thing. They are just competing interest groups in your church or in your mind. And if the exhortations don’t go deep into the gospel (and they often don’t), then we are just beating up others and ourselves with utopian dreams and masochistic oughts.” – Rev. Kevin DeYoung

On Mission, Changing the World, and Not Being Able to Do It All

In One Single Moment, Everything Can Change.

2009-09-11T21:55:00.001-04:00

If you have audio capabilities and would like to hear some beautiful music while you read, press play

Today, this hour, this minute, this second, this particular moment, one single moment in time is so very precious and cannot be taken for granted. Why, because just like that it is gone. FOREVER!!!!!

In 2001, there was a sequence of events that happened over several very perishable moments. Those moments are gone forever and can never happen again. But what remains of that day, so profound, are memories…. And unfortunately for many Americans, memories are all they have of that day.

On Tuesday, September 11, 2001, the very core of what America stands for was brutally and viciously attacked. Thousands were murdered or left with the significant loss of someone they loved. There were no moments that came and went on that day that did NOT profoundly affect EVERY single American in one way or the other.

There were moments of panic.
There were moments of fear.
There were moments of loss.
There were moments of dread.
There were moments of confusion.
There were moments of fatigue.

Those moments seemed to last a lifetime on that long September day.

But, by God’s grace, Americans showed us other moments as well.

There were moments of caring.
There were moments of generosity.
There were moments of heroism.
There were moments of selflessness.
There were moments of solidarity.
There were even moments of VICTORY!

Amazing as it seems, when struck, bloodied, and bruised; Americans showed the very best of what America is. We didn’t forget to show and do, with incredible guile those very things which we were being attacked for – individuals uniting to strive for the highest in what we do and who we are.

Moments. Tiny moments in time where our posterity was left with a profound inheritance! What Americans did on that day and on the days after 9/11, was to once again show those who will come after us, what it means to be an American. We get jabbed in the gut or even kidney punched from time to time, but we ALWAYS keep going with liberty and prosperity of heart as our goals.

And now we have reached another anniversary of that sobering fateful day.

And it truly seems like we have forgotten about those things for which we were attacked.

We are bickering amongst ourselves of ideological nonsense that has nothing to do with the liberty and prosperity of our nation.

Those souls who lost their lives and those who gave them eight years ago don’t have to worry about liberals, conservatives, radicals, terrorism, the economy, health care coverage, czars, jobs, AARP, Bill O’Reilly, Perez Hilton, Hugo Chaves, Kim Jung-Il, hurricanes, earthquakes, the NRA, the AFL-CIO, Scott Walker, Richard Trumka or so many things that seem to so readily and religiously occupy the current moments of our lives.

Those lost on 9/11 don’t have to worry about them because THEY ARE DEAD.

So why is it that we spend so much time focused on things that occupy mere moments in our lives? Yes, it is very important to stand by our convictions and principles when we deal with the aspects of life. Yet, consider this - What would the problems be to us if we didn’t have to worry about those things for the same reason the dead of 9/11 don’t have to?

Did any of you spend any moments at all today bickering with your spouse or family, worrying about bills and finances, complaining about the bonehead who just doesn’t get it at your job, getting annoyed at a truly insignificant thing, or even habitually complaining about the state of the nation or world?

Those moments you spent today are now gone forever. What difference did they make to you now? Tonight? Tomorrow? Next week? Next Month? Next Year?

September 11, 2001 showed us that EVERYTHING CAN CHANGE in one single moment. If you truly want to be able to make any moments count, then don’t be stupid by wasting the ones before you now.

Start today. Remember the ones you love and NEVER let a moment go by where there is a doubt about your love for them.

Breitbart TV: Van Jones’ Most Radical Rantings Yet and Their Ties to Young Obama

2009-09-09T11:53:00.001-04:00

OGGbama on Mars OR Why Cap and Trade WON’T Work

2009-09-09T02:25:00.000-04:00

Yes, it’s old and cheesy, but it is SPOT ON!

DESTINATION EARTH PART 1

DESTINATION EARTH PART 2

The Ultimate Jew, speaks out against PC Idiocy!

2009-08-31T07:22:00.000-04:00

A Godly Constitution

2009-08-28T00:28:00.002-04:00

The following is an interpretation and follow up to A Godless Constitution?: A Response to Kramnick and Moore by Daniel L. Dreisbach and David Barton’s American Heritage Series: Our Biblical Constitution episode.

There are so many who blindly claim that God had nothing to do with the U.S. Constitution or our government. We’ve already seen that the considerations of and to the God of the bible were very much a part of the formation of the federal government. And that each and every state in the union gives glory to God in its constitution.

So yet again, we must look at some facts regarding the proof of God’s direct influence in our nation.

Of all of the sources that our founding fathers used to quote political ideals, University of Houston political historians have analyzed 15,000 writings of our Founding Fathers. 3,154 quotations and sources made or referenced by the founders reveal that the bible was quoted most by those founders at 34% (This was more than the next three highest sources – Montesuqieu, Blackstone and Locke – combined).

George Washington and Alexander Hamilton both confirmed that the separation of powers in our government is based on a bible verse that was a subject of many sermons during the founding era - Jeremiah 17:9 – “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” This meant that human will and emotion could be uneven and should not be trusted alone. And in government, total power given to one person or group in government would be the same way.

Specifically from the Constitution:

Article I, Section 8 – Uniform Immigration Laws – “To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States” has its roots in Leviticus 19:34 – “But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.” To be sure, this is regarding LEGAL IMMIGRATION because deceptiveness in immigration would violate God’s commandments.

Article II, Section 1 – President must be natural born citizen – “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States” has its roots in Deuteronomy 17:15 – “Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.”

Article III, Section 3 – regarding witnesses and capital punishment – “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court” can be attributed to Deuteronomy 17:6 – “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.”

Article III, Section 3 – Provision against attainder – “The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted” come from Ezekiel 18:20 – “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”

Article IV, Section 4 – Republicanism (elections at local, county, state and federal levels) – “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government” is derived from the concepts in Exodus 18:21 – “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens” Furthermore, Noah Webster, who was personally responsible for Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 8 specifically cited Exodus 18:21 – “Let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers just men who will rule in the fear of God [Exodus 18:21]... [I]f the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted... If [our] government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the Divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.”

Three branches of government come from Isaiah 33:22 – “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” The founders obviously understood that only God could be judge, lawgiver, and king and that a government needed to separate those three in order to govern effectively.

The idea of tax exemptions for churches comes from Ezra 7:24 – “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests… or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

John Jay and George Washington, among other founders, frequently attributed religious causes as the basis for elections of American leaders.

John Adams affirmed the Constitution’s connection with the bible in his letters to Thomas Jefferson. - “The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite... And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all these Sects were United:... Now I will avow, that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System.”

In the constitution, there are various other clauses connected to the God of the bible:

Article I, Section 7 contains the Sundays Excepted clause. This was placed in reverence and respect for the day that gives recognition to Resurrection Day.

The four oath clauses mentioned are to be taken as seriously as that of Numbers 30:2 – “If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.”

At the conclusion is the “In the Year of our Lord” clause. The framers placed it here as a very specific homage to the fact that they were living in a time of Christ. To merely put a date down would cover the requirement for time reference. But the framers knew to give glory to the reign of our Lord and Savior and sovereignty to God Almighty.

In 1854, Congress even acknowledged the significance of the role Christianity played in the formation of our nation:

“Had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle... In this age, there can be no substitute for Christianity... That was the religion of the founders of the republic and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.” – Reports of Committees of the House of Representatives Made During the First Session of the Thirty-Third Congress (Washington: A. O. P. Nicholson, 1854), pp. 6-9.

And in 1892, the Supreme Court even reaffirmed this:

[N]o purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people. This is historically true. From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single voice making this affirmation... There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning. They affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons. They are organic utterances. They speak the voice of the entire people. - Justice Brewer; Holy Trinity Church v. U.S., 143 U.S. 457 (1892)

Our constitution is an amazing document that has been the longest lasting government document of legal record in history. It is no coincidence that so many biblical principles are indelibly evident.

For you non-Christians out there, don’t be so ready to get rid of God’s influence in government. After all it is only a real and true God that would allow freedom of religion.

Worship how you wish, or even not at all, but please understand that just because you do have that freedom, it doesn’t mean that you are the only ones that have it.

May God be glorified in this writing!

This is piece of music that I love dearly. I hope you enjoy!

2009-08-26T01:41:00.000-04:00

Oscar Mayer talks about the public option on Fox and Friends

2009-08-25T13:17:00.001-04:00

I saw the following interview with Congressman Weiner of New York on Fox and Friends this morning:

First, I’d like to say that at least this guy is trying to make his point FOR a public option in healthcare when even the President hasn’t been able to. Plus, we have yet to see Pelosi or Reid on Fox shows make their case. They spend too much time dissing the American people to attempt to make their case.

One of Weiner’s points seemed to be that since the American people like it and are happy with it, Medicare and the like are good things and the way to go. The logic doesn’t quite work when applied in reality.

I used to like beer a good bit, and would have loved it if all the beer I wanted was supplied free of charge. But is that really the best thing for me or those who have to pay for it?

Many people love dessert foods. Would it be a good thing if all desserts were supplied free of charge? If that were the case, people would go out for dessert only and not eat anything else because dessert is free.

There is a cost to everything in this world. Science reinforces it: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

The only things this nation has ever guaranteed are life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. And yet even these had a price to be paid.

The government was NEVER set up to provide for anything other than the common defense.

"Anthony Weiner has a way with B O L O G N A!"

How About a Conscientious Morality, Mr. President?

2009-08-21T09:32:00.001-04:00

Thanks to Todd Friel and the folks at ”Wretched TV” for inspiring this.

On Wednesday, President Barack “above my pay-grade” Obama attempted to appeal to faith-based groups to garner support for government involvement in health care reform. He invoked religious thought with proselytizing phrases like “bearing false witness” and “my brother’s keeper.”

In other words, unless we support his “above my pay-grade” health-care agenda, we are going against God.

What a crock!

Instead of running off any conservative or libertarian talking points, let’s look at this from a biblical perspective. We should be Christians first and then conservatives, republicans, libertarians, or patriots. Inasmuch as we may agree with Rush, Glenn or Sean, the truth of the bible is the main thing we need to be in agreement with. So, let’s do that.

“Bearing false witness” comes from Exodus 20:16, the Ninth Commandment – “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” (KJV). John MacArthur puts it this way. “Justice is not served by any untruthful testimony. Practically all societies have recognized this principle and adjure all witnesses in courts to tell the truth and nothing but the truth” (The MacArthur Study Bible). The English Standard Version Study Bible states in its notes; “Acting as a false witness suggests a legal trial in which false testimony could lead to punishment for one's neighbor. Bearing “false witness” is condemned in Scripture for its disastrous effects among people and its utter disregard for God's character. The Lord's righteousness and justice were to be reflected in Israel's life as a nation, which was thus to exclude speaking falsely, especially for the sake of gaining something at the expense of another person and perverting justice.”

By invoking this line, President Obama seemed to be “speaking falsely, especially for the sake of gaining something at the expense of another person and perverting justice.”

“My brother’s keeper” is not a statement but rather a question from Cain to God in Genesis 4.

“Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord.” And again, she bore his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a worker of the ground. In the course of time Cain brought to the Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground, and Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions. And the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his face fell. The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” Cain spoke to Abel his brother. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?” And the Lord said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand.” (Genesis 4:1-11 ESV). Again from the MacArthur Study Bible; “Cain’s sarcasm was a play on words, based on the fact that Abel was the “keeper” of sheep. Lying was the third sin resulting from Cain’s attitude of indifference to God’s commands. Sin was ruling over him.”

Barack Obama apparently expects not to be his brother’s keeper but rather to be the “keeper of sheep.” The bible makes it clear who is supposed to be our shepherd and it isn’t Barrack Hussein Obama.

Maybe, the President should have attended that National Prayer event.

AND since the President has decided to take up a religious mantle regarding universal healthcare, let’s really examine what the bible says about it.

Could the liberals actually be right about what a Christian perspective should be regarding universal healthcare?

Isn’t it the Christian thing to do? Liberally logical, isn’t it?

Among others, Ed Shultz brings up “Christian” leaders like Rick Warren and Joel Osteen. The former didn’t seem to have room for the Gospel in his “Purpose Driven Life” book and the latter seems to think that our best life isn’t the eternal one paid for by Jesus. Mr. Shultz also talks about Jesus “feeding the hungry, clothing the poor and healing the sick.” And no, Jesus wasn’t concerned with Insurance. JESUS WAS CONCERNED WITH GLORIFYING GOD BY DOING GODLY WORKS! Jesus also did NOT preach anything about either the Herodian kingdom or the Roman government to provide healthcare for all. It was Jesus in the flesh who fed, clothed and healed so that He would be known as the prophesied Messiah. The rest of the video is a standard debate geared from a liberal point of view that really doesn’t address the issue from a biblical standard. There is a mention of Matthew 25, but without contextual interpretation.

So, Are the liberals right?

First, let’s try to look at universal healthcare as if it IS the Christian thing to do:

1. Jesus and the Apostles Healed.
2. Jesus said, “Love the poor.”
3. Romans 13 promotes general welfare
4. It’s about Justice in making it right for all
5. Bringing the Kingdom of God to the Earth
6. Equality in lifestyle
7. Too many greedy and dishonest companies

But in the contextual truth of the bible, Jesus and the Apostles healed to support their message and point to the Messiah, not to support universal healthcare. As far as the poor goes, anyone who hates them is NOT a Christian. The bible describes the poor as those who have nothing and cannot help themselves, either through disease, calamity or infirmity and it is those that Christians need to be helping. Romans 13 actually defines the role of government and it doesn’t include anything about universal healthcare. Bible justice is not about evening the playing field; it’s about punishment for those who do bad. The Kingdom of God isn’t about making things better on the planet but about drawing others to it by getting people to change towards repentance and faith… on the inside first. Equality in lifestyle is NOT a biblical principal. Having opportunity to improve your lifestyle is. And although it is vital for Christians to be against greed and dishonest gain, it is biblically okay for people and companies to make a profit.

The above list may be considered the “Christian” thing to do by liberals and proponents of universal healthcare. However, It is MUCH better to have a BIBLICAL WORLDVIEW as given in scripture.

Now let’s look at what the bible says that would be against universal healthcare:

1. The bible says DO NOT STEAL (Exodus 20:15) – Taking from one to give to another is still a form of theft. And the potential taxes raised to pay for universal healthcare would do just that.
2. The Apostle Paul said “If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” (2 Thessalonians 3:10) – In the same context there are some cases of the uninsured that would be covered under universal healthcare that are capable of, but not willing to work and pay for it themselves.
3. End of Life counseling Issues and Abortion – There is NOTHING biblical that would support either of these being covered in universal healthcare. Even though Democrats have said that “Death Panels” and abortions are NOT going to be funded, the congress will NOT put language in the bill to ensure this.
4. Rationing or who gets what when – Biblically, God views only two types of people, the saved and the unsaved. Age, gender, color, size, etc. make no difference as it could in universal healthcare.
5. Old Testament Pattern – providing ownership, mercy, and safety nets for the really poor and not for those who want it for everyone.
6. Debt. – Not a good thing according to the bible. The cost of universal healthcare would exponentially increase our already growing debt.
7. Inheritance – We will be leaving to our posterity a huge debt because we cannot afford universal healthcare. Again, not a good thing as far as the bible goes.

As Ed Shultz said in the video, we do need to have our bibles handy in this issue. And liberals would love for us to leave them at home collecting dust:

So take your bible with you to the next Tea Party, Town Hall Meeting or Healthcare Rally. Be ready to give a biblical perspective on why universal healthcare is not biblical. Be a Christian first, then a political person.

Todd Friel has some great sign ideas to have at the next rallies:

FRONT
Thou shall not steal
Exodus 20:9
BACK
Stealing from the rich is still stealing.

FRONT
The wicked borrows and does not pay back
Psalm 37:21
BACK
A 1.3 Trillion dollar debt is very wicked.

FRONT
It is an abomination for kings to commit wicked acts
Proverbs 16:12
BACK
Forcing us to pay for abortions is very wicked.

FRONT
All hard work brings profit.
Proverbs 14:23
BACK
Nancy, the bible is okay with making a profit.

FRONT
A good man leaves and inheritance for his children.
Proverbs 13:22
BACK
You are not good men.

FRONT
Government’s role is to punish the wicked.
Romans 13:4
BACK
Healthcare is not government’s role.

If our political leaders and nightly talking heads are going to play the religious game, we can too. We just need to be better equipped at it and the only way to do that is to know your bible.

Don’t take my word for it, read God’s Word and find out for yourself!

Hmm... seems about right

2009-08-14T11:26:00.001-04:00

Nate Beeler

fear mongering, racism, or a possible future?

2009-08-14T10:39:00.004-04:00

If you take EVERYTHING into consideration, ObamaCare, his Czars' attitudes on life and science, his radical tutelage and associations, Obama COULD start a dystopian society from which we won't be able to escape.

It may not be listed in the current HealthCare bill. However, IF there is a national crisis where resources are depleted enough, the actions in the following video MAY be a possible future IF the current bill passes. And the attitude of the enforcers WILL develop from the NEED to put SOCIETY and the ENVIRONMENT first.

Now watch one from a contemporary point of view:

The Obama Press Conference You Won’t See

2009-08-10T14:30:00.002-04:00

At a press conference proclaiming an international relations success, President Obama was asked an unrelated question regarding the brutal attack of independent entrepreneur Kenneth Gladney by men wearing Service Employees International Union shirts out side of a St. Louis Town Hall on Health Care on August 6th. The timbre of the question even inquired as to what the incident said about Obama and race relations in America

The President responded by stating “I should say at the outset that even though the SEIU helped me get elected, so I may be a little biased here. Yet Kenneth Gladney is an America citizen. I don’t know all the facts. What’s been reported though, is that the guy was trying to earn a buck by selling ‘pro American” items at a Town Hall near St. Louis, there were several witnesses including video taken of the beating. So far, so good, right? There were plenty of words exchanged. My understanding is that Mr. Gladney proclaimed his freedom of speech rights and the permission given him to sell his items. And at that point he gets brutally beaten for utilizing his freedom of speech. Now, I don’t know, not having been there and seeing all the facts, what role race played in that, but I think it’s fair to say that:
1. Any of us would be very shocked and even angry
2. That the SEIU thugs acted stupidly in brutalizing someone for merely being an American
3. What I think we know, separate and apart from this incident, there is a long history in this country of regular Americans, from all ideologies, being verbally and even physically attacked by members of unions. That’s just a fact. And because the attackers were white and the victim is black, that is a sign that race remains a factor in society. And even though I and others have made tremendous progress in spite of racial barriers, those barriers still haunt us. And now the barriers between those in unions and those not are now becoming more apparent. The more we recognize the danger that unions can instill as well as some of the good they do, relations can improve.”

NOPE, WE WON’T SEE THIS ONE.

Revisionist Revisions About Revisionized Religion

2009-08-08T22:50:00.001-04:00

I took one of those online quiz/polls about our Founding Fathers and their views on Church state separation. It quickly became apparent that the poll was not to educate about opinions but to bash and discredit the great men who founded this nation.

Provided are responses that basically contradicts the statements of the poll that are so poorly taken out of context:

1. Who said: "When a religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it, so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of”

Benjamin Franklin

To Thomas Paine, Franklin also wrote “though you allow [only] a general Providence, you strike at the foundations of all religion. For without the belief of a Providence, that takes cognizance of, guards, and guides, and may favor particular persons, there is no motive to worship a Deity, to fear his displeasure, or to pray for his protection.”

2. Who said: "The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

5. Who said: "You judge truly that I am not afraid of the priests. They have tried upon me all their various batteries, of pious whining, hypocritical canting, lying and slandering, without being able to give me one moment of pain."

7. Who said: "Question with boldness even the existence of a god."

Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson also said: “the relations which exist between man and his Maker – and the duties resulting from those relations – are the most interesting and important to every human being and the most incumbent on his study and investigation.”

3. Who said: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition”

4. Who said: "What influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the Civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones”

James Madison

And yet it is Madison who issued a proclamation for ”a day of pubic Humiliation, and Prayer… to offer… their common vows and adorations to Almighty God”

6. Who said: "I mix religion with politics as little as possible."

John Adams

Adams also stated: “[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.”

8. Who said: "I hope ever to see America in the foremost nations in examples of justice and liberality."

George Washington

Washington rarely missed a Sunday morning church service and a likeness of him praying is done in stained glass in the Congressional prayer room at the Capitol. Washington was also very firm in his belief in God as evident in his 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation.

9. True or False: The Supreme Court has ruled that since the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the United States Constitution, it is not binding on the government.

This is a trick question and cannot be answered in the context it is asked. However, There is plenty of information regarding the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

10. Which document contains the language: "The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."

The Treaty of Tripoli

That treaty, one of several with Tripoli, was negotiated during the "Barbary Powers Conflict," which began shortly after the Revolutionary War and continued through the Presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison. 6 The Muslim Barbary Powers (Tunis, Morocco, Algiers, and Tripoli) were warring against what they claimed to be the "Christian" nations (England, France, Spain, Denmark, and the United States). In 1801, Tripoli even declared war against the United States, 7 thus constituting America's first official war as an established independent nation.

Throughout this long conflict, the four Barbary Powers regularly attacked undefended American merchant ships. Not only were their cargoes easy prey but the Barbary Powers were also capturing and enslaving "Christian" seamen 8 in retaliation for what had been done to them by the "Christians" of previous centuries (e.g., the Crusades and Ferdinand and Isabella's expulsion of Muslims from Granada 9). In an attempt to secure a release of captured seamen and a guarantee of unmolested shipping in the Mediterranean, President Washington dispatched envoys to negotiate treaties with the Barbary nations.

The American envoys negotiated numerous treaties of "Peace and Amity" with the Muslim Barbary nations to ensure "protection" of American commercial ships sailing in the Mediterranean. However, the terms of the treaty frequently were unfavorable to America, either requiring her to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars of "tribute" (i.e., official extortion) to each country to receive a "guarantee" of safety or to offer other "considerations" (e.g., providing a warship as a "gift" to Tripoli, a "gift" frigate to Algiers, paying $525,000 to ransom captured American seamen from Algiers, etc.). The 1797 treaty with Tripoli was one of the many treaties in which each country officially recognized the religion of the other in an attempt to prevent further escalation of a "Holy War" between Christians and Muslims. Consequently, Article XI of that treaty stated:

“As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity [hatred] against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

This article may be read in two manners. It may, as its critics do, be concluded after the clause "Christian religion"; or it may be read in its entirety and concluded when the punctuation so indicates. But even if shortened and cut abruptly ("the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion"), this is not an untrue statement since it is referring to the federal government.

Recall that while the Founders themselves openly described America as a Christian nation, they did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment; religion was a matter left solely to the individual States. Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation.

Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact. Article XI simply distinguished America from those historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them.

This latter reading is, in fact, supported by the attitude prevalent among numerous American leaders. The Christianity practiced in America was described by John Jay as "wise and virtuous," by John Quincy Adams as "civilized," and by John Adams as "rational." A clear distinction was drawn between American Christianity and that of Europe in earlier centuries. As Noah Webster explained:

“The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it.”

Daniel Webster similarly explained that American Christianity was:

“Christianity to which the sword and the fagot [burning stake or hot branding iron] are unknown – general tolerant Christianity is the law of the land!”

More and more of the TRUTH of our history is getting absconded by those that want to deny God and His Divine Glory in the founding and survival of the United States of America.

This author took the quiz, scored 100% and was rewarded with the following:

“You are 100% church-state separation pundit! My hat is off to you! You are a gentleman (or a lady) and a scholar! You can hold your own in a debate with any Christian revisionist.”

I can get the facts correct. What's more is that I know the truth!

"Was Pelosi So Wrong About Swastikas?"

2009-08-06T13:04:00.006-04:00

The following is from SWEETNESS & LIGHT

Was Pelosi So Wrong About Swastikas?
by Steve Gilbert on Thursday, August 6th

As you may have heard by now, the United States Speaker of the House, the number two most powerful elected federal official, Nancy Pelosi, has accused the protesters at Democrat healthcare town halls of carrying swastikas:

Interviewer: Do you think there’s legitimate grassroot opposition going on here?
Pelosi: "I think they’re Astroturf… You be the judge. "They’re carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on healthcare."

Of course her mistake may be understandable, especially in view of Mr. Obama’s latest logo for his healthcare program:

And it has been suggested that receiving Botox injections can cause blurry vision.

Of course given that she was talking about Democrat town halls, her confusion is even more understandable given the overlap between Nazi programs and Democrats’ pet issues anyway, as we all know.

The Nazis being: against big banks and capitalism in general, against big department stores, against pollution, for two years mandatory voluntary service to the country, for make-work projects (such as the autobahn), against vivisection and cruelty and to animals, against smoking and all tobacco products, for abortion and euthanasia of the infirm and undesirable – and, of course, for cradle-to-grave nationalized healthcare.

In fact, if you look really hard, you can sometimes even find a hint of anti-Semitism in the Democrat Party.

The demographical Islamic Tidal Wave

2009-08-05T02:39:00.000-04:00

The List of 45: Something You Should Consider As You Choose Your Elected Officials by Snooper

2009-07-31T11:22:00.010-04:00

The List of 45: Something You Should Consider As You Choose Your Elected Officials
By ~Snooper~ (From 1/9/08)

This is still an important detail of information that people just aren’t taking seriously. WAKE UP AMERICA! -SK

The List of 45

Years ago, a brave soul or two tried to bring to the attention of the American People that the Communist take over of America was well under way. They were chattered down and pretty much ignored through space and time. Much like today. Yet, we see every day or, at least which are tuned into reality, our political machinations stripping away at our freedoms time and time again.

It is called Identity Politics. It is called Multiculturalism. It is called Why Can't We All Get Along? It is called all manner of colored and disguised names and titles. Now, in these modern times, one can also include Cultural Jihad.

In today's rough and tumble and troubled times, we see that the ignorance of the masses has indeed brought about MANY policies of which, left unabated and unchallenged, will see the dreams and goals of the First Czarina of The United Socialist States of the Former United Free States of America. That Czarina would be the Madame Rodham, her supporters and her like-minded politicos.

Below is what I have called, The List of 45.

In the comments section, if you have a mind to, please list the items that you have seen become a reality. I have my list and it is truly eye-opening. Do you have a list? If not, you need to establish your list so you can Fight the Good Fight. Our very survival is at stake.

The communist goals were entered into the Congressional record by Albert Herlong, Jr. (a Floridian who served in Congress from 1949-69).

1) US acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2) US willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3) Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the US would be a demonstration of "moral strength."

4) Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5) Extension of long term loans to Russia and Soviet Satellites.

6) Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7) Grant recognition of Red China, and admission of Red China to the UN.

8) Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the Germany question by free elections under supervision of the UN.

9) Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the US has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress. (A standard liberal practice)

10) Allow all Soviet Satellites individual representation in the UN. (Even though there is no USSR, the allowance is still happening in the UN today)

11) Promote the UN as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one world government with its own independent armed forces. (The UN has been placed in an almost ideological ex post facto dictatorial role by so many nations)

12) Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party. (Free Speech really answers this one.)

13) Do away with loyalty oaths. (It’s happening more and more)

14) Continue giving Russia access to the US Patent Office.

15) Capture one or both of the political parties in the US. (With one of Obama’s Czars is a know self professed Communist…”

16) Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights. (ACLU)

17) Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism, and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in text books. (This happened because of a national education department)

18) Gain control of all student newspapers. (There are practically no unbiased or conservative papers at any major American college)

19) Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack. (Bill Ayers comes to mind)

20) Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions. (Notice how most major media outlets critique things from a decidedly left hue)

21) Gain control of key positions in radio, TV & motion pictures. (The main stream media comes to mind)

22) Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings," substitute shapeless, awkward, and meaningless forms.

23) Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24) Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25) Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography, and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.

26) Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as "normal, natural, and healthy."

27) Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

28) Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29) Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30) Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man".

31) Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of "the big picture": Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32) Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture - - education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33) Eliminate all laws or procedures, which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34) Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities. (Done in 1975)

35) Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI. (or usurp the FBI’s administration as the liberals have done)

36) Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37) Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38) Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand or treat.

39) Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40) Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. (With people wanting to marry anyone and anything… and be able to divorce as easily as a breath…)

41) Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. (“It Takes a Village” comes to mind)

42) Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special interest groups should rise up and make a "united force" to solve economic, political, or social problems. (Student protests starting getting violent in the 60s)

43) Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44) Internationalize the Panama Canal. (Carter essentially did that in 1977)

45) Repeal the Connally Reservation so the US can not prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike. (Continuously happening to this day)

The nitty-gritty details can be read and studied in the book, The Naked Communist.
The goals that he read were taken from "The Naked Communist" by Cleon Skousen, which can be purchased from Amazon:

Next, we will look at the Communist Manifesto

Circa 1956, or so, the Top Dog of the USSR, Nikita Kruschev pounded his shoe on the podium of the United Nations and shouted to the West, "We will bury you!"
Many had no idea what this meant and said openly that they would have to have that translated. Some scoffed at the concept at the USSR burying the West but hind sight is now 20-20. It shows that we should NEVER take for granted that this and that can never happen to us and to take all threats seriously and keep a watchful eye on the enemy in both peace time and during war. I would go as far as saying that it would be wiser to keep a more watchful eye on the enemy in peace time whether than war time.

Cooler heads prevailed and with the USSR waltzing through Europe and the Middle East, the United States proceeded to build up the United States military and created the most powerful military in the world and in history. Thus remains true to this date. Unfortunately, while the military gained prominence in the world, we allowed our political machinations go unchecked and naturally assumed that the politicians knew what they were doing. Some did. Some didn't.

There were and, still are, two kinds of those that did know what they were doing. Some were devout socialists that penetrated the American political scene and some recognized that threat but were scorned and frowned upon because certainly, this socialist take-over surely could not happen. No one would choose socialism/communism over the American Federal Republic. They have been proven wrong and it is time to wake the hell up. There are many kinds of politicians that have no idea what they are doing and it is very much evident when you hear them speak.

Liberal activists, read that communist operatives, gained positions of political office throughout American on the local, State and Federal levels. Impossible you say? Conspiratorial you say? Perhaps; but the evidence puts to rest the conspiratorial over tones.

American law making processes have gradually, through the years, and nearly assimilated into American society laws that will give a natural and seemingly painless pathway to drift into full-blown Communism in downtown America. "The Communist program from the start has been one which sees their revolution of 1917 successful only upon total domination of the world. (See Brain Washing, A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics)"

We Americans are the singularly most compassionate in the world, the most benevolent and the most naive people there have ever been. We even believe that Communism is dead because the Berlin Wall came down. Communism ain't dead. It is called something else. It is called "progressive". It is called "Social Democracy". It is called "Democracy". Some even call it "International Democracy"...think George Soros here. Political Correctness has blind-sided those that merely go along with the emotionally weak.

There are others that claim that DC has become part of the New World Order of atheist governments. Whereas that can be argued, I would not go that far but I do see a resemblance of this in the current political climate. The Iron Curtain has come down in Europe and there are indeed proponents within the United Sates that would like to raise it here at home and give birth to what I have come to call the New United Socialist States of the North American Continent, including Canada, seeing that parts of Canada has indeed succumb to socialist ideals and thought and speech control.

With that said, it is a matter of record and fact that our American Politicians have supported and passed legislation during the years spanning from the early 1960s to 2008. They are anti-Christian, anti-American statutes and regulations on the federal, state, and local levels. They are oddly reminiscent of the original ten planks of the Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx in 1848.

Listed below are 10 key "laws" which have become part of the every day life of the American populace. "The American people have truly been 'buried in Communism'" and they do not even know it or not aware of it. Not one "main stream" political party is to blame. Both Democrat and Republican parties are to blame with the majority of socialistic yearning members being in the DNC and a great number in the GOP...we call them RINOs and I now dub the socialist Democrats DINOs.

Each of the Ten Planks is noted below with annotations of laws passed in the US Legislative Processes. Be afraid and wake the hell up.

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.
The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
We call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
We call in government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive Order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
We call it the Federal Reserve which is a credit/debt system nationally organized by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State.
We call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) mandated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive Orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
We call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture. As well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Evironmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.

8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
We call it the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920's, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive Order 11000.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. We call it the Planning Reorganization act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public "law" 89-136.

10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.
People are being taxed to support what we call 'public' schools, which train the young to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based "Education".

So I ask you...does changing the words, change the end result? By using different words is it all of a sudden OK? We are so "smart," aren't we??

Ladies and Gentleman, not only are we in a war; a Global War On Terror, we are in a war right here in the Continental United States and her "offspring" and territories.

What are your freedoms worth? What price is your soul? To whom and to what do you swear your allegiance to?

Excerpt from The Communist Manifesto of 1848 by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels:

Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionizing the mode of production.

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class; if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.

The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism. -- Karl Marx, German political Philosopher and revolutionary, 1818-1883

Pharaoh Barack Hussein Obama

2009-07-30T12:01:00.001-04:00

This is from an email forwarded from my aunt.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This comes to me from my Black friend who was for change, any change, just because Obama was "BLACK"....

Finally We are seeing the light of CHANGE.

Read it and absorb it people. Praise God, he is still in charge and he still LOVES us.

Recent sermon from a church in Virginia - Gen 47:13-27

Good morning, brothers and sisters; it's always a delight to see the pews crowded on Sunday morning, and so eager to get into God's Word.

Turn with me in your Bibles, if you will, to the 47th chapter of Genesis; we'll begin our reading at verse 13, and go through verse 27.

Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us?...

Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray. So we see that economic hard times fell upon Egypt, and the people turned to the government of Pharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grain harvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built.

So the people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, and gave it all to him willingly in return for grain. And this went on until their money ran out, and they were hungry again.

So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock - their cattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey - to barter for grain, and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year.

But the famine wasn't over, was it? So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they had nothing left, except their land and their own lives. "There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh." So they surrendered their homes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh's government, and then sold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain.

What can we learn from this, brothers and sisters? That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hard times only leads to slavery? Yes. That the only reason government wants to be our provider is to a lso become our master? Yes.

But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt, in the land of Goshen. And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly." God provided for His people, just as He always has! They didn't end up giving all their possessions to the government, no, it says they gained possessions!

But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one. We see the same thing happening today - the government today wants to "share the wealth" once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants to take control of healthcare, just as it has taken control of education, and ration it back to us, and when government rations it, then government decides who gets it, and how much, and what kind.

And if we go along with it, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the people of Egypt did four thousand years ago - as slaves to the government, and as slaves to our leaders.

What Mr. Obama's government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh's government did then, and it will end the same.. And a lot of people like to call Mr. Obama a “Messiah," don't they? Is he a Messiah? A savior? Didn't the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, "You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh?"

Well, I tell you this - I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah! No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh.

Bow with me in prayer, if you will.

Lord, You alone are worthy to be served, and we rely on You, and You alone. We confess that the government is not our deliverer, and never rightly will be. We read in the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel, when Samuel warned the people of what a ruler would do, where it says "And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day." And Lord, we acknowledge that day has come. We cry out to you because of the ruler that we have chosen for ourselves as a nation. Lord, we pray for this nation. We pray for revival, and we pray for deliverance from those who would be our masters.

Give us hearts to seek You and hands to serve You, and protect Your people from the atrocities of Pharaoh's government.

In God we Trust

The Ridiculous Brouhaha over the "Brewhaha"

2009-07-29T13:00:00.001-04:00

It’s been called “B3,” “Beerfest,” and “Brewhaha,” but the hullabaloo about the powwow over the debacle regarding Harvard Professor Gates and Sergeant Crawley of the Cambridge, MA Police is getting out of hand, and the blame is owned by President Obama himself. Sadly, while Obama can apologize all day and night for America to the rest of the world, he can’t bring himself to apologize for butting in, making racial presumptions, and making this a national affair when it doesn’t need to be. But that really was his plan after all.

His health care reform plans are not going like he planned or desired and during a press conference about it, when he was bombing miserably, someone brought up the incident regarding Gates and Crawley.

Why?

The question was asked so that President Obama could appear authoritative on an issue of race. But it wasn’t a head-of-state that responded to that question. It was a community organizer who showed up and responded. It was akin to comments made by an activist like Al Sharpton, automatically defending the minority involved without getting all the facts.

In my humble opinion, the Presidential thing to say would have been, “I do not have all of the facts about the incident and would prefer not to respond on what is a local matter. Professor Gates is a friend of mine, and I hope all involved are okay and that this can be dealt with in the most professional candor.” But instead he stated that he didn’t have all of the facts and that the Cambridge Police “acted stupidly”. There is no other interpretation that could have been “calibrated” from Obama’s comments on the matter. So, the President of the United States, who hasn’t taken the time to read the enormous bills written by the House and Senate, will take time to drink a beer with two men at a picnic table – so that HE can promulgate a “teaching moment.” But who does he hope to school? Gates? Crawley?

America is getting schooled in just how ridiculous this president is, and this is just the latest example of how a community organizer should not be a president!

Carter had Sadat and Begin at Camp David.

Clinton had Barak and Arafat at Camp David>

And now in the finest of Democratic Traditions, Obama will meet with Gates and Crawley at a picnic table.

Carter’s works didn’t last that long, And Clinton was only mildly successful. How will Obama do? At a picnic table?

What’s next…? Bong hits in the Rose Garden uniting East Coast and West Coast rappers?