Commitment Is About You, Surrender Is About HIM!

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???

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"...

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???

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

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

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???

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"

“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

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

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

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

WHY?

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!!!!!!

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'

'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???