Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Destroying America

From the U.S. Naval Institute:
After years of conjecture, details have begun to emerge of a "kill weapon" developed by the Chinese to target and destroy U.S. aircraft carriers.
In another story, the Taliban commander in Pakistan told the Associated Press today that "Soon we will launch an attack in Washington that will amaze everyone in the world." Terrorism experts say the threat is credible.

This comes as Democrats announce their plans to make "large, painful cuts" to the defense budget!

Democrats are so out of touch with reality they are delusional! They are doing more to destroy America than Al Qaeda ever did.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention the North Korean threat. If they can launch a satellite, they can also launch a missile with a nuclear warhead. The electromagnetic pulse released by a nuclear warhead exploded in the atmosphere could be sufficient to bring America to its knees. And the Democrats want to cut our defense budget!

UPDATE: Fox News is reporting that the International Crisis Group has intelligence information saying that North Korea already has multiple nuclear warheads.


Condoms in church

Barack Obama's former church, the United Church of Christ, has decided that it has a moral responsibility to distribute condoms at church! According to the UCC:
The bottom line is this: safer sexual behavior can be a matter of life and death, so, when people choose to engage in sex we must affirm safer sexual behavior. Thus, it is our moral responsibility to make condoms available because doing so not only sends the right message about loving responsibly, it saves lives.
Contrary to the UCC, the church does not have a responsibility to protect people from the consequences of their sin. For example, when Ananias and Saphira sinned, Peter did not seem in the least bit interested in protecting them from the fatal consequences (Acts 5:1-11)!

What the UCC is doing is actually enabling and encouraging people to sin!

When church groups downplay or dismiss the Bible as the final authority for their faith and practice, they are free to re-imagine "Christianity" into anything they want it to be. But make no mistake about it, they are no more Christian than Muhammad!

Inching toward communism?

According to an article in the DCExaminer:
But now, in a little-noticed move, the House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009," would impose government controls on the pay of all employees -- not just top executives -- of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government.
Why stop there Barney? Why not set the salaries for all companies that benefit from the stimulus money? For example, if some company got the contract for a bridge that is being built or repaired with stimulus money, the government could set their salaries as well since their salaries affect the price they may charge to work on the bridge!

And the nation's public schools, colleges and universities all get federal help as well. Why not set the salaries for all teachers and staff?

And once the government takes over the health care system, Barney can set the salaries for doctors, nurses and hospital staff too!

Why do I keep getting the feeling that so many Democrats are really closet communists?

Monday, March 30, 2009

800 baptized!

Wow! Saddleback Church baptizes 800 people! Praise God!

Chris Dodd and AIG

You may recall how Democratic Senator Chris Dodd "emerged as a central figure in the government's decision to let executives at the now-failing AIG collect more than $218 million in bonuses...even as the company was receiving billions of dollars in assistance from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)."

Today, The Washington Times is reporting that the "Financial Products chief executive" for AIG sent an e-mail to AIG executives urging them and their wives to provide financial support for Senator Dodd's campaign s since Dodd was "next in line' to be chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, which oversees the insurance industry, and he would 'have the opportunity to set the committee's agenda on issues critical to the financial services industry."

So AIG raises tens of thousands of dollars to get Dodd re-elected so Dodd could enact legislation favorable to AIG, and Dodd repays the favor not only by supporting the AIG bailout but by adding a provision to provide $218 million in bonuses to AIG executives!

This is Washington's version of the golden rule: He who has the gold makes the rules. This is your Democratic Congress at work!

Read the whole story at The Washington Times.

Thomas Paine's message to America

Wow! Like Thomas Paine speaking from the grave, this guy has Barack Obama so scared, the President has summoned him to the White House. If I were the author of these videos, I wouldn't go without a high-powered lawyer who is not intimidated by power.




Sunday, March 29, 2009

Heil Obama?

See Atlas Shrugs on Obama's new campaign to pledge allegiance to his plan. Why does he need to have the names, addresses and e-mail addresses of his supporters? Is this the beginning of Obama's civilian army? And what happens to those who will not sign the pledge?

GM CEO resigns

Barack Obama demands--and gets--the resignation of GM's CEO.

Sounds more like the old Soviet Union to me than America.

Saturday, March 28, 2009

Spending your tax dollars on terrorists

Fox News is reporting that not only will some Gitmo prisoners be released, but some will be released in America, and your tax dollars will be used to "get them on their feet" again.

Are we going to arm them too? The Obama administration just can't seem to find enough things on which to spend your money!

Pushing homosexuality

Wow! Pushing homosexuality is BIG business. Check out the salaries!

Uncle Sam wants Muslims

Article VI of the Constitution says that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

This being the case, doesn't Barack Obama's deliberate seeking out of Muslims to appoint to public office violate the spirit, if not the letter, of this article?

If I were writing a novel about the takeover of the United States, it wouldn't be about a violent coup, it would be about some relatively unknown politician who gets elected as President and sets out to appoint Muslims throughout his administration. Together, they began to implement Sharia-compliant laws and regulations, and follow the United Nations which makes insulting Islam a crime.

With the help of politically correct lapdogs in Congress they pack the Supreme Court with like-minded politically correct lackeys who believe in interpreting the Constitution in light of contemporary politically correct standards rather than original intent.

Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion are slowly re-defined in ways favorable to Islam--similar to what is happening now in Sweden, India, the Netherlands, England, Canada and Australia-- and one day Americans wake up and realize that the America of our founders has ceased to exist and we have handed down to our grandchildren a system of Islamic slavery (see here also).

But I'm not a novel writer and who would believe such a story anyway?

Thursday, March 26, 2009

U.N. and criticism of Islam

According to Jihad Watch, the U.N. has passed a resolution criminalizing the criticism of Islam.

My King

This brother certainly know how to preach with conviction! All I can add is "Amen!" (hat tip: John W).

Democrats' abuse of power

George Will has an excellent article in the Washington Post entitled "The Toxic Assets We Elected." It is about the unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by our current government. Please take time to read it (Hat tip: John W.)

Democratic change

With the Obama administration and Congress wanting to implement universal health care and to take over corporations, banks, and even private companies (and one Democrat has proposed intervening in newspapers as well!), I fear that this little video may be closer to the truth than we might like to imagine. Is this the change Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are working toward? Sure looks like it to me (Hat tip: Don B.)

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Gay Liberation Network and freedom

From AFTAH:
Bob Schwartz of the Chicago-based Gay Liberation Network supports Wright State University’s ban against the Campus Bible Fellowship. The Christian campus group opposes Wright’s “nondiscrimination” code, which would force it to abandon its faithfulness to Scripture by allowing unrepentant homosexuals as members. Schwartz previously claimed to oppose laws criminalizing Christian speech — yet he favors banning groups because he considers them “bible bigots.” Would Schwartz and GLN (which AFTAH considers to be an anti-Christian hate group) allow a tax-supported public university to dictate ITS membership standards if it operated on a college campus?
It's simple. These gay rights activists do not believe in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of association if it conflicts with their beliefs and behavior.

Monday, March 23, 2009

Obama, laughing all the way

President Obama:

was pressed by Steve Kroft on "60 Minutes" for at times laughing or smiling while discussing the global economic crisis.

"You're sitting here. And you're laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems," Kroft told the president. "Are people going to look at this and say, 'I mean, he's sitting there just making jokes about money?' How do you deal with -- I mean: explain ... Are you punch-drunk?" (Fox).

Our President offends our friends, appeases our enemies, mocks the disabled, breaks his promises, appoints tax cheats to his cabinet, spends money like a drunken sailor, and laughs at the economic crisis--and he's only been in office for a couple months!

Can a President be impeached for simply not being up to the job?

Sunday, March 22, 2009

President Obama's change

When candidate Obama promised change, he wasn't kidding. I think Markus Shepherd has President Obama pegged! Check out his blog.

TEA parties

Thousands turn out for "TEA parties" (Taxed Enough Already) all over the country. Where is the media?

Saturday, March 21, 2009

"Obama is worse than Bush"

Maybe the light is coming on for some on the Left. One of the board of directors of an anti-war group says, "In some ways, Obama is worse than Bush...Bush wasn't proposing a surge in Afghanistan and Bush was talking about a quicker timeline for withdrawal than Obama" (Drudge).

AIG, Obama and Dodd

Fox News is reporting that the bonuses AIG gave to executives was actually about 53 million dollars more than reported.

According to the Wall Street Journal, however, the top two recipients of AIG campaign donations was Barack Obama ($104,332) and Senator Chris Dodd ($103,900)! Obama and Dodd were followed by McCain ($59,499) and Hillary Clinton ($37,965).

If the executives have to give back their bonuses, why shouldn't President Obama and Congress have to give back their "bonuses" too? After all, President Obama and Congress are the ones who made AIG legally obligated to pay the executive bonuses in the first place!

Now its sex with animals!

Regular readers of Recliner Commentaries may recall the report about the "Winter Wickedness" gathering in which sex with real animals was ruled out, but sex with partners dressed as animals was apparently OK.

Sex with real animals is apparently a much bigger problem than I realized. Fox news has a report of a homosexual man who had "been twice convicted of raping a young boy (question: why is someone like that ever allowed to see the light of day again)?

When he apparently didn't think he could get away with raping another young boy, he tied a dog--someone's pet--up to a tree, muzzled it, and raped the dog! According to the Fox article:

— FBI research on the backgrounds of serial sexual homicide perpetrators that uncovered high rates of sexual assault of animals;

— A report in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry that said twenty percent of children who sexually abuse other children also have histories of sexually abusing animals; and

— A Utah State University study showing 37 percent of sexually violent juvenile offenders have a history of animal sexual assault.

Read the entire sickening report at Fox.

Government control of salaries

According to The New York Times:

The Obama administration will call for increased oversight of executive pay at all banks, Wall Street firms and possibly other companies as part of a sweeping plan to overhaul financial regulation, government officials said.

If the government gets away with controlling banks, Wall Street firms and businesses, do you think for a moment they will stop at that? Next will be all heath care institutions. But why stop there? Why not control colleges and universities, public schools as well?

You could say that the government already regulates all these things so what's the difference? I guess you might say that the frogs have been slowly boiling for quite some time but President Obama and the Democrats in Congress want to greatly increase the heat!

We can only hope that the frogs (Americans) have enough sense to react and say enough is enough! If not, we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the America we grew up in.

Censorship by another name

"Hate speech" has just become a code phrase for censorship.

Delusions and lies

Pamela Geller at the Atlas Shrugs blog provides a lists of quotations by leaders in the Democratic Party.

I'll leave it to you to determine whether these leaders are seriously deluded or just bald-faced liars.

Discrimination against Christians

The notoriously liberal ninth court of appeals has upheld the "right" of the U.C. Hastings school of law to discriminate against a Christian group.
"People need to wake up to the fact that, in this day and age, Christian students are actually having to fight for their right just to meet together with like-minded people...A lot of people take for granted this basic right of association (Citizen Link).
Christians are increasingly becoming second class citizens in our own country. Our constitutional protection of freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of association are constantly under attack. If Christians do not wake up to this fact, we will wake up one day and find out that it is too late.

Outrage over AIG bonuses

I don't think I have ever been as disgusted with Congress as I am right now. I've been watching some clips of members of Congress expressing their outrage over the AIG bonuses which Congress approved!

This is really just a diversion by members of Congress to turn the public's attention away from one of the biggest problems in this whole economic crisis which is Congress!

Friday, March 20, 2009

Obama and Special Olympics

Was Barack Obama's comment about Special Olympics on Jay Leno offensive? You can watch the clip and vote on HotAir.

It is rare for me to defend President Obama, but anyone who does public speaking will eventually say things that didn't come out right or things he or she didn't really mean. I think we need to cut him some slack on this one.

I'm not so understanding about his destructive policies.

Social Security and Ponzi schemes

For an explanation of why Social Security is not a "Ponzi Scheme" (and an explanation of what an Ponzi Scheme is and where it got its name), see SocialSecurityOnline (hat tip: Kevin).

The President is responsible

Yesterday President Obama said he would take responsibility for the AIG executive bonuses.

Great! Way to step up to the plate, Mr. President. That's genuine leadership!

Now, if you would just pay back the bonuses out of your own pocket, I mean if you are really taking responsibility for the bill you signed into law; then I will believe you.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Sexism

MandM has an excellent article on sexism.

Freedom under attack

Alan Sears writes,
It’s high time someone asked: where in the U.S. Constitution are so many angry people finding the legal right not to be offended? The assumption that this imaginary protection exists is everywhere – and is usually invoked to suppress the much-more-demonstrable religious rights clearly secured by the First Amendment. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and American Atheists all make their headlines and their reputation by demanding the right never to be faced with any sight, symbol, or idea with which they disagree.
These organizations are anti-freedom and anti-American. If you only read one article today, please read this one.

Failed companies owed back taxes

Fox is reporting that many of these failed companies which received stimulus money owed the government tens of millions of dollars in back taxes!

And Congress rewarded them by bailing them out with our tax money!

I can't help but think that if the members of Congress were corporate executives, they would be investigated for criminal fraud and corruption!

Punishing AIG executives

The House of Representatives has passed a bill which will tax away the bonuses given to AIG. The Constitution prohibits Congress from passing laws specifically targeted at individuals. Such laws take away those individuals' right to a fair trial. If the Senate also passes this bill, President Obama says he will sign it.

Although I think the bonuses are disgusting, my contempt for AIG is nothing compared with my contempt for Congress which provided for the bonuses in the stimulus bill and then diverts attention from its own incompetence by unconstituionally punishing those who got the bonuses!

This may not be the road to totalitarianism, but sometimes it sure feels like it.
According to a report by the Associated Press we are having another baby boom: "More babies were born in the United States in 2007 than any other year in the nation's history."

The dark side of this news is that fully 40% of those new babies were born to parents who were not committed to providing the child with both a father and a mother (i.e. they weren't married). That is a truly sad state of affairs for today's children and for the nation which will have to deal with the aftermath caused by children raised without fathers or raised by mothers with numerous live-in lovers.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

11 trillion national debt

The National Debt is now up to 11 TRILLION dollars, the highest in U.S. history.

And still the President Obama and the Democrats want to spend more and more money! Like little children, they just don't seem to understand that in real life you just can't have everything you want.

Statuatory rape cover-up at Planned Parenthood

"Two more Planned Parenthoods caught on tape in alleged statutory rape cover-up."

There needs to be a nationwide criminal investigation of Planned Parenthood.

Yeah, like that's going to happen!

Why doesn't God heal amputees?

Recently someone sent me a link to an atheist website and asked for my response. The website demanded to know, if God exists, why doesn’t he heal amputees?

Wow! I guess they’ve finally got us! The fact that God does not make missing limbs grow back must absolutely prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that God does not exist! I guess its time to close down our churches, hospitals, clinics, homeless shelters, pregnancy centers, schools, charities, youth programs, drug rehabilitation programs, orphanages, and mission agencies!

But wait! Not so fast. If God actually did a genuine miracle—let’s say, parting the Red Sea or raising a dead person back to life—would His failure to do other similar miracles constitute proof of his non-existence? To think so would be silly.

If God actually caused amputated arms and legs to grow back on occasion would the atheist then be convinced of God’s existence, or would s/he just dismiss the evidence as a genetic anomaly and pose some other hoop for God to jump though?

For example, the atheist might ask why God doesn’t enable people to walk on water today, or why doesn't He heal quadriplegics, or people whose heads have been removed by terrorists. The possible scenarios are limited only by the imagination of the atheist!

And when God doesn’t jump through their hoops like some kind of trained dog, atheists can then puff out their arrogant little chests and imagine that they’ve positively disproved God’s existence.

On the other hand, if Christians were to provide documented medical evidence of people who had scientifically been proven to have had serious diseases such as cancer which had just disappeared, would atheists believe then? Of course not! Atheists have remarkable faith that God does not exist, and absolutely no evidence will be allowed to threaten that faith.

The fact is that evidence of remarkable healing does exist--in fact there have been so many cases that doctors even have a word for it: “Spontaneous remissions.”

Although “spontaneous remissions” occur regularly, such things are always capable of multiple interpretations. When someone is diagnosed with a serious disease like cancer, and their church prays, and the cancer just disappears, Christians believe this may possibly be the work of God. Atheists are just as convinced that whatever happened, God is not involved. Both positions are matters of faith!

The fact is that Atheists are committed as a matter of faith, to the proposition that God does not exist and no amount of evidence will be allowed to stand against their faith.

It was the same way in Jesus’ day. Jesus enemies said his “miracles” were done by the power of Satan or through sorcery (we have no record of anyone denying that he did such amazing works). Others thought he did such things by the power of God, saying, “no one has ever done stuff like this before!”

According to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, the letters of Peter, an editor of Josephus, the writer of Hebrews, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus and other ancient writers, Jesus did come back from the dead! In fact, early Christians were so convinced of this fact they were willing to suffer torture and death. But atheists won’t believe unless they see an amputated limb restored!

It is important to note that the atheist’s question seems to assume that our faith is based on reports of healings or miracles happening today or throughout history. This is a false assumption. Although I am convinced that God heals today--that would be hard for me to deny since I was once miraculously healed--I am personally very skeptical of the many healing and miracle stories I hear.

My faith is not based on such stories. It is based, rather, on the historical evidence that the earliest Christians were absolutely convinced that Jesus had 1) fulfilled Old Testament prophecies, 2) did signs and wonders that no one had ever done before—something his enemies tried to explain away but never even attempted to deny and 3) was seen, touched and actually even ate with people after his death.

Early Christians were so convinced of these facts that they were willing to suffer imprisonment and horrible deaths for it. This is confirmed by various historical criteria, for example, through independent attestation of multiple sources and by the fact that Christianity, unlike any other early messianic movement of the time, did not die out after it’s “messiah” died. Further, I’ve read probably thousands of pages of skeptical, counter-arguments and find none of them to be convincing. In fact, I’ve published and refuted several of them.

This evidence does not constitute absolute proof, of course, but absolute proof does not exist for any religion including atheism.

The Bible says that without faith it is impossible to please God. God often provides evidence or traces of his existence but for whatever reason, he never “proves” his existence. There is always a leap of faith. But it is no more of a leap of faith than believing that the universe exploded into existence all by itself.

It is quite illogical for anything to exist at all, in other words, it is illogical to think that something just popped out of nothing—but the universe exists!

That doesn’t prove that God, or the gods, created it, of course (after all, where did God come from)? But the idea that that the universe just sprang into existence by all by itself is so illogical that it ought to alert us to the fact that there just might possibly be more to this universe than materialism, or atheism would suggest.

And belief in God takes much less faith than believing that micro-organism more complicated than modern laptop computers—developed and evolved all by themselves!

Atheists have an enormous amount of faith in the power of science to prove there is no God. There is no doubt that science has done some remarkable things, but we’ve come a long way from the time when Darwin might have imagined “the simple cell” filled with some kind of simple protoplasm.

We now know that even the simplest living micro-organisms are more complicated than the laptop sitting on my desk—and evolutionists believe these micro-organisms appeared on this planet shortly (in evolutionary terms) after the appearance of water on earth.

Even if you believe in macro-evolution and natural selection and the tooth fairy, there simply was not enough time for so many incredibly complicated organisms to have developed so soon all by themselves. It is scientifically impossible! But atheists would rather believe the impossible, than believe in a God to whom they would be accountable.

I started reading a huge book on cell biology (a cell biologist recommended it to me saying that it was like the “Bible” of cell biology). I found it humorous how often the authors had to admit that they had no clue how or why so many of the cell’s basic functions actually work.

Science has taken enormous strides since Darwin, but it seems like the more we learn, the farther we are from having a solution—at least from having an atheist solution. But atheists have enormous faith that we will some day find out--even though the more we learn, the farther away we seem to be from finding a solution.

If there is one person in the world who should have an answer to this question, it might have been Francis Crick, an atheist and Nobel Prize winning geneticist. His solution: Panspermia, i.e. life originated somewhere else in the universe and was deposited as spores here on earth!

Why would a Nobel Prize winning geneticist--someone who knew more about the basis "stuff" of life than just about anyone else on the planet--propose such a far-out theory?

Could it be because he knew that there was no possible scenario in which life could have developed on earth all by itself so he had to move the problem to another place in space where the conditions for life to have developed must have been different (and where it can't be studied)? Let’s be honest. This is not science. It is faith.

Atheists like to imagine that they have science on their side. But all science is based on philosophical assumptions and presuppositions. The atheist who doesn’t know this is simply ignorant of the facts.

It is a choice of faith whether to believe that life on this planet came into being and evolved all by itself, or under the guidance of God, but failure to recognize that faith is involved in both cases is simply ignorance—often willful ignorance. As for me, I just don’t have as much faith as the atheist.

Anyway, getting back to the original topic, according to the Gospel of John, Jesus did heal an amputee. Peter cut off some guy’s ear and Jesus put it back on. But atheists just dismiss this as fiction. Nothing can be allowed to stand against their atheist faith.

Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act

Last year Congress passed, by overwhelming majorities, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA).

Sounds like a good thing. After all, who doesn't want consumer products improved?

The problem is that it threatens "to wipe out tens of thousands of small makers of children's items from coast to coast, and taking a particular toll on the handcrafted and creative, the small-production-run and sideline at-home business, not to mention struggling retailers."

This is because the law requires that products sold to children under 12 be tested for led. All products, even if they are made of wood or cloth which contain no lead. Even children's library books would need to be tested--but since the American Library Association has a lot of Democratic political clout, they have been able to get a one year reprieve.

Small companies which lack the power are not so lucky. The expensive tests will force thousands of small companies out of business and tens of thousands of employees out of work.

For those companies which do have products tested, the cost of the expensive tests will be passed on to you in the form of higher prices.

With lunatic programs like the CPSIA, the endless bailouts, the massive and expensive expansion of government programs, and President Obama's proposed "cap and trade" program, it is no exageration to say that our own politicians are doing more to destroy American than Al Qaeda!

Read the story on Forbes.

UPDATE: Hugh Hewitt points out that "The outrage over the AIG bonuses is over $165 million in taxpayer money. The cost of CPSIA is at least $3 billion in perfectly safe inventory that must be destroyed and tens of thousands of lost jobs --and it could be fixed if Congress bothered to take a day to do so."

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Disarming pilots

President Obama is quietly putting an end to the federal program that allows pilots to carry firearms on their airplanes (Atlas Shrugs).

Good call, Mr. President! We just can't trust pilots with guns, can we. After all, they might not be responsible enough to handle a fire arm. Yessiree, we can trust them with the lives of a couple hundred passengers, but to let them have a gun, well, that's just going too far.

Come to think of it, maybe we should disarm all the federal marshals on all those flights too.

If I didn't know better, I'd think Obama was working with Osama.

Chris Dodd and AIG

Democrat Senator Chris Dodd is furious. No, he is livid! He just can't believe the bonuses given to AIG executives after AIG took the bailout money.

That's interesting, since according to an article by Jim Meyers in today's NewsMax:
It was Dodd who inserted language known as the dodd amendment in the $787 billion stimulus bill that allowed all bonuses awarded before February 11, 2009 to be paid to AIG executives. That very amendment, which is now law, is now the chief hurdle to government officials who want to recover that money.
The article goes on to point out that "Dodd is the largest single recipient of 2008 campaign donations from AIG, with $103,100, according to the Center for Responsive Politics."

I'm not mad at the executives who took their bonuses. I'm mad at the politicians (almost entirely Democrats) who gave all our money to these corporations in the first place!

Monday, March 16, 2009

AIG bonuses

President Obama and both Democratic and Republican congresspersons are up in arms about bonuses AIG paid to its executives. My understanding, however, is that AIG is contractually bound to pay these bonuses or face expensive lawsuits.

It sounds to me like Congress and President Obama are calling on AIG to break the law! If we're going to blame someone, shouldn't the blame go to Congress and President Obama for passing bailout legislation that they didn't even take time to read?

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Cincinnati Tea Party

You may recall reading about the Boston Tea Party in early American History. The Cincinnati Tea Party which took place today is MUCH, MUCH bigger. I especially appreciated the kid holding the sign which said, "I'm only 8 and already $36,000 in debt"!

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Big brother is here

"Big Brother" is here. The link goes to a picture of the crowd at President Obama's inauguration. You can move close up on anyone in the crowd, all the way down to to the "U" bolts on the railings!

Great for security, but privacy is a thing of the past.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

What's wrong with gay rights?

Why do Evangelicals make such a big deal about gay rights? Granted, we think homosexual behavior is sin, but we don’t generally discriminate against other sinners like liars, or gossips, or even those who commit “deadly sins” like pride. In fact, Evangelicals have not launched any kind of massive campaigns against adultery or against unmarried people living together, so why all the hysteria against homosexuality?

If two loving people of the same sex want to get married, why should we stand in the way of their happiness? Why should we be the ones to deny them the benefits they can only get from marriage, like social security benefits granted to spouses, or tax-free inheritance? Isn’t that just mean spirited?

Besides, some people believe that the Bible doesn’t really condemn homosexuality anyway. Who is to say one interpretation is better than another? But even if we do believe one interpretation over another, shouldn’t we exercise a bit of humility and acknowledge that we might just be wrong?

Maybe a gay protest sign sums it all up. It said, “How does my marriage hurt you?”

These are all good questions. I’m going offer a response in three areas: Political, medical and biblical.

Political

One reason we make such a big deal of homosexuality is because there is an element within the gay community that wants to take away our freedom of religion. A recent article in the New York Times, entitled, “A Reconciliation on Gay Marriage,” co-authored by a gay rights advocate admitted, “Yes, most gays are opposed to the idea that religious organizations could openly treat same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples differently” (David Blankenhorn & Jonathan Rauch, New York Times, February 21, 2009).

In other words, when sexual freedom and religious freedom clash, most gays want sexual freedom to trump freedom of religion, regardless of what the Constitution says! So what exactly does this “clash” look like?

In San Diego, a Christian doctor could not, in good conscience, artificially inseminate a lesbian patient. Even though she found a doctor who would do the job, she sued the Christian who was just following his religious convictions.

In Massachusetts, the Catholic Charities of Boston had been in business for about one hundred years. They specialized in adoptions for hard-to-place children. When Massachusetts passed laws requiring them to adopt to gay couples, they felt that they could not in good conscience, comply with the regulations and they were forced to close their doors.

One Massachusetts legislator, a Democrat (of course), was asked about religious liberty. His response was, “You have religious liberty; you have the religious liberty to go out of business.” (NRO, “Trading Civil Rights for Religious-Liberty Protection” by Maggie Gallagher, February 23, 2009).

In Georgia, a lesbian went to a licensed counselor seeking help on resolving a same-sex relationship problem. The counselor, a Christian, referred the client to another psychologist who was more sympathetic to same-sex relationships. The lesbian sued the Christian counselor and the counselor got fired.In Virginia, a lesbian asked a Christian-owned film and video lab to reproduce her pro-homosexual movies. The Christian’s conscience would not allow him to do so and he was sued.

In New Jersey a Christian organization sometimes rented its facilities for marriages. Their convictions, however, would not allow them to rent their private facilities for a same-sex civil union. A lesbian couple filed a civil rights complaint against them.

A homosexual man tried to sue Zondervan for $60 million dollars because the publishing house won't translate the Bible to support homosexual preferences.

The Employment Non-discrimination Act (ENDA) would make it illegal for Christians in similar situations to follow their religious convictions. When people are forced by law to violate their religious convictions, we no longer have freedom of religion.

In California, Proposition 8 defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Opponents of traditional marriage sent threatening e-mails, vandalized churches, forced proposition 8 supporters out of their jobs, made abusive telephone calls and even death threats!

Hundreds of harassment cases have been documented, for example, Jose Nunez was just waiting after church services to distribute proposition 8 years signs when he was beaten by gay activists so badly that paramedics had to be called. The city of Chino Hills, California threatened voters of fines of $25.00 per day for putting up signs in their own yard which support Proposition 8.

After the defeat of Proposition 8, gay websites in California begin threats of violence against proposition 8 supports. For example, one message read, “Burn their f***ing churches, then tax charred timbers.”

Since the Mormon Church advocated strongly in favor of Proposition 8, another tolerant gay advocate wrote, "Can someone in CA please go burn down the Mormon temples there, PLEASE. I mean seriously. DO IT." White powder was also sent to the Mormon headquarters in Salt Lake City.

More recently, gay activists have created Google Maps with the names and addresses of those who supported traditional marriage in Proposition 8. The only purpose can be for harassment.

Why has no one raised the possibility of prosecution for hate crimes, or do hate crimes only apply to selected groups?

But it’s not just about Proposition 8.

A Baptist church in Montana was investigated by the state for showing a video on traditional marriage and urging members to support traditional marriage in an upcoming election. They had to get legal assistance.

In Michigan, Mount Hope Church was attacked by a homosexual anarchist group. The church was overwhelmed by gay people with condoms and propaganda. They draped an obscene banner over the balcony and shouted anti-Christian hate speech.

In San Francisco, transvestites stormed a Catholic Church service in progress and took communion.

The threats to freedom also affect colleges. For example, at William Paterson University a Muslim employee received an unsolicited e-mail promoting gay movies. He asked to be taken off the list and called such movies “perversions.”

For expressing his opinion, he was given a letter of reprimand for violating discrimination and harassment regulations. What happened to this Muslim’s freedom of religion and why wasn’t the one who sent the unsolicited e-mails which promoted gay movies charged with breaking sexual harassment regulations?

At Ohio State University, a librarian recommended a book called, The Marketing of Evil that exposed a deliberate and well organized strategy to promote homosexuality in America. Two gay faculty members filed sexual harassment charges against this librarian and he eventually ended up resigning because of harassment from other gay rights advocates on the faculty. Why hasn't the American Library Association complained of censorship?

At Missouri State University students were required to write letters to the Missouri legislature supporting adoption by same-sex couples. When a Christian student objected and asked for an alternative assignment, the professor filed a grievance against her. The student had to get legal help to defend herself from the harassment.

Threats to freedom also occur in K-12 schools. In Boston public school teachers were threatened with termination if they failed to portray homosexual marriage in a positive light. Notice, this is the government is telling teachers what position they must take on a controversial social and religious issue! What happened to Freedom of Speech?

A bill in California (SB 777) says, “No teacher”, “No textbook”, “No instructional materials”, and no school “sponsored activity” shall “reflecting adversely” upon persons because of their perceived gender or sexual orientation. Again, this is the government telling teachers what position they must take on a controversial social and religious issue! How can this possibly be constitutional?

(Documentation for the examples above can be found by clicking on “homosexuality” in the subject index to Recliner Commentaries).

So much for examples. After all, these are just isolated cases aren’t they? Why get so shook up over a few isolated cases?

The problem is that when recognition of homosexuality becomes part of official U.S. public policy it will have a deadly effect on freedom.

For example, in Massachusetts a couple complained when their second grader was forced to read a book about romance and marriage between two men. The school refused to let them opt out of the assignment. The case went to court.

A judge ruled that since gay marriage was legal in Massachusetts, in other words, it was public policy, the school had a duty to promote same sex marriage to children and had no obligation to let children opt out! In direct opposition to the Constitution, public policy was seen to trump freedom of religion.

When the California Supreme Court ruled that doctors did not have the right to refuse to perform artificial insemination on unmarried people (gay or straight), the court was saying in effect, that public policy trumps freedom of religion.

When recognition of homosexuality becomes part of official government public policy, for example, through passing of ENDA (Employment Non-discrimination Act) or the overturning of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act), the above examples will become only the first trickle in a breaking dam.

But don’t take my word for it.

Anthony Piccarello, president of the Becket Fund which specializes in religious freedom cases, said “The impact will be severe and pervasive.” “This is going to effect every area of church-state relations.” Marc Stern, one of the attorneys for the American Jewish Congress said about the coming conflict between religious freedom and gay rights, “It’s going to be a train wreck.” “A very dangerous train wreck” (“Trading Civil Unions for Religious-Liberty Protection? NationalReviewOnline, February 23, 2009).

Medical

So why don’t Evangelicals just avoid this “train wreck” and give in? That leads to the second point: Medical.

Contrary to whatever hype you’ve heard in the media or by gay activists, about HIV/AIDS being just as much a heterosexual as homosexual disease, they are lying to you!

Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop once testified under oath in Congressional hearings that only about 4% of AIDS worldwide were due to heterosexual sex. In the U.S. only 2.3% come from heterosexual contact, but most of that is from partners of IV drug users (Coulter, Godless, 181).

Researcher Stuart Brody examined dozens of scientific studies on AIDS and concluded that AIDS was transmitted almost entirely through anal intercourse and IV drug use, almost never vaginally (Sex at Risk by Stuart Brody)

"Michael R. Bloomberg’s Preliminary Mayor’s Management Report acknowledges a 30.3 percent increase in syphilis cases in New York City, 'reflecting national trends.” The report said that "95 percent of the cases are male and a majority report having sex with other men."

As a result of what the CDC described as "acquired health risk behaviors," over five hundred thousand people in the United States have died from AIDS!

At the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in Detroit, the executive director, Matt Foreman said, "Folks, with 70 percent of the people in this country living with HIV being gay or bi (sexual), we cannot deny that HIV is a gay disease," “We have to own that and face up to that."

So what’s the point? The acronym GLBT (Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered) was, not too long ago, amended by adding an additional letter: GLBTQ. The “Q” is “questioning.” It is aimed at encouraging young people to experiment and explore their sexual options. Maybe they’re gay and just don’t know it yet.

This “medical section” began with the question, “So why don’t Evangelicals just avoid this ‘train wreck’ and give in? The answer is, because it is hateful to encourage boys and teens to explore--and to encourage men to continue--lifestyles that lead to terrible sickness and horrible deaths!

For Evangelicals to give up, just because our very sick society tells us to shut up, would simply not be compassionate. We must speak out.

Biblical

I asked above, why don’t Evangelicals just avoid this “train wreck” and give in? We can’t! Even if we were to ignore the suffering that comes with the promotion of homosexual behavior, there is the matter of religious convictions.

People who are not religious, or who are not serious about their religion, often don’t seem to understand true religious conviction. The standards of non-religious people often seem to shift and change depending on changing contemporary values, the latest surveys, peer pressure, notions of political correctness, or gut feelings.

By contrast, asking those of us who are sincere about our religious faith to violate our religious convictions is asking us to rebel against our God as revealed in the Bible!

Evangelicals make such a big deal about homosexual behavior, therefore, because it is a big deal in the Bible.

In Leviticus 18, the prohibition against homosexual behavior occurs among sexual sins such as sex with one’s father, mother, sister, brother, uncle, aunt, or even with animals! The text calls these behaviors “depravity” and “abomination” and says that the land of the Canaanites would “vomit out” its inhabitants for such behaviors. The writer intends his readers to understand that these sins are so vile that God even expects pagan nations to know better.

But that’s just Old Testament, right? No one follows all the Old Testament commands anymore—not even orthodox Jews or fundamentalist Christians. For example, we don’t advocate the stoning of Sabbath breakers, adulterers, or rebellious kids!

That is true, but rather than boring the reader with theological reasons for why we believe some commands are annulled and some are still valid, suffice it to say that Evangelicals do generally take seriously Old Testament prohibitions and commands that are repeated in the New Testament. And the prohibition against homosexual behavior is not only repeated, but strongly condemned in the New Testament: Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and 1 Timothy 1:9-10.

But these letters were all written by Paul and some gay rights advocates have responded saying that Paul was really just addressing the kind of sexual excesses exhibited by Emperors like Claudius or Nero, he was not addressing loving, committed homosexual couples.

First, this kind of textual-twisting is often done by religious compromisers who are trying desperately to bring the Bible in line with modern standards, but it would not be much comfort to most homosexuals. According to a Dutch study even “committed” homosexual couples have an average of eight sexual partners (outside of the relationship) per year” (FRC). Even if homosexual behavior were allowed in the Bible, multiple sexual partners clearly is not.

Second, it is not entirely clear why homosexual behavior should be wrong when an emperor does it, but not when an average person does it

Third, I wonder if those who argue this way would also like to treat adultery in the same manner, i.e. the New Testament prohibition against adultery was just against the excesses of the emperors but it was OK for the average person to commit adultery. (!)

If so, why not take the argument one step further. Since Paul also condemns murder in Romans 1, maybe he was just addressing the excesses of powerful emperors like the Caesars, but that murder could be a perfectly acceptable option by average citizens who think they are justified in killing someone.

Of course, this line of argumentation is absurd, but so it thinking that Paul was not condemning homosexual behavior. In fact, especially in Romans 1, it is hardly possible for Paul to have been any more clear in condemning homosexual behavior.

Generally speaking, the only ones who can’t see that are those who will not see it because they don’t want to see it; as in, “there are none so blind as those who will not see!

If you think that is too harsh, just ask yourself, why is it that in the entire 2000 year history of the church no one has ever interpreted Paul as allowing homosexual behavior until very recently when it has become a major political issue. Doesn’t that lead to the suspicion that purely ideological motives involved in the sudden re-interpretation?

Another argument used against opponents of homosexual behavior is that Jesus never condemned homosexuality. Some even take it to the next illogical step saying that Jesus, therefore, must have condoned homosexual behavior.

While it is true that Jesus never specifically condemned homosexuality by name, neither did he specifically condemn incest, pedophilia or bestiality by name. But he did condemn sexual immorality (Mark 7:21; Matthew 15:19).

As a first century Jewish Rabbi who strongly affirmed the authority of his Hebrew Bible (Matthew 5:17-18), sexual immorality was defined in terms of passages like Leviticus 18 and 20. Any attempt to take Jesus’ teaching against sexual immorality out of its Old Testament context is clearly ideologically motivated.

The fact is that there can be no serious doubt that the Bible condemns homosexual behavior.

This fact leads to the next question,

Why is the Bible so harsh on gays?

The answer is that the Bible is not just harsh on gays. It is harsh on all sex outside of the bounds of marriage: Adultery, pornea, pedophilia, bestiality, incest, fornication...

I suspect that the reason for this harshness is because sex is like fire: It can be a very good thing within limits, but when it gets out of control it can be very destructive.

The media never covers this destructive aspect of homosexuality. For example, I’ve read that 22-37% of homosexuals engage in painful or violent sex and that 10% of accidental deaths in San Francisco are the result of sadomasochistic sex which got out of control.

In San Francisco there is an annual public festival called the Folsom Street Fair. Last year it was advertised with a poster of the Last Supper with Jesus and his disciples portrayed in leather sadomasochistic outfits with sex toys on the table. No one seemed to ask whether this constituted a hate crime against Christians!

The Folsom Street Fair is characterized by occasional public nudity—bare-breasted women, and men with their genitals exposed. Genital fondling, masturbation, and oral sex take place in full public view. There are public spankings, beatings and mock torture on crosses. The police look on passively, children are allowed to attend this event, and it is all apparently perfectly OK with Nancy Pelosi in whose district it occurs.

Another event which apparently occurs in various places around the country is called “Winter Wickedness.” A recent Winter Wickedness event offered numerous seminars and workshops including some on the topics of gangbanging, anal sex and enema play, erotic flogging, using a staple gun on ones partner (live demonstrations), and erotic fire-play (by Pyrosadist).

Even Winter Wickedness had it standards, however. Whipping, cutting, needle and fire-play were allowed in designated areas only. Gun-play, golden showers (urinating on someone or being urinated on), brown showers (defecating on, or being defecated on), and rainbow/roman showers (vomiting on or being vomited upon) were not allowed at this event. The very fact that they felt the need to publish this prohibition speaks volumes!

No real animals were allowed but if you wanted to have sex with a partner who was dressed as an animal that was fine. No one under 19 was allowed but having sex with someone who role-played as a child was apparently OK.

I assumed that this kind of extreme behavior must be characteristic of a very tiny mentally ill sub-group until I read that the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (!) helped to produce a book which included tips on oral sex, masturbating other males and "safely" urinating on someone for sexual pleasure! The book was given to middle school and high school students.

The point is that if sex is not kept within bounds, like fire it can become extraordinarily destructive. I’m not sure how anyone can seriously try to deny that it is a form of mental illness when people get sexual pleasure from violence, mock torture, receiving or inflicting pain; or behaviors which involve vomiting, urinating or defecating on someone for sexual pleasure.

It is uncompassionate, to say the least, when political correctness causes society to turn its back on people who are suffering from such mental illness, especially when such mental illness can lead to horrible sickness and death!

Conclusion

I will conclude with three observations.

First, from my Evangelical Christian perspective, God loved gay people so much he sent his Son to die for them. How dare we as Evangelicals treat gay people with anything but love and compassion!

It should absolutely unheard of for Christians to verbally or physically abuse gay people. In fact, though I am not a particular fan of Rick Warren, he should be commended for all his work with AIDS patients. Far from mocking or ridiculing gay people, Christians should exhibit so much love and compassion toward them that it should be laughable when the charge of “hater” is leveled against us.

Second, even so, we must recognize that Freedom of Religion is under serious attack. If Christians do no stand up and fight to preserve religious freedom we will lose it.

Freedom of Religion will be increasingly re-defined in such a way that it applies only to private beliefs expressed in the confines of one’s home or place of worship. But when the government forces people to violate ones religious convictions, that is not freedom of religion and it is not the America for which our forefathers fought and died.

On a practical level, fighting for freedom of religion means,

1) pray hard,

2) educate yourself on the issues,

3) win back the House of Representatives in two years to offer some kind of check against an administration gone wild,

4) win back the presidency in four years and then

5) get a marriage amendment or a religious liberty amendment passed. We shouldn’t need a religious liberty amendment, but we apparently need something which makes clear that freedom of sex cannot trump freedom of religion.

The third and final observation is that a genuine “born-again” committed Christian who is also homosexual AND celibate, should be treated not with contempt, but as a hero of the faith!

While the Bible condemns homosexual behavior in the strongest possible terms, it condemns behavior, not orientation.

Leviticus 18:22 says, “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman.” That is behavior, not orientation.

Leviticus 20:12 says, “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.” That is about behavior, not orientation.

Romans 1:26-27 says, “Men committed indecent acts with other men.” That is about behavior, not orientation.

First Corinthians 6:9-10 and First Timothy 1:9-10 speak of “men who practice homosexuality” (ESV). Other translations translate this differently but the Greek word in both cases is a compound word taken directly from the Greek translation (LXX) of Leviticus. It means “man-bedder” and is about behavior, not orientation.

Ahh, but some Christians will respond, what about the lust in same-sex attraction. Lust is not about behavior but Jesus makes it very clear that lust is sin (Matthew 5:27-28).

True enough. But attraction and lust are not necessarily the same thing. I’ve heard that Martin Luther once said, “You can’t keep the birds from flying over your head, but you can keep them from building a nest in your hair.” You can’t necessarily control attraction, but you can, and must, control lust. That applies just as much to those of us who are heterosexual as it does to those who are homosexual.

The point is that there is nothing necessarily sinful about being a celibate “homosexual.” Homosexuals who remain celibate because of their faith, should not be treated with contempt, but should be supported and honored for their commitment to Christ.

Fairness Doctrine by another name?

The Senate recently passed a bill preventing the return of the so-called Fairness Doctrine. Great News! But wait! When they can't get in the front door, they may try to promote censorship through the back door. That may be what the Durban Amendment is all about. See NewsBusters.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Hate crimes against Christians

The recent church cold-blooded murder of a pastor in Illinois seems to be part of an increasing trend in violence against Christians. for example:
  • November 23, 2008: A gunman killed his estranged wife in a New Jersey church as Sunday services let out.
  • July 27, 2008: Two people were killed and six wounded in a shooting rampage at the church in Knoxville, Tenn.
  • December 9, 2007: An estranged young man kills two young adults at the ministry Youth with a Mission (YWAM) before driving to Colorado Springs church, New Life, and opening fire on the congregation just after church was let out. A total of 5 people were killed, including the gunmen. An off-duty security officer, Jeanne Assam, was able to stop the shooters rampage.
  • August 12, 2007: A lone gunman, Eiken Elam Saimon, opened fire in a Missouri Micronesian church, killing a pastor and two other churchgoers.
  • May 20, 2007: A standoff between police and a suspect in the shootings of three people in a Moscow, Idaho, Presbyterian Church ended with three dead, including one police officer.
  • Although not at a church building, the Oct. 2, 2006, attack in Lancaster County, Pa., by a gunman who killed five girls and then himself at an Amish school.
  • May 21, 2006: Louisiana. Four were killed by a man at Jesus Christ Church.
  • Feb. 26, 2006: Michigan. Two people were killed at Zion Hope Missionary Baptist Church by a man who reportedly went to the church looking for his girlfriend. He later killed himself.
  • April 9, 2005: A 27-year-old airman died after being shot at a church in College Park, Ga., where he had once worked as a security guard.
  • March 12, 2005: A man walked into the services of the Living Church of God in Milwaukee and open fired immediately, killing seven people.
  • Oct. 5, 2003: A woman opened fire in Turner Monumental AME church in Kirkwood, east of Atlanta, killing the pastor and two others.
  • Sept. 16, 1999: Seven young people were killed when a man opened fire during a prayer service for teen-agers at the Wedgewood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas.
(from Christian Anti-Defamation Commission).

A gay man--Matthew Shepherd--is brutally and tragically murdered, and not only do every major news outlet in the country cover the story for weeks on end, but Hollywood even makes a movie out of it. But when churches are attacked and Christians are murdered, the media coverage is relatively minimal. Why is that? Shouldn't such violence qualify as "hate crimes?"

Regulating the church

A proposed bill in Connecticut "would create lay councils of seven to 13 people to oversee the finances of local parishes, relegating Catholic pastors and bishops to an advisory role."

That someone would even propose such an unconstitutional bill in America is truly frightening. Once the government starts telling churches how to govern themselves, freedom is truly gone.

Employee Free Choice Act

The Democrats will introduce the "Employee Free Choice Act" in Congress today. This Act will take away employees' right to a secret ballot when voting to unionize.

This, of course, will allow union bosses and their thugs to intimidate employees who don't want to be in a union.

Even though unions were part of the problem in the auto industry, Democrats are pushing this Act because unions exert political clout in favor of Democrats. For Democrats, the important question is not what's best for the country or for freedom, but what is best for Democrat power!

I've got an idea. How about an "American Free Choice Act" which would take away all American's right to a secret ballot. Then the Democrats could have their ACORN thugs intimidate people into voting Democrat!

To call this a "free choice" act sounds like some of the word-games Communists used to play in the former Soviet Union.

Monday, March 09, 2009

Only 9% of adults have a biblical worldview

According to a Barna report, only 9% of adults surveyed have a biblical worldview:

For the purposes of the survey, a “biblical worldview” was defined as believing that absolute moral truth exists; the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches; Satan is considered to be a real being or force, not merely symbolic; a person cannot earn their way into Heaven by trying to be good or do good works; Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; and God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the world who still rules the universe today. In the research, anyone who held all of those beliefs was said to have a biblical worldview.

Overall, the current research revealed that only 9% of all American adults have a biblical worldview.

Science trumps ethics, morality and religion

According to CNN, "Obama overturned an order signed by President Bush in 2001 that barred the National Institutes of Health from funding research on embryonic stem cells beyond using 60 cell lines that existed at that time."

President Obama says he wants to separate science from politics.

Really? If that were really true, why does he compel tax payers to fund research that violates their religions principles? That sure sounds like politics to me. It certainly isn't science!

Saying he wants to separate science from politics is Obama-speak for saying that science should trump ethics. Science should trump religion. Science should trump morality.

Adolf Hitler would be proud.

Sunday, March 08, 2009

Illinois pastor shot dead

Fox News is reporting that "An Illinois pastor used the Bible he was reading from to sheild himself from bullets being pumped at him from an unknown gunman who opened fire during Sunday services at the First Baptist Church in Maryville, Ill.

See also ABC News, CNN

UPDATE: Houston Belief

UPDATE: Read, "The News Media is Lying about Pastor Fred Winters"

UPDATE: Here is an eyewitness report from one of the hero's who helped subdue the gunman.

A nuclear Iran

It sound like a nuclear Iran is rapidly becoming a reality. Will President Obama have what it takes to stop it?

Just imagine Adolf Hitler with nuclear weapons.

Saturday, March 07, 2009

President Obama is in over his head

See Ed Morrissey for the story.

Friday, March 06, 2009

Maybe there's hope afterall!

According to FoxNews, "Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Thursday he'd seriously consider running for president in 2012."

Newt Gingrich for President /Sarah Palin for VP. Maybe there is hope after all.

Is history repeating itself?

Is history repeating itself? If so, we may not survive this time around.

Thursday, March 05, 2009

"I'm tired" by Robert Hall

Here is another one of those "if you only read one thing today (not counting your Bible) read "I'm tired" by Robert Hall. He just does an outstanding job of putting things in perspective. Here is a short excerpt:
I’m tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to “keep people in their homes.” Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I’m willing to help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the leftwing Congresscritters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them—with their own money.

I’m tired of being told how bad America is by leftwing millionaires like Michael Moore, George Soros and Hollywood entertainers who live in luxury because of the opportunities America offers. In thirty years, if they get their way, the United States will have the religious freedom and women’s rights of Saudi Arabia, the economy of Zimbabwe, the freedom of the press of China, the crime and violence of Mexico, the tolerance for Gay people of Iran, and the freedom of speech of Venezuela. Won’t multiculturalism be beautiful.
Please read the entire article.

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Obama lied; the economy died

Read "Obama lied; the economy died" by Tony Blankley in yesterday's Washington Times. Mr. Blankley writes,
The other difference is that George W. Bush didn't lie about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He was merely mistaken. Whereas President Obama told a whopper last week when he claimed he was not for bigger government.
Blankley is right on when he says that big government "is the essence of the man and his presidency. He doesn't like America the way it has been since its founding - and it will take an abusively big government to realize his dreams of converting America into something quite different."

When Mr. Obama said he was for "change" he wasn't kidding....or lying.

Obama cartoon

I just saw a cartoon which I would love to post, but will refrain for copyright reasons.

It is a cartoon of President Obama, with a huge smile, skipping along taking money from a wallet and throwing it all over the place.

A guy in the cartoon is thrilled saying, "Look, he's giving us money just like he promised."

The guy's wife has a concerned look on her face as she responds, "He's got your wallet."

How true it is!

Mayor Bloomberg's Management Report

"Michael R. Bloomberg’s Preliminary Mayor’s Management Report acknowledges a 30.3 percent increase in syphilis cases in New York City, 'reflecting national trends” (AFT)

The report said that "95 percent of the cases are male and a majority report having sex with other men."

So while America has no problem discouraging smoking and obesity, our government, public schools, Hollywood and the Left in general, actively promote unhealthy homosexual behavior which leads to disease and even death.

Some compassion!

Cap and trade: Hang on to your wallets!

Hang on to your wallets! The Obama administration is making plans to implement a wide-spread "cap and trade" policy which will dramatically lower and "cap" the amount of carbon emissions companies can put out. This means companies will have to spend millions or billions on new lower carbon emitting equipment. Before the election, Mr. Obama admitted that this would make utility costs skyrocket--but he doesn't care.

When utility fees go up, everything goes up! Walmart, Target, your grocery store, your drugstore--everyplace has to pay utilities, which means the price you pay not only for your utilities, but for everything goes up as well. Some companies won't be able to afford the changes and will just go out of business, which means more and more jobs lost.

It also means that more and more of America's share in the international marketplace will be gone as countries like India and China (with over 2 billion people) refuse to go along with such nonsense.

So at a time when more and more Americans are out of work, loosing their homes, or just having trouble making ends meet, our "compassionate" Democrats in Congress and the White House are planning to stick it to the American people big time, all for some questionable environmental theories on global warming!

Monday, March 02, 2009

Pelosi and global warming

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi was unable to attend the big Global Warming Rally in Washington DC.

Her flight was delayed by a big snowstorm.

Of course that doesn't say anything about whether or not global warming is a problem but you just have to love the irony.

Stimulus money

For anyone interested in tracking where your stimulus money is being spent, go to StimulusWatch.org (hat tip: Don B.).

Sunday, March 01, 2009

The hijab and freedom of religion

A state legislator in Minnesota is attempting to make it illegal for Muslim women to wear the hijab or headscarf when taking their driver's license pictures.

On this one, I come down in the side of the Muslims. As long as their faces are not covered, they can still be identified and I think their freedom of religion should be upheld.

Helping the backers of Hamas

Let me get this straight. The people of Gaza elect Hamas, a major terrorist organization to lead their government. Hamas then continually fires rockets at innocent Israelis for years until Israel finally has enough and hits back. Now the Obama administration wants to take 900 million dollars of your tax dollars to rebuild Gaza!

If we could have an election to decide whether that 900 million should go to rebuild Gaza, or to help out-of-work Americans, which do you think most Americans would vote for?

If the Obama administration actually thinks that 900 million will buy Muslim good will, they are even farther out to lunch than I feared. Since this money will be funneled through Fatah, my guess is that most Muslims in Gaza won't even have a clue that the money is coming from America! Our money will just look like it is coming from other concerned Muslims, building good will for Fatah, and freeing up Hamas to spend their money to continue their attacks against Israel!