It's interesting to review the results of the 2010 elections. A 60 seat pickup in the House but the Senate remains in enemy hands (and yes, I use that word advisedly). My concern is the certain knowledge that most of my fellow Americans don't have a clue how our country governs itself -- apparently they couldn't even track the "Schoolhouse Rock" song "I'm just a bill" much less stay awake through a semester of civics class.
And there is the problem -- we were in a runaway big-rig going down a West Virginia mountainside headed for certain destruction and some of us stood on the brakes until they melted off the rotors -- the problem is, we also needed to turn the steering wheel on the rig and take it onto the runaway ramp to end up safe -- but we only did half the job. The house is the brakes but the Senate was the ramp -- we didn't do enough and so the rig is still set to careen down the highway but this time, there is no second chance to hit the brakes since they are alrady fried.
What am I talking about? Let me break it down for you. America rightly saw runaway socialism and said "whoa, stop already". But what does it mean to stop? Stop passing new stuff? Well, there IS enough to do that -- the House can see to it that nothing more heinous happens for the next two years -- of course after the inevitible lame-duck, nothing-to-lose, the heck-with-them session wherin cap-n-trade will be passed, taxes will be raised, and the like -- why not? Every pet project that would have prevented re-election is moot now -- they either won or lost, why let integrity get in the way?
So come January, we will still have Obamacare, probably have tax increases as the Bush cuts are allowed to expire, there still won't be a budget, deficits will still be in the 5 trillion dollar range, cap-and-trade will begin dragging down the economy and all the rest. "Just reverse it, defund it, whatever" people say. And there is the problem -- with just half the job done, you can't. The House can try to defund Obamacare, but the Senate won't go along with it. The choice will be to shut down the government altogether and the Dems will keep enough packed together for the rubes to blame "the party of no". Tossing Obama on his ear for being a non-citizen usurper is never going to happen in the next 2 years. Getting Holder's Department of Injustice off of Arizona's case isn't going to happen. Calling for investigations into massive Chicago-thug voter fraud is never going to happen -- you needed BOTH houses of Congress to have a shot. Even 49-49-2 with Biden as tiebreaker would help -- I believe Joe Lieberman is a man who would do the right thing, but if the margin is even 2 or 3, NOTHING HAPPENS.
You have no idea how many political sites filled with political junkies still repeat the ridiculous notion that "Bush spent us into oblivion" ignoring the fact that it was a Democratic congress that constitutionally had the only mechanism to spend. And this is the ones who supposedly "get it". Imagine the general populace's impressions?
How do a majority of states tilt 60 seats toward Republicans and yet some of those same states send their same Democratic Senator back for another round at the bar? It's the maps, stupid. The Bush/Kerry debacle all over again -- a few dozen massively socialist big-city counties outweighing the wisdom and life-style choice of the vast majority of America. How many illegals were allowed to vote in those big cities? What mischief did the 400-strong gaggle of lawyers accomplish in the waning days of this election cycle? How much influence did the SEIU Union Maintenance men who maintained the machines in Harry Reid's home district wield as they hacked the voting machines? Now, we'll never know. Because the dirty tricks brigade was successful. They preserved their 3 seats to thwart any effort at a real fix.
I defy any reasonable person to hear a legitimate "I get it" in the President's speech today. What he "gets" is that people are "frustrated" at a "slow economy" that he falsely attributes to his predecessor. He doesn't "get" that people don't like Socialism. The thought doesn't remotely cross his mind. Of course he is smarter. Of course he deserves the power he has. Of course the people are stupid -- that's just what we are to him -- a stupid annoyance who had a 5 year old temper tantrum and Papa O is still in charge -- all is right with the world.
This election tells me the sensible minority waited too long. Truly there is now proof that the mooching, weak-willed sheeple number over 51% and will inevitably vote themselves from the public larder. Abandon ship, cap'n, she's-a-sinkin'. Maybe if we had woken up before the latest influx of drug-addled gang-bangers. Maybe if we had woken up when GWB showed us there was such a thing as a spend-happy so-called conservative. Maybe, but now it's too late.
I'll give you a way to tell for sure -- I'm told by the talking heads that never before was there a historic shift where only one houses tipped. And always before, the Dow Jones rose by 15% following the shift because it's "always the economy, stupid." But watch over the next 2-3 months. If the down goes up 15%, I'm all wrong and I'm not understanding the power to slow down. But if I'm right -- if the truck is still barelling down the mountainside -- Wall Street will know we didn't do enough. The economy will continue to tank, unemployment will now skyrocket, and you'll begin to see the effect of all of this incorrect philosophy. One of Obama's heroes is FDR -- but a real reading of history shows conclusively that FDR never got it -- he was an economic ignoramus whose every action extended a minor blip into the worst economic disaster ever seen in America. The Big O is capable of every bit as much hubris as FDR and every bit as little insight. Just watch and see. The next few months will tell the tale.
There's your lamp-light for the day.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Theology Made Painless by Music
For my musical friends:
Maybe you all know this guy and I’m last on the train, but if not, I “discovered” him on Moody today and wow, what an eye-opener, I mean ear-opener! His name is Dr. Jeremy Begbie – a theologian and classical pianist who has been exploring not how the arts can REPRESENT spiritual themes for that would require understanding the spiritual question first, but instead how music particularly, and the arts in general, can be a language we intuitively understand that can help us understand the Spiritual reality in the first place.
Music helps us understand God as Trinity – 3 notes occupying the same musical space working in harmony, enhancing each other, resonance filling out the sensation. I tried to find the whole original in which he goes on to talk about how he uses this technique with Atheists to great effect and how a little church orchestra in a large cathedral in England was able to “grasp” a Bible passage (John the Baptist in the wilderness with Jesus coming to be baptized) through music in ways reading the text would never have allowed – challenging and fascinating.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2u20RxqPvo
In this discussion, he uses music again to show how a throw-away, poor piece of music can become a masterpiece and analogously how a worn out, throw away life can become something of great beauty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlR3bOsoAdA
Too incredible not to share. Thank you Lord, for the mind of this man who can reach my sometimes-hard-heart with your fresh inspiration and understanding. Praise and Glory to you.
Yours in Christ,
Brian
Maybe you all know this guy and I’m last on the train, but if not, I “discovered” him on Moody today and wow, what an eye-opener, I mean ear-opener! His name is Dr. Jeremy Begbie – a theologian and classical pianist who has been exploring not how the arts can REPRESENT spiritual themes for that would require understanding the spiritual question first, but instead how music particularly, and the arts in general, can be a language we intuitively understand that can help us understand the Spiritual reality in the first place.
Music helps us understand God as Trinity – 3 notes occupying the same musical space working in harmony, enhancing each other, resonance filling out the sensation. I tried to find the whole original in which he goes on to talk about how he uses this technique with Atheists to great effect and how a little church orchestra in a large cathedral in England was able to “grasp” a Bible passage (John the Baptist in the wilderness with Jesus coming to be baptized) through music in ways reading the text would never have allowed – challenging and fascinating.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2u20RxqPvo
In this discussion, he uses music again to show how a throw-away, poor piece of music can become a masterpiece and analogously how a worn out, throw away life can become something of great beauty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlR3bOsoAdA
Too incredible not to share. Thank you Lord, for the mind of this man who can reach my sometimes-hard-heart with your fresh inspiration and understanding. Praise and Glory to you.
Yours in Christ,
Brian
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Wally, the New York Times, and Dilbert
Am I REALLY supposed to take what the New York Times says seriously? Honestly? It’s not April 1st and this isn’t printed as a JOKE? I’ve read stuff far less funny in “The Onion”
This is their EDITOR’S point of view:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/opinion/08sun1.html
Let me highlight for you:
• the significant accomplishments of the last two years . . . were savagely attacked by the right and aggressively misrepresented as the hoof beats of totalitarianism
• Democrats have been failing to delineate the differences between themselves and Republicans
• President Obama has become uncharacteristically combative
• The preservation or creation of nearly three million jobs, averting Depression-level unemployment
• Democrats should aggressively counter the myth that the deficit is causing unemployment, and advocate using government in ways that might re- inspire voters
• Instead of shrinking from their accomplishments, Democrats should use their remaining time to build on them
So, the NYT says “we want more of the same” – Democrats should have done even more – facts, we don’t need no stinkin’ facts – evidence, nah, we take it on faith that spending government deficit dollars and raising taxes of all kinds exponentially produces jobs and doesn’t destroy them – it all would have worked out so much better if not for those pesky Republicans (who we conveniently neglected to tell you had absolutely no say in what we did and no power in government to slow things down much less stop them -- dwat that wascally wabbit).
If this is the view of the EDITORS, just imagine how the overall tone of the paper slants reality. Dear Lord, PLEASE let the Democratic party follow this advice to “run on its’ ‘accomplishments’”. Do these people live on the same PLANET that I do and did they receive any kind of education at all? I’m convinced they were all smoking weed in the bathroom when they should have been in class. Beyond stunning. This, my friend, is why I put very little stock in what the NYT happens to print – except as resounding examples of propaganda and ignorance at its’ worst.
I DO have one guilty pleasure with the NYT -- there are times it is my version of the comics page. In the same way that Dilbert lampoons the office environment, the NYT caricatures reality by portraying it in absurd fashion. The hilarity comes from the supposed cynical sincerity. They are like Wally when he spouts off ridiculous things like “I avoid my boss and eventually he forgets I’m supposed to be working” while poor, earnest, Asok asks in befuddlement “that WORKS?” Here I am, Dilbert, pointing out the obvious – that you can’t have a healthy bank account by spending yourself into bankruptcy while Wally the NYT tells me “I spend money until I have more of it”, “when people are unhappy with Democrat-caused catastrophes, we create more of them until they like it”, “when people accuse our President of being tone deaf, combative, and basically behaving like a donkey, we encourage him to do more of it”.
Problem is – I’m not quite as gullible as Asok – I’m not about to say “that WORKS?” I’m more like Dilbert thinking “can I please be a character in a different comic strip”.
This is their EDITOR’S point of view:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/opinion/08sun1.html
Let me highlight for you:
• the significant accomplishments of the last two years . . . were savagely attacked by the right and aggressively misrepresented as the hoof beats of totalitarianism
• Democrats have been failing to delineate the differences between themselves and Republicans
• President Obama has become uncharacteristically combative
• The preservation or creation of nearly three million jobs, averting Depression-level unemployment
• Democrats should aggressively counter the myth that the deficit is causing unemployment, and advocate using government in ways that might re- inspire voters
• Instead of shrinking from their accomplishments, Democrats should use their remaining time to build on them
So, the NYT says “we want more of the same” – Democrats should have done even more – facts, we don’t need no stinkin’ facts – evidence, nah, we take it on faith that spending government deficit dollars and raising taxes of all kinds exponentially produces jobs and doesn’t destroy them – it all would have worked out so much better if not for those pesky Republicans (who we conveniently neglected to tell you had absolutely no say in what we did and no power in government to slow things down much less stop them -- dwat that wascally wabbit).
If this is the view of the EDITORS, just imagine how the overall tone of the paper slants reality. Dear Lord, PLEASE let the Democratic party follow this advice to “run on its’ ‘accomplishments’”. Do these people live on the same PLANET that I do and did they receive any kind of education at all? I’m convinced they were all smoking weed in the bathroom when they should have been in class. Beyond stunning. This, my friend, is why I put very little stock in what the NYT happens to print – except as resounding examples of propaganda and ignorance at its’ worst.
I DO have one guilty pleasure with the NYT -- there are times it is my version of the comics page. In the same way that Dilbert lampoons the office environment, the NYT caricatures reality by portraying it in absurd fashion. The hilarity comes from the supposed cynical sincerity. They are like Wally when he spouts off ridiculous things like “I avoid my boss and eventually he forgets I’m supposed to be working” while poor, earnest, Asok asks in befuddlement “that WORKS?” Here I am, Dilbert, pointing out the obvious – that you can’t have a healthy bank account by spending yourself into bankruptcy while Wally the NYT tells me “I spend money until I have more of it”, “when people are unhappy with Democrat-caused catastrophes, we create more of them until they like it”, “when people accuse our President of being tone deaf, combative, and basically behaving like a donkey, we encourage him to do more of it”.
Problem is – I’m not quite as gullible as Asok – I’m not about to say “that WORKS?” I’m more like Dilbert thinking “can I please be a character in a different comic strip”.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Socialists in the Congress
I saw an email this week that claimed that over 70 members of Congress are self-proclaimed Socialists and members of the Socialist Party’s main organization in America. (It’s attached below and I’m going to make a bigger claim – Progressivism IS Socialism and I can prove it) So let’s look at this for a moment.
Regarding the claim that many members of congress are Socialists, I checked and on the Democratic Socialists of America website and there really are many dues-paying congress-people. Sen. Joe McCarthy must be saying “I told you so” in his grave. As an aside, the next time I call Barack Obama a Socialist, I don’t want to hear ANYONE saying I’m being unfair – he has described HIMSELF as such and proven it with his (prior) membership and accepting the backing of the leading organization that espouses his viewpoint. The fact that he deflects the question now is just proof of his total lack of integrity – man-up for crying out loud and OWN it, Mr. President. That’s why we call you the Manchurian Candidate – because of your constant refusal to be truthful about what you believe and what you stand for.
So once we get past the terminology and the affiliation – the real question is this: Is America a Socialist nation? Do we want it to become one? Is it allowable for those who want it to become one to change the very fabric of the nation (and our Constitution) to make it so and to do that against the will of those who do not? Is it a “majority rule” choice? Can it be done by Presidential fiat (saying it’s so) or by just ignoring the Constitution which has clear rules in how it must be changed?
Lest you continue to doubt the relevance, let’s move on to my claim that Progressivism IS Socialism. Let’s compare the promises of the Progressive Caucus with the stated goals on the Democratic Socialist website Here are the web sites for the Socialist Party and the Congressional Progressive Caucus – compare the two, they are virtually the same – and yes, that really is the same Grijalva who is from Arizona and wants to have no enforcement of Immigration Policies – what a shock, huh?
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?SectionID=1&ParentID=0&SectionTypeID=1&SectionTree=1
They align nearly perfectly which means that mainstream “Progressivism” in this country IS “Socialism” (yes I made you dig for it – read the PDF on the DSA website. Work for it so you believe it yourself, don’t take my word for it). Don’t kid yourself by thinking Progressivism is anything other than Socialism by another name. And neither group minds the affiliation – they just don’t want you to be too aware of it because “you are too stupid not to see it is the right way to go.” And you might be old enough to have had some actual non-revisionist history -- before the socialists took over Academia -- that correctly informed you of the many failed efforts at it and their horrific toll on humanity.
The DSA (Democratic Socialists) themselves do not view “Socialist” as a slanderous accusation – they are, in fact, proud of what they stand for. My only question is that since there are many countries in the world who match their view and only a few that don’t – why can’t they PLEASE go to one of them and leave the one alternative choice ALONE. I’m certain Cuba wouldn’t mind accepting them as an immigrant. Oh yeah, they don’t want to because Socialist countries aren’t nearly as nice or as free as the non-Socialist ones. Hmmm. Think there’s something to that?
So does anyone want to have a real DEBATE on the relative merits of Socialism vs Republican Governance? Oooh! Oooh! Can I start with the millions of humans killed by Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il? Can I follow up with the millions enslaved in Europe for over 40 years who couldn’t wait to tear down a wall? Let’s talk about Nazi Germany (avowedly Socialist – anyone seen that word in any movies about Nazis?) How about Castro and Cuba – anyone want to debate Cuba before and after Castro? (before – vacation paradise, after – cesspool of a country) Can we talk about the economy before and after Barack Obama?
Let’s look at a present-day Socialist – John Holdren (Obama’s Science Czar). Here are his views on human life – he advocates forced sterilization, wants to put contraceptives IN THE WATER SECRETLY, believes children aren’t human beings until who-knows-when, and says that children are a net BURDEN to the world (as opposed to a precious gift from God). Think I’m making this up? It was in his own words, in a book authored by him – check it out here:
http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/
And no, he has not repudiated his viewpoints and “grown” – he just waffles and lies a bit better when he gets asked uncomfortable questions about it. That, my friends, is what Socialism really is all about.
What is astounding is that this viewpoint has been mainstreamed due to the huge impact of George Soros – apparently you can buy and pay for an entire country for about $5B which is what he has spent. Why can’t we find some real Patriots to spend an equal amount taking it BACK! Here is more on Soros, the most dangerous man in the world and backer of the Progressive movement. (Note this article is written by a Navy Seal and member of MENSA – not exactly a wacko or ill-educated rube)
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/14700
Check this out for the connections between the modern Progressive movement and Satanist, Aleister Crowley – you start with Crowley the Satanist – acknowledged as the founder of the phrase “New Age”, follow his disciples Alinsky (radicalism), Hefner (sexuality), Kinsey (warped views on human sexuality), Timothy Leary (drug use), and Soros (who put his money to work promoting the whole mess) and you have the end result – the Progressive movement in America and Barack Obama, it’s Socialist figurehead. Want to cement the connection? ‘Do what thou will shall be the whole of the law.’ – no, that’s not the mantra of Hollywood in 2010 or the Buster generation – it was the catch-phrase for Crowley’s seminal work. That just shows how entrenched the concept became – could have been said by Hefner, Alinsky, Obama, or Soros.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Journal/editorial.aspx?id=923348
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Journal/editorial.aspx?id=957204
Only people TRULY IGNORANT of history and clueless about human nature can possibly believe in Socialism as an ideology. At least Soros isn’t stupid – to him it’s just a tool for his own ego and power lust. He doesn’t believe for one moment that it does anything but enslave millions of human beings. Can I just end by calling this for what it is: Progressivism = Socialism = Humanism. And Humanism is the core sin (the Greeks called it Hubris) – the belief that MAN can be equal to GOD or that MAN CAN BE HIS OWN GOD. When you see the fear of global warming, or the social justice drive, or concern about overpopulation, or the need to control others “for their own good” what you see is MAN trying to do GOD’S job. And that is exactly why in this Republic formed on Christianity the founders equated FREEDOM with RELIANCE ON GOD. They got it right – people who trust God can live freely in the understanding that God is in control and that we do not have to try to control things so much. As soon as you break that link – in the interest of MORE so-called freedom – that freedom – to have sex when you want how you want, to own everything in sight, to tell others how to live, to take and scratch and steal and kill and destroy – becomes a poison. Hollywood had it right once – “with great power comes great responsibility” (Spider Man). Let’s leave the “great power” to a “great one”, GOD. And that means fighting Humanism in all its’ forms – including the masquerade of the Progressive Movement.
More on Socialism and it’s hold on our Congress – DO NOT VOTE FOR list (in my opinion)
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_philosophy/dsa_members.htm
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13696
http://sovereignty.net/center/socialists.htm
BDL
Regarding the claim that many members of congress are Socialists, I checked and on the Democratic Socialists of America website and there really are many dues-paying congress-people. Sen. Joe McCarthy must be saying “I told you so” in his grave. As an aside, the next time I call Barack Obama a Socialist, I don’t want to hear ANYONE saying I’m being unfair – he has described HIMSELF as such and proven it with his (prior) membership and accepting the backing of the leading organization that espouses his viewpoint. The fact that he deflects the question now is just proof of his total lack of integrity – man-up for crying out loud and OWN it, Mr. President. That’s why we call you the Manchurian Candidate – because of your constant refusal to be truthful about what you believe and what you stand for.
So once we get past the terminology and the affiliation – the real question is this: Is America a Socialist nation? Do we want it to become one? Is it allowable for those who want it to become one to change the very fabric of the nation (and our Constitution) to make it so and to do that against the will of those who do not? Is it a “majority rule” choice? Can it be done by Presidential fiat (saying it’s so) or by just ignoring the Constitution which has clear rules in how it must be changed?
Lest you continue to doubt the relevance, let’s move on to my claim that Progressivism IS Socialism. Let’s compare the promises of the Progressive Caucus with the stated goals on the Democratic Socialist website Here are the web sites for the Socialist Party and the Congressional Progressive Caucus – compare the two, they are virtually the same – and yes, that really is the same Grijalva who is from Arizona and wants to have no enforcement of Immigration Policies – what a shock, huh?
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?SectionID=1&ParentID=0&SectionTypeID=1&SectionTree=1
They align nearly perfectly which means that mainstream “Progressivism” in this country IS “Socialism” (yes I made you dig for it – read the PDF on the DSA website. Work for it so you believe it yourself, don’t take my word for it). Don’t kid yourself by thinking Progressivism is anything other than Socialism by another name. And neither group minds the affiliation – they just don’t want you to be too aware of it because “you are too stupid not to see it is the right way to go.” And you might be old enough to have had some actual non-revisionist history -- before the socialists took over Academia -- that correctly informed you of the many failed efforts at it and their horrific toll on humanity.
The DSA (Democratic Socialists) themselves do not view “Socialist” as a slanderous accusation – they are, in fact, proud of what they stand for. My only question is that since there are many countries in the world who match their view and only a few that don’t – why can’t they PLEASE go to one of them and leave the one alternative choice ALONE. I’m certain Cuba wouldn’t mind accepting them as an immigrant. Oh yeah, they don’t want to because Socialist countries aren’t nearly as nice or as free as the non-Socialist ones. Hmmm. Think there’s something to that?
So does anyone want to have a real DEBATE on the relative merits of Socialism vs Republican Governance? Oooh! Oooh! Can I start with the millions of humans killed by Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il? Can I follow up with the millions enslaved in Europe for over 40 years who couldn’t wait to tear down a wall? Let’s talk about Nazi Germany (avowedly Socialist – anyone seen that word in any movies about Nazis?) How about Castro and Cuba – anyone want to debate Cuba before and after Castro? (before – vacation paradise, after – cesspool of a country) Can we talk about the economy before and after Barack Obama?
Let’s look at a present-day Socialist – John Holdren (Obama’s Science Czar). Here are his views on human life – he advocates forced sterilization, wants to put contraceptives IN THE WATER SECRETLY, believes children aren’t human beings until who-knows-when, and says that children are a net BURDEN to the world (as opposed to a precious gift from God). Think I’m making this up? It was in his own words, in a book authored by him – check it out here:
http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/
And no, he has not repudiated his viewpoints and “grown” – he just waffles and lies a bit better when he gets asked uncomfortable questions about it. That, my friends, is what Socialism really is all about.
What is astounding is that this viewpoint has been mainstreamed due to the huge impact of George Soros – apparently you can buy and pay for an entire country for about $5B which is what he has spent. Why can’t we find some real Patriots to spend an equal amount taking it BACK! Here is more on Soros, the most dangerous man in the world and backer of the Progressive movement. (Note this article is written by a Navy Seal and member of MENSA – not exactly a wacko or ill-educated rube)
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/14700
Check this out for the connections between the modern Progressive movement and Satanist, Aleister Crowley – you start with Crowley the Satanist – acknowledged as the founder of the phrase “New Age”, follow his disciples Alinsky (radicalism), Hefner (sexuality), Kinsey (warped views on human sexuality), Timothy Leary (drug use), and Soros (who put his money to work promoting the whole mess) and you have the end result – the Progressive movement in America and Barack Obama, it’s Socialist figurehead. Want to cement the connection? ‘Do what thou will shall be the whole of the law.’ – no, that’s not the mantra of Hollywood in 2010 or the Buster generation – it was the catch-phrase for Crowley’s seminal work. That just shows how entrenched the concept became – could have been said by Hefner, Alinsky, Obama, or Soros.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Journal/editorial.aspx?id=923348
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Journal/editorial.aspx?id=957204
Only people TRULY IGNORANT of history and clueless about human nature can possibly believe in Socialism as an ideology. At least Soros isn’t stupid – to him it’s just a tool for his own ego and power lust. He doesn’t believe for one moment that it does anything but enslave millions of human beings. Can I just end by calling this for what it is: Progressivism = Socialism = Humanism. And Humanism is the core sin (the Greeks called it Hubris) – the belief that MAN can be equal to GOD or that MAN CAN BE HIS OWN GOD. When you see the fear of global warming, or the social justice drive, or concern about overpopulation, or the need to control others “for their own good” what you see is MAN trying to do GOD’S job. And that is exactly why in this Republic formed on Christianity the founders equated FREEDOM with RELIANCE ON GOD. They got it right – people who trust God can live freely in the understanding that God is in control and that we do not have to try to control things so much. As soon as you break that link – in the interest of MORE so-called freedom – that freedom – to have sex when you want how you want, to own everything in sight, to tell others how to live, to take and scratch and steal and kill and destroy – becomes a poison. Hollywood had it right once – “with great power comes great responsibility” (Spider Man). Let’s leave the “great power” to a “great one”, GOD. And that means fighting Humanism in all its’ forms – including the masquerade of the Progressive Movement.
More on Socialism and it’s hold on our Congress – DO NOT VOTE FOR list (in my opinion)
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_philosophy/dsa_members.htm
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13696
http://sovereignty.net/center/socialists.htm
BDL
Friday, May 14, 2010
A Confederacy of Fools
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such
as those who made him their president." - Author Unknown
I saw this today in my inbox -- attributed to the President of the Czech Republic, but an extensive search could not confirm his authorship and I doubt that attribution is authentic. But I wish I knew who wrote it. It is spot on. And it is this concern about the mental competence of some of my fellow citizens that has me most disturbed. What does it speak to our shared sense of community when a country that was once unified in its' love of individual freedom is now split nearly evenly between those so out of touch that they see no parallel between Greece's default, California's bankruptcy, and the coming collapse of the US Currency due to an over-active printing press.
What can be said about a generation that spends not just it's own money, but that of its' children and grand-children such that a newborn is born literally a slave -- owing a debt they can never reasonably repay and which they had no say in acquiring. Where is the shame? How do people look in the mirror knowing that for the first time in America, the prospects for the next generation are far worse than for the present one?
Will we have riots in the streets as those who are used to being given rebel when they are given to no longer? This is what we saw in Greece -- "just make more, give me MINE". It is a temper-tantrum suited to a 5 year old but displayed in adults. Are the California labor unions any different when they hold hostage police, fire, and city services upon a bankrupt population that is leaving by the droves?
I would love to see a proposal as to how the US can be reborn and Phoenix-like rise out of the ashes. A new coalition of those who realize that solutions to fit 300 million people are too big but those for "my town" are just right is what is required. But how do we break free? Arizona enacts something right for it and AG Holder says "no way". California favors free use of Marijuana, and DC says "we'll throw you in OUR jails". Montana says automatic weapons are fine with us and DC says "we'll apply the interstate commerce clause even to something clearly intrastate".
Fascism, Socialism, Statism, Corporatism, I don't care what you call it. I call it Tyranny. Are there not enough people left in this country who's number 1 ideal is "leave me alone!". THAT, my friends, is what I think America used to stand for. The country of "Leave me alone". "Stop telling me what to do." "Live your own life and let me live mine." I see nothing unchristian about that. It is an ideal that is neither Left nor Right nor Green nor Progressive. Why must I leave my town which I like, my State who's government works simply because a Confederacy of Fools hundreds of miles away can't keep their hands out of my pocket-book, their cameras out of my streets, their data-scrapers out of my communications, and their attitudes out of my town square and my church. Just go away -- lead your own life -- and let me lead mine.
as those who made him their president." - Author Unknown
I saw this today in my inbox -- attributed to the President of the Czech Republic, but an extensive search could not confirm his authorship and I doubt that attribution is authentic. But I wish I knew who wrote it. It is spot on. And it is this concern about the mental competence of some of my fellow citizens that has me most disturbed. What does it speak to our shared sense of community when a country that was once unified in its' love of individual freedom is now split nearly evenly between those so out of touch that they see no parallel between Greece's default, California's bankruptcy, and the coming collapse of the US Currency due to an over-active printing press.
What can be said about a generation that spends not just it's own money, but that of its' children and grand-children such that a newborn is born literally a slave -- owing a debt they can never reasonably repay and which they had no say in acquiring. Where is the shame? How do people look in the mirror knowing that for the first time in America, the prospects for the next generation are far worse than for the present one?
Will we have riots in the streets as those who are used to being given rebel when they are given to no longer? This is what we saw in Greece -- "just make more, give me MINE". It is a temper-tantrum suited to a 5 year old but displayed in adults. Are the California labor unions any different when they hold hostage police, fire, and city services upon a bankrupt population that is leaving by the droves?
I would love to see a proposal as to how the US can be reborn and Phoenix-like rise out of the ashes. A new coalition of those who realize that solutions to fit 300 million people are too big but those for "my town" are just right is what is required. But how do we break free? Arizona enacts something right for it and AG Holder says "no way". California favors free use of Marijuana, and DC says "we'll throw you in OUR jails". Montana says automatic weapons are fine with us and DC says "we'll apply the interstate commerce clause even to something clearly intrastate".
Fascism, Socialism, Statism, Corporatism, I don't care what you call it. I call it Tyranny. Are there not enough people left in this country who's number 1 ideal is "leave me alone!". THAT, my friends, is what I think America used to stand for. The country of "Leave me alone". "Stop telling me what to do." "Live your own life and let me live mine." I see nothing unchristian about that. It is an ideal that is neither Left nor Right nor Green nor Progressive. Why must I leave my town which I like, my State who's government works simply because a Confederacy of Fools hundreds of miles away can't keep their hands out of my pocket-book, their cameras out of my streets, their data-scrapers out of my communications, and their attitudes out of my town square and my church. Just go away -- lead your own life -- and let me lead mine.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Another Example of the Utter Hypocrisy of the Liberal Left
In this post:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/06/black-tea-party-activists-called-traitors/
we find the story of TEA Party members of African American descent. In the story we find the following quote:
----
Black members of the movement say it is not inherently racist, and some question the reported slurs. "You would think — something that offensive — you would think someone got video of it," Bazar, the conservative blogger, said.
"Just because you have one nut case, it doesn't automatically equate that you've got an organization that espouses (racism) as a sane belief," Johnson said.
Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, suggested a bit of caution.
"I'm sure the reason that (black conservatives) are involved is that from an ideological perspective, they agree," said Shelton. "But when those kinds of things happen, it is very important to be careful of the company that you keep."
---
Let me get this straight -- a black supporter of the limited government espoused by the TEA Party movement is counselled by a leader of the NAACP that they should be "careful of the company they keep" because of allegations that some members of a group of millions have possibly said some rascist things. Of course, there is no proof -- no video or audio of a public display that occurred the day before a momentous vote on an unprecedented health care bill. The events supposedly occurred toward congressmen -- people followed by aides and entourages. There were many opposition people and press present and there is not one video or audio tape in an era when everyone has phones capable of such.
Yet the NAACP supports the actions of a President who spent 20 years listening to the most vile hatred be spewed by Jeremiah Wright -- a man who calls himself a Pastor. His speech shows him to be an avowed anti-semite and hater of most people who are not like him either in color or belief. Yet this same NAACP misses the incredible hypocrisy that refuses to condemn the President for listening for 20 years. This pastor was a father-surrogate and spiritual mentor both organizationally and for his family personally. His comments are readily available on tape, video and print.
So let me get this straight -- a conservative is supposed to run for the hills at the mere whiff of taint by a person somewhere, somehow, with no proof of either action or allegiance possibly saying something that might be offensive for fear of harming their own image by the company they keep. But a liberal is allowed to frolic with people who bathe in hatred, document what they say, disseminate it, push it, and persevere in it for 20 years. They are allowed to be photographed with said person, sup with them, and consult with them. And yet, their affiliation is to be ignored and is considered "just ducky".
Wow. If that image doesn't belong in the dictionary as the definition of "hypocrisy" I don't know what does.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/06/black-tea-party-activists-called-traitors/
we find the story of TEA Party members of African American descent. In the story we find the following quote:
----
Black members of the movement say it is not inherently racist, and some question the reported slurs. "You would think — something that offensive — you would think someone got video of it," Bazar, the conservative blogger, said.
"Just because you have one nut case, it doesn't automatically equate that you've got an organization that espouses (racism) as a sane belief," Johnson said.
Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, suggested a bit of caution.
"I'm sure the reason that (black conservatives) are involved is that from an ideological perspective, they agree," said Shelton. "But when those kinds of things happen, it is very important to be careful of the company that you keep."
---
Let me get this straight -- a black supporter of the limited government espoused by the TEA Party movement is counselled by a leader of the NAACP that they should be "careful of the company they keep" because of allegations that some members of a group of millions have possibly said some rascist things. Of course, there is no proof -- no video or audio of a public display that occurred the day before a momentous vote on an unprecedented health care bill. The events supposedly occurred toward congressmen -- people followed by aides and entourages. There were many opposition people and press present and there is not one video or audio tape in an era when everyone has phones capable of such.
Yet the NAACP supports the actions of a President who spent 20 years listening to the most vile hatred be spewed by Jeremiah Wright -- a man who calls himself a Pastor. His speech shows him to be an avowed anti-semite and hater of most people who are not like him either in color or belief. Yet this same NAACP misses the incredible hypocrisy that refuses to condemn the President for listening for 20 years. This pastor was a father-surrogate and spiritual mentor both organizationally and for his family personally. His comments are readily available on tape, video and print.
So let me get this straight -- a conservative is supposed to run for the hills at the mere whiff of taint by a person somewhere, somehow, with no proof of either action or allegiance possibly saying something that might be offensive for fear of harming their own image by the company they keep. But a liberal is allowed to frolic with people who bathe in hatred, document what they say, disseminate it, push it, and persevere in it for 20 years. They are allowed to be photographed with said person, sup with them, and consult with them. And yet, their affiliation is to be ignored and is considered "just ducky".
Wow. If that image doesn't belong in the dictionary as the definition of "hypocrisy" I don't know what does.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Executive Order Banning Federal Funds for Abortion a Ruse
See this reference:
http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2010/03/21/draft-executive-order-on-abortion-funding-does-it-address-senate-accounting-trick/
I decided a while ago that those who said you could tell the truth by who screamed loudly and who didn't had a great idea. When NARAL and Planned Parenthood lauded the healthcare bill instead of castigating it, I knew that Bart Stupak had either been had or was always after the green and that the executive order wasn't fit to use for toilet paper.
That being said, I was a bit surprised that Commandant President signed it anyway. Why take the chance? I've now decided it was an exercise in stroking his monumental ego and a wry lawyer joke akin the the kind of games played by ER nurses ("yup, he's a gomer (get out of my emergency room)").
In this case, it's a way to say "let's see if these idiots catch on to how smart I am as a lawyer -- this isn't just unenforceable (because laws trump EOs -- it doesn't even do what it pretends to do" (cue the maniacal laughter). You can see the above link for details, but I believe the author is on to something.
The EO purports to ban the use of "appropriated funds" for providing abortions. This could perhaps trigger (in an ideal world) a huge backlash whereby the 70% of the country who does not favor killing live babies on dark tables in coat closets (as BO voted to allow while an Illinois Senator) withhold portions of their tax revenues as a form of protest. After all, they can't jail all of us, right? Well, here is yet another end-around. The money to fund abortions comes from (follow me here), the insurance companies -- not the federal government. Now maybe semantic differences matter a whole lot is sneaky lawyerly places like Washington DC or New York City, but where I live in the heartland, I don't care if you do put lipstick on a pig and call it Mary, I'm still not going to kiss it.
No sir, out here, if you force me to buy insurance under threat of fines or imprisonment, I call it what it is -- a government action -- and let's use a different word, it is awfully similar to a TAX. Yup, I see right through that. Now if you dictate to the insurance company I have to do business with what they can offer (a policy that covers abortion), then 2 things become true -- first, that insurance company just got taken over. I really don't care if you pretend to call it something different. Just like we now have Government Motors where we used to have GM, we will now have GI (Government Insurance -- you like the gastro-intestinal reference too? Because that's what it's going to feel like. So those formerly private company employees are government employees, GI is another arm of the government, and the GI product that kills babies using money I am coerced and threatened to pay them is still using my money to fund something I find morally objectionable. And that, is what a very wise man named Thomas Jefferson called tyranny.
So, go ahead and enjoy your little in-joke Mr. Obama. You can pretend you pulled the wool over us with your clever tricks like the magicians use, your sleight-of-hand and misdirection, your arcane use of legalese. But we here in the heartland see right through you. And I'm still hoping for a change -- the change that throws you and your Socialist cronies right out of office at the earliest possible opportunity.
http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2010/03/21/draft-executive-order-on-abortion-funding-does-it-address-senate-accounting-trick/
I decided a while ago that those who said you could tell the truth by who screamed loudly and who didn't had a great idea. When NARAL and Planned Parenthood lauded the healthcare bill instead of castigating it, I knew that Bart Stupak had either been had or was always after the green and that the executive order wasn't fit to use for toilet paper.
That being said, I was a bit surprised that Commandant President signed it anyway. Why take the chance? I've now decided it was an exercise in stroking his monumental ego and a wry lawyer joke akin the the kind of games played by ER nurses ("yup, he's a gomer (get out of my emergency room)").
In this case, it's a way to say "let's see if these idiots catch on to how smart I am as a lawyer -- this isn't just unenforceable (because laws trump EOs -- it doesn't even do what it pretends to do" (cue the maniacal laughter). You can see the above link for details, but I believe the author is on to something.
The EO purports to ban the use of "appropriated funds" for providing abortions. This could perhaps trigger (in an ideal world) a huge backlash whereby the 70% of the country who does not favor killing live babies on dark tables in coat closets (as BO voted to allow while an Illinois Senator) withhold portions of their tax revenues as a form of protest. After all, they can't jail all of us, right? Well, here is yet another end-around. The money to fund abortions comes from (follow me here), the insurance companies -- not the federal government. Now maybe semantic differences matter a whole lot is sneaky lawyerly places like Washington DC or New York City, but where I live in the heartland, I don't care if you do put lipstick on a pig and call it Mary, I'm still not going to kiss it.
No sir, out here, if you force me to buy insurance under threat of fines or imprisonment, I call it what it is -- a government action -- and let's use a different word, it is awfully similar to a TAX. Yup, I see right through that. Now if you dictate to the insurance company I have to do business with what they can offer (a policy that covers abortion), then 2 things become true -- first, that insurance company just got taken over. I really don't care if you pretend to call it something different. Just like we now have Government Motors where we used to have GM, we will now have GI (Government Insurance -- you like the gastro-intestinal reference too? Because that's what it's going to feel like. So those formerly private company employees are government employees, GI is another arm of the government, and the GI product that kills babies using money I am coerced and threatened to pay them is still using my money to fund something I find morally objectionable. And that, is what a very wise man named Thomas Jefferson called tyranny.
So, go ahead and enjoy your little in-joke Mr. Obama. You can pretend you pulled the wool over us with your clever tricks like the magicians use, your sleight-of-hand and misdirection, your arcane use of legalese. But we here in the heartland see right through you. And I'm still hoping for a change -- the change that throws you and your Socialist cronies right out of office at the earliest possible opportunity.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
A Walk in Someone Else's Shoes
Is it wrong for me to wish that every believer in something for nothing, let someone else pay for it, can't things all be free, and government will take care of me to have just a day in a country such as Cuba or North Korea or Iran or Soviet Georgia or Venezuela?
Can they have the flu and stand in line in Canada or Great Britain -- dressed as a 70-year-old who is deemed worthless, and unworthy of funds being expended?
Can they try life for a week as a small business owner trying to make payroll and having the lives of 10 families hanging in the balance while he has to decide which of the 10 to let go of to pay for the new costs of the remaining 9 that will now have to work longer hours?
Can they try life as an MD with a $100,000 malpractice bill, 3 active lawsuits over babies that no Doctor could create miracles for, $300,000 of medical debt, and 50 patients to see in one day so he can pay for 4 paperwork clerks, spend half his time filling out forms, be used as the verifier of vaccinations, sports physicals, existence of personhood for purposes of Social Security, and have to wait months to get reimbursed whie he, too, cannot make payroll and spends only 2 hours every 3 days at home with his own family.
Can they try life as a Pharmacist who cannot honor his conscience or be an administrator of a Catholic hospital forced to close because they refuse to take life?
Can they be the minister who has to look into the eyes of the person denied cancer treatment because a faceless bureaucrat afer 6 months' of paperwork denies their request because it's not cost-effective?
Can they see even the simple desperation of having to order drugs from India because the existing policies have donut holes, formularies, and such and the choice is between cat-food for supper or medecine that saves a life?
Can they just be human? Honorable? Respectful of their Creator? And their fellow man? Can they see for one minute the horror of war -- the American Revolution where freedom was bought at such a terrible cost? Or that day at Calvary where true freedom was purchased for an even more terrible cost?
Can't they just SEE.
Am I wrong to wish that?
Can they have the flu and stand in line in Canada or Great Britain -- dressed as a 70-year-old who is deemed worthless, and unworthy of funds being expended?
Can they try life for a week as a small business owner trying to make payroll and having the lives of 10 families hanging in the balance while he has to decide which of the 10 to let go of to pay for the new costs of the remaining 9 that will now have to work longer hours?
Can they try life as an MD with a $100,000 malpractice bill, 3 active lawsuits over babies that no Doctor could create miracles for, $300,000 of medical debt, and 50 patients to see in one day so he can pay for 4 paperwork clerks, spend half his time filling out forms, be used as the verifier of vaccinations, sports physicals, existence of personhood for purposes of Social Security, and have to wait months to get reimbursed whie he, too, cannot make payroll and spends only 2 hours every 3 days at home with his own family.
Can they try life as a Pharmacist who cannot honor his conscience or be an administrator of a Catholic hospital forced to close because they refuse to take life?
Can they be the minister who has to look into the eyes of the person denied cancer treatment because a faceless bureaucrat afer 6 months' of paperwork denies their request because it's not cost-effective?
Can they see even the simple desperation of having to order drugs from India because the existing policies have donut holes, formularies, and such and the choice is between cat-food for supper or medecine that saves a life?
Can they just be human? Honorable? Respectful of their Creator? And their fellow man? Can they see for one minute the horror of war -- the American Revolution where freedom was bought at such a terrible cost? Or that day at Calvary where true freedom was purchased for an even more terrible cost?
Can't they just SEE.
Am I wrong to wish that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)