Saturday, May 18, 2013
Pull Back the Curtain
Today is ay 18th 2013... I’ve closed my ears to all politics and news for the past 6 months since the election. LIke some kind of marvelous coincidence. Every reason I stopped watching the news seems to be the news now. This administration had involved itself in scandal to intimidate opponents of its second term ambitions through the IRS as well as covered up news about the Benghazi Al Qauda Attacks on September 11th 2012 .
Still nothing will be done beyond “conservative” politicians posturing as if they are about to bring down a hammer but then asking the Democrats where they can carefully place that hammer so no one gets hurt with it.
On the other side of the conservative bench is talk radio that do just that. Talk. They fill the air with empty words and empty interviews of congressmen that speak of a plan in the passive of “this will take time” and “there is a lot to be uncovered”...
Where is this country when Democrat leadership can get away with murder (literally)? When there is a president who has zero fear of consequence?
We are a country with soft talk. With values we celebrate in theory and with ideals that sound good when reading them from a 200 year old document.
We are a country in act of infidelity to democracy and liberty. Our leaders hold tight to rules and processes that are working against movements that do not work by the same rules. We hold hearings about Benghazi while the administration is moving forward on every destructive plan it has in store despite the fact that those plans were brought to bare through nefarious means.
There is one truth that needs to be preached over and over and that is wealth allows for liberty. Liberals (The Democrat Leadership) want to crush wealth because the more money you have the less you can be controlled.
Things must change.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Values vs Rules
If you were going to design a perfect society where would you begin? What characteristics define a perfect society? In futuristic movies you see a multicultural (sometimes multi species) caricature of society all getting along, all perusing peace, all with what may seem like the same values.
Is a perfect society founded on values or rules?
That question is easily answerable with the example of California. California is a state that is practically founded on “Progressive” ideas some of which were actually progressive for their time. However, California legislators have made a dangerous substitution, exchanging values for rules.
California legislators continue to stand between parents and children in their upbringing with the liberal agenda being pushing in the public schools system. Beyond that California and the federal government in some cases have minimized the role of parents and even more father in the family unit to such a degree that we now find legislation that mimic morality. Like a prostatic limb legislators have passed and forced laws that common sense was made for. More often than not these laws defy common sense.
That very inconsistency is the mud that law creates when values are absent. Abortion is legal but there is a limit to when you can abort? This inconsistent idea is a slap in the face of rational thought. Lawmakers are defining when life begins arbitrarily though legislation. This sends a mixed signal that right and wrong is completely subjective to who can afford a better arbitrator.
We now see moral issue after moral issue completely blurred because the legitimacy of those issues is up for debate. The irony, for example with same sex marriage is that people who want to maintain the sanctity of marriage between 1 man and 1 woman come from a moral and practical standpoint. How it is ironic is because advocates of same sex marriage declare that their opposition are bigots and homophobic. How can the accused moral down fall of a side by not acknowledging some twisted idea of equality even be relevant when this issue is up for debate only because the morality that was once universal is now obsolete? Obviously if morality is subjective to the majorities ideals then right and wrong, morality, or even ideas of equality are completely subjective and nobody has any rational base to stand on…
So again we have to defer to legislation to decide through deliberation.
Is a perfect society founded on values or rules?
That question is easily answerable with the example of California. California is a state that is practically founded on “Progressive” ideas some of which were actually progressive for their time. However, California legislators have made a dangerous substitution, exchanging values for rules.
California legislators continue to stand between parents and children in their upbringing with the liberal agenda being pushing in the public schools system. Beyond that California and the federal government in some cases have minimized the role of parents and even more father in the family unit to such a degree that we now find legislation that mimic morality. Like a prostatic limb legislators have passed and forced laws that common sense was made for. More often than not these laws defy common sense.
That very inconsistency is the mud that law creates when values are absent. Abortion is legal but there is a limit to when you can abort? This inconsistent idea is a slap in the face of rational thought. Lawmakers are defining when life begins arbitrarily though legislation. This sends a mixed signal that right and wrong is completely subjective to who can afford a better arbitrator.
We now see moral issue after moral issue completely blurred because the legitimacy of those issues is up for debate. The irony, for example with same sex marriage is that people who want to maintain the sanctity of marriage between 1 man and 1 woman come from a moral and practical standpoint. How it is ironic is because advocates of same sex marriage declare that their opposition are bigots and homophobic. How can the accused moral down fall of a side by not acknowledging some twisted idea of equality even be relevant when this issue is up for debate only because the morality that was once universal is now obsolete? Obviously if morality is subjective to the majorities ideals then right and wrong, morality, or even ideas of equality are completely subjective and nobody has any rational base to stand on…
So again we have to defer to legislation to decide through deliberation.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Gay Marriage, Black Americans, and The Democrat’s Weapon of Mass Disparagement
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35374462/Prop-8-Ruling-FINAL
(If you'd like to read the ruling)
What is one to say about this over turning of the will of the people with the recent ruling by Judge Walker concerning California's Proposition 8? Should I begin by listing the friends I have that are homosexual to absolve myself from bigotry? Should I site the list of dishonest associations to the past civil rights struggles of black Americans that supposedly legitimize the claims of the proponents of same sex marriage? The very mention of the black American's struggle for civil rights as if this is history repeated makes a dishonest comparison that not only discounts the history of black Americans, since their claim in no way elevates that of black Americans but also the comparison asserts homosexuals a supposed "minority group" status in America. We see yet again, that the plight of black Americans being used for the benefit of the political Left... It begs the question why would any Democrat in leadership want to help the black Americans of this country? It's obvious that the disposition and victim status of black Americans serves the Left without end.
(In case I didn't say that clear enough; if the Democrat leadership actually got out of the way of the needed healing of this country for the status of black Americans, they would forfeit their most valuable weapon, i.e. black victimization and social unease.)
There is an underground movement in this country by a loud fringe minority that comes from the abandonment of common sense. People have rewritten The Declaration of Independence from, "all men are created equal..." to read, "all groups are created equal". Which stands as the first victory for the same sex marriage movement. The status of "minority group" gave homosexuals an association, which they use to their advantage. It is because of that 'slight of hand' that we are forced to have this discussion explaining the difference between the struggle for black American's civil rights and homosexuals right to marriage. Yet again, we visit a reopening of that old wound of black Americans suffering, which serves its purpose for The Left. It does the job it has done for similar Leftist issues. It plants the seed of guilt for those who would object to homosexual marriage by making the association with the black American’s history of discrimination, which in-turn becomes silence by those who would speak out against it... which basically equals support for homosexual marriage. Evidence of that is the number of witnesses both sides of the case brought to the stand. Witnesses 'for same sex marriage': 16, witnesses protecting The Constitutional Amendment: 2...
Every advocate of same sex marriage knows that America does not agree with their self-proclaimed minority status, nor do Americans empathize with the actual issue of the "right" to marry. But, they know that they don't need the support of Americans... The advocates of homosexual marriage only need to control the conversation. To insure that and because of those two facts the advocates of gay marriage tie themselves to the much larger universally accepted issue of civil rights for black Americans. This wound is left festering in today’s politics by fools like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton; adding insult to injury, more recently by our President in his silence. Barrack Obama if he put America first he would be condemning the idea that attacks on his administration are based in racism. The racial divide in America serves Obama’s agenda as it serves the Left. Again, The Left understands that their power comes from the unease of black Americans so they make sure to fuel that whenever they need any reinvigoration in their party.
Advocates of homosexual marriage need to deliver guilt to their opponents. They have successfully created a false premise saying that it took courts to legalize the right for interracial marriage and desegregation; comparing that to California's overwhelming support for Prop 8, which is intellectually dishonest (to use nice words)... (The Prop 8 bill was rewritten by California's Attorney General, W. Brown. His revision read that voting "Yes" for proposition 8 was saying that you "want to TAKE AWAY the rights for homosexuals to marry. This ballot measure was created due to the 2008 California Supreme Courts over turning of the year 2000 ballot measure Prop 22, defining marriage between one man and one woman.)
The false premise is asserting that courts were the reason desegregation started not to mention, implying that they were ahead of the moral curve compared to main stream Americans in its desire to make it federal law that no state can make any laws that racially discriminates. If you didn’t know better you would think that the integration of black Americans into public schools on the news in the 60’s were the first to desegregate, when in fact they were some of the last.
Still, The Left tries to own the title of “people’s champ”, when in fact they have been on the wrong side of history in almost every case they pretend to champion. It’s almost unbelievable that Democrats use imagery of past black American injustice to promote their future initiatives, when in fact; the past injustices they claim to abhor were prolonged as well as endorsed by their own party’s obstructionism. Historically if Democrats did not stand in the way of Conservatives, slavery would have ended sooner, desegregation would have happened faster, and we would be that much closer to the dream where men would be measured by the content of there character not by the color of their skin opposite of what this present administration would like with its reinvestment into racial quotas.
Judge Walker, who delivered his verdict, ruled that the defense of Prop 8 did not show sufficient evidence to support the claims that homosexual marriage would undermine traditional marriage, or that same sex marriage was in anyway harmful to the developing psyche of kids brought up in that environment. (I have to digress yet again...ironically, the Left would seem to be masters of predicting calamity, from cel phone brain tumors, breast implant seepage, a heterosexual AIDS epidemic, widespread homelessness, over population, to man-made Global Warming™. Why this is ironic is because the arguments for these hysterical issues are always left to Conservatives to 'prove the negative'. Conservatives (for the most part) have to, "prove the world will not end by toxic levels of man produced carbon emissions in the year 2050..." Yet, when it comes to our ability to have them prove a negative that is much more likely, proof that this will not damage traditional marriage, the foundation of our civilization or the developmental psyche of kids into adulthood... we get an unwavering, very objective response from Judge Walker saying that Supporters of traditional marriage "did not supply sufficient evidence" to prove that their will be damage to society with the legitimization of same sex marriage... Shouldn't advocates of gay marriage have to prove that their desires for same sex marriage will not serve as a detriment to society? Not in this backwards world. But widespread destruction by man-made emissions... this is practically a "fact"... (We are told that there is consensus on the issue when only a fraction of scientists adhere to such claims).
It is of note that the unique situation of Judge Walker (who was a Reagan appointee) is in fact homosexual. Why this is of note is because striking down the claim of advocates for same sex marriage puts him in a potential conflict of interest. The reasons stated earlier in this piece for his judgment (of not finding sufficient evidence that gay marriage would damage two pillars in America, one being traditional marriage and the second, being future generations)... If he had ruled in favor of the constitutional amendment defining marriage as ‘one man, one woman’, it could be interpreted to himself that he would be admitting that their may be a moral issue at hand, further that a society is handicapped by his own personal core desires... Could it be understood that a homosexual man declaring that same sex marriage is not beneficial for a society cause him to question the root and legitimacy of his sexual orientation?
How can this possibly be reconciled? Ah... the magic question... Judge Walker declared that "morality was not the issue but legality is..." (paraphrased)
If one is to a measure of all the double standards of The Left, that person might find that those double standards are innumerable. Leftists do not believe in logic or morality or reason... Their values lie in emotion. It is not a double standard to The Left to capitalize on the historical moral mistreatment of black Americans to further their cause but then declare that morality plays no role in the governing factors of the right to marry.
(If you'd like to read the ruling)
What is one to say about this over turning of the will of the people with the recent ruling by Judge Walker concerning California's Proposition 8? Should I begin by listing the friends I have that are homosexual to absolve myself from bigotry? Should I site the list of dishonest associations to the past civil rights struggles of black Americans that supposedly legitimize the claims of the proponents of same sex marriage? The very mention of the black American's struggle for civil rights as if this is history repeated makes a dishonest comparison that not only discounts the history of black Americans, since their claim in no way elevates that of black Americans but also the comparison asserts homosexuals a supposed "minority group" status in America. We see yet again, that the plight of black Americans being used for the benefit of the political Left... It begs the question why would any Democrat in leadership want to help the black Americans of this country? It's obvious that the disposition and victim status of black Americans serves the Left without end.
(In case I didn't say that clear enough; if the Democrat leadership actually got out of the way of the needed healing of this country for the status of black Americans, they would forfeit their most valuable weapon, i.e. black victimization and social unease.)
There is an underground movement in this country by a loud fringe minority that comes from the abandonment of common sense. People have rewritten The Declaration of Independence from, "all men are created equal..." to read, "all groups are created equal". Which stands as the first victory for the same sex marriage movement. The status of "minority group" gave homosexuals an association, which they use to their advantage. It is because of that 'slight of hand' that we are forced to have this discussion explaining the difference between the struggle for black American's civil rights and homosexuals right to marriage. Yet again, we visit a reopening of that old wound of black Americans suffering, which serves its purpose for The Left. It does the job it has done for similar Leftist issues. It plants the seed of guilt for those who would object to homosexual marriage by making the association with the black American’s history of discrimination, which in-turn becomes silence by those who would speak out against it... which basically equals support for homosexual marriage. Evidence of that is the number of witnesses both sides of the case brought to the stand. Witnesses 'for same sex marriage': 16, witnesses protecting The Constitutional Amendment: 2...
Every advocate of same sex marriage knows that America does not agree with their self-proclaimed minority status, nor do Americans empathize with the actual issue of the "right" to marry. But, they know that they don't need the support of Americans... The advocates of homosexual marriage only need to control the conversation. To insure that and because of those two facts the advocates of gay marriage tie themselves to the much larger universally accepted issue of civil rights for black Americans. This wound is left festering in today’s politics by fools like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton; adding insult to injury, more recently by our President in his silence. Barrack Obama if he put America first he would be condemning the idea that attacks on his administration are based in racism. The racial divide in America serves Obama’s agenda as it serves the Left. Again, The Left understands that their power comes from the unease of black Americans so they make sure to fuel that whenever they need any reinvigoration in their party.
Advocates of homosexual marriage need to deliver guilt to their opponents. They have successfully created a false premise saying that it took courts to legalize the right for interracial marriage and desegregation; comparing that to California's overwhelming support for Prop 8, which is intellectually dishonest (to use nice words)... (The Prop 8 bill was rewritten by California's Attorney General, W. Brown. His revision read that voting "Yes" for proposition 8 was saying that you "want to TAKE AWAY the rights for homosexuals to marry. This ballot measure was created due to the 2008 California Supreme Courts over turning of the year 2000 ballot measure Prop 22, defining marriage between one man and one woman.)
The false premise is asserting that courts were the reason desegregation started not to mention, implying that they were ahead of the moral curve compared to main stream Americans in its desire to make it federal law that no state can make any laws that racially discriminates. If you didn’t know better you would think that the integration of black Americans into public schools on the news in the 60’s were the first to desegregate, when in fact they were some of the last.
Still, The Left tries to own the title of “people’s champ”, when in fact they have been on the wrong side of history in almost every case they pretend to champion. It’s almost unbelievable that Democrats use imagery of past black American injustice to promote their future initiatives, when in fact; the past injustices they claim to abhor were prolonged as well as endorsed by their own party’s obstructionism. Historically if Democrats did not stand in the way of Conservatives, slavery would have ended sooner, desegregation would have happened faster, and we would be that much closer to the dream where men would be measured by the content of there character not by the color of their skin opposite of what this present administration would like with its reinvestment into racial quotas.
Judge Walker, who delivered his verdict, ruled that the defense of Prop 8 did not show sufficient evidence to support the claims that homosexual marriage would undermine traditional marriage, or that same sex marriage was in anyway harmful to the developing psyche of kids brought up in that environment. (I have to digress yet again...ironically, the Left would seem to be masters of predicting calamity, from cel phone brain tumors, breast implant seepage, a heterosexual AIDS epidemic, widespread homelessness, over population, to man-made Global Warming™. Why this is ironic is because the arguments for these hysterical issues are always left to Conservatives to 'prove the negative'. Conservatives (for the most part) have to, "prove the world will not end by toxic levels of man produced carbon emissions in the year 2050..." Yet, when it comes to our ability to have them prove a negative that is much more likely, proof that this will not damage traditional marriage, the foundation of our civilization or the developmental psyche of kids into adulthood... we get an unwavering, very objective response from Judge Walker saying that Supporters of traditional marriage "did not supply sufficient evidence" to prove that their will be damage to society with the legitimization of same sex marriage... Shouldn't advocates of gay marriage have to prove that their desires for same sex marriage will not serve as a detriment to society? Not in this backwards world. But widespread destruction by man-made emissions... this is practically a "fact"... (We are told that there is consensus on the issue when only a fraction of scientists adhere to such claims).
It is of note that the unique situation of Judge Walker (who was a Reagan appointee) is in fact homosexual. Why this is of note is because striking down the claim of advocates for same sex marriage puts him in a potential conflict of interest. The reasons stated earlier in this piece for his judgment (of not finding sufficient evidence that gay marriage would damage two pillars in America, one being traditional marriage and the second, being future generations)... If he had ruled in favor of the constitutional amendment defining marriage as ‘one man, one woman’, it could be interpreted to himself that he would be admitting that their may be a moral issue at hand, further that a society is handicapped by his own personal core desires... Could it be understood that a homosexual man declaring that same sex marriage is not beneficial for a society cause him to question the root and legitimacy of his sexual orientation?
How can this possibly be reconciled? Ah... the magic question... Judge Walker declared that "morality was not the issue but legality is..." (paraphrased)
If one is to a measure of all the double standards of The Left, that person might find that those double standards are innumerable. Leftists do not believe in logic or morality or reason... Their values lie in emotion. It is not a double standard to The Left to capitalize on the historical moral mistreatment of black Americans to further their cause but then declare that morality plays no role in the governing factors of the right to marry.
Friday, July 2, 2010
Power To the People
I find myself wondering about death every now and then... You see on the news or read in history, or even see in movies of some historical event of some way someone died... I think about the soldiers on D Day or the passengers of the Titanic... people who knew death was coming well before it came... what thoughts went through their heads... did they find some peace in knowing there was nothing they could do? Did they struggle?
Today we watch our country take blow after blow against the very foundations of what the United States has stood for... We see a person nominated to the Supreme Court, the very court that will be interpreting The Constitution, completely disregarding its principles... Evading every question, lying about her beliefs... We see a Republican Party more dedicated to decorum that the future of this country.
We have a president, sitting on his hands during disasters, continually blaming capitalism and low taxes for the recession that his administration is prolonging and making worse. We see him bypassing our Constitution, race baiting immigration issues, pulling at the loose threads of our society as if he is a righteous cancer inflicted on the villain...
Where are we today... Those who rise up are called racists (Tea Party)... We have a bold spokesmen in Sarah Palin who is completely shut down by media, debased as a fool while our Vice President Joe Biden seems to be weekly competing for "America's dumbest leader"...
From extreme left wing, socialist, anti capitalist, anti-American political leaders, unions, educators, journalists... Where do we go as a people?
It is not enough to win in November! It is a fight for generations ahead of us. There needs to be a movement that creates commissions to investigate "climate change", the Governments involvement with Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac, Goldman Sacks. A commission investigating Barney Franks involvement with the housing crisis, a commission investigating exactly where the stimulus money went. A commission on the response time of the Government's reaction to the Gulf spill... And a commission on the seizing of the bonds of GM from private owners and the handing over of ownership to the auto workers union.
We cannot say that Barack Obama sitting on his hands in crisis is offensive if we do the same without acting to change this corrupt government...
Today we watch our country take blow after blow against the very foundations of what the United States has stood for... We see a person nominated to the Supreme Court, the very court that will be interpreting The Constitution, completely disregarding its principles... Evading every question, lying about her beliefs... We see a Republican Party more dedicated to decorum that the future of this country.
We have a president, sitting on his hands during disasters, continually blaming capitalism and low taxes for the recession that his administration is prolonging and making worse. We see him bypassing our Constitution, race baiting immigration issues, pulling at the loose threads of our society as if he is a righteous cancer inflicted on the villain...
Where are we today... Those who rise up are called racists (Tea Party)... We have a bold spokesmen in Sarah Palin who is completely shut down by media, debased as a fool while our Vice President Joe Biden seems to be weekly competing for "America's dumbest leader"...
From extreme left wing, socialist, anti capitalist, anti-American political leaders, unions, educators, journalists... Where do we go as a people?
It is not enough to win in November! It is a fight for generations ahead of us. There needs to be a movement that creates commissions to investigate "climate change", the Governments involvement with Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac, Goldman Sacks. A commission investigating Barney Franks involvement with the housing crisis, a commission investigating exactly where the stimulus money went. A commission on the response time of the Government's reaction to the Gulf spill... And a commission on the seizing of the bonds of GM from private owners and the handing over of ownership to the auto workers union.
We cannot say that Barack Obama sitting on his hands in crisis is offensive if we do the same without acting to change this corrupt government...
Friday, January 22, 2010
Social Justice Versus the American Dream
There are some phrases in pop culture that we hear but never take any moments to consider or digest. Like a blemish or scar these phrases slowly become commonplace in conversation by public leaders used without any real definition but instead to just convey a general negative happening that the speaker is describing… We saw that with the term “climate change”… it was introduced as an alternative to the much too specific descriptive “Global Warming” so not to be bound by any specific language like “warming”. That little parsing of words allowed for the fanaticism of the environmentally religious to ascribe any noteworthy meteorigical event to be yet more examples of the “damage” being done to the Earth by expansion of the free market.
In the spirit of slippery language (brought to you by Liberals/Statists, known more commonly as Democrats) we come to yet another divisive phrase to be added to the newspeak of the Liberal’s lexicon… As always this new phrase has been made to be stretched and bent, pulled and pushed to mean just about anything so that Democrats can prop up one more fabricated dragon to be slain. However, in using addition by subtraction we are able to define the latest and greatest from the anti–American crowd’s phrase “Social Justice”…
Like any well thought out political phrase it has its positive sound… After all how can “justice” be associated with anything negative? The word justice implies that there is some objective gage in which to measure an issue, and, that gage is a universally shared value. Ironically when Liberals use word like “justice” they are betraying their core ideology of relativism… For them to assert anything like an objective moral truth would cause them to abandon the whole of their thinking…
Yet “social justice” is the new buzzword among the harbingers of victimization.
Social justice is Communism just the same as environmentalism is. The idea implies that you (the individual) are victims of the wealthy, of industry, and you haven’t been given the opportunities that you’re entitled to. The antidote (according to Democrat leaders) is to use your vote to tax (take by force) from industry and the “rich” so that the Government can then create programs that give the downtrodden the chance to take the life that was stolen. Implying the victimization of individuals, further asserting that need for government in each person’s life.
So what happens if you do take that government hand out and you then become part of the enemy (also known as) “the rich”… I’m sorry my friend… you are then a “social criminal” and you get penalized for your success. Somehow lost is the fallacy in the premise of the entire assertion. Democrat leaders vilify the success of privileged-individuals and industries, accusing that their successes were only found by taking from you the unprivileged-individual and its up to the government to regulate and steal from them to offer a hand to the unprivileged-individual to reach that same success.
Simply put, Liberals motivate their constituents with the dreams of becoming who they also demonize.
In the spirit of slippery language (brought to you by Liberals/Statists, known more commonly as Democrats) we come to yet another divisive phrase to be added to the newspeak of the Liberal’s lexicon… As always this new phrase has been made to be stretched and bent, pulled and pushed to mean just about anything so that Democrats can prop up one more fabricated dragon to be slain. However, in using addition by subtraction we are able to define the latest and greatest from the anti–American crowd’s phrase “Social Justice”…
Like any well thought out political phrase it has its positive sound… After all how can “justice” be associated with anything negative? The word justice implies that there is some objective gage in which to measure an issue, and, that gage is a universally shared value. Ironically when Liberals use word like “justice” they are betraying their core ideology of relativism… For them to assert anything like an objective moral truth would cause them to abandon the whole of their thinking…
Yet “social justice” is the new buzzword among the harbingers of victimization.
Social justice is Communism just the same as environmentalism is. The idea implies that you (the individual) are victims of the wealthy, of industry, and you haven’t been given the opportunities that you’re entitled to. The antidote (according to Democrat leaders) is to use your vote to tax (take by force) from industry and the “rich” so that the Government can then create programs that give the downtrodden the chance to take the life that was stolen. Implying the victimization of individuals, further asserting that need for government in each person’s life.
So what happens if you do take that government hand out and you then become part of the enemy (also known as) “the rich”… I’m sorry my friend… you are then a “social criminal” and you get penalized for your success. Somehow lost is the fallacy in the premise of the entire assertion. Democrat leaders vilify the success of privileged-individuals and industries, accusing that their successes were only found by taking from you the unprivileged-individual and its up to the government to regulate and steal from them to offer a hand to the unprivileged-individual to reach that same success.
Simply put, Liberals motivate their constituents with the dreams of becoming who they also demonize.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Don't Take Candy From Strangers
When I was growing up, there was a cliché saying, “Don’t take candy from strangers.” Even though it wasn’t explained nearly as much as it was repeated it was universally understood that it implied that there were bad people out there that would entice you with tasty treats… To what end was left the imagination.
Even though my generation who was raised on the true story TV mini series of Adam Walsh’s terrible kidnapping in the 80’s, we haven’t seemed to have taken anything away from the repeating of that cliché…
Don’t take Candy from strangers… seems simple enough. However, in November 2008 the American people hungry for proof that they were not the bigoted people that the Left of this country slander them as elected a stranger… a marketed black American that delivered a confident smile, a GQ look, and a handful of candy referred to as “Hope and Change”….
In December of this year in Copenhagen there is a summit planned to try to solve the believed issue of Global Warming (despite the almost 9 year cold trend that has contradicted all Global Warming computer models)… However this summit has with it a sting that wont effect any climate that has to do with weather but instead change the economic climate of the world in an irreversible forfeiting of sovereignty by the U.S. African and Latin countries have draw up a plan of a world government that would have jurisdiction over the carbon emissions of ANY country (including the U.S.) further that the larger industrial countries must pay reparations to developing countries for “damaging the earth”…
It goes without saying that in general the most depraved of all countries are in those conditions not because of Global Warming but because of their grossly corrupt governments… Africa and Latin America have more natural resources at their disposal than any other developed country yet there almost systematic transfer of power from warlord to dictator to thug keeps their countries from ever becoming anything other than third-world charity magnets… To add insult to injury to the abused people of these countries their loss of life, lack of food and general impoverished state are used to demonstrate the desperate need for these reparations yet, it is in Africa that the very environmentalist who use the photos of these people to create sympathy with one hand, and with the other deny them the use of DDT and pesticides for their crops. They do this by denying them aid if they do not abide by the strict rules environmentalists set… In Africa alone more than 50,000,000 people have died of malaria since the ban on DDT began…
In the U.S. there is a different contradiction… The United States has the will, the resources and the know-how to create a network of nuclear power plants that would decrease our “carbon footprint” by over 70% yet EVERY single environmental agency is against it. Rather than use 1 square mile for a power plant, they’d rather carpet the U.S. with towering windmills and 10’s of thousands of square miles of solar panels that require more water for cleaning than most small countries. Almost worse than that you have farms tearing out crops that could be used for food and planting corns and sugar field to get Federal subsidies for bio fuels. Ironically it takes 4 gallons of regular fuel to produce 1 gallon of bio-fuel. In fact if the “bio-fuel” industry had to run on bio-fuel it would be out of business before it started.
All the lies and contradictions of environmentalism aside the most striking of all is the shocking resemblance environmentalism has with good ol’ fashion communism.
How is it that the redistribution of wealth is the answer to what the Left feel is a “global crisis”?
More and more Obama officials are being outted as either former members of a communist party or out right describe their affections for communist leaders.
The United States is a land bless with prosperity because of the rights and liberties given to its citizens… But these rights and liberties will be stripped away by a world government lead by the most corrupt of third world countries who will tax us and cripple us in the name of environmentalism… All that stands between our great country and them is a weak kneed president drunk on his own adulation, but worse a president who favors their opinions and views over what is best for the American people…
Barack Obama feels that America owes the world a debt… He feels that Global Warming is a real crisis and has been emboldened by his newly acquired Nobel Prize.
What did America get by taking candy from this stranger?
On August 10th 1981 the severed head of a 6-year-old boy by the name of Adam Walsh was found in a Vero Beach, Florida canal… His remains were never recovered.
Even though my generation who was raised on the true story TV mini series of Adam Walsh’s terrible kidnapping in the 80’s, we haven’t seemed to have taken anything away from the repeating of that cliché…
Don’t take Candy from strangers… seems simple enough. However, in November 2008 the American people hungry for proof that they were not the bigoted people that the Left of this country slander them as elected a stranger… a marketed black American that delivered a confident smile, a GQ look, and a handful of candy referred to as “Hope and Change”….
In December of this year in Copenhagen there is a summit planned to try to solve the believed issue of Global Warming (despite the almost 9 year cold trend that has contradicted all Global Warming computer models)… However this summit has with it a sting that wont effect any climate that has to do with weather but instead change the economic climate of the world in an irreversible forfeiting of sovereignty by the U.S. African and Latin countries have draw up a plan of a world government that would have jurisdiction over the carbon emissions of ANY country (including the U.S.) further that the larger industrial countries must pay reparations to developing countries for “damaging the earth”…
It goes without saying that in general the most depraved of all countries are in those conditions not because of Global Warming but because of their grossly corrupt governments… Africa and Latin America have more natural resources at their disposal than any other developed country yet there almost systematic transfer of power from warlord to dictator to thug keeps their countries from ever becoming anything other than third-world charity magnets… To add insult to injury to the abused people of these countries their loss of life, lack of food and general impoverished state are used to demonstrate the desperate need for these reparations yet, it is in Africa that the very environmentalist who use the photos of these people to create sympathy with one hand, and with the other deny them the use of DDT and pesticides for their crops. They do this by denying them aid if they do not abide by the strict rules environmentalists set… In Africa alone more than 50,000,000 people have died of malaria since the ban on DDT began…
In the U.S. there is a different contradiction… The United States has the will, the resources and the know-how to create a network of nuclear power plants that would decrease our “carbon footprint” by over 70% yet EVERY single environmental agency is against it. Rather than use 1 square mile for a power plant, they’d rather carpet the U.S. with towering windmills and 10’s of thousands of square miles of solar panels that require more water for cleaning than most small countries. Almost worse than that you have farms tearing out crops that could be used for food and planting corns and sugar field to get Federal subsidies for bio fuels. Ironically it takes 4 gallons of regular fuel to produce 1 gallon of bio-fuel. In fact if the “bio-fuel” industry had to run on bio-fuel it would be out of business before it started.
All the lies and contradictions of environmentalism aside the most striking of all is the shocking resemblance environmentalism has with good ol’ fashion communism.
How is it that the redistribution of wealth is the answer to what the Left feel is a “global crisis”?
More and more Obama officials are being outted as either former members of a communist party or out right describe their affections for communist leaders.
The United States is a land bless with prosperity because of the rights and liberties given to its citizens… But these rights and liberties will be stripped away by a world government lead by the most corrupt of third world countries who will tax us and cripple us in the name of environmentalism… All that stands between our great country and them is a weak kneed president drunk on his own adulation, but worse a president who favors their opinions and views over what is best for the American people…
Barack Obama feels that America owes the world a debt… He feels that Global Warming is a real crisis and has been emboldened by his newly acquired Nobel Prize.
What did America get by taking candy from this stranger?
On August 10th 1981 the severed head of a 6-year-old boy by the name of Adam Walsh was found in a Vero Beach, Florida canal… His remains were never recovered.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Defanging the Radical
The book that keeps getting talked about so much as the “Obama play book”,
Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” has been in my back pack for the past couple weeks… Like a snack I keep picking away at it, but like the wrong kind of snack its is sometimes too much to digest. This entry is not so much a book review as much as it is a warning of things to come…
“Rules for Radicals” is a freighting look into a delusional author’s distorted view of the world. To hear leaders today of the Democrat Party openly quote Alinsky or allow them selves to be deemed “alinkyites” without correction is even further reason to be afraid for the future. These casual associations being made by the Democratic leadership of far-Leftist ideologues is a new emboldened face of their party. It is nothing more than a showing of their un-American agenda and the comfort they feel they have with the climate of American people to show their true colors. Paul Alinsky by no hidden means in “Rules for Radicals” lists tactics for the misguided Left to dupe their fellow American people in believing the “anti-establishment/anti capitalism” vomit of the 60’s. At least Karl Marx was straight forward about his desire to overturn capitalism… Alinsky on the other hand, like the Democrat Party understands that their ideas are unpopular and realize they have to mask them to gain any popular support.
What motivates people like this to want to tear down the very society that gives them their definition of what a great country should be? Alinskyites and Alinsky him self use generalized statements that are and dishonest to their values of America’s past greatness as a motivating factor to “return” to those times. Yet America’s greatness was realized because of all the things these Leftists fools so adamantly abhor, like success, and free market capitalism, profit, and individual liberty. Alinsky foolishly accuses “the older generation” of being trapped in the machine of capitalism, projecting a degree of naïveté on them, believing that they cannot even see the tangled web they are in. He goes so far as to describe America as chasing false truths of the suburban nuclear family, implying that these people are forced into drugs and alcohol abuse to tranquilize the need they have for individuality that their choices don’t allow. Alinsky’s tactic is that of making his reader think that his or her family is the acception to the rule when in fact HIS description of the “trapped” family is. Ironically his call for individuality is instead a call for enslavement to a system where the logical conclusion is that of pure identity-less Communism or social-fascism.
As a unstable catalyst to his lies, he falsely empowers the most vulnerable of Americans, “the-ready-fire-aim” emotionally driven “youth” as ambassadors of “progress”, describing them as the audience to the destruction by apathy their parent inaugurate, bolstering their egos and playing on their narcissism to believe that they can see past the lies of the world around them. It’s further ironic that Alinsky was speaking to the baby boomer generation… a generation known for being born of not only our most patriotic Americans but also of a generation who sacrificed greatly for Liberty. He recruits a generation of children who have basked in the sun of their forbearer’s successes without any knowledge of the work it took to get to that destination. These are his soldiers of an all too familiar call for undefined “change”… to change the system by infiltrating the system. Then in doing so you initiate “change”… However, change according to the theories of what you (the radical) feels is needed… not what actually is needed, if anything…
Some might say that this process is democracy at work but they would be terribly mistaken. Democracy is the free exchange of ideologies, policies, and open debate where the public or electoral college can determine which of the candidates would run the country better according to their own principles. Democracy can only thrive in an environment where actual ideas can exchange. Yet in Alinsky’s world, and in Obama’s world (the radical‘s tactic) is one that uses recognizable accepted Conservative phraseology like "competition" and "choice" to distract Americans and disguise the far-Left/Statists agenda of equality over liberty... America was founded on individuals who were given the rights and opportunity to succeed...
If in fact "competition" and "choice" were a value to Democrats, why would they fight so venomously against competition in public schools by not supporting school vouchers when the public system is failing so badly? Why would they be against competition in the job market and abandon their racially based and gender based quotas? Why would they be against competition in Social Security and help privatizing retirement savings account programs so that people may be able to keep more of their money in their family rather it going to a government pot? Why would they want to regulate talk radio to silence views opposed to their own? Or, why would they be against deregulating health insurance so they can sell across state lines and ACTUALLY increase competition?
The reason is Democrats do not support these things because "competition" and "choice" are as far from their agenda as efficiency or success is from ANY government program. Which is why our founding fathers worked to create a LIMTED government one that is very apposed to the monster Democrats since F.D.R. have created.
These Leftists live in a made up world where lying about their end goals is just a means to an end and is a small wrong compared to the vast crimes against humanity they feel capitalism has committed… Ironically most of what they oppose is the product of a market contaminate by quasi-socialist policies that redistribute wealth and allow for corruption in vast government bureaucracies. They fight a disproportionate war against reason in that to lie or hide the true motivation for their initiatives is justifiable to their cause. Truth is not a value to the Left. It only stands as an inconvenience to their “progress”. They feel they know better than the individual American who believes working hard, saving money, and being responsible for them self is the most patriotic of choices. In fact they despise those Americans and accuse them as being part of the “angry Right”… They take the imaginary position of “Government knows better than you” believing their own lies and excuse away those who strive for financial stability and a comfortable life. These delusions are nothing less than religious as they are not at all diminished when confronted by factual evidence that would argue other wise. But, it is in these delusions that we see the chaos these Statists wish to create. They know that it is in chaos that Americans will become desperate for change… no matter how foreign to our American heritage.
Today’s Left cannot compete on issues because they know that they do not have the public’s immediate interests in mind. If you look at Social Security, welfare, Income tax… All have become swollen mutated monsters from the original plan of each initiative. Medicare is more than 10 times what its was predicted to be and is going bankrupt while giving the lowest standard of health care to its users.
The Democrats agenda is a slow poison. They start with just a little and build on it like water slowly boiling. Obama in a 2002 speech said that getting to Universal Health Care by way of a public option and it would be a long road claiming the need for little steps… Juxtapose that to what he is saying today that Universal healthcare is not the goal but “competition” is… Which is just like his claim at the State of the Union where he said he was “not for a bigger government” while he is continuing to increasing its size more than any other president before him… The Left (including our current President) claim to love America but only see a history of imperialism. They claim to be patriotic yet believe that America was not only founded on but is ramped with racism. They claim to value The Constitution yet completely dismiss any ideas of a Creator from which we derive The Bill of Rights from, further saying that it is a “living breathing document” rendering its wisdom and direction completely relative according to its interpreter. They claim to stand for freedom but work to silence through government fiat anyone who freely tries to practice those freedoms apposed to their own. They claim to love democracy yet slander their opponents to the point of humiliation and a retreat from public life. They claim to work for the people but then create the intricate bureaucracies and unions that act as cattle chutes so that people only go where they allow.
The Democratic Party is blindly against anything that Republicans want. Any one Republicans elect is considered by The Democrats to be racist, a bigot, homophobic, an “Uncle-Tom”, xenophobic, sexist, or any other slanderous title you can give someone… They have become experts at projecting their faults unto Republicans by demanding that Republicans are guilty of everything that they themselves actually are doing with zero accountability from most every media source. The Democrat Party have become profits who predict the doom they themselves orchestrate.
They claim that the Republican Party is a party of racism yet the Republican Part’s main charter at its conception was to abolish slavery, further that historically Democrats have stood in the way of every vote for Black equality. From The Emancipation Proclamation to Brown vs. Board of Education… Almost all votes in The House or The Senate that concerned the equality of minorities or women were party line votes with Democrats on the wrong side of history. Every bill brought to the House since the birth our nation from the Dred Scott decision to voting against the Civil Rights Act; anything that subjected black Americans was sponsored by Democrats. On June 10th 1964, Senator Robert Byrd (Democrat) began an over 14-hour filibuster opposing the legislation for Civil Rights Act. Robert Byrd still serves as a senator to this day for the Democrat Party.
The Democrats have slandered the Republicans, calling them “a party of tyranny”. Yet, it is Republican dogma that government is the problem and work toward reducing government keeping it out of people’s lives and wallets. Contrary to that set of principles, the Democrats see all solutions with a larger government but has yet to produce one efficient government program. Today’s voter has to decide between a party who’s philosophies are contrary to the lessons of history, that government is the answer or the philosophies of a party who’s policies have built this land of opportunity, the party that believes government is the problem, the party that believes individual responsibility is the answer.
Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” has been in my back pack for the past couple weeks… Like a snack I keep picking away at it, but like the wrong kind of snack its is sometimes too much to digest. This entry is not so much a book review as much as it is a warning of things to come…
“Rules for Radicals” is a freighting look into a delusional author’s distorted view of the world. To hear leaders today of the Democrat Party openly quote Alinsky or allow them selves to be deemed “alinkyites” without correction is even further reason to be afraid for the future. These casual associations being made by the Democratic leadership of far-Leftist ideologues is a new emboldened face of their party. It is nothing more than a showing of their un-American agenda and the comfort they feel they have with the climate of American people to show their true colors. Paul Alinsky by no hidden means in “Rules for Radicals” lists tactics for the misguided Left to dupe their fellow American people in believing the “anti-establishment/anti capitalism” vomit of the 60’s. At least Karl Marx was straight forward about his desire to overturn capitalism… Alinsky on the other hand, like the Democrat Party understands that their ideas are unpopular and realize they have to mask them to gain any popular support.
What motivates people like this to want to tear down the very society that gives them their definition of what a great country should be? Alinskyites and Alinsky him self use generalized statements that are and dishonest to their values of America’s past greatness as a motivating factor to “return” to those times. Yet America’s greatness was realized because of all the things these Leftists fools so adamantly abhor, like success, and free market capitalism, profit, and individual liberty. Alinsky foolishly accuses “the older generation” of being trapped in the machine of capitalism, projecting a degree of naïveté on them, believing that they cannot even see the tangled web they are in. He goes so far as to describe America as chasing false truths of the suburban nuclear family, implying that these people are forced into drugs and alcohol abuse to tranquilize the need they have for individuality that their choices don’t allow. Alinsky’s tactic is that of making his reader think that his or her family is the acception to the rule when in fact HIS description of the “trapped” family is. Ironically his call for individuality is instead a call for enslavement to a system where the logical conclusion is that of pure identity-less Communism or social-fascism.
As a unstable catalyst to his lies, he falsely empowers the most vulnerable of Americans, “the-ready-fire-aim” emotionally driven “youth” as ambassadors of “progress”, describing them as the audience to the destruction by apathy their parent inaugurate, bolstering their egos and playing on their narcissism to believe that they can see past the lies of the world around them. It’s further ironic that Alinsky was speaking to the baby boomer generation… a generation known for being born of not only our most patriotic Americans but also of a generation who sacrificed greatly for Liberty. He recruits a generation of children who have basked in the sun of their forbearer’s successes without any knowledge of the work it took to get to that destination. These are his soldiers of an all too familiar call for undefined “change”… to change the system by infiltrating the system. Then in doing so you initiate “change”… However, change according to the theories of what you (the radical) feels is needed… not what actually is needed, if anything…
Some might say that this process is democracy at work but they would be terribly mistaken. Democracy is the free exchange of ideologies, policies, and open debate where the public or electoral college can determine which of the candidates would run the country better according to their own principles. Democracy can only thrive in an environment where actual ideas can exchange. Yet in Alinsky’s world, and in Obama’s world (the radical‘s tactic) is one that uses recognizable accepted Conservative phraseology like "competition" and "choice" to distract Americans and disguise the far-Left/Statists agenda of equality over liberty... America was founded on individuals who were given the rights and opportunity to succeed...
If in fact "competition" and "choice" were a value to Democrats, why would they fight so venomously against competition in public schools by not supporting school vouchers when the public system is failing so badly? Why would they be against competition in the job market and abandon their racially based and gender based quotas? Why would they be against competition in Social Security and help privatizing retirement savings account programs so that people may be able to keep more of their money in their family rather it going to a government pot? Why would they want to regulate talk radio to silence views opposed to their own? Or, why would they be against deregulating health insurance so they can sell across state lines and ACTUALLY increase competition?
The reason is Democrats do not support these things because "competition" and "choice" are as far from their agenda as efficiency or success is from ANY government program. Which is why our founding fathers worked to create a LIMTED government one that is very apposed to the monster Democrats since F.D.R. have created.
These Leftists live in a made up world where lying about their end goals is just a means to an end and is a small wrong compared to the vast crimes against humanity they feel capitalism has committed… Ironically most of what they oppose is the product of a market contaminate by quasi-socialist policies that redistribute wealth and allow for corruption in vast government bureaucracies. They fight a disproportionate war against reason in that to lie or hide the true motivation for their initiatives is justifiable to their cause. Truth is not a value to the Left. It only stands as an inconvenience to their “progress”. They feel they know better than the individual American who believes working hard, saving money, and being responsible for them self is the most patriotic of choices. In fact they despise those Americans and accuse them as being part of the “angry Right”… They take the imaginary position of “Government knows better than you” believing their own lies and excuse away those who strive for financial stability and a comfortable life. These delusions are nothing less than religious as they are not at all diminished when confronted by factual evidence that would argue other wise. But, it is in these delusions that we see the chaos these Statists wish to create. They know that it is in chaos that Americans will become desperate for change… no matter how foreign to our American heritage.
Today’s Left cannot compete on issues because they know that they do not have the public’s immediate interests in mind. If you look at Social Security, welfare, Income tax… All have become swollen mutated monsters from the original plan of each initiative. Medicare is more than 10 times what its was predicted to be and is going bankrupt while giving the lowest standard of health care to its users.
The Democrats agenda is a slow poison. They start with just a little and build on it like water slowly boiling. Obama in a 2002 speech said that getting to Universal Health Care by way of a public option and it would be a long road claiming the need for little steps… Juxtapose that to what he is saying today that Universal healthcare is not the goal but “competition” is… Which is just like his claim at the State of the Union where he said he was “not for a bigger government” while he is continuing to increasing its size more than any other president before him… The Left (including our current President) claim to love America but only see a history of imperialism. They claim to be patriotic yet believe that America was not only founded on but is ramped with racism. They claim to value The Constitution yet completely dismiss any ideas of a Creator from which we derive The Bill of Rights from, further saying that it is a “living breathing document” rendering its wisdom and direction completely relative according to its interpreter. They claim to stand for freedom but work to silence through government fiat anyone who freely tries to practice those freedoms apposed to their own. They claim to love democracy yet slander their opponents to the point of humiliation and a retreat from public life. They claim to work for the people but then create the intricate bureaucracies and unions that act as cattle chutes so that people only go where they allow.
The Democratic Party is blindly against anything that Republicans want. Any one Republicans elect is considered by The Democrats to be racist, a bigot, homophobic, an “Uncle-Tom”, xenophobic, sexist, or any other slanderous title you can give someone… They have become experts at projecting their faults unto Republicans by demanding that Republicans are guilty of everything that they themselves actually are doing with zero accountability from most every media source. The Democrat Party have become profits who predict the doom they themselves orchestrate.
They claim that the Republican Party is a party of racism yet the Republican Part’s main charter at its conception was to abolish slavery, further that historically Democrats have stood in the way of every vote for Black equality. From The Emancipation Proclamation to Brown vs. Board of Education… Almost all votes in The House or The Senate that concerned the equality of minorities or women were party line votes with Democrats on the wrong side of history. Every bill brought to the House since the birth our nation from the Dred Scott decision to voting against the Civil Rights Act; anything that subjected black Americans was sponsored by Democrats. On June 10th 1964, Senator Robert Byrd (Democrat) began an over 14-hour filibuster opposing the legislation for Civil Rights Act. Robert Byrd still serves as a senator to this day for the Democrat Party.
The Democrats have slandered the Republicans, calling them “a party of tyranny”. Yet, it is Republican dogma that government is the problem and work toward reducing government keeping it out of people’s lives and wallets. Contrary to that set of principles, the Democrats see all solutions with a larger government but has yet to produce one efficient government program. Today’s voter has to decide between a party who’s philosophies are contrary to the lessons of history, that government is the answer or the philosophies of a party who’s policies have built this land of opportunity, the party that believes government is the problem, the party that believes individual responsibility is the answer.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Killing in the Name of Peace
Killing in the Name of Peace
For my friend, “native son”
Twitter has many uses… so many that naming them would be pointless. Personally I may be a bit on the irresponsible side with the postings I write, but my goal is to make a point; I try to get people to stop and think… I purposely hit on taboos or thoughts that the everyday person may think but doesn’t say. The other day I wrote a post saying: “Iran wants to blow up Israel...Can someone please bring back assassinations? God! It would only be a short list.” Followed by: “I'd love to start with Castro! Then Chavez... Maybe throw some other commis in there”
I was immediately challenged asking how I can advocate the killing of one of God’s creations?” I’m sure the idea of assassination is even worse to anyone that disagrees with me. Beyond that initial challenge I was quoted some scripture all of which supported an idea of pacifism. The first being Romans 12:19 “…‘Vengeance is mine’ says the Lord…” And of course Mathew 5:39, “…Turn the other cheek…”
I don’t mean to discount those arguments and I completely understand that there are more than just those verses that call for what would sounds like pacifism. Yet God does not expect pacifism…
I feel I know the bible well and thought that defending the idea of assassinating a tyrant could be defended in the bible easily because of the value God puts on each and every life. But it can’t. Yes there are times when we are expected to stop a crime or an injustice or to protect those who cannot protect them selves with lethal force if necessary, but premeditated murder of a person is not what we are released biblically to do. Capital punishment and war have an accountability and are often consequences after a sentence. (obviously there are corrupt countries and powers who deviate from moral action) that is another matter…
Yes there are areas in the Old Testament that called for capital punishment, there are kings that if killed could of drastically improved the lives of the Israelites. But, all matters of ending someone’s life in the bible was specifically ordained by God. For all capital punishments there were stipulations that needed to be addressed. There was no grey area, but where there was disagreement there was accountability. Even in war, it was God who said when wars were to be fought. David seemed to have special favor with God. Yet even in that favor God did not allow David to build His temple:
1 Chronicles 22
6 Then he called for his son Solomon, and charged him to build a house for the LORD God of Israel.
7 And David said to Solomon: “My son, as for me, it was in my mind to build a house to the name of the LORD my God; 8 but the word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘You have shed much blood and have made great wars; you shall not build a house for My name, because you have shed much blood on the earth in My sight. 9 Behold, a son shall be born to you, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies all around. His name shall be Solomon, for I will give peace and quietness to Israel in his days.
God sent David on most of those wars. In reading this passage you might wonder why God penalized David for following His direction. However, David went beyond God’s direction. The blood on David’s hands was a product of David’s zealousness for God. David killed more men than God commanded to satisfy his own appetite and not God’s plan. The Temple was a symbol of that. God did not ask for a temple yet David felt He should have one. God answered David’s request but through his son and not through David. David’s downfall was his not looking to see God’s plan but instead forging his own; though he felt is was for God, it still was not in God’s plan.
David’s story gives an example of places God has not ordained deaths even to enemies. But in the Book of Daniel we see a picture of God’s perspective on evil rulers:
Daniel 5
13 Then Daniel was brought in before the king. The king spoke, and said to Daniel, “Are you that Daniel who is one of the captives from Judah, whom my father the king brought from Judah? 14 I have heard of you, that the Spirit of God is in you, and that light and understanding and excellent wisdom are found in you. 15 Now the wise men, the astrologers, have been brought in before me, that they should read this writing and make known to me its interpretation, but they could not give the interpretation of the thing. 16 And I have heard of you, that you can give interpretations and explain enigmas. Now if you can read the writing and make known to me its interpretation, you shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around your neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.”
17 Then Daniel answered, and said before the king, “Let your gifts be for yourself, and give your rewards to another; yet I will read the writing to the king, and make known to him the interpretation. 18 O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father a kingdom and majesty, glory and honor. 19 And because of the majesty that He gave him, all peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him. Whomever he wished, he executed; whomever he wished, he kept alive; whomever he wished, he set up; and whomever he wished, he put down. 20 But when his heart was lifted up, and his spirit was hardened in pride, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him. 21 Then he was driven from the sons of men, his heart was made like the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys. They fed him with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till he knew that the Most High God rules in the kingdom of men, and appoints over it whomever He chooses.
22 “But you his son, Belshazzar, have not humbled your heart, although you knew all this. 23 And you have lifted yourself up against the Lord of heaven. They have brought the vessels of His house before you, and you and your lords, your wives and your concubines, have drunk wine from them. And you have praised the gods of silver and gold, bronze and iron, wood and stone, which do not see or hear or know; and the God who holds your breath in His hand and owns all your ways, you have not glorified. 24 Then the fingers of the hand were sent from Him, and this writing was written.
25 “And this is the inscription that was written:
MENE MENE, TEKEL UPHARSIN
26 This is the interpretation of each word. MENE: God has numbered your kingdom, and finished it; 27 TEKEK: You have been weighed in the balances, and found wanting; 28 PERES: Your kingdom has been divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.” 29 Then Belshazzar gave the command, and they clothed Daniel with purple and put a chain of gold around his neck, and made a proclamation concerning him that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom. 30 That very night Belshazzar, king of the Chaldeans, was slain. 31 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.
It is God who determines who leads and who dies. He allows evil men to rule but also numbers their days. Every man will be accountable for his actions and it is God’s justice that we wait on. It is our faith in Him that we believe that the evil men in this world will find their judgment day…
So I stand corrected. Though evil men like Castro live beyond great men like Regan. I have to believe that on some level it is a picture of God’s mercy that they have more time to turn from their ways. It is only this life that we can make this choice. After it we all will stand before God.
I owe my friend “native son” and apology and a sincere thanks you. I am happy to know that I can still learn something…
For my friend, “native son”
Twitter has many uses… so many that naming them would be pointless. Personally I may be a bit on the irresponsible side with the postings I write, but my goal is to make a point; I try to get people to stop and think… I purposely hit on taboos or thoughts that the everyday person may think but doesn’t say. The other day I wrote a post saying: “Iran wants to blow up Israel...Can someone please bring back assassinations? God! It would only be a short list.” Followed by: “I'd love to start with Castro! Then Chavez... Maybe throw some other commis in there”
I was immediately challenged asking how I can advocate the killing of one of God’s creations?” I’m sure the idea of assassination is even worse to anyone that disagrees with me. Beyond that initial challenge I was quoted some scripture all of which supported an idea of pacifism. The first being Romans 12:19 “…‘Vengeance is mine’ says the Lord…” And of course Mathew 5:39, “…Turn the other cheek…”
I don’t mean to discount those arguments and I completely understand that there are more than just those verses that call for what would sounds like pacifism. Yet God does not expect pacifism…
I feel I know the bible well and thought that defending the idea of assassinating a tyrant could be defended in the bible easily because of the value God puts on each and every life. But it can’t. Yes there are times when we are expected to stop a crime or an injustice or to protect those who cannot protect them selves with lethal force if necessary, but premeditated murder of a person is not what we are released biblically to do. Capital punishment and war have an accountability and are often consequences after a sentence. (obviously there are corrupt countries and powers who deviate from moral action) that is another matter…
Yes there are areas in the Old Testament that called for capital punishment, there are kings that if killed could of drastically improved the lives of the Israelites. But, all matters of ending someone’s life in the bible was specifically ordained by God. For all capital punishments there were stipulations that needed to be addressed. There was no grey area, but where there was disagreement there was accountability. Even in war, it was God who said when wars were to be fought. David seemed to have special favor with God. Yet even in that favor God did not allow David to build His temple:
1 Chronicles 22
6 Then he called for his son Solomon, and charged him to build a house for the LORD God of Israel.
7 And David said to Solomon: “My son, as for me, it was in my mind to build a house to the name of the LORD my God; 8 but the word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘You have shed much blood and have made great wars; you shall not build a house for My name, because you have shed much blood on the earth in My sight. 9 Behold, a son shall be born to you, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies all around. His name shall be Solomon, for I will give peace and quietness to Israel in his days.
God sent David on most of those wars. In reading this passage you might wonder why God penalized David for following His direction. However, David went beyond God’s direction. The blood on David’s hands was a product of David’s zealousness for God. David killed more men than God commanded to satisfy his own appetite and not God’s plan. The Temple was a symbol of that. God did not ask for a temple yet David felt He should have one. God answered David’s request but through his son and not through David. David’s downfall was his not looking to see God’s plan but instead forging his own; though he felt is was for God, it still was not in God’s plan.
David’s story gives an example of places God has not ordained deaths even to enemies. But in the Book of Daniel we see a picture of God’s perspective on evil rulers:
Daniel 5
13 Then Daniel was brought in before the king. The king spoke, and said to Daniel, “Are you that Daniel who is one of the captives from Judah, whom my father the king brought from Judah? 14 I have heard of you, that the Spirit of God is in you, and that light and understanding and excellent wisdom are found in you. 15 Now the wise men, the astrologers, have been brought in before me, that they should read this writing and make known to me its interpretation, but they could not give the interpretation of the thing. 16 And I have heard of you, that you can give interpretations and explain enigmas. Now if you can read the writing and make known to me its interpretation, you shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around your neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.”
17 Then Daniel answered, and said before the king, “Let your gifts be for yourself, and give your rewards to another; yet I will read the writing to the king, and make known to him the interpretation. 18 O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father a kingdom and majesty, glory and honor. 19 And because of the majesty that He gave him, all peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him. Whomever he wished, he executed; whomever he wished, he kept alive; whomever he wished, he set up; and whomever he wished, he put down. 20 But when his heart was lifted up, and his spirit was hardened in pride, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him. 21 Then he was driven from the sons of men, his heart was made like the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys. They fed him with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till he knew that the Most High God rules in the kingdom of men, and appoints over it whomever He chooses.
22 “But you his son, Belshazzar, have not humbled your heart, although you knew all this. 23 And you have lifted yourself up against the Lord of heaven. They have brought the vessels of His house before you, and you and your lords, your wives and your concubines, have drunk wine from them. And you have praised the gods of silver and gold, bronze and iron, wood and stone, which do not see or hear or know; and the God who holds your breath in His hand and owns all your ways, you have not glorified. 24 Then the fingers of the hand were sent from Him, and this writing was written.
25 “And this is the inscription that was written:
MENE MENE, TEKEL UPHARSIN
26 This is the interpretation of each word. MENE: God has numbered your kingdom, and finished it; 27 TEKEK: You have been weighed in the balances, and found wanting; 28 PERES: Your kingdom has been divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.” 29 Then Belshazzar gave the command, and they clothed Daniel with purple and put a chain of gold around his neck, and made a proclamation concerning him that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom. 30 That very night Belshazzar, king of the Chaldeans, was slain. 31 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.
It is God who determines who leads and who dies. He allows evil men to rule but also numbers their days. Every man will be accountable for his actions and it is God’s justice that we wait on. It is our faith in Him that we believe that the evil men in this world will find their judgment day…
So I stand corrected. Though evil men like Castro live beyond great men like Regan. I have to believe that on some level it is a picture of God’s mercy that they have more time to turn from their ways. It is only this life that we can make this choice. After it we all will stand before God.
I owe my friend “native son” and apology and a sincere thanks you. I am happy to know that I can still learn something…
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Letter to Keith Olbermann (re-post)
In honor of Keith Olbermann continual struggle for fairness and equality (except for those he deems unworthy) I wanted to repost an old entry:
In response to this Keith Olbermann article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27650743/#storyContinued
My response:
Like Keith Olbermann's statement, "This is a matter of the heart…" Is foolish. That statement over shadows the rest of his article. What great authority or tradition is he invoking? What beyond his own ideas of right and wrong can he measure his conclusion against? What common ground is he appealing to that all people agree?
Martin Luther King in his "I have a Dream" speech said. "…I have a dream that someday my four little children will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character…" He was not advocating to a change the definition of what people recognized as a moral absolute. Martin Luther King instead reminding people of that moral absolute that all men are created equal.
To me it is extremely disingenuous for advocates of the homosexual community to associate their struggle for complete social endorsement of their practices with black Americans. Black Americans were denied basic human rights not because of their actions (like homosexuals) but because of the way they look. If someone cannot see the difference they are fooling themselves...
The commercials and advertisements seem to understand this clearly which is why I imagine that EVERY commercial never once said "homosexual" or "same sex marriage"… All commercials were pictures of racial violence, ambiguous talk about the "importance of family", or had a heterosexual couple denied the right to be married. It is a form of bait and switch. We (the public) are shown pictures of moral absolutes that we universally agree on and then they attach their proposition without every identifying what their motive is.
It would seem that even the advocates of same sex marriage understand that what they want is radically against universal acceptance, so much so that they omit the very detail that their cause is for. If same sex marriage is a basic human right then why is it not more readily spoken about in the ads that support it? Dr. Martin Luther King readily talk about specifically white and black people coming together because he knew it was a rallying point not an agenda to be cleverly disguised.
Proposition 8 was not about equality. It is about radical change. Whether or not that change is good or bad for society I am not even arguing but it is radical compared to traditions for the last couple thousand years. It is dishonest act as if homosexuals are being persecuted unjustly when (unlike the black Americans before desegregation) they are in fact given every right that every American has. -What they are not given is the ability to have all their actions endorsed by the state. Marriage is not a right it is an institution defined by the society that endorses it and is ratified by the state that the society elects… It is not an endowment to be stolen or taken by force. Proposition 8 was half about the definition of marriage and half about the outrage over a court that has overturned (for the second time) the will of the people that has elected them.
It is sad to think that in this country words like "bravery" have been stolen from men on the battlefeild and given to people like Keith Olberman who only preach nonsense to his chior and never invites open debates of his tirades....
Sincerely,
Someone who is tired of being called a bigot by the real bigots
In response to this Keith Olbermann article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27650743/#storyContinued
My response:
Like Keith Olbermann's statement, "This is a matter of the heart…" Is foolish. That statement over shadows the rest of his article. What great authority or tradition is he invoking? What beyond his own ideas of right and wrong can he measure his conclusion against? What common ground is he appealing to that all people agree?
Martin Luther King in his "I have a Dream" speech said. "…I have a dream that someday my four little children will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character…" He was not advocating to a change the definition of what people recognized as a moral absolute. Martin Luther King instead reminding people of that moral absolute that all men are created equal.
To me it is extremely disingenuous for advocates of the homosexual community to associate their struggle for complete social endorsement of their practices with black Americans. Black Americans were denied basic human rights not because of their actions (like homosexuals) but because of the way they look. If someone cannot see the difference they are fooling themselves...
The commercials and advertisements seem to understand this clearly which is why I imagine that EVERY commercial never once said "homosexual" or "same sex marriage"… All commercials were pictures of racial violence, ambiguous talk about the "importance of family", or had a heterosexual couple denied the right to be married. It is a form of bait and switch. We (the public) are shown pictures of moral absolutes that we universally agree on and then they attach their proposition without every identifying what their motive is.
It would seem that even the advocates of same sex marriage understand that what they want is radically against universal acceptance, so much so that they omit the very detail that their cause is for. If same sex marriage is a basic human right then why is it not more readily spoken about in the ads that support it? Dr. Martin Luther King readily talk about specifically white and black people coming together because he knew it was a rallying point not an agenda to be cleverly disguised.
Proposition 8 was not about equality. It is about radical change. Whether or not that change is good or bad for society I am not even arguing but it is radical compared to traditions for the last couple thousand years. It is dishonest act as if homosexuals are being persecuted unjustly when (unlike the black Americans before desegregation) they are in fact given every right that every American has. -What they are not given is the ability to have all their actions endorsed by the state. Marriage is not a right it is an institution defined by the society that endorses it and is ratified by the state that the society elects… It is not an endowment to be stolen or taken by force. Proposition 8 was half about the definition of marriage and half about the outrage over a court that has overturned (for the second time) the will of the people that has elected them.
It is sad to think that in this country words like "bravery" have been stolen from men on the battlefeild and given to people like Keith Olberman who only preach nonsense to his chior and never invites open debates of his tirades....
Sincerely,
Someone who is tired of being called a bigot by the real bigots
Friday, May 1, 2009
Does Happily Ever After Exist in Hollywood?
The other night I went to a symposium on “church and beauty”. As terribly contrived as that title might sound to be deep or intellectual, it was an interesting lecture. The speaker (who by the way had two first names and referred to himself by both names) made correlations between art and Christianity. Some things he said were utterly fascinating with an amazing amount of insight. While other statements were left far too open ended as if because he said it, it doesn’t even need to be challenged. But that might be my preconceived notion that most intellectuals are so used to being in a class room setting that they never get challenged, therefore stop feeling that they need explanations for there ideologies…
Anyway in his talk he basically brought two scenarios of story foundations that he thought covered every popular story today… he put it that most stories fall into two categories: either “boy meets girls (and of course, vice-versa) and “a nobody rebel who makes good”.
He also made a fascinating parallel between our culture’s values and the stories we tell with their slow digression of morals… For example:
Beauty and the Beast. The original story was about a rich merchant with three daughters. Two of the daughters were selfish, self-centered and vain. The third was polite, selfless, and compassionate. One day through some trans-ocean voyage this merchant loses all his fortune and his family becomes impoverished. The two selfish daughters resent their father for it while the good one loved him all the more to support him. Through some turn of events the man’s fortune was later recovered and in celebration he asks his daughters what they desire. The two ask for gifts of jewelry and gowns, while the one asked for a single red rose.
The father returning from a journey one day finds a garden with beautiful roses and picks one, only to find that this rose garden belonged to a horrible beast! The beast after finding out he has these daughters makes a deal with the man that he will not kill him if he convinces the daughter of whom the rose was for to come care for the beast. The man agrees and to save her fathers life his one good daughter goes.
Time passes and the daughter falls in love with the beast breaking the spell that was on him and the two live happily ever after….
This stories moral was that good behavior and selflessness in rewarded while selfishness is never satisfied.
Contrast that with a Beauty (Bell) who’s first song in the Disney cartoon declares her superiority to her surrounding neighbors. Disney backs this notion up by not only making the entire village full of idiots but also making most people basically indistinguishable from the others. Bell is later rewarded for her believed greatness by actually achieving it and becomes queen over a town whose people are so brainless that they can be easily swayed into becoming an angry mob through a two-minute speech by another self diluted character, Gaston.
Disney effectively conveys that as long as you think you deserve something, you’ll get it. (Unless you have dark hair, then you’re a bad guy.) But working to achieve your goals or earning what you get is not important. In fact the character of Cinderella is now frowned upon as ridiculous or naïve. The idea that Cinderella’s principals kept her submissive to her stepmother and sisters is an idea almost unconscionable now at days.
The speaker made a much more detailed and compelling argument but said this to back up his main point in this section of the lecture …it is a lack of creativity that our arts become perverse and even dangerous. Like the pied piper who took the towns kids, the arts unchecked blur our direction for virtue and morality by caring away our sense of decency and duty. He sighted an idea in France from I don’t know what year that talked about regulating poetry and what is said. The reason was because the idea was that art was a window in which we see the soul of society. Just as any good poem can inspire you, a bad one can enslave you.
Of course he brought up Brokeback Mountain but only said that he felt artistically it was uncreative as if they took any other over played story line and made everyone nocturnal or some other arbitrary difference from normal stories.
I say all this because throughout his talk I thought about the film and theater industry. These people who spend a career pretending to be something they are not, speaking words written by other people, masquerading as lives that are not theirs become delusional and believe that they are bold in speaking out about things that they don’t understand. These misguided people have an ability to inspire people to believe past their surroundings but instead spend their time and popularity speaking out against injustices that exist in their sheltered little universe of morally inept peers.
If you can act well, you have an amazing gift. To be brave isn’t to take a roll that Hollywood deems controversial, or another roll that magnifies the worst part of our world and portrays it as commonplace. The brave path is to make sure that your ability to bring people into a character to inspire them to be better people.
What Hollywood does not want to accept also what enforces the idea that they are trying to create their own morality is the blocking, blackballing and or ignoring of original stories.
Passion of the Christ grossed $350,000,000.00 in the theaters and almost matched that on video. It was sold out weeks then days in advance for the first month it was out, breaking every box office record. Yet there was no talk of it at the Oscars or any other awards by the “entertainment industry” The hypocrisy of this industry crying the loudest about government cover-ups decides what is good and what is bad by what they determine good and bad not by actual ticket sales. They exalt the creators of Brokeback Mountain as if they were courageous to bring this love story to the public but had no difficulty with any one group about its opening. There was even a quote that said they were hoping for some uproar to help promote it and believed that Christians were trying to purposely ignore it so not to bring attention to it.
Lord of the Rings re-wrote J.R.Tolken’s King Aragorn as more rebellious so to appeal to a younger crowd. It was later changed back but again Hollywood thinks that things cannot be interesting unless they are rebellious, sending a message that you can’t be interesting unless you are rebellious!
Chronicles of Narnia: the original screenplay tried to write out Aslan as a lion! This movie grossed $300,000,000.00 without a word from any award organization! Instead the people who make movies were handing awards to themselves for the courageous release of an old story with a perverted twist of two men who fall in love with each other and then cheat on their wives. Unfortunately this story not only leaves the viewer with a distortion of real love as life long commitment would encourage but leave the viewer with a perversion of morality that “passion” somehow is such a pure virtue, that it trumps any duty or responsibility. Not to mention that this industry is the loudest proponent of born sexual orientation but is now advocating the natural interchangeability of one’s own orientation through two married men.
The point is people gravitate toward good stories that depict a world they want to live in but Hollywood is force-feeding a reflection of a deprived world because they have lost the ability to be truly creative.
Anyway in his talk he basically brought two scenarios of story foundations that he thought covered every popular story today… he put it that most stories fall into two categories: either “boy meets girls (and of course, vice-versa) and “a nobody rebel who makes good”.
He also made a fascinating parallel between our culture’s values and the stories we tell with their slow digression of morals… For example:
Beauty and the Beast. The original story was about a rich merchant with three daughters. Two of the daughters were selfish, self-centered and vain. The third was polite, selfless, and compassionate. One day through some trans-ocean voyage this merchant loses all his fortune and his family becomes impoverished. The two selfish daughters resent their father for it while the good one loved him all the more to support him. Through some turn of events the man’s fortune was later recovered and in celebration he asks his daughters what they desire. The two ask for gifts of jewelry and gowns, while the one asked for a single red rose.
The father returning from a journey one day finds a garden with beautiful roses and picks one, only to find that this rose garden belonged to a horrible beast! The beast after finding out he has these daughters makes a deal with the man that he will not kill him if he convinces the daughter of whom the rose was for to come care for the beast. The man agrees and to save her fathers life his one good daughter goes.
Time passes and the daughter falls in love with the beast breaking the spell that was on him and the two live happily ever after….
This stories moral was that good behavior and selflessness in rewarded while selfishness is never satisfied.
Contrast that with a Beauty (Bell) who’s first song in the Disney cartoon declares her superiority to her surrounding neighbors. Disney backs this notion up by not only making the entire village full of idiots but also making most people basically indistinguishable from the others. Bell is later rewarded for her believed greatness by actually achieving it and becomes queen over a town whose people are so brainless that they can be easily swayed into becoming an angry mob through a two-minute speech by another self diluted character, Gaston.
Disney effectively conveys that as long as you think you deserve something, you’ll get it. (Unless you have dark hair, then you’re a bad guy.) But working to achieve your goals or earning what you get is not important. In fact the character of Cinderella is now frowned upon as ridiculous or naïve. The idea that Cinderella’s principals kept her submissive to her stepmother and sisters is an idea almost unconscionable now at days.
The speaker made a much more detailed and compelling argument but said this to back up his main point in this section of the lecture …it is a lack of creativity that our arts become perverse and even dangerous. Like the pied piper who took the towns kids, the arts unchecked blur our direction for virtue and morality by caring away our sense of decency and duty. He sighted an idea in France from I don’t know what year that talked about regulating poetry and what is said. The reason was because the idea was that art was a window in which we see the soul of society. Just as any good poem can inspire you, a bad one can enslave you.
Of course he brought up Brokeback Mountain but only said that he felt artistically it was uncreative as if they took any other over played story line and made everyone nocturnal or some other arbitrary difference from normal stories.
I say all this because throughout his talk I thought about the film and theater industry. These people who spend a career pretending to be something they are not, speaking words written by other people, masquerading as lives that are not theirs become delusional and believe that they are bold in speaking out about things that they don’t understand. These misguided people have an ability to inspire people to believe past their surroundings but instead spend their time and popularity speaking out against injustices that exist in their sheltered little universe of morally inept peers.
If you can act well, you have an amazing gift. To be brave isn’t to take a roll that Hollywood deems controversial, or another roll that magnifies the worst part of our world and portrays it as commonplace. The brave path is to make sure that your ability to bring people into a character to inspire them to be better people.
What Hollywood does not want to accept also what enforces the idea that they are trying to create their own morality is the blocking, blackballing and or ignoring of original stories.
Passion of the Christ grossed $350,000,000.00 in the theaters and almost matched that on video. It was sold out weeks then days in advance for the first month it was out, breaking every box office record. Yet there was no talk of it at the Oscars or any other awards by the “entertainment industry” The hypocrisy of this industry crying the loudest about government cover-ups decides what is good and what is bad by what they determine good and bad not by actual ticket sales. They exalt the creators of Brokeback Mountain as if they were courageous to bring this love story to the public but had no difficulty with any one group about its opening. There was even a quote that said they were hoping for some uproar to help promote it and believed that Christians were trying to purposely ignore it so not to bring attention to it.
Lord of the Rings re-wrote J.R.Tolken’s King Aragorn as more rebellious so to appeal to a younger crowd. It was later changed back but again Hollywood thinks that things cannot be interesting unless they are rebellious, sending a message that you can’t be interesting unless you are rebellious!
Chronicles of Narnia: the original screenplay tried to write out Aslan as a lion! This movie grossed $300,000,000.00 without a word from any award organization! Instead the people who make movies were handing awards to themselves for the courageous release of an old story with a perverted twist of two men who fall in love with each other and then cheat on their wives. Unfortunately this story not only leaves the viewer with a distortion of real love as life long commitment would encourage but leave the viewer with a perversion of morality that “passion” somehow is such a pure virtue, that it trumps any duty or responsibility. Not to mention that this industry is the loudest proponent of born sexual orientation but is now advocating the natural interchangeability of one’s own orientation through two married men.
The point is people gravitate toward good stories that depict a world they want to live in but Hollywood is force-feeding a reflection of a deprived world because they have lost the ability to be truly creative.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Leftism Only Creates Destruction
I continually find proofs to myself for the legitimacy of the bible. It actually is one of those things you could never list because it is thousands of small things I discover here and there. I have been taking a Torah class in L.A. for almost 3 years now and am blown away by the need for annotation due to all the insight, practical insight it has… I am not Jewish but I am utterly astonished by the practical application of their belief system. Outside of the differences in denominations the culture the beliefs, the traditions are an insulated therapeutic utopia. Now, I understand that’s me looking in and not actually being in the religion, still I am so inspired by its completeness…
It has however inspired me to read the bible more and the more I read the bible the more I find parallels in our world and what the bible says. Not so much parallels in similarity but parallels by way of irony. Our world is the world the bible is set against. Whether you believe the bible or not; why is it almost every social/political fight today is one that the bible has specifically addressed in its first book? Allow me to answer. There are powers outside of this physical world that are battling for your life, which is proof of your individual value. In this world however the battle looks more like a, “does evil exist in a natural world?”... The question seems inconsequential but has implications that dictate you priorities. If there is no evil then there is no choice. If there is no choice then there is no accountability for our actions. If we are not accountable then there is no reason to believe or lives have any meaning beyond emotion in this life. (Please think that over)
I digress, last night I was writing notes on my hand, on a napkin and on scraps about things I wanted to research for a thought (this entry)… Last night I went to a debate that left me with more questions as any good debate should do, however this debate was solely uninteresting in its discourse. In lieu of my attention to the “debate” I sent my mind wondering about accomplishments of “The Left” which lead my comparing that to biblical principles… Which puts me back to where we left off…
Taking the religion out of the bible and just listing its principles you might find some starting revelation when you counter it with today’s social movements.
“In the beginning God”… The bible establishes God as outside of time and space by declaring His position in existence. It could have started out, “God created the heavens and the Earth…” But that leaves you with the question, “from what?” but declaring a "beginning" makes that "beginning" God’s first creation, which was time and space simultaneously. We do not know how long before the creation story God formed the Earth; we just know what events marked the first day. It is this component of time that has sent science into a frenzy as evidence against a 6 day creation. However the bible does not say the Earth was created in 6 days. What it says instead is what God did in the 6 days.
Point 1
I bring this up to come to our first point, Evolution. I will concede that the church stifled honest science for centuries and in return during what was called, “The Age of Enlightenment” man revolted against God and in almost every pattern of revolution, those who revolt replace bad with worse. God gave us purpose and spirituality. What did evolution give us random chance i.e. purposeless? Genesis 1:25 describes that God made every living creature after its kind… asserting a separation of species, yet Neo-Darwinist push pull and stretch fossil records to excoriate any idea that creatures were purposefully made. The lack of intermediate fossils in the fossil record doesn’t cause them to abandon any theory of speciation but instead emboldens them to pontificate how an animal can make a jump from reptile to bird or rodent to cat. When they find they do not have enough time geologically to fit the number of generations needed to support their hypothesis they create new theories like punctuated-equilibrium. The implications are less about the origin of species and more about proving there is no higher authority other than one of natural selection. This is humanities revolution against belief in God. Your value system is dictated by your belief in who/what is the higher power. Natural selection as the believed origin give no instruction of morals or values. Without an objective value system, there is no purpose, there is no meaning. There is no judgment…
The idea that we are not perfect (morally speaking) so we cannot judge one another is a prevailing ideology among “progressive” thinkers. We are given ideas of “natural selection” and apply them to emotional circumstance relieving individuals of their responsibilities for their actions, further removing them from their innate convictions.
Part 2
Genesis 2:18,(first part) “…man should not be alone…” God was at the beginning and could have designed man and reproduction in any way He liked… He could have made another man, or two women but he made a statement with making someone of the opposite sex to complete the man He created. God said, “I will make a helper ‘suitable’ for him…” In today’s culture there is an attack on sexuality. There is a movement that wants to desexualize society, demanding that both sexes are absolutely interchangeable. Yet the bible would argue that the opposite sexes complete a person by design. What do we have to gain with the interchangeability of sexes? It is certainly not equality because it is not the measure of someone’s efforts that we are discussing but instead the dynamics of their preferred sexuality. We are asked as a society to identify someone’s individuality not according to their individual contributions but instead according to their actions sexually. In this we are demanding a norm of society to desexualize adults but ironically worse, sexualize children by making them aware of a group that is only differentiated by whom they prefer to seek sexual gratification from. There is a revolution against marriage that doesn’t stand to make it better but only will destroy it. Leftist policies can only destroy.
Point 3
Gen 2:18 (second part)“The LORD God said, "... I will make a helper suitable for him." What did God mean by helper. Any hypersensitive feminist might read this as a hinted direction of women’s subservient position within relationships. Yet a closer look at the bible in the previous chapter and throughout the Torah you would find the placement of woman before men and men before women in equal proportions. The Garden of Eden is a picture of perfect balance. In the first 3 days God only separates and does not create. Or, one can say in the fist 3 days God created balance to Earth. In this great example of perfect balance God creates man and woman in His image. I would argue that part of that image and completeness is lost in mans solitude otherwise Adam’s aloneness would not have earned God’s attentions.
But further, In God’s perfect environment he created a perfect partnership, a foundation as God directs man to be “fruitful and multiply”. The bible speaks of family in so many ways and develops their role within their group and within a society. The family serves as an accountability and support group for individuals. However, well meaning Leftists groups pull at the loose threads of society demanding more state sponsored funding for single mothers and impoverished individuals. In the past the family has had a stake in the success of later generations as they would care for the elderly but also serve as a support group for those members who are on hard times. With the infusion of state funded care and financial support the family as it were has taken a step back from accountability and support. This has only increased the amount of people who require that state funded support exponentially. If the burden is not on the family to remedy, the family does not take action to maintain a level of accountability. But it is not just this monetary care for family members but also the emotional foundation that has been torn away with the diminishing family. The family is the core structure the back bone if you will of society and the Left from every angle is set to replace it.
Point 4
Genesis 1:25 …”let Us make man after our image…” I often get into arguments with people about Global Warming. Lately I have been given the argument “we are not qualified to question science…” Yet the story of the origins of the theory of evolution is riddled with scientists who have tried to push frauds into the science with motivations that fall short of seeking truth. Be it to end the debate or to make a name for themselves their examples of deception are in the pages of history. Evolutionary science has an investment in finding their missing link yet 150 years later they are still searching. Though there are claims of the “Java Man” found in the early 20th century or later finds of “Lucy”. Science can only postulate the existence of an almost human link to primates; only today instead of a fake conglomerate of various creatures we have stories and models made of what “should be”. These stories told over and over are the same fraudulent science only as a wedge slowly being sunk deeper into academia. The search for the missing link is a search for evidence that man was not made as Genesis 1:26 describes. This is our Tower of Babel, our declaration that ‘man does not need God’…
Point 5
Genesis 1:28, (first part) “Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Since the 18th century there have been men who have campaigned for zero population. The most famous of which is The Population Bomb (1968) written by Paul R. Ehrlich. The idea is demonic in nature as it goes against the first commandment God gave to humanity. God did not give limit to his commandment. Further the idea that we can over populate the Earth is to say that God did not design the Earth correctly, which directly attacks God’s omnipotence. Again, if God is not everything He claims He is none of His claims. And without God we have no meaning, no greater stake in this life than a blade of grass.
Secondly, This verse is in direct contradiction to ideas of abortion. We are told that abortion is a right, we are given arguments of children that have no future because of the potential circumstance of their potential parents, yet we are not told the statistics of who is getting abortions in greater number (being women who can afford them). Abortion fights against the very core of creation. It is the one area that God partners with man in such a way to be apart of His ultimate plan regardless of where you are spiritually. God goes further in His use for Cain as He uses his line to re-populate the Earth. Cain who murdered Able was God’s vehicle for a greater blessing. We do not know God’s plans with every unborn baby regardless of its circumstances.
Point 6
Genesis 1:28, (second part) “… have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Today environmentalists would have you believe that you are no greater part of this ecosystem. They would have you believe that you share this world and that it was not made FOR humanity but instead humanity is more like a cancer that lives within it. God shows without a doubt in Genesis 8 &9 that He is willing to destroy the Earth for His plan for humanity. He shows that the Earth is only the stage andit is our lives that He values.
Environmentalism in its fanaticism is destructive. It is responsible for 10’s of millions of lives in Africa because of the ban on DDT. Behind the guise of “responsibility” environmentalists would have you trade your purpose and inheritance with God for a belief in nothingness.
The first 10 chapters of Genesis outline a divine plan that is thwarted by every secular cause. An honest person must ask them selves why the dominant secular causes directly conflict with biblical direction. Is that a coincidence that an almost 4000 years ago a book was written that declared man’s individual value universally, that declared man’s dominance over nature and all creatures? Is it coincidence that man was intended not to live alone yet the desire for marriage is on the decline in Western Europe?
This argument might be poorly articulated. My structure might be lacking, yet I ask that you look at it with an honest inspection. This is less about whether you believe there is a God and more about that a 4000 year old book is mark for mark against every contemporary secular movement. How is that possible unless there is some greater struggle in our world that is not physical but spiritual? Why is there attacks on human value, Human purpose? Why is there a discounting of human life by way of environmentalism but then a inflating of it when it pertains to capital punishment, when the bible speaks plainly about both again contrary to popular culture? “It is because man was made in the Image of God that if a man’s blood is spilled so shall he have his blood spilled by man…” God declares that life is so valued that there are consequence for ending a life early, further that the murder has not just killed one man but all of his descendents (Genesis 4:10, “… the voice of your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground…” In the Hebrew the word for blood is actually plural “bloods” as if more than one generation is crying out to God)
There is a demonic force that is working against God’s plan. There is no Leftist program, movement or revolution that has ever created anything. Throughout the bible there is a contrast of purposes. A defining character of Satan is that he has no power to create anything. His sole purpose is to destroy what God has created. In turn, Leftism is a godless endeavor and finds its purpose (with sometimes the best of intentions) in only tearing down what has been created. Its movements are all about reform, its rebellions are all about removing, it’s activism is always against. What has the Left created that it hasn’t stolen or made worse?
Nothing… Sexuality, Family, Home, Accountability, Liberty, Life, Innocence, Purpose, Meaning, Self-Esteem, Honesty… Leftism is nothing more than a parasite on society. They can only mobilize after something is created for them to rebel against. They champion social victories of the past like women’s suffrage and abolitionism, taking ownership as their victories forgetting that it was Christian groups that were on the front lines of those fights and it was Leftist groups who opposed them. Leftism lays claim to social welfare causes but misses that it is faith-based groups that head that fight and it is Leftist policies that encourage poverty.
Leftists live in a fantasy world both in their accomplishments and in their struggles. They chase windmills (now literally) and never seem to realize that they are their own enemy, ironically they themselves as a group are the only thing they don’t destroy.
For reference:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201%20;&version=50;
It has however inspired me to read the bible more and the more I read the bible the more I find parallels in our world and what the bible says. Not so much parallels in similarity but parallels by way of irony. Our world is the world the bible is set against. Whether you believe the bible or not; why is it almost every social/political fight today is one that the bible has specifically addressed in its first book? Allow me to answer. There are powers outside of this physical world that are battling for your life, which is proof of your individual value. In this world however the battle looks more like a, “does evil exist in a natural world?”... The question seems inconsequential but has implications that dictate you priorities. If there is no evil then there is no choice. If there is no choice then there is no accountability for our actions. If we are not accountable then there is no reason to believe or lives have any meaning beyond emotion in this life. (Please think that over)
I digress, last night I was writing notes on my hand, on a napkin and on scraps about things I wanted to research for a thought (this entry)… Last night I went to a debate that left me with more questions as any good debate should do, however this debate was solely uninteresting in its discourse. In lieu of my attention to the “debate” I sent my mind wondering about accomplishments of “The Left” which lead my comparing that to biblical principles… Which puts me back to where we left off…
Taking the religion out of the bible and just listing its principles you might find some starting revelation when you counter it with today’s social movements.
“In the beginning God”… The bible establishes God as outside of time and space by declaring His position in existence. It could have started out, “God created the heavens and the Earth…” But that leaves you with the question, “from what?” but declaring a "beginning" makes that "beginning" God’s first creation, which was time and space simultaneously. We do not know how long before the creation story God formed the Earth; we just know what events marked the first day. It is this component of time that has sent science into a frenzy as evidence against a 6 day creation. However the bible does not say the Earth was created in 6 days. What it says instead is what God did in the 6 days.
Point 1
I bring this up to come to our first point, Evolution. I will concede that the church stifled honest science for centuries and in return during what was called, “The Age of Enlightenment” man revolted against God and in almost every pattern of revolution, those who revolt replace bad with worse. God gave us purpose and spirituality. What did evolution give us random chance i.e. purposeless? Genesis 1:25 describes that God made every living creature after its kind… asserting a separation of species, yet Neo-Darwinist push pull and stretch fossil records to excoriate any idea that creatures were purposefully made. The lack of intermediate fossils in the fossil record doesn’t cause them to abandon any theory of speciation but instead emboldens them to pontificate how an animal can make a jump from reptile to bird or rodent to cat. When they find they do not have enough time geologically to fit the number of generations needed to support their hypothesis they create new theories like punctuated-equilibrium. The implications are less about the origin of species and more about proving there is no higher authority other than one of natural selection. This is humanities revolution against belief in God. Your value system is dictated by your belief in who/what is the higher power. Natural selection as the believed origin give no instruction of morals or values. Without an objective value system, there is no purpose, there is no meaning. There is no judgment…
The idea that we are not perfect (morally speaking) so we cannot judge one another is a prevailing ideology among “progressive” thinkers. We are given ideas of “natural selection” and apply them to emotional circumstance relieving individuals of their responsibilities for their actions, further removing them from their innate convictions.
Part 2
Genesis 2:18,(first part) “…man should not be alone…” God was at the beginning and could have designed man and reproduction in any way He liked… He could have made another man, or two women but he made a statement with making someone of the opposite sex to complete the man He created. God said, “I will make a helper ‘suitable’ for him…” In today’s culture there is an attack on sexuality. There is a movement that wants to desexualize society, demanding that both sexes are absolutely interchangeable. Yet the bible would argue that the opposite sexes complete a person by design. What do we have to gain with the interchangeability of sexes? It is certainly not equality because it is not the measure of someone’s efforts that we are discussing but instead the dynamics of their preferred sexuality. We are asked as a society to identify someone’s individuality not according to their individual contributions but instead according to their actions sexually. In this we are demanding a norm of society to desexualize adults but ironically worse, sexualize children by making them aware of a group that is only differentiated by whom they prefer to seek sexual gratification from. There is a revolution against marriage that doesn’t stand to make it better but only will destroy it. Leftist policies can only destroy.
Point 3
Gen 2:18 (second part)“The LORD God said, "... I will make a helper suitable for him." What did God mean by helper. Any hypersensitive feminist might read this as a hinted direction of women’s subservient position within relationships. Yet a closer look at the bible in the previous chapter and throughout the Torah you would find the placement of woman before men and men before women in equal proportions. The Garden of Eden is a picture of perfect balance. In the first 3 days God only separates and does not create. Or, one can say in the fist 3 days God created balance to Earth. In this great example of perfect balance God creates man and woman in His image. I would argue that part of that image and completeness is lost in mans solitude otherwise Adam’s aloneness would not have earned God’s attentions.
But further, In God’s perfect environment he created a perfect partnership, a foundation as God directs man to be “fruitful and multiply”. The bible speaks of family in so many ways and develops their role within their group and within a society. The family serves as an accountability and support group for individuals. However, well meaning Leftists groups pull at the loose threads of society demanding more state sponsored funding for single mothers and impoverished individuals. In the past the family has had a stake in the success of later generations as they would care for the elderly but also serve as a support group for those members who are on hard times. With the infusion of state funded care and financial support the family as it were has taken a step back from accountability and support. This has only increased the amount of people who require that state funded support exponentially. If the burden is not on the family to remedy, the family does not take action to maintain a level of accountability. But it is not just this monetary care for family members but also the emotional foundation that has been torn away with the diminishing family. The family is the core structure the back bone if you will of society and the Left from every angle is set to replace it.
Point 4
Genesis 1:25 …”let Us make man after our image…” I often get into arguments with people about Global Warming. Lately I have been given the argument “we are not qualified to question science…” Yet the story of the origins of the theory of evolution is riddled with scientists who have tried to push frauds into the science with motivations that fall short of seeking truth. Be it to end the debate or to make a name for themselves their examples of deception are in the pages of history. Evolutionary science has an investment in finding their missing link yet 150 years later they are still searching. Though there are claims of the “Java Man” found in the early 20th century or later finds of “Lucy”. Science can only postulate the existence of an almost human link to primates; only today instead of a fake conglomerate of various creatures we have stories and models made of what “should be”. These stories told over and over are the same fraudulent science only as a wedge slowly being sunk deeper into academia. The search for the missing link is a search for evidence that man was not made as Genesis 1:26 describes. This is our Tower of Babel, our declaration that ‘man does not need God’…
Point 5
Genesis 1:28, (first part) “Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Since the 18th century there have been men who have campaigned for zero population. The most famous of which is The Population Bomb (1968) written by Paul R. Ehrlich. The idea is demonic in nature as it goes against the first commandment God gave to humanity. God did not give limit to his commandment. Further the idea that we can over populate the Earth is to say that God did not design the Earth correctly, which directly attacks God’s omnipotence. Again, if God is not everything He claims He is none of His claims. And without God we have no meaning, no greater stake in this life than a blade of grass.
Secondly, This verse is in direct contradiction to ideas of abortion. We are told that abortion is a right, we are given arguments of children that have no future because of the potential circumstance of their potential parents, yet we are not told the statistics of who is getting abortions in greater number (being women who can afford them). Abortion fights against the very core of creation. It is the one area that God partners with man in such a way to be apart of His ultimate plan regardless of where you are spiritually. God goes further in His use for Cain as He uses his line to re-populate the Earth. Cain who murdered Able was God’s vehicle for a greater blessing. We do not know God’s plans with every unborn baby regardless of its circumstances.
Point 6
Genesis 1:28, (second part) “… have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Today environmentalists would have you believe that you are no greater part of this ecosystem. They would have you believe that you share this world and that it was not made FOR humanity but instead humanity is more like a cancer that lives within it. God shows without a doubt in Genesis 8 &9 that He is willing to destroy the Earth for His plan for humanity. He shows that the Earth is only the stage andit is our lives that He values.
Environmentalism in its fanaticism is destructive. It is responsible for 10’s of millions of lives in Africa because of the ban on DDT. Behind the guise of “responsibility” environmentalists would have you trade your purpose and inheritance with God for a belief in nothingness.
The first 10 chapters of Genesis outline a divine plan that is thwarted by every secular cause. An honest person must ask them selves why the dominant secular causes directly conflict with biblical direction. Is that a coincidence that an almost 4000 years ago a book was written that declared man’s individual value universally, that declared man’s dominance over nature and all creatures? Is it coincidence that man was intended not to live alone yet the desire for marriage is on the decline in Western Europe?
This argument might be poorly articulated. My structure might be lacking, yet I ask that you look at it with an honest inspection. This is less about whether you believe there is a God and more about that a 4000 year old book is mark for mark against every contemporary secular movement. How is that possible unless there is some greater struggle in our world that is not physical but spiritual? Why is there attacks on human value, Human purpose? Why is there a discounting of human life by way of environmentalism but then a inflating of it when it pertains to capital punishment, when the bible speaks plainly about both again contrary to popular culture? “It is because man was made in the Image of God that if a man’s blood is spilled so shall he have his blood spilled by man…” God declares that life is so valued that there are consequence for ending a life early, further that the murder has not just killed one man but all of his descendents (Genesis 4:10, “… the voice of your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground…” In the Hebrew the word for blood is actually plural “bloods” as if more than one generation is crying out to God)
There is a demonic force that is working against God’s plan. There is no Leftist program, movement or revolution that has ever created anything. Throughout the bible there is a contrast of purposes. A defining character of Satan is that he has no power to create anything. His sole purpose is to destroy what God has created. In turn, Leftism is a godless endeavor and finds its purpose (with sometimes the best of intentions) in only tearing down what has been created. Its movements are all about reform, its rebellions are all about removing, it’s activism is always against. What has the Left created that it hasn’t stolen or made worse?
Nothing… Sexuality, Family, Home, Accountability, Liberty, Life, Innocence, Purpose, Meaning, Self-Esteem, Honesty… Leftism is nothing more than a parasite on society. They can only mobilize after something is created for them to rebel against. They champion social victories of the past like women’s suffrage and abolitionism, taking ownership as their victories forgetting that it was Christian groups that were on the front lines of those fights and it was Leftist groups who opposed them. Leftism lays claim to social welfare causes but misses that it is faith-based groups that head that fight and it is Leftist policies that encourage poverty.
Leftists live in a fantasy world both in their accomplishments and in their struggles. They chase windmills (now literally) and never seem to realize that they are their own enemy, ironically they themselves as a group are the only thing they don’t destroy.
For reference:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201%20;&version=50;
Friday, April 17, 2009
Why Conservatives Don't Trust Obama (in an example)
Obama and President Gul of Turkey press conference.
Cankaya Palace
Ankara, Turkey
Obama:
"That's something that's very important to me. And I've said before that one of the great strengths of the United States is -- although as I mentioned, we have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation; we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."
Preamble: a preliminary or preparatory statement; an introduction...
Alabama 1901, Preamble. We the people of the State of Alabama, invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution..
Alaska 1956, Preamble We, the people of Alaska, grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land.
Arizona 1911, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...
Arkansas 1874, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arkansas, grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government...
California 1879, Preamble We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom...
Colorado 1876, Preamble, We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe...
Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy.
Delaware 1897, Preamble Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshiping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences.
Florida 1885, Preamble We, the people of the State of Florida, grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution...
Georgia 1777, Preamble We, the people of Georgia, relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution...
Hawaii 1959, Preamble We , the people of Hawaii, Grateful for Divine Guidance ... Establish this Constitution.
Idaho 1889, Preamble We, the people of the State of Idaho, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings.
Illinois 1870, Preamble We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil , political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
Indiana 1851, Preamble We, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government.
Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the St ate of Iowa, grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings, establish this Constitution.
Kansas 1859, Preamble We, the people of Kansas, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution.
Kentucky 1891, Preamble.. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties…
Louisiana 1921, Preamble We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.
Maine 1820, Preamble We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity... And imploring His aid and direction.
Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...
Massachusetts 1780, Preamble We....the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction
Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, establish this Constitution.
Minnesota, 1857, Preamble We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings:
Mississippi 1890, Preamble We, the people of Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.
Missouri 1845, Preamble. We, the people of Missouri, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness. Establish this Constitution...
Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution.
Nebraska 1875, Preamble We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom. Establish this Constitution.
Nevada 1864, Preamble We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, establish this Constitution...
New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.
New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
New Mexico 1911, Preamble We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty..
New York 1846, Preamble We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.
North Carolina 1868, Preamble We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those...
North Dakota 1889, Preamble We , the people of North Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain...
Ohio 1852, Preamble We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common.
Oklahoma 1907, Preamble Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty, establish this
Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences
Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance....
Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing...
South Carolina, 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carolina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
South Dakota 1889, Preamble We, the people of South Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties.
Tennessee 1796, Art. XI..III. That all men have a natural and indefensible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience...
Texas 1845, Preamble We the People of the Republic of Texas, acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.
Utah 1896, Preamble Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution.
Vermont 1777, Preamble Where as all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man.
Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other
Washington 1889, Preamble We the People of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution
West Virginia 1872, Preamble Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God ...
Wisconsin 1848, Preamble We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility...
Wyoming 1890, Preamble We, the people of the State of Wyoming, grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties, establish this Constitution...
My Question to you the reader Christian or not, is Obama's denial of the heritage of this country a "progressive" move, an ignorant gaff, or an intentional underminding of this country?
Cankaya Palace
Ankara, Turkey
Obama:
"That's something that's very important to me. And I've said before that one of the great strengths of the United States is -- although as I mentioned, we have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation; we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."
Preamble: a preliminary or preparatory statement; an introduction...
Alabama 1901, Preamble. We the people of the State of Alabama, invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution..
Alaska 1956, Preamble We, the people of Alaska, grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land.
Arizona 1911, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...
Arkansas 1874, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arkansas, grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government...
California 1879, Preamble We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom...
Colorado 1876, Preamble, We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe...
Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy.
Delaware 1897, Preamble Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshiping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences.
Florida 1885, Preamble We, the people of the State of Florida, grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution...
Georgia 1777, Preamble We, the people of Georgia, relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution...
Hawaii 1959, Preamble We , the people of Hawaii, Grateful for Divine Guidance ... Establish this Constitution.
Idaho 1889, Preamble We, the people of the State of Idaho, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings.
Illinois 1870, Preamble We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil , political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
Indiana 1851, Preamble We, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government.
Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the St ate of Iowa, grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings, establish this Constitution.
Kansas 1859, Preamble We, the people of Kansas, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution.
Kentucky 1891, Preamble.. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties…
Louisiana 1921, Preamble We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.
Maine 1820, Preamble We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity... And imploring His aid and direction.
Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...
Massachusetts 1780, Preamble We....the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction
Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, establish this Constitution.
Minnesota, 1857, Preamble We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings:
Mississippi 1890, Preamble We, the people of Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.
Missouri 1845, Preamble. We, the people of Missouri, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness. Establish this Constitution...
Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution.
Nebraska 1875, Preamble We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom. Establish this Constitution.
Nevada 1864, Preamble We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, establish this Constitution...
New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.
New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
New Mexico 1911, Preamble We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty..
New York 1846, Preamble We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.
North Carolina 1868, Preamble We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those...
North Dakota 1889, Preamble We , the people of North Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain...
Ohio 1852, Preamble We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common.
Oklahoma 1907, Preamble Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty, establish this
Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences
Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance....
Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing...
South Carolina, 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carolina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
South Dakota 1889, Preamble We, the people of South Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties.
Tennessee 1796, Art. XI..III. That all men have a natural and indefensible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience...
Texas 1845, Preamble We the People of the Republic of Texas, acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.
Utah 1896, Preamble Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution.
Vermont 1777, Preamble Where as all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man.
Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other
Washington 1889, Preamble We the People of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution
West Virginia 1872, Preamble Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God ...
Wisconsin 1848, Preamble We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility...
Wyoming 1890, Preamble We, the people of the State of Wyoming, grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties, establish this Constitution...
My Question to you the reader Christian or not, is Obama's denial of the heritage of this country a "progressive" move, an ignorant gaff, or an intentional underminding of this country?
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Find Fitna
The call for liberty has many battle fronts today... Its economic front is with communism masked as an environmental movement. Its social front is a lack of nationalistic pride in the form of dictated multiculturalism. The fight for liberty itself, the front for individuality is with Islam.
People will try to deter you from your quest for truth by calling you a racist, greedy, and bigot...remember that these movements away from real liberty have grown under the protection and freedoms our liberty has provided.
Freedom is a responsibility as these battle fronts have been delivered through a "Trojan Horse" of legislation and "tolerance" yet the people who subscribe to these beliefs of multiculturalism, environmentalism, and Islam are the most intolerant of groups.
If "climate change" is true, WHEN WERE THE DEBATES?
IF Multiculturalism is of value to be sought after why does it mean abandoning American Culture on its path?
If Islam wants peace, show me when and where they have been peaceful.
We are at war with ourselves in that we have been so secure in our liberty for so long we have become apathetic to a world that hates our freedom. A world like that cannot possibly exist to us. We are told that the real evil is corporate greed, beyond that "evil" doesn't exist. We have abandoned justice and have replaced it with a subjective "right and wrong", we have been lead to believe that people are not wrong, they are instead "victims" who cannot be responsible for the events that made them who they supposedly are.
This mentality has caused a sterilization in our will to fight having our innate convictions of an objective moral truth questioned not with reason but instead questioned by the numbers of a lost mob that has no beliefs. We lack the will to fight not because we lack the courage but instead becasue we lack the urgency... Yet we fight an enemy that sees only urgency.
Liberty is what we fight for; the freedom to love and hate, the freedom to agree and disagree, the freedom to demand justice, and for a short time while we have it, a freedom to fight for our liberty...
The hour is upon us, now is not the time to sleep...
To see the movie Fitna please cut and past the link below in your browser...
http://www.themoviefitna.com/fitna-the-movie/
People will try to deter you from your quest for truth by calling you a racist, greedy, and bigot...remember that these movements away from real liberty have grown under the protection and freedoms our liberty has provided.
Freedom is a responsibility as these battle fronts have been delivered through a "Trojan Horse" of legislation and "tolerance" yet the people who subscribe to these beliefs of multiculturalism, environmentalism, and Islam are the most intolerant of groups.
If "climate change" is true, WHEN WERE THE DEBATES?
IF Multiculturalism is of value to be sought after why does it mean abandoning American Culture on its path?
If Islam wants peace, show me when and where they have been peaceful.
We are at war with ourselves in that we have been so secure in our liberty for so long we have become apathetic to a world that hates our freedom. A world like that cannot possibly exist to us. We are told that the real evil is corporate greed, beyond that "evil" doesn't exist. We have abandoned justice and have replaced it with a subjective "right and wrong", we have been lead to believe that people are not wrong, they are instead "victims" who cannot be responsible for the events that made them who they supposedly are.
This mentality has caused a sterilization in our will to fight having our innate convictions of an objective moral truth questioned not with reason but instead questioned by the numbers of a lost mob that has no beliefs. We lack the will to fight not because we lack the courage but instead becasue we lack the urgency... Yet we fight an enemy that sees only urgency.
Liberty is what we fight for; the freedom to love and hate, the freedom to agree and disagree, the freedom to demand justice, and for a short time while we have it, a freedom to fight for our liberty...
The hour is upon us, now is not the time to sleep...
To see the movie Fitna please cut and past the link below in your browser...
http://www.themoviefitna.com/fitna-the-movie/
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Introspection:
I cannot say that I consider this a real post… Today I am feeling a bit introspective and in all honesty a bit defeated. I have worked for the same company for almost 15 years… When you are in your early 30’s like I am you feel like you life is completely invested into something like this. This company I work for was worth multi-millions about 8 months ago and now it seems we are worth our debt today. In the last few months we have had 2 major layoffs, 3 substantial pay decreases and a slow down in daily motion. I wasn’t one of the lay-offs but many good people I’ve known for years were.
Here is my question if I can ask America one things:
What philosophy of life made it possible to open a company like this? Was it, “take from the haves and give it to the have-nots”? Or was it a structure that allowed the have nots to dream and go for it and become a have?
I have seen so many news reports castigating capitalism as if “greed” was that reason of the economic down turn. I am utterly speechless that people feel that some banker making too much money (according to them) affected their own opportunity to make more money. It is a complete non sequitur; one has nothing to do with the other.
We have in our government a party which is emboldened by a failing America. They institute unions that make the individual worthless and give power only to the masses so that those who do not work hard swallow your individual hard work wholly. The Declaration of Independence said in no uncertain terms that “…all men are created equal…” it gave power to the individual. This party continues to raise taxes and hides behind an impenetrable bureaucracy so that you no longer are a human but a social-security number or worse a debtor… These taxes are uses to herd us into brackets and lifestyles that they deem fit according to their ideologies, all the while demanding that Christians leave their values out of the public circle; Ironically forgetting that it was judeo/christian values that created this platform that they want to destroy.
They push their social agenda through public schools and colleges with the same fervor of a totalitarian regime always demanding that they are not funded sufficiently and sacrificing the foot-soldiers, (the teachers) in layoffs and pay-cuts to make their case stronger, leaving behind a bloated and over paid bureaucracy of redundant administration. This inconsistency of vision is never called to the carpet. This structure of paying teachers a fraction of the budget while school officials live over paid lifestyles… Instead the finger is pointed back at bankers and private corporations that actually grow this nation as greedy and over paid. And America’s youth drink it up… And why not? They are conditioned all through school to believe that America is a cancer by teachers who feel the bitter sting of being underpaid… they are taught that the common man is the cure for America, to give the wealth back to “its rightful owners” by Barak Obama (of course Russian history is avoided in our schools…)
I work for a small business which is considered a “person” when it comes to the IRS and President Obama. Any “person” making over $250k a year is “rich”… Well this person has 600 dependants, this person has people who work hard for it so that they can make more. But Mr. Obama TAKES his percentage off the profit of the company, then his percentage off the number of employees it employs, he takes his percentage from the owners that took a risk to create this business that is giving jobs and a future for Americans and then Obama TAKES a percentage out of each check of each employee. Double taxation would be an improvement to this quadruple taxation. Then Obama, wants to increase taxes on energy to discourage its use. So he takes more from the company and more from the people it employs. Then Obama wants to institute Cap and Trade, increasing prices of everyday things, so again the company is paying more out of the pocket.
The better this company does, the harder each person works to make their situation better, the more money the Government steels. WHY? Because Obama’s America is not about giving opportunity, it is about making everyone equal and that means poor…
I understands that the hope that Obama fails is a hope that America succeeds. Both cannot happen…
Here is my question if I can ask America one things:
What philosophy of life made it possible to open a company like this? Was it, “take from the haves and give it to the have-nots”? Or was it a structure that allowed the have nots to dream and go for it and become a have?
I have seen so many news reports castigating capitalism as if “greed” was that reason of the economic down turn. I am utterly speechless that people feel that some banker making too much money (according to them) affected their own opportunity to make more money. It is a complete non sequitur; one has nothing to do with the other.
We have in our government a party which is emboldened by a failing America. They institute unions that make the individual worthless and give power only to the masses so that those who do not work hard swallow your individual hard work wholly. The Declaration of Independence said in no uncertain terms that “…all men are created equal…” it gave power to the individual. This party continues to raise taxes and hides behind an impenetrable bureaucracy so that you no longer are a human but a social-security number or worse a debtor… These taxes are uses to herd us into brackets and lifestyles that they deem fit according to their ideologies, all the while demanding that Christians leave their values out of the public circle; Ironically forgetting that it was judeo/christian values that created this platform that they want to destroy.
They push their social agenda through public schools and colleges with the same fervor of a totalitarian regime always demanding that they are not funded sufficiently and sacrificing the foot-soldiers, (the teachers) in layoffs and pay-cuts to make their case stronger, leaving behind a bloated and over paid bureaucracy of redundant administration. This inconsistency of vision is never called to the carpet. This structure of paying teachers a fraction of the budget while school officials live over paid lifestyles… Instead the finger is pointed back at bankers and private corporations that actually grow this nation as greedy and over paid. And America’s youth drink it up… And why not? They are conditioned all through school to believe that America is a cancer by teachers who feel the bitter sting of being underpaid… they are taught that the common man is the cure for America, to give the wealth back to “its rightful owners” by Barak Obama (of course Russian history is avoided in our schools…)
I work for a small business which is considered a “person” when it comes to the IRS and President Obama. Any “person” making over $250k a year is “rich”… Well this person has 600 dependants, this person has people who work hard for it so that they can make more. But Mr. Obama TAKES his percentage off the profit of the company, then his percentage off the number of employees it employs, he takes his percentage from the owners that took a risk to create this business that is giving jobs and a future for Americans and then Obama TAKES a percentage out of each check of each employee. Double taxation would be an improvement to this quadruple taxation. Then Obama, wants to increase taxes on energy to discourage its use. So he takes more from the company and more from the people it employs. Then Obama wants to institute Cap and Trade, increasing prices of everyday things, so again the company is paying more out of the pocket.
The better this company does, the harder each person works to make their situation better, the more money the Government steels. WHY? Because Obama’s America is not about giving opportunity, it is about making everyone equal and that means poor…
I understands that the hope that Obama fails is a hope that America succeeds. Both cannot happen…
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Pop Culture Sold Out America
How can anyone get their head around the barrage of attacks on every dream America has ever had… This social experiment is at a crossroads, balancing on a razors edge between a failure and success. From our leftist President Obama’s, socialist political actions (yet capitalist in furthering his destructive agenda) to an army of leftists behind him who yell and complain about the enumerated injustices this great country has inflicted; ironically most of which are self inflicted by their own leftist social policies.
There is a portion of this country that wishes it to fail. Not because they are so dedicated to misery but instead because they are blindly dedicated to a secular definition of equality. They are apart of a system that cannot create anything but instead steal what is created and use it to implement an impossible utopia. They are a picture of maggots that fester in a carcass of a once powerful but now dead creature. Make no mistake Leftists are parasitic. The History that is not taught in our state ran schools is looming in wait to be repeated and the same Russian Revolution that forced that country from bad to worse is now a possible fate.
How can anyone keep track of the countless racist accusations, sexist accusations, calls for equality among individuals who will not give equal dedication to a goal but demand equal pay and resources, the attack on individuality, the promotion of mob rule by way of mediocrity through unions, the financial crises perpetuated by a system that is invested in the failure of capitalism, the re-writing of history with the glorification of failed social programs, the redefinition of words to make their agendas sound positive, the antagonizing of class war, the onslaught of environmental laws which suffocate our economy yet based on fraud science, and the accusation of misinformation by those who only give misinformation …What hope is there beyond the American people who have lived in a better generation, who understand liberty and know what the framers intended beyond what agenda driven justices dictates? Our hope is the 10% of Americans who pay 95% of the taxes. Unfortunately, those Americans actually work and mistakenly still believe that hard work is still the most valuable commodity. When will they rise up? When will they speak out? When will they march on Washington?
Our founders had the opportunity to create a country and implement various conditions that modern courts have now dictated on behalf of them, but the founders did not. Yet that fact is mindlessly over-looked by a media far removed from the average citizen. This same media exalts a worthless class of Americans known as celebrities who hypocritically denounce capitalism as they demand millions for their effortless contribution to their craft… Because of that, they chase meaning and relevance by interjecting extremely uniformed opinions into the information markets of our society… these spineless actors and entertainers who pretend to be profound mistake their fictional identities for their actual identities and endorse Anti-American ideologies and figureheads all the while feeling brave while safely insulated in their made up world of yes men.
I sit with head in hands at times knowing that the time to act is now. There will be no time when more Americans are alive that understand The American Dream better. There will be no time when more people know that the real racists are the ones pointing the fingers and not the ones being pointed out. There will be no time when there will be more Americans that understand free-markets are our best hope for economic recovery. There will be no time when more Americans will understand that environmentalism is a farce used to control money and not save anything. There will be no time when more American will be alive that remember that Freedom isn’t free and it is America who has fought on behalf of other weaker nations. There will be no time when there are more American that understand that sometimes yes, war is the answer. There will be no time when there are more American who believe that freedom of speech doesn’t just mean freedom to degrade Christianity. There will be no time when there are more American who understand that the constitution was written to give states rights to give the individual right and to be a foundation for a better democracy.
I pray to God that the engine, the fuel, the drivers of this country wake up and stop this slaughter of democracy and liberty…
There is a portion of this country that wishes it to fail. Not because they are so dedicated to misery but instead because they are blindly dedicated to a secular definition of equality. They are apart of a system that cannot create anything but instead steal what is created and use it to implement an impossible utopia. They are a picture of maggots that fester in a carcass of a once powerful but now dead creature. Make no mistake Leftists are parasitic. The History that is not taught in our state ran schools is looming in wait to be repeated and the same Russian Revolution that forced that country from bad to worse is now a possible fate.
How can anyone keep track of the countless racist accusations, sexist accusations, calls for equality among individuals who will not give equal dedication to a goal but demand equal pay and resources, the attack on individuality, the promotion of mob rule by way of mediocrity through unions, the financial crises perpetuated by a system that is invested in the failure of capitalism, the re-writing of history with the glorification of failed social programs, the redefinition of words to make their agendas sound positive, the antagonizing of class war, the onslaught of environmental laws which suffocate our economy yet based on fraud science, and the accusation of misinformation by those who only give misinformation …What hope is there beyond the American people who have lived in a better generation, who understand liberty and know what the framers intended beyond what agenda driven justices dictates? Our hope is the 10% of Americans who pay 95% of the taxes. Unfortunately, those Americans actually work and mistakenly still believe that hard work is still the most valuable commodity. When will they rise up? When will they speak out? When will they march on Washington?
Our founders had the opportunity to create a country and implement various conditions that modern courts have now dictated on behalf of them, but the founders did not. Yet that fact is mindlessly over-looked by a media far removed from the average citizen. This same media exalts a worthless class of Americans known as celebrities who hypocritically denounce capitalism as they demand millions for their effortless contribution to their craft… Because of that, they chase meaning and relevance by interjecting extremely uniformed opinions into the information markets of our society… these spineless actors and entertainers who pretend to be profound mistake their fictional identities for their actual identities and endorse Anti-American ideologies and figureheads all the while feeling brave while safely insulated in their made up world of yes men.
I sit with head in hands at times knowing that the time to act is now. There will be no time when more Americans are alive that understand The American Dream better. There will be no time when more people know that the real racists are the ones pointing the fingers and not the ones being pointed out. There will be no time when there will be more Americans that understand free-markets are our best hope for economic recovery. There will be no time when more Americans will understand that environmentalism is a farce used to control money and not save anything. There will be no time when more American will be alive that remember that Freedom isn’t free and it is America who has fought on behalf of other weaker nations. There will be no time when there are more American that understand that sometimes yes, war is the answer. There will be no time when there are more American who believe that freedom of speech doesn’t just mean freedom to degrade Christianity. There will be no time when there are more American who understand that the constitution was written to give states rights to give the individual right and to be a foundation for a better democracy.
I pray to God that the engine, the fuel, the drivers of this country wake up and stop this slaughter of democracy and liberty…
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Religulous
I know what you are thinking, "With so much going on in the world why is this person writing about a movie 5 americans have seen?" The answer is simple... I am writing 6 different postings all at the same time, this economy, healthcare, Obama's "hope", Prop 8, the unorganized Republican Party, and Business... I wanted to post something and I had a few minutes this morning... the rest are on the way...
Since last summer when the “documentary” Religulous came out, I’ve been debating weather or not I wanted to see it. I’ve made it a point to read or listen to every atheist/agnostic writer/speaker that I can find from Hitchens to Harris, and now Bill Maher.
My personal faith is complicated. I don’t have trouble with any of the cliché questions about faith and God. How a good God can make an evil world has never bothered me since it is the option for evil that we even know God might be good. Further it is that God created that option and not the action. The best analogy I’ve ever heard is that just as darkness is the absence of light, sin is the absence of God. Light does not create darkens and God does not create sin.
Still there are looming questions that keep me from raising my hands in church, questions of a more personal nature. But that might be another topic.
So, last night I finally broke down and rented Religulous. If you can get past Bill Maher trying to be funny as he basically makes a fool of everyone he talks to about his questions you are still left with an extremely empty movie. His disrespectful comments and use of language is enough to keep you clinched fisted the entire movie. His tactics are nothing short of taking (in most cases) good willed people and editing and showing them in a such a way that makes him look like he is enlightened and they are worshiping the sun.
Bill Maher spends most of the movie of Christianity, confusing Catholicism and Evangelical Christianity. He pulls the gloves off with Christians and Mormons but then handles those he interviews from Islam with the most delicate of questions and to thier face, the utmost respect. He does not question direct passages from the Koran, and doesn’t even bring up Mohammad and all his contradictory teachings. He does insinuate that Islam is a violent religion but doesn’t complete the thought by comparing the number of damning verses in the Koran to the number of “peaceful” verses. Not to mention the number of verses that nullify any verse that calls for peace.
Like most cowards in the media and the entertainment world, Bill Maher comes out swinging with Christians and Jews because he knows they wont hit back, But barely taps into Islam. Throughout the “documentary” he interviews people all over the world but for some reasons doesn’t interview Muslims who live in a Muslim country. Why? oh yeah, because he might be killed…
All I can say that I got from this movie is that if he really wanted to find answers he could have asked more informed people. But obviously he didn’t he just wanted to make fools of people. Its too bad that Bill Maher didn’t really try to make a good film. I for one would like to see an honest film that asks religion tough questions. Instead I just got a movie full of inaccurate information and a picture of a lost man.
Since last summer when the “documentary” Religulous came out, I’ve been debating weather or not I wanted to see it. I’ve made it a point to read or listen to every atheist/agnostic writer/speaker that I can find from Hitchens to Harris, and now Bill Maher.
My personal faith is complicated. I don’t have trouble with any of the cliché questions about faith and God. How a good God can make an evil world has never bothered me since it is the option for evil that we even know God might be good. Further it is that God created that option and not the action. The best analogy I’ve ever heard is that just as darkness is the absence of light, sin is the absence of God. Light does not create darkens and God does not create sin.
Still there are looming questions that keep me from raising my hands in church, questions of a more personal nature. But that might be another topic.
So, last night I finally broke down and rented Religulous. If you can get past Bill Maher trying to be funny as he basically makes a fool of everyone he talks to about his questions you are still left with an extremely empty movie. His disrespectful comments and use of language is enough to keep you clinched fisted the entire movie. His tactics are nothing short of taking (in most cases) good willed people and editing and showing them in a such a way that makes him look like he is enlightened and they are worshiping the sun.
Bill Maher spends most of the movie of Christianity, confusing Catholicism and Evangelical Christianity. He pulls the gloves off with Christians and Mormons but then handles those he interviews from Islam with the most delicate of questions and to thier face, the utmost respect. He does not question direct passages from the Koran, and doesn’t even bring up Mohammad and all his contradictory teachings. He does insinuate that Islam is a violent religion but doesn’t complete the thought by comparing the number of damning verses in the Koran to the number of “peaceful” verses. Not to mention the number of verses that nullify any verse that calls for peace.
Like most cowards in the media and the entertainment world, Bill Maher comes out swinging with Christians and Jews because he knows they wont hit back, But barely taps into Islam. Throughout the “documentary” he interviews people all over the world but for some reasons doesn’t interview Muslims who live in a Muslim country. Why? oh yeah, because he might be killed…
All I can say that I got from this movie is that if he really wanted to find answers he could have asked more informed people. But obviously he didn’t he just wanted to make fools of people. Its too bad that Bill Maher didn’t really try to make a good film. I for one would like to see an honest film that asks religion tough questions. Instead I just got a movie full of inaccurate information and a picture of a lost man.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Friday, February 27, 2009
The Road To Hell Is Paved With Democrat Initiatives
I gotta say that I am tired of having to be on the defense for Conservative Republic values. I'm tired of defending specific Republicans in office and at the same time indirectly defending my intellect because I side with them... Sometimes it feels as if there is a closet that I'm coming out of admitting that I am a conservative.
Today I went on a long walk with my dogs and had a thought. I'm pretty sure most Americans want the same thing... However, I cannot say that America has maintained unity on the core values that formed this nation. Yet, I believe that the desired outcome is what all American's can agree on.
Don't all Americans Right and Left want a booming economy? Don't all Americans want to care for those who cannot care for them selves? Don't all Americans want to feel secure? Don't all Americans want the right to be heard and the right to say what they want?
I'm absolutely sure that if you made an "end goal" list of wants for this country, the level of importance or priority might differ but the lists among Left and Right would have to be pretty similar. So why is there such a dichotomy between Right and Left?
Why do Republicans believe Obama is a terrible mistake and Democrats think Palin is a fool?
America's polarization is made by the contrasting beliefs as to which road is the best way to achieve the American Ideals.
I am not articulate enough to describe this further without examples. (If anyone ever actually reads these, I do want to be fair and try to describe these examples as they are. However, I am a Republican, I am a Conservative so read these understanding that I do have a side)
1) Education:
The U.S. education system is a failed project from its low rankings worldwide to the quality and results on the most basic levels. Flat out, teachers have crowded classrooms, are under paid and have no way of advancing for their better results.
In California last year there were 6,000,000 students enrolled in school. California spends $10,000 per student, per year for public schools. For the 6,000,000 students there were roughly 300,000 teachers (including substitutes). 6,000,000 x $10,000 = $60,000,000,000... $60 billion dollars a year toward education in just California alone. Just to put that into perspective... 60 billion seconds ago Jesus was walking around. Or, even more perspective... $60,000,000,000 divided by 300,000 teachers is roughly, $200,000.00 per teacher. However teachers earn on average in California $60,000.00 per year (before taxes) so $60,000 x 300,000 teacher = $18 billion dollars... So where is the other $42 billion spent EVERY YEAR?
California schools have zero accountability on spending and progress. California ranks as one of the lowest in the country in terms of meeting educational minimum requirements. Worse, Arnold is about to pass a bill that will increase spending per pupil to $11,000...
To say that the "system" is broken is to qualify the piss-poor public schools as a functioning system. Still Democrats demand that the problem is that we are not paying enough in education. Even after they enacted a measure that dictates that 50¢ of every tax dollar California brings in goes to education on top of California Lottery revenues. You have to ask your self how they come to this conclusion, especially when there is greater correlation between more spent per students and failing schools than successful schools and less spent. In other words, in the U.S., the more we spend on education the worse our schools do. That fact could not be made more clearly than the comparison between Utah's $5000 per student per year and Washington DC's $15,000 per student per year. W.D.C.'s effectiveness is so below Utah's that you almost can’t compare the two.
It is a fact that one of the leading contributors to the Democratic Party (who donates in the 10's of millions to them) are the teachers unions.
Republicans have been fighting for school vouchers. What this would do is privatize education. It would give the parents the amount that the state spends on each student in their household to spend where they feel they will get the best education. Schools will be forced to compete for students and in tern re-direct the money spent on union leaders and multi-redundant administration positions to more qualified teachers.
The teacher's unions in turn will become complacent and unneeded since it will be the performance of the teacher that will dictate their value and not the collective body of teachers (a large portion of which are utterly useless in that position).
The logical conclusion is that if Democrats stop getting in the way of the motions to transition into vouchers then they are basically forfeiting 10's of millions of dollars in donations from teachers unions. One could gather that Democrats care more about the money that they receive from teachers unions than the students who they use as propaganda. The lack of value students really have is already shown in school districts when cutbacks are unavoidable... It is always the teachers who feel the cutbacks, never the Union leaders, NEVER the multi-redundant administration.
2) Small Business and The Rich
In the last couple elections "the rich" have been demonized by Democrats. In the most recent election there has been a distortion of truths by our new president that asserted that George Bush was giving tax breaks to the "rich" meanwhile leaving a struggling middle class and the poor in the economic dust. What Obama didn't say is that group that earns the wages that he called "rich" are in fact not the individuals but the small businesses that those individuals own which employs of over 70% of the U.S. workforce... What that means is that all those business have to change their prices and or lay-off emplyees to compensate for their loss in earnings from higher taxes for their business… Obama’s “rich” somehow does not include the independently wealthy, the trust fund babies, the wall street multi millionares,… Obama is taxing the Americans who take risks, work and produce jobs… In the name of helping the middle class he instead hurts them.
3) Higher Taxes & An Inconsistent Philosophy
It has been a long tradition of Democrats to tax various things to discourage their use, such as cigarettes… The increasing cost of cigarettes is always justified by explaining that the tax will help in decreasing the purchasing of them. Another tax based sales discouragement has been proposed in the recent past is one of cars that are not “efficient”. A certain bill is going to be voted on soon that would raise the taxes on a car based on its gas mileage and emissions output. The idea was brought to the table to “encourage” people to buy more environmentally friendly cars.
Because smoking has been so associated with so many different forms of illness (all without any real proof) Americans allow higher and higher taxes to be attached to cigarettes, now the same with emissions. Whether or not you believe the hype about Global Warming it doesn’t matter, your choice in cars will be narrowed by government fiat.
Regardless on what you feel about taxing things it is a fact that Democrats use taxes to discourage use.
That fact begs the question as to why then do Democrats believe that the same principle doesn’t apply to individuals and business? Democrats want to raise taxes on income, on productivity, on capital gains on anything that you can make money on. Why would anyone invest when you are penalized for doing so? Why would anyone get married when your combined income might put you in a worse tax bracket? Why would anyone want to be more productive when you are taxed more for it?
4) Universal Healthcare
Have you ever been to an all you can eat buffet? If you have, how many times have you packed on way more than you can eat just because you could. How much food get thrown away because of that wasteful indulgence? How much more waist would it be if it was also free?
Apply that scenario to doctor visits. However the difference would be that we would be paying for through higher taxes. The Federal Government would have to create a budget and force medical facilities to work within that budget. This budgeting of resources would directly effect the time a doctor can spend on an individual patient. Not only that it would discourage doctors from using costly tests to determine an illness to stay inside of a budget. Doctors time and resources would be rationed creating a shortage...
This is currently happening in every country that has universal healthcare (except Sweden and that is only because of their very small population and extremely high taxes)
5) Redefining Liberty and Unions (copied from an earlier entry)
Though the laws of physics make it impossible, it would seem that the story that leads up to George Orwell’s book “1984” actually starts in the year 2009. How can a man have such foresight about the undermining of logic and common sense, and, the events that lead up to that lost society in his book?
1984 is known mostly by its ironic depiction of a false reality. Its fictional society (Oceania) is ran by a group known as “The Party” which implies that there is an opposing view in another “party” but in Oceania, there is not. several bureaucracies run Oceania. “The Ministry of Peace” which is responsible for the never ending war against other nations, “The Ministry of Plenty”, which is responsible for food rationing and controlling of goods, The Ministry of Truth”, which controls all the propaganda and history revisions of Oceania, and “The Ministry of Love”, this agency is responsible for the identification, monitoring, arrest and torture of dissidents, real or imagined.
How far are we from those fronts? In 2009 we confront “The Free Choice Act” which allows union officials to know who votes against their initiatives by removing the right of secret ballot by employees and union members. How does that make one more free?
In 1963 The First Amendment was re-worded to remove prayer in public schools yet today in the name of multiculturalism some schools give Islamic children an extra recess to pray. What is that about?
Pro-Choice advocates (including President Obama) want to make a federal law that “protects kids” by making it illegal for school officials to inform children’s parents that they are having an abortion. There is no age too young. Pro-Choice advocates fight every year to keep “abortion rights" off the ballot so it cannot be voted on giving people the choice. How is that “pro-choice”?
The “Fairness Act” is an initiative to regulate talk radio so that conservative talk shows have to give an equal time to opposing views. Talk-Radio is one of the few places where a conservative message is heard since that message is ostracized from schools, media, movies, and TV… Isn’t a free market fair? Doesn’t every one get the same opportunity to fight for ratings? How is this “fair”?
Some universities who claim to treasure "free exchange of ideas" will fire, remove, or defund any views that encourage any study into Intelligent design or programs that debunk "Climate Change®"...
The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act, better known as the stimulus for 2009. Over 90% has nothing to do with the economy or business almost all the beneficiaries are among the constituency of the Democratic Party, who ironically endlessly accuse Republicans of paying off special interest groups. "Reinvestment act” is the key phrase.
Prop 75 was an initiative that gave union workers the right to opt out of dues that were going to political groups that they did not support. The AEU (American Teachers Union) garnished extra dues from its workers (who cannot work unless they are apart of the union) to fight this bill. The Unions paid over $40 million to fight Prop 75, all the while telling its members (through union paid-for propaganda) that the bill removed their rights to be heard. Meaning, THE UNION LEADERS LIED TO THE UNION MEMBERS TO KEEP THEM FROM HAVING TO BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE MONEY THEY TAKE. The bill would have made the accounting transparent so that its members could see what the dues were used for. Up and down the street where I live were more people than I’ve ever seen here with signs that read “Don’t let Schwarzenegger take our voice”. When in reality it was the unions who were taking their voice and its members were voting for it...
Forget 1984, welcome to “Hope” and “Change” in 2009
Today I went on a long walk with my dogs and had a thought. I'm pretty sure most Americans want the same thing... However, I cannot say that America has maintained unity on the core values that formed this nation. Yet, I believe that the desired outcome is what all American's can agree on.
Don't all Americans Right and Left want a booming economy? Don't all Americans want to care for those who cannot care for them selves? Don't all Americans want to feel secure? Don't all Americans want the right to be heard and the right to say what they want?
I'm absolutely sure that if you made an "end goal" list of wants for this country, the level of importance or priority might differ but the lists among Left and Right would have to be pretty similar. So why is there such a dichotomy between Right and Left?
Why do Republicans believe Obama is a terrible mistake and Democrats think Palin is a fool?
America's polarization is made by the contrasting beliefs as to which road is the best way to achieve the American Ideals.
I am not articulate enough to describe this further without examples. (If anyone ever actually reads these, I do want to be fair and try to describe these examples as they are. However, I am a Republican, I am a Conservative so read these understanding that I do have a side)
1) Education:
The U.S. education system is a failed project from its low rankings worldwide to the quality and results on the most basic levels. Flat out, teachers have crowded classrooms, are under paid and have no way of advancing for their better results.
In California last year there were 6,000,000 students enrolled in school. California spends $10,000 per student, per year for public schools. For the 6,000,000 students there were roughly 300,000 teachers (including substitutes). 6,000,000 x $10,000 = $60,000,000,000... $60 billion dollars a year toward education in just California alone. Just to put that into perspective... 60 billion seconds ago Jesus was walking around. Or, even more perspective... $60,000,000,000 divided by 300,000 teachers is roughly, $200,000.00 per teacher. However teachers earn on average in California $60,000.00 per year (before taxes) so $60,000 x 300,000 teacher = $18 billion dollars... So where is the other $42 billion spent EVERY YEAR?
California schools have zero accountability on spending and progress. California ranks as one of the lowest in the country in terms of meeting educational minimum requirements. Worse, Arnold is about to pass a bill that will increase spending per pupil to $11,000...
To say that the "system" is broken is to qualify the piss-poor public schools as a functioning system. Still Democrats demand that the problem is that we are not paying enough in education. Even after they enacted a measure that dictates that 50¢ of every tax dollar California brings in goes to education on top of California Lottery revenues. You have to ask your self how they come to this conclusion, especially when there is greater correlation between more spent per students and failing schools than successful schools and less spent. In other words, in the U.S., the more we spend on education the worse our schools do. That fact could not be made more clearly than the comparison between Utah's $5000 per student per year and Washington DC's $15,000 per student per year. W.D.C.'s effectiveness is so below Utah's that you almost can’t compare the two.
It is a fact that one of the leading contributors to the Democratic Party (who donates in the 10's of millions to them) are the teachers unions.
Republicans have been fighting for school vouchers. What this would do is privatize education. It would give the parents the amount that the state spends on each student in their household to spend where they feel they will get the best education. Schools will be forced to compete for students and in tern re-direct the money spent on union leaders and multi-redundant administration positions to more qualified teachers.
The teacher's unions in turn will become complacent and unneeded since it will be the performance of the teacher that will dictate their value and not the collective body of teachers (a large portion of which are utterly useless in that position).
The logical conclusion is that if Democrats stop getting in the way of the motions to transition into vouchers then they are basically forfeiting 10's of millions of dollars in donations from teachers unions. One could gather that Democrats care more about the money that they receive from teachers unions than the students who they use as propaganda. The lack of value students really have is already shown in school districts when cutbacks are unavoidable... It is always the teachers who feel the cutbacks, never the Union leaders, NEVER the multi-redundant administration.
2) Small Business and The Rich
In the last couple elections "the rich" have been demonized by Democrats. In the most recent election there has been a distortion of truths by our new president that asserted that George Bush was giving tax breaks to the "rich" meanwhile leaving a struggling middle class and the poor in the economic dust. What Obama didn't say is that group that earns the wages that he called "rich" are in fact not the individuals but the small businesses that those individuals own which employs of over 70% of the U.S. workforce... What that means is that all those business have to change their prices and or lay-off emplyees to compensate for their loss in earnings from higher taxes for their business… Obama’s “rich” somehow does not include the independently wealthy, the trust fund babies, the wall street multi millionares,… Obama is taxing the Americans who take risks, work and produce jobs… In the name of helping the middle class he instead hurts them.
3) Higher Taxes & An Inconsistent Philosophy
It has been a long tradition of Democrats to tax various things to discourage their use, such as cigarettes… The increasing cost of cigarettes is always justified by explaining that the tax will help in decreasing the purchasing of them. Another tax based sales discouragement has been proposed in the recent past is one of cars that are not “efficient”. A certain bill is going to be voted on soon that would raise the taxes on a car based on its gas mileage and emissions output. The idea was brought to the table to “encourage” people to buy more environmentally friendly cars.
Because smoking has been so associated with so many different forms of illness (all without any real proof) Americans allow higher and higher taxes to be attached to cigarettes, now the same with emissions. Whether or not you believe the hype about Global Warming it doesn’t matter, your choice in cars will be narrowed by government fiat.
Regardless on what you feel about taxing things it is a fact that Democrats use taxes to discourage use.
That fact begs the question as to why then do Democrats believe that the same principle doesn’t apply to individuals and business? Democrats want to raise taxes on income, on productivity, on capital gains on anything that you can make money on. Why would anyone invest when you are penalized for doing so? Why would anyone get married when your combined income might put you in a worse tax bracket? Why would anyone want to be more productive when you are taxed more for it?
4) Universal Healthcare
Have you ever been to an all you can eat buffet? If you have, how many times have you packed on way more than you can eat just because you could. How much food get thrown away because of that wasteful indulgence? How much more waist would it be if it was also free?
Apply that scenario to doctor visits. However the difference would be that we would be paying for through higher taxes. The Federal Government would have to create a budget and force medical facilities to work within that budget. This budgeting of resources would directly effect the time a doctor can spend on an individual patient. Not only that it would discourage doctors from using costly tests to determine an illness to stay inside of a budget. Doctors time and resources would be rationed creating a shortage...
This is currently happening in every country that has universal healthcare (except Sweden and that is only because of their very small population and extremely high taxes)
5) Redefining Liberty and Unions (copied from an earlier entry)
Though the laws of physics make it impossible, it would seem that the story that leads up to George Orwell’s book “1984” actually starts in the year 2009. How can a man have such foresight about the undermining of logic and common sense, and, the events that lead up to that lost society in his book?
1984 is known mostly by its ironic depiction of a false reality. Its fictional society (Oceania) is ran by a group known as “The Party” which implies that there is an opposing view in another “party” but in Oceania, there is not. several bureaucracies run Oceania. “The Ministry of Peace” which is responsible for the never ending war against other nations, “The Ministry of Plenty”, which is responsible for food rationing and controlling of goods, The Ministry of Truth”, which controls all the propaganda and history revisions of Oceania, and “The Ministry of Love”, this agency is responsible for the identification, monitoring, arrest and torture of dissidents, real or imagined.
How far are we from those fronts? In 2009 we confront “The Free Choice Act” which allows union officials to know who votes against their initiatives by removing the right of secret ballot by employees and union members. How does that make one more free?
In 1963 The First Amendment was re-worded to remove prayer in public schools yet today in the name of multiculturalism some schools give Islamic children an extra recess to pray. What is that about?
Pro-Choice advocates (including President Obama) want to make a federal law that “protects kids” by making it illegal for school officials to inform children’s parents that they are having an abortion. There is no age too young. Pro-Choice advocates fight every year to keep “abortion rights" off the ballot so it cannot be voted on giving people the choice. How is that “pro-choice”?
The “Fairness Act” is an initiative to regulate talk radio so that conservative talk shows have to give an equal time to opposing views. Talk-Radio is one of the few places where a conservative message is heard since that message is ostracized from schools, media, movies, and TV… Isn’t a free market fair? Doesn’t every one get the same opportunity to fight for ratings? How is this “fair”?
Some universities who claim to treasure "free exchange of ideas" will fire, remove, or defund any views that encourage any study into Intelligent design or programs that debunk "Climate Change®"...
The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act, better known as the stimulus for 2009. Over 90% has nothing to do with the economy or business almost all the beneficiaries are among the constituency of the Democratic Party, who ironically endlessly accuse Republicans of paying off special interest groups. "Reinvestment act” is the key phrase.
Prop 75 was an initiative that gave union workers the right to opt out of dues that were going to political groups that they did not support. The AEU (American Teachers Union) garnished extra dues from its workers (who cannot work unless they are apart of the union) to fight this bill. The Unions paid over $40 million to fight Prop 75, all the while telling its members (through union paid-for propaganda) that the bill removed their rights to be heard. Meaning, THE UNION LEADERS LIED TO THE UNION MEMBERS TO KEEP THEM FROM HAVING TO BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE MONEY THEY TAKE. The bill would have made the accounting transparent so that its members could see what the dues were used for. Up and down the street where I live were more people than I’ve ever seen here with signs that read “Don’t let Schwarzenegger take our voice”. When in reality it was the unions who were taking their voice and its members were voting for it...
Forget 1984, welcome to “Hope” and “Change” in 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
