RACE RELIGION AND POLITICS 2O13 B
1833- HENRY
I’ve been getting together with
the homeless guys these past few days- I haven’t seen Henry in a while and I
thought I better check up on the guys.
Henry- who I have written about a
lot- is one of the close friends from the street.
He grew up in the north east-
Mass. - so we have ties.
Henry is a true bible scholar- I
mean I might mention a verse and Henry will quote the entire chapter- it’s kind
of like a Rain Man type thing- but instead of remembering the gambling numbers-
he does it with the bible.
Anyway we had a good fellowship-
we went for a nice ride over the causeway and headed towards Rockport- just a
chance for Henry to see the area.
I went to pick him up at the boat
dock where he works- but missed him- caught him at the mission.
I gave Henry some money- he
doesn’t drink or get drunk [or do drugs] with the money so it’s not like I’m
contributing to the delinquency of a senior.
When we got back to the house I
cooked a few things for Henry- though he did not want me to- yet he ate well.
He likes to catch the sports on
my Direct TV- he’s a sports nut- knows all the latest stats- reads the scores
in the paper- or catches a coffee at the Mexican restaurant and watches the
sports on the tube.
From what I have picked up over
the years- I think Henry used to be one of the top wrestlers at his high
school- till this day- Henry looks to be in top physical shape- like he works
out- he’s a few years older than me- 52?- yet he’s a health nut.
So he likes being able to catch
the multiple sports channels on my TV.
Henry had a good day- and for a
real homeless guy- looks the part- you would never know what a straight shooter
he is.
One time we were sitting at the
homeless mission and they were gonna do the Lords Supper.
I said ‘great- I'm in’ Henry did
not partake- he later told me it would be a violation of the apostle Paul’s
order to the Corinthians not to partake with sinners- and yes- some of the guys
were drunk.
Yeah- he was right- I just felt
like I needed to partake at the time.
The next day I took a ride to the
bay front area of our city- one of the most beautiful downtowns you will ever
see- many post cards have the area highlighted.
I just took a walk by the bay-
and spotted a homeless girl- I was surprised- I rarely have seen them in that
area.
I talked to her a little while
and gave her some money- she was a Black girl.
About a mile down the road I also
saw a Black kid sleeping on the bench- obviously homeless too- I think she
might have been with him.
The other day I mentioned that in
the next few weeks I will try and read/study 1st John.
He is the 3rd ‘pillar’
in the 3 main church leaders that we wanted to cover.
Even though I barley started
reading the letter- I know one of the main themes from John is ‘he that obeys
Gods commands is from God’.
John hits this theme a lot.
And then he says the command is
‘he that sees his brother in need and does not help him- how can Gods love be
in you?’
This theme is repeated over and
over again in John’s letter- and it’s the same message Jesus gave when he was
asked what the great commandment was.
‘Love the Lord your God with all
your heart, soul, mind and might- and your neighbor as yourself’.
Jesus said ‘on these 2 hang all
the law and the prophets’.
Yeah- this is the major emphasis
that we will look at when we cover his letter.
I think I will try and see the
guy’s today- maybe go down to the mission for a little while.
Not all of the homeless are like
Henry- Henry works- does not get ‘a check’ [if you knew how many young guys-
perfect health- are all getting govt. checks it would make you sick].
No- Henry- like some of my other friends [Tim]
does not live off of the welfare system.
They do eat the free lunch at the
mission [which I do not- I don’t take the meals that are intended for the poor]
yet I see retried/working people drive up in the cars- or on their motorcycles-
and they simply come for the free food.
The mission even has said to me
‘John- eat- because the more people who sign up- the more money we get’.
Geez- I know they mean well- but
it’s like when I worked at the fire dept. - we tried to use all the money in
our budget- even if we didn’t need it- just so they wouldn’t cut our budget the
next year.
So we need to keep these things
in mind when the accusation is made politically ‘they want to take food from
grandma- kids’ in some of these cases its food from people who have it- but
they prefer the free meals instead.
All in all I focus on the truly
needy- the guys who have lived their entire lives on the streets.
Yeah- John said if we see our
brother in need and don’t help him- then how can we say Gods love is in us?
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1832- BIDENS REVENGE?
As we end the week- once again-
we have had some ‘real’ stories- things that are important- and silly stuff.
First- a few days back the Obama
administration spiked the football over the Bin laden killing and we had a few
days of back and forth on it.
One of the things they did was
released some of the secret memos we found at the time of the raid.
Now- you must understand that
Obama makes the call- along with the intelligence people- on what to let out.
So- as I watched the various
media outlets repeat- over and over again- the top lines- I could not stop
laughing- very loudly- as they reported one of Bin laden’s desires.
Now- I did not laugh at the first
part ‘we want to kill the president of the U.S.’.
No- not funny.
But the next part ‘and whatever
you do- don’t hurt Biden! We need him to survive- because he will become
president and he does not know what he’s doing- he will bring the U.S. down’.
Now- you must see that Bin
laden's final plot- the mastermind of 911- his plan was to get Biden in the top
seat and watch him bring the country down.
Okay- to me this was funny- to
see the reporters doing this story while trying not to laugh.
How do you think Ole Joe took it?
Okay- this is my conspiracy
theory- obviously he’s watching this story over and over again- knowing that
the President made ‘the call’ to release this very intriguing tid bit.
And who knows- maybe Obama did it
out of some hidden anger about Biden making so many gaffs in the first term.
So Biden’s response?
He goes on national TV and says
how much he supports gay marriage- a position that the Pres did not make yet.
Touché
Now- the president and his people
have to scramble to get the story under control- they at first try to ignore
it- but after a few days Obama comes ‘out of the closet’ and makes the call-
yes- he too is for it.
Now- some think this was all
planned- that they wanted to orchestrate the pro Obama stance and contrast it
with the next story- how Romney is a serial gay bashing bully- with a pair of
scissors.
I don’t know- I think Biden just
did what he does best- and spoke before he thought.
Anyway- as I’m watching the media
coverage of the most serious story of the day.
The terrible Syrian bombing that
killed many?
No.
The very troubling revelation
that J.P. Morgan/Chase [the countries largest bank] took a 2 billion dollar hit
in the first quarter?
No.
I’m talking about the most
important story of the day.
That in 1965 Romney stalked some
kid with blonde hair in his prep type high school- and he cut his Goldie locks!
Yes- as I’m watching this
breaking worlds news- the news also comes out that Biden trotted on over to the
White house and apologized to the boss.
Wow- they actually had to report
this.
‘John- do you really believe
Biden did this to get even’?
No- not really- but just know- it
was Bin laden’s wish for Joe to get 4 more.
Okay- J.P. Morgan.
Yesterday morning I posted about
my belief that most financial guys have tried to down play the Euro debt
crisis- that they are not seeing the real danger it plays for the U.S.
Then during the day I caught the
story that Jamie Dimon- the CEO of Morgan- held a conference call and let the
cat out of the bag- that they made bad investments and lost 2 billion.
As I watched thru out the day I
thought ‘I bet it has something to do with the E.U.’
Sure enough it did.
It looks like this bank made the
same gamble that Jon Corzine and his investment group did.
The same thing that began our
‘great recession’ at the end of 2008 when Obama came into office.
They made certain types of
investments- called Hedging- and they bet that the European bonds would get
bailed out and all would go well.
Now- the fact is things look like
they might go downhill- and that some of the E.U. countries will default on
their debt and that the Euro currency might even go bust.
Okay- J.P. Morgan still did the
kind of thing that led us into the huge financial problems we have been dealing
with these past few years.
So the fact is ‘too big to fail’
is still out there- it can in fact happen again.
The reason we bailed out the big
financial institutions was because all the insider guys who worked for Bush
[and Obama] convinced the presidents [Bush and Obama] that this was what needed
to be done- or else the global financial system might fail.
Now- after we did the bailout we
were supposed to put in place checks and balances that would never allow a huge
bank- that has FDIC insurance- which means if they fail the govt. bails out the
depositors- to get into a spot again where we might have to do it again.
But we did not fix the ‘too big
to fail’ problem- and once again we see that these huge banks are still ‘making
bets’ with money.
Romney.
Okay- in the morning I saw that
the Washington post ran a 3 page story on Romney’s ‘wicked ways’.
Yes- when I was in high school we
used to beat the hell out of people- in the school building.
We bought drugs- and used them-
on school grounds.
And we engaged in all types of
illegal activity during our high school days.
So- as the campaign heats up- the
Washington Post did their due diligence and went and tracked down 5 of Romney’s
classmates- from 1965- and confirmed the story that Romney was a serial bully
back in the day.
Okay- as the article went on- it
portrayed Romney as the ring leader of a group of brief case carrying youth
[the article did say this] that were upset about this kid who wore long blonde
hair at the school.
They said that Romney teased this
boy- who might have been gay- and even called him a girly name.
So- after a period of time-
Romney just could not take it anymore and he lead this group of fellow students
to go and get the blonde kid.
Yea- the article states that as
the boys held the kid down- Romney- armed with a pair of scissors ‘repeatedly’
[geez- not one snip!] cut the boys hair- as tears arose in the boys eyes.
Okay- did we really need to know
this?
Did it really need to be a top
story- right up there with all the real news going on in the world?
Look- I don’t want to say
bullying is not a problem- but in 1965- if the worst thing you can find on
Romney is this- then this guy is a goody too shoes!
I find it funny that the media
were able to go back 50 years for this silly story- and they never managed to
find the drug dealer who sold coke to Obama when he was in school [Obama admits
using ‘blow’ back in the day].
Now- do I want to know who the
president bought the cocaine from- not really.
But I sure did not want to know
that Romney ‘packed scissors’ back in the day.
So you see what the next year
will be like- a very sad thing indeed.
So as the week comes to a close
we had some important stuff- and some not so important stuff.
We had a few apologies [Biden-
Romney apologized too- even though the blonde victim died a few years ago- you
know- those Mormons do have continuing relationships with the dead!]
And we had some serious stories
as well- the Syrian situation is bad- many people are dying over there- and I
do hope we can do something about it.
All in all it was a busy week-
lets all try and take a break this weekend.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1831- TEA PARTY?
So the other day we had a few
more primary elections- and the big news was the Dick Lugar loss [Repub from
Indiana].
Lugar was the longest serving
senator in congress- 6 terms.
He got booted by a Tea Party guy-
and the media made it sound like D day.
I mean the nonstop talk about the
country being taken over by the extreme right- that Lugar was such a fine man-
who was punished because he voted [often!] with Obama.
It’s funny- whenever the
Democrats have a big win- a ‘take over’ it gets described as a wonderful choice
that the country has made- a true generational paradigm shift.
When the President got elected-
and the Dems took the house and the senate- by huge majorities- you even had
conservative media Folk describing it
this way [Cokie Roberts].
Yet when the right side of the
aisle do a sweep- it’s the country throwing a ‘tantrum’ [yes- the main line
news described it this way when the Repubs took back the house in the mid
terms].
I’m not a Tea Partier- or an
occupier- but from what I see the Tea Party folk are simply people who want
fiscal restraint.
They have no ideological social
agenda- just for the govt. to not spend more than it takes in.
Okay- sincere people might have a
disagreement on this- but to describe any organized grass roots group- who are
simply fiscal conservatives- to talk about them as a dangerous movement that
might bring the Republic down- well that seems to be a bit much.
Economy?
Well- I hate to say it [not
really] but I ‘told you so’.
Yeah- if you go back and read my
posts over the last 6 months- I felt like too many financial guys were hyping
the chances for a strong recovery this year.
I even mentioned that Larry
Kudlow- a straight shooter [business guy] was talking 3% growth for this year.
I said I thought it would be more
like 2.
Now- both of these numbers are
actually terrible!
But 3 would be better than 2.
Last night he changed his
prediction- yeah- 2.
Why?
To me there really should be no
surprise- when the Dow was at 13,200- I simply thought people were ignoring the
reality on the ground.
This morning it opens at a little
over 12,800- and I think the ‘real’ number should be in the low 12,ooo’s.
Why?
When we kicked off the year- some
analysts were hoping for new job growth
to be at around 250,000 jobs a month.
You need this many- every month-
for a few years before the economy can truly recover.
So- we did have a few months at
this number- and there was some good economic news as well- so I thought maybe
I was wrong- maybe the E.U. crisis will not be as bad- and if everything goes
good- more power to ya.
But then the month before last
something happened- the new jobs number was a little over 100,000- not good.
All the talking heads gave their
views- and it was possible that the number was a fluke [Sandra?]
But no- the number for last month
has come out- again- a little over a 100,000.
That’s bad.
The reason you need around
250,000 a month to really move the needle is because every month we have over
100,000 new people enter the job market.
These are people that just turned
working age and are new to the market.
So- if you are barley covering jobs
for them- or are a little under- in reality the unemployment goes up- not down.
But we have seen the number go
down [from 8.2 to 8.1].
How can this be?
The way we calculate unemployment
is by the amount of people who are actually looking for jobs.
So- if 300,000 people drop out of
the hunt- then the number goes down on paper- when in reality it should go up.
So- it looks like we might be
stalling again.
Europe.
The E.U. zone problems are still
there- and they are our biggest market.
As a matter of fact- the 17
nations that make up e.u. are the biggest economy in the world.
So- if they are our biggest
customer- and if they are in trouble- we are too.
Just this past week 2 E.U.
countries voted out the leaders that wanted austerity [cut spending] and put in
guys who want to spend money they don’t have.
What does this mean?
It means if they keep going down
this road they will be facing a depression- and it looks like the ‘cut back
spending’ people are all on their way out.
So- as we see a slowing down in
our country- and a continuing disaster with our biggest trading partner- well
these things are not the recipe for a real recovery- and the insiders know it.
‘John- do you think we will be
able to deal with our debt/deficit’?
These past few weeks as I have
flipped the news/business channels- I have seen the Dems go point by point thru
the Repubs budget- and at every point where they wanted to cut- they said ‘they
want to cut your kids from free lunch- the elderly from their food [meals on wheels]’.
I just heard Matthews [MSNBC] say
‘how can you vote for cuts that when someone’s mother goes to the hospital for
an operation- and you cut their Medicare and the doctor says- sorry- because of
the Repubs- you must die’.
Now- if the Dems keep playing
this game- if they do not try and deal with a very real problem- if they
politicize it like this- then yes- we will be just like Greece in a few more
years.
Now- I’m not saying I support the
Ryan plan out of hand- but we need something fairly close.
Some say his plan does not cut
the debt fast enough.
Either way- the number 1 crisis
facing the country right now is our exploding debt- and the most notable
organized group- who has actually organized around this problem- is the Tea
Party.
While I am not a hard right type
of guy- and do have some social justice issues that I support [I do not want to
kick kids and grandma out on the street] yet- if the most prominent ‘right
wing’ group is actually nominating people who will do something about the number
one problem our country is facing.
Then maybe we should stop
throwing up our hands and talking about the end of the world- maybe- just
maybe- it might be what the doctor ordered.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1829- A CHINESE LAWYER AND LIVING
STONES
I want to try and teach a couple
of things from the letter of 1st Peter [in the New Testament] - but 1st
a few comments.
Today the big story is the
Chinese dissident- Chen Guangcheng.
Chen is a blind lawyer who has
been under house arrest for years by the govt.
His main fight against the
repressive communist state is their 1 child policy.
In China- because of the
population growth- if a woman gets pregnant more than once- they force the
woman to have an abortion.
This practice has not only killed
many innocent kids- but also causes the parents to voluntarily abort the first
child if it’s a girl.
Many of the families prefer a boy
if they can only have 1 child- so the moms often abort the first [or 2nd-
or 3rd] if it’s a girl.
So anyway- Chen miraculously
escaped house arrest and made it to ‘safety’ to the U.S. embassy in China.
Here’s where there is some
contradiction.
After a couple of days hiding out
in the embassy- he left of his own ‘free will’ and the U.S. escorted him to a
hospital [he suffered some inures during his escape].
Then we left him there- and he
came under further persecution by the govt.
He called for help- and begged
the U.S. to take him and his wife and family to the U.S.
Now- Hillary Clinton just happens
to be there for talks this week- and she played down the case at first- and
Chen says the U.S. rep’s told him if he didn’t leave the embassy that the
Chinese officials would harm his wife.
Now- both sides agree that the
threat was made [Chen and the U.S.] but we are denying that we related the
threat to Chen.
Either way- the man left the
protection of the embassy because of fear for his family- and he is now in
danger.
This incident has now
overshadowed the original reason for Clinton’s visit- and all the hype this
week over the Bin Laden death anniversary.
Actually- it did look bad- as I
was flipping the news channels- I saw the re-run of the NBC ‘coverage’ [more
like an hour long free campaign ad].
They just did a special on the
lead up to the death of Bin Laden- and it showed play for play coverage of the
president and his team- I mean I do give the president credit for the death of
Bin Laden- but they do seem to be overplaying the hand a bit much.
Even some of the elite Special
Forces guys are complaining about his politicizing of the event.
So as I’m seeing clips about ‘we
made the call [to kill him] it was a risk- but that’s what the job of president
is- taking risks’ on and on- talking about how much of a risk it was for Obama
to make ‘the call’.
And then on the next channel- we
seem to be throwing this heroic Chinese dissident under the bus- and it seems
like ‘the risk’ of actually saving the guy and his family- against the will of
China [our bank] who does not want the U.S. to interfere- might be too much.
It is sad- I don’t want to
politicize the thing- but for the media campaign to be harping on how much of a
risk it was for the president to ‘make the call’- and at the very same moment-
we have a crisis that needs him to ‘make a call’ it’s a bit much.
Okay- this morning I read a
little from the letter of Peter.
In chapter 2 Peter uses the
imagery of Jesus- and of us- as being stones- spiritual stones in a ‘living
temple’ who offer up spiritual sacrifices to God thru Christ.
I always liked this imagery- the
apostle Paul also uses it in his writings [Ephesians].
Peter says Jesus was a tested
corner stone- a tried stone- rejected of men- but approved by God.
We too- as living stones- will be
tested and tried- and yes- rejected by men.
This is part of the process.
He will later say ‘don’t think it
a strange thing- the fiery trial you are going thru- it is not only given to us
to believe on Jesus- but to also suffer for him’.
This is one of the main themes
you see run thru out the New Testament.
Peter even says ‘if any man
suffers as a Christian [by the way- this term is only used 3 times in the New
Testament] let him glorify God’
Yes- suffering and difficulty are
part of the package- and the apostle tells us not to ‘think it strange’.
Why?
There are so many well meaning
believers in our day who have been taught that suffering- hard times- lack of
wealth- that all these things only happen to people who don’t have faith- who
haven’t yet learned how to ‘claim their covenant rights’.
Now- while most of these teachers
mean well- they leave out the other side of the coin.
And if you only hear the ‘happy’
side- then when the tough stuff hits- you ‘think it strange’ you say ‘geez- I
guess I’m just not as good as so and so- after all- why would I be suffering’.
So Peter warns us to be aware
that the trying of our faith is an important aspect of the Christian life- and
there are times when believers are called upon to share in this Cross
experience.
In chapter 2 Peter says that
Jesus was a tested stone- one that went thru the process of being chipped and
honed and shaped into the vessel that God wanted.
Part of the shaping was the
rejection process.
God uses ‘tested’ stones in his
temples.
In the Old Testament- when they
were building the temple- the bible says they prepared the stones away from the
building site- so there would be no noise of the hammers chipping away at the
temple site itself.
But after the stone was ready- it
would be brought to the site and placed into the building.
Often times God allows us to have
‘down time’ a place of being prepared- getting chipped away at- but when he
thinks the stone is ready- it is then brought to the site and put into the
building.
The apostle John- in the book of
Revelation says ‘I John saw the holy city- the New Jerusalem- coming down from
God out of heaven- and there was no temple in it’.
John was describing the new
kingdom community [the church] that would be absent ‘the temple’ [the old
system of law and temple] and would be a new people- a living temple- a kingdom
of priests and kings.
These new people would offer up
spiritual sacrifices to God- no longer the animal sacrifices of the law- and
this would please God.
Yes- we are the people of God-
kings and priests unto God.
John also says this in
Revelation.
‘thou art worthy to open the book
and to loose the seals thereof- for you were slain and have redeemed us to God
by your blood out of every nation tribe and tongue- and have made us KINGS AND PRIESTS
unto God- and we shall reign on the earth’.
Yes- kings and priests- a new
community- a living spiritual temple.
All wonderful things- but the
only stones that make it into this temple are tried stones- rejected stones-
stones that got ‘chipped’ at for a long period of time.
Yeah- these are the precious
stones.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1827- SCHOOL LOANS AND HOW MANY
TIMES DID THAT ROOSTER CROW?
I want to try and do both ‘politics
and religion’- lets start with politics.
This story is a couple of days
late [the big one this week is the anti Romney ad that the Obama campaign
released- saying he would not have killed Bin Laden].
This story is last week’s fight
over keeping the cost of federally funded student loans from doubling in July.
Basically in 2007 congress passed
a law to keep the interest rates low- and it expires in a few months.
Now- both sides of the aisle
actually agree on this- they just disagree on how to pay for it [around 6
billion in cost].
The Dems in the senate want to
‘tax the rich’ yes- they are not afraid to keep going to this pool- even though
eventually this pool will run dry [not saying all the rich will become poor-
but ultimately you drive the wealth from the country- people put their money
where it won’t cost so much to keep!]
The Dems in the house want to tax
the oil companies.
The Repubs want to pay for it by
taking some money out of Obama care.
Okay- as the battle lines were
drawn- the Repubs control the house- so they passed it- with about a dozen Dems
on board- with the money coming from Obama care.
The President threatened to veto
it- and the Dems began accusing the Repubs of waging ‘a war on women’s health’.
Boehner [speaker of the house]
actually got mad and said the Dems are waging a phony fight.
Who’s right?
Okay- as an independent- there
are some points on both sides- but the ‘war on women’ is a stretch.
Why?
The fund in the health care law
that the Repubs want to use- is a fund for preventative care- less than 1 % of
this fund is targeted for women’s health.
The President and the Dems were
the first ones to tap into this fund- as sort of a slush fund- when they needed
the money for- of all things- a tax cut!
Yes- in the recent fight over
extending the payroll tax cut [Social Security] the Dems came up with the idea
to tap into this same preventive fund- and they used the money [billions] to
give people a tax cut.
Now- when they did it- it was not
a ‘war on women’ it was a ‘good thing’.
When the Repubs did it- it was a
war on women’s health.
So- this is gridlock- this is why
our country is becoming more and more dysfunctional as the days go by.
I have said this over the past
few years- if we don’t actually elect people who will deal with the real
issues- the big one being the cost of Medicare- which at the current rate will
consume around 50 % of all federal spending in a few years- if we don’t elect
people who will do this- then all the other little ‘campaign’ talking points
will mean nothing.
Okay- this past week I went thru
a course by Professor Bart Ehrman.
He teaches at the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
He teaches Christianity and the
New Testament and has been popular the last couple of years because he had a
N.Y. times best seller- Misquoting Jesus.
Whenever I study a course- I
usually do a parallel teaching on the blog.
Not word for word- I usually have
a background in the subject already- and if the course goes too ‘off course’ I
dump it and just finish the blog study by memory.
This time I never planned on
covering the course from the get go- because I knew Ehrman was what you would
call a Liberal scholar.
Now- Liberal and Conservative- in
the field of Theology- are not political matters.
Liberals are those who hold to
the critical view of the bible that was developed in the 19th
century- primarily out of the German universities- men like Rudolph Bultman
were leaders in the field.
This ‘way’ of interpreting the
bible- called Higher Criticism- had some good points to it- but at the end of
the day they came to reject the historical accuracy of scripture- and said that
the Gospels were written by unknown men who wanted to simply convey spiritual
truths that Jesus taught.
Conservative teachers [like me]
hold to the belief that the bible is indeed historically accurate- and the
‘Inspired Word of God’.
Okay- as I went thru the course-
I honestly expected Bart to make a better case for his side.
I really learned nothing knew- I
was already familiar with the critic’s points- and he made the same ones that
the conservative side has already refuted.
Now- let me give you a few
examples.
When I first started reading thru
the bible as a new believer- I did find some of these ‘discrepancies’ myself.
I noticed that in Matthews’s
gospel the story about the denial of Jesus says Peter will deny Jesus 3 times
before the ‘rooster crows’.
In Marks gospel it says ‘before
the rooster crows twice’.
When I first saw this- it really
wasn’t that big of a deal to me- and one time I mentioned it to my Pastor- a
good Baptist man who was trained in a Fundamentalist school- and to my surprise
he was not aware of this.
I also noticed a few more things
like this over the years- and my pastor simply was never trained in these
areas.
Now- I mention this only to point
out that if you get a well rounded education- it really should include some of
these so called discrepancies.
Some of the Higher Criticism is
helpful- some not.
But to avoid these textual
problems- simply because you’re a Fundamentalist- does more harm than good-
especially when your parishioners are learning the stuff on their own!
Okay- I ‘solved’ the problem of
the denials by simply seeing that even though one gospel says ‘before the
rooster crows’ and the other ‘twice’- that at the end of the day one writer is
simply giving you more detail.
It really is not a contradiction-
if Matthew said ‘before the roster crows once’ then yes- that would be a
problem.
But he simply gave less detail
than the other writer.
Okay- after becoming familiar
with Ehrman- and knowing that he is famous in the field of liberal scholarship-
I thought for sure he would come up with something better than this.
But in actuality- this was one of
his main examples of why the bible is not historically accurate.
I couldn’t believe it.
Now- to be fair- there are other
things like this that do happen- but they are all minor details of the story
[John’s gospel seems to indicate that Jesus was crucified on a different feast
day than the other writers say].
But all these minor details in no
way justify rejecting the gospels as historically accurate.
Let me just hit on a few things
that the higher critics have right.
They do point to the fact that
the early followers of Jesus lived in an Oral culture- things were passed along
by word of mouth for the most part.
The writing of books [scrolls]
did take place- but it was not an easy- or cheap trade.
We live in a day of books and
internet access and all sorts of ways for the printed word to be distributed-
but in the early church it was not like this.
So- the gospels were probably
written about 20-50 years after the death and resurrection of Christ.
What?
Yes- this is true.
The more conservative scholars go
with the earlier date [some go as early as 15 years after Christ] but no one
claims that the gospels were written at the same time as Christ walking the
earth.
Yes- the stories were transmitted
orally [oral culture] but they were written later on.
Now- the ultra liberal scholars
say ‘see- how could they have known all the facts if they were written so much
later’- and Ehrman uses the example of the game ‘telephone’ [or something like
that?].
Where you have one person in
class tell something to the next in line- and at the end of the line you get a
different account.
Ehrman says ‘see- we have no idea
what/who Jesus really was’.
Okay- the main discrepancy that
Bart used- was the rooster crowing.
He actually sounded mad on the
C.D. [I listen while I work!] and he said ‘well- which is it [damn it!!] did
the rooster crow once- or twice!’
And then he jumped to the
conclusion that the gospels were really fake stories that were made up by
unknown men- well meaning men- but they had no real historical truth to them.
This my friends is what I call a
‘leap of faith’.
Geez- if we did this was all
other biographies- we would have no ‘factual’ histories about anyone.
I’ll end with a note to my
Catholic readers.
A couple of years ago I read the
Popes book- Jesus of Nazareth- I did a brief review on the blog and I really
liked the book a lot.
One of the things the Pope deals
with [remember- Benedict was a priest from Germany- where the whole school of
higher criticism arose] in the book is this whole debate over the historical
accuracy of the bible.
At one point- as he graciously-
yet boldly defends the conservative view- he is talking about the liberal view
that the gospels were written by these unknown men who basically made the
stories up.
The Pope asks ‘and just how did
these men manage to write the most popular books of all time- books that came
to be revered and known and loved by generations and generations- and yet no
one even knows the names of the authors?’ [I did ad lib a little here]
The bottom line is- if the
gospels were written by a bunch of anonymous men who simply wanted to convey
some spiritual truths about Jesus- and they managed to stay hidden for all
these centuries- this theory has more holes in it than say- a rooster crowing
once or twice.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1824- LAST TRAIN TO VICTORVILLE
[a dog [man?] eat dog world]
As we wrap up the week- we have
had some serious [and silly] discussions going on in the country.
Silly?
Yes- a few weeks back the Obama
team decided to make the ‘dog on Romney’s car’ a story.
His campaign people began talking
about the way Romney treated his dog by making him ride on the roof on a trip
to Canada.
Oh yes- you even have on-line
sites- by dogs- who are criticizing Romney.
Now- when you do stupid stuff
like this [on both sides] and make it an issue- then beware- they will find a
dog story about you.
Sure enough- the ‘right’ found a
quote from Obama where he admitted he dined on Dog meat while a 7 year old boy
in Indonesia.
Oh yea- sweet.
You saw all the on line pictures
of Obama chomping on a hot dog- but in place of the wiener you saw a cute pup
with mustard on his head.
You had the Pres chasing after
his dog at the white house- with a spatula in hand- ready to plop him on the
grill.
Yeah- we spent a week with the
dog wars.
Serious stuff?
Well- we did have the vote on the
Buffet Tax go down in flames.
Why?
This is where my friends on the
left don’t seem to get it.
As an independent- I try and see
the middle ground- the real value [if any] behind the things the President
wants to do.
I don’t hate the man- see him as
a commie- but he does do [say] things that are really disingenuous.
Okay- the tax on millionaires.
The president- and his cronies-
keep saying- nonstop- that millionaires need to pay ‘their fair share’ and that
they pay less than the average working stiff.
The famous quote about Buffet is
‘he pays less than his secretary’.
Now- this has been said so much-
people actually now believe it.
What John- aint it true?
Not really.
The tax rate on millionaires [income tax] is
around 38%.
That’s the highest you can go.
So why does the Pres keep saying
they pay less?
He’s talking about the tax rate
on investment income [Stocks].
This rate- called Capital Gains
tax- is 18%.
Now- if you’re a millionaire with
no regular income- and you live off your stock income [dividends] then your
only paying 18 on that.
John- do most millionaires do
this?
No.
There are more millionaires who
pay both rates- income tax at 38- and capital gains at 18.
In reality- if Obama passed the ‘millionaires’
tax- it would raise about 4 billion a year- which is nothing compared to a
15-16 trillion dollar debt.
But the president has said this
tax would fix the debt- and do a host of other things which is simply not true.
It is only a political game-
that’s it.
So- when you do stuff like this-
waste all this time going around the country claiming that this millionaire’s
tax is some sort of solution- then we know he is not serious about really
dealing with the major problem the country is facing- dealing with
entitlements.
Okay- being we are in another
possible economic slowdown [things are not looking that good- the European
crisis is rearing its head- and some housing and jobs numbers are showing bad
signs].
What does the president have on
the table as a jobs plan?
I have mentioned this a few times
in the past- but his plan right now [besides pouring billions into a hole
called solar energy] is to do High Speed Rail.
Yes- the president has talked
about pouring billions of dollars into high speed rail projects- while at the
same time cutting billions form other real programs.
The train from Victorville [80
miles outside of downtown L.A.] to Vegas.
The govt. has a program [RRIF]
where we lend money to rail projects across the land.
Now- the main purpose of the
program- is to either fix or upgrade existing rail lines.
The president has been stopped
with the stimulus money- congress is not going to give him any more.
The only chance of getting more
‘fake money’ into the game is if the Fed Reserve does a Qe-3 [prints another
batch of money] and puts it on the table.
So- the president knows if he can
simply spend more govt. money- in any way [like extending the ‘payroll’ tax
cut- all this does is starve the Social Security fund for another year- so
people have more money now. This is not policy- per se- its simply saying ‘we
won’t have people pay into the system while I’m president- so they spend more
in the market- and I won’t look so bad’].
Now- the only way the pres could
get the money for these silly rail projects- is to use an existing govt. loan
program to fund it.
The train?
This rail line will fulfill one
major purpose- it will transport tourists from the L.A. area to Vegas- to the
casinos [Harry Reid’s pet lobby- that’s why he as the majority leader in the
senate will pass it].
Yes- this project is the brain
child of the casino moguls- what Obama terms as ‘the fat cats’.
Hmm?
The train departs from
Victorville- goes nonstop to Vegas- at a cost of about 100 bucks.
It takes about 4 hours to drive-
once you’re on the train- 80 minutes.
You have to drive from L.A. to
the Town of Victorville- Park your car [for a charge] and when you get to
Vegas- either rent a car- or ride the taxi.
The rail line has no real purpose
for those coming to L.A. from Vegas- because you would be stuck 80 miles
outside of town- and have to rent a car for the day- plus get back on the train
on your way home- and pay the car rental spot to pick up your car- and drive
home.
Okay- you could fly round trip
from L.A. to Vegas for around the same price.
Their already is a private bus
co. [probably more than one] who will take you and a crowd for 99 bucks- plus
feed you on the way.
But no- the real pressing need of
the country- at a cost of 5 billion tax dollars [one years worth of the Buffet
tax]- is to build this high speed rail- after all- look at all the jobs it will
create.
Really.
The so called benefits of these rail lines are
they create less pollution and auto traffic.
Because everyone will abandon
their silly cars and ride the rail.
In most places [if not all?]
where this has been tried- the govt. has to step in and underwrite the loss at
the cost of the taxpayer.
These projects just don’t work-
or you would have had the casino moguls get funding for it thru the banks.
So- the rail line plan- the
presidents main plan for jobs [he said this in his state of the union-
remember- our Sputnik moment?]
Is doomed for failure.
It will also shut down the
private bus services that now do this.
It will compete with the round
trip ticket from the private plane companies.
It will cost jobs in the end- not
create them.
All at a cost of 5 billion tax
dollars.
The govt. loan company that makes
these loans has never spent this much before.
Yes- I’m not talking another
single loan- no- they have never spent this much in their entire history of
making loans- total.
So Obama is simply using them as
a cover to get stimulus money for the project.
A project that would basically
cost you- and me- 5 billion tax dollars- all so tourists could ride to the
casinos.
Okay- this is what we mean when
we say the president simply does not have the experience for the job.
That he has made bad business
decisions- and continues to make them- time and time again [Solyndra].
No- I’m not mad at the president
for chowing down some fine dog cuisine while in Indonesia.
I’m just worried that Dog meat
might be the meat of the future- because if this high speed rail plan is what’s
gonna bail us out- then we all might be eatin it soon.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1821- TRAYVON REDUX
I know it’s a little late- but I
hope everyone had a good Easter.
I ‘enjoyed’ seeing all the media
reports of the towns that canceled their Easter egg hunts because of past
violence- by the grown ups.
Yes- they showed video of people
trampling each other- pushing kids out of the way- and one video taken by a
bystander showed the start of one hunt.
As they rang the bell they were
off. One mom falls down and the amateur videographer gives ‘play by play’
coverage- in the classic style of Howard Kossel.
Remember ‘Down goes Frazier- Down
goes Frazier’?
Yes- we heard ‘down goes mom-
down goes mom’ as the other ‘adults’ were about to trample her.
It was just such a wonderful way
for us to remember the resurrection of Christ.
And then as I watched the
ridiculous ‘media’ coverage of MSNBC [and NBC].
I couldn’t get over the nonstop
talk about Mormons being a cult.
I mean show after show was
talking this way- question after question about Romney’s involvement in the
church- how he was a lay elder in the church- over and over and over- from this
network.
So Orin Hatch- a long time
senator who is a Mormon [like Harry Reid] says that he believes the Obama
campaign and the media are going to attack Romney on his faith.
Now- guess what network could not
believe that this charge was made?
You got it- NBC-MSNBC.
Yeah- they did entire programs
[Hardball] asking the question ‘do you think the media/Obama will attack
Romney’s religion’?
I couldn’t believe it- it might
be the first time that the actual network who is doing the attacking- nonstop-
at the same time will try and spin ‘no one is attacking Romney- how anyone even
dare think it’!
It would be funny if it were not
true.
Even David Gregory- the lead news
guy for the Sunday morning NBC show [Meet the Press] had on a panel of various
reliogus people- and he too brought up the question ‘why would Hatch- or
anybody make such a false charge!’
On the panel there was a Mormon
congressman- he said right there ‘your own network is the major offender-
Lawrence O’Donnell even said the Mormon church was founded by a guy who simply
wanted to have sex with more than one wife’.
I mean it’s ridiculous- the
actual network who is the chief offender- is at the same time trying to spin a
fake story that ‘how dare anyone even think that the media are attacking
Romney’s faith’.
It reminds me of the time when
one of the news magazine shows [20-20 ?] did an ‘expose’ about cars exploding
on impact.
In the piece they indeed showed
you these cars getting hit- and Walla- they blew up like a bottle rocket on the
4th of July.
Now- the actual car makers- they
watched the show and could not believe their cars were blowing up like this.
I mean it made the classic Pinto
look like a fire proof space ship.
So the car makers had an expert
look at the video and they discovered that the news show actually placed
exploding detonators right at the point of impact.
They had some bomb specialist off
to the side and he was detonating the device at the point of impact.
You know how the news channel
reacted when they got caught?
After they couldn’t hide what
they did- they said ‘oh yeah- sure we blew the cars up with our own bomb- but
it was made to simulate what was happening on the street’.
They actually tried to get the
public to believe that what they did was just.
Yeah- go ahead NBC- be outraged
over anyone ever even thinking that the media would attack Romney’s faith- and
oh- keep playing the MSNBC pieces that smear the guy nonstop- we will never
figure it out.
And last but not least- last
night George Zimmerman was arrested in Fla.
Yes- the special prosecutor made
the arrest.
I have written on this case a few
times- and I have basically taken the side of Trayvon.
Now- as a media watcher- I do
realize that there was some unfair reporting on both sides.
Initially they showed pictures of
Trayvon at the age of 12-13.
He looked like a little boy.
Then they made it sound like this
‘little boy’ was just buying skittles and tea- for himself [as opposed to his
little brother at the house] and Zimmerman attacked him.
Okay- if you look at the more
recent pictures of Trayvon- he was a big kid- looked in good shape.
I will tell you- at the age of 13
it’s not easy to beat up an adult- but at 17 it’s not hard at all.
So it is possible that Trayvon
was pissed about being followed- and maybe did throw the first punch- I don’t
know.
But whenever you have an unarmed
teen shot to death- and the armed person was the initiator of the
confrontation- even if the final confrontation was Trayvon coming back to the
car to approach Zimmerman- then you at least need an arrest.
I know the media- the right and
the left- have now turned this into a political debate- which is sad.
Every time I hear the parents
speak- especially the mom- she is a sincere person who lost her son.
She has never called for
vigilante justice- and she has prayed to God for the right thing to be done.
Like I said- I have heard both
sides- and I have seen media bias- on both sides.
But in the end- I think Zimmerman
did indeed cross a line- how the last 2 minutes of the incident happened- we
don’t know yet.
But if that’s the voice of
Trayvon crying for help- and not Zimmerman- then the man needs to do some
prison time.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1819- KENOSIS
Being its Passion week- I do at
least want to recommend everyone try and read Isaiah 50.
This chapter speaks about the
willingness of Christ to bear the reproach of the Cross ‘he gave his back to be
whipped- his beard to be pulled out’.
In Christian theology we call
this the Kenosis [Philippians] it’s the willing act of Jesus to empty himself
of all the Divine privileges- his glory- while at the same time retaining his
deity.
Many of the early church councils
struggled with this division- that is how to understand that Jesus always was
God- and yet he ‘gave up’ the unique privileges of that deity when he hung on
the Cross.
The bible says he ‘emptied
himself and became obedient unto death- even the death of the Cross- therefore
God has highly exalted him and given him a name above every name- that at the
name of Jesus every knee should bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is
Lord- to the glory of God the father’.
Yes- this is what distinguishes
the Christian faith from all the other religions of the world.
That’s not to say that the other world religions have no value- they do.
Many teach good virtues- loving
your fellow man.
Others hold to the traditional
belief in God and hold to the same apologetic arguments that the Christian
church uses.
But the distinguishing factor is
we believe that Jesus died for our sins- the founder of ‘our religion’ didn’t
just give us good precepts- or examples.
No- we believe he actually died
for us- and redeemed us back to God the father by his death and resurrection.
The epistle to the Romans says
‘we therefore have peace with God thru our Lord Jesus Christ’.
Amen- and amen.
Okay- now a few notes.
2 or 3 posts back I mentioned how
we should get ready to see a new narrative- how the media will begin telling us
a particular kind of story about the Supreme Court and the political wrangling
going on over health care.
Sure enough- to my surprise- the
next day the President cane out and took on the court in an unprecedented way.
Many legal experts- on both sides
of the aisle- were shocked.
The president used language like
‘a bunch of unelected judges overturning the will of the people’.
He said how there were many
judges and legal experts who believe that the law [health care] is
constitutional and should not be overturned.
He used language that was kind of
deceptive- making it sound like the possible overturning of the law would
almost be an illegal act.
I mentioned this in the other
post- that if you carefully followed this law getting challenged in the courts-
it split about 50-50.
And as I listened to the various
arguments- to me it is not a stretch to think the law will be overturned.
But the president made it sound
like the overturning of it would be political judicial activism.
I don’t think he actually knows
what that means- when the term political activism is used it’s referring to
judges who ‘legislate from the bench’.
That is they make new law- law
that has not been in existence until their ruling.
A good example would be the Roe v
Wade case [abortion].
The court found a ‘new’
constitutional ‘right to privacy’ in their ruling.
Now- however you believe about
the ruling- the point is that’s what ‘judicial activism’ refers to- not the
possibility of the court finding a new law unconstitutional.
The president also said if the
court overturned his law- that it would be unprecedented.
What?
The court has declared around 150
laws to be unconstitutional since the late 1700’s.
This would not be unprecedented
in any way.
The day after he made these
charges- he got so much criticism for overstepping his boundaries- there are 3
branches of govt.- Judiciary, Executive and Congress- and for any president to
try and influence a decision like this is usually considered way out of bounds.
It is true that FDR had battles with
the court- as well as other presidents- but for a president to use the language
Obama did- well it was way over the line.
So yesterday he back peddled
some.
I mean it was so bad that one of
the other challenges to the law- taking place right now in the 5th circuit
court of appeals- the judge interrupted the lawyer for the govt. and asked her
if the president believes the courts have the right to rule against the law.
He told the lawyer for the
justice dept to bring back a 3 page- single spaced- explanation form Eric
Holder to explain their position.
This judge basically let the
administration know that the courts are not going to put up with such a public
attack on their independence.
So anyway that’s where it stands
as of now- hopefully some things will settle down and we will see what happens
when the ruling comes out in a couple of months.
Okay- try and read the chapter I
mentioned today- maybe read Philippians chapter 2 as well- that’s the chapter I
quoted from- and mediate on the death and resurrection of Jesus- he died for
the whole world.
When Jesus was born the angels
said ‘peace on earth and good will towards men’.
Christ came into the world to
bring peace- to offer to all mankind a new and living way.
As Christians- it’s not our job
to condemn all the other religions of the world- but to show them the
difference between the Christian faith and the other well meaning faiths- and
to let them know that Jesus died for all- all are welcome.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1818- WHO IS BARRY?
Last night I was channel surfing
the news shows- and I caught Lawrence O’Donnell doing another one of his ‘anti
Mormon’ critiques.
Yes- MSNBC has an ongoing
narrative where they speak about Romney as a ‘strange- weird- cult member’.
I saw this months ago- and they
have been faithful to their task.
So anyway O’Donnell is covering
the ancient teaching of Brigham Young [the co-founder of the Mormon religion- a
follower of Joseph Smith] and he’s quoting all the racist teachings that he
held to.
Specifically that mixed marriages
are wrong.
Now- I could quote the actual
Christian bible- yes- the Protestant/Catholic bible- and find this teaching in
there.
Yes- the bible O’Donnell believes
in!
But that would solve nothing.
Many old time preachers did teach
this doctrine- from many various denominations.
Do we [I] believe that mixed
marriage is wrong?
No.
But you do have some
fundamentalist groups who still teach this.
So O’Donnell is fulfilling his
task to portray Romney as a cult guy- and he spends a big portion of the show
telling everyone that Romney’s religion is racist.
Now- you could find stuff like
this out- with all the other candidates- even the President- yet this network
is really not a news network- they are simply Obama devotees.
Axelrod- the presidents campaign
guy- a few weeks back tweeted that Romney’s religion does not allow women to
enter the temple when they are menstruating.
He left the tweet up for a little
while then pulled it.
What?
I have heard other Mormons say
this is a false charge- I really don’t know if the church ever taught it- but
it’s possible.
Why?
Again- you do have certain health
standards in the Old Testament- that if you read them- they speak about
‘uncleanness’ when a woman is menstruating.
We find verses on Dwarves not
being able to serve God.
People [men] whose ‘stones’ are
crushed not being able to serve God [testicals are stones].
So if you wanted- you could trace
all these things- not just to Brigham Young or Joseph Smith- but you could also
tie them in to the Christian faith.
Now- do most sane Christians
believe these ‘strange’ teachings are still in effect?
Thank God- no.
But if your goal is to simply
slander the opponent- then have at it.
One example.
Over the last few years- as a
news watcher/reader- you pick up on certain clues along the way.
Maybe a story won’t make it into
the mainstream [for various reasons- to cover up for a person- etc.] But as you
read the other columnists- you see little pieces of the puzzle.
So- one of the charges that the
‘right’ has made against Obama is that he had a different name when he grew up-
and went to school.
Some say he held the name ‘Barry
Sotero’.
They claim his identity is in
question because he might have been legally adopted by his stepdad- thus
throwing the whole citizenship issue back into play.
Now- I have never read/heard a
‘mainstream news’ report on this- so I never brought it up [to me- it’s just as
bad as raising the history of Romney’s church up- a belief he- and most Mormons
do not hold to].
But as an avid reader of all
stripes [both Liberal and Conservative writers].
I noticed something about a year
ago- Maureen Dowd- a liberal columnist who writes for the N.Y. Times- she
started referring to the president as Barry.
She gives no reason for it- she
does not try and defend her use of it- she simply knows that he did indeed use
this name- from what I can tell- all the way right up into his years in
college.
Then why would you have never
heard about this until now?
Because the media have a
narrative- a story they want to tell [and also believe in].
They tell one that has the
opponents of the president as a bunch of weird cult members- people who reject
mixed marriages- people whose women can’t attend church when they are on their
period- who have houses that have elevators for their cars [Romney].
These same media people were so
entranced by a particular image of a man- an unrealistic messianic image- that
they were so taken captive by- that one of them quit their job as a reporter-
right on the spot- to simply join the most ‘transformative presidency’ in the
history of man [Linda Douglas- who was reporting on the 2008 election].
You had another reporter [George
Stephanopoulos] who admitted on national TV that he cried- very loudly [I guess
like when you can’t get a word in type thing?] when he watched the inauguration
of the president.
Chris Matthews famously said a
thrill goes up his leg when he simply hears words proceeding from the
presidents mouth.
Now- I don’t hate the man.
I don’t even like Romney.
But as you attempt to navigate
between what’s best- what’s true- what’s fake.
For us to get treated to the 200
year old teaching of some strange leader of a religious sect- and yet for us to
not even know that the current president never even came to the mainland of the
U.S. until college- is striking.
Yes- the president lived in
Indonesia- spent time in Kenya- visited the African continent- wrote about the
anti Imperial mindset of the African colonies.
He was influenced by stories and
people whose view of America was negative.
He lived among them- went to
school with them.
Wore their Muslim garb [yes].
Prayed the Muslim prayer.
Used the name Barry.
And never stepped on the lower 48
until college.
Now- does this mean he’s a bad
man?
No.
But for us to know that
menstruating Mormons cant attend temple- and to not know any of this- well
that’s what you call media bias.
That’s not journalism.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1817- SCOTUS stuff
As the week begins I want you to
see if you can catch the narrative- the ‘new’ story that the media is going to
tell.
This past week- the top story was
the case of the Supreme Court hearing the arguments about the health care law
[referred to as Obama Care- not the real name].
As the justices closed the last
day of hearings- most observers seem to think that the law will be struck down
as unconstitutional.
This came as a surprise to some
in the ‘media/legal’ world- but not all.
As a brief review- the main
argument against the law [there are a few] is that the federal govt.
overstepped its boundaries by telling the states that their people had to by a
private product- health insurance.
Now- as the year went by- some of
the lower courts agreed with the President’s side- others did not.
They just about split 50-50 on
it.
Some judges did indeed seem to
agree with the side that said the federal govt. - under the Commerce Clause-
does not have the right to make people by insurance.
Now- why would the president have
constructed the law- using the Commerce Clause as the basis to make people by
insurance?
He knew that to simply do a
straight ‘raise a tax to pay for health care’ would not pass.
That is- would not pass congress-
though there is no doubt that it would have survived the courts.
Yes- the constitution does indeed
give the power to tax to the federal govt. - this is clear.
So- in my mind- when I first
heard the 2 sides- I thought it was actually reasonable to conclude that the
law would get struck down- because the Commerce Clause says the govt. has the
right to regulate commerce [business] between the states- but not to force
people to buy a product..
And the President said ‘being
everybody will eventually access the system [which by the way is not true-
there are some people who live- and die- without ever even going to the E.R. ]
But the Presidents side said
being everyone is already doing ‘commerce’ by the fact that they will someday
use the system- therefore we are just regulating it by telling people to start
paying now.
To me- this was a stretch- and it
seems like a majority of the court agree.
So- after the very bad week for
the Presidents side- the media began spinning the story.
Nina Totenberg- NPR- a fairly
liberal news lady- been around for a while.
She was on one of the morning
news shows and she said that almost ‘all’ legal experts agree that this case is
a hands down win for Obama.
But because the court- the 5
conservatives- are the ‘Bush Court’ [they gave the election to Bush under the
Bush versus Gore ruling] that they are now basically a Tea Party court- a right
wing court who either does not know the law- or is refusing to rule according
to the law.
Now- the problem with this is the
media are going to being spinning this- a few others have already gone down
this road [Carville].
I can already hear my liberal
friend- in a week or 2- saying ‘geez- can you believe these Bush justices- they
are practically breaking the law by going against Obama care’.
It’s sad- and wrong- because this
is not what happened at all.
There are 9 justices that make up
the court- most think that 4 are liberal- 4 conservative- and that justice
Kennedy plays a ‘swing vote’ role.
Why are some said to be liberal
and others conservative?
It’s not a political statement to
say this about the justices- but it has to do with the way they interpret their
role on the court.
Conservatives believe it’s the
role of the court to simply interpret the constitution.
That when they hear cases- they
simply need to look at the constitution- and the way the previous courts have
ruled- and that’s how the decision should be made.
The Lib’s have an idea that the
constitution is a ‘living document’ [Ginsberg has said this- a liberal justice
on the court]. And they believe that you should be able to make decisions based
on what the founders might have thought if they were around today- don’t just
limit your decisions based on the ‘static’ reading of the constitution.
Okay- because it is true that
Republicans usually nominate more conservative types- and Democrat presidents
nominate liberals- this does not mean in any way that the justices make rulings
based on what party they belong to.
It’s really slanderous for the
media to begin telling this ‘story’ this narrative that the 5 conservatives are
ruling ‘politically’ because after all- their conservatives.
See how they do this?
Whatever way the court rules
[they actually voted the other day- but the final ruling wont be revealed until
the summer] it would be right to think that they ruled according to the way
they think- that the conservatives more than likely thought the Commerce Clause
did not give the federal govt. the right to mandate people to buy a product.
And the Liberal justices who will
vote for it- they probably will do so because it fits more in with their legal thinking- they won’t vote for it
simply because they are politically liberal [though that’s also probably true]
but because that’s the view they sincerely hold to.
So get ready- you will begin
hearing how the justices are either outright hostile to Obama- because they owe
their allegiance to Bush- or they are really inept- sort of a picture of them
being out of touch with ‘the majority’- if not all- of the ‘legal experts’.
Read- think for yourself.
My first impression- when I first
heard the Commerce Clause argument- was that the argument was weak- and that to
interpret a law that says ‘the federal govt. has the right to regulate
commerce’ to think that means ‘we can make you buy insurance’ it just seemed
like a stretch to me.
I really don’t need Totenberg- or
Carville- or anybody to explain to me that ‘all’ the legal minds think the
other way- besides this being not true- you can simply read the case being
made- and see that the conservative argument- over this particular point- seems
right.
I am not saying that there are
not real issues about health care that we do need to deal with- there are.
Nor am I saying that ‘Obama care’
is a socialist takeover of the country [that’s as bad as Totenberg’s lie].
But I am saying- don’t let the
media tell you how to believe- begin demonizing the 5 conservatives to a point
where you believe the lie- that there is ‘no way’ true- honest- legal minds
would have struck down the mandate.
The fact is- most reasonable
people would probably conclude the same thing.
The majority of the American
people believe the same thing about the mandate- that it is wrong.
The majority of the court seem to
be saying the same thing.
But the Totenberg’s of the world-
they are going to tell you ‘another story’ try- real hard- to see that it’s
just ‘a story’.
Note- Do me a favor, those who read/like
the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on.
Thanks- John
1816- CASA DI MI PADRE
This is the latest Will Ferrell
flick to hit the big screen.
It’s in Spanish [no joke] and
Ferrell speaks all his lines in Spanish.
I caught his interview on Jon
Stewart- plugging the movie- and it looks funny.
I do like Ferrell- I clipped an
article [so I would remember to mention it] and just about 5 minutes ago as I
re-read the thing- I couldn’t stop laughing.
It shows a picture of Ferrell-
all made up to look like a Mexican drug lord [I think he plays a brother of one
in the movie] and he’s holding this rifle- in a real awkward way- and he looks
like an idiot.
That’s what makes me laugh about
the guy- he’s just funny.
The movie is a spoof of the
Spanish Telenovela movies- he’s basically making fun of the genre- and at the
same time trying to appeal to both Spanish and English speaking audiences.
As the week ends- there have been
some surprises in the news world.
Most observers think the Health
Care law has more of a chance of being struck down by the court than less of a
chance.
It was not so last week- so this
is a major story.
Also about 2 weeks ago I wrote
some posts on the Syrian situation- if you remember both Russia and China
rejected the U.S. lead effort [in the U.N.] to condemn Assad [the Syrian
president] and call for his ouster.
At the time I said the U.S. needs
to realize that we can’t keep calling for the ouster of leaders- even bad ones-
every time a rebellion rises up.
Why?
Because the radical Islamist
groups see this- and that’s why you started having various protestors calling
for ‘NO FLY ZONES’.
They were reading us- and at
times trying to simply manipulate us to do their bidding.
Now- after our U.N. resolution
failed [because of China and Russia voting it down] Susan Rice- the U.S.
ambassador to the U.N.- made a public statement- calling it ‘unconscionable’
and using language that you normally don’t see by ‘fellow negotiators’ from the
U.N.
As I watched the fallout- I saw
that experts at how the U.N. process works- they said Rice was incompetent- and
her reaction showed her inability to handle the job.
These criticisms came from both
sides- Russian and U.S.
I also said at the time that the
U.S. needs to basically listen to what Russia’s objections are- and we need to
move in their direction on this- and not the other way around.
Russia basically was fed up with
the West coming in and backing rebel groups- unseating the leaders of the
countries- and then leaving the place a mess [Libya- Egypt].
Russia [and China] saw the
writing on the wall- and they called for a ceasefire on all sides- and for
everyone to sit down at the table.
I thought this was the best way
to go as well.
But Rice [U.S.] called for Assad
to step down [which means he will get tried and executed- as various Al Qaeda
groups take the country over].
So just the other day- the news
headlines read ‘Russia capitulates to U.S. position’.
As I read the article- the
opposite happened.
We agreed to the Russian
position- not the other way around.
But every article on it- bar
none- made it look like ‘we prevailed’.
That Obama and his team were the
real experts- standing up for liberty- and the other side lost.
How many people knew enough to
see that the articles were wrong- how many just read the headlines and thought
‘wow- what a bang up job that Susan Rice is doing at the U.N.’
This is how media bias works-
sometimes I think they even believe their own stuff- even when it’s obviously
wrong.
In the next week or so I’m going
to try and wrap up a few more posts on Philosophy.
We started around 6 months ago-
with the pre Socratic Philosophers [7-800 years B.C.] and made it all the way
up to the Existentialists of the 19th century.
I hate to stop there- because we
were right at the time of the rise of the Atheistic existentialists- the
Nihilists- who saw no hope in existence.
These guys ‘stole’ existentialism
from its founder- a Christian- Soren Kierkegaard- and developed a purposeless
philosophy- a ‘man without hope’ future world.
Guys like John Paul Sartre and
Camus [20th century] were writing/saying things like ‘the only
question now left is the viability of suicide’.
Books with the simple title
‘Nausea’ or ‘no exit’ [a play]- describing the fate of man.
As I watch/read the current
trends- it is tempting to see our future in this way.
I mean society is struggling for
meaning- Arab nations are going thru tremendous times of questioning- and some
observers are grasping at the solutions that the 19th century
Atheists already espoused- and failed.
Men like Sam Harris [the End of
Faith] blame all society’s ills on religion itself- pointing to Islamic
terrorism- and making statements like ‘almost all wars are religion based’.
I mean his argument sounds good-
he’s just wrong.
Out of all recorded major wars-
around 1700- under 10 % are considered religious in nature.
But who really has time for facts
like this?
So- over the next few weeks- as I
watch the scene- maybe catch the Ferrell flick- I will keep in mind another
famous line of Ferrell’s.
He was talking to Christina
Applegate- in his classic film ‘Anchorman- the Legend of Ron Burgundy’.
And there sitting at some
lookout- viewing the city of L.A.
And Ferrell waxes eloquent about
the city- he says ‘L.A. - the city named after..’
Well- it’s kinda crass- he
basically says it was named after the female part of a whale.
Christina looks at him- puzzled-
and says ‘I think its name means City of Angels’.
Ferrell disagrees- he tells her
‘well- we will just have to agree to disagree’.
She says ‘no- I’m pretty sure I’m
right’.
I’m glad the country is having a
debate about what’s right and wrong- the Trayvon Martin case- the ethical
responsibility that society has to the poor [Health care arguments].
Our role as a lead nation ‘among
nations’- how to side with the protestors- in a responsible way that doesn’t
leave the nations in a mess when where done.
All of these debates are ethical
in nature- the questions we are asking is ‘is this right or wrong’.
And contrary to some modern
thinkers- there is a right and a wrong on these issues- yes- sometimes we
compromise- sometimes we ‘agree to disagree’ and sometimes it takes one side to
tell the other ‘no- I think you are wrong on this’.
Do it in love- do it with
boldness- ‘speaking truth to power’ but when you see the need- then do it.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1814- I WILL NEVER SEE MY HOME
AGAIN
When I was a kid growing up in
New Jersey- there were certain stories that I heard- you know- things that
stick with you for the rest of your life.
One of the all time greats was
the day my mom took my Italian Grandma to the store.
Now- my mom was notorious for
getting lost- even as a young kid I would tell her directions on my way to
school- blocks from the house!
But this one was the best.
The store they were headed to was
named Valley fair- it was about 15 minutes from the house- I drove passed it
many times- even rode my bike there.
So my mom picks up Nauna and off
they go.
Now- my Nauna was a first
generation immigrant- you know- came over on the boat [Plane?]
So you might see things
differently because of that- having had the experience of leaving your homeland
and moving to some strange new world.
As they make this ‘short’ drive-
my mom begins worrying that she might have missed the turn.
As a matter of fact- it seems
like they have been driving for a while [quite a while to be exact!]
So she finally stops at the gas
station and asks the guy ‘do you know where Valley Fair is’?
The guy looks puzzled- and you
must understand [to those of you not from the Garden State] that the cities are
so tight- it’s easy to drive thru 10 cites without even realizing you did it.
So the guy asks ‘what city is the
store in’?
Simple enough.
She tells him [I think the town
was Little Ferry?]
He still looks puzzled- he asks
‘what state is that in’?
Yes- they drove out of state and
were wandering in New York state.
My Nauna simply said ‘I will
never see my home again’.
Yes- we all hate change- we fear
the new environment- having to learn new tasks.
Today is day 3 for the Supreme
Court to hear the oral arguments on Obama Care.
They set aside 6 hours over 3
days for the case- which is really extraordinary.
They usually give you one hour
and that’s it.
But they know this is a major
thing- and they want to hear both sides.
By most accounts- the Solicitor
General for the govt. [the lawyer who argues the case for it] had a bad day.
Some even went as far to predict
that the law will get struck down [Toobin for CNN].
I think it’s still too early to
say that- but it did look like the court might be accepting [at least asking]
more arguments on the side of those who want to overturn the law then those who
are for it.
Why are so many people against
it?
About 2/3rd’s of the
country do not like the mandate [Me too].
People will indeed be forced to
buy insurance- or pay the fine.
I found it funny that one of the
more liberal justices- Stephen Bryer- kind of rebuked the president’s lawyer
[the guy arguing for it].
The lawyer kept referring to the
fine as ‘the tax’ and Bryer called him out on it.
Why was the lawyer fudging like
this?
Because if you argue that the
mandate is simply a tax- then by all accounts the govt. has the power to tax.
But the law was not drawn up this
way- because of political reasons.
So instead of saying the charge
is a tax- they said it’s a fine.
As this case has made its way
thru the courts- the govt. has tried this a few times- and one judge said
‘look- you have argued in public that this is not a tax- now you are saying it
is- you can’t have it both ways’.
So the govt. [Obama] has really
twisted this thing a lot.
I don’t know if the court will
uphold or reject the law- but things look brighter today for those who want it
struck down.
One of the things that will
happen- is if it passes- is things will change.
Now- frankly I’m not in the camp
of thinking the whole country will go socialist over it- to be honest the
mandate used to be a Repub idea [the Heritage Foundation- a conservative think
tank- once supported the idea].
Socialism- in its truest form-
would have been the one payer- govt. run system- this plan is not that.
But yeah- there will be changes-
many for the worse- a few for the better.
Many people will lose their employer
provided insurance- because it will be cheaper for the Employers to drop their
coverage and let people fall into the plan.
So that will be bad for some.
And of course- the argument that
all the govt. is doing is regulating commerce [that’s the argument they are
using- the commerce clause] is really silly in my mind- they are trying to
mandate people to buy a private product- from the private business sector- this
is much more than simply regulating commerce.
But overall- if it passes- things
will change.
Yes- change is scary- we get used
to familiar surroundings- then one day you wake up- head out to the store- and
before you know it- you will never see your home again.
1813- THE BLACK KID [Trayvon
Martin]
About a year ago I was out of
town- a city called Rockport- a really beautiful city about 40 miles from my
home.
To be honest- it was a rough day-
I was on foot, walking. It was about 9:00 p.m. - and I had no cell phone.
To put it simply- I was stuck.
Now- I have been there before
[there= situations like this] but it’s been a while- and I’m an old guy now!
Nevertheless I was walking- and
thinking of some way to get a ride.
The first store I stopped at- I
asked ‘do you mind if I use your phone’- they looked at me like I was Jack the
Ripper- they gave me some excuse and sent me packing.
Then there were a couple of
‘kids’ there- looked like the classic gang kids- the whole 9 yards. They were
Hispanic- and I asked them ‘hey- can I use your cell phone’?
He let me- I made a call- no one
answered.
Then I walked about another
block- thinking I would start walking down the highway and just hitch a ride.
I found another store.
At this store I got some change
and used the pay phone and called a taxi service- I did have my wallet and took
cash from the ATM.
As I was sitting outside waiting
for the cab- I noticed a Black kid with a buddy- he was getting gas- it was
late- I looked pretty ‘rough’ and I noticed he kept checking me out- he was
telling his friend something and he started my way.
I was sitting out of the way- by
the air pumps.
I thought ‘damn- I’m tired- It’s
been a tough day- I’m too tired to run- let’s see what this kid wants’.
You know- I figured if worse
comes to worse- I’ll do the Florida ‘stand your ground law’ yeah- that sounds
good [though I wasn’t familiar with their law yet].
Oh-one problem- I don’t have a
gun.
So the kid walks right up to me-
kinda in my face- I tried to give him the Jersey stare ‘yeah- what’s up man’
[you can’t looked scared or the stare won’t work].
He simply walks right up- takes
his hand out of his pocket- and gives me about 2 bucks in change.
Yeah- he thought I was one of the
local homeless guys- he wanted to help me out!
Man- I knew I looked rough- but
didn’t realize it was that bad!
I kinda laughed and told him I
didn’t need it- he left it anyway.
This last week we have been
having a conversation about race- the president made a comment about Trayvon
Martin- and one of the Repub candidates criticized him for it.
I heard the president- read his
statement- there was absolutely nothing wrong with what he said.
I have a feeling that we might
find out a few things that we are not aware of right now.
It seems like Trayvon might have
fought with Zimmerman [the guy who shot him].
And maybe we will hear a few
things about Trayvon- maybe some problems at school or something.
But no matter what his history
is- if he did have some problems- or even if he punched Zimmerman in the face
and broke his nose.
Yet- the way Zimmerman pursued
the kid- even after the 911 dispatcher told him not to- then he got out of his
vehicle and confronted the kid- then he wound up killing him.
Look- the whole thing was wrong.
We don’t need self appointed
‘neighborhood watch’ guys acting like cops- and making 50 911 calls in the last
year [which he did].
I worked for the Fire Dept. for
25 years- and I loved our volunteer firefighters- some of the guys were really
helpful.
But you had a few that never
could get hired as full time guys- and these guys acted like they were the
‘real deal’.
I mean they wore the fire dept
Tee shirts around town- had the lights on their trucks [the paid guys never did
stuff like this].
They wanted to be firefighters-
paid- and if they couldn’t score high enough on the test and get on the dept. -
then they did the next best thing- they acted like they were on the job!
I see this in Zimmerman- and
while we don’t have all the details- he was not justified in killing this kid-
no matter what else we find out- this was an unjustified killing.
And I agree with the president-
every person- Black- White- Hispanic- should be concerned about this shooting-
and we want to get to the bottom of this.
For a 17 year old kid [Black-
White- whatever] to get shot in cold blood- and to be lying on the slab for 2
days before the parents know what happened.
And for the shooter to be home-
still playing ‘cop’- and keeping his gun- this stuff needs to stop- and we as a
country need to condemn stuff like this.
Yeah- did I feel nervous when the
Black kid walked up to me at the gas station that night?
Sure.
He saw some White guy- a guy he
thought was homeless- and he wanted to help.
When we see a Black kid- a hood
or not- let’s not think ‘this kid is up to no good’ [the words of Zimmerman on
the 911 call].
If we/you think something looks
suspicious- yeah- go ahead and call 911.
But for heaven’s sake- if your
packing heat- don’t get out of your car and play cop.
There's a reason some of the
volunteers never got hired- and there’s a reason Zimmerman was not a cop.
If you aint ‘the real deal’ then
call the pro’s- and stay in the damn car.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1811- ETCH A SKETCH
The top story of the day- the
big- no- huge- breaking news.
What was it?
You aint gonna believe me.
Yes- the Etch a Sketch
controversy!
During the day yesterday some campaign aid for
Romney said when they get to the general election- they will move to the center
and do like the Etch a Sketch- shake the game and clear the slate.
Okay- was this the smartest thing
to say? No.
Sure- it played into the charge
that Romney is a ‘change agent’ [he changes his position to suit the day].
But top news? Please.
What should be top news?
I have covered a bunch of
important overlooked stories these last few weeks- there are so many I could
write one a day- but let’s hit a couple for now.
The top government leader in
Libya has just said- quote ‘the central govt. is incapable of protecting or
governing the nation’s vital institutions since the capture and killing of
Gadhaffi’.
Yes- we over through that govt.
by force- and we left the country in a mess.
Egypt- this week they just
acquitted 9 terrorists who belonged to Al Qaeda and were part of the Islamic
Jihad movement.
They had charges against them
from trying to overthrow the former regime- Mubarak- who we forced to step
down.
Yes- the people we enabled to be
in charge- they acquitted our so called number one enemy in the world- Al
Qaeda.
So why do these important
stories- stories that demand headline news coverage- why do they get put on the
back burner- and instead we have room for the Etch a Sketch.
It’s because the media do not
want to report stories that would have a negative effect on Obama.
John- do you really believe this?
Yes.
Hillary Clinton believed it to.
During her run against Obama for
the nomination- her insider political people knew that the media were
purposefully covering for Obama.
It has been reported- credibly-
that her people actually contacted Hannity from Fox news- and told him that
they were grateful that Fox was the only network willing to cover Obama.
A book just came out by David
Corn- a liberal supporter of Obama- works for Mother Jones.
In the book Corn says how Obama
has told his supporters that his poll numbers are down because Fox news accuses
him of being a Muslim 24/7.
I watch Fox- as well as all the
news channels- I have never heard a hard news report that claimed Obama was a
Muslim.
Now- the president himself has
indeed made so many statements in the past- calling Islam ‘my Muslim faith’.
He has said that he studied the
Koran- he has prayed the Muslim prayer at sunset- and it was- quote ‘a
beautiful thing’.
He has made statements like this
over and over again- nonstop- over the years.
So- you would have thought that
during the campaign some media people would have simply asked ‘why did you say
this- a lot’.
Not one question- instead the
media began a campaign to get people to think ‘geez- why are they always
accusing Obama of being Muslim’.
The news reporters would ask the
opposing candidates ‘do you think he’s Muslim’.
They would ask ‘should you make
so and so apologize because he thinks Obama is Muslim’.
Yet not one story on his own
statements associating himself with Islam.
Many of you probably never heard
the few I just quoted in this post.
Okay- am I on this anti Muslim
rant- trying to associate Obama with Islam?
No.
But the book just came out- and
this is a charge he makes- that the other side are ‘24/7’ calling him a Muslim-
that’s just not true- and any other candidate who made the statements he has in
the past- they would have not gotten ‘a pass’.
I talked about the atheist
Nietzsche in the last post.
One of the famous comments he
made was- man- like the Superman- should ‘will to power’ he should live for
what he deems best- and strive for the top- even if you have no real reason for
your own existence. He said man should ‘build his house on Vesuvius’ [an active
volcano].
As the year progresses- as the
top stories of the day become a stupid Etch a Sketch comment- or how one side
is so right- while the other so wrong- we need to read between the lines.
There are many serious- important
stories to cover.
Innocent people being killed-
leaders oppressing their people.
Children starving around the
world in vast numbers.
These are all very serious issues
that we need to know about- pray about- and if we can- do something about.
But no- we want the Etch a
Sketch- we want the stories that have no real value- no true meaning.
Yes- we are building our house on
Vesuvius- and we don’t even know it.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1810- THE CRUCIFIED ONE
Yesterday I shopped at the local
grocery store- and as my habit is- I started at the vegetable/fruit section.
When I grab the little bags to
put the stuff in- I usually grab a few extra- and if I don’t use them I’ll take
them home and stick them in the cabinet.
So, as I’m checking out- the lady
asks me ‘oh- do you want me to throw these out’. I think she knew I was gonna
confiscate them for personal use.
So- as a joke- I say ‘no- that’s
fine- I sell them to the homeless guys out front’ [The store is a couple of
hundred yards from the homeless mission where I hang out- everyone in the area
knows about the ‘homeless guys’].
As I tell her the joke- both she
and the bagger- they don’t seem to think it’s funny.
They look pretty mad- to be
honest.
I tell them ‘no- I’m kidding- I
take them home and use them for the onions and stuff’.
Their look didn’t change one bit-
they did not want me to get those damn bags!
Right now in Texas we have an
ongoing war with the Obama administration. In all my years as a political
observer- I have never seen someone as petty as this current president.
I have written about him denying
us federal aid when we applied because of wild fires we had a few years back.
Then the recent accusation that
Texas is racist because of the voter I.D. laws.
Plus- the E.P.A. rules that are
shutting down parts of our power grid- this coming year Texas is going to face
some blackout problems because of this.
So- this week the president cut
the federal funds for the WHP program.
This program gives care to poor
women.
There are over 2400 hundred
providers in Texas that will lose the majority of their funding because of
this.
Why would the president do this?
Texas- like a few other states-
passed a law that prevents tax payer money going to clinics that provide
abortions.
The federal money supplies about
90 % of the funding- the federal govt. said if you deny any funding for the
Planned Parenthood clinics- then we will cut all the funding to all of the 2400
clinics.
Now- did they have to do this?
No.
How many Planned Parenthood
clinics are in this group of over 2400 providers?
If you simply listen to the
media- you would think that just about all of them are- or maybe half.
Out of the over 2400 providers-
Planned Parenthood makes up 44.
Yeah- 44.
The president cut off funding for
2400 clinics- that do breast screenings and mammograms.
That actually treat cancer and
other diseases.
He cut them all off- because
Planned Parenthood would not be in the group any more.
Planned Parenthood does not treat
for breast cancer- does not offer pre natal care- and does not even have mammogram
machines.
Many of the 2400 clinics that the
president cut off do all of these services.
So why would you cut off over 90
% of the clinics that actually do these real- needed services?
Because of the political ideology
of being pro abortion.
Obama has positioned himself as
being on the side of abortion and his supports want that.
So- to appease his base- he cut
off 2400 poor women’s clinics in Texas- this was a choice he made- not Perry.
A poll was done the other day-
they asked women ‘would you like free birth control- or have to pay for it
yourself’?
Now- if you ask just about
anybody ‘would you like free dental- or health insurance- or beer’ what do you
think the majority of people would say?
So after they did the poll- they
said ‘see- most people support the position the president takes on abortion and
birth control’.
See how the media shapes the
conversation? You can ask a question in a way that gets a certain answer- and
Walla- they achieved the goal.
Society has a decision to make- can
we as a people live without any ethical requirements.
Should ethics- making a
distinction between right and wrong- should this be part of the conversation?
In our Philosophy study- as
scattered as it has been- we ended right around the 18-19th centuries.
We were coming up to the
Existentialists.
Existentialism is a difficult
philosophy to pin down [as most are].
But the easiest short definition
I have found is it’s the philosophy of Existence.
That is real life- It’s not just
a matter of intellectual data- it’s what we learn and experience as passionate
people- people who have real problems and issues- yet they strive for meaning.
The father of Existentialism was
the 19th century thinker- Soren Kierkegaard.
Kierkegaard was a Christian- he
challenged the dead church of Denmark- the state church- and he called for a
more adventurous approach to the faith.
Some notable followers of this
philosophy took a different approach- they were the atheistic existentialists.
One of the most famous being
Frederick Nietzsche.
Nietzsche taught that men should
abandon all hope of a future afterlife- that the whole field of ethics was
futile ‘do what you need to do to excel- step on the other people on the way up
the ladder- and that’s what life is all about’.
He called this the Superman- man
coming into this new age of science and reason- and rejecting the old forms of
religion and ethics- which keep man down.
Nietzsche spent the last years of
his life in an insane asylum.
His sister sold tickets to the
‘audience’ who wanted to see the madman.
She exercised her ‘superwoman’
and did what would benefit her- financially- without any worry about whether it
was right or wrong.
The last couple of years of his
life- Nietzsche signed his letters ‘the crucified one’.
In his rejection of God- he lost
his mind and took the identity of Jesus Christ- the ethical one.
As we grapple with what’s right
and wrong- as states pass laws that say 'we don’t want our tax payer money
supporting abortions’.
Then we are going to have to deal
with the backlash- those who at the time have the power [money] to cut the
states off who see ethics as a priority.
Yes- the Superman [Feds] can deny
that ethics play a role in women’s health- they can say ‘no money for any of
your 2400 clinics’ just because you won’t fund 44 Planned Parenthood clinics.
People can get mad- and even take
polls that say ‘we want free things’ [don’t we all? My grocery bags!]
At the end of the day- right and
wrong do make a difference.
Trying to live a life- a
worldview [philosophy] in a passionate way- that’s a good thing- we are all
real people who deal with real issues.
But when you leave God/ethics out
of the picture- then you are on a crash course- you might wake up one day-
having lost your mind- and signing you letters as The Crucified One.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1809- 3 THINGS
First- Sanford Florida.
The case of Zimmerman and the
Black kid.
As most of you have heard by now-
Zimmerman was this neighborhood watch guy and he saw a Black kid walking thru
the area.
To Zimmerman- for whatever
reason- he thought the kid looked suspicious [you know- Black kid walking-
yeah- very strange!]
So as any good citizen would do-
he stalked the kid!
As you listen to the 911 calls-
it seems as if this Black kid realized some guy in a vehicle is following him
and he gets scared.
Even though the dispatcher tells
Zimmerman not to follow the kid- Zimmerman replies ‘these type always get
away’.
Then you hear from the 911 tapes-
Zimmerman confronts the scared kid- the kid is screaming for his life- and
Zimmerman kills him- you know- with the gun he uses for ‘self defense’.
No arrest- the cops say it was
self defense.
Geez- if this was self defense-
keep me away from Sanford.
Obviously Zimmerman murdered the
kid in cold blood.
Sure- maybe he should not get
convicted for the most severe type of murder- but this guy needs to go to
prison for this stunt.
Second- George Clooney.
This past week Clooney has made
the rounds on the talk shows- and even got arrested at the Sudanese embassy in
D.C.
He has been bringing awareness to
the tragedy going on in the Sudan [Africa].
Last year I wrote a few posts on
the situation. Sudan had a referendum
and the south split from the north.
Clooney did say ‘this is the
world’s most recent nation’.
Actually he got that wrong [go
back a post or 2 and read my post on Barqa].
But overall he did well.
What’s going on in Sudan is
actually worse than what’s happening in Syria.
In Syria- the president- Assad-
has indiscriminately bombed civilian cities [Homs] - it is an overreaction that
has killed many innocent people [some estimates are around 10,000].
But yet- it is a ‘reaction’.
A response to a popular uprising
in the country.
In Sudan- the govt. is simply
dropping [literally- rolling them off the planes] bombs on women and children-
to get them to move out of the Nuba mountain area- so the govt. can take the
land.
The people living in the area-
they have already missed the last year of the planting season- and they can’t
plant this year because of the bombs- many are on the verge of starvation- and
they are living under rocks and in caves because of the bombing.
This truly is a tragedy- and I
commend Clooney for his activism.
And last but not least- sergeant
Bales.
Yes- we now have had a few
reports on the soldier accused of killing 16 civilian Afghans.
As the portrait is being drawn-
we see a sad story.
By all accounts Bales grew up as
a great kid- well liked and a truly good guy.
He joined the military a few
months after 911- and was one of those kids who said ‘this won’t happen on my
watch’ type of thing.
He had already seen multiple
tours of duty in combat zones- and suffered some severe injuries as a result
[lost part of his foot and had some head injuries].
He is married and has 2 small
kids.
He owned 2 homes- one was
foreclosed on- the other he agreed to sell at a 50,000 dollar loss- one of
those unfortunate guys who is ‘underwater’ on his mortgage [you owe more than
the house is worth].
On his wife’s blog- she wrote
that they were trying to deal with these losses by the possibility that their
next tour of duty would be in Germany- Italy or maybe Hawaii.
Bales said the military told him
they would not send him back into a combat zone.
Then he got the news that they
were going to Afghanistan instead.
Now- all these things obviously do not justify
the killing of civilians- but we need to see that our govt. also plays a role-
a responsibility- if we are stressing guys to the limit.
The day before the incident-
Bales witnessed his friend getting his leg blown off.
Everybody in the company was
upset about the injury.
It is said that Bales was
drinking the day of the killings- and by all accounts- it looks like a tragic
story of a good man- who snapped.
In all these cases- the killing
of the Black kid- Sudan- and Bales- we as a nation get mad.
We see the injustices- the
victims- and even the very real humanity of those who perpetrate the crime
[Bales].
We want- and should- give people
the benefit of the doubt.
But we should also make sure we
are not simply overlooking a real crime- because it’s just easier to say ‘oh-
self defense’.
The 2 chapters I recommend for
the week are John chapter 3 [born again- Jesus] and Ephesians chapter 2 [saved
by grace].
If I remember I will comment on
them before the week is out.
But they do talk about
forgiveness- God sending his Son into the world- not to condemn the world- but
to save it.
As we pray for these situations-
and also seek justice where it needs to be done [Sudan- Fla.] we need to keep
in mind both sides [Bales].
While we never want to overlook a
serious offense- we also want to be aware of the overall situation.
Are we stressing our guys too
much?
Should guys who have had multiple
serious injuries- loosing parts of their limbs- should we be sending them into
combat zones 3 or 4 times?
Like I said- no excuses for the
wrong done- but have we also done wrong- by putting him there?
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1808- 22 DAYS- AND COUNTING
As we end the week it’s been 22
days since Obama has held possession of the 1 million dollars that Bill Maher
gave him.
I’m not sure how much longer he
will keep it- all the clips of Maher calling women bad stuff- well they have
been going viral on the net.
I even heard Ed Rendell- a big
Democrat insider- say that he has Democrat women telling him that Obama needs
to give the money back.
Maher just did a sold out show
here in Texas [San Antonio] - he talked about giving up the ‘cu-t’ line about
Palin [he also speaks of her as a ‘twat’ and makes fun of her Down syndrome
child].
He said he gave up the ‘cu-t’
line [left the n out] even though it was the funniest line in his routine- that
everyone loved it.
If that’s the funniest line on
your show- then you have one dull show.
Sinbad [the Black comedian] is
funny- you laugh when he does stand up- and you never hear any stuff like this
out of him- if you need to degrade women and Down syndrome children to get
laughs- then you have a problem.
The sad thing is- Obama and his
guys are still 100% behind Maher- defending him on TV [Axelrod].
I heard Axelrod give a defense of
Maher just the other day- while at the same time accusing the Repubs of waging
a ‘war on women’.
Too much- that’s funnier than all
the Maher skits combined.
Okay- let’s ‘keep em honest’ [as Cooper
says].
As the debate heats up- Obama has
been denying- vehemently- that he wants higher gas prices.
He told one reporter at a news
presser- ‘do you really think that a president- in an election year- wants gas
to go up’?
Actually- I don’t.
Then why ask this?
One of the political positions
that some have taken over the years [Gore] believe that in order to wean the
nation off of fossil fuels- that you have to get the gas prices high enough
that it would then make the alternative clean fuels more economically feasible.
At the same time- this view
believes that the Govt. should invest in clean fuel companies [thus Solyndra]
and help them get off the ground.
Okay- has Obama and his Energy
secretary ever espoused views like this?
Yes- many times- in public- on
camera- on utube- even in the last couple of years.
Okay- do we have the right to be
suspicious?
Obama- and Chu [energy secretary]
have both said there goal was to get fuel prices higher- Chu said 8 dollars
would be about right [a gallon].
This administration has touted
clean fuel companies and has even been caught [emails] telling one company that
was about to go under [Solyndra] ‘wait until after the midterm elections before
you go bust’.
They have held this anti fossil
fuel position for a long time.
Then why is it so unreasonable to
simply ask ‘do you still hold to your past position- one you are on record as
having- that you want gas prices to go up’.
Yet- the MSNBC crowd- and the
other supporters of Obama in the media- they cant believe that anyone would
ever believe that Obama and Chu would want gas to go higher.
Chu was confronted this week at a
congressional hearing- the congressman asked him if he still held to the words
he spoke a few years ago when he said he wanted gas to go up in price.
Chu said- ‘no- I don’t hold to
that view anymore’.
Geez- this was your life long
mission- something you advocated for- for many years- you’re were on that side-
the Gore idea- and now you say ‘I don’t hold the view’.
Who do we believe man?
As MSNBC continues their ‘war on
women’ accusation- we now have clips of Sharpton making the rounds [UTUBE]
where he calls the Greek Philosophers [the ones I have been teaching on this
least year] ‘a bunch of Homo’s’.
How wonderful- Sharpton- a guy-
flim flam man- who holds a regular show on msnbc- he degrades Jews- calls
Greeks ‘Homo’s’ speaks of Whites in terrible ways- yet he is lauded as some
great civil rights guy- and he is a major supporter of Obama.
Race?
This week- the justice dept just
overturned a Texas voter I.D. law.
Some states have been passing
laws that say you need picture I.D. to vote.
Holder [attorney general- who has
said that the civil rights laws are only meant to protect Blacks- not Whites-
he did say this by the way].
He overturned Texas’ law because
he said it was racist- because more minorities don’t have I.D.’s.
A few years ago- there was a
video making the rounds- a Democrat woman [I think Ca.?] she was onstage
talking to an Hispanic audience- she said ‘go tell your friends and neighbors
to vote- even if they don’t have documentation- because they are not allowed to
check at the polls’.
So some states have passed laws-
trying to make sure that only citizens are voting.
In 2008- Georgia’s first vote
after they passed voter I.D. laws- they had MORE Blacks show up to vote.
In 2008- the Supreme Court upheld
Indiana’s voter I.D. law- Justice John Paul Stevens- a liberal- wrote the
majority decision.
He simply said that states have a
real interest- not racist- to make sure only eligible voters are voting.
He said there was absolutely no
evidence to suggest that requiring people to have picture I.D.’s to vote is
racist.
Yet Holder says that states that
are trying to pass voter I.D. laws are trying to ‘undo’ the civil rights gains
that men like John Lewis fought for in the 60’s.
This guy is unbelievable.
So we have an administration-
whose public defenders- who’s attorney general- whose energy secretary- and all
the other people around him- hold to paranoid views on race and energy and all
types of things.
They call women the nastiest
manes in the book- they speak about Jews and Whites as groups that conspired
against Blacks and who need to be ‘eliminated as a social class’ [Bell].
Yet- at the same time they are
also running a media campaign that says 'look at all the Repubs- they are anti
woman- they are racist- they call women sluts’.
And then when 2 polls come out
[this week- Washington Post and N.Y. Times] they cant believe that Obama’s
approval actually fell- even among women.
Yes- after the Super Tuesday
results- when Santorum won a large amount of women voters- you had the pundits
on MSNBC shocked- even mad ‘I guess these southern women are too stupid- that
they would vote for a guy who wants to take away their birth control’.
Now- Southern women- Northern
Women- women from all regions and colors- they have daughters and sons who need
jobs- who have a very bleak future ahead of them- if the economy does not start
really producing jobs.
These women are paying 75 dollars
to fill up their cars/vehicles.
These women- they have real
concerns about real issues.
And for the media to have really
thought that their contrived War on Woman campaign- to have thought that women
would go out in huge numbers to vote for their ‘right to have birth control-
paid for by everyone else’ for them to have thought this was demeaning-
condescending.
Yes- women are concerned about
health care issues- and the CBO said this week that Obama care will cost twice
as much than what he said [1.7 trillion instead of 900 billion].
And that private employers would
drop around 20 million people from their rolls [not 1 million as Obama said].
Yes- these health care issues
matter to women- it matters to women that your major supporters degrade women
on a regular basis- accuse Jews and Whites of conspiracies.
These things matter too.
But no- the media can’t
understand how Obama’s approval actually went down among women- not up.
I guess they don’t realize that
Jews and Whites and Hispanics and all other races- well they are women too.
And even though Eric Holder does
not believe that these ‘other races’ are covered under the civil rights laws-
and that states that simply want citizens to vote- whether they be Mexican or
White or Black- they want to make sure only eligible voters vote.
Well Holder says that those
states are trying to turn back the civil rights gains made over the past 60
years.
It’s no wonder why the numbers
are going down- women see these things- women of all races- and its
condescending to have thought that women were going to abandon the other side
in huge numbers and support Obama- all because a Georgetown university student-
who pays 40 thousand a year tuition- can’t afford 9 dollars a month at wal mart
for birth control.
It’s a surprise for me to think
that any woman- Black- White- North- South- would have swallowed a line like
that.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1807- HAVE A FINE WINTER TIME IN
THE POCON…- NAH- HOW BOUT BARQA.
Have you heard the good news?
Yes- the world community has just
added another nation to the pot.
It’s this wonderful coastal state
that sits right off of the Mediterranean [club med?].
You know- the northern part of
Africa- on the border with that other famous tourist spot- Egypt.
Yes folks- last week the eastern
half of Libya broke away from its capital [Tripoli] and launched their own
state.
The new ‘leaders’ of Libya- they
said it was an Arab conspiracy to destroy the nation.
Why are the new leaders- the guys
we installed- crying?
Let’s see- the eastern half of
the Arab nation has all the oil- oh- so what we did in Libya- the military
action that is regularly touted as the new successful model- it split the
nation in half and will probably send them into a long term civil war.
In the last post or 2 I also
mentioned how the new leaders are guilty of war crimes and are continuing to
oppress the part of the population that supported Gadhaffi.
Yes- the new nation is called
Barqa- and I bet this is the first time you heard the ‘good news’.
Why is this stuff important John?
Because what we did- did not work
out well at all.
Yet the media- and the supporters
of the president- continue to talk about our action [with NATO] as a great
success.
As far as I can tell- it’s
turning into a mess.
Iraq?
Yes- after all the blood spilled-
both American and Iraqi- how are things working out?
The leader- Malaki- he has
charges against the vice president [of another sect] and he’s trying to try the
guy on terrorist charges- he’s hiding out in the north- the Kurdish region.
It looks like Iraq will also
divide into 2 or 3 territories.
The leader- Malaki- is a
supporter of Iran- and is even supporting the Syrian dictator- the one we are
trying to get out- yes- the guy we backed in Iraq is supporting Iran and Syria-
and not us.
Last but not least- Afghanistan.
Yes- we had the tragic incident
of one of our guys leaving the base and killing 16 innocent civilians in cold
blood- many of them women and children.
Tragic.
We have had Afghans protesting in
the streets- images of Obama being lynched [did you see it? I did].
After all this time- trying to
pretend that the Afghans see us as their liberators- they see us as occupiers-
and we are their oppressors.
The Taliban put out a statement
after the killing of the civilians- it said that if the U.S. military blames
this on a mentally unstable person [he was a staff sergeant who had suffered a
previous bran injury].
They said then it shows you that
the U.S. is so bankrupt- that they are putting guns in the hands of their
mentally unstable soldiers and sending them to our country.
Don’t tell me these Taliban are
not smart.
Yes- after all this time- all the
blood and money and time- it seems like all the nations we have been involved
with militarily- well they are either worse off- or just as bad- as before we
got involved.
Isaiah chapter 2 says at the end
of time the Lords kingdom will prevail over all kingdoms- men will take their
military weapons and turn them into instruments of peace [swords into
Plowshares ring a bell?]
Yes- the ultimate goal is ‘war no
more’ [this is also in the chapter- learn WAR NO MORE].
I’m not a pacifist- I believe we
have the right to defend ourselves with force if need be.
But we must use it as a last
resort- we must see that force- military action rarely wins the hearts and
minds of people.
And for a Western ‘Christian’
nation to go into the heart of the Arab world- even with good intentions- and
to think that our killing of other Arabs/Muslims can with the hearts and minds
of the people- then we are on a fool’s errand.
Yes- maybe well intended- maybe
justified in the sense that we had the right to strike back- but the overall
strategy is failing- terribly.
Oh well- maybe if we all take a
vacation things will look better when we get back- how bout we all go to the
sandy shores of Barqa- I hear the Margaritas are great.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1806- THE 2% LIE
I want to talk a little bit about
how we perceive things- the way the media and politicians use propaganda to
sway the way people think.
This weekend I spoke with my
liberal friend from N.J. - by the way- when I use examples from our talks-
these are real discussions that I have had with this friend for the last 30
years.
This is not a ‘made up person’.
Okay- one of the first things
they said was ‘can you believe these Repub candidates- all they want to talk
about is birth control’.
Now- I told my friend that this
was a perfect example of how the propaganda machine works.
If you remember back to the first
time birth control came up during this election- it was a question by George
Stephanopoulos.
He asked Romney if states have
the right to ban Birth control.
Everyone on the stage- and in the
audience were shocked- surprised. Why in the heck would you ask a question like
this- no one on the trail is talking about it [until then] and it simply was
not part of the ‘conversation’.
A few days later- Stephen Colbert
had Stephanopoulos on his show [Colbert Report] and he asked him ‘why would you
ask a question like that’?
He responded ‘I had a bet with
Dianne Sawyer that I could get Romney to admit that birth control was a good
thing’.
He lied.
What really happened was the Dem
strategists had a plan- they knew that it would be difficult for the President
to run on the economy [even though now the numbers are looking better- to his
credit].
So they had a strategy to turn
the conversation into one on birth control and ‘the war on women’.
The president was just about to
announce his new rule on birth control- that the Catholic church would no
longer be able to not provide it thru their plans- and this whole conversation
was orchestrated to get the average person to wake up one day and say ‘geez-
look at all these stupid stone age Republicans- all they want to talk about is
birth control’.
And Walla- my friend swallowed the
bait- hook line and sinker.
Now- do both sides do this?
Sure- I’m just showing you how.
Now- the present problem [in my
mind] is that Obama has been unable to distinguish between speaking honestly as
a president- and speaking ‘politically’ as a campaigner.
What do I mean?
The last 2 weeks the president
has been going around making public speeches and saying ‘when these Repubs say
“drill baby drill” they are lying to you about the problem- even if we drill-
we use 20% of the world’s oil- and only have 2% of the oil reserves here in the
U.S.’.
Now- he has said this more than
once- and sometimes he qualifies the statement by saying ‘proven oil reserves’.
But as you hear the words- you-
the average Joe [Mary] think ‘geez- if we only posses 2 % of the world’s oil-
and we use 20%- then just doing more drilling is not the answer’.
Okay- do we only have 2% of the
world’s Oil here in the U.S.?
No- if you opened up ALL the oil
rich regions- both offshore and on land- we would have 100% of our oil needs
met- for 250 years.
Yes- you heard me- we would have
so much oil- that we would not have to import any- nada.
So John- how can Obama say we
only have 2%?
Well- put aside the ability to
lie for a moment- and realize [like the birth control] that the political
insiders for Obama realized that the gas/oil issue does have the potential to
derail the presidents bid to get re-elected.
So they devised a strategy to
respond to the Repubs argument that gas is going up- and blame Obama.
Now- here’s the tricky part.
When Obama uses language like
this- he is using a little known definition of ‘proven oil reserves’ that the
OMB [office of management and budget] uses.
This definition of proven oil
reserves actually means- all the oil reserves that we are currently tapping
into- and the ones that the govt. /pres has already approved down the road.
In essence- Obama is saying ‘out
of all the oil reserves THAT I AM GOING TO APPROVE- we can only get 2%’.
And when the ‘drill baby drill’
folk say ‘let’s drill’ they are talking about all the reserves that we are not
drilling from.
So- in essence- Obama simply
lied.
Now- did he lie- like under the
legal definition of Bill Clinton ‘were you ever alone with Lewinsky’?
Answer ‘No’.
Reason ‘there were other people in the building at the time’.
Okay- he was alone with her in
the Oval Office- but in his mind- if there were other people in the building-
or lets say in D.C.- or lets say ‘in the world’ well yes- you can technically
say that none of us ‘are ever alone’.
But to the average mind- well-
you were ‘alone’.
So- when you hear the president-
saying over and over again [he has now stopped- I think- he got caught] ‘we
only have 2% of the world’s oil reserves’ well- he’s using Clinton language.
Problem?
When you campaign- and do stuff
like this- okay- they all do it- it’s not right- or good- but they do it.
When you are actually holding the
office- and people hear you say this- you are purposefully deceiving folk- you
know they think something other than what you are saying.
I mean who thinks ‘Ah- he’s using
the OMB definition for oil reserves- not true human speak’.
Who remembers where we left off
on our Philosophy posts?
We were in the 18th
century and were discussing Empiricism- the idea that we obtain true knowledge
about things thru the things themselves- the empirical evidence.
One of the famous philosophers
that falls into this category was a Bishop named Berkeley.
Even though he is called an
Empiricist- he kind of had some ideas that were also Idealist- those that saw
ideas and the Metaphysical world as the main source of knowledge.
You might not have ever heard of
Berkeley- but most of you are familiar with his famous statement ‘If a tree
falls in the forest- and no one’s there- does it still make a sound’.
Or the modern version ‘if a man
speaks in a room- and no woman is there- is he still wrong’.
Berkeley grappled with the debate
of what role does the observer play in the actual existence of things.
Does reality depend upon an
observer- if something is not being perceived- does it really exist?
His conclusion was- things do
depend upon an observer to exist [I don’t hold to this view by the way] and
that God is the ultimate observer- he is observing all things at all times-
therefore all things really do exist.
As you can see- Philosophy does
get fuzzy at times.
When people use language- ‘2% of
the world’s oil reserves’ they expect you to be using language that most humans
agree upon.
When you say ‘I did not have sex
with that woman- Miss Lewinsky’.
They don’t realize that your
definition of sex does not include oral sex- or any other sex- outside of
standard missionary position intercourse.
So as we progress over the next
few months- yes- both sides are going to be using propaganda- the media- to
make their point.
And some things are true- others
are not.
Reality/truth is not something
that changes- or depends upon an observer- if the tree falls- yeah it makes a
noise- whether you are there or not.
When you say ‘2%’ of the world’s
oil- yes- it makes a difference that you are using a definition that MOST
HUMANS ARE NOT OPERATING BY- and whether an ‘observer’ catches you or not- it’s
still wrong.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1805- GROUND ZERO- ABOTTOBAD
[Pakistan]
Let’s start with an article I
read this week on the last days of Bin Laden.
Now- I must admit when I got
about halfway thru I could not stop laughing.
I sit in the yard during the day
when reading- and yes- I was outside- laughing loud.
The story covered how during the
last few months of Bin laden on the lamb- that his oldest wife ‘showed up’ one
day at the compound.
Yes- the article repeats this-
she ‘showed up’.
It made it sound like they did
not want her to know where he was living.
Understand- his 3 story compound-
which we have all seen on the news- was considered the world’s most top secret
hiding spot- hidden right by the Pakistani military academy- to protect it from
the U.S.- and we spent years trying to track him down.
Even on the day of the famous
seal team 6 raid- we still did not know for sure that he was there.
Yet- this oldest wife- well- she
‘showed up’ one day [just a warning to all you players out there].
Now- the story goes that everyone
in the compound [28 people in total] were all afraid that she was going to rat
them out.
Bin Laden lived on the 3rd
floor with his youngest wife- from Yemen.
And he had another wife living
with them on the 3rd floor- she slept in the computer room.
But the oldest wife- the one who
just ‘showed up’ she stayed on the 2nd floor- right below Bin laden.
Now- one of the sons of the other
wives kept asking her ‘what are you doing here?’- And she finally said- I’m
quoting from the article now ‘I HAVE ONE LAST DUTY TO PERFORM FOR MY HUSBAND’.
The son immediately ran to the 3rd
floor to inform the world’s most feared terrorist- the man who masterminded the
worst terrorist attack to ever hit our shores- 3,ooo dead.
The son tells him the ominous
tone of the woman’s voice.
It is said that Bin Laden simply
replied ‘the will of Allah be done’ [okay- I hedged some- the article states he
simply felt fate would take over].
Fate taking over- Allah’s will be
done- come on man- do something about it.
Now- as a Christian blogger I
usually don’t advocate for murdering a disgruntled spouse- but I just saw this
past week how some American took his wife ‘deep sea diving’ and was charged
with killing her- they think he turned off the air valve.
Okay- rank amateur- American born-
you would think Bin Laden could have done more than say ‘the will of Allah be
done’.
Okay- the famous night of the
raid- he’s living on the 3rd floor- a compound within a compound-
everyone in the home fears for their lives- not from the U.S. - but from the
oldest wife.
Then all of a sudden- you hear a
commotion- guns going off- we have all seen the depiction of Bin Laden standing
by the bed- reaching for a gun- when the door breaks and seal team 6 arrives to
save the day.
Yes- the cartoon depiction [we
have no real video] left one thing out- Bin Laden probably said ‘Oh thank
Allah- it’s just you guys’.
I will end the Bin Laden saga
with one last quote- the article states that after Bin laden's death- the
Pakistani intelligence people- who just happen to have actual Taliban and
terrorist within their ranks- when they interrogated the older wife- they said-
quote ‘She is so aggressive- she borders on being intimidating’.
They basically were afraid of
being in the room with the woman- now we know why we have all the videos of Bin
Laden sitting in his room- looking at that TV screen- isolated- alone.
The reports were he was sick- and
some questioned his mental health.
Yes- it looks like seal team 6
did save the day- for the U.S. - and Bin Laden.
Okay- wasted too much time on
that one- and too risky.
You say ‘John- you do have
readers in some of these countries in the Arab world- should you so freely be
joking like this?’
To which I have one reply ‘who’s
John’?
Okay- like I said in the last
post or 2- the backlash of the Rush ‘slut’ comment- which caused him to lose
advertisers- has provoked a response from the right- they have now gone and
found the statements of Bill Maher- and have made a short UTUBE clip about
them.
I don’t want to repeat the ones
from the previous post- but be warned- these get bad- real bad.
Maher referred to Palin getting
the job at fox ‘Palin is now going to comment on fox- her night job is like her
day job- talking to Down Syndrome people all day’.
Note- Down Syndrome is a serious
problem- one of the stigmas of it is many people used to confuse it with other
more serious mental retardation issues.
How anyone can say this on
national TV- and at the same time be a major supporter of the president- it’s
beyond me.
Okay- he also refers to Palin- as
‘that C-U-N- and then a T’ [I mean- it’s so bad I have to find ways to say it-
without ‘saying it’.]
As the week progressed- and the
comments came out- some on the right are simply saying ‘this guy is a major
funder of Obama’s PAC- he has made all the rounds on TV- he even called Plain a
MILF [mothers I’d like to f—k] on CNN- and the news media are not asking Obama
or his supporters if he should apologize’.
Yes- Obama needs to give the
blood money back- disconnect from this idiot- and part ways.
But wait- as I was listening to
right wing radio- Hannity- they had some Democrat woman on- who said these
comments were acceptable- because they were made in a political environment-
and were not a personal attack against all women.
Calling her the C word- bringing
her sons sickness into it- acceptable? Unbelievable.
And last but not least- the
videos and connections Obama has had with radical left wing Black activists.
A video came out that showed
Obama supporting/introducing a Black racist.
The video simply showed Obama at
Harvard introducing Derrick Bell- a radical racist activist who is anti White
and Anti Semitic.
Now- Obama did not just do a
onetime introduction- when Obama taught at the University of Chicago- he had
this man’s books as required reading for a law class he taught.
Bell advocates for ‘radical race
theory’- an idea that says the ‘JEWS’ conspired with the Whites in order to
keep the Black man down- and that the only solution is to ‘abolish the White
race as a social category ‘[actual quote].
Okay- a few years ago I remember
when Trent Lott- the leader of the Repubs in the senate- he made a silly/stupid
comment at a birthday party for Strom Thurmond.
When Strom was younger- he did
run as a presidential contender in the south- and the Repubs and the Dems have
a history of racism in the south- actually the Dem’s have a more racist history
in the south [Dixiecrats].
So Lott says ‘things would have
been a whole lot better if you won’
Okay- the media and the Dems went
nuts- were you saying you wished that the south ‘won’ and the racists took
over?
He simply apologized and said it
was a stupid statement he gave at a party- he shouldn’t have done it.
Now- Lot lost his spot as the top
leader over this.
Yet Obama has endorsed- spoken
kindly about- and even recommends the books of a man who hates Jews- wants to
‘abolish the White race as a social category’- and has said these things openly
before the whole world.
‘Well John- you don’t believe
Obama believes this- do you’?
I have no idea- the point is he
does have all these bad connections with people- things the media ignores- and
at the same time he calls for a more civil discourse- on the right side of the
aisle.
Okay- will end with one last
quote- this came up on the Opie and Anthony show- the guy was some type of
Democrat ‘entertainer’- he referred to Sarah Palin’s son- who has Down Syndrome
‘that retarded piece of &^%$ that came out of her C---T’.
Yes folks- you heard it- this
same man was scheduled to speak/entertain at a Dem fundraiser later in the
year.
I have not heard one prominent
Democrat rebuke these comments- the things Maher has said- on video- not one
Democrat has come out with the same ‘righteous outrage’ that they felt when a
Republican called a lady- a Slut.
If we want civil discourse Mr.
Obama- then let it start with your supporters- because it seems like they never
heard the phrase.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1804- THE NEW ISAAC
So a few days have gone by- and
the number one media story- the story that topped the deaths in Syria- the U.N.
report that says we and NATO backed a group that committed ‘war crimes’- yes-
the top story- that Rush Limbaugh referred to Sandra Fluke as ‘a slut’ and that
he finally apologized- yes this was the headline of the week.
What U.N. story John?
Glad you asked.
If you remember during our
‘kinetic action’ in Libya- I wrote a bunch of critical posts about our
involvement.
I kept saying that we were using
the wording of the U.N. resolution- that said we had the authority to go in and
use DEFENSIVE means to protect civilians- well that wording became twisted [by
us] to mean we can chase down Gadhaffi and his family [and his friends] and
simply kill them.
When some observers began
questioning this act- we said we were using ‘defensive’ means to knock out the
‘command and control’ of Gadhaffi- and that’s how we justified it.
Now- this whole thing was a
farce- there never was any ‘command and control’ in the buildings we bombed- we
simply thought Gadhaffi might have been there.
So we bombed his sons house in a
private neighborhood- killed his grandkids- but missed him.
Okay- the U.N. did a yearlong
study to see if we did indeed violate human rights by lying like this.
The report came out- and it said
we tried to reduce the civilian causalities- but did kill around 60 innocent
people under the guise of ‘taking out command and control’.
They found that there was no
evidence at all that these buildings we targeted were command and control
centers.
War crimes?
Yes- the report also states that
the rebel group we backed did commit war crimes- now- the report says
Gadhaffi’s side committed ‘crimes against humanity’ [far worse] but that our
side did commit war crimes- and till this day the new ‘govt.’ will not
investigate the possible crimes committed when they killed innocent people.
So- this story was a small
article in the back of the paper- it should have been headline news- not ‘the
slut’ comment.
Okay- in the last post I
commented on Jeremiah chapter 33.
This was the promise God made to Israel
that he would fulfill his promise and they would be restored into a strong
nation.
I referenced the earlier story we
find in Genesis [chapters 12-15] where God makes this promise to Abraham.
If you read these 2 chapters-
plus 17 and 22- you will get the main promise.
God called Abraham to leave his
homeland and go on a journey. In this new land God would bless Abraham and he
would have tons of kids and grandkids and eventually become a nation [the
nation of Israel].
So over a period of time- thru
many dangers and trials- he finally has a son- named Isaac- and this son is the
promised child thru whom all the others will come from.
In chapter 22 of Genesis- when
Abraham was an old man- Gods tests him and says ‘Abraham- go and take Isaac-
your only beloved son- and offer him up to me on Mount Moriah’.
Abraham went thru many years of
doubt and struggle before he finally received the promised son [read chapters
17-18 of Genesis].
And when Sarah finally had the
child- it was a miracle.
So when God says ‘offer this boy
up’- to Abraham it was putting at risk the whole purpose of his life- the very
reason he left his friends and family and moved to a strange land.
But the bible says he took the
child- and when they got near the range of mountains where mount Moriah was- he
told the servants ‘you guys wait here- me and the boy will go to worship- and
we will BOTH BE BACK’.
This phrase is picked up in
Hebrews chapter 11- the writer says Abraham simply believed that God would
raise the boy from the dead- that’s how he justified in his mind the order to
offer his son- and this same son being the child thru whom the others would
come.
So as Abraham approaches the
mountain- he takes the wood for the offering- the ‘fire’- and no animal.
He puts the wood on Isaac’s back-
to carry up the hill.
Isaac asks his dad ‘dad- we have
the wood and all- but where is the animal for the offering’
Abraham simply tells his boy ‘God
will provide himself a lamb for the offering’.
As they get to the top of the
hill- Abraham ties Isaac with the rope- and puts him on the altar and takes out
a knife to slay him. At that moment- an
angel calls out to him and says ‘STOP!’
The whole thing was a test- to
see if Abraham would do what God said- even if it seemed contrary to Gods promise
and purpose for his life.
It should be noted that the
Rabbi’s tell us that Isaac was not a young boy at the time- he was probably an
older teen- strong enough to carry the wood up the hill.
This signifies that Isaac could
have probably put up a fight- and won!
But he heard all the stories
about God’s miracles- his dad recounted all the great signs and things that God
did in their lives- and when Abraham got to the point of offering up his son-
maybe Isaac simply accepted that God was in control and he would do whatever
needed to be done.
Over a thousand years later-
Jesus would walk the dusty streets of Jerusalem- he too was a promised son.
He preached and healed and was a
true miracle worker.
He often used ‘Father Abraham’ as
an example to prove his teachings- one time he said ‘before Abraham was- I AM’.
This incensed the hearers and
they took up stones to kill him- the words I AM- are the words that refer to
God [during Moses time he told Moses he was the I AM].
So the day comes for Jesus to ‘take
the wood’ of the sacrifice- and go up the hill- called Calvary.
History tells us that Calvary is
in the same range of mountains that Moriah sits on.
Jesus- the ‘second Isaac’ took
the wood of the Cross- just like Isaac- and carried it to the top.
In the story of Abraham- when the
angel said STOP- they looked around and found a ram in the brush- they used the
ram as a sacrifice.
But this day- the day of Jesus-
no ram was to be found- he looked up to his God- and he said ‘why do you
forsake ME LIKE THIS’.
Yes- Jesus was the lamb that
Abraham prophesied of- he was the ultimate sacrifice.
Sometimes we go thru things that
seem contrary to the true purpose- things that we see as course changers.
When Jesus died- all of his
followers thought the goal was gone- they thought he was going to lead a
present day rebellion against Rome and become the new Messiah ruling out of
Jerusalem.
When he died on the Cross- they
could not harmonize what they thought was the whole purpose- and this gruesome
death.
Yet 3 days after they saw the
true purpose- the ultimate reality.
Are you at Mount Moriah?
The place that seems like all is lost.
Trust God- after 3 days
everything will look totally different.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1803- A MONKEY- A BLOGGER- AND-
WELL- A ‘SLUT’.
Okay- once again we have spent a
news week- with some very important stories to cover [Syria- etc] and some
stupid stuff.
So what was the stupid/silly
stuff?
Well- as a 70’s generation kid-
sure- I liked the Monkees [Hey- Hey with the Monkees- …].
You remember?
Its Saturday morning- can you
just hear the song in your mind as you read the above line?
If so- then you- and me- are
actual nerds.
Big deal- Yeah- I watched the
thing- and even walked to school with a Beatles lunchbox- you know- the metal
kind- hey- it beat having a Brady Bunch one.
Davy Jones- the lead singer-
seemed to be a nice guy- he passed away- and it was sad to see him go- I prayed
for his wife and kids.
Then we had the passing of the
right wing blogger- Andrew Brietbart.
He was known for his bold- in
your face style.
Famous for bringing down Tony
Weiner- the N.Y. Dem who liked texting his genitals to unknown women on his
Facebook sight.
He was also famous for posting a
video of Shirley Sherrod- a Black woman who worked for the govt. - she handled
loans for farmers.
This dept. has been sued in the
past for discriminating against Black farmers and they settled a big lawsuit a
few years back.
Anyway- Shirley gave a speech at
some Lib/Dem thing- and in part of the speech she said how when White farmers
came in for loans- she thought to herself ‘why should I help this white guy-
it’s now his turn to get the bad end of the stick’.
Later in the speech- she said she
now knows these thoughts were wrong- and she said how God rebuked her for it.
Okay- when the short clip got
out- only showing the first part- there was a firestorm and Obama fired the
lady.
Later we found out about the
whole clip- and he offered to rehire her- she said forget it.
So- the media- all over- every
day- accused Brietbart of only showing the bad part of the clip- and not the
good part.
‘You SOB’.
Actually- in his original post-
he showed both the good and the bad.
It was Glenn Beck and a few
others who only showed the bad part.
But the media- who all feed off
of each other- kept going with the fake story that he only posted the bad
stuff.
Till this day- they still believe
it.
So just this last week Brietbart
was on a progressive [liberal] show- Cenk Ugyr- Young Turks- and Cenk accused
him once again of the false accusation.
For the first time on TV-
Brietbart corrected the accusation and rebuked Cenk on air- Brietbart revealed
the false charge that the media kept reporting- that he only showed the bad
stuff.
Then a few days later I noticed
he was invited on a number of more liberal news shows- to sit as a commentator
on the election.
I think some of these news guys
[Piers Morgan- CNN] might have double checked the story and found out that yes
indeed- they all ran with the fake story- even till this day.
So- what do you know- Brietbart
dies at the age of 43- and Andrea Mitchell- Shep Smith- and a few other news
reporters once again repeated the charge- the false one- that he was famous for
railroading Sherrod by only posting the racist part of the video- not the
repentant part.
Ah- what can he do to defend
himself- he’s dead- Yippee!!
Sad.
And last- but not least- we had
the uproar over the Rush comments about Sandra Fluke- the Georgetown University
student who testified before congress about her having to pay for her own birth
control- which cost a lot- damn you!
Yes- Rush made fun of the girl-
and said she was ‘a slut’- and he wanted her to post her ‘extra curricula’
actives on line for all to see- because she wants the tax payer to pay for her
birth control.
So the media thought this
important enough to bill as a top story- right up there with the deaths of the
Syrians in Homs.
They are asking all the Repub
candidates to make Rush apologize- on and on.
Now- was Rush wrong?
Of course- I mean no one should
be using this type of language.
But to hammer the Repubs on it-
like they are responsible- heck- they don’t control the guy.
Then yesterday as I was musing on
the thing- I thought ‘Tomorrow I’ll write on it- and I’ll use Bill Maher as the
counter argument’.
Sure enough- as the day went on-
all the shows already got to him.
Maher is the Dem supporter- who
just this last week donated 1 million to Obama- he has had his show
‘politically incorrect’ [or Correct?] on HBO for years.
I really don’t like the guy- for
a bunch of reasons- but he often uses real off color language when referring to
Repubs.
Okay- WARNING- this part will get
rough.
A few weeks ago when Tebow lost
the game- Maher tweeted ‘Jesus f—ked Tebow’.
As you know- Tebow is the
Christian Quarterback that is outspoken for the faith.
Sarah Palin- a book came out that
said she once slept with a famous Black NBA player.
Maher made a comment- about a
woman who ran for office- a politically active Repub- former Alaska Governor-
who has kids- ‘she would have f—cked him too- if he was Black’.
He was referring to some White
guy.
Speaking about a Repub ‘he can
suck my d—k’.
Now- all these things- and more –
were said on national TV.
This guy just made a 1 million
dollar donation to Obama- as he made the rounds on the news shows- not one time
was he- or Obama- or any other Dem asked ‘do you think you/he should apologize
for these remarks’.
What if Rush spoke about Michele
Obama like this?
That she would ‘f—k’ some guy if
he were White.
Do you think that story would get
covered?
The whole point is the media
plays selective outrage- sure- all of this language is wrong- but Limbaugh does
his thing- Maher his- and if you want to go down the road of making political
figures responsible for what others say- then that’s a long road to walk.
This week I read Jeremiah chapter
33.
This chapter has some great
promises in it- the famous verse ‘call unto me and I will answer you and show
you great and mighty things you know not’.
But the bulk of the chapter is
God reassuring his people Israel that he will indeed keep the promise that he
made to them years before.
A while back we covered the Old
Testament and I said how you can almost sum up the whole O.T. by saying it’s
the story of one man and his family.
That man was Abraham.
In Genesis chapters 12 and 15 we
read about the promise God made to him- that if he left his home town and went
on a journey to the promised land- then God would make him into a great nation-
he would have kings sitting on the throne for generations to come- and they
would be a great people.
Yet- at the time of Jeremiah the
people were divided- they were captive- and things looked really bad.
In chapter 33 God tells them ‘do
you think my promise will fail? If you can break my promise to the day and
night- that day and night will happen every 24 hours- then you can break my
promise to you’.
God was telling his people that
even though things looked bad- yet he would fulfill his word- and bless them
like he said.
One of the verses in the chapter
even speaks to the divided nation accusation ‘some say these 2 nations will
never be a great people’ and God rebukes that accusation.
As I look out over the terrain of
our nation- and all the stuff ‘all of the above’ it does look at times
hopeless- a whole week on some commentator calling a girl a slut- please!
Yet I still see some light at the
end of the tunnel- congress and the President actually passed some stuff these
past few weeks- stuff that seemed like was never going to get done- so yeah-
maybe we can see the light right now.
But if a huge donor to the Obama
campaign can get away with saying ‘Palin would have f—ked him if he were Black’
on national TV- and not one reporter asks Obama if he should ask Maher to
apologize- then maybe we should dial down the rhetoric on the ‘slut comment’ a
little- you think?
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1802- THE HARVARD PROFESSOR
Caught an interesting show the
other night- a Harvard economist [liberal] gave a lecture on economics.
Now- when I say ‘liberal’ I do not
use the term in a derogatory way- no- he was the type of economist that would
fit into the category of a Paul Krugman.
Krugman writes for the N.Y. Times
and often [always?] gives you the Keynesian view.
So anyway this Harvard prof. made
some good points.
But he blundered somewhat in his
defense of Socialism/communism.
He talked about Karl Marx [the
‘founder’ of the system] and said that what happened in the Silicon Valley boom
[the Dot.com businesses] was a type of Marxism.
The internet boom companies had a
different view of the business structure- instead of the ‘bosses’ being over
the working class stiff- you would have the actual employees run the show.
Yeah- when you watch the
documentaries on Facebook [and other Companies like it] you do see an
environment where all these young ‘hipsters’ are calling the shots- and they do
have a sense of freedom that you don’t see in the standard business model.
But the Harvard Prof. went a step
too far when he compared this to Marx.
Marx was raised in Germany- he
was a Jew.
His father had to re-locate his
business and join the Lutheran church in order to fit in with the people he
needed to do business with.
Marx would eventually go to ‘university’ in England- and he developed his ideas in an environment where the industrial revolution took off.
He witnessed the plight of the
working class man [proletariat] and how he became a victim of the factory
system.
In England you did see many
hopeless workers fall prey to a lifestyle that had you going to work at the
factory all day- often in a dark and dingy environment.
You would come home to a gloomy
existence and often drink yourself to sleep.
Marx saw the working class as
victims of the Ownership class [the original 99 versus the 1%].
Marx saw that those who ran the
system- and ‘owned the tools’ had the true influence in society- and according
to Marx- they used two primary means of controlling the masses.
Law and Religion.
So Marx advocated for a violent
overthrow of the system- thru Revolutionary means- in order to free the working
class slave from the power of the few.
Now- where the Harvard Prof
missed it is he compared Marx’s idea to the Dotcom business model.
Facebook and other internet
businesses- they tried to empower the worker by making him part owner.
When Facebook went public this
last month [Initial public offering] it was said to have made many millionaires
overnight.
Why?
Because those who got in at the
start [even the kid who painted the Graffiti on the walls of the building] were
offered the option of cash or stock.
Those who took the stock became
rich when the company went public [it actually will go into effect if a couple
of more months].
So- this model empowers the
working class person by making him part owner.
Okay- Marx wanted to ‘level the
field’ by putting the State in charge.
He felt like if you took the
power away from the private owner [capitalism] then you could even out the
scales by making the state decide how much pay was fair- and the state would
literally own ‘the tools’ of the system.
Most of us know by now that his system failed
pretty badly [Soviet Union].
Though he meant well- trying to
defend the hopeless worker- yet he created a Monster State- and the state would
become the new oppressor of the people- and take away the incentive that the
private ownership model gave.
So all in all- the Harvard prof
had some truth to what he said- but he went a step too far.
In today’s political climate- we
all have a tendency to hear one side- and if we lineup with that side- we very
rarely question those who advocate the way we believe.
It’s important to hear both
sides- to give credit to the ideas that are good- and then reject the ideas
that are bad.
Marx had some very legitimate
concerns- the founder of the Salvation Army- William Booth- began his ministry
to the same class of people that Marx saw.
Marx rejected religion because he
believed the ownership class used it to keep the masses under.
Any truth to this?
Some.
Many of the Black slaves were
encouraged to attend church and keep singing their Black spiritual songs.
Why?
Many of the themes of these great
songs did indeed encourage the suffering servant to just hold on until he/she
gets to the Promised Land.
As a matter of fact- many of the
themes taught that if you rebelled against the slave owner then you would
forfeit your reward in the hereafter.
Marx experienced the power of
religion- and the role it played in his own family in Germany- his father had
to join the Lutheran church- even though he was Jewish- just so he could be in
contact with the people of influence in his town.
So yes- it’s good to hear both
sides- give credit when you can- and also reject what you must.
Yeah- the Harvard Prof seemed to
be a good guy- he knew his stuff- just not well enough.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1801- LOVE MEANS NEVER HAVING TO
SAY YOUR SORRY- I THOUGHT.
Let’s end the week with a few top
news events. Yes- once again we have had the burning of the Quran- and the
violent aftermath.
What happened this time? Well- it
was not an outright insult to Islam- like the Florida pastor who hosted ‘burn
the Koran day’.
These Korans were part of a
‘detention’ library facility [gee- maybe that’s the 1st problem?]
where prisoners have access to religious material.
They were available to Afghani’s
who were being held as prisoners of war.
So- our side found possible
hidden notes in them- and yeah- we burned the stuff.
Okay- was this a bad thing to do?
Sure.
But the nonstop apologies- the
reaction of Muslims rioting and killing- all over the world- not just in
Afghanistan- this reaction needs to be condemned.
We are falling into a trap- a
mindset that says ‘we will tolerate- and overlook intolerance- because after
all- it’s not as bad as 9-11’.
Yesterday Iran was going to
execute a Christian pastor because he refused to denounce his faith.
You say ‘yea John- but we condemn
Iran anyway’.
But they do stuff like this in
Saudi Arabia and Bahrain too- and these are our ‘good friends’.
I was watching a show the other
night- it was a defense of Islam- against those who have a ‘crusade’ against
it.
Though the show portrayed the
people against Islam as bigots- they showed a few clips and interviews with a
woman who was raised in a predominantly Muslim land- and she now lives in the
U.S. and she feels that many in the U.S. media are overlooking the very real
prejudices against women who live in these countries.
So- during the interview-
intended to make her look bad- they ask her something like ‘but what about all
the Muslims who reject violence’.
The reporter wanted her to
commend those in Islam who reject violence [Muslim Brotherhood groups] yet
still advocate for Shariah law.
The ‘radical’ anti Islam woman’s
response ‘so- you want me to give credit to people just because they don’t want
to kill me’.
The lady was right- she warns
people against the rise of Shariah law- as the ‘law of the land’ and even
though some of these groups are trying to achieve their goals peacefully- thru
the ballot box- yet the end result is a society that executes Christians
because they believe.
So as the week has passed- we
have been apologizing nonstop- writing personal letters [Obama to Karzai].
Showing clips of our commanders
instructing our soldiers to not react- to not ‘get upset’ that Muslims are
rioting and killing them.
Look- we made a mistake- on the
scale of ‘crimes against humanity’ the mistake rates at around zero.
Yes- we understand that to
Muslims it’s a blasphemous act- and we did not do this out of disrespect for
Islam.
But we must say- loud and clear-
if your religion justifies the killing of people simply because they burn a
book- or write a comedy sketch- or do any of a number of things that most of
the civilized world do- then you need to either change your religion- or come
up with a better interpretation.
Because we can’t all live in a
world where stuff like this continues to happen- and we in the West seem to say
‘we understand your side’- no- when your side kills because of it- then we must
condemn that side- whether it be Christian or Muslim.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1800- THE CHURCH LADY
I caught the debate last night
[number 20!] and was surprised that King only asked one question on ‘social
issues’ [I think?].
He did bring up the ‘controversy’
over birth control.
Now- up until a few weeks back-
starting with the question by Stephanopoulos [a Dem insider- worked for
Clinton- admitted- on air- that he cried while sitting at home during the Obama
win. You say ‘so what John- Boehner
cries too!’ Yeah- but he’s smart enough not to admit it when he weeps in private].
Yeah- when Stephanopoulos brought
up the silly question on whether states had the right to ban birth control-
right after that the media jumped on the band wagon and have been saying how
the Repubs want a war on women’s right to health.
The media keep parading women
across the screen- decrying the attack on their health- after all- birth
control cures cancer! [The truth be told- there are many more health risks to
abortion and birth control then there are health benefits].
Yes- they want the country to see
the Repubs as right wing ‘satan hatin’ preachers!
I just read an article the other
day- 2 ‘women’s health clinics’ were fined in Texas- their disposal company was
dumping the bodies of aborted babies in the city dump.
A woman’s right? I wonder how
many of these little bodies belonged to future women.
So the debate goes on- and the
populace drinks it in.
They have been showing the clips
of a speech by Santorum- he talked about evil as a reality and satan as an
enemy.
Okay- he was speaking at a
Catholic university forum- it was about 4 years ago- what’s the big deal?
‘Well- you never know- say if he
starts talking like this in office’
You mean like Obama?
Yes- 2 weeks ago the Pres was
speaking- at a political/religious forum- in Washington- and he defended his
tax policies by saying they are based on Jesus’ teachings in the gospel of
Luke.
He quoted Jesus ‘to whom much is
given- much is required’.
Okay- I see the point he’s trying
to make- asking the rich to pay more.
But for a sitting U.S. president
to say that his tax policy- as opposed to the other side- is the ‘Jesus one’
well- that would have been world news for days if it were Bush.
So the satan speech- given at a
catholic school- geez- give it a break.
The media would have you think
that Santorum is the church lady from SNL [Saturday night live].
Dana Carvey did the Church Lady-
he would often come up with some circumstance- and then reply ‘hmmm- could it
be satan’.
Yeah- that’s Santorum!
This week I have been reading Ezekiel
chapter 34.
It talks about the leaders-
shepherds of the people. They are being rebuked because they are like
‘shepherds who feed themselves- they kill the sheep- eat the meat and wear the
wool as clothes’.
In the New Testament Jesus
alludes to this when he says ‘beware of false prophets- they are like wolves in
sheep’s clothing’.
Yes- that’s where the term comes
from.
The term means more than meets
the eye.
It’s speaking about a mindset-
one that sees people- church people- citizens- any group of people being
‘ruled’ by others.
And the mindset is ‘I can benefit
in some way from my position over them’.
This usually means financially.
I have written much about this
over the years- and I’m convinced that many good men in modern ministry do not see
the violation of scripture they engage in when they enter ‘ministry’ and
constantly appeal for money- even to the point of thinking that their becoming
rich off of the giving of people is ‘Gods way’.
But also in the broader sense-
God is rebuking the leaders because they really don’t have the true concerns of
the people at the fore front.
Good leaders- politicians-
presidents- congressman. They should be willing to make the right decisions-
even if those decisions seem less popular at the time- they should do it
because it’s right.
The Pres put out a policy
yesterday that said he wanted to lower corporate tax rates and eliminate tax
loopholes.
Now- I haven’t read the thing-
and I know some say it’s really a scam- I don’t know.
But if it has some truth in it-
then it would be a good thing.
Why?
Because most analysts say that’s
really a major step in the right direction.
Dems and Repubs- responsible
ones- have already said this needs to be done.
So if the thing is accurate- then
we should support the pres.
The other major thing that the
next pres must deal with is the entitlement programs- but whoever gets in-
whether it be Romney- Obama- or the Church Lady- they will need to govern for
the people- not pander to them for personal gain [popularity that will help
them win again].
Don’t get me wrong- as a
Christian I’m glad the Pres talked about Jesus- and that Santorum talked about
satan.
But the reality is- the ‘wolves
in sheep’s clothing’ looked/talked just like sheep- that’s how they kept getting
into the sheepfold- but all they really wanted was personal gain- they saw the
sheep [people] as a means to an end- and that’s what gets us in trouble- every
time.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1793-
ACCESS DENIED?
As
we close the week lets try and wrap up one of the major news stories.
This
week the war raged over the Obama care mandate for religious institutions to
provide free birth control to their employees.
Obviously
the main objection to the rule came from the Catholic Church.
Those
on the left [by the way- not all] tried to frame the debate around a woman’s
right to have access to birth control.
The
right said it was a freedom of religion- 1st amendment argument.
Obama
did an about face- to his surprise many of his own team were mad about what he
did- and he supposedly ‘solved’ the problem by saying that the insurance
companies must pay for it instead.
The
Catholic Bishops conference in the U.S. - headed up by Archbishop Timothy Dolan
[from N.Y. - soon to become a Cardinal] hesitated at first before they made a statement
either accepting Obama’s compromise or rejecting it.
As
of right now- they reject it.
Why?
Many Catholic institutions provide their own
insurance- the so called compromise still has Catholics paying/providing for
something that they believe is contrary to their faith.
I
guess it would be good to cover why Catholics are against contraception.
Most
Protestants [including me] have no problem with simple birth control practices.
We
do have a problem with methods that basically abort the child after he/she is
conceived.
But
overall we are okay with the idea.
Catholics
historically appeal to the very real mandate in scripture to ‘be fruitful and
multiply’.
In
Genesis chapters 1-2- you read how God created plants and animals and man- and
they all have the ‘seed within themselves’ that is it is part of Gods purpose
for things to reproduce.
Now-
in the current debate those on the left have made some simple- and obvious
contradictions.
They
have argued that to give the conscience clause exception to the Catholics- that
would be denying women ‘their right’ to health care.
They
say it is an issue of access- that if you don’t do this women will not have
proper access to the stuff.
Then
at the same time they are saying ‘look- 99.9 % of all women use
contraceptives’.
Okay-
which one is it?
If
just about every woman on the planet uses the stuff- then how can you argue
that unless Catholic institutions offer it- then they are denying access?
Its
seems pretty clear to me that most women that need it can get it.
Number
2- some political experts have said that the whole thing was planned- that the
Democratic team was trying to change the debate from ‘a woman’s right to
choose’ [abortion] to ‘those darn right wingers want to ban birth control’!
When
I first heard this- I wasn’t too quick to jump on the bandwagon.
Dick
Morris was the first to bring it up on Fox News.
But
as the week progressed the idea grew legs.
It
made it to the radio talk circuit and as of today many do think the whole thing
was planned.
Why
do I think there might be some truth to this?
Remember
about a month ago when George Stephanopoulos hosted one of the debates.
He
asked Romney a strange question- I mean even the audience booed.
He
asked if a state has the right to ban birth control.
To
be honest- the question seemed to catch everyone off guard.
Romney
never fully answered it- but he did say that there is no one that he knows of
that wants to do this- that there are no states pushing to ban birth control.
Then
of course you had the present debate- which some on the left did indeed try to
frame by saying ‘they want to rob you of your ‘right’ to birth control’.
Yea-
I think Morris was right.
Now-
if you can frame the argument- about anything- by convincing people that it’s
‘their right’.
Then
sooner or later people will try to ‘access’ the right.
Let
me give you an example.
A
few years ago I caught a movie about some persons fight for Euthanasia [or as
MSNBC says ‘youth in Asia’].
The
show covered the struggle of some dying man and his fight for the ‘right to
die’.
It
was a true case that he fought all the way to the Supreme Court.
He
finally won ‘hooray- no one can deny me this right- yippee!’
Then
as the show concluded they admitted that as the year went by- the person kept
getting worse- and you can imagine all his friends and fellow strugglers who
fought with him to ‘win the right’.
Well-
they kind of felt like ‘gee- when is he gonna pull the trigger’ after all- it’s
his right.
The
show ended by saying the disease progressed so fast that he didn’t have time to
kill himself.
What?
I
mean he grew rose over a year- there was plenty of time.
He
realized that what happened in his case was he was surrounded by people- many
good people- people who I’m sure meant well.
But
his entire fight was something that he really did not want- something that in
the end was no right at all- he got caught up in the political fight and when
he won- like the dog who chased the car but didn’t know what to do with it when
he caught it- yes this victim was not only a victim of his disease- but a
victim of those who convinced him that this was his right.
As
of today- women in this country have access to birth control.
It
looks like the congress might actually pass a law that restricts Obama’s health
law- that says the religious exemption clause must stand.
I’m
glad that the issue rose up now- because it does give some time for the
president and congress to do something.
But
the fact is- according to those who advocate for no religious exemption- they
themselves admit that 99.9% of all woman use the stuff.
This
does not seem like a ‘no access’ issue to me.
Note-
Do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as
well as the site you read them on. Thanks- John
1792- A NUMBERS GAME?
What’s in the numbers?
The pres finally put out a budget plan- and of course in
this election year the odds on anything getting passed is nil.
Yet the effort at least needed to be made.
What’s in the budget?
The main thing is the so called reduction in the debt- 3 [no
wait- 4!] trillion over 10 years.
The actual budget states 3 trillion in reduction.
1.5 in tax hikes- on those darn rich folk!
And 1.5 trillion in cuts [which means a reduction in the
rate of growth- not cuts like human beings use the word].
But the media- and
the president keep saying 4 trillion in cuts- why?
They are adding in the 1 trillion in forced cuts that
congress mandated because they couldn’t reach a debt deal.
But this 1 trillion is not in the budget.
The way they spin it is ‘well- this is our overall goal- so
we add that in’.
Jobs?
The media and the press report that Obama has ‘created’ 3.5
million jobs.
Hmm?
When the pres took office- we were losing about 750 thousand
jobs a month.
Okay- not his fault- got it.
They played the Bush card for 3 years- it’s now getting old.
Yet they say Obama has created 3.5 million jobs.
What are the ‘real numbers’?
During Obama’s term we lost around 4.7 million jobs.
Obama did manage to ‘create’ around 3.6 million- for a net
loss of around 1.1 million.
So how would you report this- better yet- how have the media
reported this during past presidencies?
You would not report a gain [creation] of 3.6 million- you
would report a loss of 1.1 million [unless you want to take in the possibility
of an alternate universe- then maybe they report it as job creation].
Gas prices?
The average gallon of gas is around 3.50 a gallon.
This is the highest ever during the month of Feb.
Yesterday I saw some news clips- you had some key congress
people decrying the failure of the pres to have an energy plan.
They held media ‘pressers’ condemning the pres for the gas
prices.
Who were these dastardly villains?
Nancy Pelosi- Jim Clyburn and a few other key Democrats.
They were news clips of them condemning Bush when gas prices
went up to 3.05 a gallon under him.
Yes- the outrage under Bush- but under Obama- it’s not his
fault.
Yes- for the first time ever- I saw the main line news do a
complete report on why the pres is not responsible for the fuel prices.
I mean they went in depth [a few months ago].
You know- war in the middle east- all stuff that is true-
it’s just they never gave a report like this under Bush- no- as a matter of a
fact they blamed him for it.
Here’s the biggie ‘the pres is an idiot’.
What- who said this! I demand his head on a platter!
The lovable Mormon from Nevada- Harry Reid.
Yes- he referred to Bush- a sitting pres- as an idiot.
A few days later- the media realized they couldn’t just let
it slide- well then they would look too political.
So a reporter asked Reid ‘do you think its right to call the
pres and idiot’?
After a moment of thought- Reid’s response ‘he is one’.
The reporter left it at that ‘well you heard it folks- he is
one’ with a smirk on his face.
Outrage- calls for the senator to apologize? Nah- Bush is a
big boy- he can take it.
Okay- last but not least.
Have you heard about the new Movie- ‘the assassination of
the president’?
Yes- this is an independent film- released on video and also
playing in theatres around the country- it shows you a depiction of the
president getting his head blown off.
Bad stuff indeed- it should be against the law to make a
movie like this- in my view.
The full name of the movie?
The assassination of George W. Bush [I kid you not].
It came out during the Bush years- and you could take your
kids to see Bush getting his head blown off- what a wonderful night of fun.
Popcorn and drinks?
What was the response?
Nada.
Can you imagine the riots in the streets if this happened
today?
The cries of endangering the pres by simply using the term-
never mind making a full length feature.
I of course condemn this language on all sides- the point
I’m making is the media can manipulate the public if they want.
If they choose not to focus on a story- they won’t.
If they choose to focus on one- like when a Repub said ‘you
lie’ and they made him publicly apologize and punished him on the floor- well
then you too will be outraged- and you won’t even know that you [or anyone
else] were not outraged about the Bush ‘getting killed’ movie.
These stories are silly in a way- I could have covered the
story of the 2 car bombs that blew up in Damascus- the Syrian capitol- and
killed 28 innocent people- injured over 200.
Or the killing of the ‘general’ in Damascus- he was a doctor
who ran a hospital- assassinated by the ‘rebels’.
Yet the media do not want to show you that the opponents of
Assad are doing the same things that terrorist’s do- because that does not fit
‘the story’.
So when a major oil pipeline blew up yesterday in the city
of Homs- the rebels said Assad did it- the media first reported that Assad blew
the pipeline up- to attack the rebels ‘environmentally’?
The pipeline is a major supply source for Damascus- Assad
would never cut off his own source of
oil.
My first thought was the ‘rebels’ did it- not Assad.
Any normal person would think this- but no- not the media.
As the day wore on- they began saying they were not sure who
blew it up.
I’ll tell you- it was the rebels- that’s who.
Yes- these are the stories that need to be told right.
These are the things that matter- we want to be properly
informed.
But when we live in a media world that reports ‘3.5 million
jobs were created’ when you really have a loss of 1.1 million.
Then yes- you might even believe that Assad blew up his own
oil supply- to environmentally attack his enemies.
Note- Do me a favor, those who read/like
the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on.
Thanks- John
1791- PICTURES OF ME WITH BLACK PEOPLE
Well it’s been a sad couple of days- yes- we lost the
beautiful angel Whitney Houston.
I never was really a fan of Whitney- I mean she had a great
voice and all- I just never bought any of her music.
As I watched the media cover her death- I began to realize
how interesting her journey was- even with all the failures.
She was from Newark N.J. - I never knew that [right around
the area I grew up].
She started her singing ‘career’ in a church choir.
As I saw all the clips the past few days- I saw her singing
some Christian songs [I didn’t know that either].
And the last clip of her being recorded- a few days before
her death- she sang a note from the famous kids bible song ‘Yes Jesus loves
me’.
I know many in the media- and ‘church world’ have a tendency
to judge people when they die- many seem to know ‘for sure’ who made it to
heaven- and who did not.
I have learned a long time ago- I’m not the judge on stuff
like that.
I saw Bill O'Reilly do his shtick. He tried to do the ‘real
guy’ stuff- you know- like when he had on Bernie Goldberg- a Jewish friend- who
was trying to outdo Bill on the ‘I am a friend of the Black man’.
Goldberg brought out a photo of him with a Black rapper- Ice
Cube.
As Bernie shows the photo- to say ‘look- I even hug Black
men’.
He refers to Cube as ‘Ice T’.
Bill- as a true brother- corrects Bernie and tells him ‘it’s
not T but Cube’.
Bernie gets mad- you can see the look on his face ‘how dare
you correct me’.
Then someone from off camera must have yelled ‘listen- Bills
right- its Cube- not T’.
And Bernie quickly back tracks.
I guess Bernie got the picture from his file ‘pictures of me
with Black people’.
So anyway- O'Rielly does the section on Whitney and he kind
of goes hard on her.
He talks about her choice to do drugs- and basically says
she was looking to die- she made the choice.
I realize what he was saying- but I found it to be the wrong
time to say it.
A few years ago I heard a radio preacher talking about the
funeral of a gang member that he preached at.
He said the mother and family and all the gang bangers were
there- and he ‘told it like it was’.
He went on and said how he preached ‘this kid is in hell
right now- screaming his brains out- he has no rest- he’s burning- forever!!’
He said how the mom ran out crying- his family was
distraught- I thought he was lucky that he didn’t get gunned down right in the
pulpit.
Yes- we need to have
grace in these situations.
So- after seeing all the clips of Whitney- I believe she
very well might be with God right now- and sure- I know she messed up lots- but
I am certainly not in the position to judge the angel.
Okay- Angels?
The other day I was reading Psalms 147.
I read how God counts the stars and gives them names.
It reminded me of the book of Revelation- where there is
this vision of Jesus [chapter 1].
John the disciple sees Jesus- he has hair like wool- these eyes of fire- and feet
like brass- burned in a furnace.
As Jesus is standing there- he is surrounded by 7 golden
lamp stands- and he has 7 stars in his hand.
The vision is revealed to John- the lamp stands are the
churches [of Asia Minor] and the stars are the ‘angels of the 7 churches’.
Now- as a theology buff- I know many bible folk say these
angels are Pastors- because the Greek word simply means messenger.
But as I have read this over the years- I have come to
believe these are actually angels.
What does the bible say about angels?
In the book of Hebrews we read that they are ‘ministering
spirits- sent forth to minister to those who are inheriting salvation’.
We often hear that angels in the bible look like men- they
are not things with wings!
Actually- this is another ‘fable’.
While it is true that many appearances of angels in the
bible do look like men- and Hebrews also says that we should entertain [show
hospitality] to strangers- because some have helped angels and they didn’t even
know it.
Yet- there are also angels ‘with wings’.
We call these creatures Cherubim and Seraphim.
In the book of Exodus we read the story of the 10
commandments [chapter 20].
We read the first commandment as not having other gods
before God- and not to make graven images of anything.
Over the centuries the church has had some debates over
Christian art- is it right or wrong?
After all- much of it is statues and pictures depicting
people and creatures and angels and God.
So during the Protestant Reformation [and the rise of Islam]
you had occasions where people went out and destroyed the statues and paintings
of other groups.
A few things should be noted here.
The commandment- however you take it- does not say ‘go and
smash the statues of other religions’ [a few years ago the famous statues of
Buddha were destroyed- I think in India- but radical Muslims did this because
they felt the statues violated the commandment on angels]
Also- after Moses gets the 10 commandments from God- he puts
them inside a box called ‘The Ark of the Covenant’.
This box has a lid on it [called the Mercy Seat] and on the
lid you had 2 statues of Angels [Cherubim].
So- the actual box that held the commandment not to make
idols- had religious art on it!
So we need to be careful before we start going around
smashing statues [by the way- this smashing of the statues was called
Iconoclastic].
So- we see that angels are spirits- created by God- and they
are here to help us.
In Revelation 1 we read about a war in heaven- Michael and
his angels fighting against the dragon and his angels.
We read that Michael prevails and the devil loses.
It says ‘the accuser of the brothers is cast down- the
devil- who accused them before God day and night’.
There are only 2 named angels in the bible [3- if you
include the Catholic apocrypha].
They are Michael- Gabriel- and Raphael.
Yes- angels are real- they war on our behalf- and they fight
in a specific way- they cast down the dragon [satan] who accuses the believers.
This day I am happy in a way for Whitney- she struggled a
long time- she was such a beautiful ‘angel’.
I would like to think
she is with God right now- getting ready for ‘church’ this Sunday- yes- I know
she is not ‘an angel’ in the biblical way.
But let’s stretch some- yes- she will be singing in the
angelic choir once again.
Let’s not accuse her this day.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1790- DEMOCRACY?
I read a statement from the French President- Nicholas
Sarkozy. He was speaking about the dire situation in Syria [Syria has been
fighting rebels in a city called Homs- they have been using deadly heavy
artillery to bomb buildings and homes- many civilians have died].
Sarkozy said a military response [Like what he- and we- did
in Libya] was no longer a legitimate solution.
I found this insightful- France was thee number one
supporter of the ‘no fly zone’ in Libya. France had their planes bombing many
spots- they were more ‘pro war’ than the U.S. and the Brits.
Many in the political scene in France have accused Sarkozy
of wanting to develop the image of a mini Bush- that is a leader who is willing
to engage in violence in order to defend ‘just causes’ in the world.
Right after the Libyan action began- some in the Arab/Muslim
world began saying that France and NATO should be seen as the enemy- not
Gadhaffi.
In Afghanistan- where France has troops like us under the
NATO banner- they just had an Afghan soldier- one who is supposedly on our
side- gun down a bunch of French troops in cold blood.
The French president then called for a quicker withdrawal of
forces than the U.S. wanted [2013- instead of 2014].
Sarkozy realized- that no matter how just your cause might
seem- there are never any situations where one side is 100 % right- while the
other 100% wrong [let's say rarely].
In Egypt- Libya- and now Syria- you do not have [did not]
complete agreement on the protests. Many who had stable lives and lived for
many years in these countries- they felt like the rebels were wrong about the
way to have their ‘revolution’.
Many in the Christian minority saw the revolutions as
dangerous to their own survival. Our
actions in Iraq have decimated the Christian population there.
Though we did not mean to do this- the result is we have
installed a more anti Christian regime in the country.
The same has now happened in Egypt- the original Tahrir
square protestors might have been a majority of simple pro- democracy groups-
but after the recent parliamentary elections- the Muslim Brotherhood took over
about 50 % of the parliament.
Though this group has rejected violence and terrorism as a
means to gain power- yet they still advocate for an extreme religious view if
they gain power.
They want Shariah law as the law of the land- and this type
of ‘democratic govt.’ is really not good- even if it is voted in by a majority.
We in the West have different values than some in other
parts of the world.
We tend to side with those who want to ‘throw off the
shackles of dictators- free the voice of the people’.
Yet we underestimate the very real danger of sounding this
mantra every time a nation has rebels rise up in the streets.
Say if all you saw on the news every night was the Occupy
Wall street protests. And say if there
rose up a few hundred thousand that marched nightly on Washington [which we
never want to happen!]
But say if that’s all you saw every night- and it got so
dangerous that troops- or cops- had to actually shoot some protestors.
We would understand why we had to do this- we would not be
calling for the president to step down- or for his family to be submitted to a
trial by ‘right wing’ conservatives who just might execute you and your kids.
Now- I am not saying all these leaders in these nations are
equal to the American system- but it’s foolish for us to look at all these
situations thru the lens of Western style Democracy.
We [the West] seem to think that when we side publicly with
the rebels [whoever they be- Libya- Syria- etc.] that we are on the ‘right side
of history’ that we are a part of a true democratic movement that will spread
thru the world and in a few years down the road we will be living n a world
with many truly just democracies.
That picture- that hope- as just as it might seem to those
who keep using this type of language [like John McCain- who I like!] is simply
not a realistic view.
Where did the idea of Democracy come from? Did world
governments have democratic style govts for thousands of years?
No- the idea rose up during the Enlighten period [17th-
18th century] and was promoted by men like John Locke.
If you remember- we studied the philosophy of Locke this
past year.
Locke played a key role in the transition of popular
philosophy from Rationalism to Empiricism.
We covered that in the posts- don’t want to do it again.
But Locke- like other thinkers of the time- began writing on
a new idea of govt- a govt ‘by the people- and for the people’.
Many people living at the time resented the rule of kings-
and the role religion [Catholic countries] played in society as a whole.
One of the first experiments with people saying ‘we will
throw off the church and king’ was what we call the French Revolution.
It took place right at the end of the 18th
century- right before the Napoleonic wars.
It was a Secular [non religious] effort to depose the rule
of govt we call Monarchy [King and Queen] and it resulted in the Guillotine and
beheading of many Catholic priests and leaders.
It was truly a rebellion that got way out of hand.
Yesterday- one of the current Repub candidates for president
made headlines when he compared Obama’s recent ‘anti religious’ actions to the
French Revolution.
One commentator [CNN] said the rebels were all Catholics and
that to say the revolution hurt the church was wrong.
This man [Paul Begala] had no idea what he was saying- its
sad that they say misinformed statements like this to such a wide audience.
Some of our founding fathers were fans of John Locke
[Jefferson] and our country drew up the founding documents during a time when
these ideas were ripe and were seen as a new type of govt. for the people.
Thus- we have our Democracy today- for which I am grateful-
do indeed think it’s the best in the world today- but it is not inherently
‘more just’ than all other styles.
The govt. we see in the bible is Monarchy [mostly- Rome was
Imperial- did have a senate and all- but in no way was it a democracy like we
think of].
The point?
When we try to help these countries- when people rise up and
protest- we must not simply jump to the conclusion that all of these rebellions
are seeking- or will end up like the U.S.
We must not condemn all ‘monarchies’ as evil- the bible says
there are just ones.
Kings can rule justly- be fair- and do good.
We should not assume that all ‘non western style
democracies’ are evil- they are not.
Most of these present uprisings are in countries where you
have what’s called Autocratic rule- not full ‘kingdoms’ with kings in the way
we think.
Yes- I do think our experiment- based on the Enlightenment
idea of govt. by and for the people is the best- but we must not assume all other
types are inherently evil- nor should we be so quick to side- militarily will
all rebels- like some already calling to arm the rebels in Syria.
The end result of these protests are not secure at all- it
is highly doubtful that any of them will become ‘little U.S. of A’s’.
So we should call for non violence on all sides- we should
stand on the side of innocent victims- be against all regimes that use military
force on their people- but be realistic about the situation- violence [on all
sides] is very rarely the answer- Sarkozy learned this lesson the hard way.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
1789- JUST SUE ME
Last night I caught the tail end of the Wolf Blitzer show
[CNN] or has Herman Cain calls him ‘BLITZ’.
Jack Cafferty does the usual rant- I like Jack- I grew up in
the local media market where Jack got ‘broken in’.
As he’s reading the emails from ‘regular folk’ he reads one
that says ‘Jack- I am a Southern White Evangelical- and I just want to admit
that we are all lying to you- the world- and everyone. We hate Black folk- we
use the term Nigger whenever they are not around- even my Pastor. We will not
vote for Obama- because he is one of them’ and the email went on in this way.
Now- as someone who has done radio for 20 years- you do
something that’s called ‘screen the callers’ you basically get both Lib’s and
Conservatives that call in and act like they are on the other team- and they
try and influence the conversation by faking it.
Oh Jack- my poor brother- I know you have been on the Wagon
for many years- and I commend you for that- but I think the effects are long
lasting- maybe Blitz needs to adjust the show.
In the last post I mentioned Syria- I don’t not want anyone
to think that what’s happening over there is good- it is not!
My critique of the handling of the situation- especially of
our U.N. ambassador- Susan Rice- was basically meant to say we have tried the
strategy of saying ‘you are on the wrong side of history’ and demonizing the
leaders of these countries- and maybe now we need to try another approach-
because this one has not worked.
Then I caught the Russian ambassador on the Charlie Rose
show- note- his show is very informative- for those who want to really get to
know the issues in a serious way- I recommend you watch the show.
But the ambassador was asked what happened in the recent
veto- by Russia and China- on the Syrian resolution.
He said Susan Rice has no idea what she’s doing- that Russia
put an amendment on the table- and they have even offered to hold talks between
the Rebels and the Syrian leader- but the U.S. refused to listen- and they did
not even know how to bargain for a negotiation.
Okay- I listened with a grain of salt.
The next night- I heard a former U.N. worker- a U.S. worker-
say the same thing. That the insiders have been saying that Susan Rice is a
total incompetent- that for the sake of the country Obama simply needs to
realize she is in over her head and replace her.
But on MSNBC I hear Matthews speak of her as doing one of
the greatest jobs ever.
We need to be able to keep politics outside of this- if
indeed she has messed up- which happens- then instead of jumping to her
defense- let’s fix it. People are indeed dying- and it’s a tragedy.
The nightly news coverage is showing the damage- and when
the media decide to play an angle- that says ‘see- Obama and Rice were right’
then you will be told that story.
This week the Russian envoy went to Damascus- and he was
greeted with cheers from thousands of people- they want to sit down and have
the talks- these people were not staged.
These are people who live in the capitol- who have
businesses and kids going to school- and they have lived fairly decent lives
for 30 years or so.
They have seen the result of the Egypt uprising- basically
your country goers to hell in a hand basket. They have seen the Libyan
situation- that many in the city of Tripoli- they too lost their lives and
futures after the ‘revolution’ and these Syrians in Damascus really want the
Russian solution- not the American one.
But instead- we have called the Russian solution
‘disgusting’. Why won’t we sit down with both sides?
The rebels- like in Libya- have said no.
When you have armed people on both sides- and one side is
saying ‘let's have a cease fire- lets meet’ then the side that says no bears some
blame.
In Libya and Syria we are saying no to the side that wants
to negotiate a peace- we are leaving them with no option- except certain trial
and execution by the rebels once they take over.
Our handling of the Arab Spring has been a gigantic failure-
and if Susan Rice is indeed not up for the job- then she needs to go.
The other day I had a conversation with my liberal friend-
who only watches MSNBC for their news source.
In the conversation the person tore Romney apart- talked
about how the Repubs are all crooks and cheaters- and on and on.
I told the person I was no bigger fan of Romney then Obama-
but I tried to tell the person that they are only seeing one side- they have
all these complaints against one side- while they are unable to see the wrongs
being done right now.
I mentioned the Fast and Furious scandal- and the cover up
going on at the justice Department under Eric Holder.
This person never heard of the scandal.
I explained that it had to do with a program approved by
Holder- the justice Dept. - that allowed illegal guns to be sold to Mexican
drug runners- and that these guns were then later found at the scene of the
death of one of our border patrol guys- agent Terry.
Now- my friend thought I was making this up ‘how could
anyone ever do this’.
I explained that the intent of the program was to try and
track the guns down- but instead we let over 2,000 walk- and for many years to
come these guns will kill many Mexicans and Americans and other law enforcement
folk.
Now- when the story broke [February of last year] Holder and
Obama and others swore they had no knowledge of it.
The Repubs held a hearing on it- got some documents- and
found out Holder lied.
They did indeed know about it- and at the point of them
realizing their cover was blown [2-11] they refused to give up any more emails
or correspondence from the justice dep’t about it.
Why?
Well it’s obvious that they have said stuff they don’t want
the public to know.
The Repubs are now threatening to charge Holder with contempt
of congress- because he has 80,000 known papers on the subject- but has only
released 20,000.
The other 60 are all after the point where they realized the
news was out.
Holder’s response is ‘if you don’t like it- sue me’
When Obama made the recess appointment a few weeks ago- he
said ‘if you don’t like it- sue me’
I watched the hearings this past year on CSPAN [Holder]. The
administration and the justice dept. were denying any involvement and
knowledge- at one point they caught one of the main guys in a lie- you saw it
live.
The mother of the dead agent- who was being lied to- broke
down in tears.
What is our govt's response to this ‘don’t like it- sue us’.
Her family sued the justice dept this past week for wrongful
death.
Last year- in the first time in U.S. history- an American
president gave orders to execute an American citizen without a trial- or even
charges being filed against him.
Some say it was good- others say no.
When asked for the paper that gave the justification for the
action- the administration said ‘no- sue me’.
The ACLU [no conservative group!] sued him last week.
Texas just recently got turned down for a partial exemption
from the new health care law.
The law says starting this year insurance companies must
spend 80 percent of their money on actual health care- and if they spend less-
then the difference will be rebated back to the customer.
Good deal?
Overall it sounds good.
But many say the result will be private insurers will leave
some markets- and the average person will pay more.
Texas applied for a waiver that would allow the companies to
transition more slowly.
70% one year- 75 the next- and then hit the 80 mark.
Obama said ‘no’.
17 states have applied for the waiver- 9 were denied- 6 got
it- 2 are pending.
All the states that got the waiver are more pro Obama than
Texas.
It would be reasonable to say ‘why not us’?
No answer- don’t like it ‘sue me’.
As a retired Texas fire fighter- still in the union- over
the years when we have had real bad wild fires- we would apply for federal aid-
and if you met the criteria [so much land burning at a certain rate] then you
got the aid- no questions asked.
During Obama’s administration- for the first time I can
remember- we applied during real bad fires last year [maybe 2 years ago?] and
they said ‘no’.
We were shocked- many of us could not believe he would play
politics like this. Perry was about to run- and he was touting the economic
success of Texas- and Obama said ‘well- you guys are doing so good- you pay for
it’.
Don’t like it- sue me.
My friend who watched only one source of news- they felt
very justified in their view- but they only saw their side.
I know I have been hitting Obama hard- but the media have a
way of showing you what they want.
If you only see one side- then you will always hate the
other side.
In all these dealings- especially with the death of a U.S.
border patrol agent- these things should not be covered up- all the papers need
to be released- we need to know what happened.
As of today there have been no firings- no suspensions- not
even a letter of reprimand that you would normally put in a person’s file- even
for the smallest offenses [I worked civil service for 25 years- you normally
would at least get this].
I hope we can straighten out the U.N. problem- the Holder
problem- the whole ‘don’t like it- sue me’ problem- but if we can’t straighten
it out soon- then maybe we just need to change the guy at the top- because this
suing thing aint getting us any where- you think?
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John
No comments:
Post a Comment