Leave to Sen. Barack Obama to equate bad sexual behavior and punishment with the potential for a young girl to have a baby. Just when one does not think that a serious presidential candidate can push the envelope on one of the great moral morasses of this age, in comes Sen. Barack.
At a campaign event over this past weekend, Sen. Barack said the following:
Look, I got two daughters, nine and six years old. I am going to teach them values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. I don't want them punished with and STD (sexually transmitted disease) at age 16, so it doesn't make sense not to give them information.
To be fair, if what Sen. Barack is talking about sexual education, here is a clue. It is being taught with more vigor than United States history, reading, and math. It is all out for young people to see. Their knowledge about sex today would astound most adults.
But it is the comment about babies being some kind of punishment that is beyond belief.
Babies are a gift from almighty God. Maybe some were not created in a loving way. Some are created in the heat of passion. Some, unfortunately, are the result of rape and even the sick and depraved act of incest. But, overall, a baby is a gift to the world.
To call a baby a punishment, or the attaining an STD a punishment shows what the socialist left thinks about the outcome of sexual relations.
Are some, particularly young girls, not mature enough to have a baby? You betcha! And, there are plenty of adult women who do not have the maturity to have a baby. But, if a young girl does become pregnant, there are options beside abortion. There is giving the baby up for adoption. There is the reality of becoming a parent at a young age. And, for some it is an instant maturity that many, including the father and mother may have not known they had.
Is there any provision for when a young girl, or any woman, is the victim of rape and or incest? Yes, there are two. Again, the baby can be carried to term and either raised by the woman or, and I know some will argue, but in these cases an abortion should be considered. That is why I do favor exceptions to abortion. But, even those exceptions must be strictly enforced.
What Sen. Barack did in that statement say what many on the left and or socialists really think about babies and or transmission of STDs. That they are somehow a punishment for promiscuity. Maybe they are. I do not agree. I believe that sex is not taken seriously enough in this nation. Look all around. Erotic advertising is all the rage. Walk by an Abercrombie and Fitch store and see near sex acts on display in huge billboard-sized photos. How about the female homoerotic advertising? It is all on display. And the behavior of the narcissistic celebrity culture. Does anyone with a brain cell think that Britney Spears should be mother of the year? Do you think that she did not have sex ed while in school? Please!
Sen. Barack will try his best to backtrack this astounding statement. That is if the DDBMSM even reports this with any seriousness. His sycophantic media lap dogs will dismiss this the same way they dismissed his relationship with his pastor, the "Rev." Jeremiah Wright.
This man will be the Democrat nominee for president. It is time for all to see the light of day as to what kind of president Sen. Barack will make. A disaster that will make us old enough to yearn for the days of Jimmy Carter.
HT: Hugh Hewitt, Right Wing Sparkle
Monday, March 31, 2008
Baseball Is Back!
Today begins another year of triumph and defeat. Today is the day that 30 teams that make up major league baseball believe that they will be World Series champs.
Of course, that reality gets changed around June when pretenders become cellar-dwellers and the contenders just get warmed-up.
Of course last night was the home opener of the new Washington Nationals Park, and I posted on the disgusting display of the fans towards President Bush. And, the Nats beat the hated Atlanta Braves.
If that was not enough, my beloved Los Angeles Dodgers easily dispatched the truly hated San Francisco Giants today at their real ballpark, Dodger Stadium. And, it was a shutout, 5-0!
So, I will NOT make my predictions until the weekend.
Why?
Because I have come to the conclusion that making predictions before any season begins is, well a crap shoot. I mean. 30 exhibition games mean nothing. A player maybe hurt or a big trade is pulled off. No, I think, while to some it is gutless, I will wait and get a feel of the teams that everyone else seems to think will win their divisions and or the World Series.
But, a preview of who I think will end up in the Fall Classic.
The National League winner will be from the Western Division. The American League champs will be from the Central Division.
Wait until this weekend for the complete rundown!
Of course, that reality gets changed around June when pretenders become cellar-dwellers and the contenders just get warmed-up.
Of course last night was the home opener of the new Washington Nationals Park, and I posted on the disgusting display of the fans towards President Bush. And, the Nats beat the hated Atlanta Braves.
If that was not enough, my beloved Los Angeles Dodgers easily dispatched the truly hated San Francisco Giants today at their real ballpark, Dodger Stadium. And, it was a shutout, 5-0!
So, I will NOT make my predictions until the weekend.
Why?
Because I have come to the conclusion that making predictions before any season begins is, well a crap shoot. I mean. 30 exhibition games mean nothing. A player maybe hurt or a big trade is pulled off. No, I think, while to some it is gutless, I will wait and get a feel of the teams that everyone else seems to think will win their divisions and or the World Series.
But, a preview of who I think will end up in the Fall Classic.
The National League winner will be from the Western Division. The American League champs will be from the Central Division.
Wait until this weekend for the complete rundown!
Sunday, March 30, 2008
SHOW SOME RESPECT!
In another sign that there is something wrong with what this culture chooses to respect and disrespect, tonight many citizens of Washington, D. C. chose the latter when President Bush threw out the first pitch in the opening game of the brand new Washington Nationals Park.
While rock stars, movie stars and people with absolutely nothing but money and narcissism get loads of respect by many, a man that was elected twice to be the commander-in-chief was mercilessly booed by many as he strode to the pitcher's mound and threw one just a bit high and outside.
Did President Bush cower and run and duck and hide in the dugout? Of course not. He did his business with a smile on his face and the pleasure of seeing another new baseball stadium open, this time in the nation's capital.
It is too bad that in a non-political moment, people let their politics interfere with a duty that every president has done while there have been baseball teams in Washington. It was a ceremonial first pitch, not President Bush signing a war-declaration against Iran for crying out loud.
I would love to see our public boo the crud out of someone like Paris Hilton the way they did President Bush. But, now a days it looks like it is all backwards. And we are considered a civilized nation!
While rock stars, movie stars and people with absolutely nothing but money and narcissism get loads of respect by many, a man that was elected twice to be the commander-in-chief was mercilessly booed by many as he strode to the pitcher's mound and threw one just a bit high and outside.
Did President Bush cower and run and duck and hide in the dugout? Of course not. He did his business with a smile on his face and the pleasure of seeing another new baseball stadium open, this time in the nation's capital.
It is too bad that in a non-political moment, people let their politics interfere with a duty that every president has done while there have been baseball teams in Washington. It was a ceremonial first pitch, not President Bush signing a war-declaration against Iran for crying out loud.
I would love to see our public boo the crud out of someone like Paris Hilton the way they did President Bush. But, now a days it looks like it is all backwards. And we are considered a civilized nation!
115,300
That may seem like just a number to many, but to the baseball fan, the true baseball fan, it is the attendance at last night's major league baseball exhibition game between the Boston Red Sox and the Los Angeles Dodgers.
In celebration of the Dodgers 50th anniversary of being in Los Angeles, owner Frank McCourt thought that it would be a great idea to have a game at the first home of the Dodgers when they high-tailed it from Brooklyn, the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.
The Dodgers played at the cavernous, not-for-baseball Coliseum for four years before moving to the cathedral of baseball, heck St. Peter's Basilica of baseball, Dodger Stadium.
Now, the Coliseum is football stadium, but it was actually built in 1923 in hopes of luring the Summer Olympics. That came in 1932.
The Coliseum holds 92,000 when all areas are in use. And when the Dodgers came west, it created the weirdest baseball field in memory.
Because of it being a bowl, it was impossible to make legitimate dimensions. So, the left field line was 251 feet from home plate. To prevent a slew of homers, a 40-foot mesh fence was put in front of the left field stands. It did not get any better for hitters, but that is not the story.
It is at the Coliseum that the largest crowds ever attended a baseball game.
And last night, Mrs, rightviewfromtheleftcoast and I were part of 115,300 people who will be in the record books.
Now, it did take us roughly two and a half hours to get there and about the same time to get home.
Why you may ask?
Well, with little if any parking around the Coliseum, and a $25 to park, we decided that the Dodger shuttle from the Stadium to the Coliseum would be a great idea. So did about 50,000 other people. And while the Dodgers provided up to 100 buses and vans to shuttle back and forth, it still was not enough. And, we went at the worst time both to and fro.
But, the crowd was very good natured and for the most part well behaved. After all, the hangover of having the Oakland Raiders here and the "fan base" they attract does permeate in all local sports.
It was absolutely amazing to be a part of history. Positive history. So much of the kind of history we may be a part of is usually bad. But this was all done in the name of raising money for cancer research. History and a great cause, who can ask for more.
Oh, of course the Dodgers did lose to the game, 7-4.
But who cares? We were a part of history and that made all the negative worthwhile.
In celebration of the Dodgers 50th anniversary of being in Los Angeles, owner Frank McCourt thought that it would be a great idea to have a game at the first home of the Dodgers when they high-tailed it from Brooklyn, the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.
The Dodgers played at the cavernous, not-for-baseball Coliseum for four years before moving to the cathedral of baseball, heck St. Peter's Basilica of baseball, Dodger Stadium.
Now, the Coliseum is football stadium, but it was actually built in 1923 in hopes of luring the Summer Olympics. That came in 1932.
The Coliseum holds 92,000 when all areas are in use. And when the Dodgers came west, it created the weirdest baseball field in memory.
Because of it being a bowl, it was impossible to make legitimate dimensions. So, the left field line was 251 feet from home plate. To prevent a slew of homers, a 40-foot mesh fence was put in front of the left field stands. It did not get any better for hitters, but that is not the story.
It is at the Coliseum that the largest crowds ever attended a baseball game.
And last night, Mrs, rightviewfromtheleftcoast and I were part of 115,300 people who will be in the record books.
Now, it did take us roughly two and a half hours to get there and about the same time to get home.
Why you may ask?
Well, with little if any parking around the Coliseum, and a $25 to park, we decided that the Dodger shuttle from the Stadium to the Coliseum would be a great idea. So did about 50,000 other people. And while the Dodgers provided up to 100 buses and vans to shuttle back and forth, it still was not enough. And, we went at the worst time both to and fro.
But, the crowd was very good natured and for the most part well behaved. After all, the hangover of having the Oakland Raiders here and the "fan base" they attract does permeate in all local sports.
It was absolutely amazing to be a part of history. Positive history. So much of the kind of history we may be a part of is usually bad. But this was all done in the name of raising money for cancer research. History and a great cause, who can ask for more.
Oh, of course the Dodgers did lose to the game, 7-4.
But who cares? We were a part of history and that made all the negative worthwhile.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Another From The Jeremiah Wright's Greatest Hits
I tell you, the "Rev." Jeremiah Wright, he is amazing. I mean, just as one would think that there is not much more the "Reverend" could say insulting, as the television infomericals say, 'but wait! There's more!'.
At a eulogy for Asa Hilliard, a scholar who went to the glory, the "Rev." Wright had this little gem:
Jesus' enemies had their opinions about him. The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.
Can I please have a drum roll for that hoot?!
Where do I begin?
Firstly, there were no Italians in that time. There was no Italy until 1867. They were R-O-M-A-N-S. No, not Italians but Romans. They were the conquerors and as conquerors, they were not exactly welcomed with open arms by the Jews that they had conquered. Like the Nazis nearly 2,000 years later, they had collaborators. They would be the elites. But, there were no Italians.
And, just what does the "Reverend" mean by garlic noses? I mean, he could have used the time-worn WOP, for these Romans were without papers as would be the slur to their Italian successors.
It is absolutely amazing that this creep, Jeremiah Wright, can walk around and claim to be a man of God, a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He is nothing but a racist, black African nationalist who has co-opted a church much the same way as his buddy, Calypso Louis Farrakhan co-opted the Nation of Islam to spread very similar beyond divisive thoughts.
I am sure that there will be more hits coming out of the vault of the Trinity United Church of Christ, and there will be more questions as to how a man who wants to be president of the United States as does Sen. Barack Obama, stay in this so-called church. How Sen. Barack can claim the mantle of being a follower of Jesus Christ when his spiritual guide follows a non-Christian message.
Here is one for the "Rev" Wright. No, not God Bless Jeremiah Wright! no God D--- Jeremiah Wright!
At a eulogy for Asa Hilliard, a scholar who went to the glory, the "Rev." Wright had this little gem:
Jesus' enemies had their opinions about him. The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.
Can I please have a drum roll for that hoot?!
Where do I begin?
Firstly, there were no Italians in that time. There was no Italy until 1867. They were R-O-M-A-N-S. No, not Italians but Romans. They were the conquerors and as conquerors, they were not exactly welcomed with open arms by the Jews that they had conquered. Like the Nazis nearly 2,000 years later, they had collaborators. They would be the elites. But, there were no Italians.
And, just what does the "Reverend" mean by garlic noses? I mean, he could have used the time-worn WOP, for these Romans were without papers as would be the slur to their Italian successors.
It is absolutely amazing that this creep, Jeremiah Wright, can walk around and claim to be a man of God, a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He is nothing but a racist, black African nationalist who has co-opted a church much the same way as his buddy, Calypso Louis Farrakhan co-opted the Nation of Islam to spread very similar beyond divisive thoughts.
I am sure that there will be more hits coming out of the vault of the Trinity United Church of Christ, and there will be more questions as to how a man who wants to be president of the United States as does Sen. Barack Obama, stay in this so-called church. How Sen. Barack can claim the mantle of being a follower of Jesus Christ when his spiritual guide follows a non-Christian message.
Here is one for the "Rev" Wright. No, not God Bless Jeremiah Wright! no God D--- Jeremiah Wright!
Why Is McCain Such A "Gentleman" To The Dems
I have been giving this a lot of thought since Sen. John "F--- You" McCain became the 2008 Republican presidential nominee. Why is it that Sen. "F--- You" McCain seems to be, dare I write this, gentlemanly towards Democrats?
I think, maybe I have the answer.
Let us take a look at the elected history of Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
Then civilian John McCain ran for congress from Arizona in 1982. He ran for the John Rhodes seat, a long time Republican house leader. 1982 was a terrible year for Republicans across the board. The seat Mr. McCain won was as safe as one could win in that terrible climate. And Mr. McCain won that seat. However, all the gains that Republicans made in 1980 were wiped out and the Republicans lost 28 house seats to fall to a 166-269 minority. The house minority leader was Robert Michel (R-Ill). A nice man, one who would not be around in 1994 when the Republicans would sweep into power by retaking the House of Representatives.
So, Mr. McCain went into congress a decided minority in a very minority Republican party. And, those Republicans seemed to know that they would be in the minority for a long time.
Being in the minority in the house is no fun. Much of what a minority member proposes never sees the light of day. Minority members get the lousy office space. And, like children playing in a schoolyard, the bullies let the bullied know who is in charge.
In 1986, Congressman McCain ran for and won the Barry Goldwater seat in the senate. Ah, but once again, timing is everything. In that same year, the Republicans lost their tenuous majority in the senate and the whole congress was in Democrat control.
However, the senate is a little different. There is more of a buddy-buddy approach to doing things. The minority is not treated as badly and the constitution gives minority senators more power. The power to compromise. And, that is why a reliable conservative as John McCain became more like accommodating John McCain.
In 1994, the Republicans stormed the gates, winning back senate control, the house, the majority of state governors. It was a banner year. But, Sen. McCain did not get the memo and was still compromising John.
I think at the end of the day, when one is elected to an office and is in the minority, it is harder for some to shake that off when suddenly, you are the majority. And that is why we have the kind of Republican that we have in Sen. "F--- You" McCain. A deal cutter.
But, there is hope.
I am hopeful that if Sen. McCain is elected president, I think he can be more forceful for some conservative initiatives. Not want I would necessarily want, but he will no longer be the maverick. In fact, he is no longer the maverick. He is now the big cheese. And, he must act accordingly.
Being the one in charge has to be hard for one who started his political climb in the minority. But, I am hopeful that as the election season moves on, Sen. "F--- You" McCain will be more aggressive in a conservative, Republican agenda. Sen. John McCain is no longer in the minority. Sen. McCain is in control of his own destiny.
I think, maybe I have the answer.
Let us take a look at the elected history of Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
Then civilian John McCain ran for congress from Arizona in 1982. He ran for the John Rhodes seat, a long time Republican house leader. 1982 was a terrible year for Republicans across the board. The seat Mr. McCain won was as safe as one could win in that terrible climate. And Mr. McCain won that seat. However, all the gains that Republicans made in 1980 were wiped out and the Republicans lost 28 house seats to fall to a 166-269 minority. The house minority leader was Robert Michel (R-Ill). A nice man, one who would not be around in 1994 when the Republicans would sweep into power by retaking the House of Representatives.
So, Mr. McCain went into congress a decided minority in a very minority Republican party. And, those Republicans seemed to know that they would be in the minority for a long time.
Being in the minority in the house is no fun. Much of what a minority member proposes never sees the light of day. Minority members get the lousy office space. And, like children playing in a schoolyard, the bullies let the bullied know who is in charge.
In 1986, Congressman McCain ran for and won the Barry Goldwater seat in the senate. Ah, but once again, timing is everything. In that same year, the Republicans lost their tenuous majority in the senate and the whole congress was in Democrat control.
However, the senate is a little different. There is more of a buddy-buddy approach to doing things. The minority is not treated as badly and the constitution gives minority senators more power. The power to compromise. And, that is why a reliable conservative as John McCain became more like accommodating John McCain.
In 1994, the Republicans stormed the gates, winning back senate control, the house, the majority of state governors. It was a banner year. But, Sen. McCain did not get the memo and was still compromising John.
I think at the end of the day, when one is elected to an office and is in the minority, it is harder for some to shake that off when suddenly, you are the majority. And that is why we have the kind of Republican that we have in Sen. "F--- You" McCain. A deal cutter.
But, there is hope.
I am hopeful that if Sen. McCain is elected president, I think he can be more forceful for some conservative initiatives. Not want I would necessarily want, but he will no longer be the maverick. In fact, he is no longer the maverick. He is now the big cheese. And, he must act accordingly.
Being the one in charge has to be hard for one who started his political climb in the minority. But, I am hopeful that as the election season moves on, Sen. "F--- You" McCain will be more aggressive in a conservative, Republican agenda. Sen. John McCain is no longer in the minority. Sen. McCain is in control of his own destiny.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
The Supremes Get One Right
Today in a 6-3 decision, the United States supreme court decided that the Bush administration overstepped its authority and ruled that the state of Texas does not have to reopen a case in which the convicted killer of two young girls was sentenced to death.
The case gained fame because the convicted killer, Jose Ernesto Medellin is a Mexican national who had been in the United States illegally. But, because Medellin was a Mexican national, according to the International Court of Justice, Medellin should have been able to contact the Mexican consulate and consulted with Mexican diplomats. Oh, yes Mexico is one of those countries that has such a high matter of conscience that they oppose the death penalty.
For the record, this animal killed two young girls, Jennifer Ertman, 14 and her friend Elizabeth Pena, 16, in such a sick, depraved, brutal way that I will not write it here in this blog.
But, Medellin has been very much fighting his execution and used his home country, Mexico, to do it.
The Mexican government filed suit in The Hague, The Netherlands, at the World Court that the United States violated a 1964 Vienna Convention pact that when a foreign national is arrested in another nation that the have the right to contact their nearest consulate and or embassy to huddle with diplomats. Of course Mexico won and the case and the Bush administration acquiesced and ordered Texas to reopen the case of Medellin.
Of course Texas said no way.
And the supreme court said that Texas did not violate the "rights" of Medellin and that they did not reopen the case. Now Texas awaits when the supreme court will rule on if lethal injection is "cruel and unusual" punishment. What this animal did to the two girls was beyond cruel and unusual.
This was a near assault on the United States constitution by the Bush administration and six courageous supreme court justices, led by chief justice, John Roberts, said not this time.
If you do not think this upcoming presidential election is important, look at this decision in November and vote accordingly.
The case gained fame because the convicted killer, Jose Ernesto Medellin is a Mexican national who had been in the United States illegally. But, because Medellin was a Mexican national, according to the International Court of Justice, Medellin should have been able to contact the Mexican consulate and consulted with Mexican diplomats. Oh, yes Mexico is one of those countries that has such a high matter of conscience that they oppose the death penalty.
For the record, this animal killed two young girls, Jennifer Ertman, 14 and her friend Elizabeth Pena, 16, in such a sick, depraved, brutal way that I will not write it here in this blog.
But, Medellin has been very much fighting his execution and used his home country, Mexico, to do it.
The Mexican government filed suit in The Hague, The Netherlands, at the World Court that the United States violated a 1964 Vienna Convention pact that when a foreign national is arrested in another nation that the have the right to contact their nearest consulate and or embassy to huddle with diplomats. Of course Mexico won and the case and the Bush administration acquiesced and ordered Texas to reopen the case of Medellin.
Of course Texas said no way.
And the supreme court said that Texas did not violate the "rights" of Medellin and that they did not reopen the case. Now Texas awaits when the supreme court will rule on if lethal injection is "cruel and unusual" punishment. What this animal did to the two girls was beyond cruel and unusual.
This was a near assault on the United States constitution by the Bush administration and six courageous supreme court justices, led by chief justice, John Roberts, said not this time.
If you do not think this upcoming presidential election is important, look at this decision in November and vote accordingly.
Monday, March 24, 2008
More Telling Evidence Sen. Barack Is Nothing But A Garden Variety Socialist
Today, radio talker Hugh Hewitt http://hughhewitt.com, devoted his show to the fact that Sen. Barack Obama not only did the audio reading for his tome "Dreams Of My Father" but unedited. And due to the unediting, many a profanity made way to the abridged audio version of the tome.
Now, Mr. Hewitt thinks that this is another demerit along with the "Rev." Jeremiah Wright and the infamous Trinity United Church of Christ. You, it is unbecoming of a future president to read aloud how he talked in a lifetime ago.
I do not want to focus on that.
On one of the five soundbites, Sen. Barack talks about his entry to college. The disturbing line that stuck out was this.
When I entered college, I had to choose my friends carefully. I did not want to be seen as a sellout.
Firstly, who when entering college would think about such a thing? I mean, most people want to be assured that they will have A friend, let alone what "kind" of friend.
As the soundbite went on, Sen. Barack admits that he finds the most malcontent people he could associate with. You know the type. The socialist malcontents. Punk rockers, avant-garde types, 'politically active blacks', Chicanos, Marxist professors.
So, Sen. Barack, or was he known as Barry then, went for the worst of the worst in college life?
It is very telling on two fronts.
One, that this line of thought is not that of a "regular" person. One does not put that kind of thought into how they are going to have the college experience. As noted earlier, going to college is so different from high school. One can be the "big man (or gal) on campus" and be lost in the crowd in college. The thought most people have is are they going to have any friends at all. Not what kind of people they will hang with.
Then there is the calculating fact of those he "hanged" with. Why would someone who had aspirations at a serious political career, even becoming president someday, want to associate with those that are the worst of the worst in the college experience? To learn. To learn.
Being with these malcontents gave Sen. Barack meaning to his world view. It made what he had been thinking more than likely inside more alive. He went from being a mixed-race young man to one seeking his black identity.
There is a reason that he went to Chicago, became a "community organizer", code for left-wing agitator, joined a decidedly "black", no "African" church and moved up the political ladder in the Chicago Democrat party machinery.
The reality is that Sen. Barack, a man who was a "post racial" candidate, used his black identity to throw his white grandmother, one who he wrote in the tome that was nothing but sweet to him, under the bus by saying she used racial slurs and expressed fear about black men walking by her on the street. And, he stuck by his racist minister, expressing feigned shock and chagrin when confronted with some of his greatest hits, er sermons.
The fact is that Sen. Barack is nothing more than a garden variety socialist who has never let anything get in his way to attain power. Why, I am not sure he is really that much different from his opponent, Sen. Hillary Clinton. Maybe he has learned a little from the best.
Why would he put so much effort to chose the type of friends he would have in college? Only Sen. Barack knows.
Now, Mr. Hewitt thinks that this is another demerit along with the "Rev." Jeremiah Wright and the infamous Trinity United Church of Christ. You, it is unbecoming of a future president to read aloud how he talked in a lifetime ago.
I do not want to focus on that.
On one of the five soundbites, Sen. Barack talks about his entry to college. The disturbing line that stuck out was this.
When I entered college, I had to choose my friends carefully. I did not want to be seen as a sellout.
Firstly, who when entering college would think about such a thing? I mean, most people want to be assured that they will have A friend, let alone what "kind" of friend.
As the soundbite went on, Sen. Barack admits that he finds the most malcontent people he could associate with. You know the type. The socialist malcontents. Punk rockers, avant-garde types, 'politically active blacks', Chicanos, Marxist professors.
So, Sen. Barack, or was he known as Barry then, went for the worst of the worst in college life?
It is very telling on two fronts.
One, that this line of thought is not that of a "regular" person. One does not put that kind of thought into how they are going to have the college experience. As noted earlier, going to college is so different from high school. One can be the "big man (or gal) on campus" and be lost in the crowd in college. The thought most people have is are they going to have any friends at all. Not what kind of people they will hang with.
Then there is the calculating fact of those he "hanged" with. Why would someone who had aspirations at a serious political career, even becoming president someday, want to associate with those that are the worst of the worst in the college experience? To learn. To learn.
Being with these malcontents gave Sen. Barack meaning to his world view. It made what he had been thinking more than likely inside more alive. He went from being a mixed-race young man to one seeking his black identity.
There is a reason that he went to Chicago, became a "community organizer", code for left-wing agitator, joined a decidedly "black", no "African" church and moved up the political ladder in the Chicago Democrat party machinery.
The reality is that Sen. Barack, a man who was a "post racial" candidate, used his black identity to throw his white grandmother, one who he wrote in the tome that was nothing but sweet to him, under the bus by saying she used racial slurs and expressed fear about black men walking by her on the street. And, he stuck by his racist minister, expressing feigned shock and chagrin when confronted with some of his greatest hits, er sermons.
The fact is that Sen. Barack is nothing more than a garden variety socialist who has never let anything get in his way to attain power. Why, I am not sure he is really that much different from his opponent, Sen. Hillary Clinton. Maybe he has learned a little from the best.
Why would he put so much effort to chose the type of friends he would have in college? Only Sen. Barack knows.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
John Adams
Have you been watching the HBO mini-series, "John Adams"? Well, you should for it is an excellent story of a forgotten hero in the American Revolution and shepherding the young republic.
Just finished watching episode three where it shows Mr Adams, played by Paul Giamatti, in France with Benjamin Franklin, played by Tom Wilkenson, trying to secure France's alliance with the fledgling nation to defeat and drive out the British.
I will give none of the plot away but I will write this.
Paul Giamatti is giving the performance of his career. And Laura Linney, who plays wife Abigail Adams is also stellar. Actually, all the stars, some lesser known, are putting in a terrific performance. The sets and the settings are very realistic and a testament to maintaining a painstaking accuracy that is so missing from many historical movies of this nature. It is a great story and the credit for this being brought to life goes to historian David McCullough who wrote such masterpieces as 1776 .
It is important to bring the history of this great nation to life. Since our public schools fail to do so, it is becoming more incumbent to turn to alternative forms to teach the next generation the important people that created the United States of America.
And for those that do teach American history and do so well, when this series becomes available on DVD, they should get as many copies as possible for this is one of those rare events that can be used for teaching, along with the book, which is an epic and a lot of pages.
Bravo to HBO and to actor Tom Hanks for being one of the producers of this masterpiece.
You still have time to catch up. The latest episode will be rerun throughout the week and part four will be next Sunday at 6pm, Eastern, 9pm Pacific time http://hbo.com.
It is well worth a little over an hour on a Sunday evening to watch such a drama unfold before our eyes.
Just finished watching episode three where it shows Mr Adams, played by Paul Giamatti, in France with Benjamin Franklin, played by Tom Wilkenson, trying to secure France's alliance with the fledgling nation to defeat and drive out the British.
I will give none of the plot away but I will write this.
Paul Giamatti is giving the performance of his career. And Laura Linney, who plays wife Abigail Adams is also stellar. Actually, all the stars, some lesser known, are putting in a terrific performance. The sets and the settings are very realistic and a testament to maintaining a painstaking accuracy that is so missing from many historical movies of this nature. It is a great story and the credit for this being brought to life goes to historian David McCullough who wrote such masterpieces as 1776 .
It is important to bring the history of this great nation to life. Since our public schools fail to do so, it is becoming more incumbent to turn to alternative forms to teach the next generation the important people that created the United States of America.
And for those that do teach American history and do so well, when this series becomes available on DVD, they should get as many copies as possible for this is one of those rare events that can be used for teaching, along with the book, which is an epic and a lot of pages.
Bravo to HBO and to actor Tom Hanks for being one of the producers of this masterpiece.
You still have time to catch up. The latest episode will be rerun throughout the week and part four will be next Sunday at 6pm, Eastern, 9pm Pacific time http://hbo.com.
It is well worth a little over an hour on a Sunday evening to watch such a drama unfold before our eyes.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
HAPPY EASTER!
The Lord is risen, alleluia!
The Lord is risen indeed, alleluia!
Most of you will read this on Easter Sunday, the Day of the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
It is the most glorious day on the Christian calendar. It is the time to renew one's life, remembering that God brought our savior, Jesus Christ, from the death of the grave to risen, new life. He showed the risen Jesus to those who believed, that were followers of his to the death. And, just in case there was any doubt, He showed the disciple Thomas, the doubting one, the scars on his hands and feet. The scars of his crucifixion.
It is the time of renewal, to draw closer to God and to renew not only our relationship with Him, but his son, the one that went to the cross for us, Jesus Christ.
Today, while you spend time with your families and friends and especially at church, remember that now is the time to make all things new.
For
The Lord is risen!
The Lord is risen indeed!
The Lord is risen indeed, alleluia!
Most of you will read this on Easter Sunday, the Day of the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
It is the most glorious day on the Christian calendar. It is the time to renew one's life, remembering that God brought our savior, Jesus Christ, from the death of the grave to risen, new life. He showed the risen Jesus to those who believed, that were followers of his to the death. And, just in case there was any doubt, He showed the disciple Thomas, the doubting one, the scars on his hands and feet. The scars of his crucifixion.
It is the time of renewal, to draw closer to God and to renew not only our relationship with Him, but his son, the one that went to the cross for us, Jesus Christ.
Today, while you spend time with your families and friends and especially at church, remember that now is the time to make all things new.
For
The Lord is risen!
The Lord is risen indeed!
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Don't Hire David And Michelle Patterson To Be Your Marriage Counselors
As if the state of New York does not have enough problems having a governor resign after being caught with his pants down, literally and figuratively, with a prostitute, the new governor and his wife admit to numerous episodes of adultery.
BEAUTIFUL!
According to the New York Post http://nypost.com, new governor David Patterson took the initiative and presumptively announced that he had been unfaithful to his wife, Michelle, not once but numerous times. And, if that is not enough, Michelle Patterson admits that she too had an affair, at least once.
But, folks, this gets better.
The Luv Gov, as the Post calls him, started with admitting to an affair with one woman. But it deteriorated from there.
Luv Gov then went on to blame wife Michelle and her infidelity, or multiple ones, as the reason he went on his spree of adultery. And there is the supposed fact that Mrs. Luv Gov was about to file for divorce. Gee, I do not have any idea as to why she would want to leave this winner.
As those infomercials scream, but wait there's more!
At least one or maybe two of the Luv Gov's conquests are on the New York state payroll.
And, here is how much of a cad this Patterson fellow is.
Some of his trysts were in a Days Inn in Manhattan. Now, I have stayed in many a Days Inn, with Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast, and they are nice places and usually allow us to bring our Scout the Wonder Dog, but to have love in the afternoon? In New York City? As the New York Post's columnist Andrea Peyser noted, "Days Inn, David? Was Motel 6 booked?!"
Incredibly, this Luv Gov cad said this in a news conference, of course with wife Michelle at his side,
I betrayed a commitment to my wife several years ago. I do not feel that I betrayed my commitment to the citizenry of New York. I haven't broken any laws. I don't think that I have violated my oath of office.
WOW! Such an arrogant cad!
First of all, it is not just a "commitment" to his wife as the Luv Gov puts it. It is an oath. It is as follows in the Book Of Common Prayer:
In the Name of God, I take you to be my wife/husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, until we are parted by death. This is my solemn vow.
The last sentence has to be highlighted because a vow is also known as an oath.
Thus, the Luv Gov's claim that he simply failed to uphold a commitment with his wife, he really stretches the truth, big time.
It shows that both the Luv Gov and wife Michelle are not very mature people. Do not take the marriage vow very seriously. For if they did, should they have known that their marriage was in trouble? And, rather than hop in the sack with others not each other, should they have not gone into marriage counseling? To a religious mentor? Friends? One would think so.
But it shows how there is a real disconnect with those in power, whether it is politics, entertainment, business and regrettably, the clergy and the rest of us. Most of us would never let our marriages get to this point. Most would try to make even a token attempt to save a marriage.
But, these two feel it is nothing more than a commitment that they just could not keep. Kind of like being late for dinner. You apologize to the host and then enjoy the meal. Or a meeting. Again, you apologize and go on with the meeting. After all, these are just commitments, not much more.
Here is a real clue these people need to really read.
Marriage is the most serious vow that anyone will take in their life. For those of us of faith, we believe it to be the most important vow or oath we can make outside of, for the Christian, baptism. In the Holy Bible, Paul explains that it is the joining together of two different people, man and woman, as one. Jesus Christ must have taken marriage seriously for he did the first miracle of making water into wine.
I think that if politicians would take their marriage vows seriously, they may not be caught up in the power of their office that they think they can do and explain away anything.
No, David Patterson probably did not break the laws of New York state, but he and his wife broke the most important vow. The vow to each other.
BEAUTIFUL!
According to the New York Post http://nypost.com, new governor David Patterson took the initiative and presumptively announced that he had been unfaithful to his wife, Michelle, not once but numerous times. And, if that is not enough, Michelle Patterson admits that she too had an affair, at least once.
But, folks, this gets better.
The Luv Gov, as the Post calls him, started with admitting to an affair with one woman. But it deteriorated from there.
Luv Gov then went on to blame wife Michelle and her infidelity, or multiple ones, as the reason he went on his spree of adultery. And there is the supposed fact that Mrs. Luv Gov was about to file for divorce. Gee, I do not have any idea as to why she would want to leave this winner.
As those infomercials scream, but wait there's more!
At least one or maybe two of the Luv Gov's conquests are on the New York state payroll.
And, here is how much of a cad this Patterson fellow is.
Some of his trysts were in a Days Inn in Manhattan. Now, I have stayed in many a Days Inn, with Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast, and they are nice places and usually allow us to bring our Scout the Wonder Dog, but to have love in the afternoon? In New York City? As the New York Post's columnist Andrea Peyser noted, "Days Inn, David? Was Motel 6 booked?!"
Incredibly, this Luv Gov cad said this in a news conference, of course with wife Michelle at his side,
I betrayed a commitment to my wife several years ago. I do not feel that I betrayed my commitment to the citizenry of New York. I haven't broken any laws. I don't think that I have violated my oath of office.
WOW! Such an arrogant cad!
First of all, it is not just a "commitment" to his wife as the Luv Gov puts it. It is an oath. It is as follows in the Book Of Common Prayer:
In the Name of God, I take you to be my wife/husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, until we are parted by death. This is my solemn vow.
The last sentence has to be highlighted because a vow is also known as an oath.
Thus, the Luv Gov's claim that he simply failed to uphold a commitment with his wife, he really stretches the truth, big time.
It shows that both the Luv Gov and wife Michelle are not very mature people. Do not take the marriage vow very seriously. For if they did, should they have known that their marriage was in trouble? And, rather than hop in the sack with others not each other, should they have not gone into marriage counseling? To a religious mentor? Friends? One would think so.
But it shows how there is a real disconnect with those in power, whether it is politics, entertainment, business and regrettably, the clergy and the rest of us. Most of us would never let our marriages get to this point. Most would try to make even a token attempt to save a marriage.
But, these two feel it is nothing more than a commitment that they just could not keep. Kind of like being late for dinner. You apologize to the host and then enjoy the meal. Or a meeting. Again, you apologize and go on with the meeting. After all, these are just commitments, not much more.
Here is a real clue these people need to really read.
Marriage is the most serious vow that anyone will take in their life. For those of us of faith, we believe it to be the most important vow or oath we can make outside of, for the Christian, baptism. In the Holy Bible, Paul explains that it is the joining together of two different people, man and woman, as one. Jesus Christ must have taken marriage seriously for he did the first miracle of making water into wine.
I think that if politicians would take their marriage vows seriously, they may not be caught up in the power of their office that they think they can do and explain away anything.
No, David Patterson probably did not break the laws of New York state, but he and his wife broke the most important vow. The vow to each other.
Sen. McCain Already Looks Presidential
For this post, I will not refer to the Republican presidential nominee in waiting as Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. He is for this post Sen. McCain
The reason is that while Sen. Barack has to explain away his crazy uncle, er pastor, and Sen. Clinton sits back and laughs, Sen. McCain is travelling in the Middle East already looking like the president that he will be next year at this time.
Oh yes, it is bittersweet to write, but Sen. John McCain will be president and it is this trip to the Middle East that seals the deal with the American people.
So far, Sen. McCain has not done and or said anything wrong. He is meeting all the right people and avoiding those that will be nothing but an embarrassment. And once again, he started in Iraq and shows that as president, he will never hesitate to go to the front lines in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. And that is something neither of the Democrat candidates for president can say.
Sen. McCain is calling this a congressional fact-finding trip, but that is a wee bit o' straight poop. Two of those along for the ride are Sens. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), two of the senator's leading supporters. But, so what? I think they may be members of a future McCain cabinet and while they have some faults and one is not a Republican, they are supporters of the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. Too bad it could not have included Sen. Barack or Sen. Clinton. But they are too busy tearing each other to shreds to actually care about the focus of American foreign policy.
But, Sen. McCain and company do realize that while there are serious problems brewing with the economy, it is going to matter who is the commander-in-chief. And that, my friends, is the strong suit of Sen. McCain.
And that is what the American people are seeing, although it is getting sandwiched in between Spitzergate and his philandering succesor and Sen. Barack and the racist pastor.
Sen. McCain needs to keep up the aspect of his candidacy on the foreign policy issue of out time and focus hard on relaying to the American people that it will matter who the president is in this time of war. Sen. McCain is not for retreat and defeat. He is for victory. And not just in Iraq but in Afghanistan and all over the world where these Islamofacsist scum kill American soldiers and plot their next bloody assault on the United States.
Sen. McCain is transforming in our eyes as President McCain and the more he makes these kind of trips and explains his vision of the United States in the world in the 21st century, the more he looks like president of the United States.
The reason is that while Sen. Barack has to explain away his crazy uncle, er pastor, and Sen. Clinton sits back and laughs, Sen. McCain is travelling in the Middle East already looking like the president that he will be next year at this time.
Oh yes, it is bittersweet to write, but Sen. John McCain will be president and it is this trip to the Middle East that seals the deal with the American people.
So far, Sen. McCain has not done and or said anything wrong. He is meeting all the right people and avoiding those that will be nothing but an embarrassment. And once again, he started in Iraq and shows that as president, he will never hesitate to go to the front lines in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. And that is something neither of the Democrat candidates for president can say.
Sen. McCain is calling this a congressional fact-finding trip, but that is a wee bit o' straight poop. Two of those along for the ride are Sens. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), two of the senator's leading supporters. But, so what? I think they may be members of a future McCain cabinet and while they have some faults and one is not a Republican, they are supporters of the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. Too bad it could not have included Sen. Barack or Sen. Clinton. But they are too busy tearing each other to shreds to actually care about the focus of American foreign policy.
But, Sen. McCain and company do realize that while there are serious problems brewing with the economy, it is going to matter who is the commander-in-chief. And that, my friends, is the strong suit of Sen. McCain.
And that is what the American people are seeing, although it is getting sandwiched in between Spitzergate and his philandering succesor and Sen. Barack and the racist pastor.
Sen. McCain needs to keep up the aspect of his candidacy on the foreign policy issue of out time and focus hard on relaying to the American people that it will matter who the president is in this time of war. Sen. McCain is not for retreat and defeat. He is for victory. And not just in Iraq but in Afghanistan and all over the world where these Islamofacsist scum kill American soldiers and plot their next bloody assault on the United States.
Sen. McCain is transforming in our eyes as President McCain and the more he makes these kind of trips and explains his vision of the United States in the world in the 21st century, the more he looks like president of the United States.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
St. Barack Is No More
One thing about "The Speech" that St. Barack Obama gave today in Philadelphia is that he did not back down and gave tacit support for his spiritual advisor, the "Reverend" Jeremiah Wright, soon to be former Head Pastor of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.
And it is both a testament to "keeping it real" and the tragedy that he not only should have repudiated the vitriolic statements of the "Rev" Wright but said that he would have left the church.
The reality is that St. Barack was in a box. Had he condemned the "Reverend's" statements and said that he would leave TUCC, he would be a hypocrite and a political opportunist. And it would be correct. But, he threaded the needle by condemning the comments and explaining his relationship with the "Rev." Wright and basically saying he would not leave and is still a member of TUCC.
So, St. Barack has come to earth and is back to being Sen. Barack.
As far as the speech, there were some nuggets meant to appeal to a broad-spectrum in general, but when it comes to specifics, it was a rehash of grievances that will never seem to be overcome. Ever.
On the one hand, he talks about continuing the long march for a more equal, just, free, caring, prosperous America. Good, left-wing boilerplate issues.
As Sen. Barack goes on in the speech, he talks about his background, which is very much a modern American background for many. A black, African father, a white woman from Kansas, deep in the heartland of the United States. He talks about having relatives scattered across three continents. And, he pays due to the fact that this could only happen in the United States.
Sen. Barack addresses the issue of him being "too black" or "not black enough" for some Americans.
Then, he addresses the insidious comments of the "Rev." Wright.
Sen. Barack admits that the "Rev." Wright has been a harsh critic of United States domestic and foreign policy. That the "Rev." Wright had indeed made controversial remarks during sermons while he was attending services. And, that Sen. Barack did disagree with some of the comments and or views. And he points out that some pastors, priests and rabbis may have made remarks in which we have disagreed.
A couple of asides.
Sen. Barack does not mention imams for that would play into the rumors of he really being an Islamic, which I do not believe that he is. And, Sen. Barack deftly avoids some of the "Reverend's" greatest hits. Because he did not address specific remarks, he left it up to the imagination were he disagreed with the good "Reverend". And, that keeps the controversy from being swept under the rug, as Sen. Barack hoped that he would with this speech today. He failed on this point.
But, to Sen. Barack's credit, he went on to try to explain the "Reverend" Wright, where he is coming from so to speak. And here, he failed once again because it looked more that he was reading from Democrat talking points.
No where does Sen. Barack talk about a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, the fact that Jesus was so obedient to his father in heaven that he went to death on the cross to atone for our sins. And that Jesus sits at the right hand of God to await his coming in glory to judge the quick and the dead.
No, it is the Social Gospel. Or the Socialist Gospel. And in the case of TUCC, it is a black liberation, social gospel. It is where the "Reverend" Wright can, audaciously, claim that Jesus Christ was a black man that was killed by the white establishment of the day. Well, Jesus and the Jews are a Semitic people, not black. Unless the "Rev." Wright is referring to the Roman overlords, he really needs to re-read his Holy Bible. Pontius Pilate washed his hands and gave Jesus to the Jews to crucify. It is where the "Rev." Wright can say "No, no, no. Not God Bless America, but God D--- America. It is right there in the Bible!" Hmm, I am still looking for the "God D--- America" reference since America as a nation did not exist in biblical times.
Another aspect of the Sen. Barack speech is that he makes a not-to-subtle reference to his white grandmother. The reference is to her admission that she feared black men who passed her on the street. And for good measure, Sen. Barack made another reference to her uttering racial and or ethnic stereotypes that made him cringe. My question is, did anything his pastor may have said that were racial and or ethnic stereotyping make the senator cringe? How about when the "Rev." Wright made reference to "white" America getting what it deserved with the evil terrorist attacks on 9/11? Oh, thats right, he was not there that Sunday, so he says. And to the good "Reverend". Did the terrorists make sure to fly the planes into the buildings where only "white" Americans would be? Were there no blacks killed in the terrorist attacks of 9/11? I will not hold my breath waiting for that answer.
As the speech went on, Sen. Barack talk about his perception that issues of race have never really been talked about and worked out in this nation. Anytime people who think differently on race issues, like conservative black thinkers like Thomas Sowell, Dr. Walter Williams, Armstrong Williams (no relation to Walter), Larry Elder, Michael Steele and many others, they are referred to as sellouts or the time-worn insult, "Uncle Tom". So, unless we all agree with the socialist, left position on race relations, there will be no peace.
Further into the speech, Sen. Barack tries to justify how the "Reverend" came to his views. Coming of age in the 1950s and 1960s, when segregation was still law of the land. WHAT?! Yes, segregation was still the law, in a narrow part of the United States, almost entirely in the South.
Not to say that there was not tacit segregation in other parts of the nation, but it was not in law as it was in the South. That was not a slight error, it was a slight of hand to make his point larger. That it was in a negative environment that the "Reverend" Wright became the racial firebrand that he is now.
While there were some good points in the speech, overall it brought the once St. Barack back down to earth. He is now a human like the rest of us. His fault, if it is a fault, is that he is taken in by a minister that perverts the Holy Bible to justify an "African" view of the Christian story. In a sad way, it is no different from those in the Islamic community who pervert their religion for dominance and control.
But, Sen. Barack is running for president of the United States. For all Americans, not just black America. And, he needs to affirm that now more than ever. This was a mediocre start and it is a diversion that he can not afford to have now as he is about to nail the door shut on Sen. Clinton and become the Democrat nominee for president.
St. Barack is now Sen. Barack and that may not be a bad thing.
And it is both a testament to "keeping it real" and the tragedy that he not only should have repudiated the vitriolic statements of the "Rev" Wright but said that he would have left the church.
The reality is that St. Barack was in a box. Had he condemned the "Reverend's" statements and said that he would leave TUCC, he would be a hypocrite and a political opportunist. And it would be correct. But, he threaded the needle by condemning the comments and explaining his relationship with the "Rev." Wright and basically saying he would not leave and is still a member of TUCC.
So, St. Barack has come to earth and is back to being Sen. Barack.
As far as the speech, there were some nuggets meant to appeal to a broad-spectrum in general, but when it comes to specifics, it was a rehash of grievances that will never seem to be overcome. Ever.
On the one hand, he talks about continuing the long march for a more equal, just, free, caring, prosperous America. Good, left-wing boilerplate issues.
As Sen. Barack goes on in the speech, he talks about his background, which is very much a modern American background for many. A black, African father, a white woman from Kansas, deep in the heartland of the United States. He talks about having relatives scattered across three continents. And, he pays due to the fact that this could only happen in the United States.
Sen. Barack addresses the issue of him being "too black" or "not black enough" for some Americans.
Then, he addresses the insidious comments of the "Rev." Wright.
Sen. Barack admits that the "Rev." Wright has been a harsh critic of United States domestic and foreign policy. That the "Rev." Wright had indeed made controversial remarks during sermons while he was attending services. And, that Sen. Barack did disagree with some of the comments and or views. And he points out that some pastors, priests and rabbis may have made remarks in which we have disagreed.
A couple of asides.
Sen. Barack does not mention imams for that would play into the rumors of he really being an Islamic, which I do not believe that he is. And, Sen. Barack deftly avoids some of the "Reverend's" greatest hits. Because he did not address specific remarks, he left it up to the imagination were he disagreed with the good "Reverend". And, that keeps the controversy from being swept under the rug, as Sen. Barack hoped that he would with this speech today. He failed on this point.
But, to Sen. Barack's credit, he went on to try to explain the "Reverend" Wright, where he is coming from so to speak. And here, he failed once again because it looked more that he was reading from Democrat talking points.
No where does Sen. Barack talk about a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, the fact that Jesus was so obedient to his father in heaven that he went to death on the cross to atone for our sins. And that Jesus sits at the right hand of God to await his coming in glory to judge the quick and the dead.
No, it is the Social Gospel. Or the Socialist Gospel. And in the case of TUCC, it is a black liberation, social gospel. It is where the "Reverend" Wright can, audaciously, claim that Jesus Christ was a black man that was killed by the white establishment of the day. Well, Jesus and the Jews are a Semitic people, not black. Unless the "Rev." Wright is referring to the Roman overlords, he really needs to re-read his Holy Bible. Pontius Pilate washed his hands and gave Jesus to the Jews to crucify. It is where the "Rev." Wright can say "No, no, no. Not God Bless America, but God D--- America. It is right there in the Bible!" Hmm, I am still looking for the "God D--- America" reference since America as a nation did not exist in biblical times.
Another aspect of the Sen. Barack speech is that he makes a not-to-subtle reference to his white grandmother. The reference is to her admission that she feared black men who passed her on the street. And for good measure, Sen. Barack made another reference to her uttering racial and or ethnic stereotypes that made him cringe. My question is, did anything his pastor may have said that were racial and or ethnic stereotyping make the senator cringe? How about when the "Rev." Wright made reference to "white" America getting what it deserved with the evil terrorist attacks on 9/11? Oh, thats right, he was not there that Sunday, so he says. And to the good "Reverend". Did the terrorists make sure to fly the planes into the buildings where only "white" Americans would be? Were there no blacks killed in the terrorist attacks of 9/11? I will not hold my breath waiting for that answer.
As the speech went on, Sen. Barack talk about his perception that issues of race have never really been talked about and worked out in this nation. Anytime people who think differently on race issues, like conservative black thinkers like Thomas Sowell, Dr. Walter Williams, Armstrong Williams (no relation to Walter), Larry Elder, Michael Steele and many others, they are referred to as sellouts or the time-worn insult, "Uncle Tom". So, unless we all agree with the socialist, left position on race relations, there will be no peace.
Further into the speech, Sen. Barack tries to justify how the "Reverend" came to his views. Coming of age in the 1950s and 1960s, when segregation was still law of the land. WHAT?! Yes, segregation was still the law, in a narrow part of the United States, almost entirely in the South.
Not to say that there was not tacit segregation in other parts of the nation, but it was not in law as it was in the South. That was not a slight error, it was a slight of hand to make his point larger. That it was in a negative environment that the "Reverend" Wright became the racial firebrand that he is now.
While there were some good points in the speech, overall it brought the once St. Barack back down to earth. He is now a human like the rest of us. His fault, if it is a fault, is that he is taken in by a minister that perverts the Holy Bible to justify an "African" view of the Christian story. In a sad way, it is no different from those in the Islamic community who pervert their religion for dominance and control.
But, Sen. Barack is running for president of the United States. For all Americans, not just black America. And, he needs to affirm that now more than ever. This was a mediocre start and it is a diversion that he can not afford to have now as he is about to nail the door shut on Sen. Clinton and become the Democrat nominee for president.
St. Barack is now Sen. Barack and that may not be a bad thing.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Eliot, Eliot, Tsk, Tsk, Tsk
When pride cometh, then cometh shame
Proverbs 11.2
Soon to be former Democrat New York state governor, Eliot Spitzer. . .
Wait!
Let's read that again.
Soon to be former Democrat New York state governor, Eliot Spitzer. . .
I admit, I like the look of those words!
Anyway, to continue, the soon to be former New York state governor, Eliot Spitzer, was forced out of office today due to one dalliance too many as he has been implicated in not only hiring high-end prostitutes, but crossing state lines with them, a very big no-no, and hiding the money used in said transactions.
The reason this is as big a story as it is because Mr. Spitzer was the New York state attorney general for eight years before winning the governor's office in 2006 in the largest landslide in New York state history.
And, allegedly, a lot of these actions took place not only while he was the attorney general, but while he was making a splash by going after, I kid you not, prostitute rings!
The reason that Mr. Spitzer was even found out was because the IRS was investigating the financial dealings of the high-end "escort" service, the Emperor's Club. Mr. Spitzer is allegedly "client no. 9" according to reports http://FoxNews.com.
Forgetting all the legal mumbo-jumbo, lets look at the ramifications of the actions of the once dubbed "Mr. Clean" of New York politics.
Many people do not think that prostitution is a big deal and some advocate decriminalizing it. Those advocates regard prostitution as a "victimless" crime at worst.
But the fact is that prostitution is still illegal in much of the United States. Also, there is a little something called the Mann act which makes it a federal offense to take a prostitute across state lines to engage in hanky-panky.
Oh, and one should not be playing a shell game with money that was going to the Emperor's Club to send a woman from New York City to Washington D. C.-on Valentine's Day no less-to provide sexual services for a governor, one time state attorney general who should have known better.
But, Mr. Spitzer apparently thinks that there are two kinds of law.
One is that white-collar criminals, Mr. Spitzer's speciality, is a mortal threat to American society. Mr. Spitzer went after them with a zealousness of a biblical prophet. Many a person on Wall Street were accused of crimes, prosecuted and sent to prison.
And there were nuisance crimes like prostitution. To make it completely, one has to at least pay lip service to ending this scourge on modern life. And, Mr. Spitzer did just that. And, of course he bragged about it.
While Mr. Spitzer has been accused of cavorting with high-end prostitutes for anywhere from six to 10 years, he was sending some "pimps" to prison while getting his taste of the spoils.
There is the background.
The real story is what was Mr. Spitzer thinking while "hooking up"? How did Mrs. Spitzer, who like so many beaten wives, stood there while her man resigned the office of governor, not know what was going on? And the fact that this deviant has three young daughters adds the dimension of would he like his daughter's to aspire to be a whore?
What Mr. Spitzer was thinking may have been that he could get away with it. After all, he had a reputation above reproach. He went with a vengeance after those eeeeviiiiilllll corporate crooks. Got a lot of convictions and sent some to prison. Because of the high that he must have got at going after people that he really thought were evil, he had to release it somewhere. Maybe Mrs. Spitzer did not like the way he wanted to release that tension. Only the Spitzer's know that.
Speaking of Mrs. Spitzer, why did she just stand there like a potted plant while her husband all but humiliated her in public? Why do any of these wives stand with their deviant men while they prostate for forgiveness? What Mrs. Spitzer should have done is socked Mr. Spitzer one right in the chops. All I can think is that Mrs. Spitzer must have known something was not right with Mr. Spitzer. Otherwise, if I did to Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast what Mr. Spitzer did to Mrs. Spitzer, I would have been smacked around on national television and rightfully so.
Most awful is the fact that Mr. Spitzer has three young daughters. Can they be proud of their father now? Of course not. What they realize is that their father does not think much of women in general. That he would not take the marriage vows seriously and stooped to buying high-end whores. What an example he has set. And, what would Mr. Spitzer say if one of the said daughters came to him and said one day, "Dad, I just got a new job" "Wonderful, what is it?" "I'm a high-end whore! Isn't that great dad?"
It is shameful that this arrogant man would have to do what he did to get his kicks. But that he drags his wife and daughters in this sordid tale shows that the ol' proverb is oh so true.
Proverbs 11.2
Soon to be former Democrat New York state governor, Eliot Spitzer. . .
Wait!
Let's read that again.
Soon to be former Democrat New York state governor, Eliot Spitzer. . .
I admit, I like the look of those words!
Anyway, to continue, the soon to be former New York state governor, Eliot Spitzer, was forced out of office today due to one dalliance too many as he has been implicated in not only hiring high-end prostitutes, but crossing state lines with them, a very big no-no, and hiding the money used in said transactions.
The reason this is as big a story as it is because Mr. Spitzer was the New York state attorney general for eight years before winning the governor's office in 2006 in the largest landslide in New York state history.
And, allegedly, a lot of these actions took place not only while he was the attorney general, but while he was making a splash by going after, I kid you not, prostitute rings!
The reason that Mr. Spitzer was even found out was because the IRS was investigating the financial dealings of the high-end "escort" service, the Emperor's Club. Mr. Spitzer is allegedly "client no. 9" according to reports http://FoxNews.com.
Forgetting all the legal mumbo-jumbo, lets look at the ramifications of the actions of the once dubbed "Mr. Clean" of New York politics.
Many people do not think that prostitution is a big deal and some advocate decriminalizing it. Those advocates regard prostitution as a "victimless" crime at worst.
But the fact is that prostitution is still illegal in much of the United States. Also, there is a little something called the Mann act which makes it a federal offense to take a prostitute across state lines to engage in hanky-panky.
Oh, and one should not be playing a shell game with money that was going to the Emperor's Club to send a woman from New York City to Washington D. C.-on Valentine's Day no less-to provide sexual services for a governor, one time state attorney general who should have known better.
But, Mr. Spitzer apparently thinks that there are two kinds of law.
One is that white-collar criminals, Mr. Spitzer's speciality, is a mortal threat to American society. Mr. Spitzer went after them with a zealousness of a biblical prophet. Many a person on Wall Street were accused of crimes, prosecuted and sent to prison.
And there were nuisance crimes like prostitution. To make it completely, one has to at least pay lip service to ending this scourge on modern life. And, Mr. Spitzer did just that. And, of course he bragged about it.
While Mr. Spitzer has been accused of cavorting with high-end prostitutes for anywhere from six to 10 years, he was sending some "pimps" to prison while getting his taste of the spoils.
There is the background.
The real story is what was Mr. Spitzer thinking while "hooking up"? How did Mrs. Spitzer, who like so many beaten wives, stood there while her man resigned the office of governor, not know what was going on? And the fact that this deviant has three young daughters adds the dimension of would he like his daughter's to aspire to be a whore?
What Mr. Spitzer was thinking may have been that he could get away with it. After all, he had a reputation above reproach. He went with a vengeance after those eeeeviiiiilllll corporate crooks. Got a lot of convictions and sent some to prison. Because of the high that he must have got at going after people that he really thought were evil, he had to release it somewhere. Maybe Mrs. Spitzer did not like the way he wanted to release that tension. Only the Spitzer's know that.
Speaking of Mrs. Spitzer, why did she just stand there like a potted plant while her husband all but humiliated her in public? Why do any of these wives stand with their deviant men while they prostate for forgiveness? What Mrs. Spitzer should have done is socked Mr. Spitzer one right in the chops. All I can think is that Mrs. Spitzer must have known something was not right with Mr. Spitzer. Otherwise, if I did to Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast what Mr. Spitzer did to Mrs. Spitzer, I would have been smacked around on national television and rightfully so.
Most awful is the fact that Mr. Spitzer has three young daughters. Can they be proud of their father now? Of course not. What they realize is that their father does not think much of women in general. That he would not take the marriage vows seriously and stooped to buying high-end whores. What an example he has set. And, what would Mr. Spitzer say if one of the said daughters came to him and said one day, "Dad, I just got a new job" "Wonderful, what is it?" "I'm a high-end whore! Isn't that great dad?"
It is shameful that this arrogant man would have to do what he did to get his kicks. But that he drags his wife and daughters in this sordid tale shows that the ol' proverb is oh so true.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Good To See Rep. King Does Not Back Down
I am very happy that Iowa Congressman Steve King did not back down from his comments regarding a potential Sen. St. Barack Obama victory in November http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2008/03/10/news/local/doc47d5e3.
Despite a strong rebuke by members of Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, Rep. King only elaborated what he meant by his comments and it is nothing more than affirmation. And there is nothing wrong with someone standing by what he says rather than back pedaling and caving into politically correct land, a sad land indeed.
Again, what Rep. King said is truth. It is too bad than Camp McCain can not jump on the Steve King Straight Talk Express.
Despite a strong rebuke by members of Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, Rep. King only elaborated what he meant by his comments and it is nothing more than affirmation. And there is nothing wrong with someone standing by what he says rather than back pedaling and caving into politically correct land, a sad land indeed.
Again, what Rep. King said is truth. It is too bad than Camp McCain can not jump on the Steve King Straight Talk Express.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Can We Not Speak The Truth About Electing St. Barack?
It appears that in Sen. John "F--- You" McCain's attempt to be a "civil" Republican presidential nominee, a supporter can not speak the truth about what potentially electing St. Barack Obama, er Sen. Barack Obama, would mean.
Ask Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa).
He told a local newspaper http://www.spencerdailyreporter.com/story/1316727.html that a win by St. Barack would lead to "dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they (radical Islamics) did on September 11 because they would declare victory in this war on terror."
There is not one thing wrong with that statement.
One can argue that the Socialists won the 2004 Spanish national elections due to terrorism committed by al-Queda on the Spanish commuter rail system in Madrid that killed 191 people. The election then was very close and the terror act send Spaniards into the hands of the party that said it wanted to leave Iraq.
Oh, maybe it was the fact that Rep. King might have strayed into that middle name of St. Barack's. You know, the one respectable people do not say. HUSSEIN! Yes, it is St. Barack's middle name. Too bad it is a very popular Islamic name, sometimes first but mostly a last name. And, St. Barack was named as a junior as his father, a real paragon of virtue, was Barack Hussein Obama.
But, what Rep. King said was that St. Barack's middle name does matter "because they (radical Islamics) read a meaning into that.
Now, we all know that St. Barack is a committed and practicing Christian. Not my kind of Christian, but a Christian none the less.
But, Rep. King is right. The radical Islamics do read a lot into the name and the fact that St. Barack has said throughout his campaign that he will withdraw all United States forces in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. He has not backed down.
But, leave to the allies of Sen. "F--- You" McCain to say "F--- You" to a supporter, Rep. King, who states the obvious.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain's travelling press secretary, Brooke Buchanan, said that Rep. King had no affiliation with the McCain campaign. Nice to deny that an actual supporter have nothing to do with the campaign?!?!?! http://FoxNews.com. But, Brookie baby continues:
The senator has been clear that he intends to keep this campaign about the issues. He has condemned similar comments by (radio talk show host) Bill Cunningham. He doesn't agree with (Rep) King's comments. He (McCain) intends to run a respectful race and keep it about the issues.
Such pablum!
What Rep. King brought up is a legitimate issue. How the world could perceive the American people electing St. Barack Obama. The middle name thing is that it is an issue. And, in some defense of St. Barack, he could have changed his middle name long ago. He did not. So, he is stuck with it, warts and all. And, he will get some serious commentary about what the name really means to him. And, if he were smart, he would meet it head on and stop whining about it.
Since I believe that Sen. "F--- You" McCain wants to be president, if St. Barack is in fact the Democrat nominee for president, the erstwhile senator will have to find a way to work all of this as part of his campaign. Like it or not, it is an issue.
For the record, Rep. King said that he meant no disrespect about St. Barack's middle name. And, I believe that. Because Rep. King said the obvious, chalk up another supporter run under the Straight Poop Express.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain better get this through his noggin.
This is the big time. Whoever the Democrat nominee is, either St. Barack or Hillary Clinton, they are going to come on you like a ton of bricks and about that much in anvil weight. The Democrats smell total domination of government, the White House and both houses of congress. They will not play by the Marquis of Queensbury rules. They will, if they have to, stoop to the depths of the gutter to take you out.
When that time comes, if you keep throwing your supporters who speak the truth under the Straight Poop Express, there will be few if any left to defend you. It is a two-way street.
For a supporter of Rep. King's stature to be thrown off because he may have, and I stress may have, been a wee bit hyper in the rhetoric department, it shows one of the weaknesses of Sen. "F--- You" McCain's campaign. How they will or will not take on St. Barack Obama.
Ask Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa).
He told a local newspaper http://www.spencerdailyreporter.com/story/1316727.html that a win by St. Barack would lead to "dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they (radical Islamics) did on September 11 because they would declare victory in this war on terror."
There is not one thing wrong with that statement.
One can argue that the Socialists won the 2004 Spanish national elections due to terrorism committed by al-Queda on the Spanish commuter rail system in Madrid that killed 191 people. The election then was very close and the terror act send Spaniards into the hands of the party that said it wanted to leave Iraq.
Oh, maybe it was the fact that Rep. King might have strayed into that middle name of St. Barack's. You know, the one respectable people do not say. HUSSEIN! Yes, it is St. Barack's middle name. Too bad it is a very popular Islamic name, sometimes first but mostly a last name. And, St. Barack was named as a junior as his father, a real paragon of virtue, was Barack Hussein Obama.
But, what Rep. King said was that St. Barack's middle name does matter "because they (radical Islamics) read a meaning into that.
Now, we all know that St. Barack is a committed and practicing Christian. Not my kind of Christian, but a Christian none the less.
But, Rep. King is right. The radical Islamics do read a lot into the name and the fact that St. Barack has said throughout his campaign that he will withdraw all United States forces in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. He has not backed down.
But, leave to the allies of Sen. "F--- You" McCain to say "F--- You" to a supporter, Rep. King, who states the obvious.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain's travelling press secretary, Brooke Buchanan, said that Rep. King had no affiliation with the McCain campaign. Nice to deny that an actual supporter have nothing to do with the campaign?!?!?! http://FoxNews.com. But, Brookie baby continues:
The senator has been clear that he intends to keep this campaign about the issues. He has condemned similar comments by (radio talk show host) Bill Cunningham. He doesn't agree with (Rep) King's comments. He (McCain) intends to run a respectful race and keep it about the issues.
Such pablum!
What Rep. King brought up is a legitimate issue. How the world could perceive the American people electing St. Barack Obama. The middle name thing is that it is an issue. And, in some defense of St. Barack, he could have changed his middle name long ago. He did not. So, he is stuck with it, warts and all. And, he will get some serious commentary about what the name really means to him. And, if he were smart, he would meet it head on and stop whining about it.
Since I believe that Sen. "F--- You" McCain wants to be president, if St. Barack is in fact the Democrat nominee for president, the erstwhile senator will have to find a way to work all of this as part of his campaign. Like it or not, it is an issue.
For the record, Rep. King said that he meant no disrespect about St. Barack's middle name. And, I believe that. Because Rep. King said the obvious, chalk up another supporter run under the Straight Poop Express.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain better get this through his noggin.
This is the big time. Whoever the Democrat nominee is, either St. Barack or Hillary Clinton, they are going to come on you like a ton of bricks and about that much in anvil weight. The Democrats smell total domination of government, the White House and both houses of congress. They will not play by the Marquis of Queensbury rules. They will, if they have to, stoop to the depths of the gutter to take you out.
When that time comes, if you keep throwing your supporters who speak the truth under the Straight Poop Express, there will be few if any left to defend you. It is a two-way street.
For a supporter of Rep. King's stature to be thrown off because he may have, and I stress may have, been a wee bit hyper in the rhetoric department, it shows one of the weaknesses of Sen. "F--- You" McCain's campaign. How they will or will not take on St. Barack Obama.
Friday, March 07, 2008
This Is NOT Justice
In the United States, one expects a judge and or a commissioner to rule on a case based on law, not ones personal beliefs. But, for a children's court commissioner here in California, her views on the War Against Islamofacsist Terror in the Iraq theatre blinded her to ruin a great beginning to a foster child in the United States Marine Corps http://www.dailynews.com/ci_8482917.
Los Angeles county superior court commissioner Marylin Mackel denied Shawn Sage, 17, to sign up early to join the Marine Corps and the be in the sniper corps.
According to marine recruiter, Sgt. Guillermo Medrano, Commissioner Mackel said the following:
All recruiters are the same. They all tap dance and tell me what I want to hear. And then, according to Sgt. Medrano, commissioner Mackel said I don't want him to fight in it (the Iraq war).
So, a judicial activist denies a foster child who has his head on straight and a career path a chance to sign on to the Marine Corps, attaining a $10,000 signing bonus, and a chance to serve his country. What a surprise!
But, Mr. Sage is not taking this laying down. Already, Mr. Sage is acting like the marine that he wants to be.
Mr. Sage participated in a state assemblyman's Write A Bill challenge and won the contest.
State assemblyman Cameron Smyth (R-Santa Clarita) has introduced a bill in the California state assembly that would allow all foster children age 17 and older the right to sign up for the armed services without having to seek the consent of a judge/commissioner. The foster child could do so with the permission of the foster parent or a social worker.
Mr. Smyth said the following:
Here is one impressive young man who somehow made it through the challenge of the foster system, had a clear sense of a career path and was denied that opportunity by a judge basically because of her personal bias. Amen, brother!
The fact is that since Mr. Sage was seven years old, he wanted to be a marine. By participating in the USMC Delayed Entry Program, Mr. Sage was encouraged to finish his high school education and also to better his skills, eat healthy and all that it takes to be a marine.
Yet somehow, this is not a good choice for Commissioner Mackel because she is opposed to the United States liberation of Iraq and the fact that, wether she likes it or not, it is the front line in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. I would like to know if this was peacetime, would same commissioner have allowed Mr. Sage to participate in the program? And, of course all Commissioner Mackel has done is delayed the inevitable and thus keeping Mr. Sage back when he would be ahead of the game and on his chosen path.
And the left wonders why conservatives and those who oppose judicial activism of this sort have hostility towards the so-called independent judiciary.
Independence does not mean that a judge can or should make a ruling based on their opinions and or prejudices. It belittles the purpose of the judiciary, which is to be unbiased and to use the law to make correct and just rulings.
Sometime next week, the transcripts of the hearing denying Mr. Sage his right to become a marine will be made public. It will be interesting what kind of socialbabble this commissioner will have used to deny a right to a young man who has already had a crummy start to life, being abandoned by his biological parents when he was two years old.
Hopefully, the crazed lefty Democrats that control the state assembly will let Mr. Smyth's bill, AB 2238, come up to the floor for an up-or-down vote. If they and the state senate pass the bill and Governor Arnold signs it, this will be true justice won for Mr. Sage and those that will follow him.
Because justice was denied by one of those judges' that know what is better for us than us.
Los Angeles county superior court commissioner Marylin Mackel denied Shawn Sage, 17, to sign up early to join the Marine Corps and the be in the sniper corps.
According to marine recruiter, Sgt. Guillermo Medrano, Commissioner Mackel said the following:
All recruiters are the same. They all tap dance and tell me what I want to hear. And then, according to Sgt. Medrano, commissioner Mackel said I don't want him to fight in it (the Iraq war).
So, a judicial activist denies a foster child who has his head on straight and a career path a chance to sign on to the Marine Corps, attaining a $10,000 signing bonus, and a chance to serve his country. What a surprise!
But, Mr. Sage is not taking this laying down. Already, Mr. Sage is acting like the marine that he wants to be.
Mr. Sage participated in a state assemblyman's Write A Bill challenge and won the contest.
State assemblyman Cameron Smyth (R-Santa Clarita) has introduced a bill in the California state assembly that would allow all foster children age 17 and older the right to sign up for the armed services without having to seek the consent of a judge/commissioner. The foster child could do so with the permission of the foster parent or a social worker.
Mr. Smyth said the following:
Here is one impressive young man who somehow made it through the challenge of the foster system, had a clear sense of a career path and was denied that opportunity by a judge basically because of her personal bias. Amen, brother!
The fact is that since Mr. Sage was seven years old, he wanted to be a marine. By participating in the USMC Delayed Entry Program, Mr. Sage was encouraged to finish his high school education and also to better his skills, eat healthy and all that it takes to be a marine.
Yet somehow, this is not a good choice for Commissioner Mackel because she is opposed to the United States liberation of Iraq and the fact that, wether she likes it or not, it is the front line in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. I would like to know if this was peacetime, would same commissioner have allowed Mr. Sage to participate in the program? And, of course all Commissioner Mackel has done is delayed the inevitable and thus keeping Mr. Sage back when he would be ahead of the game and on his chosen path.
And the left wonders why conservatives and those who oppose judicial activism of this sort have hostility towards the so-called independent judiciary.
Independence does not mean that a judge can or should make a ruling based on their opinions and or prejudices. It belittles the purpose of the judiciary, which is to be unbiased and to use the law to make correct and just rulings.
Sometime next week, the transcripts of the hearing denying Mr. Sage his right to become a marine will be made public. It will be interesting what kind of socialbabble this commissioner will have used to deny a right to a young man who has already had a crummy start to life, being abandoned by his biological parents when he was two years old.
Hopefully, the crazed lefty Democrats that control the state assembly will let Mr. Smyth's bill, AB 2238, come up to the floor for an up-or-down vote. If they and the state senate pass the bill and Governor Arnold signs it, this will be true justice won for Mr. Sage and those that will follow him.
Because justice was denied by one of those judges' that know what is better for us than us.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Could The Jerusalem Slaughter Happen Here?
Tonight the State Of Israel is in a state of shock as an Arab Israeli opened fire in a Jewish Rabbinical seminary in the heart of Jerusalem. Eight were killed and four were injured before an armed civilian killed the gunman http://FoxNews.com, http://drudgereport.com, http://hughhewitt.com.
The question is, can it and the rocket attacks that strike southern Israel from the Hamas-dominated Gaza Strip happen here?
You betcha! And do not think that it would be limited to Jewish seminaries.
Liken what happened today to an ardent Protestant who went to a Roman Catholic seminary in Washington, D. C. with the murder of as many Roman Catholics as possible. Or, vice-versa. Or a Jewish gunman who went to an Islamic seminary with the mission to take out as many Islamics as possible.
Before any one thinks, "It could never happen here." one better realize this. That it is the way that the majority of Israelis live every single day. There is nowhere safe when a brutal attack takes place in the capital deep in the heart of Israel.
The open hostility to rabbinical students should be proof positive that the Arabs, and by extension the radical Islamics, do not just hate the existence of the State Of Israel, but the Jewish religion itself.
The hatred of Judaism in the Arab world is rampant. In Egypt, an Arab nation that has diplomatic relations with Israel, official state television presented a whole mini-series based on the "Protocol Of The Elders Of Zion", the Czarist Russian hit piece book that claimed a massive Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. The "Protocols" has long been discredited, but is taken as gospel in the Arab world. And among many, probably a large majority of Islamics and anti-Semitic Christians, many in the Mainline Protestant denominations that have sided with radical "Palestinians" and Islamics.
Jews in Arab and or Islamic-dominated nations live in fear and religious persecution. Now, with this brutal attack, they live in fear in their own homeland.
Yes, this can happen here and more than likely it will, God forbid. And it may happen sooner than we want to think as we continue to battle and defeat the radical Islamics and al-Queda.
But, we can not cut, run, and hide in the United States thinking that nothing will happen to us. I believe that 9/11 proved that to be wrong.
This is a stark reminder of the stakes in the upcoming presidential election. We know what Sen. John "F--- You" McCain would do and what Sens. Hillary Clinton and St. Barack Obama would do, or in their case not do.
All should pray for those who died and those that are injured. And let this not weaken Israel's or the United States' resolve in finding and taking out those who want this madness to continue.
WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!
If you should go to any of the websites that I linked, be prepared for some of the most gruesome photos you will see. I forgot that disclaimer in the beginning of this post.
The question is, can it and the rocket attacks that strike southern Israel from the Hamas-dominated Gaza Strip happen here?
You betcha! And do not think that it would be limited to Jewish seminaries.
Liken what happened today to an ardent Protestant who went to a Roman Catholic seminary in Washington, D. C. with the murder of as many Roman Catholics as possible. Or, vice-versa. Or a Jewish gunman who went to an Islamic seminary with the mission to take out as many Islamics as possible.
Before any one thinks, "It could never happen here." one better realize this. That it is the way that the majority of Israelis live every single day. There is nowhere safe when a brutal attack takes place in the capital deep in the heart of Israel.
The open hostility to rabbinical students should be proof positive that the Arabs, and by extension the radical Islamics, do not just hate the existence of the State Of Israel, but the Jewish religion itself.
The hatred of Judaism in the Arab world is rampant. In Egypt, an Arab nation that has diplomatic relations with Israel, official state television presented a whole mini-series based on the "Protocol Of The Elders Of Zion", the Czarist Russian hit piece book that claimed a massive Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. The "Protocols" has long been discredited, but is taken as gospel in the Arab world. And among many, probably a large majority of Islamics and anti-Semitic Christians, many in the Mainline Protestant denominations that have sided with radical "Palestinians" and Islamics.
Jews in Arab and or Islamic-dominated nations live in fear and religious persecution. Now, with this brutal attack, they live in fear in their own homeland.
Yes, this can happen here and more than likely it will, God forbid. And it may happen sooner than we want to think as we continue to battle and defeat the radical Islamics and al-Queda.
But, we can not cut, run, and hide in the United States thinking that nothing will happen to us. I believe that 9/11 proved that to be wrong.
This is a stark reminder of the stakes in the upcoming presidential election. We know what Sen. John "F--- You" McCain would do and what Sens. Hillary Clinton and St. Barack Obama would do, or in their case not do.
All should pray for those who died and those that are injured. And let this not weaken Israel's or the United States' resolve in finding and taking out those who want this madness to continue.
WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!
If you should go to any of the websites that I linked, be prepared for some of the most gruesome photos you will see. I forgot that disclaimer in the beginning of this post.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Let's Talk About Obama's Church
Since the Dinosaur, Drive-By, Mainstream Media spent much of the early Republican primary season assaulting Mitt Romney and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormons, maybe it is time to look at the Church of St. Barack Obama.
And, what a church it is!
St. Barack is a member of and attends Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago http://tucc.org.
Now, as noted in this blog several times, the UCC is the most liberal denomination in American Christendom. Makes my Episcopal Church look like the Southern Baptist Convention!
But Trinity, well Trinity is a church that is a, how can I write this, a black church. Not any black church but "Unashamedly Black and Unaplogetically Christian."
Now, I do not understand what it is to be unashamedly black. Of course there is not one thing to be ashamed of. It is how God created his people. I do understand being unaplogetically Christian. One should never have to apologize for being a follower of Jesus Christ.
But I think where it goes off the rails is the 10-point "Vision" of the Trinity United Church of Christ:
1) A congregation committed to ADORATION.
2) A congregation preaching SALVATION.
3) A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
4) A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
5) A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
6) A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
7) A congregation committed to HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.
8) A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
9) A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
10) A congregation committed to ECONOMIC PARITY.
WOW!
Where do I begin?
Nothing wrong with the first three points. It is traditional Christian thinking.
But, what does a commitment to Africa have to do with spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Or "cultural education?" What does that mean? Obviously it is an "African" education.
And what about a "Historical education of African people in Diaspora?" Now, we know that blacks where brought out of Africa, at the hands of other blacks, mostly through the slave trade. Is St. Barack's church teaching that? I doubt it.
"Liberation" means black liberation. But what are they liberating? Do they want to take over the United States? Do they want a black "homeland" here? Do they want to go back to Africa?
And "economic parity" is clear. Socialism.
This "church" had been led by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but he is being replaced this year. He had been spewing this rubbish for 36 years.
Basically, what Trinity preaches is a ostensibly black, Christian separatist movement.
Not one thing unifying about it.
It is no wonder that Pastor Wright does not see anything wrong with "Minister" Louis Farakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam. Mr. Farakhan is one of the most racist religious leaders in the United States. He, like Pastor Smith, believes in black separatism.
Now, the question is does St. Barack support all of this rubbish? If he does, then how can he run as the candidate of change and hope and unity? Is that just for "disadvantaged" blacks? And, what was St. Barack doing as a "community organizer" in the first place?
Again, Mormon doctrine was under attack and Mitt Romney had do explain it as much as possible. Why does St. Barack get a pass? And should he?
Go to the Trinity website, look it over and judge for yourself. I have and it is very disturbing and we all need to know more about this "church".
And, what a church it is!
St. Barack is a member of and attends Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago http://tucc.org.
Now, as noted in this blog several times, the UCC is the most liberal denomination in American Christendom. Makes my Episcopal Church look like the Southern Baptist Convention!
But Trinity, well Trinity is a church that is a, how can I write this, a black church. Not any black church but "Unashamedly Black and Unaplogetically Christian."
Now, I do not understand what it is to be unashamedly black. Of course there is not one thing to be ashamed of. It is how God created his people. I do understand being unaplogetically Christian. One should never have to apologize for being a follower of Jesus Christ.
But I think where it goes off the rails is the 10-point "Vision" of the Trinity United Church of Christ:
1) A congregation committed to ADORATION.
2) A congregation preaching SALVATION.
3) A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
4) A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
5) A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
6) A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
7) A congregation committed to HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.
8) A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
9) A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
10) A congregation committed to ECONOMIC PARITY.
WOW!
Where do I begin?
Nothing wrong with the first three points. It is traditional Christian thinking.
But, what does a commitment to Africa have to do with spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Or "cultural education?" What does that mean? Obviously it is an "African" education.
And what about a "Historical education of African people in Diaspora?" Now, we know that blacks where brought out of Africa, at the hands of other blacks, mostly through the slave trade. Is St. Barack's church teaching that? I doubt it.
"Liberation" means black liberation. But what are they liberating? Do they want to take over the United States? Do they want a black "homeland" here? Do they want to go back to Africa?
And "economic parity" is clear. Socialism.
This "church" had been led by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but he is being replaced this year. He had been spewing this rubbish for 36 years.
Basically, what Trinity preaches is a ostensibly black, Christian separatist movement.
Not one thing unifying about it.
It is no wonder that Pastor Wright does not see anything wrong with "Minister" Louis Farakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam. Mr. Farakhan is one of the most racist religious leaders in the United States. He, like Pastor Smith, believes in black separatism.
Now, the question is does St. Barack support all of this rubbish? If he does, then how can he run as the candidate of change and hope and unity? Is that just for "disadvantaged" blacks? And, what was St. Barack doing as a "community organizer" in the first place?
Again, Mormon doctrine was under attack and Mitt Romney had do explain it as much as possible. Why does St. Barack get a pass? And should he?
Go to the Trinity website, look it over and judge for yourself. I have and it is very disturbing and we all need to know more about this "church".
It's Official-The Mac Is It!
As of tonight, we can officially call Arizona senator John "F--- You" McCain the 2008 Republican presidential nominee. And the former Arkansas governor, the Rev. Mike Huckabee, has called it a day once the senator pulled a four-state sweep and the comensurate number of delagates, 1,191.
It was a very dramatic comeback for Sen. "F--- You" McCain who six months ago was all but given up for an also ran who may not have made it out of New Hampshire.
But for many Republicans, there is one over ridding issue. The War Against Islamofascist Terror. And because of that, Sen. "F--- You" McCain is the Republican nominee.
No, Sen. "F--- You" McCain is not the most conservative Republican to be the nominee. Many of us have a lot of problems with him. But, he is considerably better than either Laurel and Hardy, er Sens. Clinton and Obama, who the Democrats will at some point nominate for their presidential candidate.
And here is one thing that I hold out hope for.
That as President McCain, he will be more of a conservative than he has been in the senate.
Being the Commander-In-Chief has a way of doing that.
Whether we like it or not, he is our guy and this conservative Republican will be voting for John McCain in November.
It was a very dramatic comeback for Sen. "F--- You" McCain who six months ago was all but given up for an also ran who may not have made it out of New Hampshire.
But for many Republicans, there is one over ridding issue. The War Against Islamofascist Terror. And because of that, Sen. "F--- You" McCain is the Republican nominee.
No, Sen. "F--- You" McCain is not the most conservative Republican to be the nominee. Many of us have a lot of problems with him. But, he is considerably better than either Laurel and Hardy, er Sens. Clinton and Obama, who the Democrats will at some point nominate for their presidential candidate.
And here is one thing that I hold out hope for.
That as President McCain, he will be more of a conservative than he has been in the senate.
Being the Commander-In-Chief has a way of doing that.
Whether we like it or not, he is our guy and this conservative Republican will be voting for John McCain in November.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Gloria Steinem Is A Moral Midget
Ah, one of the Grand Dames of the left-wing feminist movement, Gloria Steinem, proved over the weekend that she is nothing but a moral midget in slamming Sen. John "F--- You" McCain over his time as a "guest" of the Hanoi Hilton.
According to Miss Steinem:
Suppose that John McCain had been Joan McCain, had got captured, shot down and had been a POW for eight years? "What did you do wrong to get captured? What terrible things did you do there while a prisoner for eight years." I mean, hello? This is supposed to be a qualification to be president? I don't think so. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/clinton-surroa.html
One does not know where to start, but I will correct the order of events, firstly.
John McCain was shot down and then taken prisoner and it was for five years.
Now that the time line is straight, what I do not understand is the female-male analogy.
Is Miss Steinem suggesting that a Joan McCain would have done something wrong to get shot down and captured? And that she would have been a sell-out while in captivity? That is so wrong. Miss Steinem is playing the victim card with gusto. She is putting women back oh, say about a hundred years at the short end. If a woman had been in the same exact circumstance as John McCain, she would have done the same thing.
As far as a qualification for being president, no it is no better than Sen. John Kerry possibly fabricating stories to obtain his medals. And being in the armed services does not make anyone more or less qualified to be elected president.
I have spent a lot of time on this blog writing about the political disagreements I have with Sen. "F--- You" McCain. But they are not personal. It is about policy. Even the "F--- You" McCain is nothing more than a little humor over his "F--- You" bomb to Sen. John Cornyn of Texas during the infamous immigration bill-scam debate.
But I will NEVER, EVER denigrate his character or what he endured as a prisoner of the brutal Red Vietnamese. John McCain went through unmentionable hell as a prisoner. He came back physically a broken man, to a nation that was so torn it could not show him the proper gratitude he and so many others deserved for going to a war that the United States did not have the will to win.
That is why I know that he wants the United States to not only win in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofascist Terror, but to defeat the Islamoterrorists all over the world. John McCain know better than most Americans what it is like to not only lose a war, Vietnam, but to come home to a seemingly ungrateful nation.
It is why at the end of the day, I will cast my vote for Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. For if the terrorists are afraid of President Bush, they will be petrified at a President McCain.
For Gloria Steinem to use the abuse that John McCain took at the hands of the Red Vietnamese and mock it shows why she is nothing but an ignorant, moral midget. And, Hillary Clinton should apologize to Sen. McCain yesterday.
According to Miss Steinem:
Suppose that John McCain had been Joan McCain, had got captured, shot down and had been a POW for eight years? "What did you do wrong to get captured? What terrible things did you do there while a prisoner for eight years." I mean, hello? This is supposed to be a qualification to be president? I don't think so. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/clinton-surroa.html
One does not know where to start, but I will correct the order of events, firstly.
John McCain was shot down and then taken prisoner and it was for five years.
Now that the time line is straight, what I do not understand is the female-male analogy.
Is Miss Steinem suggesting that a Joan McCain would have done something wrong to get shot down and captured? And that she would have been a sell-out while in captivity? That is so wrong. Miss Steinem is playing the victim card with gusto. She is putting women back oh, say about a hundred years at the short end. If a woman had been in the same exact circumstance as John McCain, she would have done the same thing.
As far as a qualification for being president, no it is no better than Sen. John Kerry possibly fabricating stories to obtain his medals. And being in the armed services does not make anyone more or less qualified to be elected president.
I have spent a lot of time on this blog writing about the political disagreements I have with Sen. "F--- You" McCain. But they are not personal. It is about policy. Even the "F--- You" McCain is nothing more than a little humor over his "F--- You" bomb to Sen. John Cornyn of Texas during the infamous immigration bill-scam debate.
But I will NEVER, EVER denigrate his character or what he endured as a prisoner of the brutal Red Vietnamese. John McCain went through unmentionable hell as a prisoner. He came back physically a broken man, to a nation that was so torn it could not show him the proper gratitude he and so many others deserved for going to a war that the United States did not have the will to win.
That is why I know that he wants the United States to not only win in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofascist Terror, but to defeat the Islamoterrorists all over the world. John McCain know better than most Americans what it is like to not only lose a war, Vietnam, but to come home to a seemingly ungrateful nation.
It is why at the end of the day, I will cast my vote for Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. For if the terrorists are afraid of President Bush, they will be petrified at a President McCain.
For Gloria Steinem to use the abuse that John McCain took at the hands of the Red Vietnamese and mock it shows why she is nothing but an ignorant, moral midget. And, Hillary Clinton should apologize to Sen. McCain yesterday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)