Interludes in the Control Room

Yesterday afternoon in the control room, I had two short conversation with a few coworkers...

Coworker #1: "Did you watch the debate last night?"

EL: "No. I had better things to do. How can you debate 8 or 9 different guys and have time enough to give substantive answers to lame questions?

Coworker #1: "Not all the questions were lame, you know they were posted online by some 3000 people.."

EL: "yeah, I heard. Weren't those thing available on YouTube all afternoon? couldn't the various campaigns have scanned them over a bit to get a picture of what the 'askers' wanted, and prep their answers ahead of time?"

Coworker #1: "Don't know about that... but you can check out the questions they asked on CNN.com"

EL: "I'll pass. I'm just not interested at this point. All these debates so far from even the first Primary... It just looks like a big infomercial for the Democratic Party. The only two who're really standing out are Obama and Clinton, with Edwards running a close third."

Coworker #1: You know, if Clinton wins..."

EL: "I've heard tell there's an 80% chance of that."

Coworker #1: yeah, looks like, but if she wins she'll likely get reelected which means we'll have lived through 32 years of only two families ruling the country?"

EL: "Ruling? [chuckles] Yeah, scary ain't it? Clinton messed up his eight. Didn't retaliate after the first attack on the World Trade Center. Did nothing substantive after the USS Cole... nothing after our Embassy's in Africa were bombed. And we tucked tail and ran after Mogadishu? Isn't that what the democrats are trying to do now?"

Coworker #1: "Right. Do we really want another eight years with two Clintons in the White House again?"


...::FADE TO INTERLUDE #2::...


Coworker #2: "What will they call Bill if his wife becomes president?"

Coworker #3: "Probably the "First Man"

EL: "Naw, Adam's the First Man. Let's please not compare him to Adam, however apropos... or not."

Coworker #2: "I think we should call him the 'First Lady'." [Chuckles all around]

EL: "What about the "First Ladies Man'?" [Guffaws all around]

Now, I thought "First Ladies man" was cute. Thought maybe I coined a term. But google, as of this morning, has the listing for "First Ladies Man" + "Clinton" at 408. Anyway, Clinton's two terms were near disasters, Bush's hasn't been much better; albeit he actually acted like a president when we were attacked... he rarely defends himself from unjust criticism... Now we have 8 more years of Clinton to look forward to? What a complete and utter disaster for this country!!

What? Are we going to 'ping-pong' the presidency back and forth between two families for the foreseeable future? Will Jeb Bush run after Hillary's stint? This is ridiculous. Anyone but Hillary, please. Even John Edwards.

Though I'd much prefer a Newt Gingrich, or a Fred Thompson... someone with back bone.

Back to the debate: The only candidate on the stage with both courage and intellectual honesty (and, according to Rush, 'The only adult on stage') was Joe Biden.

YouTube Questioner: "Dear Presidential Candidates. See those three flags over my shoulder? They covered the coffins of my grandmother, my father, and my oldest son. Someday mine will join them. I do not want to see my youngest sons join them. I have two questions. By what date after January 21st, 2009, will all US troops be out of Iraq, and how many family members do you have serving in uniform?"

Sen Biden's Response: "There's not a single military man in this audience who will tell this senator he can get those troops out in six months if the order goes today. Let's start telling the truth. Number one: you take all the troops out, you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the green zone where I've been seven times and shot at, you better make sure you have protection for them or let them die. Number two. So you can't leave them there, and it's going to take a minimum of 5,000 troops to 10,000 just to protect our civilians! So while you're taking them out, governor, take everybody out. That may be necessary. Number three, the idea that we all voted, except for me, for that appropriation, that man's son is dead. For all I know, it was an IED. Seventy percent of all the deaths occurred have been those roadside bombs. We had money in that bill to begin to build and send immediately mine resistant vehicles and increase by 80% the likelihood none of your cadets will die, general -- and they all voted against it. How, in good conscience, can you vote not to send those vehicles over there as long as there's one single, solitary troop there?"

Good answer Senator Biden!

Senators Clinton? Obama? Care to respond?

Here's more

My Narrow-Minded Faith

Thank you Ms. Green. Eloquent as always.

----

There is no God but God Almighty: The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, The Angel of the LORD, the Son of the Living God, Jesus Christ the Savior of the World, currently sitting at the right hand of the Father.

All Praise, All Glory, All Worship to God in the Highest. And to Jesus His Son, soon to be crowned King of kings and Lord of lords, who will sit upon the throne of his father David, in Jerusalem, and will rule the world in peace with an iron rod. We will beat our swords into plowshares and our spears into pruning hooks. What a day that will be!

Hallelujah!

Amen!!

----

Today is the day of salvation! Seek Him while He may yet be found!

Here's more

Worth remembering-- for it's beauty, if nothing else

The Garden

How vainly men themselves amaze
To win the palm, the oak, or bays,
And their uncessant labors see
Crowned from some single herb or tree,
Whose short and narrow-vergèd shade
Does prudently their toils upbraid;
While all the flowers and trees do close
To weave the garlands of repose.

Fair Quiet, have I found thee here,
And Innocence, thy sister dear!
Mistaken long, I sought you then
In busy companies of men:
Your sacred plants, if here below,
Only among the plants will grow;
Society is all but rude,
To this delicious solitude.

No white nor red was ever seen
So amorous as this lovely green;
Fond lovers, cruel as their flame,
Cut in these trees their mistress' name.
Little, alas, they know or heed,
How far these beauties hers exceed!
Fair trees! wheresoe'er your barks I wound
No name shall but your own be found.

When we have run our passion's heat,
Love hither makes his best retreat:
The gods who mortal beauty chase,
Still in a tree did end their race.
Apollo hunted Daphne so,
Only that she might laurel grow,
And Pan did after Syrinx speed,
Not as a nymph, but for a reed.

What wondrous life is this I lead!
Ripe apples drop about my head;
The luscious clusters of the vine
Upon my mouth do crush their wine;
The nectarine and curious peach
Into my hands themselves do reach;
Stumbling on melons as I pass,
Insnared with flowers, I fall on grass.

Meanwhile the mind, from pleasure less,
Withdraws into its happiness:
The mind, that ocean where each kind
Does straight its own resemblance find;
Yet it creates, transcending these,
Far other worlds, and other seas;
Annihilating all that's made
To a green thought in a green shade.

Here at the fountain's sliding foot,
Or at some fruit-tree's mossy root,
Casting the body's vest aside,
My soul into the boughs does glide:
There like a bird it sits and sings,
Then whets and combs its silver wings;
And, till prepared for longer flight,
Waves in its plumes the various light.

Such was that happy garden-state,
While man there walked without a mate:
After a place so pure and sweet,
What other help could yet be meet!
But 'twas beyond a mortal's share
To wander solitary there:
Two paradises 'twere in one
To live in Paradise alone.

How well the skillful gardener drew
Of flowers and herbs this dial new;
Where from above the milder sun
Does through a fragrant zodiac run;
And, as it works, the industrious bee
Computes its time as well as we.
How could such sweet and wholesome hours
Be reckoned but with herbs and flowers!


--Andrew Marvell (1621-1678)
First publication, circa 1681

Here's more

Tammy Faye Messner

1942-2007

"May the good Lord bless and keep you. May he make his face to shine upon you and be gracious unto you. May he lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace."

Here's more

ISAIAH 5:20, 24

Bauer: Evil of Islamo-fascism evident in U.S., Israel
Jim Brown OneNewsNow.com July 17, 2007

A prominent pro-Israel activist says "elites" in America are afraid to confront what he calls "the gathering storm of Islamo-fascism." And the evil behind Islamo-fascism, says Gary Bauer, is nearly incomprehensible.

American Values president Gary Bauer has told the Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in Washington, DC, that freedom of religion and freedom of speech are under attack from a "sick" and "evil" philosophy that is behind the terror campaign currently being waged against Israel.

Bauer, who was greeted with a 20-second standing ovation after being introduced, said a certain group in America wants to make excuses for Islamo-fascism.

"If a bunch of Iraqi children are blown up because they're accepting candy from a U.S. soldier, these elites blame George Bush," Bauer shared. "If rockets are pouring into northern Israel from Hezbollah, these elites blame Israel. They come up with a thousand excuses -- 'well, it's social injustice; it's poverty' -- all sorts of things to explain away what's happening."

The former presidential candidate characterized the fight against Islamic terrorism as "a great battle between good and evil." In addition, he said, the fruits of the Islamo-fascist ideology are evident in the terror campaign being unleashed against Israel.

"[W]e've all seen the photos and the pictures of mothers in Gaza leaping with joy at the news that their son [or daughter] has blown himself up, as long as they're assured that he killed Jews in the process," Bauer pointed out. "Every mother, I believe, has been imbued by God with the impulse to protect their young. But this philosophy is so evil it can even make a mother shed that normal motherly emotion."

CUFI's Second Annual Israel/Washington DC Summit continues through Thursday, July 19.

----

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! ...as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel."

Personal Note: This nation IS sick, and it's not simply a Democrat vs. Republican, or Liberal vs. Conservative issue. It's a Light vs. Darkness issue. It's a Children of God vs. the Children of Satan issue. The war is ratcheting up, but FEAR is not at issue here... not for the righteous, for what have we to fear knowing Light has already won? All we must do is hold the ground given to our care and defense. And warn as many as will listen that the time for choosing Light is now. Better now than tomorrow, for no one is promised tomorrow.

Here's more

Need Any More Proof that Democrats are Idiots?

Republicans are trying to insert language into a Homeland Security bill that will protect, from civil liability, Americans who report suspicious behavior to the authorities... ala the Flying Imam's who are currently suing the passengers who reported THEIR suspicious behavior. All the evidence appears to paint a picture of deliberate suspicious behavior. And guess what? Yeah, that's right. Democrats are trying to kill the language that would protect citizens who turn in the bad guys. That means the clerk who reported to the authorities the Fort Dix plot could get sued. Why don't we take it a step further and make it illegal for anyone to report crime anonymously via community "CrimeStoppers" program. That'll teach the dirty snitches.

Have the democrats learned nothing from 9/11? Do they not believe the heated testimony of those who want to kill Americans? Pull out of Iraq? Punish the citizens who report suspicious behavior?

Democrats are too dangerous to hold office.

Here's more

That's Right! No BLOODBATH after Vietnam Pullout

John Kerry never disappoints. Always an entertaining liar.

Here's more

The Limbaugh Compromise

What follows is brilliant. And it'll never happen. Democrat in Congress don't have a single complete spine between them... Nope, I take it back. Joseph Lieberman DOES have a complete spine.


"I want to present a hypothetical here. I know this would not happen, but I'll offer a compromise, the Limbaugh Compromise to the Democrats in the Senate and in the House. The Limbaugh compromise:

"I will agree to pull our troops out of Iraq if you Democrats will agree to my conditions after the defeat, and here are my conditions to agree with you on a pullout.

"When Al-Qaeda celebrates after we pull out, after we admit defeat, every TV image of Al-Qaeda celebrating must be a split screen. On one side, Al-Qaeda celebrating; on the other side, I want pictures of Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer and Carl Levin smiling and congratulating themselves.

"When Al-Qaeda slaughters Iraqis after we pull out and we see the pictures of this on TV, every TV image must show a split screen. On one side of the screen, the bloody slaughter scenes; on the other side of the screen, pictures of smiling Harry Reid, smiling Chuck Schumer, smiling Carl Levin congratulating each other with big laughs.

"When Al-Qaeda takes over another village, ransacks another village, another town, another city, after we pull out, on one side of the screen, I want desperate villagers running for their lives. On the other side of the split screen, I want pictures of smiling Harry Reid, smiling Chuck Schumer, smiling Carl Levin, shaking hands and embracing and congratulating themselves.

"When the American flag burners in the Middle East start burning [our] flag and the president and vice president in effigy, I want one side of the split screen to show every image of that happening. I want the flag burners. I want the characters of Bush and Cheney being burned in effigy, and on the other side of the split screen, I want pictures of a smiling Harry Reid, a smiling Chuck Schumer, a smiling Carl Levin embracing, shaking hands, laughing and congratulating themselves.

"I think that's a reasonable compromise, and I've offered it here in all sincerity. If the Left will agree to this compromise, I will join them in calling for a pullout from Iraq."

Here's more

Christians Crucified In Iraq, Dutch MP Says

The tolerant religion of peace...

Comments on this article at BosNewsLife are not very 'Christian'. Here are all the comments-- in order --from a poster calling himself "Mohammed"

"We we conquer Europe...starting with the Netherlands, Belgium ,England ,Germany and Sweden. Your children will be of Arabic blood. We will own your women. your children and your property. The demographics are on our side and you have spit upon your christian heritage. With time...not war or violence...we muslims shall overtake you, conquer you and your children will be as servants in thier own land."

"In Europe...christians are a minority and getting even smaller. It is furtile ground for Islam This once staunchly ancient christian continent will be overcome by Mohammed. The new E.U. doesn't even mention God or mention its christian heretage. Athiesm and Masonic Relativism rule supreme in Europe. It is ready to fall to the forces of Islam...give us a mere 50 years and Europe will be Muslim."

"We will overtake Europe and America shall be the next to fall. Within 100 years Islam will be the predominate religion. The fastest growing religion in America is Islam. Your wives and children are weak "Relativist". They shall take up the righteous name of Mohammed. They shall be fathered by Arabic blood .Give us but 100 years and America is Islamaic.You lost...we won!"

"No...you so-called christians permit abortion, gay marriage and interbreeding between human and animal. You do nothing...nothing. Your so enthralled with your own perverse world. You will be converted to Islam...your women shall lay with real men of God. You perverted christians will reap what you have sown...death of the spirit and sons of satan."

"Yes...you are weak. Allah shall stand on your pitiful hand wrigging. We have all the oil...you are slaves to oil. Your country will soon colapse because you need Arab oil. Your children shall cry from hunger and your young men shall fight for scrapes. Your women shall give themselves willingly to our Islamic way of life to feed thier starving children. Victory is ours!...watch the next 10 years and see how you will beg Allah and Muhammeds mercy!"

"You make me laugh...your oil fields can't even pruduce 1/2 of what you need daily. When your economy collapses...Islam will be there to convert the remnant that survives after you kill each other over a loaf of bread. Have you seen you dollar lately...its worth nothing! Time is short for you christians."

And Democrats want to cut and run in Iraq. Just remember, America deserves every terrorist action upon her soil because she has forgotten God. And Washington D.C. is 'Infidel' Prime.

Another commenter, Jacques, has this to say...

"Muhammad is right but partially only: We Christians have discarded our Christian heritage, allowing monstrous things in our societies such as abortion, cloning, same-sex, pornography: God's chastisement is upon us and we will suffer a lot under the Islamic yoke and perish under its sword unless we repent and we come back to our Christian roots. But Muhammad is wrong bcs the Christian martyr's blood will call revenge of God upon Islam. Islam will be destroyed and all Muslims will convert to the true faith or will perish: There are a lot of prophecies saying that. Islam was on the way to disappear one century ago: It is our money (the money of OIL) that revived it along the 20th century. That's the mistake of the Islamists: They believe that's their strong faith that make Islam to expand, while that's only their financial power."

Amen. Islam is doomed to a future of blood and fire. Islam will never know peace apart from God. Not Allah, but the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the Angel of the Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God. No muslim will enter Heaven.

Yeah. You can comment.

Here's more

Sorry, no commenting except for team members. Wanna be one? Send a request. For now I'm simply tired of it all. Have something to say? Send it via email... maybe it'll find its way into comments. I'm not long for this blog anyway.

Here's more

One more time for the hard of hearing...

Can Bob Novak Change Media’s View of Valerie Plame Wilson Affair?


No.

Because the media are filled with lying, hypocritical, mental and moral defectives.

Here's more

In Conversation with a Nurse

It would seem doctors in this area do not treat causes-- a stunning admission from a nurse who seemed equally stunned to be admitting it. Yes, it's true! Doctors treat symptoms, not causes! According to this nurse, whose husband weighs more than 300 lbs, and is diabetic on the verge of losing a foot, she's the shocking victim of modern American medicine. I say shocking, because she was shocked that she hadn't realized it herself until it came out of her own mouth.

For all her training, all her knowledge, it never occured to her to apply what she knew about nutrition, and the chemicals that comprise our food, to treat the cause of her husbands problems, seeking instead to rely on the standard treatment of symptoms.

It was amazing to hear this nurse of 15 years admit that the reason some diseases-- diabetes in particular --are considered incurable, is because they ARE incurable when treated as a collection of symptoms, rather than digging for and treating the underlying causes. Got a cough? prescribe something to stop it! Got pneumonia? Prescribe a strong antibiotic! Nothing wrong with that, right? Often times such treatments are necessary. But what is completely UN-necessary is leaving the treatment at that... not looking for why one has a cough or why one has pneumonia. Treating the symptoms alone and ignoring the cause.

This woman was on the verge of getting her husband to undergo a lapband procedure to help him lose weight, despite knowing all the risks both during and after the procedure. What was it Hypocrates, the father of medicine, said?

"Let food be thy medicine, and medicine be thy food"

She also admitted that the doctors she knows all think people who prefer more holistic aproaches to medicine are kooks.

The conversation ended with her determined to use her knowledge and skills to attack the cause, and to seek a more holistic lifestyle to include changing her and her husbands diet.

Bravo!


Weigh that with what Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, had to say about revamping America's healthcare system.... Start at the beginning! In the education of doctors!

Mike Adams has a not too funny cartoon on the difference between how China's deals with corrupt FDA officials and how the U.S. deals with corrupt FDA officials. The difference is stark. He has a compelling commentary there as well.

















The body can heal itself if you give it what it needs in terms of raw material... and if you're religiously diligent. We are fearfully and wonderfully made. These bodies were meant to live forever, and yet the average life expectancy is somewhere in the neighborhood of 70?

Figure it out for yourself-- I know one nurse who has! The only way you'll believe is to figure it out for yourself.

Here's more

Pithy Review: 1408

They stopped making movies like this decades ago.

The last fifteen seconds serves up a heart-wrenching twist; the kind that grabs the eyeballs and squeezes out its due in tears. It's an ending that is both unambiguous, and the alien step-sister to what passes for horror these days.

It was worth every penny of its matinee price and then some.

Here's more

Adieu...

I was given an orchard
To tend and to manage
Many long years ago
That has since grown savage
I cared nothing for pruning
Neither harvest nor toil
I cared nothing for weeding
Or tending the soil
Yet as day lay setting
I survey what was mine
And there'll be no breads
Or late summer wines
For the grain fields have perished
The arbors are thin
No figs on the bough
'neath these gables of sin
I'll reap what I have sown
Which is little of worth
For Him who so gifted me
With rich fertile earth
I must seem ungrateful
With so small a yield
Of the promise of bounty
From orchard and field
Pitiful in comparison
To His mercy and grace
I am filled with shame
To be given a place
As a welcomed honored son
Oh, what mercy is mine
To be so utterly loved
By One so graciously kind


ELAshley
071207.075430.6

Here's more

It's Official...

If you're not Catholic you're not a proper Christian.

Or so says a 16-page report issued by the Vatican and endorsed by Pope Benedict XVI.

From the TimesOnline...

The Vatican has described the Protestant and Orthodox faiths as "not proper Churches" in a document issued with the full authority of the Pope.

Anglican leaders reacted with dismay, accusing the Roman Catholic Church of paradoxical behaviour. They said that the new 16-page document outlining the "defects" of non-Catholic churches constituted a major obstacle to ecumenism.

Now personally, I don't give two figs for Ecumenism, because it seeks to draw all faiths together in a kind of shared... spirituality... which is contrary to the doctrines of faith contained within the Bible. There is only one God. And very few "Religions" worship Him.

But as for Defects within NON-Catholic churches, let's turn the lens on Catholicism for a moment...

The Eucharist, according to the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, is the actual physical flesh of Jesus Christ Himself. Communion for Catholics is like going to a great big boar-roast-- a glorified Hawaiian luau. Every time good faithful Catholics line up to the altar the priests carve a little off His pierced side to plop into the starving mouths of the faithful. This Eucharist is what makes the believer clean... what sanctifies him, not the shed blood of Jesus, or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Mary, the perpetual Virgin, is co-redemptrix for believers. People pray to Mary so she can pray to her son who is angry with Mankind for rejecting and killing Him.

Mary was born without sin... immaculately conceived! Which means she could have died for the sins of mankind had she been able to live a sinless life. What need she then of bearing the Son of God if she herself could have went to that old rugged cross?

Did you know Mary is called the Queen of Heaven? In Akkad she [the Queen of Heaven] was called Ishtar. In Sumer she was called Inanna. In Egypt, Isis. All these women were goddesses; each referred to as 'The Queen of Heaven.'


But in truth...

The Eucharist is just a cracker. Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of me." Talk about putting God in a box! These people keep him on the carving table!

Jesus said, "I AM the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." Sorry, no mention of Mary in there.

And why the insistence in turning Mary into a goddess? Doesn't Catholicism recognize that by doing so they break the Commandment that admonishes against having "other" gods before Him? This is Idolatry

As Mary being born of a Virgin herself.... Sorry, there's no mention in scripture to support this. None whatsoever.


I'm truly sorry Pope Benedict, but when it comes to pointing out defects, I'm afraid you don't have much room to talk.

Here's more

What About Fairness Doctrine for Education?

Here is a reasoned, coherent argument FOR including intelligent design in Public Education's curriculum.

Artificial Life by Intelligent Design
by Babu Ranganathan

Here's more

Measured in Inevitability

There are seven Continents. One has no government to speak of, and no divisions-- at least not the kind that foment conflict. It is united in its isolation and its inhospitable climate... no one, aside from the scientist and the strange, really want to live there year round. And even the scientist doesn't want to stay there and make a life for himself.

Another is a nation unto itself. It has a single government, and is unified in national pride and spirit.

Then there is North and South America, Africa, Europe and Asia.

Asia is rife with divisions which has resulted in bloodshed throughout human history. Especially in this last century.

Africa is a veritable basket case of divisions, feuds, petty tyrants and quasi-kings. With the exception of South Africa, life is cheap among the nations of Africa. Africa has seen ethnic cleansing, genocide, slavery, torture, mutilation, rape, AIDS, starvation, depots, famine, neglect, ignorance... and so much more.

Yet for all the divisions between ethnic groups, religious groups, and national borders, Africa is entertaining the idea of a continental union-- perhaps inspired by Europe and the success of the Euro --encompassing the entire continent. There are many hurdles to overcome before such a vision is even remotely possible. For now, call it a Continental Pipe-dream.

There has also been talk among some South American leaders of creating a European Style union there, encompassing the whole of the Continent... Chavez among them, though I suspect he envisions himself as king over such a fiefdom.

Then there is Europe, whose union is nothing short of remarkable. That they have advanced to the point where they share a single currency! Ratification of a Constitution is not far off. Already the Euro is a greater monetary powerhouse than the US dollar, and has been for the last couple of years.

Europe is seeking to take the lead in Peace Talks between Israel and the greater Middle East. They desire to extend their membership to Turkey, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Libya... all the lands once ruled by the Roman Empire, though in its present incarnation I don't see Libya, Egypt, OR Syria joining the EU-- Ghadaffi has expressed great interest in creating an African Union. But Israel... Israel greatly desires membership.

A poll from February of this year showed 75% of Israelis 'would like Israel to be part of the European Union'. Only 11% said they would leave Israel if granted EU citizenship-- though the article did not say 'to where.'

Lastly there's North America: the United States, Canada and Mexico. Talk of a North American Union with open borders and a common currency is already making people both nervous and angry. There are also many who scoff at the idea, saying no such plan is in the works. And yet many of America's policy meetings between her member countries seem aimed at loosening the borders that separate the three, rather than strengthening them.

Adjusting tack, the European Union, even after it finally adopts a Constitution will still not be that prophetic 'Revived Roman Empire' described in the Bible. But the EU must be in place for that Empire to arise. Europe, whether anyone reading this cares to believe, will supersede the United States in terms of economic and military power. And it will be in our lifetime.

The world is changing. It's never stopped, in fact. I asked in Unpopular whether anyone truly believed America would be free 20 or 30 years from now. Many of the responces pick up the ball and run with the belief America will shine even greater in years to come-- and that may be true --declaring we will be MORE Free. Mark even told me to "chin-up," that things aren't really as bad as they seem. But I'm reminded of a quote from "The Matrix"...

"Do you hear that Mister Anderson? That is the sound of Inevitability."

For some of you, the idea of "prophecy being fulfilled in our lifetime" is probably a ridiculous notion, never mind the fact that Israel became a nation again, after 2500 years of dispersement. Never mind the fact that Israel now controls Jerusalem, whose history extends as far back as the book of Genesis.

The Euro is gaining in strength-- it is already worth more than the dollar. Europe will soon ratify a Constitution. She will increase in stature while America decreases. Petty squabbling among America's elite will result in a decrease of personal liberty... it's already happening. It happened under FDR's watch, Kennedy's watch, Nixon's, Carter's, Reagan's, Clinton's, Bush's... The changes have been incremental and so small as to not draw much attention, but the changes are apparent to anyone looking. Change is a simple fact of life. In point of fact, Change is the one UN-changing force in the lives of men.

Do we have freedoms today we didn't yesterday? Of course. But at what price? What was the trade off? I can tell you what the trade off WILL be... in due course.

National Sovereignty.

"Do you hear that Mister Anderson? That is the sound of Inevitability."

Just as over geological Ages the Continents drifted, deepening the gulfs between, so too have they begun now to drift back, metaphorically speaking, in an ebb and flow measured in Millenia. The world is getting smaller. Language is no longer a barrier.

The work at Babel was abandoned circa 5000 years ago. But 'Babel' is beginning to rise again. Both figuratively AND literally. Babylon is rising... from ignominity to new world wonder. And the spiritual work that was abandoned in her some 5000 years ago will also rise with her.

Say what you will. The evidence is all around you. I can't make you open you eyes. I can't make you believe.

But I made you read, didn't I?

Here's more

Now praying gets 7 Christians arrested

Holding Bibles while lying prostrate = 'Disturbing Peace'

Here's more

Unpopular

Not to be the voice of pessimism, but does anyone really believe America will be "Free" 20 years from now?

30 years from now?

Have we not pushed the envelope of "Freedom" too far? That by lying idly by, allowing "Progressive" change to occur, it may be too late to take it all back? A tea party is pretty much out of the question-- the government would only send in troops and shoot us all. Does anyone recall Kent State?

Are we really "Free"? Is this still "America"?

Let's talk about the Bill of Rights. Why do you suppose the Framers chose to protect speech? And what is it about speech that needs protecting? What KIND of speech, exactly, needs protecting? I'll tell you... Unpopular speech.

To protect the voice of dissidents, is the highest charge of a just and fair government, and our Founders knew this well. How do I know this? It was the very first thing they addressed in the Bill of Rights:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

What's very interesting to note about the First Amendment, is it's subject matter. First, there is the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses, comprising this nations right to Freedom of Religion. And here's the interesting part: Immediately after is Freedom of Speech. Now, why do you suppose they included Freedom of Religion in the same Amendment as Freedom of Speech (to say nothing of the Press, Assembling, and Redress)? Were they not then deemed to be of equal importance?

Let's extend this line of thought a little further...

If we've allowed this nation to devolve to such a point that many feel the squashing of Christian liberty is not only Constitutional, but chic in many instances, why should it surprise us that they now want to squash speech? Again, what kind of speech is protected by the First Amendment? Unpopular speech.

Many in this nation already believe they can toss out the Ten Commandments, Portraits of Jesus, and any mention of Jesus in Student sponsored prayer from the public square. And they've largely gotten away with it because Liberalism has been largely responsible for the state of our Public Education System. Too many students graduate from Public Education without an adequate, factual, understanding of our Founding, our Constitution, or our History. By design? Who can say, but it's not relevant to my point, which is: Because of the poor state of education in this country, many citizens see no problem whatsoever with regulating speech. The Fairness Doctrine is a prime example.

What kind of speech does the First Amendment protect? Unpopular speech. Why does the Left and their uneducated myrmidons see no problem in squashing the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz and so many more? Because they see nothing wrong with kicking God out of the classroom. Because they see no problem with stipping the Ten commandments from the Courtroom wall. Because they've felt no compunction in inventing doctrines like "Separation of Church and State" and the "Fairness Doctrine". Both of which go against the grain of real Americans, and blatantly violate, the First Amendment.

If they care nothing for the First Amendment, why should we expect them to respect the others?

So again, I ask you...

Do you really believe America will be free 20... 30... years from now? How much more "Progressive" -ness can this nation absorb and still REMAIN America?

Here's more

George Washington had this to say in his farewell address, 1796....

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

"It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

"Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened."

And from where does enlightenment come? From secular knowledge alone? Or is it that, as Washington stated, Enlightenment is founded upon religion and morality. Do intellectual pursuits and honesty suffer because of the public acknowledgement of Religion and Morality? Of God? Or is it that such intellectual pursuits and honesty are dependent upon Religion and Morality?

So what has happened in the last 211 years that has so changed the philosophy of our founding principles? Have we become more enlightened? To the point that we realized Religion and Morality are hinderances? Or have we adopted strange gods? Marxism. Multi-culturalism. Among others.

How has modern enlightenment managed to convince itself that it does not need religion or morality... or God? How have we gotten to the place where the ACLU can claim a painting of Jesus in a St. Tammany parish Courthouse is unConstitutional? How is such a painting unConstitutional now, when Men like George Washington and our founding fathers clearly believed otherwise?

How long will America continue to be free if Americans don't even know the history of their nations founding, and the principles upon which it was built? How have we allowed the ACLU and Liberalism to so distort the Constitution to the point that America may well not survive?

We have the freedoms we enjoy today BECAUSE of Religion and Morality. Because the men and women who fought for this nation held strongly to those two pillars. But sappers have been at the foundation for almost a century, and their work is nearly complete.

George Washington would not recognize America today. He would likely weep for the dehumanization of the unborn, and a lack of religious knowledge and morality in this once great nation. What good is education in America if it neglects Religion and Morality?

Enjoy your fourth of July. And pray for this nation.

Here's more

Regarding the Libby Commutation -- Corrected

Liberals in the Media and elsewhere are shocked... simply SHOCKED... and outraged that President Bush commuted Scooter Libby's two-and-a-half-year prison term.

As with so many other things, these Liberals are hypocrites and worse... deceitful to boot.

1. Some have accused conservatives of holding a double standard in that they castigated Clinton for lying to a Federal Grand Jury, yet pushed for a Libby pardon.

What's hypocritical about the Left's accusation here is President Clinton didn't spend a single day in prison-- wasn't even sentenced to prison. So the double standard lies in the Left's desire to see a Republican staffer punished more harshly than a Democratic president for, essentially, the very same crime.

2. This past march when Libby was convicted, Liberal Media mouthpieces all over the airwaves (including FOX) touted this as "The highest-ranking White House official" ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair.

But this is patently false. Does anyone remember Henry Cisneros? Bill Clinton Cabinet Member? Henry Cisneros Secretary of Housing and Urban Development? The same Henry Cisneros who was indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, giving false statements and obstruction of Justice. The same Cisneros who managed a plea agreement of 'guilty' to lying to the FBI, who also managed to avoid jail alrogether. And the Left are screaming about Libby getting his sentence commuted? Besides which, Cisneros' conviction was AFTER Iran-Contra. Which makes Cisneros the highest White House official who would have been ordered to prison for a very long time.... had he not gotten off the hook big-time. The Clinton White House stone-walled the Barrett investigation at every turn-- the net result being that Cisneros was let off the hook. Last time I checked, EVERY member of the President's Cabinet outranks the Vice President's chief of staff.

3. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew who leaked the Plame name BEFORE he began to focus on the office of the Vice President. Before. And that 'who' was Richard Armitage-- there's your man. And yet Fitzgerald continued his investigation, and Libby for some inexplicable reason chose to lie about something that ultimately had no bearing on the outing of a NON-covert CIA operative. Even on the day Fitzgerald handed down his indictment, he clearly stated that Ms. Plame was NOT outed, and that NO charge for such was included in the indictment.

So Henry Cisneros, a bigger political fish than Libby; he pleads guilty to a lesser charge and ultimately spends NO time in jail, eventually getting a pardon from his boss, while Libby gets 30 months for the very same "crime" to which Cisneros pled guilty? So Libby, a Republican, get's a harsher sentence than Cisneros, a Democrat?

Talk about injustice! Clinton tells a bold-faced lie to a Federal Grand Jury, is justly impeached for it, get's to keep his office, and his freedom, but Libby get's two and a half years? Cisneros get's NO time, and the Liberal pus-gobs on TV get all indignant over Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence?

And many of these "Wonders of Intellectual Acuity" think talk-radio needs to be reined in? It's the other way around. Liberal Media needs to be reined in. They have a lot of nerve accusing talk-radio of propagating distortions of fact.


How about these pardons? Signed by President Clinton on his last day in office, for people who did far worse, by degrees, than Libby.

Susan McDougal, who had already completed her sentence, was pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal; McDougal had served 18 months on contempt charges for refusing to testify about Clinton's role.

Dan Rostenkowski, a former Democratic Congressman convicted in the Congressional Post Office Scandal. Rostenkowski had served his entire sentence.

Melvin J. Reynolds, a Democratic Congressman from Illinois, who was convicted of bank fraud, 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice, and solicitation of child pornography had his sentence commuted on the bank fraud charged and was allowed to serve the final months under the auspices of a half way house. He had served his entire sentence on child sex abuse charges before the commutation of the later convictions.

Roger Clinton, the president's half-brother, on drug charges after having served the entire sentence more than a decade before. He was also briefly alleged to have been utilized in lobbying for the Braswell pardon, among others.


President Clinton waited 'til all these (with the exception of Roger who finished his sentence a decade BEFORE president Clinton took office) served their sentences, THEN pardoned them. A lot of good that did MISTER McDougal, who died in prison.

James McDougal died of a heart attack in federal prison in Fort Worth, Texas. The circumstances of his death remain questionable: he was apparently denied access to his heart medication, and he was placed in solitary confinement without the medication.

So, Scooter libby gets a commutation-- but not a pardon! And the Media wonders about double standards?

But back to Cisneros in closing: Who here remembers David Barrett, the Independent Counsel assigned the job of investigating Cisneros? From Wiki:

The office of the independent counsel issued a press release along with the final report stating:

An accurate title for the Report could be, "WHAT WE WERE PREVENTED FROM INVESTIGATING." After a thorough reading of the Report it would not be unreasonable to conclude as I have that there was a coverup at high levels of our government and, it appears to have been substantial and coordinated. The question is why? And that question regrettably will go unanswered. Unlike some other coverups, this one succeeded.

Here's the disconnect in Liberal minds [at least in my neck of the woods]. Former Governor Don Siegleman and Health South CEO Richard Scrushy have been sentenced to decent jail terms, seven and a half and six years respectively. Yet on a local talk radio on Liberal Night [yes, they only get one night], these men bemoan Libby's commutation, while insisting Siegleman and Schrushy should be let out of jail. There is a HUGE double standard here.

_________
Apologies for the error. All I can only point to are the late hour and heavy eyelids for confusing Henry Cisneros with Michael Milken. My overall point remains however: the glaring double-standard of Liberals and Media, their hypocrisy, and their deceitfulness in relating the facts...

Here's more