What did I say yesterday about the left and the 'pure' motive? Well here it is front and center on the big ol' tube. Remember, I said the liberal left would always use the excuse of ' I did it from conscience' for any deed they are accused of, no matter how dastardly. Also, they are call the leaker a 'whistle-blower'. See, it's okay! They have used this excuse so many times in the past and are using it now to try and destroy this country.
Katie Couric of NBC's "Today Show" had reporter James Risen on, who has written a book on NSA leaks and, of course, he writes for the New York Times. Writing for the Times makes everything and anything suspect.
James Risen is the guy who claims to have the inside scoop on the NSA spy intercepts. He say he got this confidential information from a 'patriot' that is concerned about our government that's out of control. Risen says that his leaker is 'pure' of heart and so his motive is justified.
In the New York Times and on national TV, these media elites, like Risen, believe that they are in sole possession of the truth. It doesn't matter what the facts are, even if they are laid out right in front of them, they will deny their existence. It has never been necessary to use facts to justify a train of thought for the liberal left. They have lived in a fantasy land for so long that now it's a natural act to change events to fit one's view of how the world should look and act.
We will find out just what the truth is, I hope, when the Grand Jury, being assembled by the Justice Department, calls Risen to divulge his sources. The information that he has is top secret and therefore against the law to release it to the public. Of course, Risen being a domestic terrorist, has no interest in obeying the law, especially when he can strike at the heart of the country. What foreign terrorist couldn't do to us, the Risens of this world and the New York Times will.
The Justice department is investigating all aspects of the NSA leak and the European prisoner locations leak that came out last month.
Here's a good one. Howard Dean, today, sent out a message to Democrats all around the country, under rocks and hollow logs, explaining how the President's order to spy on terrorists is some how connected to President Bush's nomination of Samuel Alito to the supreme Court. The nomination hearings are starting soon so Dean is laying the ground work to smear him anyway he can.
It make sense that he would do this as the Democrats are probably responsible for the leaks of classified information in the first place, so why not use their own outrage for these leaks to condemn the President and smear Alito at the same time as some right wing mad man who supports spying on everybody.
I am getting very tired of the same old and tired accusations that the Democrats use to protect their lack of will and moral fiber. The people of this country are not buying into this crap of ant-Americanism anymore. You have to wonder why the Democrats hate this country so much!!
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Monday, January 02, 2006
Schumer on Justice for All
I watched a little bit of Fox News on Sunday with Mike Wallace when he asked a few questions of Chuck Schumer about the leak of classified information to the New York Times. It's interesting to note that Senator Schumer didn't go off half cocked as he usually does on subjects that have the potential to harm the President.
The question was about the investigation that is on going now from the Justice Department into the leaks about the NSA digital intercepts and the release of information on the prisoner detention centers in Europe. Both are highly classified and are very important to our national security in fighting the war on terror.
Schumer's response was measured to say the least. The question from Mike Wallace was how will you responded to the investigation and prosecutions of these leakers? Schumer thought that we have to protect our sources of information and that our national security would be compromised if we didn't. He also stated, in effect, that we must be careful as to who these individuals are because they might be serious individuals that are very frustrated with the situation that we now face in Iraq and how the President is handling it. If it was leaked to hurt the country, that is a different story. Justice must be tempered as to the motive.
I have used my own phrasing here to sum up what I believe he said as close as I can remember, but in the long run it's his intent here to tread the high rung of the fence, something that he hasn't been party to for many years. He has been watching the recent polls that show the liberal agenda of defeat is wrong headed. The public isn't buying it.
It's hard to believe that we have to say it's okay to damage the security of the country if our motive in doing so is an act of conscience. It's like the Democrats back in the 60's and early 70's protesting the war in Vietnam. They thought is was okay to destroy buildings and kill innocent people in the streets to make their point. Their motive was pure - so it's okay. I saw it happen on campus !
If we have a systemic release of secret information to the media with the intent to destroy President Bush and our government by anti-war groups, or any other group that hates this country like many of the environmental crazies, it's okay, according to Schumer, their actions are justified because, in their hearts, they really believe they are right. The means justifies the ends.
By his definition then, those that want to destroy this country because they hate us, also by definition, the Islamic terrorists, we have an absolute right to bring them to justice by what ever means under the law. We have to understand, he is saying what the Bush Administration has done with the NSA is okay, and as long as the investigation into the leaks doesn't extend to those poor individuals with good intentions, liberal members of congress and big media reporters.
My question then is, what about the statements made by members of Congress that are worse then those of the terrorist? Schumer, Reid, Murtha and Durbin have not released classified information, as far as I know, although I wouldn't put it passed them to do so if they thought it would advance their cause, they have, through their statements, given 'aid and comfort' to the enemies of this country.
Their words are intended to destroy a sitting president, and by trying to do so, have caused our country harm, giving the enemy hope that we will give up our quest for freedom and democracy in the middle east. They think that if they just hang on long enough, they can win the war. How could they think other wise? The Democrats have demonstrated, on many occasions, that they are on the side of the terrorist. They believe that defeat of our troops, our country, over seas, means power for the liberal Democrats. They are invested in defeat.
Is the release of top secrets any worse then what our own Senators are doing in our nations capital? Do these Senators and representatives have the best interests of this country at heart? I think not! Are we justified in trying to bring them to justice?
The question was about the investigation that is on going now from the Justice Department into the leaks about the NSA digital intercepts and the release of information on the prisoner detention centers in Europe. Both are highly classified and are very important to our national security in fighting the war on terror.
Schumer's response was measured to say the least. The question from Mike Wallace was how will you responded to the investigation and prosecutions of these leakers? Schumer thought that we have to protect our sources of information and that our national security would be compromised if we didn't. He also stated, in effect, that we must be careful as to who these individuals are because they might be serious individuals that are very frustrated with the situation that we now face in Iraq and how the President is handling it. If it was leaked to hurt the country, that is a different story. Justice must be tempered as to the motive.
I have used my own phrasing here to sum up what I believe he said as close as I can remember, but in the long run it's his intent here to tread the high rung of the fence, something that he hasn't been party to for many years. He has been watching the recent polls that show the liberal agenda of defeat is wrong headed. The public isn't buying it.
It's hard to believe that we have to say it's okay to damage the security of the country if our motive in doing so is an act of conscience. It's like the Democrats back in the 60's and early 70's protesting the war in Vietnam. They thought is was okay to destroy buildings and kill innocent people in the streets to make their point. Their motive was pure - so it's okay. I saw it happen on campus !
If we have a systemic release of secret information to the media with the intent to destroy President Bush and our government by anti-war groups, or any other group that hates this country like many of the environmental crazies, it's okay, according to Schumer, their actions are justified because, in their hearts, they really believe they are right. The means justifies the ends.
By his definition then, those that want to destroy this country because they hate us, also by definition, the Islamic terrorists, we have an absolute right to bring them to justice by what ever means under the law. We have to understand, he is saying what the Bush Administration has done with the NSA is okay, and as long as the investigation into the leaks doesn't extend to those poor individuals with good intentions, liberal members of congress and big media reporters.
My question then is, what about the statements made by members of Congress that are worse then those of the terrorist? Schumer, Reid, Murtha and Durbin have not released classified information, as far as I know, although I wouldn't put it passed them to do so if they thought it would advance their cause, they have, through their statements, given 'aid and comfort' to the enemies of this country.
Their words are intended to destroy a sitting president, and by trying to do so, have caused our country harm, giving the enemy hope that we will give up our quest for freedom and democracy in the middle east. They think that if they just hang on long enough, they can win the war. How could they think other wise? The Democrats have demonstrated, on many occasions, that they are on the side of the terrorist. They believe that defeat of our troops, our country, over seas, means power for the liberal Democrats. They are invested in defeat.
Is the release of top secrets any worse then what our own Senators are doing in our nations capital? Do these Senators and representatives have the best interests of this country at heart? I think not! Are we justified in trying to bring them to justice?
Sunday, January 01, 2006
Gotta' Love a Golden
What a great dog! She is our oldest Golden Retriever and in this photo is getting her Agility Championship, or MACH - Master Agility Championship.The thing that is cool about her is that she is 10 years old. She would have gotten her title sooner except she is a pistol to train.
Her basic problem is that she has an agenda running that doesn't coincide with the one of the trainer, my wife. Needless to say, it was a long time coming but now that she has it, she is retired - kinda' She will probably do some more agility but in a class for retired pros call Preferred.
The bad news about her is she has a nasty ulcer in her left eye that has hung on for the past month. So now we are taking her to a specialties in Milwaukee for treatment.. As a result she had a simple operation where they scratched the eye in a cross-hatch to stimulate the healing - I hope it works,.If not, we will have to have it cut out.
So now she has to wear the E-collar for two weeks - it isn't too bad to see her struggle around the house when you think about the alternative.
Saturday, December 31, 2005
Eating Out - - Grrr
When was the last time that you went out to eat? We don't make it a habit, but it's usually on the spur of the moment.
We took my brother out to eat went he came down from Minneapolis this last Wednesday night. It was 6 pm when we arrived at The Olive Garden. What a surprise we had. There wasn't a single parking place left and the over-flow crowd was waiting outside the front door. Pizza Hut, Chilies, Out Back Steak House and all of the others that are aligned just outside the frontage road of a Large mall were packed to capacity.
What is going on here! This is Wednesday night, not a Saturday after school gets out for the Holiday. Even the mall parking lot was almost full. I was speechless.
My wife suggested that we head back the way we came and look for something away from Madison. Good Luck - well we did find something, but we wound up driving several miles away from the city before we found a restaurant that wasn't completely jammed. We still had to wait twenty minutes.
After I had slugged down a beer at the bar, I was starting to feel like the night wasn't completely wasted when were finally seated. The food was good and the company was great, so how bad can things really be.
As it turned out, it wasn't as bad as I thought for an evening on the town. But the next time I have guests and volunteer to take them out to dinner, I will give the timing more thought.
Again, have a great New Year !
We took my brother out to eat went he came down from Minneapolis this last Wednesday night. It was 6 pm when we arrived at The Olive Garden. What a surprise we had. There wasn't a single parking place left and the over-flow crowd was waiting outside the front door. Pizza Hut, Chilies, Out Back Steak House and all of the others that are aligned just outside the frontage road of a Large mall were packed to capacity.
What is going on here! This is Wednesday night, not a Saturday after school gets out for the Holiday. Even the mall parking lot was almost full. I was speechless.
My wife suggested that we head back the way we came and look for something away from Madison. Good Luck - well we did find something, but we wound up driving several miles away from the city before we found a restaurant that wasn't completely jammed. We still had to wait twenty minutes.
After I had slugged down a beer at the bar, I was starting to feel like the night wasn't completely wasted when were finally seated. The food was good and the company was great, so how bad can things really be.
As it turned out, it wasn't as bad as I thought for an evening on the town. But the next time I have guests and volunteer to take them out to dinner, I will give the timing more thought.
Again, have a great New Year !
Friday, December 30, 2005
Problems to Work On in 2006
Well, that was a fun time, the past three days, visiting with my brother. We don't get together nearly enough, as I have stated previously, but when we do, we discuss everything from fast cars to the birth of Christ.
He is very well read, especially when we discuss the Bible. I marvel at how he describes events in such detail and with such enthusiasm. I couldn't help but be transported into that long ago time and feel a as though I was experiencing some of the event, live. He's good.
The other events that have been center stage this week, politically and other wise, have not been of much importance to me at this time. I know that they will be there when I get back from this fantastic interlude that has occupied me these past days. Just the thought of having to revisit those islands of muck and mire is daunting but, at the same time, I also realize, it is necessary. I want to stay on top of events as much as possible so as not to get blind-sided by something that will impact me directly.
As it seems to be the trend these last days of 2005 to look back at what we think are the important stories of the year, and there are many, I think I can identify some that stand out as being high-impact type items that will and have influenced how we live now and how they will control our lives in the future.
First and most important, I believe, is how the main stream media has dropped any pretense of being anything other than a torch for the socialist left liberal Democrats in this country, The Democrat National Committee, and how the Marxist puppet masters pull the strings that make the media dance to their tune.
It is no secret how that the internet has grown to oppose the misdirection, false and out right lies that the media, on daily basis, subjects the reading public to as a means to impose their agenda that will crush democracy and freedom of thought. This is the most important danger that we face today. We have to be on guard every time we read anything these days as to what bias it holds.
Of course, a media that is invested in the destruction of this country as we know it, influences everything else. Case in point is the war on terrorism. The war on terrorism is my second most important issue this year, and even a blind man can see how a destructive media can have an incredible influence as to what the general public believes to be the real problem in fighting that war. Not just the war in Iraq but fighting terrorists all over the world. Just reading the New York Times tells you all you have to know about how they are invested in defeat.
The third major problem for 2006 is immigration. This has direct impact on the war on terrorism as one might expect seeing that we have over 10 million illegal emigrants in this country now and more on the way. How many of those that are already here are have intentions of doing us harm? How many more that are pouring into this country are criminals? How many have major health problems and those that brought their families enter our schools and welfare programs?
A bill just passed the house of representative that will answer some of these problems. One of the provisions is building 700 hundred miles of fence. But, It has to get through the senate, of course, to make it law and we all know what that means. I can just imagine the outrage. Someone is sure to be disenfranchised.
This law makes sense so Marxist like Schumer and Reid, among others, will fight it tooth and nail. The Democratic agenda demands that the borders stay open to terrorists so they can attack us. The liberals firmly believe that this is a sure route to power for them.
The other problems that will face us in the near future will be on going but need constant attention. Chief among these is health care. Medicare and Medicaid. We must constantly work at reforming these monsters that drives up costs each year for everyone and that will prove to be our undoing if we don't face up to reality.
I don't know what the answer is to health care, but I have some ideas that are born from living over sixty years in and out of the system. They entail everyone starting to shoulder more responsibility for their own care, i.e. everyone excepting more of the risk of health care instead of paying an insurance company to do that. Simplistic? Maybe, but when you are paying the bill out of your own pocket, the hospitals are a lot more careful with the bottom line. I will expand on this idea in the future. I'm sure there won't be many that will like what I have to say.
The budget deficit is rapidly becoming a cancer that will drag us and our children down to ruin if we don't start demanding that our representatives use some common sense when funding old and useless programs, and then funding new ones that benefit only a vocal few in our society.
Social Security, of course, looms large on the horizon. The President has tried to reform this out of control program of retirement assistance but with no luck. Again, it is the Democrats in the congress that scream bloody murder if anyone touches their link to that huge block of voters that relies on those funds for their very existence.
This really is one of the very last strong holds that the Democrats have left from the old days. They think any reform, self directed funds, will seal their fate in all future elections. What bull! It is in everyone's interest to see that the system works. Even knowing that it will fail completely by 2042, they still refuse any suggestions for reform. Go figure.
I'm sure there are many more problems for us to work on that we will have to face next year, but these that I have mention I believe are some of the more pressing ones. The media will be an important factor in how these problems are resolved. Thank God for the internet and talk radio. The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Times do a good job as well.
Have a happy and safe New Year -
He is very well read, especially when we discuss the Bible. I marvel at how he describes events in such detail and with such enthusiasm. I couldn't help but be transported into that long ago time and feel a as though I was experiencing some of the event, live. He's good.
The other events that have been center stage this week, politically and other wise, have not been of much importance to me at this time. I know that they will be there when I get back from this fantastic interlude that has occupied me these past days. Just the thought of having to revisit those islands of muck and mire is daunting but, at the same time, I also realize, it is necessary. I want to stay on top of events as much as possible so as not to get blind-sided by something that will impact me directly.
As it seems to be the trend these last days of 2005 to look back at what we think are the important stories of the year, and there are many, I think I can identify some that stand out as being high-impact type items that will and have influenced how we live now and how they will control our lives in the future.
First and most important, I believe, is how the main stream media has dropped any pretense of being anything other than a torch for the socialist left liberal Democrats in this country, The Democrat National Committee, and how the Marxist puppet masters pull the strings that make the media dance to their tune.
It is no secret how that the internet has grown to oppose the misdirection, false and out right lies that the media, on daily basis, subjects the reading public to as a means to impose their agenda that will crush democracy and freedom of thought. This is the most important danger that we face today. We have to be on guard every time we read anything these days as to what bias it holds.
Of course, a media that is invested in the destruction of this country as we know it, influences everything else. Case in point is the war on terrorism. The war on terrorism is my second most important issue this year, and even a blind man can see how a destructive media can have an incredible influence as to what the general public believes to be the real problem in fighting that war. Not just the war in Iraq but fighting terrorists all over the world. Just reading the New York Times tells you all you have to know about how they are invested in defeat.
The third major problem for 2006 is immigration. This has direct impact on the war on terrorism as one might expect seeing that we have over 10 million illegal emigrants in this country now and more on the way. How many of those that are already here are have intentions of doing us harm? How many more that are pouring into this country are criminals? How many have major health problems and those that brought their families enter our schools and welfare programs?
A bill just passed the house of representative that will answer some of these problems. One of the provisions is building 700 hundred miles of fence. But, It has to get through the senate, of course, to make it law and we all know what that means. I can just imagine the outrage. Someone is sure to be disenfranchised.
This law makes sense so Marxist like Schumer and Reid, among others, will fight it tooth and nail. The Democratic agenda demands that the borders stay open to terrorists so they can attack us. The liberals firmly believe that this is a sure route to power for them.
The other problems that will face us in the near future will be on going but need constant attention. Chief among these is health care. Medicare and Medicaid. We must constantly work at reforming these monsters that drives up costs each year for everyone and that will prove to be our undoing if we don't face up to reality.
I don't know what the answer is to health care, but I have some ideas that are born from living over sixty years in and out of the system. They entail everyone starting to shoulder more responsibility for their own care, i.e. everyone excepting more of the risk of health care instead of paying an insurance company to do that. Simplistic? Maybe, but when you are paying the bill out of your own pocket, the hospitals are a lot more careful with the bottom line. I will expand on this idea in the future. I'm sure there won't be many that will like what I have to say.
The budget deficit is rapidly becoming a cancer that will drag us and our children down to ruin if we don't start demanding that our representatives use some common sense when funding old and useless programs, and then funding new ones that benefit only a vocal few in our society.
Social Security, of course, looms large on the horizon. The President has tried to reform this out of control program of retirement assistance but with no luck. Again, it is the Democrats in the congress that scream bloody murder if anyone touches their link to that huge block of voters that relies on those funds for their very existence.
This really is one of the very last strong holds that the Democrats have left from the old days. They think any reform, self directed funds, will seal their fate in all future elections. What bull! It is in everyone's interest to see that the system works. Even knowing that it will fail completely by 2042, they still refuse any suggestions for reform. Go figure.
I'm sure there are many more problems for us to work on that we will have to face next year, but these that I have mention I believe are some of the more pressing ones. The media will be an important factor in how these problems are resolved. Thank God for the internet and talk radio. The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Times do a good job as well.
Have a happy and safe New Year -
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
National Security is #1
What is the number one priority for the people of the United States? Social Security? There are certainly a lot of older Americans that will say it should be but know better - they aren't stupid for the most part. The Economy? Everybody wants to make a good living and live the good life, but no, that's not it. Maybe it's immigration or world trade or the deficit. If you guessed these you would be wrong. The major debate is on National security whether most people want to admit it or not.
Okay then, who is best able to do this. Who has the moral courage and vision to see the problems that lie ahead of us and take effective action to resolve them. What party in this country has the proven record of placing the security of the country first instead of personal considerations of how this will effect the power that they control.
The Democrats have the number one spot when it comes to the absolute failures in foreign policy. They have failed in many other places as well, but never with such gross negligence as those of Johnson in Vietnam, Carter in the middle east hostage affair, Iran falling to hard line Muslims and, of course, Clinton's eight years of 'cut and run' polices all over the world.
Reagan and Bush #1 and Bush #2 have the number one spot for showing courage and taking action. Reagan won the cold war, Bush one won the first gulf war, and Bush two is trying to clean up the mess that Clinton left behind.
Are we more secure now than when the Democrats were in office? Let's take a look at what they have to offer. The Democratic National committee chairman, Howard Dean, along with many Senate Democrats, are demanding that we cut and run again. They say we have to get out of Iraq no matter what problems that would make for the Iraqi population or how bad it would make us look, and not to mention what would happen to our credibility in the eyes of the world. Are the Democrats more interested in the country or personal gain?
It really all comes down to the war in Iraq. What are we doing there and how will it keep us from being attacked again. Who is in control of our national security? The President of the United States, George W. Bush, or the outraged socialist members of the US Senate, Reid, Schumer and their like?
The President took command of the situation after 9/11 and took the fight for our security to the enemy where they live. He went on the offensive. He decided that we could not wait around to be attacked again. Virtually all members of Congress agreed, at that time, Saddam Hussein was a crazed killer, given his track record of mass murder and his use of weapons of mass destruction. All the leaders of both parties agreed that he had such weapons because he used them against people in his own country.
George Bush decided, after 14 United Nations resolutions of the security council demanding that Saddam give up his WMD to inspectors, that tried to find them but had no luck, to attack Iraq and remove a threat to world security that the entire world knew that he was, and they all testified to this effect, but lacked the back bone to actually do it.
After eight years of the United States folding like a paper bag in the face of terrorist attacks around the world in the nineties, George Bush took the fight to the enemy and is winning that fight as witnessed by over 50 million people that are free to decide their own destiny, free election in Iraq and Afghanistan and new elections in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Syria has withdrawn from Lebanon and Jordan's population is demanding the terrorists leave their country.
Now, who is sincere about the peace and security of the world, those that are will to risk it all to win the day or those that are more interested in power and personal advantage?
You decide. The Reagan's and Bush's of this world that fight to win the peace, or the Clinton's, Carter's, Reid's and Pelosi's that are invested in defeat, and the surrender of our national heritage?
Okay then, who is best able to do this. Who has the moral courage and vision to see the problems that lie ahead of us and take effective action to resolve them. What party in this country has the proven record of placing the security of the country first instead of personal considerations of how this will effect the power that they control.
The Democrats have the number one spot when it comes to the absolute failures in foreign policy. They have failed in many other places as well, but never with such gross negligence as those of Johnson in Vietnam, Carter in the middle east hostage affair, Iran falling to hard line Muslims and, of course, Clinton's eight years of 'cut and run' polices all over the world.
Reagan and Bush #1 and Bush #2 have the number one spot for showing courage and taking action. Reagan won the cold war, Bush one won the first gulf war, and Bush two is trying to clean up the mess that Clinton left behind.
Are we more secure now than when the Democrats were in office? Let's take a look at what they have to offer. The Democratic National committee chairman, Howard Dean, along with many Senate Democrats, are demanding that we cut and run again. They say we have to get out of Iraq no matter what problems that would make for the Iraqi population or how bad it would make us look, and not to mention what would happen to our credibility in the eyes of the world. Are the Democrats more interested in the country or personal gain?
It really all comes down to the war in Iraq. What are we doing there and how will it keep us from being attacked again. Who is in control of our national security? The President of the United States, George W. Bush, or the outraged socialist members of the US Senate, Reid, Schumer and their like?
The President took command of the situation after 9/11 and took the fight for our security to the enemy where they live. He went on the offensive. He decided that we could not wait around to be attacked again. Virtually all members of Congress agreed, at that time, Saddam Hussein was a crazed killer, given his track record of mass murder and his use of weapons of mass destruction. All the leaders of both parties agreed that he had such weapons because he used them against people in his own country.
George Bush decided, after 14 United Nations resolutions of the security council demanding that Saddam give up his WMD to inspectors, that tried to find them but had no luck, to attack Iraq and remove a threat to world security that the entire world knew that he was, and they all testified to this effect, but lacked the back bone to actually do it.
After eight years of the United States folding like a paper bag in the face of terrorist attacks around the world in the nineties, George Bush took the fight to the enemy and is winning that fight as witnessed by over 50 million people that are free to decide their own destiny, free election in Iraq and Afghanistan and new elections in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Syria has withdrawn from Lebanon and Jordan's population is demanding the terrorists leave their country.
Now, who is sincere about the peace and security of the world, those that are will to risk it all to win the day or those that are more interested in power and personal advantage?
You decide. The Reagan's and Bush's of this world that fight to win the peace, or the Clinton's, Carter's, Reid's and Pelosi's that are invested in defeat, and the surrender of our national heritage?
Monday, December 26, 2005
Fighting for Christmas?
Did you ever think that the day would come when the word Christmas couldn't be used in a public forum like schools or government buildings? Is it possible that there is enough people in this country that would sit back a let that happen? I never thought so either but I am beginning to believe it could happen now.
Fortunately, for all of us Christians, there are groups that have sprung up to combat this surge of secularism brought on by the liberal Democrats and their far left Marxist friends in the party and the main stream media.
The liberal left socialists in this country are convinced that if they can separate enough people from their religion, especially the Christians, the dominate religion in this country, they can change the way we live as a country. Since they are godless creatures themselves, they can use those that gave up their god, for the security of government, to regain the power they need to control those that refused to give up their religious life. Can't happen here? Think again.
The technique is simple. Christians have for centuries relied on their God to guide them in good times and bad. The God of Israel has been the fortress of millions since He walked this earth over two thousand years ago. The Bible is the most popular book ever printed. It is the tour de force upon which the entire Christian religion is based.
The secularists believe that big government is all that is needed for people to survive. A big benevolent brother and sister that will be all things to all people. All you have to do is give up your God of Israeli for the warm embrace of a socialist institution that will take of you from birth to the grave. An institution that will be run by the kind of people that we see today on the news like Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, John Murtha and Nancy Pelosi. They believe they have all of the intelligence that you need to run your life. You won't need a God to guide you.
It makes sense why the liberal left wants to separate you from any form of religion. They want you to be an empty vessel that can be filled with what ever they deem necessary for their needs.
A Marxist believes that if you have no guiding philosophy in your life, like a compassionate God, you will need something in it's place for you to turn to for answers to all of your problems. That is, a guiding hand to shape your future and maximize your productivity for the good of the whole country. An intelligence greater than yours to show you where and how to live and what you will do for your whole life. It will be all laid out for you. You won't have to do anything except what you are told. A workers paradise. Does this sound familiar?
It's like the story about the frog that someone dropped into a tub of hot water. He jumped out immediately. The frog reacted to the hot water because instinctively he knew it was a flight situation. By the same token, when the frog was placed in a tub of cold water that was put on the fire, he swam around until he was cooked to perfection. He never noticed the water getting hotter until it was too late.
So, it is with the loss of our freedom of religion. Little by little they chip away at our foundation of beliefs. It is happening in our schools, government institutions, businesses and churches. Churches? You bet!!
Main stream church's are loosing people and to get them back they think they have to become more Politically Correct (PC). The intelligentsia of most main stream churches is dominated by the socialist left. The National Council of Churches is dominated by the socialist liberal left. They condemn the United States at every opportunity.
The Lutherans, Presbyterians, and I believe the Methodists have taken it upon themselves to condemn Israel for their security wall, and at the same time, made no mention of the Palestinian suicide killers that have murdered over a thousand Israeli women and children on buses, in restaurants and shopping malls. Chip - chip - chipping away.
The Episcopalians, as well as other denomination, are being fractured by the ordination of homosexuals. This is strictly forbidden by the scriptures, yet the churches, and their congregations, vote to let it happen. Not everyone, but a majority. Chip - chip.
Some state governments can't have a Christmas tree now, they have to have a Holiday Tree. Schools can't sing Silent Night, it has to be Cold Night. Teachers are forbidden to use the word Christmas in their class rooms in some school systems as it might be offensive to a secularist or some other religion.
It's high time to watch what is going on in our own back yards. The majority of citizens of this country are Christians of some kind, that is, their foundation beliefs are base on the God of Israel. Why is it we don't have a say in what goes on in our schools and government agencies? What ever happened to Majority rule and Minority right?
Oh, I forgot, the ACLU sued to have that overturned and turned around.
When did that happen? I don't know. It wasn't in the paper. I didn't see it on TV? Well then, I guess it didn't really happen - - - . True, it didn't, it's only a concept. But see how easy it would be.
Fortunately, for all of us Christians, there are groups that have sprung up to combat this surge of secularism brought on by the liberal Democrats and their far left Marxist friends in the party and the main stream media.
The liberal left socialists in this country are convinced that if they can separate enough people from their religion, especially the Christians, the dominate religion in this country, they can change the way we live as a country. Since they are godless creatures themselves, they can use those that gave up their god, for the security of government, to regain the power they need to control those that refused to give up their religious life. Can't happen here? Think again.
The technique is simple. Christians have for centuries relied on their God to guide them in good times and bad. The God of Israel has been the fortress of millions since He walked this earth over two thousand years ago. The Bible is the most popular book ever printed. It is the tour de force upon which the entire Christian religion is based.
The secularists believe that big government is all that is needed for people to survive. A big benevolent brother and sister that will be all things to all people. All you have to do is give up your God of Israeli for the warm embrace of a socialist institution that will take of you from birth to the grave. An institution that will be run by the kind of people that we see today on the news like Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, John Murtha and Nancy Pelosi. They believe they have all of the intelligence that you need to run your life. You won't need a God to guide you.
It makes sense why the liberal left wants to separate you from any form of religion. They want you to be an empty vessel that can be filled with what ever they deem necessary for their needs.
A Marxist believes that if you have no guiding philosophy in your life, like a compassionate God, you will need something in it's place for you to turn to for answers to all of your problems. That is, a guiding hand to shape your future and maximize your productivity for the good of the whole country. An intelligence greater than yours to show you where and how to live and what you will do for your whole life. It will be all laid out for you. You won't have to do anything except what you are told. A workers paradise. Does this sound familiar?
It's like the story about the frog that someone dropped into a tub of hot water. He jumped out immediately. The frog reacted to the hot water because instinctively he knew it was a flight situation. By the same token, when the frog was placed in a tub of cold water that was put on the fire, he swam around until he was cooked to perfection. He never noticed the water getting hotter until it was too late.
So, it is with the loss of our freedom of religion. Little by little they chip away at our foundation of beliefs. It is happening in our schools, government institutions, businesses and churches. Churches? You bet!!
Main stream church's are loosing people and to get them back they think they have to become more Politically Correct (PC). The intelligentsia of most main stream churches is dominated by the socialist left. The National Council of Churches is dominated by the socialist liberal left. They condemn the United States at every opportunity.
The Lutherans, Presbyterians, and I believe the Methodists have taken it upon themselves to condemn Israel for their security wall, and at the same time, made no mention of the Palestinian suicide killers that have murdered over a thousand Israeli women and children on buses, in restaurants and shopping malls. Chip - chip - chipping away.
The Episcopalians, as well as other denomination, are being fractured by the ordination of homosexuals. This is strictly forbidden by the scriptures, yet the churches, and their congregations, vote to let it happen. Not everyone, but a majority. Chip - chip.
Some state governments can't have a Christmas tree now, they have to have a Holiday Tree. Schools can't sing Silent Night, it has to be Cold Night. Teachers are forbidden to use the word Christmas in their class rooms in some school systems as it might be offensive to a secularist or some other religion.
It's high time to watch what is going on in our own back yards. The majority of citizens of this country are Christians of some kind, that is, their foundation beliefs are base on the God of Israel. Why is it we don't have a say in what goes on in our schools and government agencies? What ever happened to Majority rule and Minority right?
Oh, I forgot, the ACLU sued to have that overturned and turned around.
When did that happen? I don't know. It wasn't in the paper. I didn't see it on TV? Well then, I guess it didn't really happen - - - . True, it didn't, it's only a concept. But see how easy it would be.
Sunday, December 25, 2005
Merry Christmas To All
On this momentous occasion of the birth of Christ, I want to extend a very warm and joyous Merry Christmas and a fun and safe New Year -
Friday, December 23, 2005
Time for Justice
This from Power Line blog on the New York Times article revealing top secret information and the legal ramifications thereof.
Permit to repeat one key point. The Times story is based on leaks of classified information by "nearly a dozen" current and former government officials. Whatever ambiguity may exist regarding the legality of the NSA program -- I don't think there's much, and whatever there is derives from our lack of knowledge of all relevant facts -- does not exist regarding the leaks. Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 798) prohibits the disclosure of several narrowly defined categories of information, specifically including classified information regarding communications intelligence:
a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
***
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government...
***
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. The following subsection (b) makes clear the applicability of the act to the informants and information related to the Times story:
The term "communication intelligence" means all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients;
The term "unauthorized person" means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States.
It's about time to move on this and make it as public as possible. Move now!!! Those responsible for this release of a national security secret and those that released it to the world must be brought to justice.
Permit to repeat one key point. The Times story is based on leaks of classified information by "nearly a dozen" current and former government officials. Whatever ambiguity may exist regarding the legality of the NSA program -- I don't think there's much, and whatever there is derives from our lack of knowledge of all relevant facts -- does not exist regarding the leaks. Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 798) prohibits the disclosure of several narrowly defined categories of information, specifically including classified information regarding communications intelligence:
a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
***
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government...
***
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. The following subsection (b) makes clear the applicability of the act to the informants and information related to the Times story:
The term "communication intelligence" means all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients;
The term "unauthorized person" means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States.
It's about time to move on this and make it as public as possible. Move now!!! Those responsible for this release of a national security secret and those that released it to the world must be brought to justice.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Party Animal
I'm off to a Christmas party - well, maybe not a party - it's just a bunch of us guys getting together from where I use to work and kick around the past twenty years at one of the local bars. I did it last year and what a fun time it was. It only last about three hours and then everyone goes home. After all, there is just so much bull one throw and then you have to call it quits -
I have to watch how much I drink though, as I have a thirty five mile drive home, and to do that with a snout full is not a fun or safe thing to do. So, two beers will be the limit and a burger at the end of the evening will have to hold me.
Here's mud in your eye -
I have to watch how much I drink though, as I have a thirty five mile drive home, and to do that with a snout full is not a fun or safe thing to do. So, two beers will be the limit and a burger at the end of the evening will have to hold me.
Here's mud in your eye -
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
