Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Logan, the Sky Angel Cowboy

Little did I know when I was given the audio to this phone call that it would become SO HUGE. When I produced this video, I knew it was special to ME, but never would I have guessed when typing the text and editing the music that it would literally touch MILLIONS. I am proud to have put this video together for the world to see and hear. We have had a lot of requests to replay the phone call that Pastor Mike shared during our church service on Sunday, Nov. 11th, 2007. -- Frank Lozano

Listen to Logan, the Sky Angel Cowboy at YouTube here

Ahmadinejad tells West: Accept Israel's 'imminent collapse'

Hey, I've got it! Maybe we should send a Democrat over there to have tea with him...yeah, that'll do it!!

Find out why not here

Monday, January 28, 2008

I never quite understand how the Clintons' initial exploitation of racism was overlooked the first time around...

Several police and prison-officer witnesses expressed extreme queasiness at this execution of a gravely impaired man, and the prison chaplain, Dennis Pigman, later resigned from the prison service. The whole dismal and cruel and pathetic story was told by Marshall Frady in a long essay in The New Yorker in 1993 and is also recounted in a chapter titled "Chameleon in Black and White" by your humble servant in his book "No One Left To Lie To". For now, I just ask you to imagine what would have been said if a Republican governor, falling in the polls, had gone out of his way to execute a mentally incompetent African-American prisoner.
Read the whole thing here

If everything is grace, then grace is no more

I was cleaning up a bunch of old loose papers today (what a mess!) and found a small pink piece of paper with the picture of an angel in the top left corner. It was a grocery list that was left in a shopping cart at Von's several years ago. I had been depressed, going through some difficulties then, and saw the quote next to the angel: "Everything is grace." --St. Thérèse de Lisieux

I took it home, needing to hold onto that thought at the time. Well, before I threw it out today, I decided to look up this quote and see what I could find. This grabbed my attention (you'll see why):

"The thing that seems most useful to me is the ability to distinguish,proper to the whole Thomist tradition. The refusal to distinguish what is distinct leads to confusion and denies maybe what one wanted to defend in the first place. If everything is grace, then grace is no more." --An interview with Cardinal Georges Cottier, the Pope’s theologian on April 14, 2005.

Apparently, not everything involving The Church is sancrosanct! Just like life, things are sometimes more complicated than they may first appear.

However, I did find some politically and historically interesting comments by the are several excerpts regarding Marxism and Atheism. (I have omitted the questions):
When I had finished my ecclesiastical studies, my superiors asked me to do a thesis at the University of Geneva, where they had opened one of our Dominican monasteries. Many of my student friends had been gripped by communism. Now it’s not even possible to imagine the fascination of communism from after the war onwards. And then I was interested in grasping the relationship between Marxism and atheism. I centered my studies on that.
I saw that the root of Marx’s atheism was all in Hegel. As Karl Lowith has said, the philosophy of Hegel is a massive «Gnostic christology». Precisely when Hegel is lauding to the skies the cultural importance of Christianity for the progress of civilization, he is denying the faith of the apostles in Jesus. Christ is interesting only as idea in his view, as divine model. Of Jesus as historical figure, perceptible, he doesn’t know what to do. Kierkegaard, who for me is one of the greats, understood all this.
I’ve never felt the seductive powers of Marxism. A friend in the French diplomatic corps, who was in Russia at the time of the war, told me of the terrible realities of communism, and that inoculated me against it for ever.
This is an interesting point about Christianity that I hadn't thought of before:
We are not born Christians. One is born a Jew, one is born a Moslem. One becomes Christian, with baptism and the faith. Hence Christianity is unarmed. It is a divine helplessness. Because Christians are not manufactured, as those belonging to other religions can become so simply by being brought into the world. Every child must take its own step, nobody can do it in its place. Surroundings, catechesis, can help it. But no sociological condition can replace the attraction that is gift of the grace, that makes personal liberty assent.

(30Days, March 2004)
Georges Marie Martin Cardinal Cottier, O.P.
Cardinal Deacon of Sts. Dominic and Sixtus
Theologian of the Papal Household

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Some people get it

Some people "get it" judging by one of the comments here by someone named Paranam: Dutch Braced For 'Koran Insult' Backlash
There is a portion of the Muslim population that does hold extreme views that are incompatible with Western civilization and democracy. The percentage of Muslims that believe in the following is hard to calculate. It is probably large, but not a majority.

1.  The interpretation of jihad as a duty to convert non-Muslims to Islam by force.

2.  The rejection of the separation of church and state.

3.  The rejection of Western laws based on Judeo / Christian / Roman / Greek foundations.

4.  The belief that all people, even non-Muslims, must obey Sharia law and duties.

5.  The rejection of women’s political rights.

6.  The segregation of women and their subjugation to second-class status.

7.  The circumcision of young women.

8.  The refusal to integrate into, and follow the rules, of western societies.

9.  Honor killing of Muslims who date or marry non-Muslims.

10.  Honor killing of non-Muslims who try to convert Muslims.

11.  Violent attacks on anyone who questions or criticizes Islam.

I have no doubt that many Muslims who emigrate to the West are not interested in melting into Western society. Rather they hope to convert the West to Islam by persuasion- if possible, or force- if necessary. This view makes them invaders, not immigrants.

Clinton spends your tax dollars on this?

Top Earmark-er Clinton Grants $303,000 to Gay Lobby Group
By Fred Lucas Staff Writer
January 24, 2008

( - A group that lobbies for needle exchanges, for allowing more immigrants with HIV/AIDS to legally enter the country, and for condom distribution in prisons received a $303,000 federal earmark pushed by Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.).

That was one of 261 earmarks Clinton personally helped usher through Congress. That's more earmarks than any other member of Congress seeking the presidency, according to an analysis by the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW).

Read the whole disgusting thing

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Hillary's modest proposal (to wreck the housing market)

The current mortgage mess requires a more intelligent approach than the buzzsaw plan floated by Hillary Clinton.

By Jon Birger, senior writer
...when I discussed Clinton's plan with a more sympathetic economist - one who'd worked for Bill Clinton - his reaction was much like mine and Duncan's. "This is an ugly correction, but it's a necessary one," says Jared Bernstein, senior economist with the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute. "This kind of an idea is a little bit of untying your shoes with a buzz-saw."
Read the whole thing

Well, said a friend of mine, Hillary, blaming evil corporate sub-prime lenders, forgets to mention some salient facts. She was a partner in two 'failed' real-estate ventures, each of which defrauded taxpayers of millions of dollars in federally guaranteed loans. She should have some familiarity with customer culpability in their own defaulted mortgage loans.

Further, the infamous "lost billing records" are hers from a real estate development legal client she represented called Castle Grande, although the corporate name was different. Hillary and the Bubba were partners, in this one, as well as in Whitewater Development Corp (with Jim and Susan McDougal.)

But, regarding the failed Castle Grande, Hillary testified before the Grand Jury as the attorney for Castle Grande, that she did not know it was the corporation she knew as a different name--a corporation in which she and her "husband" were partners! She claimed to be only the "Billing Partner," and the supporting documents to apply for mortgage loans were purportedly prepared by underlings. Now, the billing records which disappeared, and which mysteriously re-appeared, in the residence of the White House, were for work done on behalf of the partners developing Castle Grande, i.e., her real estate project. The work in question created fraudulent applications for mortgage loans that far exceeded the value of the property. The project went bust; the American taxpayers took the loss.

The fraud was facilitated by sham purchases and sales of the property, performed by Web Hubbell's uncle, to make the value appear higher than it actually was. If you ask Hillary if this is not the type of fraud that caused some loans to be granted in error in the present crisis, she would probably answer in the same way she did in the grand jury hearing, multiple times: "I can't recall."

Although many mortgage defaults have been caused by people who misrepresent property values, or borrower income, Hillary's participation as the legal representative, as well as a partner, in the Castle Grande fraud, stands out as one of the most egregious examples in our history. So, she lectures us about corporate greed.

~~Robert Gismondi (Reseda, California)
P.S. In the Whitewater situation, Counselor Hill represented the taxpayer insured failed lender, Madison Guaranty Bank, in bankruptcy proceedings. Later, she represented the state agency that regulates financial institutions, to liquidate the assets of the failed Madison Guaranty Bank. You see, kids, her hubby was the gov.! And their antics were so outrageous, they are difficult for most people, and all libs, to believe.

But believe them you must, folks. My friend lived through all that and knows what he is talking about. This is our country, damn it! And, there's an arsenal of info that will really leave no stone unturned if you need more:

Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton by Barbara Olson

Rewriting History by Dick Morris

Investigation of Whitewater Development Corporation U.S. Senate

High Crimes and Misdemeanors by Ann Coulter

The initial investigations by the media were by The American Spectator, and the Los Angeles Times.

Bill Clinton helped create the sub-prime crisis!

As with most economic problems, we find the hand of government. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, whose provisions were strengthened during the Clinton administration, is a federal law that mandates lenders to offer credit throughout their entire market and discourages them from restricting their credit services to high-income markets, a practice known as redlining. In other words, the Community Reinvestment Act encourages banks and thrifts to make loans to riskier customers.
Now, Bush is going to try to use government fix a problem that government created in the first place:
President Bush's plan to deal with the subprime crisis is to freeze interest rates on adjustable rate mortgages. Freezing interest rates would stop people's mortgage payments from increasing. That is a gross violation of basic contract rights and would appear to be a Fifth Amendment violation. If a contractual agreement is willingly entered into and agreed upon by a borrower and lender, it is binding and if broken by one party or the other, harsh penalties should ensue. Now here comes government, under the Bush plan, to declare millions of contracts null and void. The long run effect of the Bush plan is to make lending institutions even more selective in choosing borrowers. Then there's the question: If government can invalidate the terms of one kind of contractual agreement where the borrowers can't pay, what's to say that it won't invalidate other contractual agreements where the borrowers encounter hardship and what will that do to financial markets?
What's happening to our freedom? Do we all not want the ability to make personal decisions about anything anymore? What happened to the concept of "fairness"? Shall we change the rules and make bait-and-switch the name of the game so now no one will ever be able to gauge the results of their actions?
The Bush bailout, as well as Federal Reserve Bank cuts in interest rates, is a wealth transfer from creditworthy people and taxpayers to those who made ill-advised credit decisions, and that includes banks as well as borrowers. According to Temple University professor of economics William Dunkelberg, 96 percent of all mortgages are being paid on time. Thirty percent of American homeowners have no mortgage. Delinquency rates were higher in the 1980s than they are today. Only 2 to 3 percent of all mortgages are in foreclosure. The government bailout helps a few people at a huge cost to the rest of the economy.
Subprime Bailout - Read the whole thing!

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Liberals who brand conservatives as fascists need to take a look at history

It started civilly enough, discussing my new book, Liberal Fascism. But things got sufficiently testy that we spent nearly 20 minutes swearing and sparring, and only six minutes aired. The result was "choppy as hell," Stewart had to concede.

Largely left on the cutting-room floor were some important points that might have made my book seem a bit more nuanced.

Read the whole thing

Dennis Prager endorses Rudy Giuliani

To the extent that I understand how most Republicans think, it would seem that former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani comes closer to the Republican ideal than any of the other viable Republican candidates. They are all good and decent men who would be better for America than either of the Democratic front-runners. But it is difficult to see, from a conservative- and Republican-values perspective, what major shortcoming Giuliani brings as compared to the other candidates. And given the obsession of liberal news media with publishing negative reports about Giuliani and frequent praise of John McCain, it would appear that it is Giuliani whom Democrats most fear as the Republican presidential nominee.

On the "war on terror," no Republican contender but John McCain equals Giuliani in longtime efforts on behalf of that war or in understanding and articulating the threat radical Islam poses to America and to liberty on earth. And they both have great courage. If the only issue that mattered in the next election were the "war on terror," all those -- including Democrats and independents --who share this awareness of the Islamist threat could be happy with either candidate.

Anyone who does not understand the nature of the war that liberty is now waging against tyranny should not be president of the United States. And the Democratic candidates until now have shown no such understanding -- the term "Islamic terror," invoked by nearly every Republican candidate, was not mentioned once in any of the Democrats' debates. But while this understanding is necessary, it is not sufficient. America needs a strong leader domestically, as well as internationally.

And when it comes to being strong on both domestic and international issues, it seems that no presently viable Republican candidate matches Rudy Giuliani.

The current leading contender, Sen. John McCain, is a great American and a true American hero. However -- and this is written in sadness -- on too many significant issues, conservatives, and even many moderates, would not only disagree with John McCain but also would question his judgment.

John McCain is a leader in promoting legislation on behalf of "campaign finance reform." Aside from limiting freedom of speech, such legislation has done real damage to our democracy. For example, it has severely limited how much money one American can give to another American to run for public office. Consequently, increasingly only the very famous and/or the extremely wealthy -- e.g., California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, former senator -- now governor -- Jon Corzine of New Jersey, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg can run for office. The percentage of very wealthy members of the U.S. Senate is the greatest in American history. Thanks to John McCain and "campaign finance reform," Americans running for public office can spend hundreds of millions of dollars on themselves, but individuals can give only $4,000 to non-wealthy candidates.

John McCain, in a recent Republican debate, asked, "Why shouldn't we be able to re-import drugs from Canada?" (With its socialized medicine, Canada buys drugs at cheaper rates.) This is not merely not conservative; it is radical and it is foolish.

As George Will wrote this week, "That amounts to importing Canada's price controls, a large step toward a system in which ... new pain-relieving, life-extending pharmaceuticals would be unavailable. ... When Mitt Romney interjected, 'Don't turn the pharmaceutical companies into the big bad guys,' McCain replied, 'Well, they are.' There is a place in American politics for moralizers who think in such Manichaean simplicities," Will concludes. "That place is in the Democratic Party."

John McCain twice voted against President Bush's tax cuts.

John McCain has wholly bought the politically correct view of man-made carbon emissions leading to global catastrophe. It is true that all the Republican candidates pay lip service to a hysteria that is capable of truly harming the American and world economies, but John McCain is the major Republican activist on this issue. He is co-author, with Sen. Joe Lieberman, of a bill empowering Congress to legislate carbon emissions, and he has dismissed all scientific questions with Al Gore's, "The debate has ended."

John McCain's view of drilling for oil in a remote corner of Alaska: "As far as ANWR is concerned, I don't want to drill in the Grand Canyon, and I don't want to drill in the Everglades." Any comparison of a part of frozen Alaska that has been seen by almost no human being in history with the Grand Canyon and the Everglades, which tens of millions of people have visited and always will visit, is, shall we say, odd.

John McCain is a good man, a good American and a good leader, but he is not a conservative in some important ways. That is why John Kerry considered John McCain as a possible running mate. Would John McCain be a better president than a Democrat? Yes, primarily because of his stance on the "war on terror." But conservative supporters of McCain need to acknowledge that some fundamental conservative principles -- as noted above -- probably would be rejected in a McCain presidency.

Rudy Giuliani may have made a great mistake by not campaigning in New Hampshire, Nevada, Iowa and South Carolina. But between Rudy Giuliani (and, for that matter, Mitt Romney) on the one hand and John McCain on the other, there is little question as to who more embodies mainstream conservative and Republican principles.

But Giuliani is not merely more of a conservative than John McCain. In fact, if it is Ronald Reagan that Republicans want, Giuliani is extraordinarily close to that venerated man. Ronald Reagan stood for two great beliefs: that big government is a big problem for a free society and that America must be militarily strong and lead the war against global communism.

Substitute "global jihadism" for "global communism" and you have Rudy Giuliani's twin pillars. His one major weakness in appealing to all conservatives is that he is for abortion rights. Let me, then, briefly address all those who, like me, consider nearly all abortions immoral.

Ronald Reagan was pro-life, and it mattered little to the pro-life cause. Concerning abortion, what matters most in a president is the type of judges he appoints to the Supreme Court. As George Will wrote on behalf of Giuliani, "The way to change abortion law is to change courts by means of judicial nominations of the sort Giuliani promises to make." It is extremely unlikely that John McCain would appoint similarly conservative judges. After all, why would he appoint judges like Scalia and Alito who apparently differ with him on the constitutionality of McCain's own "campaign finance reform" laws?

Pro-life Republicans need to ask themselves: Will a Democrat or Giuliani as president render abortion less common in America? The best is the enemy of the better. And Giuliani is far better on abortion than any Democratic nominee.

Giuliani is for school vouchers, against bilingual education, for reducing taxes further, for reducing government spending. And he has well-thought-out positions on how to achieve these things. He also has the experience of cleaning up the most liberal major city in America.

I write this column aware that Giuliani may have lost his chance at getting the Republican nomination. But I could not live with my conscience if I did not articulate one week before the potentially decisive Florida primary why I believe Rudy Giuliani would make an excellent president of the United States.

Copyright 2008, Creators Syndicate Inc.

World cooperates to stop Iran!

BERLIN (AP) - The U.N. Security Council's permanent members [China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States] and Germany agreed Tuesday on a new draft resolution on sanctions against Iran, strengthening existing measures over the country's refusal to suspend its nuclear program, officials said.

Read the whole thing

Monday, January 21, 2008

Donations to Hillary Unethical

Monday, January 21, 2008 9:00 AM
By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann

As American banks go hat in hand to foreign financial institutions and governments, begging for capital to help them get out of the mess into which their subprime loans have landed them, the question arises as to whether the United States should permit nations like China, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) and the banks they control to acquire part ownership of our leading banks.

The presidential candidates discussed this issue in their Nevada debate and Hillary was asked about it in an interview with Neil Cavuto on the Fox Business Network yesterday. She replied that she would not “stand in the way” of such investments, but said that they needed to be vetted and called for more disclosure and “transparency.”

The fact is that Hillary Clinton is totally unable to be objective on this key question of our national financial sovereignty because she and her husband have been so compromised by their financial dealings with the very countries at issue in the decision.

Should the Saudi monarchy be permitted to purchase an important equity position in some of America’s leading banks? How can Hillary be objective when the very same monarchy donated $10 million to the Clinton Library and Foundation?

Should the U.A.E. be allowed in? How can Hillary decide fairly when Bill — and therefore herself — have been getting a reported $10 million per year from a fund that administers the investments of the Emir of Dubai, the largest component state in the U.A.E.?

The Dubai Ports deal compromised our national security by putting key points of entry in that nation’s control. But the infusion of capital and the acquisition of equity in our key banks has the potential to make that encroachment on our sovereignty seem piddling by comparison.

Neither Dubai nor Saudi Arabia would be permitted to contribute to Hillary’s campaign.

Foreigners are not allowed to do so, precisely to avoid having potential office holders compromised by gratitude for their financial support. But these nations have used the porous ethics of the Clinton family to acquire positions of massive influence by making contributions, not to her campaign, but to her personal bank account — either through Bill or through the Library and Foundation, which the Clintons directly control.

The extent of the influence their millions must buy with a family only recently, according to Hillary, in the “middle class” must be huge. And it is for exactly this kind of situation that the Clintons should be required to divulge the extent of their involvement with foreign interests and exactly how much money their personal bank accounts and their Library/Foundation have received. (The Saudi donation to the Library and Foundation was only discovered by The New York Times when the information was inadvertently posted on the Library’s Web site. Soon after the story appeared, it was taken down. The Clintons refuse to reveal the donors to the Library or the related Foundation.)

Hillary and Bill have also refused to release their income tax returns, despite the fact that Bill willingly released his when he was running for president.

Why hasn’t Barack Obama or John Edwards even mentioned this issue? Their attacks on Hillary’s links to lobbyists and other special interests are usually painted with a broad brush. But the journey of America’s banks abroad in search of a bailout makes this specific conflict a key question of policy and highly relevant to their campaigns.

What better illustration could one have of Hillary’s conflicts of interest than this one?

Donations to Hillary Unethical
© 2008 Dick Morris & Eileen McGann

Friday, January 18, 2008

Please don't vote with your epidermis or your genitalia...

The Perils of Identity Politics
January 18, 2008; Page A13
People who think with their epidermis or their genitalia or their clan are the problem to begin with. One does not banish this specter by invoking it. If I would not vote against someone on the grounds of "race" or "gender" alone, then by the exact same token I would not cast a vote in his or her favor for the identical reason. Yet see how this obvious question makes fairly intelligent people say the most alarmingly stupid things.

Madeleine Albright has said that there is "a special place in hell for women who don't help each other." What are the implications of this statement? Would it be an argument in favor of the candidacy of Mrs. Clinton? Would this mean that Elizabeth Edwards and Michelle Obama don't deserve the help of fellow females? If the Republicans nominated a woman would Ms. Albright instantly switch parties out of sheer sisterhood? Of course not. (And this wearisome tripe from someone who was once our secretary of state . . .)

Those of us who follow politics seriously rather than view it as a game show do not look at Hillary Clinton and simply think "first woman president." We think -- for example -- "first ex-co-president" or "first wife of a disbarred lawyer and impeached former incumbent" or "first person to use her daughter as photo-op protection during her husband's perjury rap."
Read the whole thing

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Obama campaigns as a "uniter." Yet his spiritual mentor, and longtime pastor of his church, is an ardent admirer of Louis Farrakhan!

Read about Obama, nation of Islam leader Farrakhan, and the controversy here

Democracts make big changes in DC

Pelosi pushes gourmet menu

Newly ascendant Democrats may have hit roadblocks on Iraq and fiscal issues, but they have revamped congressional menus, replacing fatty, pre-made foods with healthier, gourmet alternatives. The once dreary congressional cafeterias now abound with haute cuisine.

The menu transformation is part of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s “Greening the Capitol” plan to make the House campus more environmentally friendly and socially progressive.

But there can be a downside to delicious. Not everyone is happy with the enhanced offerings. Many congressional employees have complained that as the food quality has increased, so have the prices.

Read the earthshaking news here.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Dozens in Texas town report seeing UFO

Several dozen people — including a pilot, county constable and business owners — insist they have seen a large silent object with bright lights flying low and fast. Some reported seeing fighter jets chasing it.

Read the whole thing

Sunday, January 13, 2008


by Mark Schindler
Forerunner, December 2001

On December 1, 2000, the hotel in which I work shut down for a $50 million renovation, causing about 250 employees to lose their jobs. Only a few managers and a skeleton engineering crew remained.

Months beforehand, the hotel's Human Resources Director and the General Manager devised a plan to provide jobs for all those who were good employees and wanted to continue to work. Working diligently over several months and trying to keep the employee's best interests at heart, they were able to place most of our staff with our other eleven Chicago hotels. To the rest, even those who were not very good employees, they gave handsome severance packages, as well as help to find other employment. These two men labored diligently to insure that everybody who wanted to work received jobs.

A fellow who works for me expressed a bit of a bad attitude a couple of weeks before the closing, and it worsened to the point that I finally had to call him into the office and talk to him about it. For my department, I had to develop a plan, budget, and justification for a skeleton crew to be maintained during the renovation, and this fellow was not one of those who could be kept. His particular job was unnecessary to the operation of the hotel during the shutdown. However, he is an excellent member of the department, and I had already told him that, when we reopened, he would be offered a job in a different classification making a substantially increased wage.

Because of his particular job description and pay, it was difficult to place him with one of the other hotel properties, but I had been able to work out some options for him and a few others who would be let go. One was to move him and two others to another property for less money initially but more chance for advancement, if they chose to go that route.

The other option was to take $5,800 in severance pay plus his accrued six weeks vacation pay and sit out the three months until we could rehire him. Under this plan, he could even collect unemployment compensation! In addition, upon his return to work, we would reinstate his seniority and full benefits, including his five weeks of vacation.

I had given him a number of very fine options, especially under the circumstances. However, here he was in a snit because, as he said, he felt like an orphan that nobody wanted. He believed that I had made sure to get some of the people in my department jobs during the renovation but not him.

I had to remind him how much negotiating I had to do with the corporate office to justify the small staff that was staying. I also repeated that he was getting one of the best severance packages of anyone and that he would be coming back in a much better-paying job with all his seniority and vacation benefits completely reinstated. It took quite a bit of time to show him that I was not rejecting him out of hand, but that many people had worked very hard to help him through an ordeal that could have been much worse.

By the end of the conversation, he still thought he was getting the short end of the stick, but his attitude had improved. He saw what the hotel faced in shutting down and renovating a property that would make no money for the company for six months to a year.

Nevertheless, this fellow was being given enough money to cover his salary for the three months he would be off plus unemployment. He would not be paying for transportation to and from work. Because he is very handy, he could pick up extra money doing side jobs during that time, and he would come back to a career-advancing, higher-paying job—but all he could see was what he was not getting and others were!

I Deserve Better!

Is this not how we look at things in this life, more often than not? We see how much we lack, as opposed to how much we have. Our glass is always half-empty rather than half-full. We see ourselves as a "have-not" rather than a "have."

When I looked at this man during our conversation, I saw one of my best employees, a good worker, one for whom I had tried very hard to do what was right—and he turned my best intentions around, saying it was not enough! He deserved better! Looking at him, I was disappointed and disgusted because I knew I was looking in the mirror!

How many of us really thank God for what we have and what He is doing to create us in His image (Genesis 1:26)? How many of us thank Him for every breath we take and for every action He takes for our benefit? How many of us gratefully sing His praises and glorify His holy name when He answers our prayers—or for that matter, even when He "seemingly" does not?

For instance, we are often encouraged to pray for the ill among us. God not only hears our prayers, but He also frequently acts upon them, giving the afflicted strength and healing. Do we sound His praises and thank Him with the same fervor in which we requested His aid? Could this be a reason why more of our brethren are not healed completely? Could we possibly be demonstrating ingratitude in our hearts toward God?

We all think that we esteem God highly and are grateful to Him for everything, but how true is that? Ingratitude will separate us from God and what we were to become. We see this in Jesus' first beatitude, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:3). Being poor in spirit is an attitude of poverty in all respects, one that is so poor that every little favor warrants joyous thanksgiving!

Do we believe that God owes us nothing except death? Do we believe that everything we have and are is a gift worthy of praise to the Eternal God?

Or do we think that, because we prayed hard for it, God owes it to us? Because we work hard, God owes us blessings? Because He called us into His church, He owes us? Because we have endured the persecution of this world for His sake, He owes us?

Maybe we do not think we are this way, but, then again, maybe our actions betray us. Maybe God sees our heart because the mouth does not speak the words of thankful praise, "for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (Matthew 12:34).

Korah and Satan

Two biblical examples will illustrate this attitude of ingratitude. The first appears in Numbers 16:1-2: "Now Korah the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, with Dathan and Abiram the sons of Eliab, and On the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men; and they rose up before Moses. . . ." Notice that men is written in italics. The translators, not knowing what to do with the verb took at the end of the clause, supplied it to finish the thought. Men is plural, but took is in the singular, so it cannot apply to all these men. Took expresses the action of the singular subject of the sentence, Korah. Young's Literal Translation says, "Korah . . . takes both Dathan and Abiram. . . ." Interestingly, the New American Standard version renders it, "Korah . . . took action." The sense, however, is the same: Korah took these men against Moses.

They gathered together against Moses and Aaron, and said to them, "You take too much upon yourselves, for all the congregation is holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them. Why then do you exalt yourselves above the congregation of the Lord?" . . . Then Moses said to Korah, "Hear now, you sons of Levi: Is it a small thing to you that the God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to Himself, to do the work of the tabernacle of the Lord, and to stand before the congregation to serve them; and that He has brought you near to Himself, you and all your brethren, the sons of Levi, with you? And are you seeking the priesthood also? Therefore you and all your company are gathered together against the Lord." (Numbers 16:3, 8-11)

This is an example of a person who is dissatisfied with what he has and stirs up others because of his ingratitude for what God had given him already.

The consequences of Korah's "taking action" are clear: God destroyed all these who rose up against Moses and Aaron—against Him. Does this pattern look familiar? It should. It is the age-old and oft-repeated sin of pride manifesting itself in ingratitude. Satan did the same thing (Isaiah 14:12-15; Ezekiel 28:14-17). It was not enough for him to be a covering cherub at God's throne. It was not enough to have the lordship over the earth and one-third of the angels (Revelation 12:3). No, he wanted to resemble or compare to the Most High (Isaiah 14:14)! His pride led him to go to war against God, a battle he soundly lost (Luke 10:18). Revelation 12:7-10 prophesies that his pride will drive him to attempt another coup d'état before Christ's return.

This is where ingratitude can ultimately lead a person: into total rebellion against God. It lends to an individual feeling a false sense of worth, that he deserves more. If not checked, it becomes a plague of discontent that soon infects others, as Satan's ingratitude spread to other angels.

If this kind of attitude lands us in trouble, just what should our attitude be? A truly humble and grateful person will never rebel against God because he knows that even the very breath he breathes is a gift and calls for praiseful thanksgiving to the Father. Sharing this thanksgiving with others in the church works like soothing oil that helps to heal the body.

Paul in Philippi

Acts 16 contains a clear example of what God expects from us. As the chapter opens, Paul and his companions are traveling through the cities of Asia Minor, delivering the Word of God, and the people heartily receive them (verse 4). They establish new churches in the faith, and the number of converts increases daily (verse 5). God's Holy Spirit directly leads them in the work (verses 6-7), keeping them from certain areas that were Peter's responsibility (see I Peter 1:1).

In Acts 16:9-10, Paul has a vision in which a Macedonian pleads with him for help, and Paul and his companions conclude that God wants them to preach the gospel there. Macedonia, a Roman province, lay north of Greece. Paul began preaching first to those there who kept the Sabbath, and Lydia became his first convert (verses 13-15). He seemed to be making good but labored progress.

However, a woman possessed by a demon begins to follow Paul and his party, calling them "servants of the Most High God" (verses 16-17). Though this is true, it greatly distresses Paul because the Jews might conclude that he consorted with soothsayers, unlawful according to Leviticus 19:31; 20:6; and Deuteronomy 18:9-14. From their point of view, the Gentiles might consider the religion Paul preached to be as pagan as all the other religions of the time. Thus, Paul commands the demon to leave the woman in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:18).

Her employers, who made quite a profit by her fortune telling, are not pleased because her supernatural abilities disappeared with the demon. So they haul Paul and Silas before the city courts (verse 18), saying:

"These men, being Jews, exceedingly trouble our city; and they teach customs which are not lawful for us, being Romans, to receive or observe." Then the multitude rose up together against them; and the magistrates tore off their clothes and commanded them to be beaten with rods. And when they had laid many stripes on them, they threw them into prison, commanding the jailer to keep them securely. Having received such a charge, he put them into the inner prison and fastened their feet in the stocks. (verses 20-24)

Unlike the Jews, the Romans were not limited to 39 stripes, so the beating Paul and Silas took was severe. The stocks they had to endure afterward were two large pieces of wood pierced with holes at different distances, designed to restrain the feet and produce pain.

Confined to the pitch-dark bowels of the prison, Paul and Silas now lie on a filthy floor on their bloody, shredded backs, their legs painfully distended. One might think they would have every right to complain about how unfairly the Philippians had treated them—or at least to spend all their time beseeching God to relieve them of their pain. Notice verse 25, however: "But at midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them"!

Not only were they singing praises of thanksgiving to God, but they were also doing it loud enough for the other prisoners to hear them! Just as James says in James 5:13: "Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him sing psalms." They were praying for their affliction, but they were also singing songs of praise to God from hearts filled with thanksgiving!

Gratitude Is a Gift

Are we willing to do this, or will we just thank God when we think He deserves it? We need to make it a sincere habit to thank God fervently every day for all His benefits, glorifying His holy will and purpose for us. He is never undeserving of our praise and thanks—indeed, we cannot thank Him enough.

It hurt me when my employee griped and grumbled about my best efforts to give him something good. Even after I sat down and explained to him what he could have and why things had been done the way they were, he only expressed a qualified thanks to me. I had done the best I possibly could, but it rated only a qualified "thank you" from him.

How does our heavenly Father feel when we only express a qualified "thank you" occasionally or not at all? How does He feel, knowing that He has done what is absolutely, perfectly the best for us for now and all eternity?

Ingratitude, whether passive or active, is a tool that Satan uses to recruit us to join him against God's Family. By this means, we can allow him to plant us as a tare within Christ's field and spread our ingratitude to others (Matthew 13:24-25, cf. verse 33). On the other hand, a constant attitude of praiseful thanksgiving, no matter what the circumstances, is a gift of God to us. Gratitude spreads a healing balm among those with whom we fellowship, and it will speed us on the path to God's Kingdom!

Original article - all the links here are clicakble

© 2001 Church of the Great God
PO Box 471846
Charlotte, NC 28247-1846
(803) 802-7075

Anti-war Soros funded Iraq study

...George Soros, a convicted felon in France, a man who almost brought the British economy to it's knees when he sold the pound short through his hedge fund, a naturalized U.S. Citizen from Romania who keeps his billions in off-shore accounts, is buying up the Democrat Party. Read about it at The Neville Awards
Well, this same disgraceful human being paid to put out bad information (used on The View by Rosie O'Donnell among others) about the Iraq War!
A STUDY that claimed 650,000 people were killed as a result of the invasion of Iraq was partly funded by the antiwar billionaire George Soros.

Soros, 77, provided almost half the £50,000 cost of the research, which appeared in The Lancet, the medical journal. Its claim was 10 times higher than consensus estimates of the number of war dead.

The study, published in 2006, was hailed by antiwar campaigners as evidence of the scale of the disaster caused by the invasion, but Downing Street and President George Bush challenged its methodology.

New research published by The New England Journal of Medicine estimates that 151,000 people - less than a quarter of The Lancet estimate - have died since the invasion in 2003.

“The authors should have disclosed the [Soros] donation and for many people that would have been a disqualifying factor in terms of publishing the research,” said Michael Spagat, economics professor at Royal Holloway, University of London.

The Lancet study was commissioned by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and led by Les Roberts, an associate professor and epidemiologist at Columbia University. He reportedly opposed the war from the outset. Read the whole thing!

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Bible Prophecy Today

This is a sharp, savvy, politically oriented blog that will appeal to Christians who want to track the 'end times' in real time.

Bible Prophecy Today

Friday, January 11, 2008


Complete information here

January 14
7:05 pm
Georgetown Loews Theater
3111 K Street, NW
Washington DC

January 17
Las Vegas, NV
7:00 pm
Brenden Theatres at the Palms
4321 W. Flamingo Road
Las Vegas, NV 89103

January 22
Greenville, SC
7:00 pm
Cherrydale Cinemas 16
3221 N. Pleasantburg Dr.
Greenville, SC 29609

January 24
New York City
7:00 pm
Regal E-Walk Stadium
247 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036

January 30
Phoenix, AZ
8:00 pm
Scottsdale 101
7000 E Mayo Blvd.
Phoenix, AZ 85054

February 2
7:05 pm
South Coast Village Theater
1561 W Sunflower Ave.
Santa Ana, CA 92704

For information or to attend a screening, please contact Citizens United at 202.547.5420

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Obama's Abortion Stance Hurts Blacks, Say Pro-Life Experts

By Penny Starr Senior Staff Writer
January 08, 2008

( - Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) may be riding what seems a perfect wave toward the Democratic presidential nomination, but some African-Americans say his pro-abortion stance make him a danger to the black community.

"Between 1882 and 1962, 3,446 blacks were lynched," says Rev. Clenard H. Childress Jr. on his Web site, "That number is surpassed in less than three days by abortion."

More than 1,400 African-American children are aborted each day in the United States, said Childress.

Childress also fights to promote life in the African-American community as president of the northeast chapter of the non-profit Life Education and Resource Network. He also is the senior pastor at New Calvary Baptist Church in Mt.Clair, N.J.

"We want every American citizen to know this man's voting record on such a crucial issue," Childress told Cybercast News Service, referring to Obama's vote against the Born Alive Victims Protection Act, a federal law that gives rights to newborns who survive late-term abortion. "Abortion affects the African-American community more than any other ethnic group in the country," said Childress.

Read the whole thing!

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Barack Obama's Racist Church

If Sen. Obama rejects the Rev. Wright’s warped view of this country, why does he continue to attend his church?

Monday, January 7, 2008 10:16 AM
By: Ronald Kessler

Imagine if Mitt Romney’s church proclaimed on its website that it is “unashamedly white.”

The media would pounce, and Romney’s presidential candidacy would be over. Yet that is exactly what Barack Obama’s church says on its web site — except in reverse.

“We are a congregation which is unashamedly black and unapologetically Christian,” says the Trinity United Church of Christ’s website in Chicago. “We are an African people and remain true to our native land, the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.”

That’s just the beginning. The church has a “non-negotiable commitment to Africa,” according to its website, and its pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. subscribes to what is called the Black Value System.

While the Black Value System includes such items as commitment to God, education, and self-discipline, it refers to “our racist competitive society” and includes the disavowal of the pursuit of “middle-classness” and a pledge of allegiance to “all black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System.” It defines “middle-classness” as a way for American society to “snare” blacks rather than “killing them off directly” or “placing them in concentration camps,” just as the country structures “an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.”

In sermons and interviews, Dr. Wright has equated Zionism with racism and Israel with South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. On the Sunday after 9/11, Wright said the attacks were a consequence of violent American policies. Four years later, Wright suggested that the attacks were retribution for America’s racism.

“In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01,” Wright wrote in a church-affiliated magazine. “White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.”

In one of his sermons, Wright said, “Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run!...We [in the U.S.] believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God.”

As for Israel, “The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now,” Wright has said. “Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism.”

Obama says he found religion and Jesus Christ through Wright, whom he met in the mid-1980s. He has been attending Wright’s church regularly since 1988.

The church occupies a tan building on West 95th Street near a public housing project and railroad tracks. Since becoming pastor in 1972, Wright has seen the church’s membership grow to more than 8,500. The church is the largest congregation in the United Church of Christ, a predominantly white denomination known for its liberal politics.

In 1991, Obama joined the church and walked down the aisle in a formal commitment of faith. Wright later married Obama and Michelle Robinson and baptized their two daughters.

The title of Obama’s bestseller “The Audacity of Hope” comes from one of Wright’s sermons. Wright is one of the first people Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004.

But Obama’s life does not exactly support Wright’s thesis that blacks in America are oppressed. A Harvard Law School graduate, Obama married a black Princeton graduate who also has a degree from Harvard Law School. Obama is a U.S. senator from Illinois; his wife is a vice president of the University of Chicago Hospitals. With his wife, Obama has been making more than $1 million a year.

On a few points, Obama has sought to distance himself from Wright’s teachings or explain them away. While Wright is his pastor and friend, Obama has said, they do not see eye to eye on everything. In particular, Obama has said he “strongly disagrees with any portrayal of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that advocates divestment from Israel or expresses anything less than strong support for Israel’s security.”

As for Wright’s repeated comments blaming America for the 9/11 attacks, Obama has said it sounds as if the minister was trying to be “provocative.”

Just before Obama’s nationally televised campaign kickoff rally last Feb. 10, the candidate disinvited Wright from giving the public invocation. Wright explained: “When [Obama’s] enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli” to visit Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, “a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell.”

According to Wright, Obama then told him, “'You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.'” But privately, Obama and his family prayed with Wright just before the presidential announcement.

To his credit, Obama so far has avoided race-specific appeals as part of his candidacy, accounting in part for his widespread appeal.

Obama “has taught the black community you don’t have to act like Jesse Jackson, you don’t have to act like Al Sharpton,” conservative commentator Bill Bennett said on CNN on Jan. 3. “You can talk about the issues. [Obama has] great dignity.”

But if Obama rejects Wright’s warped view of this country, why does he continue to attend his church, raising the question of whether Obama secretly agrees with his friend and mentor? At the least, Obama’s membership in Wright’s church suggests a lack of judgment and an insensitivity to views that are repugnant to the vast majority of white Americans who are not bigots.

That same lack of judgment has shown up in Obama’s gaffes—threatening to invade Pakistan and offering prompt negotiations with anti-American despots. More frightening, Obama voted last August to give Osama bin Laden and other terrorists the same rights as Americans when it comes to intercepting their overseas calls in order to pick up clues needed to stop another attack.

Jen Psaki, a spokesman for Obama’s campaign, has tried to paper over the candidate’s support of the Black Value System by saying that Obama “believes its basic tenets of commitment to God, to community, to self-discipline and self-reliance continue to have applicability not only to the African-American community but to all people.”

But that is not what the Black Value System says. One can only imagine the outrage that would erupt if a white presidential candidate like Romney subscribed to something called the White Value System. Yet while Obama has been referred to in the media tens of thousands of times in the past month, only one story in the Concord Monitor in New Hampshire offhandedly mentioned Obama’s church’s “unashamedly black” slogan.

In contrast, in an exquisite example of the double standard they apply to Democrats versus Republicans, the media love to focus on Romney’s religion, which is not relevant to how he would perform as president. Close to half the media references to Romney refer to the fact that he is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Very few of them mention that he is both a Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School graduate, credentials that are relevant to how he would perform as president.

When Romney’s father ran for president, his religion was not an issue simply because the media rightly recognized that it was not pertinent to his candidacy. Today, as part of their coverage of Romney, the media run denigrating quotes about Mormonism that they would never dare to run about any other religion. At the same time, the media have largely ignored or downplayed the clearly racist slogan of Obama’s church and the anti-American and anti-Israel stances of its pastor.

In two exceptions to the media blackout, Tucker Carlson of MSNBC described Trinity as having a “racially exclusive theology” that “contradicts the basic tenets of Christianity.” Sean Hannity of Fox News confronted Wright on TV and asked how a black value system is any more acceptable than a white value system.

If a white presidential candidate’s church had a similar statement and “you substitute the word black for white, there would be an outrage in this country,” Hannity said. “There would be cries of racism in this country.'”

“If your spiritual advisor makes outrageous statements, it’s incumbent on you as a leader to denounce those statements,” says Brad Blakeman, a former Bush White House aide who heads the conservative Freedom’s Watch. “Silence is an admission that you agree with what your spiritual advisor pronounces.”

If his church membership calls into question Obama’s judgment, the dichotomy in the coverage of his and Romney’s religious affiliations spotlights the media’s double standard and how its skewed reporting influences who will become president.

But media bias or not, if Obama is his party’s nominee, his Republican opponent will rightly be able to make use of Rev. Wright and his radical teachings as effectively as supporters of George H.W. Bush used Willie Horton’s furlough to help Bush win the presidency.

Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of

Monday, January 07, 2008

Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam

by Daniel Pipes
January 7, 2008

Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and a prize-winning columnist, now writing for the New York Times Syndicate.

Read the whole thing!

Sunday, January 06, 2008

Al Gore will put us in our graves


Warning: Vacate room when CFL bulb breaks - Energy-saving devices called so dangerous everyone must leave for at least 15 minutes

Posted: January 6, 2008
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2008

Thomas Edison must be rolling over in his grave.

Less than a month after the U.S. Congress passed an energy bill banning the incandescent light bulb by 2014, the UK Environment Agency issued guidelines calling for evacuation of any room where an energy-saving compact fluorescent light bulb is broken, releasing toxic mercury.

The warning comes a month before the British government begins its phase-out of tungsten bulbs, scheduled to be completed in 2011. The switchover to CFL bulbs will save at least five million tons of carbon dioxide emissions every year, the government said.

Health experts warned this week that people with certain skin ailments will suffer from the new eco-friendly bulbs which cause conditions such as eczema to flare up. Additionally, the bulbs have been linked to migraine headaches in some people.

The Environment Agency's latest advice focuses on the 6 to 8 milligrams of toxic mercury in each bulb.

Users who break a bulb should vacate the room for at least 15 minutes, the new guidelines say. The debris should not be removed with a vacuum cleaner, which could put toxic dust into the air, but with rubber gloves. The broken glass and all residue is to be placed into a sealed plastic bag and taken to a local official recycling site for proper disposal.

(Story continues below)

"Because these light bulbs contain small amounts of mercury, they could cause a problem if disposed of in a normal bin," environmental scientist Dr David Spurgeon told the London Daily Mail.

"It is possible that the mercury could be released into the air or from land-fill when they are released into the wider environment. That is a concern, because mercury is a well-known toxic substance."

The Environmental Agency noted that neither warnings about the bulbs' toxicity nor directions for proper disposal is printed on any packaging.

Such warnings aren't necessary, said one toxicologist who said a number of bulbs would have to be smashed simultaneously before there was a danger.

"Mercury accumulates in the body – especially the brain," Dr. David Ray, from the University of Nottingham, told the BBC. "The biggest danger is repeated exposure – a one off exposure is not as potentially dangerous compared to working in a light bulb factory.

"If you smash one bulb then that is not too much of a hazard. However, if you broke five bulbs in a small unventilated room then you might be in short term danger."

The most-immediate hazard from the CFL bulbs may be to Brits' pocketbooks. It costs about $1,300 to properly dispose of one municipal recycling bin full of bulbs – a figure that is sure to increase residents' tax bills.

Saturday, January 05, 2008

If candidates ads let it all hang out...


By Don Feder
Posted January 3, 2008

For a conservative, one of the masochistic delights of living in Massachusetts, the bluest of blue states, is listening to all of the cloying candidate ads – the pungent political fertilizer being shoveled into New Hampshire via Boston TV and radio stations.

If I hear of another candidate who “cares” or has “courage” or “vision” or supports “change,” I’ll begin cleaning my guns and listening to the voices again.

The other day, I heard a radio spot for the Creature from The Ninth Circle of Hell, sponsored by the American Federation of Teachers.

It consisted of a number of women chattering about the wonders of La Rodham, and what she’ll do for their children. “Education is the key to everything,” says one. “I’m supporting Hillary,” another gushes. A third assures us: “She really knows what’s going on. When she walks in, she’s gonna know what a president has to do.” (Here, the speaker clearly has confused U.S. president with Reich’s chancellor.)

Anyway, I thought: Wouldn’t it be peachy if the presidential candidates told us what was really on their (you should pardon the expression) minds.

It might go something like this:

Hillary Ad #1: “She couldn’t be bothered raising her own kid – when Bill was Arkansas governor, they hired a nanny, illegally paid for by the state’s taxpayers – but she wants to tell you how to raise yours. When Hillary says ‘it takes a village,’ she means a motley crew of social workers, bureaucrats and educrats. Hillary -- She has lots of experience talking about other people’s children.”

Hillary Ad #2: “’I’m Hillary Clinton, and I’m a power freak. For 30 years, I turned a blind eye to Bill’s philandering, and even played Tammy Wynette in public, for the power I derived from being first the wife of a governor and then first lady. During Bill’s White House years, I got a shot at nationalizing health care. Bill even gave me a say in cabinet and judicial appointments. Now, I want to step out from behind the throne and rule in my own right. Aren’t you getting a little tired of democracy and representative government? C’mon, give me a chance. I promise: It’s the last political decision you’ll ever have to make.’ Hillary -- for people who want to be told what to do.”

Hillary Ad #3: “’I’m Hillary Clinton, and I’m better than you. Sometimes I’m dazzled by my own brilliance. As long as I can recall, I’ve thought of myself as a superior being – both intellectually and morally. When Bill and I resided at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., aides were ordered not to look at me when they passed me in the hallway, lest I be sullied by their glances. You should be grateful that I’m willing to condescend to rule you, you pathetic peasant.’ Hillary Clinton – Here’s looking down at you, kid.”

Hillary Ad #4: “’Hillary here. If you’re a rich scoundrel who’ll someday need a presidential pardon, open your checkbook to me! Look what Bill and I did in our last weeks in the White House. What we did for Marc Rich (Time Magazine called his pardon ‘One of the Most Notorious Presidential Pardons’), we can do for you. Besides, Bill wants a crack at a new crop of White House interns.’ Billary -- because hormones are a terrible thing to waste.”

Hillary Ad #5: “I’m Hillary Rodham Clinton. If I’m elected president, I’ll pretend that North Korea isn’t developing nuclear weapons, just like Bill. Then, when I can no longer deny the obvious, I’ll sign a treaty with Pyongyang, just like Bill. And when Kim Jong-Il violates it, I’ll pretend it didn’t happen, just like Bill. And, when terrorists attack us, I’ll bomb an aspirin factory in the Sudan, just like Bill. And then, I’ll disband the army, except for the gay division. And we’ll never go to war again, no matter what anyone does to us. And our children will pick flowers and learn to speak Korean and Farsi.”

Hillary Ad #6: “With no formal training and having despised capitalism as a student, Hillary turned a $1,000 investment into $100,000 in six months, playing the futures market. Turn the wolf of Wall Street loose on the federal budget.”

Hillary Ad #7: “Hillary knows how to keep a secret. When Bill was nominated in 1992, the paper shredders at the Rose Law Firm worked day and night. Hillary Clinton, she’ll make Richard Nixon seem open and candid. Can you say CIA Director James Carville?”

Obama Ad #1: “’I’m Barack Obama, and I have less experience than any other serious candidate. Three years ago, as a member of the Illinois legislature, I was taking constituent calls on potholes. But if you’re a guilty, white liberal obsessed with race, I’m you’re man.’ Barack Obama – politically inexperienced, Oprah approved.”

Obama Ad #2: “Democrats, I’m a political powerhouse. In 2004, I achieved the heroic feat of beating Alan Keyes for the Senate in Illinois. I have charisma to spare. And I’m really likeable, unlike you-know-who.”

Obama Ad #3: “To hell with the troops. Let’s signal the terrorists that they’ve won, by pulling out of Iraq now. The road to victory in the war on terrorism is paved with unilateral surrender. Obama -- for waving the white flag at Al-Qaeda.”

Obama Ad #4: “Hillary Clinton flip-flopped on the Iraq War. She voted in favor of the resolution authorizing intervention. Now she claims she’s against our involvement. Speaking to a veterans’ group this summer, she said the surge was working in ‘some ways.’ Hillary is a closet interventionist. Hillary in the White House would mean a continuation of the disastrous Bush/neo-con foreign policy. Hillary has a secret crush on Dick Cheney and writes anonymous mash notes to him almost every day.”

Kucinich Ad: “It isn’t easy getting to the left of Clinton and Obama, but Dennis – the Red Dwarf – Kucinich has managed to occupy that narrow strip of terrain. If you want a man in the White House who believes in UFOs – who might be an extra-terrestrial himself – vote Dennis. Besides, if you get tired of looking at him for 4 to 8 years, you can always look at his wife. Dennis Kucinich – ugly is as ugly does.”

Edwards Ad #1: “’I’m John Edwards and I made a fortune chasing ambulances. If you believe in multi-million dollar verdicts for women who scald themselves holding hot coffee between their knees while driving, support my candidacy.’ John Edwards – in tort lawyers we trust.”

Edwards Ad #2: “Most men who learn their wife has a recurrence of cancer would alter their career plans to be with her as much as possible and give her all of the support they could. Not the Breck Girl. If you admire blind ambition, vote Edwards in 08.”

Romney Ad #1: “I’m Mitt Romney, and I saw my father, the late Michigan Governor George Romney, march with Martin Luther King for civil rights. I also saw him land on Omaha Beach on D-Day, break through to Bastogne with Patton in the Battle of the Bulge, charge up San Juan Hill with Teddy Roosevelt and save the Union by stopping Pickett’s charge at Gettysburg. Actually, I didn’t literally see him do any of these things. I’m speaking metaphorically. What’s the meaning of ‘saw’ anyway? (See ‘Bill Clinton’s New Dictionary of the American Language.’)”

Romney Ad #2: “Mitt Romney: He lied to the people of Massachusetts for eight straight years, but he’s telling the truth now. You can trust Mitt Romney – to say anything to get elected.”

Romney Ad #3: “Mitt Romney changed his mind on abortion, just like Ronald Reagan. Except, Reagan changed over years, Mitt changed over months. You might say Mitt had an epiphany on the Road to Des Moines. For most of his adult life, Mitt Romney was oblivious to the humanity of the unborn child. But after a mythical encounter with a Harvard stem-cell researcher, his eyes were opened. As a governor and a Senate candidate, Mitt also didn’t know what a handgun or an illegal alien was. Mitt Romney – he doesn’t have a clue.”

Romney Ad #4: “If Mitt Romney is elected president, he promises to build an electrified fence around his Belmont, Massachusetts home to keep illegal aliens from doing any more yard-work there. Mitt Romney – ready to get tough on illegal immigration in his own backyard.”

Giuliani Ad #1: “I’m Rudy Giuliani. I didn’t keep my promises to my first two wives -- to love and honor -- but I’ll keep my promises to you.”

Giuliani Ad #2: “Don’t ask Rudy Giuliani about his relationship with the Catholic Church. That’s between Rudy and his confessor, even though he doesn’t have one. And don’t ask him about his relationship with his children, who won’t even talk to him. Leave his family out of it! And don’t ask him how someone who was proud to be the mayor of a sanctuary city can secure our borders. Any other questions? Dial 1-800-Don’t-Ask-Rudy.”

Giuliani Ad # 3: “It’s time for conservatives to get over their obsession with abortion. And what better way to do that than to nominate a candidate who, as mayor, made New York City the abortion capital of America. If you’re a Republican who’s tired of getting the lion’s share of religious voters, we’ve got the solution. Rudy Giuliani – got choice?

Huckabee Ad #1: “I’m Mike Huckabee, and I want to be compassionate with your money. I believe in scholarships for the children of illegal aliens. It’s what Jesus would do – if he was a member of the National Council of La Raza.”

Huckabee Ad #2: Mike Huckabee isn’t sure if global warming is man-made. But he still wants a cap on CO-2 emissions, because we have a responsibility to be good stewards of the environment – even at the cost of wrecking the economy. Mike Huckabee -- we don’t need no stinkin’ jobs!”

Huckabee Ad #3: “Mike Huckabee believes in the DC voting rights bill, because minority-pandering and political correctness are more important than the Constitution. Vote Mike, and give the Democratic Party another House seat, and perhaps two Senators down the road, in perpetuity.”

Huckabee Ad #4: “’This is Mike Huckabee. Did you know that Mitt Romney is a member of a satanic cult that thinks the Devil is Jesus’ second-cousin once removed? I’m sorry I said that (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).’ Mike Huckabee -- because innuendo is a terrible thing to waste.”

McCain Ad #1: “He’s old. He’s mean. He shouts obscenities at Senate colleagues. Bleep kinder and gentler. Vote McCain.”

McCain Ad #2: “I’m John McCain and I was the chief Senate architect of the amnesty bill. Corporate America needs cheap, peon labor. We can’t arrest every illegal in the country; we haven’t got enough handcuffs. So why try? If I’m elected president, Mexico can close its embassy and consulates. I’ll represent its interests better. Vote for me, you stupid, racist gringos.”

McCain Ad #3: “’John McCain spent the past two decades pandering to The New York Times. He was – hands down – the media’s favorite Republican. He teamed up with Russ Feingold, a far-left Democrat, to stick it to his own party with the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act., which partially suspends the First Amendment 90 days before a national election and unleashed George Soros in 2006. Bleep party loyalty. Bleep free speech. McCain for President.’ ‘I’m John McCain, and you bet I approve this message, you son of a -----.’”

Paul Ad: “Ron Paul is a knee-jerk isolationist. Ron Paul thinks there’s no national defense like no national defense. If you think 9/11 happened because ‘we bombed Iraq for 10 years,’ if you think ‘by far and away the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government,’ if you think heroin and prostitution should be legal, vote Paul. If you believe in black helicopters and CFR conspiracies, vote Ron Paul. If you want the foreign policy of Pat Buchanan with the social policy of Bill Maher, vote Ron Paul. If you don’t, his zombie army might get you.”

Thompson Ad: “Vote for Fred, in solidarity with the millions of Americans suffering from chronic-fatigue syndrome. ‘I’m Fred Thompson, and I’ll approve this message, as soon as I wake up.’”

Hillary Ad #8 – “This is Hillary Clinton, did you know Barack Obama is an addict, a Muslim, a card-carrying member of Al-Qaeda and part of the vast right-wing conspiracy? And if there’s one thing which I will not tolerate, it’s the politics of personal destruction.”

Now, isn’t this more fun than “She really knows what’s going on”?

An earlier version of this commentary appeared at

Thursday, January 03, 2008


These three positions on Pakistan are so totally mind-boggling that I think I'll just have to take LSD (the intellectual equivalent of throwing the cards up in the air) if one of these jokers becomes President!

"I mean, that's what this election is all about. Returning to our principles, standing against terrorists like Musharraf.." --Democratic candidate Bill Richardson to CNN's John Roberts, 1/3/08
NOTE TO DEMOCRATS: When Roberts pointed out how the candidate had labelled Musharraf, who has held onto the Bush administration's strong backing despite widespread enmity on the Pakistani street, Richardson insisted that "I called him a tyrant. It's 5:30." --DeadlineUSA
"If President Musharraf wishes to stand for election," [Senator Clinton] told Blitzer, "then he should abide by the same rules that every other candidate will have to follow."
NOTE TO DEMOCRATS: "The upcoming elections are for the next parliament. Musharraf was just elected president of Pakistan, overwhelmingly, by popularly elected electors on Oct. 6. He's just begun his five-year term as the president of the country. Why would he ever want to run for one seat in parliament? It wouldn't make sense." -- Pakistan analyst Thomas Houlahan
"...they are causing us problems, and they are still plotting to do harm to America." Barak Obama speaking at a townhall in Nevada, Iowa on 12/27/07.
NOTE TO DEMOCRATS: " an August 2007 speech on counterterrorism [Obama] argued the United States should strike Pakistan unilaterally if they find actionable intelligence about al-Qaeda terrorist camps there and Pakistan fails to act. The speech was criticized by some as overreaching in terms of foreign policy. But Obama frequently cites it now when pointing to the turmoil in Pakistan to say that he was right." --Posted 12/27/07 by NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan

Top Russian scientist: global COOLING coming soon

...the current spell of global warming, such as it is, can be expected to end just as the Kyoto treaty ends in 2012, but having nothing to do with reduced emissions from fossil fuels. For the remainder of this century, it will be global cooling we'll have to worry about, according to highly credentialed Russian scientist, Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin.
Read this. It's important.

Tuesday, January 01, 2008

May you feel the electricity in the air, smell the flowers, and hear the clomping of the horses in the coming new year!

Gail Paulson was drawn to the parade route although she is blind. "There's a lot a blind person can appreciate at this parade. There's electricity in the air, the smell of the flowers, the clomping of the horses," Paulson, 64, of Oxnard, said as her guide dog Elton led her to a seat.

Happy New Year!

Islam vs. Free Speech

Each and every presidential candidate should speak -- loudly and clearly -- against this encroachment of foreign law on the First Amendment. Anyone who doesn’t stand forthrightly against these foreign infringements on Americans’ Constitutional rights should receive neither our confidence nor our votes.
Islam vs. Free Speech