Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
"Daily Motivations"
"We can have more than we've got because we can become more than we are." -- Jim Rohn
"You and I possess within ourselves, at every moment, under all circumstances, the power to transform the quality of our lives" -- Werner Erhard
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
"But God showed His great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners." (Romans 5:8)
To what length would you go in order to communicate your love to the people you care about the most?
When a Los Angeles train disaster killed eleven people and injured several others in 2005, firefighters got busy rescuing survivors. Just when it seemed all the living had been found, an emerging survivor indicated that one last man was trapped inside.
Captain Rosario was one of the firefighters who helped free John, the trapped man. But when he did so, he found a message he would never forget. As John had been pinned in by the debris, certain he was about to die, he laboriously scrawled words to his wife and children, using his own blood: "I love my kids. I love Leslie,"
It wasn't the first time that love was written powerfully in blood.
As the Bible tells us, some would give their lives for good people, but God sent His Son to die for sinners, including the ones who put that Son on the cross. No higher demonstration of love is possible.
"The Patriot Post"
"The republican principle demands that the deliberate sense of the community should govern the conduct of those to whom they intrust the management of their affairs; but it does not require an unqualified complaisance to every sudden breeze of passion or to every transient impulse which the people may receive from the arts of men, who flatter their prejudices to betray their interests." -- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 71, 1788
This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award
"We know that al-Qa'ida and its extremist allies threaten us from different quarters of the globe, from Pakistan, but also from East Africa and Southeast Asia, from Europe and the Gulf; and that's why we're applying focus and relentless pressure to al-Qa'ida by sharing more intelligence, strengthening the capacity of our partners, disrupting terrorist financing, cutting off supply chains and inflicting major losses on al-Qa'ida's leadership." --Barack Obama, neglecting to mention Afghanistan or Iraq as places we're fighting al-Qa'ida
IAEA Director Attacks Israel
"Israel is the number one threat to the Middle East, given the nuclear arms it possesses." So said International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, a career Egyptian bureaucrat, this week in Tehran. ElBaradei, while announcing a coming inspection of the rogue Iranian regime's nuclear program, took the opportunity to sound off on Israel, complaining about the Jewish state's 30-year refusal to allow nuclear inspections. Israel will not confirm or deny its nuclear arsenal, but neither is it threatening total annihilation of other Middle Eastern countries. For the record, Iran is.
As noted by Investor's Business Daily, "Looking back on the past four decades, the Jewish state's policy of refusing to confirm or deny its nuclear arsenal is, as the Old Testament proverb goes, a wisdom 'more precious than rubies.' The only fully free, Westernized country in the Middle East has been able to let its surrounding enemies know that it will defend itself with the deadliest of force if its existence comes under direct threat." Meanwhile, ElBaradei is barking up the wrong tree -- and not unintentionally.
Immigration Front: Arpaio Handcuffed on Alien Arrests
"The Obama administration is curbing the powers of an Arizona sheriff who has led one of the most contentious fights against illegal immigrants," reports The Wall Street Journal. "Under an agreement involving local enforcement of federal immigration law, Sheriff Joe Arpaio's deputies will no longer have the authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants in the streets in the course of their duty."
Long a lightning rod in the immigration debate, Arpaio has arrested approximately 30,000 illegals since 2007 as part of a partnership with the federal government. But the sheriff was forced to sign a revised agreement restricting his ability to determine immigration status of those inmates booked into Maricopa County jails -- it can no longer be a reason for federal arrest by county officers. Lest readers think old Joe caved, however, he declared, "They took away my authority on the streets. That doesn't matter because I will still pursue illegals on the streets of Maricopa utilizing the authority I have as the elected official."
Business & Economy - Dollar Looking Weaker
With the dollar's continued decline due to excessive debt racked up by the Obama administration, the oil-rich nations of the Middle East, along with a cabal of other countries including Russia and China, are discussing a switch to currencies other than the dollar for trading oil. This would mark the first currency change since the Bretton Woods Agreements (signed during WWII) collapsed in the early 1970s, eventually resulting in the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency.
Such a switch away from the dollar obviously portends a loss of American influence on the world's currency system. This erosion of the dollar is a direct result of out-of-control government spending, debt and money printing. These policies have so destabilized the dollar that even the Communist Chinese government has asked the administration to change course before inflation further devalues the dollar and Chinese investments in the United States.
Unfortunately, Obama's agenda doesn't include saving the dollar. When the dollar crashes under the pressures of unsound monetary policies and rising inflation, it will be too late to refocus.
Kerry Says Recession Helps Environment
Echoing White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's maxim, "Never let a serious crisis go to waste," Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA) wants to capitalize on, extend and even increase current unemployment rates to cut carbon dioxide emissions. Endorsing draft legislation of a so called "cap and trade" bill co-introduced with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Kerry stated, "Let me emphasize something very strongly as we begin this discussion. The United States has already this year alone achieved a 6 percent reduction in emissions simply because of the downturn in the economy, so we are effectively saying we need to go another 14 percent."
Translated: the recession is good for the environment, so we should make it permanent. Or, as the Heritage Foundation notes, "It took a solid year for the United States to reach 10 percent unemployment through the financial meltdown and the housing crisis, let's keep it there, or make it worse, with cap and trade. Why not be even more aggressive?" Democrats apparently want 18 percent unemployment to hit the magic 20 percent reduction in CO2 emissions. Never mind the nearly two million jobs that cap and tax will extinguish by 2012. What's a job when the environment is supposedly in question? Nice to know where Senator Kerry's priorities lie.
Meanwhile, Leighton Steward, a geologist and former believer in global warming is on Capitol Hill this week to inform our wise representatives that CO2 does not cause warming. In fact, carbon dioxide emissions are good for the planet.
Predictably, Auto Sales Plummet After 'Clunkers' Ends
Despite plaudits by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood as "the one stimulus program that seems to be working better than just about any other program," Cash for Clunkers has turned out to be one big flunker. As The Wall Street Journal reports, not only did this bureaucratic brainchild drive a 25 percent drop in new car sales for U.S. automakers in September as compared with last year, but the program's grand vision of advancing environmental salvation translated into a mere 0.2 percent reduction in annual oil consumption (less than one day's worth), and that's a best-case scenario.
To top it off, according to the University of Delaware's Burton Abrams and George Parson, all factors considered, the program imposed a net cost of about $2,000 per vehicle. In short, government made the country $1.4 billion poorer and spent nearly $3 billion to do so. And that's Washington's definition of a "working" program.
Culture & Policy - From the 'Non Compos Mentis' File
It's a well-known fact that mockumentarian Michael Moore is a self-aggrandizing gasbag, but perhaps right now we should be thanking him. In keeping with the filmmaker's love of shooting his mouth off, he recently "outed" ObamaCare in Rolling Stone Magazine. "If a true public option is enacted -- and Obama knows this -- it will eventually bring about a single-payer system, because the profit-making insurance companies won't be able to compete with a government-run plan and make the profits they want to make. I probably shouldn't be saying this, but I'm counting on the fact that Republicans won't be reading Rolling Stone."
Moore made no bones about the fact that he supports the single-payer system that exists in "every other Western democracy." Clearly, he had not done his research on the quality of health care in England and Canada, and he most certainly does not realize (or care) that, if Obama gets his way, there will be nowhere to run for those in other countries who are acutely ill and not receiving treatment in a timely manner.
"Capitalism: A Love Story," Moore's new film, is doing about as well as the market will bear. On its opening weekend, it came in seventh among commercial releases, bringing in only $4.8 million from 962 theaters. This is a far cry from the unfortunate success of "Fahrenheit 9/11." Perhaps Americans are onto Moore and looking for real facts this time, not Moore's twisted version of them.
So, Mr. Moore, first of all, some Republicans do read Rolling Stone Magazine. Perhaps they know it's prudent to keep abreast of what the leftist propaganda machine is cranking out; perhaps they just like pop music. Second, it's not just Republicans who are fighting ObamaCare -- it's every Patriot willing to stand up and fight for what we as a nation hold dear: self-determination.
Climate Change This Week: Antarctic Ice Report
According to World Climate Report, "The ice melt across during the Antarctic summer (October-January) of 2008-2009 was the lowest ever recorded in the satellite history." Marco Tedesco and Andrew Monaghan, in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, report, "A 30-year minimum Antarctic snowmelt record occurred during austral summer 2008-2009 according to space borne microwave observations for 1980-2009. Strong positive phases of both the El-Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the Southern Hemisphere Annular Mode (SAM) were recorded during the months leading up to and including the 2008-2009 melt season."
So where is all the media attention? NASA researchers for years have dutifully released a plentiful supply of stories about melting sea ice in the Arctic, but icy news at the South Pole has yet to prompt a NASA report. Obviously, if warmers can silence the opposition, it helps build the hoax -- er, "consensus."
Village Academic Curriculum: Videos of the Week
Courtesy of Real Clear Politics, "Kids from the Ron Clark Academy are on CNN singing for health care reform set to Miley Cyrus' 'Party in the USA.' The song mentions 'Obama says everyone needs health care now.'"
From Michelle Malkin, "Take a look at the Obama worship song that students at Longfellow Elementary in Howard County, MD were assigned to memorize last week."
Meanwhile, Obama's "Safe School Czar" Kevin Jennings -- the one we reported last week failed to disclose a 15-year-old boy's homosexual relationship with an adult male -- complained this week that "kids are being aggressively recruited to become heterosexual in this country." And to reiterate, he's in charge of making schools "safe."
Faith and Family: DC to Allow Same-Sex Marriage
Speaking of promoting certain sexual disorientations, the Washington, DC, City Council introduced legislation Tuesday to allow same-sex marriage in the District. The bill will likely become law by the end of the year. Once Mayor Adrian Fenty signs the bill, it goes to Congress, which has 30 days to pass a joint resolution of disapproval. That, in turn, would have to be signed by Barack Obama. So, in addition to Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut and Iowa, DC will allow such nuptials soon.
"FRC"
Rally the Troops--Hate Crimes Is Coming
Get out your pen, Mr. President. Back on August 17 you made this promise to our veterans: "[I]f Congress sends me a defense bill loaded with... waste, I will veto it." Seven hundred seventy-eight earmarks later, the Defense Authorization bill is still standing. Why? Because House and Senate leaders aren't above playing politics with national security.
In a slap to the face of our servicemen and women, they attached "hate crimes" legislation to the final defense bill, forcing Congress to choose between expanding hate crimes or making our military go without. Unfortunately, House liberals had plenty of help from the GOP in sabotaging the bill. When it was put to a vote, nine Republicans refused to remove hate crimes from the Defense Authorization bill: Bill Cassidy (La.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Todd Platts (Penn.), Charles Dent (Penn.), Greg Walden (Ore.), Judy Biggert (Ill.), Anh Cao (La.), Michael Castle (Del.), and Dave Reichert (Wash.). These Republicans are serving as the enablers for a radical social agenda that could ultimately silence Christians and use the force of government to marginalize anyone whose faith is at odds with homosexuality.
Now that Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has filed cloture on the conference report, it could be less than 24 hours before the Senate votes on the final legislation. Before they do, we need your help. Contact your senators and urge them to fight for our freedom--and the soldiers defending it. Remind them that this is not an inconsequential vote. Expanding hate crimes puts America in lock step with the stated agenda of homosexual activists who will turn next to the so-called Employment Non-discrimination Act, followed by the repeal of the ban on homosexuality in the military and then the Defense of Marriage Act. More than 100,000 people have signed our petition opposing hate crimes as a violation of the First Amendment. Add your name today by visiting www.fighthatecrimes.com before the government makes you decide between your faith and your rights.
While Congress is busy giving preferential treatment to homosexuals, maybe it's time to point out the kind of calls we receive from the side of "tolerance." Last week, FRC Senior Vice President Tom McClusky came into his office to find this voicemail:
"Uh, yeah, I read about your, uh, homophobic comments, and I just gotta give you some advice. It's not a good idea to be, uh, an intolerant bigot s*****g. Uh, because, you know, you reap what you sow and when you start spreadin' hate against other people, that's exactly what you're gonna get back. And, you know, who knows what effect that could have on you, or your family, or your office, you know, on G Street? Uh, just a bit of advice for ya. You should really learn, really-stop bein' such a redneck piece of s**t."
And he's not alone. We get reports almost daily from donors who have given to pro-marriage campaigns in the states and are being awakened in the middle of the night by harassing phone calls and death threats. Where's the protection for them? Where are those blowing the trumpet of tolerance?
City Slickers: Anti-PRC Campaign Goes Local
Speaking of harassment, pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) may be on the receiving end of it in Baltimore, Maryland, where city leader, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, has introduced a bill to discredit and bankrupt PRCs. Under her legislation, these centers would be required to post signs that they don't provide contraception or abortion--or be fined $500 per day!
Archbishop Edwin O'Brien is baffled by the idea. "...Nothing in a pregnancy support center's yellow page advertisements or Web pages would lead a woman to believe these centers provide abortions or abortion-related services." Knowing that they could never pass such a bill statewide, NARAL Pro-Choice America is calling the bill a model for other cities and encouraging bigger metropolitan areas like Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Madison, Wisconsin to follow suit.
Obviously, the pro-abortion crowd feels threatened by its pro-life competition. With publications like FRC's A Passion for Life, A Vision to Serve highlighting the success of PRCs, women are beginning to understand that they have more options than abortion. Besides, if cities want to start posting clinic records on the doors, how about forcing Planned Parenthood clinics to publicize their services--like using $300million taxpayer dollars a year to cover up statutory rape, commit fraud, and violate basic safety standards?
"The Web"
Manufacturing Czar Ron Bloom--Sept 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azDnT3_FSSE
Two Democrats Join GOP Call for Countrywide Probe
By Tory Newmyer
Roll Call Staff
http://www.rollcall.com/news/39822-1.html
Two Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are joining with panel Republicans in formally calling for Chairman Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) to launch an investigation of the Countrywide VIP loan scandal.
“The American people deserve to the know the truth about these lending practices, and if they had undue influence on federal housing or financial policy based on awarding ‘VIP’ loans to federal officials,” Reps. Paul Hodes (N.H.) and Mike Quigley (Ill.) wrote in a letter Thursday to Towns and ranking member Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).
Towns and Issa have been feuding for weeks over the California Republican’s demand that the panel pursue a probe of the Countrywide matter. The letter from the two junior Democrats on the panel is the latest evidence that Towns faces growing pressure on his own side of the dais to move ahead with one. While Quigley was already on record supporting the investigation, Hodes, who is running for Senate, was not.
A Towns spokesman said the chairman “appreciates their input and is taking their letter into consideration.”
The spat between Towns and Issa escalated this week, when Towns' staff changed the locks on the door Republicans use to access the committee room. They confirmed the move was retribution for Republicans shooting video of Democratic members exiting the room in what the minority charged was an attempt to avoid a vote on issuing Countrywide subpoenas.
Towns and Issa huddled Wednesday to try to resolve the dispute, and while both sides reported progress, they broke without a deal. They were set to meet again Thursday but postponed that session until Friday.
Hodes’ declaration potentially changes the calculus of those talks. Both he and Quigley serve on the panel’s Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, meaning there is now majority support on the subcommittee to issue the subpoenas. An Oversight aide noted that would obviate the need for action by the full committee. But it is not clear when the subcommittee is next scheduled to meet.
In their missive, the lawmakers said the panel should seek all documents relating to federal officials’ participation in the “Friends of Angelo” program, designed by Countrywide chief executive Angelo Mozilo to curry favor with key decision-makers. They also called for recovering correspondence with federal officials in the program informing them of their membership or explaining its benefits and any internal Countrywide correspondence indicating who should be included in it.
Hodes and Quigley wrote that any information relating to Members of Congress should be “referred to the appropriate investigative bodies.” Two Senators who received loans through the program — Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) — were investigated and cleared by the Senate Ethics Committee earlier this year.
An Issa spokesman said the lawmaker “fully supports” the approach laid out in the letter. “He believes it is a blueprint for a fair and comprehensive investigation that will uncover the full scope of Countrywide’s efforts to buy influence,” Kurt Bardella said.
Obama "Judge me by the people I surround myself with&qu
http://www.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=7670026
Tim Geithner - Tax cheat
Kathleen Sebelius - Tax cheat
Tom Dascle - Tax cheat
Kevin Jennings - Safe School Czar - cofounder and executive director of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), told attendees at a GLSEN conference over a decade ago that he looked forward to the day when promoting homosexuality in schools will be seen in a positive light. (See the remarks here) Also BROKE LAW, as a teacher by NOT notifying authorities of a sexual relationship between one of his male students, and an adult male.
Van Jones - Green Jobs Czar - Admitted racist, avowed communist
John Holdren - Science Czar - Supports FORCED Sterylization, and the drugging of drinking water
Cass Sunstein - Regulatory Czar - Wants to ban hunting, ban guns, give animals lawyers, and the right to sue. Monitor, and control internet blogging etc.
Mark Lloyd - FCC Diversity Czar - Hugo Chavez admirer, and racist who wants qualified whites to step down to make room for minorities and gays, AND also wants to silence free speech (opposing views) conservative radio, by implementing a 100% tax on talk radio operating costs..
Harold Koh - State Dept Legal Advisor - Says "Sharia Law could apply to disputes in US courts"
Adolfo Carrion - Urban Czar - Pocketed thousands of dollars in campaign cash from city developers whose projects he approved or funded with taxpayers' money.
Michelle Obama - Oversaw patient dumping scheme for profit, as the vice president Of University of Chicago Hospital, where she also coincidently went from 100K to over 300K promotion upon Barack Obama becoming state senator.
Tony Rezko - Chicago Slum lord, Convicted on 16 counts of corruption
Jeremiah Wright - Obama spiritual mentor 20 years, who promoted anti-government, anti-white sentiment.
ACORN - Corrupt federally funded organization, who Obama gave 800K to, and who Obama lawyered for, and benefitted from politically. Fraudulant voter registration drives. Recently exposed advising a pimp , and prostituute on how to bring in minors from other countries for purposes of prostitution, how to get illegal tax breaks, and how to stash away profits.
William Ayers - Weather Underground domestic terrorist who Obama partnered with (Chicago Annenberg Challenge) (Woods Fund) on radical left projects with the intent of indocrtinating youth.Obama also launched his bid for Chicago senate from Ayers home.
Do you get it now? Part Deux…Manufacturing Czar says 'the free market is nonsense'
http://www.thecitizen.com/~citizen0/node/40069
Ron Bloom, our manufacturing czar stated
“Generally speaking we get the joke. We know that the free market is nonsense. We know that the whole point is to game the system, to beat the market, or at least find someone who will pay you a lot of money because they're convinced that there is a free lunch. We know this is largely about power, that it's an adults only, no limit game. We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun. And we get it that if you want a friend, you should get a dog.”
That's just the guy who's restructuring manufacturing in America.
Obama said: Judge him by those from whom he seeks advice.
Obama also said to judge him by the people around him
Ok let's do that..
And the list goes on….
White House Communications Director Anita Dunn - In front of a group of school children she states..
“Two of her most favorite leaders are Mao Tse Tung and and Mother Teresa. “ She went on saying that Mao Tse Tung clung to his resolve when everything was under Chiang Kai Shek’s control. She referred to Mao as the leader to whom she turns to most.
Let's remember who they admire so much
Mao Tse-Tung-Kill tally: 14 to 20 million deaths from starvation during the 'Great Leap Forward'. Tens of thousands killed and millions of lives ruined during the 'Cultural Revolution'.
Though the number of deaths that occurred in China as a result of Mao's reign places him in the same league as Stalin or Hitler, Mao was of a completely different calibre to those two genocidal murderers.
And this is who Anita Dunn and Ron Bloom looks to for inspiration.
Green Jobs Czar Van Jones.. an admitted proud Communist, “rowdy black nationalist” and radical activist. Jones also worked on the board of a front environmental group established by one of the founders of the violent Weather Underground.
Health Czar Nancy-Ann DeParle–pro-partial birth abortion.
Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein explicitly supports using the courts to impose a "chilling effect" on speech that might hurt someone's feelings.
Global Warming Czar Carol Browner, — was part of Socialist International, a group for "global governance
HealthCare Advisor Ezekiel Emmanuel— proponent of the Complete Lives System, which puts values on lives based mostly by age
FCC Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd– "It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press.... This freedom is all too often an exaggeration.... At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies."
Science Czar John Holdren–has advocated forced abortions and “compulsory sterilization”. Holdren has called for a “Planetary Regime” to control human population and its usage of earth resources. He has stated his belief that “to provide a high quality of life for all, there must be fewer people.”
The Fallacy of Unconditional Love
http://www.americanvision.org/article/the-fallacy-of-unconditional-love/
by Eric Rauch
Modern Christianity is known, among other things, for teaching the idea of God's unconditional love. It is often spoken of in terms of evangelism, when believers express their concern for the "afterlife" of unbelievers. "God loves you unconditionally," they tell their unbelieving audience, "and He wants you to be with Him in heaven." I cringe every time I hear something like this said, not because I doubt the motivation behind the evangelistic sentiment, but because the unbeliever has such a perfect opportunity to ask a question of the believer that would probably end the conversation on the spot. Although I have never heard an unbeliever ask this question, it is important that we think about it so that we may be "always ready with an answer" (1 Peter 3:15).
What is the question? Simply this: "If God loves me unconditionally, why does it matter how I live my life?" Or it could also be phrased this way: "If God truly loves me unconditionally, why should it matter whether or not I 'become a Christian?'" Be careful to not miss how powerful and deadly this question really is. It is not just a clever twist of wording, meant to sidetrack the evangelistic efforts of well-meaning proselytizers. Far from it. This question is the stake in the heart of the modern evangelical notion of God's "unconditional love." In fact, I challenge you to search for the phrase "unconditional love" in the Bible or find the concept that God unconditionally loves every person on earth being taught anywhere in Scripture. In fact, R.J. Rushdoony makes the bold claim that "unconditional love is contrary to the Bible."
Unconditional love is a more revolutionary concept than any other doctrine of revolution. Unconditional love means the end of discrimination between good and evil, right and wrong, better and worse, friend and enemy, and all things else. Whenever anyone asks you to love unconditionally, they are asking you to surrender unconditionally to the enemy. [1]
Strong words, but necessary ones because modern Christianity finds itself exactly where Rushdoony claimed they would be: in an unconditional surrender to the enemy. Any situation that does not have "conditions" can play to the advantage of either side. Imagine entering a marriage with "no conditions." There would never be grounds for divorce (even in the biblical "condition" of adultery), because no terms were ever agreed to. We tend to think of unconditional love in a positive sense, but there is just as much an equal and opposite negative side. Rushdoony continues:
We are told to love our enemies, that is, those who offend us personally on non-religious and non-moral issues. When the cause of division is petty and personal, we must rise above it with an attitude of law and justice; we must continue to extend to all such persons the full protection of the law from injustice, malice, and false witness. But the enemies of God's justice and God's law, of fundamental law and order, must not be loved. To love them is to condone their evil. The accusation of the psalmist is to the point: "When you see a thief, you delight to associate with him, and you take part with adulterers" (Psalm 50:18, Berkeley Version). What we condone morally, we also approve of or delight in. St. John forbad hospitality to those who trying to subvert the faith: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds" (II John 10,11). [2]
Notice that Rushdoony says that we are to love our enemies unconditionally, but never God's enemies. This is precisely what is wrong with saying that God's love is unconditional. We are applying a command that has been given to us by God back onto God Himself. While it is true that God loves his friends unconditionally, that love can exist only because Jesus Christ has already fulfilled the conditions of the friendship on the cross. The same Jesus who said "no longer do I call you slaves..but I have called you friends," also said that His friends do what He commands and "if you love Me, you will keep My commandments" (John 15: 14-15; 14:15). God's friendship/love is conditioned upon obeying Him and doing what He commands. If we show love for Jesus by keeping His commandments, then we also show hate for Him by not keeping them.
Those who preach unconditional love are simply trying to disarm godly people in order that evil may triumph. The same is true of the idea of unconditional forgiveness. Forgiveness in the Bible is always conditional upon true repentance. Unconditional forgiveness is simply the total, unconditional toleration of and acceptance of evil. It demands that we accept the criminal, the pervert, the degenerate, the subversive as they are. But to do so means that we must change. We must surrender our laws, faith, religious standards, and all godly order. The demands for unconditional love and unconditional forgiveness are demands for total change on our part, total revolution in society. They are in reality demands that we commit suicide in order that evil may live. [3]
By now you should begin to understand why I said that the unbeliever's question above is a deadly pill to modern evangelism. The very fact that we are telling the unbeliever to come to Jesus so that he might be saved from eternal punishment and separation from the holy God implies a condition. If God truly loved everyone unconditionally, there would be no need to evangelize. In fact, there would be no need for the church at all. If God was truly an "unconditional" God, then it wouldn't much matter if we gave Him praise or not, it wouldn't much matter if we read and taught His word or not, it wouldn't much matter if we lied, cheated, and stole our way to fame and fortune or worked diligently and honestly. In fact, the entire Bible would be a waste of time and effort if God did not expect us to learn something from it and respond to it in obedience and faithfulness. God's holiness is completely opposed to sin and disobedience. God's love is conditioned upon repentance and obedience, therefore it can never be offered as "unconditional."
House Bill Raises, Not Lowers, Health Care Costs
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/10/22/house-bill-raises-not-lowers-health-care-costs/#more-17743
The Chief Actuary in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the Obama Health and Human Services department issued a memorandum late yesterday looking at the potential impact of the House health reform legislation (H.R. 3200). As the Associated Press and other media outlets have been reporting, the study shows that- among other things- the legislation would, as President Obama promised, bend the health care cost curve … but in the wrong direction.
The findings suggest that if the House legislation were enacted, President Obama would be breaking his long standing promise that reform would reduce rapidly growing health care costs. Although the President has continually argued that Americans spend too much on health care, and that under reform they would spend less, the new HHS report finds the opposite is likely to occur under the House legislation. Here are some key findings from the HHS memorandum:
The legislation would increase total national health expenditures in the U.S. by about 2.1 percent during the period between 2010 and 2019.
As a share of gross domestic product (GDP) health care spending would grow to 21.3 percent compared to 20.8 estimated under current law.
The bill carries a price tag of about $1 trillion dollars (from 2013 to 2019), which does not even represent a full 10-year cost estimate.
The measure is likely to deliver only small savings despite the many provisions intended to reduce the growth in health care costs.
While the proposal might cover 34 million uninsured it would still leave 23 million people without coverage, including as many as 18 million Americans who would remain
uninsured and face a new tax penalty.
More than 50 percent of the new coverage gains under the bill (18 million out of 34 million) would come from expansions in the Medicaid program.
40 percent of those obtaining coverage through a newly established health insurance exchange could be enrolled in the public option.
Cuts to the popular Medicare Advantage program for seniors could have the effect of reducing enrollment by 64 percent, with projected enrollment in 2014 falling from 13.2 million to only 4.7 million seniors.
And, all told, the plan puts new strains on health care providers which could lead to price increases, increased cost-shifting onto the privately insured, and/or compromised access to high quality care.
In sum, the findings in the report aren’t pretty. Let’s just hope the White House and Democrats in Congress got the memo.
Dems seek cover to boost debt limit
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28586.html
The Senate must soon increase the national debt limit to above $13 trillion — and Democrats are looking for political cover.
Knowing they will face unyielding GOP attacks for voting to increase the eye-popping debt, Democrats are considering attaching a debt increase provision to a must-pass bill, possibly the Defense Department spending bill, according to Democratic and Republican sources.
Adding it to the defense bill would allow Democrats to argue that they voted for the measure to help troops in harm’s way — and downplay that their vote also expanded the limit for how much money the country can borrow.
The strategy has not yet been finalized, aides and senators said. The House already approved a debt limit increase of $925 billion — above the $12.1 trillion ceiling Congress approved as part of the economic stimulus package last February — but Democrats may seek to increase the limit further so they don’t have to revisit the politically treacherous issue until after the 2010 midterm elections.
As of Tuesday, the debt stood at $11.95 trillion, staring at senators amid a roiling health care debate in which critics have seized on the potential costs of the overhaul. Unlike those of the House, the Senate’s rules do not allow it to automatically increase the debt with its adoption of the annual budget resolution. That puts senators in a tough position politically. And if the Senate balks at the increase, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has warned that the slow economic recovery could collapse, as investors around the world would sharply lose confidence in America’s abilities to meet its credit obligations.
“This president inherited, in some ways, an economic fiasco,” said conservative Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. “It’s not going to be a pleasant vote, but it may be necessary until we can get back on track.”
Indeed, Democrats are quick to point out that President George W. Bush left President Barack Obama with a $10.6 trillion debt — and that the debt limit was increased seven times in the Republican’s eight years in the White House. But now Democrats are in charge of Congress and the White House; and the Treasury Department reported last week that the annual deficit for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 stood at a record $1.4 trillion, with that number likely to balloon under Obama’s policies.
With the debt limit about to be eclipsed, Republicans are eager to force Democrats to find the votes to increase it among themselves, putting the majority party in a lose-lose situation and searching for a way to minimize public backlash.
“Regardless of the political treachery, I’m more worried about the economic treachery and the monetary aspects of it with devaluing the dollar,” said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.).
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and the committee’s ranking member, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), both told POLITICO that appropriators may add the language to must-pass spending legislation.
Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), whose committee is in charge of the debt increase, said “oh yeah, it’s a possibility” of adding the debt-ceiling increase to the spending legislation.
“I care less how it’s done so long as it is done,” Baucus said.
And Conrad said he wants any debt increase to be coupled with language that would create a “comprehensive” process to force Congress to begin making tough choices to cut the debt — something akin to legislation he and Gregg proposed that would establish a commission to study ways to cut the deficit, whose recommendations would be fast-tracked through Congress.
Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, a centrist Democrat, said he wouldn’t support an increase in the debt limit “unless there’s some mechanism to start getting the deficit under control.”
Bayh and nine other Democrats sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last week that called on Congress to approve a “special process” to control the deficit — warning that adding trillions more dollars to the country’s credit card could force a sharp rise in interest rates and cause the price of goods and services to decline while limiting the country’s ability to act on a range of pressing issues.
But if that language is attached to a stand-alone bill to increase the debt limit, the House would be forced to vote on the amended version — a vote that House Democratic leaders are eager to avoid. Folding a method to control the deficit — with an increase in the debt limit — into a much larger bill seems to be a more politically palatable solution, several aides said.
“Sen. Reid agrees about the importance of dealing with our long-term fiscal challenges and has been talking with Sen. Conrad, the administration and others in the Democratic leadership about the best way to proceed,” said Jim Manley, senior communications adviser to Reid. “Those discussions are ongoing, and the administration is evaluating what they may want to recommend.”
Republicans are keenly aware that Democrats may try legislative maneuvering to avoid political fallout, with one senior GOP aide saying the defense appropriations route was under “active consideration.”
Three Republicans — Reps. Jerry Lewis and Buck McKeon of California and Rep. Bill Young of Florida — sent a letter to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey (D-Wis.) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) Wednesday asking Democrats to keep the defense bill clean of extraneous items, including the D.C. Voting Rights Act and an increase in the national debt limit.
A spokesman for Obey, Ellis Brachman, said he “couldn’t speculate on what will be in the final defense appropriations package,” which is awaiting action by a House-Senate conference committee.
Rob Blumenthal, a spokesman for Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), declined to comment.
Since conference reports cannot be amended, the GOP wouldn’t be able to offer amendments to a debt ceiling increase if it’s added to the defense bill.
And GOP Senate leaders — who expect their 40 members to unite against the debt limit increase and force Democrats to find the necessary 60 votes on their own — are eager to have a protracted amendment process on the floor.
“My guess is that we will try to offer some amendments to [the increase] because I think it’ll be a good opportunity for us to have a debate on spending and borrowing, and that’s obviously a debate that we want to engage in,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), No. 4 in the GOP leadership.
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), the Senate’s biggest swing vote, said she was uncertain how she’d vote on a debt limit increase.
“You absolutely have to make government run,” she said, “but I have to look at it.”
Cheney: Obama's Afghan War Strategy First Developed By Bush Team
http://www.newsmaxworld.com/headline_story/cheney_obama_war/2009/10/21/275332.html?s=al&promo_code=8F24-1
Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Wednesday that the Bush administration had developed a new strategy on the war in Afghanistan before leaving office -- a strategy that he said "bears a striking resemblance" to the one announced by President Obama in March.
In a speech to the Center for Security Policy, Cheney said the Bush administration handed Obama's transition team a policy review of the Afghan war conducted last fall to meet the new challenges posed by the Taliban.
"They asked us not to announce our findings publicly, and we agreed, giving them the benefit of our work and the benefit of the doubt," Cheney said.
Cheney's comments countered a recent claim by White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel that the Obama administration had to form an Afghan war strategy from scratch because the Bush administration hadn't asked any key questions about the war and left it "adrift."
The comments add more fuel to the ongoing war of words between the former vice president and Obama administration officials over the current administration's national security policies, including the Justice Department's probe into alleged abuse of terror suspects by the Bush CIA and the president's plan to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay.
Obama is currently debating whether to ramp up war at the request of his military advisers or scale back the effort and focus on going after Al Qaeda in Pakistan, as some of his political advisers are urging.
"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we?
I don't know who wrote it but they should have signed it.
Some powerful words. This woman should run for president.
Written by a housewife from New Jersey and sounds like it!
This is one ticked-off lady.
"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001?
Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan , across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania ?
Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?
And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet?...Well, I don't. I don't care at all.
I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.
I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia ..
I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat.
I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.
I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.
I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.
In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.
When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college-hazing incident, rest assured: I don't care.
When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank: I don't care.
When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts: I don't care.
And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and-you guessed it-I don't care !!
If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your E-mail friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior!
If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button. Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great Country! And may I add: "Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don't have that problem" -- Ronald Reagan
I have another quote that I would like to add AND.......I hope you forward all this. "If we ever forget that we're One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under." Also by .. Ronald Reagan
One last thought for the day: In case we find ourselves starting to believe all the Anti-American sentiment and negativity, we should remember England 's Prime Minister Tony Blair's words during a recent interview. When asked by one of his Parliament members why he believes so much in America , he said: "A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in.. And how many want out."
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you:
1. Jesus Christ
2. The American G.I.
One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO PASS THIS ON, AS MANY SEEM TO FORGET BOTH OF THEM. AMEN!
"The e-mail Bag"
Returning home from work, a blonde was shocked to find her house ransacked and burglarized. She telephoned the police at once and reported the crime. The police dispatcher broadcast the call on the radio, and a K-9 unit, patrolling nearby, was the first to respond.
As the K-9 officer approached the house with his dog on a leash, the blonde ran out on the porch, shuddered at the sight of the cop and his dog, then sat down on the steps.
Putting her face in her hands, she moaned, 'I come home to find all my possessions stolen. I call the police for help, and what do they do? They send me a BLIND policeman!'
No comments:
Post a Comment