Ze Verd Christmas is now hereby forbidden!

Ok. It is December and retailers and businesses want our money again. However these same retailers have again fallen for the myth that the majority of their customers are offended by the word Christmas but not by the more generic word Holiday. Or perhaps they feel safer lumping all of the big holidays into the word "Holiday" so when you do your Kwaanza and Hannakah shopping you will shop at their store. The irony is that 90% of their potential customers, even the athiests, are buying stuff to give as gifts on Christmas!

Every year it gets worse but this year I am seeing the effort to avoid mentioning the word Christmas at all cost, actually to a point where it doesn't make sense.

Here are some examples:

• I got something in the mail from St. Mary's Bank. If I open an account with them I will get a "free holiday DVD". However ALL of the DVDs I can choose from are Christmas DVDs! So St. Mary's Bank is calling a stack of Christmas DVDs, "holiday DVDs", so as to entice me to give them my business.
• I heard an eBay radio ad the other day in which Santa bellows "Happy Holidays America". OK, well what other holiday does Santa Clause come on besides Christmas? Has he ever been associated with Kwaanza or Hannakah? It's kind of like George Steinbrenner cheering "go organized teams!" from his owners booth so as not to offend fans of other teams or other sports.
• In a UPS ad, the driver talks about the job 'driver helper' as a way to "make extra cash for the holiday". He talks about the joy of bringing people their packages and how happy they are to see him. However, at the end of the spiel but he says "when December 25th hits... you did a good job and I'll see you next year." I guess saying "when holiday hits..." would sound kind of weird so I imagine the spinless marketeers at UPS probably said "well just say 'December 25th' since holiday doesn't fit so well."
  

Anyway, more observations may come but in honor of thought police around the world I say Merry December 25th and a Happy January 1st!

I Get A Peaceful, Uneasy Feeling...

Remember that ditty by the Eagles. Well... I decided to modify it because I am feeling uneasy right now. China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela and Cuba all seem to be on the same page right now. They are feeling empowered and unchallenged as they begin to set up strategic alliances and positions in the western hemisphere. Iran is finalizing its first nuclear weapon and is salivating about "wiping Israel off the map". Russia has a new friend in Venezuela. The ingrates of Iraq are burning effigies of President Bush as the lame duck U.S. administration wants to continue to be polite to the incoming administration, who really couldn't care much less about foreign affairs

The incoming administration is, itself, salivating over the collapse of the American economy so they can make a complete power grab once inaugurated. Since Obama is such a charismatic speaker and the American public is so apathetic, Obama plans to easily have the government take over our private health care system, automobile industry, banking industry and whatever else he will be allowed to grab. When all is said and done, the leftists, taking over in January, will attempt to own as much of the private economy as the awestruck and ignorant majority will allow.

It appears that people are now accepting the fact that government will do make things right, not because there is evidence to support that (there is actually reams of evidence to support the opposite) but because they believe that the private sector failed. Nowhere is the understanding that the government (hello Fannie and Freddie) getting its non-market force hands into the private sector actually was the catalyst to the current malaise.

So two forces are at work here. The evil nations of the the world are feeling emboldened to flex their muscles in America's backyard and the incoming Obama administration is looking forward to a government power grab of the economy under the guise of saving it.

I am getting that uneasy feeling.

So where is the peace? Don't those on the left worship the concept of peace? Well, their peace requires one to put their head in the sand and make pretend there are no bad people. I am talking a different peace. Is it pie-in-the-sky to believe that a higher power is at work here and has a plan? I am not a scholar of biblical prophecy but I can't shake the thought that the Good Book has already predicted the times we may be entering. I also find that during difficult times, we tend to turn to the spiritual. Thus the best answer for that is turning to the Prince of Peace.

Turn to Him and let that peaceful feeling rule your uneasy feeling.

Shame on New Hampshire

Shame on you New Hampshire. Once a red beacon of freedom loving light in a sea of blue, big government-loving darkness, the granite state has sought to be like it derelict neighbors. Remember the NH advantage? Well it appears NH no longer thinks it fair that we are head and shoulders above the rest of the New England states or maybe they just forgot why have been.

NH has an advantage because we didn't vote for big government. MA, VT, RE, ME all do. Apparently NH voters now believe it is better if we become like Massachusetts - you know, the corrupt, over-taxed, one-party state to our south?

The biggest tragedy occurred in NH's 2008 Senate Race. John Sununu is the only Engineer in the US Senate is from NH. He is a brilliant and honest man. Unfortunately for voters it doesn't matter what good you've accomplished. If they believe the economy is bad, they throw out members of the senate who are in the same party as the president, even if the Sununu and Bush didn't cause this financial mess.

As a matter of fact Sununu is on the banking committee in the Senate. He sponsored legislation more than once to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. All the Republicans on the banking committee voted for it and all the Democrats voted against it. Chuck Schumer and Chris Dodd would not let it go to the floor of the Senate. As we all know, Fannie and Freddie's sub prime loans practice was the catalyst to the collapse of the banking industry.

So I ask, why would someone who tried to stop the collapse get voted out and replaced with someone who would have voted for the continued practices of Fannie and Freddie? Do you really think Jeanne Shaheen would write legislation to regulate the Democrat's piggy bank? I don't think so.

So I say shame on you New Hampshire for voting out someone who tried to do the right thing only to replace him with a rubber stamp of those who really caused the economic mess.

Hello end of the greatest idea in human history

The grim reality is history fades, people die and new people repeat history. Only those who live through an historic event and its uncertainty will understand that time period in a way that they will not want to repeat it. However, their children and grandchildren will only read about or hear about it from parents and grandparents.

But then the parents and grandparents, who live through it, die and so goes the first hand account. It's a first hand account of how the days were long and people in the coffee shop thought it was end of the world. Future generations have the luxury of knowing it was not the end of the world, instead they are convinced that what they are facing is the end of the world.

We have the luxury today of having hours of film and reams of newspapers from WWII, not to mention that many from that generation are still alive to relay what it was like. Again, though, the greatest generation is dying away as naturally would be the case. Have we learned from their lessons?

I'd say it is doubtful. In WWII, the US fought and defeated a fascist (Mussolini), a national socialist (Hitler) and an imperialist (Japan). It was not easy but the love of America and its freedoms prevailed.

Today we are about to elect our first unabashed Marxist to lead our nation. Why? Because most voters are uninformed and they believe that Bush caused the current economic problems. However the truth is Barack and his ilk in congress protected the cancer that was Fannie and Freddy. When Fannie and Freddie collapsed, it affected everything. The fact that Bush tried to stop it and the Dems wouldn't let him doesn't matter. The fact that the Bush tax cuts helped strengthen our economy in spite of the Dems doesn't matter.

What is the lesson today? If a republican is in the Oval Office, the Dems can destroy the economy and be rewarded by the voters by winning in a landslide.

Hello high taxes. Hello 20 million immigrants from 3rd world countries. Hello 'Fairness Doctrine' to stifle opposing opinion. Goodbye America, the greatest idea in the history of human civilization. :-(

The Power of the Great Uninformed

All voters fall somewhere along a spectrum.

Informed conservative - listen to talk radio and read the news regularly. They are well informed and tend to vote conservative. They vote for Republicans typically.

Informed liberal - they read the New York Times and watch the network news. They read the internet and listen to some talk radio. They know conservatives are right but they love centralized power so they will usually vote for the most liberal Democrat.

Now it gets more gray:

Minimally informed conservative - They tend to have been raised in a conservative Republican home. They don't keep up with the news but they have a sixth sense about what is right. They usually vote Republican.

Minimally informed liberal - they watch the network news. They pride themselves on being open minded. They tend to have been raised in a liberal Democrat family. They know when they vote Democrat that it doesn't feel right but they tend to do it anyway.

Now here is where the power resides:
The Great Uninformed - They know very little about any of the issues and like it that way. In every presidential election they are generally uninformed on the cantidates. They base their vote on how they feel about the economy and how the two candidates make them feel. It is usually not based on anything concrete but the are adament about who they are voting for. They recycle talking points when they are asked why they are voting for x or y. This group will vote Democrat or Republican. It all depends on how they currently feel.

The Rush Limbaugh imprint on the future

God Bless the soul of Ronald Reagan. It is without question where he stands in history. His tax cuts spawned 20 years of economic growth, thus bringing in a standard of living never seen before in the history of human civilization. His defeat of the Soviets led to a world where the benevolent U.S. is more powerful than everyone else combined, thus bringing unprecedented world peace. However it was another change that Ronald Reagan made that could have much longer lasting effects for many generations. Through his leadership, in August 1987, the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. On August 1, 1988 Rush Limbaugh went national.

I am 40 years old and came of age in the late 80's. The fact is I have listened to Rush my entire adult life. His affect on my ability to think critically cannot be overstated. He solidified my love for the founding principles of this nation. He solidified and reinforced my conservative values like no one before and no one since.

In 2008 we were introduced to Sarah Palin, 44. When she was first interviewed by Rush on his show, I wasn't sure who was more giddy to talk to the other. Sarah started the conversation with "dittos" and ended it by saying "we'll keep listening". I can only assume she has listened to Rush throughout her adult life as well. As a matter of fact all of those considered rising stars in the party - Gov. Bobby Jindal, La., 37, Rep. Adam Putnam, Fla., 29, Rep. Mike Pence, Ind, 49, Rep. Eric Cantor, Va., 45 - have had access to Rush for a majority of their adult lives and I can assume are probably dittoheads at some level as well.

So for those conservatives under 50 who are sick of the get-along, placating "Republicans" that the party puts up like Ford, Dole and McCain and those who believe fighting for conservative principles is more important than making the press and the Dems like us, then rest-assured in that future of the party has been properly influenced.

Riots predicted if Messiah doesn't win

Sound familiar, Kenyans?

It has just been eluded to that if Obama doesn't win then there may be race riots here in a America. It makes a sane person who expects the peaceful transfer of power wonder if we are talking about some banana republic.

I mention Kenya because late last year there was close election, in which the incumbent president Mwai Kibaki narrowly defeated Raila Odinga. Odinga, it was reported, is a distant cousin of Barrack Obama. Obama went to Kenya to help campaign for him.

Odinga is described as "a flamboyant politician who hails from the minority Luo tribe and has won support from rural and urban voters after promising to share the wealth among all the people". Sound familiar?

When Odinga lost by 230,000 votes out of 8.9 million counted his party accused the government of "doctoring" the results. Odinga fanned the flames of anger stating that if the president was announced winner "it will do the biggest injustice to the people of this country." This was enough of a green light for the rioters to vent their rage.

Yes we see this as typical of elections in Africa but not in America. Recently we saw video on YouTube that showed young black men in military garb essentially paying allegiance to Obama.

What will the 2008 elections bring us? Seems like the choice is going to be Socialism or civil upheaval. I want neither.

Those willing to talk "Jesus" and those not

What would you think if a travelling salesman came to your door to talk about a *name brand* product? However, you know that his version of the name brand product really diminishes its value. You would wonder why those who actually believed in said *name brand* product would have the audacity to be here selling it, right?

The other night my doorbell rang. I answered and there were two well dressed young men. The first comment from them was "we would like to talk to you about Jesus". Sadly the first thought in my mind was "this can't be evangelical or catholic types. It must a Jehovah's Witness". However when I asked what religion they represented he was reluctant but said sheepishly "Latter Day Saints..."

Aah the Mormons.

I quickly told him that we were practicing Christians and deeply rooted in our faith and would not be interested in talking. I could tell they wanted to still talk but I really had to go, so the conversation quickly ended.

Afterward I got thinking about these nice gentlemen. They are Mormons. The first thing they told me was they wanted to talk about Jesus. I knew they didn't believe in the Deity of Jesus but I wanted to know more so I then did some research on what do Mormons think about Jesus. In World Religions Made Easy I read "Mormons teach that Jesus Christ is our elder brother and that he, himself, progressed to godhood. Mormons teach that Jesus Christ was born as a result of God the Father having sexual intercourse with Mary." "The Book of Mormon teaches that the Holy Spirit is a spirit in the form of a man."

That to me sounds like a sad marginalization of Jesus. On the contrary, we, as evangelical Christians, believe that Christ was the son of God, Himself. He is part of the trinity, which makes him God. Most importantly Jesus died as a loving act of God so that the penalty for our sins would be paid for. That is amazing! That is truly good news!!

So why aren't Christians, with eternally life saving news, going door to door asking people if they'd like to talk about who Jesus really is? The truth is so much better than the co-opted, humanized version that the Latter Day Saints are selling, but apparently there are other reasons for the lack of boldness of those who should be gleefully proclaiming the truth about Jesus.

Philosophical difference as to who controls the money

We know power all comes down to money and who controls it. In a free market society businesses and their leaders will get wealthy. They risk their capital, put in hard work, provide a good or service to their fellow man and justly profit. Yes some unscrupulous business leaders, in an attempt to out-do their peers, over pay themselves. I am not suggesting that anyone should dictate what a private company pays its leaders; I am saying that there is a point where it is less about paying for performance and more about accumulating more than that pompous guy at the country club. Morally speaking, in a perfect world, these leaders would get their share but they would also share the excesses with their employees, in the form of bonuses, etc (can you say supply side).

However there are those who find it unacceptable that this kind of trust (to share with their employees) is entrusted to private citizens. These people usually end up in a governmental position of power. To get that position they preach to the employees that the boss can't be trusted to share the wealth with them. Only if the politician is elected will they be guaranteed to get their share. Since the employees outnumber the bosses, the politician gets elected. Once in power the politician pushes to raise taxes on the business leaders so the politician can be the one to give money to the employees. So now you have an individual in government that did not risk capital, work hard nor provide a good or service to his fellow man, being given credit for sticking up for the little guy by making the boss pay. Doesn't seem right, huh?

Well it gets worse. The same politician realizes that not all of the employees are voting for him even though he is sticking it to their boss. They realize that the bonus from the boss exceeded any schadenfreude they get from watching the politician take from the boss. So the politician begins to use the money he takes from the rich bosses and gives it to people in the district that don't work or don't want to work. These people get just enough from the government to maintain their sustenance, but the key is they remain loyal to the politician as he continues to demagogue about sticking it to those rich people.

At the same time the politician becomes rich from being in office, names buildings after himself and attempts to entrench himself in his government position for a lifetime. A lifetime of passing laws to take money from those who earn it and take credit from those he gives it to for making their lives better, when ironically their lives don't ever get better.

Liberal socialist types, in their heart of hearts, believe that there should be equal outcomes when it comes to living standards. They believe because some are rich and some are poor then there is an injustice that only they can fix. Their fix is the wealth should be shared by those at the top with those at the bottom. They pine about this all the time.

In the capitalist system, not everyone is the equal! In any system not everyone is equal. It is impossible to equalize outcomes because people are different. There are different personalities. Everyone has a different drive to succeed. Some people are under achievers. There are people who work 60 hours a week to get by and there are people who won't work at all. Both get what their labors bring them.

Liberal socialist types see only one solution. The governing authority takes money from the achievers and transfer it to the underachievers. This philosophy makes four dangerous assumptions:

1. The people in government are benevolent. They are human. They have absolute governing power and that corrupts absolutely. I don't see benevolence but only the potential for corruption.
   
2. The people in government will treat money they have not earned with the same respect as a business owner. Not possible. Remember when that bully took your bike? Did he treat it the same way you did after you spent your hard earned money to buy it?
3. The poor that get the handouts will benefit. Ya they'll have a bare minimum but what incentive do they really have to make their lives better?
4. The rich will continue to work just as hard whilst more of their money is taken in higher taxes. Not forever. Every individual has a breaking point where they stop working because most of what they are earning is going to that government guy to give to the non-achiever in the name of compassion.
   

SUMMARY: Conservative politicians say cut taxes on EVERYONE, including the rich. Then the risk takes will invest their money in private sector ventures (new businesses and subsequently new jobs). If the business succeeds. Liberal politicians seek control by means of the tax system to limit the power of the rich (making themselves rich) and dole out pittances to everyone else.

Pelosi planning the future giveaways

I read that the Dems believe they have this wrapped up and they will own House, Senate and Prez come January. They have even come public with what they plan to spend (our) money on. One social program and giveaway after another - as if the Government doesn't spend enough on that.

I then took a step back and thought about what these people are doing and why. They were elected to a position to take our tax dollars and give them to the less advantaged. Sounds noble? Well, we didn't voluntarily give them our money and are the recipients really benefiting from the gift. If the recipients are continually given gifts that keep them perpetually just above poverty then what incentive will they ever have pull themselves up and making something of themselves on their own? In most cases none. So while the permanent underclass is kept down, the political class continues to keep their power, take from the achievers and give to the underclass.

Can you imagine if a politician said that there would be no more handouts because in the long term they don't benefit the recipients? Not in this lifetime. As long as there is largess coming into the treasury there will be politicians using it to expand their power. Life 101.

Conservative equals dumb, I guess

I was listening to talk radio recently and the local host's producer is a super lib. He distrusts all things Republican. He has continually referred to George W. Bush as dumb. I viewed that as par for the course for libs. But just the other day he called Sarah Palin a "dumb hockey mom". What? I got to thinking about what in the world would make him think she is dumb. I attributed it to an elitist attitude that many rank and file lefties from New England have. They inherently think lower intelligence when they hear accents unlike their own speaking of freedom, country, free-markets, pro-life positions, gun rights. It is completely knee-jerk and very much the same biases that they accuse conservatives of having.

It seems like those whom they tell us are the most brilliant have the tendency to micromanage that which they are in charge of, rather than letting those who actually do the work be in control. On the other hand, those who apply a more "free market" approach to managing are considered dumb, not because of their free market approach but because they don't adhere to ideas that ... control.

There is no more perfect example of this than Obama in 2008. He is an incompetant, control freak who knows little about economics, small business, tax consequences, foreign policy, etc but he is considered brilliant and messianic. But folks like George W. Bush and Sarah Palin who are actually very pragmatic, humble, wise and very smart are thought of as dumb by those same elites.

I finally watched the mini-series "Roots"

I was a month short of 9 years of age when Roots was first broadcast on TV. Til only recently I had never ever seen it. I heard a lot about it but never actually sat down to watch it. I was recently at our town library and decided to take volume 1 home. I was somewhat excited about it as I sat down to watch.

In the first volume I found the idealization of Kunta Kinte's tribe and, except for the Ed Asner character, most white characters were 1 dimensional, to be a little too difficult to swallow.
However I continue to watch.

In the subsequent volumes as Kunta grew up, married and raised Kizzy, the writing of the characters began to show some depth. Frankly in those episodes I was pleased that not all white people were evil masochists. I liked Robert Reed's character. He was fair, deep and introspective. Even when he sold Kizzy away it was not done for no reason.

The final volume was where I started to feel like I was watching a cartoon again. I thought the Lloyd Bridges character had little depth and was completely one dimensional. His character's relationship with Tom was the most one dimensional relationship in the whole series in my opinion. I found other slave owners and white characters like Mr. Ames, Tom Moore and even John and William Reynolds having multi-dimensional, more realistic relationships with their slaves. This helped draw me in to the miniseries - of course until the end when all the white people were either wimps (George Johnson), overt racists (Evan Brent(Bridges)) or corrupt Senators (Burl Ives' character).

I was deeply moved by the plight of the slaves, especially Kizzy. When she visited her father's grave and all that was written on it was "TOBY", I was profoundly affected. I was affected primarily because I felt like I knew Kunta from his youth and how he was a valued human being as a young person only to end up in a grave with a cheap stone scrawled with "TOBY". It was a very powerful moment when Kizzy wrote "Kunta Kinte" on the stone.

There are two things apart from the specifics with certain characters that I would have done differently in making this mini-series. First I would have had the people in Africa speak a native African tongue with subtitles (a la The Passion of the Christ and Apocalypto). This would have made it more believable especially when Kunta comes to the US and suddenly can't speak or understand English. Yes as I watched it I could get beyond that and make pretend he wasn't speaking English when he was in Africa, but it would have been better if they spoke their native language in Africa.

The second thing is as a Christian, I would like to have seen someone introduce Christianity to Kunta and at some point give his life to Christ or at least see one of his progeny do it.

I highly recommend this mini-series to anyone. I am not a black person but I can empathize with people who sincerely want to know the truth about their lineage.

Palin derangement syndrome - a sight to behold

I was 20 when Dan Quayle was introduced to the national stage. Immediately the main-stream press went after him. They called him a rich kid and a frat boy. Although being very intelligent he was not a great orator. This added to the fodder for late night comedians and perpetuated the myth that he was a dunce. Yes people on the left didn't like him him but it was at least relatively civil.

However this is 2008 and all sense of decency and objectivity has been cast to the wind with the introduction of Sarah Palin to the national stage. After hearing this woman speak for the first time I felt, as many did, the strong sense that she is a real person. She felt like a far cry from most politicians who are told what do say and what do think and what to wear and where/when to go potty. She is charismatic, likable, intelligent, well-spoken, compassionate, pragmatic and quite attractive.

Of course since her arrival, the vitrial from the left hasn't been well contained. The list of celebrities and public figures coming out opposing her isn't a surprise. The surprise is the level of discourse as they try to deal with her and who she is. Here is some of the brilliance spouted by our best and brightest:

• Matt Damon, former talented newbie and now hollywood elitist snob, thought it would enhance his career to decided to be one of the first to go public to display his ignorance. He compared her rise to a "'really bad Disney movie' and said it's absurd that this woman could become President.
  

• Lindsay Lohan, mentally unstable actress and noted lush (who now believes she is gay) called Sarah "narrow minded, media obsessed homophobe."

• Pamela Anderson, dim bulb and rock star serial wife, said "I hate her, she can suck it".

• Sandra Bernhard, lowlife commedianne, suggested that she be raped by black men if she comes to NY.

• Non-political Oprah Winphrey refused to allow Sarah on her show as she openly stumps for Obama.

• SNL does a skit insinuating that Todd Palin is having sex with his daughters.

• Democratic Congressman Alcee Hastings said about Sarah "Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through."

This has truly been a site to behold. Remember when you were in high school and there was this really popular girl. The girl was pretty, smart, nice to everyone, class president, honor society, volunteer at homeless shelter, prom queen, etc. Most people in your class liked her because she was genuinly likable and she never did anything to you to make you not like her... But you learned that there were kids in your class that didn't like her. They just did not like her. You chalked it up to jealousy. You knew the haters usually came from dysfunctional homes and had very low self-esteem. It all made sense.

Real life seems to be copying the caddy days of high school. Sarah Palin represents that super girl from high school and most people really like her. The more we get to know her the more we like her. However there are those who still hate her. Yes it appears irrational, not based on any facts and basically deranged.

The whole irony of hollywood's take on Sarah is they are making a tantamount admission that they hate their fans. Sarah is more of an everyday American as opposed to an elitist. Everyday Americans buy Hollywood's product but those in Hollywood dispise what she represents. It just doesn't make sense.

This is, however, fascinating to watch. The late Ronald Reagan reminded us that as a whole the American public knows the truth regardless of what is fed them by those who assume the mantle of America's elite.

God Bless America and His blessings to Sarah Palin.

Liberal conundrum: Abortion/Racism

• Fact: Planned Parenthood is a pro-abortion entity.

• Fact: Planned Parenthood was started by a racist named Margaret Sanger ostensibly to eliminate black babies.

• Empirical evidence suggests that abortion is a sacrament to those on the political left. Therefore those on the left typically have a positive opinion of Planned Parenthood.

• Empirical evidence suggests that those on the political left - usually Caucasian and guilt laden - believe that racism and "hate crimes" are far worse than most historically felonious crimes.

I read something on a left-wing message board yesterday and I see this quite often. I see the same people who are militantly pro-choice also see themselves are the saviors to African-Americans. Something just doesn't seem right with these people. Perhaps that is why it is accurate to say liberalism is a mental disorder.

Contrary to how we are portrayed, we on the mainstream right in this country are pro-life (all races) and we don't view black folks as inferior and in need of patronizing government policies.

God's special gift to humans

I have a cat that acts more like my mistress. OK. Hold on. Sounds weird? Well stick with me here... When I sit down she climbs on my lap and rubs her chin on my chin. She lets me kiss her and pet her. I am the only living person she does this to. When I lay down in bed, within minutes she is there laying on me, licking and rubbing my chin with her chin and cheek. It is nice to have a living thing make me feel so loved.

However if I look deeper, am I really being loved? Fact is, I am the only person in my house that has a stubbly chin. This cat discovered my chin as a young kitten and sees me as her personal face scratcher. OK the bubble is burst, she loves me because I fill a primal need of hers. The pleasure she gets from getting her face scratched by my chin. :-(

This lent me to think more about this. This sweet, soft, gentle animal is just that... an animal. She has no concept of loving another being (except her babies for a short time) for the sake of the other being. She can't. No animal can... except for humans. Humans are the only living animals that can choose to love another living animal in order to solely benefit the other living animal.

The sad reality is that some humans never quite break from that animal instinct. Have you ever met someone who, when they do something nice for you, you know they are expecting something back. You know they are ultimately doing it for their own self-interest. Some may argue that all humans are like that. I would agree to a point. I would say that all humans are born like that. It is a sin nature and a need to self-preserve. Unfortunately some never grow out of it. Usually it is some childhood trauma that stunts their emotional growth like a parental abandonment or abuse.

Ultimately, my friends, there is hope for those who are only capable of serving themselves. When God's Holy Spirit enters your heart you will find the peace and the ability to love and give to another and you will find that you don't have that pang that has always followed a loving deed. You know the one where you feel like your good deed must be followed by a payback greater than or equal to what you had just given. That is the power of Christ in a persons heart. You will feel the desire to do things and not get paid back. You will feel the desire to find those in need and help them - anonymously. The joy will be too much to hold in; joy you certainly never felt when you used to keep score and definitely something my poor little cat will never feel.

Why are news reporters that way?

Who are these news reporters and anchors and why do they nearly all, in their reporting, support Democrat candidates and causes over Republican?

1. Many have journalism degrees and the motivation for that was to "Change the world".
2. Most like their jobs and want to keep them. You see, those who run the networks and news outlets are liberal and are very closely tied with local liberal politicians. Those who run news outlets also read/watch their product. The little people who do the reporting know this. There is no point risking their jobs by running a neutral report. The reporter knows that if they can slant the report and actually report it with a leftward slant then they will endear their management and keep their jobs.
3. The news reporters are generally ignorant of world history and US history. Their thinking is guided by the conventional wisdom. If you actually present them with facts or ideas outside the box then they get uncomfortable. Also take away their teleprompter or script and they will quickly be found out to know very little about anything except maybe what Tom and Katie have been doing lately.
   

Real answer to the uninformed question.

I am going to try to anwer the uninformed question: "Will her gender sway women to Palin?" 

That misses the point completely.   The premise of that question is that there are women who are totally void of brain matter, see a woman and thus will vote for that woman.    That is absurdly insulting.

Women have opinions on issues that supercede their gender.   Let's take abortion.  Some women are for legal abortion and some are opposed to it.    Those who are for legal abortion are not going to be "swayed" to Palin solely because she is a woman.    Just like pro-life women would not vote for Hillary because she too is a woman.

The choice of Palin will indeed have a clear sway on people but the sway will not be restricted to gender.    Evangelicals, social conservatives, pro-americans, outside the beltway types (you get the picture) will be swayed because they finally see a product they want to buy.   There was a large group of the Republican base that was luke-warm to McCain (I am one of them).  We saw three U.S. Senators (Obama, Biden and McCain) on the ticket thusfar and felt that we were being unrepresented.  The addition of Palin, though I may sound melodramatic, finally included America in the race for the presidency.     Average, hard working Americans of every race and gender will see Palin for who she is and that she represents the America outside of Washinton DC.     That will ultimately "sway" them whether they be male or female.

The resentful 80 vs. the comfortable 20

There are basically two types of people when it comes to interacting with a generous partner.  First, there are those who sit back and let the generous person do all the work.  Second there are those who see the work the generous person is doing and they vocalize their appreciation and subsequently offer to help.

All close relationships are dynamic.    Relationships are never 50/50.    In static relationships they would be a constant 50/50.    However we are human and this is the real world.    There is ebb and flow.   Sometimes relationships are 80/20 and sometimes 15/85 and sometimes 45/55 and even sometimes 100/0.    This is fact.

The question is what does each person do when they are a "20" or when they are an "80".   This is key.    When a person is a 20, they are not really doing much.   It can be pretty comfortable when the other person is doing 80%, especially if they are not complaining about it.   This is short term pleasure however because inevitably the 20 takes the 80 for granted and begins to protect their 20.   They think if the other person is willing to do 80 and not complain then let's not change things.   If the 80 begins to not want to be the 80 any more then the 20 will choose to either step up to the plate and raise their percentage or they will choose fight back in order to maintain their advantage and keep from having to do more.   The person doing 20 may try to make the case that things should remain like this because the 20 (for any number of reasons) deserves the current order of things.   It will not hold water indefinately.  Even if the 80 has the lowest self esteem on the planet, they cannot sustain 80 ad infinitem.    They will either crack or find another person that sees the injustice of one person doing 80% all of the time.

The 80, low self-estem notwithstanding, cannot maintain 80.   The higher the self esteem the sooner they will realize they are being taken advantage of and will say something about it.   If nothing changes then resentment sets in and the 20's hand is called.    If nothing changes then the relationship will crumble.

The prior paragraphs referred to a time when a relationship is stuck in 80/20.    However in healthy relationships the values fluxuate constantly.   In the healthiest relationships both parties seek to contribute 100%.    Since mathematically both cannot sustain anything over 50 at the same time something wonderful happens.   When both partners seek to do 100%, without expecting repayment from their partner, then there is a constant balance that manifests itself.   The 80 always knows that they will not be doing 80% for long because the 20 chooses not to be 20 for long.   Does that make sense?  We are talking about choices here.   Both choose not to be comfortable at 20 then the 80 will never be resentful but joyfully 80.

Relationships are extremely challenging and if either party chooses to milk the comfort of being the 20 then they open the door to resentment and distance and they never fill the full potential of the relationship.

Elizabeth Elliott profundity

I was recently listening to an old recording I have of Elizabeth Elliott. She just made the profound statement that originally prompted me to keep the recording:

"there is nothing worth living for unless it's worth dying for"

I love that quote.

How many things on this earth and in our lives do we each consider worth dying for? Life has so much more meaning when you are surrounded by those whom you would die for. Those who are surrounded by "things" that they believe bring them pleasure would admit they would surely not die for them. Thus they don't know the level of meaning that they can obtain for their own life if they would just trade in their things for meaningful relationships.

There is a secular song written for and performed by none other than The Monkees. I love the lyrics in the second verse of the song, "The Door into Summer". It speaks of the man who spent his life building up his pile of "things" and the ultimate regret therein:

With his travel logs of 'maybe next year' places
As a trade-in for a name upon the door
And he pays for every year he can't buy back with his tears
As he finds out there's been no one keeping score

We cannot serve many masters, effectively. We cannot put 100% energy into more than one thing. Yes many can get a way with 50/50 if they are affective and things fall into place just right. However that is not reality because life doesn't fall into place all the time as we plan. Yes we can give 50% to work but our career may suffer. Yes we can give 50% to our family but our family will suffer. People tend not to be happy when they give 50% to something. Therefore one thing
inevitably gets more attention. It is usually those earthly things that bring us immediate gratification that get most of our attention.

For example, children are a long term investment. The effects of what you do or don't do with our children today will not be seen for many years to come. However if a man puts all his time into the workplace, he may get pay raises and praise today but ultimately it does not matter. Let me explain. I recently attended a funeral of a friend from my church. Several people got up to speak about the life of this woman. NO ONE got up and said they were happy that she worked more hours than expected or she always did great work on the job. People spoke about how she hugged and how she listened to others without judging or how she always was there to talk. People who were really touched by how she treated them were the ones who testified to her life.

Who or what are you living for? Is it worth dying for?

I think J.C. Watts would be the best choice

I think J.C. Watts would be the best choice for VP. I think it would be brilliant on so many levels. Close your eyes and listen to how well he speaks and how passionate he is. Next read what he writes and what he believes.

Unfortunately we live in a race-inflamed climate, especially this political season. Obviously, Obama is half black and technically his dad is not "african-american" since he is from Kenya.

Therefore with JC Watts, we would counter the "blackness" on the Democrat side with a man with actual "slave blood". I must reiterate that this means nothing to me but there are people on the left that base their votes on this idiocy. Having JC would call out the guilty white liberals who are voting for Obama to solely make themselves feel good. Perhaps it would also put to bed once and for all that Republicans are NOT the party of racism but the Dems are - although sadly I seriously doubt it. It is too ingrained in the political minds of those on the left.

Mr. McCain, make the right choice.

What if you had six months to live?

We have a great friend in our church, in her 50's, who is dying of a very aggressive cancer. I went on a missions trip last February with her and many others to Hackberry, LA to build a house.

She had untreated melanoma on her back for a few years and it has now spread throughout her body. She was officially diagnosed in July. It is now the first week in August and the doctors say she has hours to days to live. At the end of this month it will be 6 months since our mission trip. I am looking at photos from the trip. I can only think, what if we could go back in time and tell her that she would be with the Lord in 6 months. What if...

I will miss you Deb. You will be with our Lord soon!

No T.V. and the impending joy

It goes without saying that I am no big fan of T.V. Yes I watch some shows. I love the History Channel and National Geographic channel and Discovery Health.... yada yada.

With that said, last saturday we lost power to our home from around 2am til 10pm. It rained all day so we couldn't go outside either. No lights, no computers, no internet and, above all, no T.V.

With my whole family in the living room I stood up and said 'Isn't this great! No distractions from TV. We can talk and play and just pay attention to one another!'. That announcement was met with less than enthusiasm from my TV family. However there was no choice in the matter. We ended the day with so much reading time and face time and family time, it was wonderful. I spent quite a bit of time just laying down talking to my 8 year old daughter about all sorts of stuff. My wife and I even talked more.

Don't let your TV become a substitute for family connections. God bless.

Response to a news article about a failed abortion

------------------------------------------------------
Article in black/brown. My comments in red. ------------------------------------------------------

Baby Miraculously Survives Abortion, Expected to Live 'Normal' Life

{The whole headline makes me think I am in la-la land or some bad dream where I am the only one that sees that the emperor has no clothes. Let's begin by recognizing that they use the term "baby". Apparently since the tissue mass kept on living after it's attempted murder, then it now qualified as human.
They also view this survival as a "miracle". I am so perplexed at the use of this term here. They are attempting to kill an defenseless baby but the baby does not die like they all wanted it to. Therefore, a divine power stepped in is the conclusion they draw? We are not talking about someone surviving a car accident or a gunshot to the head. This was a willful and legal murder being carried out. Perhaps the headline writer actually knows it is wrong and is quietly cheering.
Lastly "expected to live 'normal' life" kind of struck me funny too. I must give them credit for at least putting normal in quotes. How confused will this child be as he tries to come to term with the fact that mom chose to have him killed because she thought he had a kidney disease.}

Thursday, June 05, 2008

A mother who decided to abort her son because he may have inherited a life-threatening kidney condition is overjoyed that he survived the procedure.

{The operative term in this byline is "may". Would mom be overjoyed if the baby survived but still had the condition? What is she actually overjoyed about? Does she realize she did something wrong? I will never know.}

Jodie Percival of Nottinghamshire, England, said she and her fiancee made the decision to abort baby Finley when she was eight weeks pregnant.

{Another routine mention of couples having babies before marriage. How committed can couples really be? Yet we wonder why western culture is declining.}

Percival's first son Thane died of multicystic dysplastic kidneys — which causes cysts to grow on the kidneys of an unborn baby — and her second child Lewis was born with serious kidney damage and currently has just one kidney, the Daily Mail reported.

{This is tragic and I praise God that both of my children are healthy. I cannot imagine what it must be like every time they get pregnant only to wonder if that baby will die too. But I also don't understand why they chose to kill it rather than the possibility that it will die of an inherited disease. In the UK, the moral standard has been lowered so much that abortion is kind of like getting a tooth pulled, especially if you may have inherited bad lateral incisors.}

"I was on the (birth control pill) when I became pregnant," Percival, 25, said. "Deciding to terminate at eight weeks was just utterly horrible but I couldn't cope with the anguish of losing another baby."

{There is without a doubt, no question, that she was put in a position that I would not ask for my worst enemy. I am sure it is beyond horrible. But folks, that is where faith and prayer are supposed to come in. Since a foundation of faith may be missing from her life her response to losing another baby was to kill the baby... get it?}

A short time after the abortion, Percival felt a fluttering in her stomach. She went to the doctor for a scan and discovered she was 19 weeks pregnant.

"I couldn't believe it,' Percival said. "This was the baby I thought I'd terminated. At first I was angry that this was happening to us, that the procedure had failed. I wrote to the hospital, I couldn't believe that they had let me down like this.

{I don't even know how to relate to this. Well once I called my auto mechanic when something broke down after they 'fixed' it ...
I too was pretty bummed and I felt let down. Ya, I was angry too at first. Ugh! This is a baby she is talking about here. I wonder what she said in her letter.}

"They wrote back and apologized and said it was very rare," she added.

Dr. Manny Alvarez, managing health editor for FOXNews.com, said Percival's situation is actually quite common.

"Women that have early terminations in weeks six, seven and eight, many times the pregnancy is so small that doctors miss removing the baby," Alvarez said. "The danger is that the failed attempt can damage the baby. That is why these patients who get early terminations need follow-ups."

{Again the more I read this article the more I want to yell "but he has no clothes on". The doctor actually said the danger of failure can damage the baby. OK, he called it a baby first and foremost but his use of the word danger intrigues me. Isn't his goal to damage the baby so much that the baby dies?? Why does he consider it a danger that failure to kill the baby can hurt the baby??}

Another scan a week later confirmed the baby also had kidney problems, but doctors told the couple the baby was likely to survive, so they decided he deserved another chance at life.

{Awe how charitable. I hope Finley someday appreciates his parent's benevolence.}

In November, Finley was born three weeks premature. He had minor kidney damage but is expected to lead a normal life.

{Praise God}

The supernatural invitation

Christ calls on us to do that which can only be described as supernatural. The dictionary says supernatural means "of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal." Oswald Chambers wrote "...the relationship which He demands is an impossible one unless He has done a supernatural work in us."1 Chambers said we can only be disciples of Jesus if we are made one, supernaturally and "as long as we have the deadset purpose of being disciples we may be sure we are not." Therefore the supernatural nature of Christ is put within us once we accept him as Lord of our lives. The manifestation of this supernatural blessing in human beings fascinates me because is it so contrary to our earthly understanding while its embodiment is so evident in how lives are changed.

I, like everyone else, was born sinful and self-centered. Until Christ entered my heart I lived my life making sure I got everything I wanted, desired and "deserved" regardless of the effect on others. If someone wronged me, it was only natural to make sure I wronged them back or somehow make their life miserable with a passive-aggressive form of payback. Why was I engaging in this payback? Because the conflict I was engaging in was solely human to human. The other human hurt me, and now, to feed my ego and sense of self-righteousness, I had no choice but to hurt him back, until I felt he paid for it. Of course the amount he had to pay was subjectively based on my mood and how much I liked or disliked him that day.

However what if I was wronged by a person and I decided only to forgive? What if I was at peace with that decision? What if I was wronged and I decided to help the other human paint his house - free of charge? I am certainly not trying to win the battle... right? My earthly sense would tell me I was admitting I was a loser or I was weak. Well what if I said that with these choices, I actually won the battle between the other person and myself? Confused?

Let's look at another example. Take a man who from age 12 was drawn to fill an appetite for pornography and/or drugs. They ruled his life for 30 years. He was doomed to die or end up in jail. His habit had wired his brain so deeply that kicking these addictions was considered impossible from all earthly viewpoints. He accepts Christ's invitation and the day eventually arrives that he no longer desires drugs or porn. Did someone do surgery on his brain to re-wire it? Well, in a sense, yes. But not someone of this earth.

The power of Christ upon taking ownership of a man's heart and mind cannot be explained in human terms. Why does a man who is addicted to drugs or alcohol or pornography lose his desire for them either immediately or over time? Why does a woman who was abused by her mother suddenly no longer feel anger toward her mother but seeks to introduce her to God? Why would a spouse who has not been treated well by or has been neglected by his husband/wife for years decide to rub his/her feet without asking? Why does a man whose history has consisted of using his fists to influence people become a person with whom you want to approach because you now feel safe? In a human sense, these are miracles of the human spirit. What in the world does that mean? Even humanists have to evoke the terms miracle and spirit - both non-physical entities - to describe these changes.

In each case I am sure that Christ's Holy Spirit has entered the heart of each situation I mentioned here. We have an invitation from God that we can accept or deny. We have been told by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount to do that which is supernatural. Do we choose to obey or to continue to seek our own way.


1. "My Utmost for His Highest" by Oswald Chambers.

Black and White Americans are each other's greatest allys

There is a phenomena that I have observed in our American Society today that is evolving and should be acknowledged. Black and white Americans have more in common than many of us think.

There are two major cultural ties that we share and one more that is bringing us closer every generation. The two major ones are Religion and Language. The majority of Blacks and Whites are Christian and predominantly protestant. Nearly all blacks and whites speak English and don't speak a second language. The third one which is not as obvious is pop-culture.

Religion

The fact is the majority of blacks and whites are Christians. Each also values the faith in Christ that they share. I have been to Christian events, like Promise Keepers, where black and white people are drawn close by the sharing of their faith. Islam and Christianity are not the same. Islam in its extreme is quite hostile to Christianity. In the 21st century these two religions are in a battle for superiority. This puts the majority of blacks and whites on the same team.

Language

The majority of blacks and whites in America speak English and only English. In the last 40 years and more so throughout the the 21st century, Spanish speaking peoples from south of the US border are coming to this country and refusing to assimilate. Part of this refusal is not giving up their language for the English language. Language differences are even more balkanizing than religion because of the difficulties of communication. This again puts black and white Americans on the same team. Have you noted that tensions between Hispanics and Blacks seems to be on the rise, especially in southern California? Violence seems to be provoked by the Hispanics who see blacks at their only threat to taking over as the country's largest minority and all the benefits that come with that title. I would suspect in their heart of hearts that white Americans are quietly siding with their black, English speaking brethren.

Pop culture

There was time one hundred years ago when English and Italian Americans were clearly distinguishable but today you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who doesn't consider them both white. Although blacks and white may never have the same skin pigmentation, their friendships and the lines of distinction are fading with each generation.

TV and movies have shown black and white Americans as allies and friends for 30+ years now and it is pretty much ingrained in the minds of our youth that it is the natural order of things for blacks and whites to be friends. George Jefferson had white friends back in the 70's. Raven (of That's So Raven) has a best friend who is white. How about the fact that the largest demographic that listens to and enjoys black rap music is young whites...?

Look at commercials and you will find blacks and whites enjoying the same products, foods, etc. It is everywhere now and the taboos all by "last generation". You will also find that Black/White interracial marriages are far more prevalent today than ever.


I could go on and the evidence is always mounting that in the 21st century black and white Americans need each other more than ever but the first step is to look at those ties that bind us and not focus on our differences.

People just won't do it....

People basically won't do what they don't want to do. If they agree to do something they really don't want to do then they will find some technicality on the way or some anecdotal reason to get out of it - if they are not willing to step out of themselves for another person.

That last sentence is the key. When these same people look outside themselves to a higher power, namely Jesus Christ, then there is the sole motivating factor that makes a self-focused person an other-focused person. Then and only then will they consistently do what they don't want to do because it is the right thing to do for a loved one.

Fight the common enemy

Spouses need to work together to fight a common enemy. You have a common enemy and he wants to destroy your marriage. You might say that it is not your problem but your spouse's. Well that may be true to a point. They may be the one being tempted thus when the choice comes to listen to satan's lies or flee, they must choose to flee. They must be able to tell you when their temptation level is high - not as a means of manipulation but as a means of keeping you connected and close and to keep the foxes out.

"Catch for us the foxes, the little foxes that ruin the vineyards, our vineyards that are in bloom" Song of Songs 2:15

Shame be gone – Forever

I more and more believe that Satan uses shame as one of his greatest weapons against a man struggling with sexual addiction. The enticement is the false promise; The act is the false intimacy; the subsequent shame is real. Satan got to another one of God's people. Satan does not care about you and me. he only cares about using us to get at God.

As years go by and the shame is never dealt with a man begins to believe that he will never do enough penance to relieve himself of this shame. I am here to tell you friends that that is simply not true. The cross is not just a symbol of what the Romans did to people. The cross is where Jesus went to pay for your shame and my shame so that we can be free to love God and spread His good news. Spreading the good news is just about impossible and not very believable when it comes from a man who is full of his own shame. God knows this and he gave the ultimate sacrifice - the brutal death of His Son - in order for everyone, everyone to come to Him through Christ as a new creation. A new creation with no shame forever more.

When man listens to the enticement of Satan he begins the road back to feeling shameful and feeling unworthy of what Christ did for ALL of us. Thus the battle begins for a lifetime. We have the armour of God through Christ to forever be free from shame and forever turn away from the daily enticements of Satan.

The Cross is waiting for you.

God Bless.

What will hindsight be in 2020?

I look at my young children today and I look at what we are facing in the world today as well; terrorism spread world wide, border problems in the south, Europe slowly dying away, etc. I will sometimes think to myself 'is this going to be end of the world or the end of anything good ever happening to this country again?'

At this point I like to sit back and try to drop my hysterical perspective and attempt to get an historical perspective. I was born in the very tumultuous year of 1968. There were protests in the streets over the war in Vietnam. There was rioting in the south for civil rights. TWO prominent figures, including a presidential candidate were assassinated. There were riots in Washington DC. There were more riots at the Democratic National Convention. Those who were adults then were probably saying the same thing - what kind of world are the children born today going to see? Well hindsight showed us that that 1980's and 1990's were not a bad time to live in.

Let's look back even further to a more tumultuous time. How about the 1940's? The world was at war! Food and fuel and other things were being rationed at home. America was fighting a war on 3 fronts. My parents were born in 1942. What did the adults think then of the children born in those years? Did they ask the same question; 'what kind of world will these children see?' Well the 1950s were a nice decade from what I have heard and read...

We could probably go back generation after generation when the world seemed like it was "really" going to end and the children were believed to have a bleak future, but these prophecies never came to fruition. The truth is that the youth are going to want to have a full life. They don't want the world to end because they want a full life. The ones waxing on about the kids born today not having a nice world to grow up in have no idea what the future actually holds. Nor do they know what the 2010's will be like.... we will have to wait for hindsight in 2020 for that.

For those who love the "porn body"

For those men whose introduction to the female anatomy was through porn it would be cliche for me to tell you that your thinking may be tainted.

But you know it is deeper than that.

For those men who love the "porn body" you have no idea what you are missing. You are eating a spoonful of your favorite frosting while not realizing how good the whole cake is. Your mind is so terribly powerful when it comes to what you think excites you. When you think only a perfect BODY will excite you then you will always focus on the body and your pleasure will always be earthly and finite.

When you move away from shallow nature of porn and allow your brain to heal from this limitation then you will begin to see the women's soul. It goes without saying that this is a place where most porn addicts dare never tread. Being vulnerable is worse than death in most cases but to be attracted to a woman because she loves God and/or because she treats people with kindness and compassion is so much deeper. To see her less than perfect body and want to please her like no other because her inner beauty is so incredibly striking is frankly a "God thing". When this person is your wife then you will truly feel the closest thing to God on this side of heaven.

What about the year 2268?

Eternity is such a long time....

I picked a year in the future. A year that I would have turned 300. That will be at least 3 times the amount of time I spent alive on earth. 2268 will be a full year, with full days, with sunshine and trees and mosquitos and people. But everyone who reads this blog and the one who wrote this blog will not be here. Where will be be?

If I take a humanistic approach I will believe that my human body will be long fed to the worms and my soul was just the result of chemical that ran through my body when it was functioning. Thus, in 2268 I do not exist anywhere. By gosh I need to start partying and making money and living crazy now because once my body is gone then I am gone. What a desparate and depraved way to approach the short time we have on earth...

If I take the Christian approach then I believe that because I accepted Christ as my Lord and Savior while here on earth then my body will still be long gone in 2268 but my soul will be with God. Now think again about the time. Frankly God's time has been debated but by earthly standards hundreds and thousands and millions of years is a long time. That is a long time for my soul to be with or be without God.

This leaves us with the infamous "Eternal Choice", a choice that we must make (or not make) while we still live here. What about the year 2268? What about the year 2340938749823? Where do you want to spend eternity? Long gone after living a meaningless life or with the Creator of everything forever?

Obama and the unmitigated disaster

It will be an unmitigated disaster if Obama is elected. For those knee-jerk types, it is not because he is black. His ideas, naivete', and overall lack of understanding of America are the problems. Yes he is a smart man. Some very smart people think they are smarter than history and believe that if they are in charge they can make things like socialism work. They all fail but the next brilliant liberal comes along and tries it again.

One of the mantras that we have heard for years that Obama repeats is that we have suffered in the eyes of the world. We have suffered in the eyes of the thugs and dictators that run the U.N., not the people of the world. If we are such a bad place to be why are we talking about building a fence to keep people out? Thugs and dictators do not like a free populace. What has been America for the last 200 years has never occurred in the history of civilization. Do you understand that? No society has ever been governed by its free people. NONE. Today, the countries that hate us are governed by people with absolute power over all of the affairs of the nation. So why are liberals like Obama so obsessed with getting the approval of these people?

Liberals do not like when a central authority is not in charge. They believe that power should be in the hands of the few who know better than the rest of us. Why do you think the most die-in-the-wool liberals are so envious of Castro?

Something else that Obama has said in the campaign trail is that Bush's tax cuts "for the wealthy" have wrecked the economy. The economy is in a slowdown right now. These things happen. The economy is cyclical. This current slowdown is primarily due to lousy legislation which forced lenders to loan money to people with poor credit. Yes you read that right. Our great congresspeople, in an compassionate attempt to continue paving the road to hell found it necessary to force lenders (the awful rich whose money the libs want) to not refuse loans to people with bad credit if they had a certain a certain skin color. Lo and behold the people with bad credit can't afford the loans so they are defaulting at record numbers. Now congress wants to blame and punish the lenders. Well, this is affecting the economy negatively. Thank you Ms. Pelosi.

I heard an Obama supporter on a talk show yesterday say that Obama will bring the price of gas back down below $3. When the host pressed him on how he was going to do that the caller changed the topic. This showed me the ignorance of economic issues that his supporters have. The price of gasoline is affected by several dynamics in the world today. First, demand for gas has skyrocketed with the increase demands from China, India and other large countries. Second, supply in the U.S. has been hamstrung by the environmentalists. Politicians will not drill in Alaska. They will not build new refineries. They will not explore for oil in the Gulf of Mexico (though Mexico is). Why?? They are afraid to upset the environmentalists. So with demand in the world up and supply not being allowed to increase, economics 101 tells us the price will go up.

Of course this explanation would never come from politician because their supports eyes would glaze over once the words supply and demand were mentioned.

Mr. Obama's lack of hands on understanding foreign policy will have a serious affect on our war on terrorism. We are fighting people who hate the concept of a free nation. They hate the concept of a christian nation. They are bad people. They have stated that they want to kill us. So why would people like Obama and his ilk not believe that. Why do they think that if we just talk to our enemies and get them to like us we will prevail. Ironically they will be embolden to fight harder and take bolder steps against us. Because unlike our liberals, the enemy knows when it smells blood and will step up its fight.

Lastly there are millions of people who will vote for Obama because of a "chance to make history" or to "alleviate white guilt" or to "right the wrongs of the past" of "because of the novelty". These are not reasons to vote for anyone.

Voting in anyone with no record, no understanding of economics, a pension for wanting to understand those who want to kill us, but who is a phenomenal orator is a recipe for unmitigated disaster.

Ted Kennedy's self hatred guides most of his policies

What is Ted Kennedy's obsession with Spanish. I just saw an article on how he sand in Spanish while in Texas. As you know, Kennedy started all of this in the mid 1960's with immigration "reform". At the time he promised that this would not lead to millions of illegal immigrants. Of course he was wrong.

But why did Ted push that law over 40 years ago? At the time immigrants needed a sponsor and they needed to have a job. He believed at the time that since whites were in the majority, they were only sponsoring other whites, which violated the ultimate sin, racism. Thus Ted removed that requirement and the floodgates opened to non-whites which is OK but it also opened the door to non-workers who began to come here for the welfare benefits.

The bigger question is 'why does Ted Kennedy have so much animus toward white people who speak English?' This has been a pattern throughout his tenure in the senate. Probably his second greatest passion next to abortion.

This bias toward people of his own race is really not that easy to understand. Ted was raised in privilege. He didn't have to earn anything growing up. His senate seat was won simply because he lived in MA and his last name is Kennedy. This has helped him get re-elected as well. This privileged life has fostered a lifetime of guilt. He is the most guilt-ridden white man in America. He medicates that guilt by making sure that other white men who speak English are no longer given any advantage. This could explain why he is so obsessed with giving amnesty to as many illegal, Spanish speaking people as possible. He actually believes that the millions of Hispanics will continue to vote for him and other white liberal Democrats for all eternity. However he is a naive man too. Once the Hispanics get the numbers they will only vote for other Hispanics. That is the way of the world for time in memorial. Voters that believe they are a discriminated minority vote for their own ethnicity regardless of the issues.

Maybe Ted will be replaced by a privileged Hispanic who hates his race....

Child-like intellect

Last week we went to dinner with friends who have twins in kindergarten. During our conversation they told us that their children had a mock election a while back. They said that their 5 year old daughter said she voted for Hillary because "she wants to help people and take care of people." They said that their 5 year old son voted for Edwards because he heard his name on a phone call prior to the primary.

It made me think a little about the adults that are voting for Hillary. There are actually adults that will vote for Hillary for the precise reason that this child voted for her... because "she will take care of people." Which is frightening, not only because these people vote, but because there are adults that believe that the role of a president is to take care of his/her people. Maybe in a communist country this is tried and failed but in a free republic it is scary.

The cantidate says nothing. His voters are entranced.

The candidate says nothing. His speech writers have designed it that way. He looks good and is a superior orator. Have him say a bunch or meaningless cliches - couple that with the fact that the average Democrat voter is in denial about what the real world is like. Fill the crowds with young people who only want to prove to their ancestors that they are not racist as they were. Invite the sycophantic press to report the messianic power that he has on the crowd.

However in recent days the candidate has opened his mouth off the cuff and we are beginning to see why having him speak only in cliches was the wisest thing to do.

What if? Game of inches. Who is your god?

Yes we have heard it before. Football is a game of inches. Football games can turn on 1 play or1 yard or 1 decision. My beloved Patriots just fell to the Giants in the Super Bowl. It hurts. It really hurts. If Eli had only been sacked on 3rd down instead of hitting David Tyree. If Rodney Harrison had come up with the ball instead of Tyree. If if if if if if if if if if. Maybe football is a game of ifs.

I am trying to put it into perspective. In the Super Bowl against the Eagles, Harrison picked off a pass by McNabb that ended the game and sealed the victory for the Pats. What if that pass had been caught by the Eagles receiver and they eventually scored? What if? Well Rodney got that one and the Pats won- game of inches.

How about Super Bowl 36? Now we know how the Rams fans probably felt. The Greatest Show on Turf should have destroyed the Pats in that game. How did the Rams fans feel as Vinatieri hit the game winning field goal? What about the 15-1 Steelers that the Patriots beat in January 2005 in Pittsburgh? What about the 14-2 Chargers that the Patriots beat in January 2007? What about the 1998 Vikings losing in the NFC title game? What if?

How about the Rams previous super bowl against the Titans? Remember the last play of the game? On the final play of Super Bowl XXXIV, Rams linebacker Mike Jones performs The Tackle on Titans receiver Kevin Dyson, who fell one yard short of the goal line - game of yards.

What if Scott Norwood hit his field goal? How did Buffalo fans feel about that outcome? They haven't had a good team since that run in the early 90s. - What if?

Every year there is a loser in the Super Bowl. Here in Patriot Nation we have become accustomed to a Super Bowl win being the natural order of things. Well it is not. Rodney did not intercept the ball to seal the win for the Pats this year. Why not? Why did Rodney Harrison intercept it in Super Bowl 39? The football gods? Ok. Let's get serious. How about the God of the universe? How about the benevolent creator who is in control of all things???

Let's face it. Many of us have made the Patriots our god. I will openly confess that during this 16-0 season I have turned off my favorite Christian radio station and have listened the local sports station almost around the clock. My emotions lived and died based on how well the Pats were playing. During the Ravens game I got so worked up that my wife thought I had our life savings bet on the game. During the Super Bowl this year I was so worked up that I found myself praying for a win. Why in the world was I praying for a win? Ya I wanted the home team to win but I had no control over it and the only thing I would gain from a win was the knowledge that my team won. Is it worth it? Was God really going to help me by making something happen so that the Patriots won? Are the Pats worth having have heart attack for? Are they worth dying for?

Absolutely not. The one and only true and benevolent God is the only one worth dying for. Why did Rodney not catch this ball? How about a benevolent God wanted to teach those of us that put the Pats above Him, who was really in charge? Remember, Patriot Nation, that God is in complete control and He may have thrown us a warning and a gift. There are to be no Gods before Him.

The day I have chest pains over potentially losing eternity with Christ as opposed to getting chest pains at the end of the Super Bowl is the day I have not put this god above the only true God.

Christ saved my life for all eternity. The Patriots have provided finite entertainment.

Patriot Super Bowl thoughts

Well, it is 6:28 am on February 3rd, 2008. I have been up for an hour and I really didn't get much sleep last night. I could be the decongestant I am on. It could be musical beds with the sick children. It could be the Super Bowl is finally here today. I could be that I turn 40 tomorrow.

It could be all of the above.

I have random thoughts on the game tonight and the weeks up to the game.

Tom Brady

Tom had a bad, 3 interception, game against San Diego. Though he won't admit it, anyone watching him knows he was ill. That affected judgment and timing. Tom's throws were impatient and off. Who knows about the ankle? Add a bad ankle to the mix and he is not himself but the team still won. San Diego's secondary I dare say is better than the Giant's. Tom is healthy today and very focused on the job at hand. He never has two bad games in a row.

Junior Seau

Junior entered the league in 1991 and his team made it to Super Bowl XXIX in January of 1995 with his hometown Chargers only to be shellacked by the 49ers. That means it has been 13 more seasons in which he has not seen the big dance. Last year he broke is arm with the Pats and couldn't help them get there. However as we wake up today, Junior is healthy and fired up. Fired up is putting it mildly. He had a phenomenal game against the Chargers in the AFC title game and since he is now 39 this may be the last game of his hall-of-fame career.


The Refs

If you have read my blogs you know I believe that the NFL has a man-crush on Peyton Manning. For years they have been trying to get Peyton into the Super Bowl but other teams have gotten in the way. When playing the Colts you can expect the most egregious calls against your team, especially the phantom interference call. This year even the refs couldn't help him. But Hey his little brother is in the Super Bowl! The NFL has never given that kind of treatment to Eli and his Giants. Perhaps if Bill Polian were in the Giant's organization they would but that is a topic for another day.
The Refs play a crucial role in the outcome of a game. An interference call is absolutely devastating in the NFL but when you look at the replay and there is no interference and the team got a touchdown instead of punting then it's like a dagger to the heart. It will be interesting to see if the refs start to call a bad game to the benefit of Eli so that they can market the "Super Bowl Champ Brothers". Eeeek.

Eli Manning

Eli has been the best quarterback in the playoffs this year. He hasn't had phenomenal numbers but he also hasn't made mistakes which is his biggest problem in his career. Burress is a game time decision (we think) but he has been Eli's go-to guy. Eli's last interception was against the Pats in week 17 because, I believe, he was getting nervous about the ensuing track meet with Tom Brady.

The Giants rhythm

The Giants have been on a roll. They have been in a rhythm, playing every week. The Super Bowl is different. There is two weeks of hyped up craziness. How will this affect their "rhythm"? The Patriots have been here before in recent years and know what it is all about.

Bill Belichick's focus

Bill has been here many times and he knows what mental shape his team needs to be in. On Wednesday he pulled the entire team off the field because he felt they were practicing like crap.
That team will be mentally ready.

Strahan/Umenyiora

They barely got to Brady in week 17 and the Pats had no tight ends that game. Also two of their linemen were out. Protection will be different today. Strahan will also be playing his head off today. He went to the Super Bowl in January 2001. His career is near the end and he may not be on another Giants team that peaks at the right time.

Jacobs/Bradshaw

This is the phenomenal tandem of backs that the Giants have. The Pats had a lot of trouble initially with Jacobs in week 17 until they adjusted in the second half. They have not seen Bradshaw yet but they hit or miss with backs of his style like Tomlinson and McGahee.

Maroney

He has been the best back in the playoffs. He benefits from Moss tremendously. However he still needs to run. And he has. He has been on fire and on a mission. What he has going for him the most are his fresh legs. With the out-of-this-world passing attack for the first dozen games, Maroney did not have to do much running. You can really see that now as he seems to have the freshest legs on the field in the 4th quarter. That was the difference in the AFC championship game.

Injuries

Who knows who will get hurt today and what affect it will have. It is always there.

Rodney Harrison

Stupid penalties or super plays, he is a difference maker. He thrives in the big dance.

Randy Moss

How will the legend do in his first Super Bowl of his long career? Will he be double teamed all night? Will he be nervous and fumble a ball or drop a pass? This is his chance to shine.

Bulliten Board material

First Osi Umenyiora said that Matt Light was a dirty player. The offensive line is good enough. They didn't need a rallying cry for one of their own. Then Plaxico Burress guarenteed and win and came up with a score! Who does that?!?! Didn't they see what happened the last time someone guarenteed a win against the Patriots?

Spygate redeux

Grandstanding politician, Arlen Spector, had to pick the week leading up to the Super Bowl to bring up cameragate... Now the government wants to step in and stop this unpopular team!! I can just see the absolute FOCUS in the Patriot locker room to win it for their coach. Thank you Senator.

So many questions. So many variables. So looking forward to my nap before the game.