If Ayres and Dohrn (sp?) gave me a kick-off campaign party for one of my earlier political races in his living room (parsed away as untrue by Obama (untrue for the pres. race--but it is true re: another campaign of Obama's) --and if my supporter so recently said he wished he had bombed more --and he so recently had himself photographed standing on the American flag --I would question why this man thought I would be a good candidate. And I hope I'd have the good sense to refuse his official help.
It's natural for a discerning public to assume that these two men, Ayres and Obama, think alike at some point --are mutually critical of our nation--have shared conversation to that effect. Michelle said it when she said she was proud for the first time of AMerica because they were supporting her husband. One wonders about her past lack of pride in America if this is her first time of pride.
Obama's minister said "God damn America." Was that a prayer?? That's a poor way to say America needs to repent, which it does --regarding our pornography, abortion, remnants of racism, drugs, gambling, casinos, and general immorality as a people --as well as the corporate greed that would cause Enron's disgrace and the Freddie Mac corruption (and all the other) (headed by Obama's friend who got 90 million as the CEO of the unregulated Freddie mac--whose advice Obama sought concerning housing policy recently) --note that Obama was one of two biggest recipients of campaign support from Freddie Mac and its CEO, Raines.
We should know that Obama is not a successful change agent --considering that the progress he attempted to achieve in So. Chicago did not come to fruition in the long run.
And why not? Because politics and gov't spending are not the solution to the so. side of Chicago. They could help --but the real change needed in blighted areas of the nation is moral and spiritual.
The people who get ahead in America (on average) are the ones who take school seriously, have a good work ethic, marry one woman and support her children, and stay away from extra-marital sex, alcohol, drugs, nicotine, gambling and gangs. And even these people are experiencing much divorce and disfunction if their lives are not founded on the Lord.
The real change has to be inner --and it starts with the wisdom of the Bible: "Be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds." "If any man is in Christ He is a new creation." "ye must be born again --born of the Spirit of God."
That's the change that can transform a nation.
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Sounds like you are in the death throes, barb. I hear that morbid rattle in your post- searching for ANYTHING you can to throw at Obama.
Poor woman,I know how VERY DIFFICULT it will be, perhaps even mildly traumatic, to awaken on November 5th and realize that the religious-right's favorite hang-out has gone down to massive defeat.
I'd suggest that you take to your bed all day and have hubby give you some Alprazolam to keep you sedated. I cannot imagine how you will be able to function for the next 4 years.
Of course, you could spend those long, gloomy November and December days bitching here on your blog, you know, the same nasty remarks you are already making against everything Democrat. It may be a cathartic experience for you, a good purge, even better than a fine enema.
You should know, Mudly, about these remedies for gloom. A fine enema? Does it help you?
But we have been here before, when Clinton won --twice. Nothing energizes the GOP more than a few years with a democrat for president. But I am afraid it will be too late if we get the ACLU as the majority on the judge's bench. That's what happened when we got legalized abortion.
the problem was that the religious right was not being political with George W. as president. They have so much more to do --to just be pro-life, pro-marriage --and pro-their church ministries --and pro-their own families --so I think the RR was asleep when it came to uniting behind one GOP pres. nominee in the primary.
You see, the REligious right really isn't a lot of control freaks who try to run the gov't --as you would claim. Or we would have gotten behind either huckabee or even Romney. I think Newt made a play for the RR support with his latest book and Dobson was considering him as viable --but Newt's marital record is pretty bad for a family values candidate.
So we got McCain who is not an evangelical like Bush -- who has made a statement in late 90's that he supposed we couldn't reverse roe v wade (the public is afraid to forbid abortion --it's become so accepted)
so he's just not as ideologically acceptable as, say, Huckabee would've been.
But he IS more acceptable than Obama --who will liberalize the USA even worse than it is --because all the old liberals of the Supreme Court will give place to new and more radical liberals.
If Obama IS elected, however, I hope he proves to be very good and wise. I don't expect it --because his past shows him to be a left wing radical on abortion. And that issue alone tells us something about a man's faith and his heart.
Now, Alprazolam --that's a new one to me. Are you using it? Does that help? Or do you find your blogging to be cathartic, as you suggest for me --getting all that muck out of your head and onto the screen?
"Obama's Ayres Connection"
McCain's 'Palling' Terrorist
A fine enema? Does it help you?
Hey, I'm qualified to give those!
Now if I could just get through that wet to dry dressing change / sterile wound signoff. Aaaagh I'm floundering.
Steve- can you get hold of a veterinarian-sized enema bag, like they use on elephants?
Do you need one that big, Mudrake? I had no idea....
Help him, STeve!
Once one sinks to abusive language and shaming tactics - they've lost the debate.
Truth and logic will see you through an honest debate.
But again - you cannot have an honest debate with a dishonest person.
And it's a huge waste of time to debate a liar once they've been proven out.
Obama has been a member of the church of christ for 20 PLUS YEARS and has spoken publicly about his conversion. But I guess God has given you guys special powers to JUDGE and discern the voracity of ones faith. But since tomorrow is sunday, you guys might want to ask God for forgivness for breaking one of his commandments by "bearing false witness" against your neighbor / fellow christian - Obama.
It's not a real stretch to comprehend that one who's spiritual leader for 20 years, actually spoke from the pulpit these words (repeatedly) God d**n America - is spiritually challenged (to be very kind) and an negative influence on Obama. If you have never experienced a spiritual mentor then I am sorry for you.
You should seek one out. One who has read the Bible.
Jesus did not speak as such - he spoke in parables.
If you would provide your address I would be very happy to provide you with a Bible.
Steve- Kate B and barb in fact DO know everything that the Bible decrees so there is no sense arguing with either one. They are very righteous.
Gosh, I though they already told you that.
Church of Christ --can mean almost anything doctrinally. I appreciated that Obama claimed he was born again and had accepted Christ as His Savior --when talking in the Saddleback interview. I hope that's true. It gives me hope for him and us, if he is elected.
However, his obstinant liberalness --voting over and over again against BAIPA and other abortion limitations --makes him seem insincere as a Christian --because Jesus would never support abortion --letting a baby die after a botched abortion without trying to help the baby. Killing the baby on the way out of the birth canal when it's life is viable.
Life is so miraculous --once that zygote forms, there is a person and as Dr. Suess wrote of the Whos, "A person's a person, no matter how small."
ANONYMOUS --again, YOU go to the sites you want us to see and copy the address bar at the top--and paste it over here --because I found Pinkerton at Foxnews in some forum but not in the article you referenced.
I do want to understand what you are talking about.
someday I'd like to trace the history of how the word "liberal" became synonymous with evil. I'm not sure even what a liberal is anymore because the meaning of the term has become the definition of anything "non conservitive". When I think of "liberal" I think of people who care for things other than their own self interest: like you know, caring for the poor, or caring for the environment- something’s that maybe Jesus might care about. I just don't understand how the "liberal" ideas of helping each other out.. "We are all in this together".. ect.. is such an evil thing? I guess I'm just a stupid jarhead or something.
"LIberal" in political or religious terminology IS simply the opposite of conservative.
In American protestant religion, the forerunners were the "modernists." The term may denote people who claim to be Christian but don't believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. They may not believe in miracles or the Resurrection. Or they may not believe that a man has to believe in Christ in order to be saved for Eternity, forgiven by God.
To some fundamentalists, I am liberal because I believe women can teach in the church --or be ordained. I didn't mind when Muslims wanted to rent our building for dinners --but others considered me liberal for that. I'm liberal because my family has gone Trick or Treating while others shun Halloween as devil worship. I grew up without conviction or any sense that i was celebrating the Devil --because my family and fundamentalist church in which I grew up didn't impose that conviction. We were making light of witches, ghosts, etc. They had no power over us --they were as ineffectual as the make-believe cartoon characters which they were to me.
but growing up, we were ultra conservative about other lifestyle issues --no dancing, drinking, smoking, cards, gambling --and no recreation on Sundays!
So liberal and conservative are flexible terms --and most people are probably a mix.
But in matters of religion and politics today, it is generally agreed that abortion and gay marriage are part of the liberal agenda. And being pro-life about babies and pro-family (and pro-hetero marriage because this is the union that creates children) --these are the conservative beliefs.
And yes, the Bible says that murder of the innocent as with abortion--and sodomy --are evils --i.e. sins.
It's the LIBERALS who mischaracterize themselves as having a corner on compassion and generosity. Conservatives are ALSO compassionate and generous.
In fact, conservatives are less selfish by not aborting --and they are more compassionate in sounding the alarm about the consequences of the gay agenda and the consequences of abortion, nationally and personally.
Religious conservatives are more compassionate in telling us the truth about death being the wages of sin --whereas the gift of God is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Of course, liberal and conservative in American politics refers to a view of government and its role --a view of taxes.
Libs want gov't to be in charge of more things than conserves want --including our incomes and the money we save to leave when we die. They are more confiscatory, believing in Nobama's forced wealth spread.
on the morals issues LIbs want no restraints but a religion-free, value-free, morally neutral, morally relative culture. Conservs want a decent society for rearing children. They don't want to raise the family in Sodom and Gommorrah but in a wholesome america that knows what is bad for kids and protects them --culturally. They don't appreciate corporations or schools taking the liberal side in the culture wars --and they oppose such --with boycotts and their own schools in some cases.
Libs do seem to say that war and torture are always wrong --yet they can be violent terrorists like Ayres and sympathize with cruel terrorists who behead and murder their own people--who declare death to their neighbors --like Israel. They don't believe in going elsewhere in the world to help the oppressed like Iraqis. They say that's because they want the national monies at home for the social programs. They claim that social programs suffer because of our inter-national involvements --yet, we've borrowed heavily to keep both going and I understand that our social programs are still the biggest, ever-growing portion of the federal budget pie.
Conserves know that self-reliance is better than gov't reliance --and that we really can't afford as much of the latter as we now have. I think of several families I know that are on the public dole entirely --and I can understand that the working tax payers can't afford all the dependent people's apartment and utility bills--that this is no way to live. These are people with brains for work --who just can't bring themselves to work for their own support when they get more help by not working. And I know that depression is a big part of it --messed up family relations, etc. that go back to their parents and are passed on to the future generations --people who can't get along well enough to live with other family members and share expenses. which is what we may have to do more of in the future out of economic necessity.
Liberals claim to be the compassionate party --but again --it is not compassion to encourage people's sense of entitlement (the richer owe me) and helplessness.
Well the old adage of 'you are known by the company you keep' has really come home to roost for Obama these last two weeks.
When the LA Times does release their tape of Obama at the dinner (and I'm sure it'll be after the election), we'll get to see if he's a friend to Israel or not.
Maybe that Ayres is one of his nicer connections.
Actually, Khalidi did make a speech that described Chicago politics pretty well --
but I feel that anyone who thinks Israel has no right to exist is a real threat to world peace.
Post a Comment