Daily Archives: March 21, 2008

Pray for America and Western Civ

One Minute Each Night

In WWII, there was an advisor to Churchill who organized a group of people who dropped what they were doing every night at a prescribed hour for one minute to collectively pray for the safety of England, its people and peace. This had an amazing effect, as bombing stopped!

There is now a group of people who are organizing the same thing here in the US .

If you would like to participate, each evening at 9:00 PM Eastern Time (8:00 PM Central, 7:00 PM Mountain, 6:00 PM Pacific), stop whatever you are doing and spend one minute praying, for the safety of the United States, our troops, our citizens and for peace in the world.

Please pass this along to anyone you think may be interested.

Someone said if people really understood the full extent of the power we have available through prayer, we might be speechless. Prayer is one of the most powerful asset we have.

Blessings to you.

Advertisements

Obama’s Real Faith (IBD, Jan. 23, ’07)

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Recent media questions about Barack Obama’s Afrocentric faith were, in fact, raised by an IBD editorial more than a year ago.

Campaign 2008: Those spreading rumors that Barack Hussein Obama is a “closet Muslim” are off the mark. His religion has little to do with Islam and everything to do with a militantly Afrocentric movement that’s no less troubling.


Read More: Election 2008 | Religion


Surrogates for Hillary Clinton and GOP front-runners hope to tarnish golden boy Obama by making him out to be some kind of Manchurian candidate for Islamist masters because he shares a name with Saddam Hussein and is the son of a Muslim.

True, his late father was a Muslim, but he can hardly be described as “radical,” as the rumors have put it. He turned atheist in his early 20s before Obama was even born.

His mother is from a Christian background but eschewed organized religion altogether. She and her parents (one Baptist, the other Methodist) ended up raising Obama after her two marriages failed.

Yes, his former stepfather, an Indonesian oil executive, also was a Muslim, albeit a secular one. Obama describes him as “nonpracticing,” and he spent only five years with the man before he and his mother split up.

If, as rumors claim, Obama’s stepfather nurtured a “lifelong relationship with Islam” for his stepson, why isn’t his daughter a practicing Muslim? Obama’s Indonesian half-sister, now a University of Hawaii professor, is a “hottie” who dresses in Westernized clothing, students say.

What about the supposed “Wahhabi madrassa” Obama attended for “four years” in Jakarta? Actually, he went to a Muslim school for two years, and a Catholic school for the same amount of time. “I was sent first to a neighborhood Catholic school,” Obama wrote in his autobiography, “and then to a predominantly Muslim school.”

Obama said he was drawn to Christ after college while working with black churches on inner-city projects. Soon he knelt “beneath the cross” at one of them, he said in a recent speech, and “embraced Christ.” If he were Muslim, this act alone would be punishable by death.

Trouble is, Obama embraced more than Christ when he answered the altar call 20 years ago at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Southside Chicago. The 8,000-member church describes itself as “unashamedly black” and holds classes in “African-centered Bible study.” Obama also pledged to honor something called the “Black Value System,” which is a code of nonbiblical ethics written by blacks, for blacks.

This is what should give American voters pause.

According to its Web site, Trinity puts the “black community” first. Black members are encouraged to pursue education and skills exclusively to advance their community, and allocate their money exclusively to support “black institutions” and black leaders.

In short, it preaches from the gospel of blackness and black power. There’s little room for white Christians at Obama’s church. It disavows the pursuit of “middleclassness” — code for whiteness — arguing that middleclassness is a conspiracy by white leaders to keep talented African-Americans “captives.”

Obama, meanwhile, has been getting in touch with his African roots. He recently visited relatives in Kenya for the first time; he dropped the nickname Barry for the more African-sounding Barack.

“I believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change,” he recently asserted. He said his faith has also led him to question “the idolatry of the free market.” This reflects Trinity church doctrine that no African-American can really rise to the top echelons of a “racist, competitive” white society on merit.

Obama, in turn, calls the dashiki-wearing minister of this militantly black church his “spiritual adviser” and mentor. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright said of Obama and his other congregants: “We are an African people, and remain true to our native land, the mother continent.” He wants health care for all and more housing for the poor, and calls those who voted for President Bush (and his tax cuts) “stupid.”

Do such beliefs translate into a political agenda tailored to African-Americans? Would Obama, despite his agreeably race-neutral and nonthreatening public persona, govern and petition on behalf of one group and not necessarily for the greater good of the country?

White House challengers such as Clinton think Obama’s childhood brushes with Islam will make Americans nervous. But it’s his adult conversion to black nationalism and socialism that makes this otherwise attractive minority candidate unfortunately so unattractive.

 

Latin word of the day

Major continet in se minus – The greater contains the less.

Message To Beijing

Comment:

I want to say something really scathing about people not being serious about budgets and spending, about the future, about anything, but I just can’t get it out right now.

  

Article:

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Geopolitics: French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner mulled a boycott of China’s Olympic ceremonies to protest its crackdown in Tibet. It may or may not work, but he’s right to tell Beijing that repression doesn’t pay.


Read More: East Asia & Pacific


Just four months before the Olympic torch is lit in Beijing, China sent in goon squads to break heads and shoot dissidents as frustrations boiled over in Tibet. Web sites were censored, and anyone reporting the news was kicked out of Lhasa.But photos of China’s atrocities got out anyway, and Tibetans say that 80 people have been killed. As the global Olympic games begin in August, this won’t be far from anyone’s mind.

So much for the ancient Olympic tradition of truce during the games. Or Beijing’s promise to the International Olympic Committee that the media would have full access to the country.

But more to the point, why would anyone from a civilized country want to be associated with a murderous regime putting on an empty show while acting as an oppressor?

The Tibet actions are a reminder that China is still little more than a nasty feudal state with Marxist and state capitalist overlays. Amid the glass skyscrapers and new technology, the ugly truth about its oppression is real — as is the prospect of the unrest spreading across the country.

Boycotting the Olympics entirely is one response. But having tasted that approach during the Jimmy Carter administration, it’s not a good one. After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Carter’s 1980 boycott penalized American athletes, instead of confronting a major strategic challenge. It didn’t accomplish a thing.

But Kouchner’s “interesting” idea for the European Union to boycott only the Olympic opening ceremonies could be a better option. Although he has now backtracked on the idea, apparently in response to economic pressure from Beijing, it still has merit because it deftly takes aim at Beijing’s effort to create a good image of itself — leaving China room to change some of its behavior.

Olympic opening ceremonies are prestige events for the host country. Boycotting one — or perhaps the audience turning its back or waving Tibet flags when communist officials speak — has the potential to knock the Chinese over with a feather.

It may be the only proportionate way to send a message to China that barbarism shoved defiantly in the world’s face merits no applause. Unless China moves soon to lighten its oppressive hand at home, it needs to feel the global sting of losing face.