Oh, no, those prayers are too Christian

Marion County, Fla., commissioners are now considering their response to an Americans United for the Separation of Church and State complaint that their prayers opening commission meetings are too Christian.

According to a report in the Star-Banner of Ocala, Fla., Americans United said it was acting on a complaint from an unidentified source and that it had reviewed video from eight regular commission sessions since the beginning of the year. They claimed that on five occasions the name of Jesus Christ was specifically mentioned during the opening prayer. It was the mentioning of the name of Jesus Christ to which the legal group was protesting.

The group’s lawyer, Ian Smith, requested that the board of commissioners bring its “prayer practice” into compliance by using a “nonsectarian” invocation or by abandoning the practice of prayer altogether.

According to the Star-Banner, Smith suggested that the board switch to a more inclusive moment of silence, make the prayers nonsectarian or invite members of the community and “prayer-givers” from varying faiths to present the invocations.

“The Commission’s prayer practice,” Smith said, “unconstitutionally affiliates the county with Christianity.”

But Pastor Carl Gallups, author of the Amazon No. 1 Bestseller “The Magic Man in the Sky: Effectively Defending the Christian Faith,” says the United States is affiliated with Christianity, a fact he says even Americans United could embrace if they understood its significance.

“Here is a classic example of the collision of two worldviews,” Gallups told WND. “I have an entire chapter in my book devoted to this phenomenon. The chapter is titled, ‘When Two Worlds Collide.’ The collision is the clash between the completely unique and distinctive message of the Christian faith with the secular worldview that there is no God. Or, conversely, it is a clash with the universalism message that ‘all religious views hold equal value and consideration.’”

“When was the last time that you heard of a lawsuit in America dealing with a public prayer that was ‘too Muslim’ or ‘too Hindu’ or ‘too secular in nature?’” asked Gallups.

Read more here.

The American Tea Party VS The Anti-American Fleabaggers

The American Tea Party

VS

The Anti-American Occupy Fleabaggers

You decide!

The Beginning of the End

Last week’s elections were historic, there is no question about that. Voters were fed up with our lurch into socialism and with the rise of the TEA party movement, questions of government spending, control and intrusion were finally being discussed openly and honestly. Many people became involved in politics for the first time, recognizing that politics affects everything in our daily lives and if we ever want to regain some control over our lives (i.e. our liberty) politics can no longer be ignored or left up to the “political class.” All this represents a good trend.

TEA partiers and conservatives who pinned their hopes on Republicans are likely to be very disappointed, however. There are two reasons for this. The first is that the new TEA party/conservative Republicans represent a small minority of the total number of Republicans in office, at all levels of government. Because of this, it will be very difficult for them to resist the pressure the establishment has on “public servants”. The “system” has been in place for a long time and the beneficiaries of that system are not about to let these upstarts disassemble it. Even if they have the character to resist the pressure to conform, the radical steps necessary to save us from catastrophe will never move beyond their sparse numbers and may be beyond the imaginations of most of them.

What am I talking about? Here are some necessary steps for starters. Ending the Federal Reserve and pegging the dollar to gold. Ending all entitlement programs, a particularly difficult pill to swallow for Republicans who have been demonized for phantom proposals to do so in the past. Remove all the tax and regulatory impediments to businesses so we can return manufacturing to the United States. Eliminate public sector unions and approximately eighty percent of government jobs. Bring the military home from the vast number of places it is around the world and slim it down to a size that will ensure a devastating defense, not a costly and ineffective offense, or even less unsuccessful nation building. Can you see even one of those things happening the in next two years, or even four years with a Republican president and congress? I certainly don’t.

The problem is that we have already reached the point of no return and we have reached that point with the complicity of both major political parties. Allow me to explain. We are all familiar with the exploding federal debt which has reached around fourteen trillion dollars, greater than the entire Gross Domestic Product of the country. Then there are the annual deficits which add to that debt which were high under President Bush and have exploded under President Obama. All that is bad. However, because of the way our government fiddles with the numbers and has changed it’s reporting and accounting, this picture is rosy compared to the reality of our situation.

Businesses, when they make reports, must include their future liabilities on their balance sheet. If they only report profits and loans but do not include pensions or health care liabilities, we would say they are fudging the books to make them look better than they are. In fact, it would be dishonest and illegal. The government, however, does just that. Future entitlement liabilities, Social Security and Medicare in particularly, are not included in the deficit projections or in the current and future debt numbers. Allow me to give you those actual numbers. If we used the real, inclusive numbers, in 2008 the deficit was $5.1 trillion, not $455 billion and in 2009 the real shortfall was $8.8 trillion, not $1.4 trillion. Again, this includes the present cash based value of Social Security and Medicare liabilities.

That is a lot of money, more than we can actually conceive of. We know that government spending is out of control, we complain about it all the time. The fact is that we cannot bring the deficit under control without eliminating entitlement spending, something that is not going to happen until the system actually collapses. For example, if we taxed everyone, every business and every corporation in the county at 100%, something the president’s father suggested, we would still be running a deficit. If we stopped spending on everything except Social Security and Medicare, we would still run a deficit. These entitlements are like a bomb that has been ticking for a long time and now we are about to see it blow up in our face.

What will that mean? An economic situation that will make this one look like the “good ‘ol days.” A collapse of the dollar which would bring most economic activity to a screeching halt. This will result in a complete realignment of our political and social structure in the next few years. The major political parties will finally receive the blame they are due for putting us in this situation although the apathy and complicity of the American people cannot be ignored. We do have the power of the vote although the stranglehold of the two party system on our country has mitigated against those of us who do not participate in either of those parties having a seat at the table. As someone who ran as a libertarian in the last election, I have seen this first hand.

There will be one of two results of this catastrophe. The first is that the establishment works with other establishment types around the world and they bring about a new world order, not the spooky kind of the conspiracy theorists but like the global realignment of power and structure that occurred after both World Wars. The United States, which has been moving toward a powerful executive-style government at all levels, may see the president, particularly this president, use the “crisis” to take complete control of the country, relegating the congress and judiciary to irrelevance as in Venezuela or the former Soviet Union.

The other possibility is this. We the people will build on what began as the TEA party and restore the individual liberty which was the bedrock of the American Experiment. Once the system collapses, we need to rebuild the vision of our founders upon the ashes. There is only one way that happens. First, we need to say “NO” to government solutions when they are offered because we need to recognize that government caused the problem and is the problem. Second, we need to rebuild the family and community ties that have been weakened or destroyed through government policy and cultural degradation. Finally, we need to rekindle that innovative, hard working American spirit that the socialism we have embraced has suppressed. We need to relearn self reliance as opposed to government reliance, community safety nets as opposed to government safety nets, cooperation with our neighbors as opposed to political division.

The second possibility is only viable if we prepare now. The establishment has contingency plans to implement their will in the case of a crisis. Most of us have just woken up and we need a crash course. We need to recognize the extent of the problem and prepare our families first. We also need to demonstrate our leadership in our communities. If we fulfill our role as the “watchman on the wall” to the extent that people recognize our foresight and the ability to provide solutions, we will put ourselves into a position to provide the leadership necessary to steer our country back to liberty and resist tyranny. Time is short, The Fed has already begun monetizing our debt, the last act of a desperate central bank before hyperinflation. Our time to prepare may now be measured in months instead of decades. But our future and that of our children remains in our hands. We need to roll up our sleeves and work even harder now.

patricksamuels.com

Assimilation and the Founding Fathers

By: Michelle Malkin

In his immigration speech on Thursday, President Obama heralded America as a “nation of immigrants” defined not by blood or birth, but by “fidelity to the shared values that we all hold so dear.” If only it were so. Left-wing academics and activists spurned assimilation as a common goal long ago. Their fidelity lies with bilingualism (a euphemism for native language maintenance over English-first instruction), identity politics, ethnic militancy and a borderless continent.

Obama blames “politics” for the intractable immigration debate. Whose politics? The amnesty mob has taken to ambushing congressional offices this week to scream at lawmakers to choose “reform” (giving a blanket path to citizenship to millions of illegal aliens) or “racism” (their description of any and every legislative measure to stiffen sanctions for and deter the acts of border-jumping, visa-overstaying and deportation-evading).

Is there no middle ground for all sides to agree that clearing naturalization application backlogs should take priority over expanding illegal alien benefits, or that tracking and deporting violent illegal alien criminals should take precedence over handing out driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, or that streamlining the employee citizenship verification process for businesses (E-verify) and fixing outdated visa tracking databases should come before indiscriminately expanding temporary visa and guest worker programs?

Must every response to even the most modest of immigration enforcement measures be “RAAAAACIST”?

Further, as I’ve noted many times over the years when debating both Democrats and Republicans who fall back on empty phrases to justify putting the amnesty cart before the enforcement horse, we are not a “nation of immigrants.” This is both a factual error and a warm-and-fuzzy non sequitur. Eighty-five percent of the residents currently in the United States were born here. Yes, we are almost all descendants of immigrants. But we are not a “nation of immigrants.” (And the politically correct president certainly wouldn’t argue that Native American Indians, Native Alaskans, Native Hawaiians and descendants of black slaves “immigrated” here in any common sense of the word, would he?)

Even if we were a “nation of immigrants,” it does not explain why we should be against sensible immigration control. The Founding Fathers were emphatically insistent on protecting the country against indiscriminate mass immigration. They insisted on assimilation as a pre-condition, not an afterthought. Historian John Fonte assembled their wisdom, and it bears repeating this Independence Day weekend:

George Washington, in a letter to John Adams, stated that immigrants should be absorbed into American life so that “by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word soon become one people.”

In a 1790 speech to Congress on the naturalization of immigrants, James Madison stated that America should welcome the immigrant who could assimilate, but exclude the immigrant who could not readily “incorporate himself into our society.”

Alexander Hamilton wrote in 1802: “The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.”

Hamilton further warned that “The United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass; by promoting in different classes different predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and antipathies against others, it has served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils. It has been often likely to compromise the interests of our own country in favor of another. The permanent effect of such a policy will be, that in times of great public danger there will be always a numerous body of men, of whom there may be just grounds of distrust; the suspicion alone will weaken the strength of the nation, but their force may be actually employed in assisting an invader.”

The survival of the American republic, Hamilton maintained, depends upon “the preservation of a national spirit and a national character.” “To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens the moment they put foot in our country would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty.”

As pro-amnesty extremists moan that “we didn’t cross the borders, the borders crossed us” and illegal alien marchers haul foreign flags above Old Glory, President Obama pretends that the “common national sentiment” our Founding Fathers embraced still binds us all together. Many of us still have faith in a strong, sovereign America — the unhyphenated, the law-abiding, the gratitude-filled sons and daughters and grandchildren of legal immigrants for whom such distinctions still matter. But it’s no thanks to the assimilation saboteurs who put “one world” over “one nation under God.”

Why Conservatives Love the Founders

By James Lewis

A Salon writer wonders, “What’s the conservative fetish with the Founding Fathers?”

It’s because we read history, my sadly ignorant friend. So did the Founders.

History is full of Obamas, and the people who idolized such power-hungry self-glorifying narcissists. The Founders understood human history in their very bones, because they read history from the Bible to the Roman Empire, Europe’s bloody and tyrannical history, and the Americas. If you want to understand Obama, just look at any idolized hero in Latin America: Chavez, Fidel, Bolivar, Juan Peron. Look at European monarchs. Look at Napoleon.

They are all the famous Man on Horseback, the hero of the hour who instantly turns into a tyrant. Even today Latin America is bedeviled by its own Obamas, who all demand to be idolized and worshipped. Obamas are a dime a dozen.

The Founders knew about abuse of power by arrogant and ignorant narcissists, over and over again in human history. They read it in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. They read it in the Book of Kings, where you can find out all about Saddam Hussein, because the politics of the Middle East hasn’t changed much. They saw it in the Middle East of their day, which was full of clan tyrannies and immense cruelty. Arab slavers were still raiding Britain when the Founders proclaimed the Declaration of Independence.

They read it in Plutarch’s Lives of the Ceasars. They read it in the history of Athens, torn between bloody factions, and constantly raising new Obamas to power.

You see, all you Salonistas, the Founders were profoundly educated people. They were passionate believers in the Enlightenment. They understood the role of free speech, free thought, free political debate, and free trade. They saw the benefits of freedom in their own lives.

The Founders knew about slavery in the South, and they were deeply ashamed of it. But unlike contemporary liberals, who are massively ignorant of everything but their navels, they also knew that slavery was the norm in the British Royal Navy, for example, which recruited its sailors by force, using press gangs in London and other port cities. The British Navy also kidnapped American sailors.

The Royal Navy abolished the African slave trade. But common British sailors were whipped to work every day. They slept in 28 inches of space, almost as bad as African slaves, and were kept in bondage (deserters were hanged), and drug-addicted on daily grog and beer. The Founders knew about slavery in Biblical times, and among Russia’s serfs. They knew about slavery in France and the German states, where violence was used routinely to keep peasants tied to the land. The Founders also knew about the mental slavery that comes from indoctrination, which is why they loved liberty, including liberty of faith.

The Founders understood that liberty had to come in stages. Only tyrants claim to create instant paradise. Practical statesmen work step by step. They created the intellectual and legal framework for the liberation of the slaves. When Abraham Lincoln came along, Americans were willing to fight a terrible war to free the slaves, even if more than half a million people had to die. Read the lyrics of the Battle Hymn of the Republic, and you can see the real campaign for human liberty, not the fantasy version liberals entertain today. Liberty is bought very dearly, in blood and suffering. (And it was Christian Abolitionists who created the campaign to liberate the slaves.)

America’s wars of liberation were real, not frauds like the Marxist ones. We brought liberty to Europe in World War I, in World War II, and in the Cold War. We brought liberty to American slaves in the Civil War. No other nation in history can claim anything close to that.

The Founders created the first land of liberty in human history. To be sure, they learned a great deal from British political thinkers like John Locke and Edmund Burke, and from the classical writers. They demanded for themselves the rights that were (theoretically) granted to Englishmen of their time. Meanwhile the French Revolution led to massive bloodshed and twenty years of bloody war to conquer Europe. Napoleon was another Obama idol.

Read your history, my friends. Real history, not the Leftist propaganda version.

America gave the first great opportunity in human history to start afresh. The Founders used that opportunity to create the greatest political foundation in history — because they understood that human nature hasn’t changed, and that there would be those (like Obama) who were so power-oriented that they would try to lord it over all Americans. The Constitution was carefully designed to stop and balance human power mongers, like Obama. It has done so for two hundred years, and today it is the Marxist Left that is mounting a great assault on the US Constitution. But Marx never changed human nature.

The Left seems to believe that Karl Marx found a better way than the American Founders did. But look at the works of Marxism: The Soviets, Maoism, Pol Pot. One hundred million human beings killed by Marxist regimes in the 20th century alone. Look at North Korea, my sadly ignorant friends. Look at Robert Mugabe and his ilk. Look at the Nazis and their close affinity for Marxist totalitarians.

Karl Marx was just a throwback to all the slave-taking empires in history. Marx was born in Prussia, and idolized the chief propaganda philosopher of Prussia for his own “philosophy.” (That was Friedrich Hegel.) Marx wanted a militaristic state, run by an elite of Marx followers, who would indoctrinate all the workers to march in lockstep to the Central Commander. Is that what you want? It’s what Obama is creating for the United States today.

Read a little history, my poor friend, and you will see Obamas everywhere you look. Lenin was an Obama (and the Obama campaign deliberately used Lenin imagery for its propaganda). Stalin was an Obama. Mussolini was an Obama. Napoleon was an Obama. Putin is an Obama. Ahmadinejad is an Obama. Saddam was an Obama.

America never had a rock star president until the Obama campaign. George Washington made very sure no one would suspect him of being an Obama. Lincoln never claimed to be an Obama. None of our presidents have paraded themselves as Obamas — not until Obama came along and brought the psychology of self-glorifying narcissism to these shores. And the Left snapped to and saluted Obama, worshiped at his feet of clay in that ancient and corrupt way that humans have known for millenia.

Are rock stars your idea of an American president? If so, please go back to school and read a little history.

Russian president Medvedev said this last week – said it out loud, to the deaf, dumb and blind Leftists of the world:

“President Medvedev has issued a stinging repudiation of the Soviet Union, condemning it as a totalitarian state that had deprived Russians of their basic rights. He also condemned Joseph Stalin’s record of repression before Victory Day celebrations on Sunday marking the 65th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany, an event that many elderly Russians attribute to the leadership of the Soviet dictator.

… “Stalin committed mass crimes against the people. And despite the fact that he worked a lot, despite the fact that under his leadership the country achieved successes, what was done to his own people cannot be forgiven.”…

Conservatives love the Founders because we read history. We know that you don’t read history. Obama doesn’t know history.

%d bloggers like this: