• Categories

  • Events (2)
  • General (50)
  • Historical (10)
  • Letters (4)
  • Politics/Law/Worldview (80)
  • Syndicated (39)
  • Technology (4)
  • The Tuesday Ten (2)
  • Theology/Apologia (14)

• Meta

  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • Register
  • Log in

• Archives

  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • November 2007
  • September 2007
  • July 2007
  • April 2007
  • January 2007
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • December 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • March 2004

Obama sowing socialist seeds in young people
Jon Voight
Monday, July 28, 2008

From: www.washingtontimes.com

We, as parents, are well aware of the importance of our teachers who teach and program our children. We also know how important it is for our children to play with good-thinking children growing up.

Sen. Barack Obama has grown up with the teaching of very angry, militant white and black people: the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers and Rev. Michael Pfleger. We cannot say we are not affected by teachers who are militant and angry. We know too well that we become like them, and Mr. Obama will run this country in their mindset.

The Democratic Party, in its quest for power, has managed a propaganda campaign with subliminal messages, creating a God-like figure in a man who falls short in every way. It seems to me that if Mr. Obama wins the presidential election, then Messrs. Farrakhan, Wright, Ayers and Pfleger will gain power for their need to demoralize this country and help create a socialist America.

The Democrats have targeted young people, knowing how easy it is to bring forth whatever is needed to program their minds. I know this process well. I was caught up in the hysteria during the Vietnam era, which was brought about through Marxist propaganda underlying the so-called peace movement. The radicals of that era were successful in giving the communists power to bring forth the killing fields and slaughter 2.5 million people in Cambodia and South Vietnam. Did they stop the war, or did they bring the war to those innocent people? In the end, they turned their backs on all the horror and suffering they helped create and walked away.

Those same leaders who were in the streets in the ’60s are very powerful today in their work to bring down the Iraq war and to attack our president, and they have found their way into our schools. William Ayers is a good example of that.

Thank God, today, we have a strong generation of young soldiers who know exactly who they are and what they must do to protect our freedom and our democracy. And we have the leadership of Gen. David Petraeus, who has brought hope and stability to Iraq and prevented the terrorists from establishing a base in that country. Our soldiers are lifting us to an example of patriotism at a time when we’ve almost forgotten who we are and what is at stake.

If Mr. Obama had his way, he would have pulled our troops from Iraq years ago and initiated an unprecedented bloodbath, turning over that country to the barbarianism of our enemies. With what he has openly stated about his plans for our military, and his lack of understanding about the true nature of our enemies, there’s not a cell in my body that can accept the idea that Mr. Obama can keep us safe from the terrorists around the world, and from Iran, which is making great strides toward getting the atomic bomb. And while a misleading portrait of Mr. Obama is being perpetrated by a media controlled by the Democrats, the Obama camp has sent out people to attack the greatness of Sen. John McCain, whose suffering and courage in a Hanoi prison camp is an American legend.

Gen. Wesley Clark, who himself has shame upon him, having been relieved of his command, has done their bidding and become a lying fool in his need to demean a fellow soldier and a true hero.

This is a perilous time, and more than ever, the world needs a united and strong America. If, God forbid, we live to see Mr. Obama president, we will live through a socialist era that America has not seen before, and our country will be weakened in every way.

Jon Voight is an Academy Award-winning actor who is well-known for his humanitarian work.

From the Evangelical Outpost:

“That movie was totally overrated. Now if you want to see a really worthwhile flick you should see…” Because film buffs like me say this type of thing all the time so I thought it would be a worthwhile exercise to actually list 50 of the most overrated and 50 of the most underrated films of all time.

A few of the overrated films are just plain bad while most are merely undeserving of the critical or popular praise they receive. The underrated films, though, are all examples of excellent cinema and should be considered at least slightly more worthy than the corresponding “overrated” film with which they share a category. The categories, which range from the obvious to the just plain odd, are intended to cover a broad selection of interests but are not meant to be exhaustive.

Here then are 100 of the most overrated and underrated films of all time (overrated on the left, underrated on the right):

The Rest of the Story…

8 July 2008 Filed under: Other Stuff Author: tony

My apologies to everyone who participated in the Metro-Rednexual Contest. I’ve been delayed in compiling the results. After reviewing all the submissions, I’ve arrived at the following top 10 list. Without further delay:

You might be a metro-rednexual if…

The Rest of the Story…

Article by Joe Holland June 2008

Psalm singing is experiencing a renaissance. A national worship conference being held this year is entitled “Rediscovering the Psalms”. Websites are providing resources for people who would like to learn more about psalm singing. Churches are making strategic plans to train their members in psalm singing. Blogs and internet bulletin boards buzz with excitement over the Psalter. It is undeniable that the church is waking up to that which once marked it–the passionate singing of psalms. I am a child of this movement. I’ve tracked my growth in psalm singing by three major milestones.

The Rest of the Story…

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, July 03, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Oil: With the long July Fourth weekend, you might get a chance to see your senator or representative. If so, you should be ready to dispel a few myths politicians now have about drilling for more oil.

This is especially true of Democrats. Many in Congress seem either disconnected from reality or intentionally disingenuous about our energy crunch…

The Rest of the Story…

It’s been clear for a while that Democrats were making an empty promise when they talked of treating our allies better and ‘restoring’ America’s reputation abroad. Respected Yale University professor and Democratic foreign policy expert Stuart Gottlieb, makes the case quite effectively:

The message Democrats are sending to the world is clear: You cannot trust America to honor its trade agreements, even with developing nations struggling to enter the global middle class. This is a far cry from Obama’s Lincolnesque promise in his Democratic nomination victory speech June 3rd to restore “our image as the last, best hope on earth.”

On Iraq, Democrats have put themselves in an equally tenuous position. Despite all evidence to the contrary, Obama and congressional Democrats remain committed to calling the “surge” a failure. And they are wedded to promises for immediate troop withdrawals.

Every reputable analysis of Iraq – including from the bipartisan Iraq Study Group – warns that a rapid reduction of US troops would reignite sectarian violence and threaten the government in Baghdad.

Nonetheless, more than 40 Democratic congressional candidates recently pledged that, if elected, they would legislate an immediate withdrawal of all troops except those guarding the US Embassy. And Obama maintains his vow to immediately begin removing “one to two combat brigades each month” – a pace that would represent the most frantic retreat since Vietnam.

On trade, it’s hard to picture a President Obama undoing the damage Congressional Democrats have already done. Presidential trade negotiating authority has elapsed. Existing trade deals–which were already modified to address labor and environmental concerns–were killed anyway. With Congress likely to face a crowded legislative agenda, there’s unlikely to be room for Obama to reclaim one of America’s most valuable ’soft’ foreign policy tools of the last few decades — trade.

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, July 4, 2008; A17

You’ll notice Barack Obama is now wearing a flag pin. Again. During the primary campaign, he refused to, explaining that he’d worn one after Sept. 11 but then stopped because it “became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism.” So why is he back to sporting pseudo-patriotism on his chest? Need you ask? The primaries are over. While seducing the hard-core MoveOn Democrats that delivered him the caucuses — hence, the Democratic nomination — Obama not only disdained the pin. He disparaged it. Now that he’s running in a general election against John McCain, and in dire need of the gun-and-God-clinging working-class votes he could not win against Hillary Clinton, the pin is back. His country ’tis of thee.

In last week’s column, I thought I had thoroughly chronicled Obama’s brazen reversals of position and abandonment of principles — on public financing of campaigns, on NAFTA, on telecom immunity for post-Sept. 11 wiretaps, on unconditional talks with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — as he moved to the center for the general election campaign. I misjudged him. He was just getting started.

Last week, when the Supreme Court declared…

The Rest of the Story…

Works and Days
Victor Davis Hanson
4 July 2008

CNN Looks at the Candidates

I was watching a rerun of the Anderson Cooper biographical documentaries of McCain and Obama. In the McCain piece here’s what I think we got in the end: Cindy McCain’s a former drug addict, a stroke victim, and fought false rumors their adopted child was an illegitimate offspring of her husband’s liasons, and is the only-child of zillionaires; McCain was knee-deep in the Keating Five, took on and then caved to the Religious Right.

In contrast, in this National Enquirer-type approach, the Obamas were blessed from the beginning—no mention (as there should not have been) of Obama’s admitted drug use, his radical past, nothing about Michelle’s divisive speeches, Princeton thesis.

Result: here is the contrast, a 42 year old who lied about his age married a princess who lied about hers, then lived apart, and then she spiralled downward while he got caught in ethics problems and flip-flops; meanwhile the super couple were drug-free, hardly privileged, and have a true partnership based on their model parenting and meritocratic-based education excellence.

In short, not even the pretense of even-handedness.

Is the Thrill Gone?

Listening to the recent various Obama speeches, I was struck by his…

The rest of the Story…

President Calvin Coolidge rose to the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence on July 4,…

On July 9, 1858, Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas gave a campaign speech to a raucous throng from the balcony…

Charges of flip-flopping do play a big role–perhaps too much–in the rapid response operations of both campaigns. There are obviously a lot of reasons a candidate might alter his position that have nothing to do with political opportunism. After 9/11, for example, President Bush’s foreign policy changed in a dramatic way. I don’t think anyone–save perhaps Ron Paul–implored President Bush on 9/12 to stick with the neo-isolationist talking points of his campaign. Flip-flopping is very relevant, however, when it demonstrates a candidate either doesn’t know what he believes or is willing to set aside any conviction for political advancement.

In Obama’s case, I’m not sure which is true, but it is patently obvious from the speed and frequency with which his flip-flops seem to come that principle is not playing any role. Just consider his evolution in a single month: Obama opposed welfare reform, and now he supports it. Obama supported the D.C. handgun ban, and now he believes it was unconstitutional. Obama said he would accept public financing, and now he won’t. Obama opposed immunity for telecommunications companies involved in terrorist surveillance, and now he supports it. Obama opposed the death penalty in all cases, and now believes it is justified in certain extreme instances. Obama supported immediate withdrawal from Iraq, and now he’ll listen to the commanders on the ground if they tell him to phase out the troops slowly.

Nothing has fundamentally changed with any of these issues. The only thing that has changed is that Obama became the presumptive nominee. Andrew Sullivan says, “Sometimes a flip-flop is a sign of real maturity in a politician responding to new events or facts.” That’s only true however, when a candidate acknowledges and explains why he’s changing. Principle plays no role when the pol instead self-righteously asserts that there has been no change at all, and it also doesn’t play a role when a candidate claims that everyone simply misunderstood his previous position–as with the meaning of “negotiate with Iran without precondition”–even when the so-called misperception was widely reported and the candidate did nothing to correct it for many months.

Aside from charging the other side with flip-flopping, one other job typically assigned to a campaign’s war-room is correcting media reports that mischaracterize their candidate’s position. That Obama’s staff was apparently sitting on its hands shows Obama either meant what he said or wanted people to believe that he did.

Post by Collin Hansen

Christianity Today’s July cover takes its cue from the famous Time magazine cover from 1966 that asked, “Is God Dead?” CT responds “not yet” (?) with an article by William Lane Craig. He writes, “To paraphrase Mark Twain, the news of God’s demise was premature. For at the same time theologians were writing God’s obituary, a new generation of young philosophers was rediscovering his vitality.” Craig sees a turning point in 1967 with the publication of Alvin Plantinga’s God and Other Minds: A Study of the Rational Justification of Belief in God.

The cover package also includes Craig’s recommended reading on the existence of God.