tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-55381256863025512042024-03-13T21:20:15.024+08:00Mark's Current Events BlogMark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comBlogger286125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-8109699726336428452012-10-27T12:18:00.001+08:002012-10-27T12:18:46.170+08:00Current Event Ramblings, October 27It's been a really busy semester and that's interfered with my writing and some other things I wanted to do. But I've got a few minutes and have a few thoughts.......<br />
<br />
**********<br />
The Democrats are running a TV ad aimed at young people. Some sleazy actress compares voting for Obama the first time to the feeling one gets from losing his/her virginity. Absolutely, utterly disgusting. But that is the Democratic Party now. Obviously, Obama and the leadership of the Democratic Party see nothing wrong with this kind of appeal. There are very few taboos to these people, and the mindset that would even <em>think </em>of an ad like that is indicative of how far into immoral slime the Democrats have sunk. It also tells us that Obama has nothing positive to run on.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
It really looks, at the moment, like Mitt Romney is going to win the election. Barack Obama has been a horrible President; I knew--and said--four years ago that he would be, and it's only ignorance of history and the Bible that ever had any hope that he would do a good job. Such ignorance still supports him. And there is no excuse for it, not in this day and age. This election should not even be close. It borders on amazing that any American would support Obama. Yet, he still has a chance to win. The vast majority of blacks, who have absolutely no ability to think for themselves, will vote for Obama. It's a racist thing, and most blacks are far more racist than most whites. An increasing number of Americans are living off other people, have no conscience about it, and fear losing their lazy lifestyle; Obama certainly appeals to those people. There is also--and don't underestimate this--an increasing number of people who hate Christianity and everything it stands for. That is just about the only way a white, working individual could support Barack Obama, and it largely explains his support in the notheastern part of the country, which is largely white. They hate the South, they always have, and it's a moral issue, not economic or anything else. That number of Americans is growing, too. And, of course, the Democrats will do anything they can to win; no scruples. If they can steal the election by voter fraud, they will do it. Make no mistake about that, either. Any group of people that would support the murder of unborn children, the rights of queers to get "married", and disgusting TV ads like the one mentioned above, certainly would have no qualms about lying about voting, and no conscience about stealing an election.<br />
<br />
The simple question is--the <em>only </em>question is--do there remain enough decent Americans to elect Mitt Romney? Romney is certainly not the greatest thing since sliced bread, but he is a decent human being, and Barack Obama is nothing but a lying, Chicago thug. He never was qualified to be President, he was a media creation from the very beginning. He is not especially intelligent, has no talent except to read, from a teleprompter, a speech written by somebody else, he is an amoral Marxist, who is the most radical, left-wing President ever elected. And, frankly, all this was known four years ago; this is not new. The "mainstream" American media, who put him in power in the first place by their savage attacks on George Bush and their Messianic exaltation of Obama, is doing everything they can to get him re-elected. The reason Romney might win is that, now, Obama has a four-year record as President, and it's a horrible one. Obama has wasted trillions of taxpayer dollars and put the country deeper in debt. Americans realize that making the decision to kill Osama bin Laden did not take a lot of intestinal fortitutde; only Bill Clinton wouldn't make a decision like that. The economy has not recovered (the 7.8% unemployment rate is a joke), and it will not and cannot under Obama's policies. The world is not a safer place, and Libyan disaster can be laid right at Obama's feet. He knew about it almost immediately, and just as quickly, in a clear case of CYA, he lied about repeatedly. For all his talk of "healing" the country, he is as partisan as any President in history. <br />
<br />
But, yet, he still might win. The fact that almost half the people are going to vote for him indicates how little education Americans have, and how far the country has drifted from decency, morality, and plain old common sense. This election will tell if America has passed the point of no return.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-12818479440035649982012-09-20T13:04:00.003+08:002012-09-20T13:06:06.385+08:00Why the Presidential Race is Close<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">There's two ways of looking at the "why the race is close" question. Given the condition of the United States, both domestically and its foreign policy, Mitt Romney should win the election in a landslide. Barack Obama's incompetence is manifest, and another four years of his policies are indeed horrifying to contemplate.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">But then, given the fact, that almost none of Obama's bungling is being fairly reported in the "mainstream media," that they are doing everything they can to destroy Romney and cover for Obama, it's amazing, from that standpoint, that the race is as close as it is. Romney makes a mistake and it's plastered all over the country. Obama is protected as tightly as possible. But, as the Nazi well knew, the bigger the lie, the more people are apt to believe it.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Why is the race close? Because America is not the same country as before. <br /> <br />Basically, the United States has become the Chicago teachers' union--many people living off of somebody else (at least the teachers work for it). And they want more. About 47% of the country doesn't pay any income tax. Over 8,000,000 are living on disability. Over 45,000,000 on food stamps. 67% of the people who claim to Democrats say the government <em>isn't doing enough. </em>This is, obviously, not the America of the past, nor is it a recipe for continued greatness. <br /> <br />Think about it. If somebody comes along and says, "I'm going to cut your taxes," that means nothing to half the people. Indeed, that half wants the other half taxed more.<br /> <br />If Barack Obama can convince enough people that the Republicans are going to take away their government benefits, then that's another countless number of millions of people who will vote for Obama.<br /> <br />And, of course, there is the anti-God vote--a growing number of people who want their immoral rights, not just defended, but accepted as mainstream and given the same moral status as the laws which God has given to us. They will vote for Obama, too.<br /> <br />So, it doesn't matter how bad the economy is. It doesn't matter how big a liar Barack Obama is. It doesn't matter how disastrous American foreign policy is. <br /> <br />Romney was exactly right. Obama has almost half the people ready to vote for him because it's in their selfish interest to do so. People will vote what they perceive to be their own interests, and the United States government, led by the Democratic Party, has made dependency and immorality the "interest" of about half the country. What a sad, sad thing that is. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Alexander Tyler once again: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with a result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years." The United States has been living on borrowed time anyway. </span>Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-49319502786372008432012-09-15T14:21:00.000+08:002012-09-15T16:47:30.516+08:00American Foreign Policy IAmerican foreign policy, right now, is in shambles. The mess in the Middle
East is simply symptomatic of it. It's not all Barack Obama's fault, though he
has certainly made things worse. Liberals do not understand a cardinal
principle of humanity, and that is, some people are just evil and understand
nothing short of the business end of a gun. Paul Johnson, the great British
historian, wrote, "The experience of the 20th century indicates that
self-imposed restraints by a civilized power are worse than useless. They are
interpreted by friend and foe alike, not of humanity, but of guilt and lack of
righteous conviction" (<em>Modern Times, </em>636). If you try to be
"nice" to some people, they will take advantage of you. To these thugs in the Middle East, "niceness" and "apologies" are weakness. And weakness can, and will be exploited. A foreign policy
of apology--the cornerstone of the Obama administration policy--is doomed to
failure and only encourages the kinds of actions we've seen in the past few
days. If you are sorry for what you did to somebody, you certainly aren't going
to try to stop them if they decide to take a piece out of your hide. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
But American foreign policy issues are much deeper than Barack Obama's
liberal naivete and guilt; you can trace the current malaise back at least to
Theodore Roosevelt in the early 20th century, the "Imperial
President," as he has sometimes been called. Roosevelt believed that the wealth
America had accrued in the previous generation should be manifested in national
power and gave us the right to exercise that power as we saw fit. From that point, America, usually on its own initiative--often for good,
often without warrant--begin to intervene wherever American leaders deemed
necessary. And that included almost every area of the globe. Such intervention
infuriated many people, and understandably so. Nobody likes a bully. Yet, in many
instances, the American intervention did proved beneficial; for space' sake, I
won't give examples here, I will only mention the obvious: two world wars.
Defeating communism was also a worthwhile goal and the countless millions who
have been liberated from Marxist tyranny would no doubt agree. The problem is,
American leaders often don't know when to stop. And here is the key, here is where it came from and its continued source: the same
"progressive" mentality that believes government can solve domestic
problems also rules American foreign policy. If these liberal, secular elites can build
a utopian country, why not a utopian world? <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span><br />
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span>There is absolutely no difference, in
principle, in the American government trying to force people who don’t want it to
buy health insurance and the American government trying to force people who don’t
want it to have a democratic government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Some call it the “welfare/warfare state.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The source is the same:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“progressive,” secular intellectuals who think
they know how to create an earthly utopia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Those who opposed the war in Iraq, but who condone the welfare state at
home, are being inconsistent; it’s the same mentality behind both.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Saddam Hussein needed to be stopped, just
like Osama bin Laden did.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But once you
kill the target, you come home.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
United States military has no business trying to nation-build.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That must be left to the people of the
countries we’ve helped.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But, building a
better world is what the liberal, secular elite is all about, and the so-called “neo-cons”
have fallen for it, too.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The temptations
of power are just too great for most mortals to resist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Only a few, an elite, only excellence, can do
it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And mediocrity—democracy—elects excellence
only by accident. And as mediocrity slides closer and closer to barbarity, do not be surprised when utter incompetents, like Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi, are handed the reins of power. The last four years are evidence of the result of such mind-boggling folly.<br />
<br />
Americans recently died in Libya when a bunch of people, who didn’t want us
there in the first place, killed them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A
question too few people are asking is, what <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">are
</i>we doing there?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why do we need an embassy
in Libya?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Or Egypt?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Or Tunisia? How many Americans can even find Tunisia on a map? (Protesters are tearing up our embassy there, too). Why do we have embassies </span>in 95% of the countries where we have
them?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What are our troops doing in South
Korea?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And Japan?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And Europe?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The United States is not being invaded in South Korea, but we <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">are </i>being invaded on our southern
border.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why aren’t the troops there,
where they are really needed?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Well, the
answer to that question is obvious:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the
Democrats <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">want </i>that southern
invasion, so they can give those people amnesty and make voters out of
them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What a way to run a foreign
policy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Waste money around the world,
get Americans killed in places in which we have no vital interest, and yet open
the floodgates so that certain politicians can stay in power.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
It’s over, folks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>America is
finished, because neither political party has the will or the guts to do what
is necessary to save the country—domestically or internationally.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
America, of course, does have interests in the world, and the United States
needs to maintain a strong military.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We
must remain on the cutting edge of military technology and that will take significant
sums of money.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But that is a legitimate
government function—protecting its people.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>We should, indeed, be concerned if Iran gets nuclear weapons; in the
hands of the wrong people, such weapons could be utterly catastrophic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Obama way will never work.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Quit apologizing for the country.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Remain the strongest country, economically
and militarily in the world, but leave other people alone, except to build
friendly trade relations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If somebody
threatens us, if somebody needs their butt kicked, go do it, get it over with, and come home.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Close every embassy except a very few.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Maybe China, Russia, England.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One in South America and one in Africa,
although I don’t know any safe countries in the latter continent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I’m not going to claim wisdom enough to know
every place where an embassy might truly serve our interest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But I do know that, if the people of a country
don’t want us there, if they start killing our people and burning our flags, it’s
time for us to leave--not because we are running scared, but because we never should have been there in the first place.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Most of those people are going to kill <em>somebody, </em>because that's what they have been doing their entire history. I wish they would all convert to the Lord, but if they aren't going to do that, then let them kill each other; get Americans out of harm's way. </span>And in other regions of
the world where there is really no vital interest, pack up and leave (can
anybody give me a reason for having an embassy in Chile?).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“No entangling alliances,” George Washington
said, and while he wasn’t necessarily talking about embassies, he was talking about a wise foreign
policy that minded its own business, didn’t waste the taxpayers’ money, and
protected America, not the rest of the world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Once again, the men who founded the country knew what to do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And the people running the country today—and for
most of the 20th century—have made America a hated country, and cost American
lives, because they refused to heed the wisdom of our forefathers.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
And then…and then….there is Israel….Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-63480807469378905962012-09-15T13:12:00.003+08:002012-09-15T14:28:32.327+08:00Quotes From Some Intelligent People<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">In
the posts on this blog, I have often praised the thinking of America’s Founding
Fathers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They were wise, mainly for two
reasons:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>they understood that there is
such a thing as “moral law,” directed and overseen by a Creator (most of them
were strong believers in the Christian religion, though not pure New Testament
Christians), and—almost as important—they knew history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And that IS crucial.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Today’s politicians know neither.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The following are some quotes from Thomas
Jefferson (one from Abraham Lincoln).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This is almost amazing, the foresight and wisdom seen in these
statements.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I say, “almost amazing,”
because they are not amazing to anyone who understands the Bible (the source of
moral law) and history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><o:p><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></o:p></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">The
choice, Jefferson said in 1816,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>is
“between economy and liberty, or [government] profusion and servitude.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If we run into such debts, as that we must be
taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our
labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of
England are, our people, like them, must come to labor 16 hours in the 24, give
the earnings of 15 of those to the government for their debts and daily
expenses; and the 16th being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as
they do now, on oatmeal and potatoes.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Or food stamps.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He is being a
little facetious, obviously, in this statement, but the meaning is clear.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Jefferson
complained of federal politicians who seem “at a loss for objects whereon to
throw away the supposed fathomless funds of the treasury.”<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">“A
single consolidated government would become the most corrupt government on
earth.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The more power in the hands of
government, the more corrupt it becomes.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">“To
compel a man to furnish contributions of money (taxes) for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Read that again.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now, read it again.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Following this irrefutable principle would eliminate 90% of federal spending.</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">“If
we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the
pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Welfare state, anyone?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Even
in his own day, Jefferson bemoaned “the rapid strides with which the federal
branch of our government is advancing towards the usurpation of all the rights
reserved to the States.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One federal
judge today—one judge—can strike down a state law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Regarding
interpreting the Constitution:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“On every
question of construction [we should] carry ourselves back to the time when the
constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and
instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented
against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If the courts don’t do that, of course, then
the Constitution becomes meaningless.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It
can, in effect, mean anything, thus, it means nothing.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">On
becoming President in 1801, Jefferson slashed federal spending and abolished
all domestic taxes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He also closed
several American embassies around the world as a waste of money.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What a novel idea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He also cut military spending, although
interestingly, he did have a small Middle Eastern war against some pirates who
were raiding American ships.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He sent
Marines to Tripoli, hence the Marine hymn, “From the halls of Montezuma to the
shores of Tripoli….”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"></span></span> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">And I love this one from Jefferson: "A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you've got." I'm just...almost overwhelmed...by their wisdom and foresight. But, then again, I'm not.</span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">One
more quote, this one from Abraham Lincoln:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>“If the Almighty had ever made a set of men that should do all of the
eating and none of the work, he would have made them with mouths only and no
hands.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s what Americans used to
believe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Well, today, some still
do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Unfortunately, the entire Democratic
Party does NOT believe that, and such is the source of their political
power.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And they know it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And they aren’t about to give it up.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">To
find justification for such rampant theft of honest people's money, the Democrats flee to the Marxist dogma of “zero
sum” economics, i.e., that there is only so much wealth in a society, and thus,
the more the rich have, the less the poor have.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>“The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> That is</span> pure, unadulterated Marxism, and shows
absolutely no understanding of wealth creation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Jefferson, and probably Lincoln, would respond, “Well, if the rich are
getting richer because they are investing, providing jobs, goods, and
services that people want, and the poor are getting poorer because they are
sitting around on their lazy backsides doing nothing, then the rich OUGHT to be
getting richer and the poor OUGHT to be getting poorer.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This, however, does not mitigate the propriety of
charity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There will always be poor
people, of course, and those who are truly needy should be helped.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>No one denies this.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> <em>No one denies this! </em></span>The question is not, and never has been,
should the “needy poor” be assisted; the question is only, and always, HOW
should they be helped?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Is that a
legitimate function of government?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To
the men who founded America, it was not, because they believed government
assistance to the poor only encouraged people to look for handouts rather than
become productive citizens of society.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The more government freely hands out money, the more people who will
stand in line for it; that’s part of human nature that America’s Founders
grasped well.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To them, charity/poverty
was a moral, as much as an economic, issue.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Government welfare encourages sloth and vice, and as we can see from
American society today, they obviously knew exactly what they were talking
about.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">But
then, they knew history and they understood the eternal, moral laws flowing
from the nature of God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>America will
never recover until we again get leaders of the same quality.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">**********</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">And if I'm going to have a quote from some intelligent people, to be fair, I must also have a quote from an idiot. This is Jay Carney, the White House press secretary: </span><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">"this is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy, this is in response to a video that is offensive to Muslims." Yes, a spontaneous protest that had obviously been planned for quite some time....</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">Just another reason Barack Obama must be removed from office for the good of the country. He hasn't a clue what's going on in the world. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">Or maybe he agrees with the protesters. That wouldn't surprise me in the least.</span></div>
Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-14025829824320359002012-09-13T22:41:00.000+08:002012-09-13T23:03:40.291+08:00And A Few More Headlines....<span style="color: black; font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">I won't even bother to comment on most of these, except to say...how can anybody believe that the United States is better off now than four years ago?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">"Jobless claims rise 382,000 in latest week" An Obama Labor Department official blamed Hurricane Isaac for the increase. If they weren't destroying the country, Obama and his people could be really funny sometimes.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">"Inflation jumps; wholesale gas up most in 3 years"</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span><br />
"<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Obama
rejects Netanyahu meeting, invites Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood president to
talk</span>"</span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">"Median
income lowest since 1995"</span></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;">"Lower class grows..."</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span></span><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;">"Rich-Poor Gap Widens to Most Since 1967..." I thought that was what Obama was supposed to cure.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span></span><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;">"Michelle O: Being fat 'Greatest Threat to National Security." I kid you not, folks, she said it.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span></span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><span style="color: black;">"Dollar Weakens Before Fed Move"</span></span></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;">"<span style="color: black; font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Protesters
storm American embassy in Yemen" </span></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">"US Flags Burned at Tunisia embassy"</span></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"></span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun;"><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">"New Clashes in Cairo" </span></span><span style="font-family: "Courier New";"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">"Consulate in Berlin evacuated"</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Courier New";"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">"Iraqi militia threatens U.S. interests"</span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><br />
Let's have four more years of this....<br />
<br />
**********<br />
And if I didn't already know how brain dead, ignorant, and downright stupid millions of Americans are, then this poll figure would convince me. In a recent Rasmussen poll, 47% of Americans (polled) trusted Obama in job creation compared to only 45% who trusted Romney more. Here's a man who has never created a job in his life, against a man who worked, very successfully, in the private sector and created countless jobs and thus knows how to do it....and yet more Americans trust Obama to create jobs than Romney. Brain dead. People just don't care. That's what Romney is up against. People don't know or care about the well-being of the country. They are going to vote Obama, and not one single, solitary shred of evidence will ever convince them to do otherwise. That's frightening, for people who cannot, or who refuse to think for themselves, can and will be led by demagogues. And demagogues have killed countless of hundreds of millions of people in history.</span><br /></span><br />Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-74309627028184531832012-09-13T14:50:00.000+08:002012-09-13T14:50:58.350+08:00More Interesting Headlines and StuffThis isn't a headline, but is the first paragraph of a <em>New York Post </em>article regarding the attack on the American embassy in Libya two days ago:<br />
<br />
"US officials are increasingly suspicious that the murder Tuesday of the US ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three other American officials was not the result of a protest against an anti-Islam film, but instead was a coordinated terror strike timed for the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks."<br />
<br />
I can only shake my head in amazement. How long did it take these "US officials" to figure this out? This is an absolutely horrendous failure of American foreign policy, and yes, Barack Obama is to blame. Liberals don't get it that, to radical Muslims, 9/11 is a day to celebrate, not apologize for or mourn over. Everyone of America's embassies and consulates in the Middle East should have been triple-prepared, on that day, for something to happen. And then, intially, they want to blame some movie maker for offending Muslims? I doubt very seriously that those people in Libya and Cairo knew a thing about that movie. 9/11 is an anniversary to them and America should have been prepared.<br />
<br />
One fellow asked a great question: if Obama is so concerned with feelings<br />
in the Muslim world, why is he bragging so much about killing Osama bin Laden?<br />
<br />
Why am I not surprised that we weren't prepared for what happened two days ago? Well, here are a couple of reasons:<br />
<br />
<em>Headline number 1:</em> <em> "President Skips More Than Half of Intel Briefings...Report: Spent 412 hours in economic meetings, 600 hours on the golf course"</em><br />
<br />
Obama doesn't know what's going on because he doesn't care. On top of that, even if he did, his whole philosophy makes it impossible for him to successfully deal with any major policy issue in the country. You cannot apologize your way to national greatness or tax and regulate your way to economic growth.<br />
<br />
<em>Headline number 2</em>: <em>"White House declines Netanyahu request to meet with Obama...'Schedule Full'...Announces 'Letterman' Appearance..."</em><br />
<br />
Appearing on the David Letterman show is more important to the President of the United States than meeting with the head of state of one of our best friends from a country in one of the most vital, strategic, and volatile regions of the world. Jimmy Carter was George Washington compared to this guy.<br />
<br />
And an economic headline that explains why there has been no recovery under this administration: <em>"Obama Adds 11,327 Pages of Regulations in Three Years...18 pages to define 'full-time employee' for Obamacare..."</em><br />
<em></em><br />
"You didn't build that...." Well, nobody is going to build anything if Barack Obama remains President....Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-59896191340649234552012-09-09T10:32:00.000+08:002012-09-09T10:32:04.132+08:00To the Democrats, Tyranny is a SuccessBesides the killing of Osama bin Laden (which was accomplished by troops sent to the Middle East by George Bush), about the only "success" Obama is touting for his administration is "saving the auto industry"--the bailout of GM and Chrysler. "I saved the auto industry!" he champions. Only to Obama and liberals could tyranny be trumpeted as a success.<br />
<br />
Why do I say this? Well, let's consider. Why did the auto industry (GM and Chrysler) need a "bailout" in the first place? Put aside for a moment the horribly destructive role of the unions and the increasing number of non-productive retirees who were supported lavishly by the productive workers. Anybody with an ounce of economic sense would be able to see that such was a recipe for eventual disaster. But, again, set that aside and let me ask another question.<br />
<br />
Why did the auto industry almost go bankrupt? Basically, it was for the same reason any other company goes belly-up--it didn't provide consumers the products they wanted at prices they were willing to pay. The American people, by and large, didn't want GM products. A company like that <em>should</em> fail; if they don't provide what people want, they shouldn't be in business. It happens every day. But here comes Obama <em>and forces the American people to support an industry they did not want to support on their own! </em>Forcibly taking people's money (taxes) and giving it to an entity they would not/did not voluntarily support is not freedom, folks. It's tyranny. This is only a "success" if you believe, with Obama and the Democrats, that government knows better how to spend your money than you do. To Obama, tyranny is a success.<br />
<br />
Actually, the bailout was for one reason--to save the unions, one of Obama's most slavish supporters. It certainly wasn't for the good of the American people; they had spoken, loudly and clearly, with their pocketbooks, on the future of GM and Chrysler. But, increasingly the federal government--and the Democratic Party almost absolutely--governs against the will of the people. I grant you, most people are stupid and do stupid things with their money. But freedom means people have that right, and often will learn from their mistakes if not "saved" from the consequences of those mistakes by those who think they know better, but more often than not don't, because...well, who put them in power in the first place?<br />
<br />
Give Stupidity the vote, and it will elect Stupidity, Give Immorality the vote, and it will elect Immorality. And Stupidity and Immorality in power, Stupidity and Immorality with an army and a legislative pen, is a whole lot more dangerous than Stupidity and Immorality left to its own devices.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-57558162775875235122012-09-08T12:59:00.000+08:002012-09-08T12:59:18.876+08:00"The Loftiest of Hopes and The Greatest of Expectations"Dana Milbank, a liberal <em>Washington Post </em>columnist, wrote an article, published September 7, entitled "Obama the demigod comes down to Earth." The first line was about the just-concluded Democratic National Convention: "It began, like the Obama presidency itself, with the loftiest of hopes and the
greatest of expectations." Alas, for so many, those hopes and expectations have been dashed. Sad, but far from astonishing.<br />
<br />
No one, who truly understands the meaning of existence on this earth, is the least bit surprised that Barack Obama has been a wretched failure as President of the United States. The fact that there ever were such "hopes" and "expectations" is decisive evidence of how far men have drifted from God and the eternal principles of truth that flow from His very nature. There was no way, from the very beginning, that Barack Obama could succeed, because, not only was he totally unqualified for the position in the first place, but, more importantly, what he believes--and has tried to put into practice--is just wrong. More than ever, it is strikingly self-evident to the wise that the Bible is right, and that the principles and examples found in God's Word, and illustrated repeatedly throughout the history of mankind, are once again being confirmed. Verily, because God does not immediately punish men for their sins (Ecclesiastes 8:11), there are times when the "wicked prosper" (Job 21:7; Jeremiah 12:1). But men cannot mock God forever, and where evil might succeed, for a time, on a limited platform, it can only prove disastrous when attempted on a grander one. Democracies <em>always </em>fail, because they end up compromising the truth to please the ignorant, selfish, pleasure-seeking majorities who elect people just like themselves. And the farther a democracy moves away from the truth, the more rapidly it declines; the "left" will destroy a country more quickly and thoroughly than the "right." Barack Obama is the most radical leftist President the United States has ever had; the country will survive (I guess), but never recover from, four more years of his and the Democratic Pary's deliberate booing of God. The fact that Obama has a strong chance of re-election is, as I have written repeatedly, a full indication of how tragically far America has sunk into an immoral slime pit.<br />
<br />
The only "hope" I had when Barack Obama was elected was that God would be patient enough with America to allow it to survive four years of rampant debauchery that was sure to come, but my "expectations" have been fully met--an insidious President who operates in direct denial of history, economic, and moral law. His failure was a given. Nor am I the least bit surprised that countless millions of people still do not see it. You cannot know what you have not been taught, and the greatest tragedy of all in America, and the world, is abysmal ignorance of God's Word. "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" (Hosea 4:6). Written about 2800 years ago, yet that bells tolls as clearly today as it did in the 8th century B. C.<br />
<br />
Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-82050380369993568182012-09-07T20:38:00.001+08:002012-09-07T20:38:56.844+08:00The Democrats and GodRush had a great line about the Democratic delegates at the convention: they booed God and cheered Bill Clinton. That pretty much describes the modern day Democratic Party. They hate righteousness and holiness, and they love adulterers and liars. Not to mention homosexuals, abortionists, law-breakers, sluts, and moochers.<br />
<br />
The Republicans have put out an ad/video: "They booed God three times." How the mighty have fallen...Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-66256303192550577952012-09-05T13:05:00.003+08:002012-09-05T19:12:52.992+08:00Some More Interesting Headlines The headlines keep telling us what is happening in the United States. Here's one that should surprise no one:<br />
<br />
Headline #1: <em>"Democrats Drop 'God' From Party Platform"</em><br />
<br />
Well, at the least the Democrats are finally honest about something. Their party platform doesn't mention God at all, which given their policies, is exactly what should happen. No political party, no human being, who believes in abortion, homosexual marriage, feminism, etc. should use the word "God" in any context, except to say either, "I hate God," or "I don't believe in God." In this case--for once--the Democrats did exactly what they should have done.<br />
<br />
No, actually, of course, they should return to God, but since they aren't going to do that, and since they insist on defending some of the most egregiously immoral activities human beings can engage in, they should indeed distance themselves, as far as possible, from their Creator. They can explain to Him why when they meet Him.<br />
<br />
Headline # 2: <em>"Convicted murderer gets taxpayer-funded sex change"</em><br />
<em></em><br />
This certainly goes a long way to explain why the United States is now $16 trillion in debt. A federal judge claims this pervert, who killed his wife, is entitled to Americans paying for his perversion because he has "gender-identity disorder." How in the world any sensible, rational, thinking, even semi-intelligent human being can come to a conclusion like this is completely beyond my ability to comprehend. <em>The United States government doesn't have the money, Judge Blithering Idiot,</em> and to force decent human beings to pay for this is disgusting and tyrannical beyond description. Well, maybe Joe Biden could explain it if it wasn't so hot....<br />
<em></em><br />
Oh, wait a minute, I'm sorry, it's right there in Article One, Section Eight, of the Constitution, the powers given to Congress: "Money shall be forcibly extracted from unwilling taxpayers to pay for sex changes for murderers." Clearly a power the Founders gave to Congress....<br />
<br />
Headline #3: <em>"DNC Video: 'The Government Is The Only Thing We All Belong To'" </em><br />
<br />
This speaks volumes about the beliefs of the Democratic Party. I've got news for these tyrants: we are citizens of the United States, we don't "belong" to any government, <em>the government belongs to us! </em> Government isn't some kind of "club" we are all members of. Government exists for one reason, and one reason, only--to serve its citizens as efficiently, thriftly, and virtuously as possible, to protect their property (not redistribute it) from enemies, within and without, who would threaten it, and otherwise leave the people alone to pursue their own socially productive goals. Some Republicans (not many) know this; no Democrats do, as this headline testifies.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
And some interesting facts: Unemployment was 7.8% when Barack Obama took office. It's now 8.3%. Median household income was almost $55,000. It's now less than $51,000. Gas was at $1.85 a gallon when he took office. Now, it's $3.78, almost doubled. National debt was $10.6 trillion and it will go past $16 trillion this week. <br />
<br />
And yet, in my opinion, Barack Obama still has a better-than-even chance to get re-elected. This just isn't the same United States as it was, even 32 years ago, when Ronald Reagan was elected over a bumbling incumbent who, frankly, wasn't nearly as radical or incompetent as Barack Obama. You just can't hold back the tide.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-41437268177983908502012-08-30T19:48:00.000+08:002012-08-30T19:51:14.027+08:00Some Interesting Recent Headlines<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Some interesting recent headlines garnered from hither and yon.</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Headline number one: “</span><a href="http://nation.foxnews.com/ellen-barkin/2012/08/28/ellen-barkin-hopes-hurricane-kills-every-pro-life-xenophobic-gay-bashing-sob-rnc" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Actress Hopes Storm </span><span style="color: windowtext; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">(Hurricane Isaac)</span><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"> Kills 'Every Pro-Life, Xenophobic, Gay-Bashing SOB'…</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">”</span></i></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">I forget the name of the paragon of moral righteousness who uttered these virtuous words; some thing out of Hollywood, a woman, I had never heard of her. It reminds us to never forget that there is much more to the current political climate in America than just economics. “Pro-life” means she hates people who oppose the murdering of babies. “Xenophobic” means she does not object when millions of people break the law. And “gay-bashing” needs no explanation. These people are a significant part of Barack Obama’s base.</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">A huge percentage, well over a majority, and probably over 90%, of the Democratic Party’s support comes from the morally base (white liberals), the dependent, Hispanics, and blacks. Look at the current state of Hollywood, Europe, Latin America, and Africa and you will see where the Democratic Party is taking America.</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Headline number two: “</span><a href="http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/08/28/chinese_media_slams_romney_as_convention_begins" target="_blank" title="Chinese media slams Romney as convention begins"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Chinese media slams Romney as convention begins</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">.”</span></i><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">There is, of course, the Marxist element that also loves Obama. It isn’t small in the United States. For all its “openness,” the leadership of China is still in the hands of the Communist Party, which is the greatest enemy of freedom the world has ever seen. So any condemnation of Mitt Romney by the state-controlled Chinese media is as good an endorsement as any condemnation of Mitt Romney by the Obama-controlled American media.</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">And this third headline caused me to laugh. I don’t know why, it’s not necessarily funny, it’s just so….characteristic, so typical…of the kind of human being Barack Obama is. I am almost convinced (I don’t like to read anybody’s heart) that Obama hates America, so anything to do with honoring those who defend and protect the United States has to be anathema and repulsive to him. Anyway, </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Headline number three: “Obama Honors Fallen SEALs By Sending Parents Form Letter Signed By Electric Pen...”</span></i></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></i></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">What an insult. Men who die protecting the principles that allowed him to become President of the United States, and Obama can’t do more than send them a form letter which he won’t even sign. But then, he’s too busy raising money and trying to retain power to give a second thought to the people he is supposed to govern.</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">On August 11, 2010, George W. Bush and his wife, Laura, went personally to the Dallas-Fort Worth airport to greet 150 Iraqi/Afghanistan returning war veterans. But then, George Bush is a great American.</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">**********</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">And, here is an interesting little tidbit from Walter Williams’ most recent column. Obama and the Democrats are constantly calling out for the rich to pay their “fair share” of taxes, but we are never told what that “fair share” is. It would be 100% if Obama spoke the truth. But, the question is, how much are “the rich” paying in taxes? Williams:</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">“According to IRS 2007 data, the richest 1 percent of Americans earned 22 percent of national personal income but paid 40 percent of all personal income taxes. The top 5 percent earned 37 percent and paid 61 percent of personal income tax. The top 10 percent earned 48 percent and paid 71 percent of all personal income taxes. The bottom 50 percent earned 12 percent of personal income but paid just 3 percent of income tax revenues.”</span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
</div>
<div class="ecxMsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Dr. Williams goes on to point out what is well-known: currently, 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax at all. Why should they be interested in an income tax cut, since they aren’t paying any taxes to begin with? And, indeed, a “tax cut” might scare them, because it might mean a cut in government revenue, which might mean a cut in their welfare check, which might mean—God forbid!—they would have to go out and work for a living. Not all 47% of these people are bums, of course…but a lot of them are. And guess whom they will vote for? “Yeah, take more from the rich…and give it to me!” It’s exactly what Barack Obama wants to do. </span></div>
Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-11364509085242655612012-08-15T13:48:00.003+08:002012-08-15T13:50:08.543+08:00These Are Obama's PeopleMichelle Williams, New Black Panthers chief of staff to the Republican National Convention: "Our Feet Will Be On Your Motherf***ing Necks."<br />
<br />
Did you ever hear anybody in the Tea Party talk like that?<br />
<br />
Make no mistake about it, folks, the left WILL have violence. When they need it, and when they can get away with it, <em>they...will...have...violence!</em>Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-60637939266191280382012-08-11T10:38:00.000+08:002012-08-30T19:58:03.003+08:00The Awakening<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>A
lot of people are finally waking up to what modern liberalism and its
subjective, atheistic morality is all about.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The question is, is it too late, and it almost certainly is.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>America
was built by decent people—“Decent America,” I will call them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These people were—are--honest, hard-working,
moral, ethical people.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They have a
conscience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They aren’t perfect, of
course, but they try to live good, clean, wholesome lives, with a sense of
integrity, propriety, politeness, and honor. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That is obviously the kind of people a country
wants.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But these folks also tend to be a
little naïve.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is hard for them to
think in a different way, and it is especially hard for them to realize that
there are people who do NOT think that way, that there literally exists humans
who are totally amoral, with no sense of decency, fairness, or uprightness—people
who have no virtue, no ethics, no conscience at all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The “decent” mind rebels against thinking
that way about others; there is just something in their mind that repudiates
the idea that someone would deliberately, premeditatively lie—or worse--just
for personal gain.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We know it happens; the
history of liberalism, the left, in the 20th century is too close in
time—the Nazis, the communists, the atheistic horrors that slaughtered dozens
of millions of innocent human beings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>And history is full of such stories.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>We know, intellectually, that to be the case, though our minds still
have difficulty grasping the horror, the reality that humans could actually
behave this way.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>But
America is different, isn’t it?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Surely
no one in America could think in such a fashion…<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
Awakening may be occurring.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yes, it can
happen in America because the exact same moral system--atheistic subjectivism—that
actuated Hitler, Stalin, Mao, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">et al</i>—underlies
the American left, too.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And while the
Democrats in America haven’t started killing people yet (that we know of),
character assassination and “the end justifies the means” philosophy is
certainly increasingly evident in their actions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That has recently been evidenced in two major
events.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Harry
Reid, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader, was lying when he said somebody
from Bain Capital called him and told him Mitt Romney hasn’t paid taxes in 10
years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Reid was lying, he knows he was
lying, and everybody else (well, everybody but a liberal robot) knows he was
lying, too.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“Decent America” asks, how
can any virtuous, honorable human, with a conscience, do that?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A man who is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">supposed to be </i>a leader in the country.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It doesn’t compute, but, the truth of the
matter is, Reid has no conscience, he has no virtue, no honor—<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">atheistic ethics teaches he should only have
those qualities when necessary to accomplish his goals!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></i>Then comes the utterly ridiculous
SuperPAC ad about Romney killing some woman with cancer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Even much of the liberal media chuckled at
that one and exposed its utter falsehood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>But, interestingly, the President never repudiated that ad—never.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He said he didn’t authorize it, but he never
did what he should have done and publicly announce that such an accusation was
despicable, dishonest, and he would have no part in this kind of a deceitful campaign.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Obama never did that—and that speaks volumes
about the kind of person Barack Obama is.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He, too, has no conscience, no virtue, no decency.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For purely political, personal reasons, he is
taking a calculated risk here—that there are more stupid people in America who
will believe these utterly contemptible lies than there are decent people who
are revolted by them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> And he's probably right. November will decide that. The fact that it is even an issue demonstrates how far America has sunk into an immoral cesspool--that politicians would actually, deliberately try to appeal to such people. But it's all about v</span>otes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Winning at any cost.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s all that matters to Obama and the
left.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The end justifies the means.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">I say, “the end
justifies the means” because that is exactly what they believe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They will be “decent” when they can, because
they want to fool Decent America into voting for them, if possible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But, if danger threatens, if they see the
possibility of defeat lurking, then they’ll do whatever is necessary to crush—and
I mean crush--their opponents to secure victory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You see, recently, Obama has been in some
trouble politically.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The country is
getting worse off and anybody with a brain can see it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His policies have not succeeded in making the
country better—they can’t, as I’ve pointed out before on this blog. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And so, there has been a lot concern on the
left that he actually might not win a second term.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Liberals, right now, have the best man they
have ever had in the Presidency.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Bill
Clinton was ok, but he’s not near the radical that Obama is.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The left simply <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">must </i>have Obama re-elected; since they have no God, no heaven to
look forward to, then he is their Messiah, he will bring Utopia to them—if only
the brainless, hick conservatives would shut up and get out of the way, quit hindering
the Messiah in his goal of establishing a “progressive” heaven on earth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And so, with Obama reeling, anything goes—the
vicious, lying attacks on Mitt Romney are only symbolic of the kind of people
these liberals are.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Again, if we look at
the 20th century (actually, one can trace the roots back to the
French Revolution of the 1790s and its infamous guillotine), we can see the
ultimate horrors of secular, leftist morality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The left in America hasn’t been able to kill people yet—Americans can
own guns, of course, and shoot back (Stalin said about his sheep, “We don’t let
them have ideas.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why would we let them
have guns?”).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And again, Decent America—any
decent mind—simply rebels against the idea, is horrified by the thought—“no, it
couldn’t happen in America.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As immoral
as Barack Obama is, he would never start killing people…”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I hope not, but I know history, I know
atheistic morality, and it’s there in history—recent history—for anybody to see.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As Sartre, Dostoevsky, and others have noted,
“if there is no God, then everything is permitted.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and
the leadership of the Democratic Party have absolutely no decency or conscience
at all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They will do whatever it takes
to win because, to them, life is not about getting to heaven; the only heaven
there will ever be is the one we create on earth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">And
they know how to do it! <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And it’s only George Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter,
Republicans, and backwoods Southern hayseeds that are preventing it from happening.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Of course, it’s only
fair to point out, that, to a limited degree—or maybe not—the tactics being
used by Obama, Reid, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">et al</i>, against
Romney are the same tactics he used against Michelle Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, and
Rick Santorum in order to secure the Republican nomination in the first
place.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Just like Obama is doing now,
Romney gambled.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He surmised that, once
he won the nomination, those people who were appalled by his slanderous attacks
on Gingrich, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">et al</i>, would line up
behind him anyway, because the alternative—Obama—was horrifyingly worse.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But Romney is in a quandary now.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If he plays the same kind of despicable game that
Obama is playing, and starts throwing mud and slime, he risks losing the Decent
America vote; they’ll just stay home, being utterly disgusted at both
candidates.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And, of course, if Decent
America doesn’t vote, Romney hasn’t got a prayer of winning, because Obama has
the stupid-immoral vote wrapped up.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Romney
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">must </i>stay above the fray or he risks
losing his base. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But because Romney, at
one point, was willing to use the mud-slinging tactics, we do get an exposure
of his character, hypocritical at best.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>What do we want in the Presidency—a hypocritical Mormon or a lying atheist?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Not much of a choice, frankly, though it
would be impossible for the Republicans to find a candidate worse than
Obama.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Romney needs to win, but only because
the alternative is too terrifying to contemplate.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">But what this shows, as
much as anything else, is the wisdom of the American Founding Fathers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They didn’t trust any politician and never
intended for any human being to have the kind of power and control American
politicians now have.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We have, as always, ignored history and its
wisdom, and we will be destroyed because of it.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">Many in Decent America
might finally be waking up to what liberalism, atheistic subjectivism, and the
intellectual leadership in the Democratic Party really are—a movement and
people with no honor, no virtue, no conscience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I only shake my head in frustration that it is taking so long for so
many to see it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Bible, as always, is
spot on, telling us that there are people who are “past feeling, have given
themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness”
(Ephesians 4:19), who consciences have been “seared with a hot iron” (I Timothy
4:2).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In a way, if one can look at it
from a God’s-eye view, it is fascinating to watch history lessons and Biblical
truth being—again—so accurately played out.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It’s just a shame that so many human beings will—again—have to suffer
because of it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But, we mock God at our
own peril.</span></div>
Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-68417534879790824432012-08-11T06:00:00.000+08:002012-08-12T18:41:14.238+08:00Romney's VP<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Romney’s
choice of Paul Ryan for VP is a good one, maybe the best choice of all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ryan is young, smart, and conservative.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He made mincemeat of Obama’s rather outrageous claim that
Obamacare wouldn’t add to the deficit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Romney is/was a good businessman, and Ryan is probably the best
budget-brain on Capitol Hill.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Together,
they would most likely do a pretty good job in getting some kind of handle on
the government economic disaster.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Perhaps Ryan’s only problem is he is so smart that the, um, economically unenlightened people of
America—their name is Legion, of course—will never understand his
explanations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That could hurt in the
upcoming campaign.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But the Romney-Ryan
ticket is a solid one, from an economic standpoint, light-years ahead of
Obama-Biden, of whom it would be hard to find two men less qualified.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;"><o:p> </o:p><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The
major hitch, though, is that America’s principal problem is not economic, it’s
moral.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The moral degradation underpins
the economic chaos, and until there is a serious character transformation in
the American people, there will never be any real progress towards a better
nation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It doesn’t matter what kind of
government a country has; if the country is full of sorry people, it’s going to
be a sorry country, and America, right now, is a sorry country or it never
would have elected Barack Obama in the first place (not to mention Clinton,
Reid, Pelosi, etc.).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don’t know what
anybody can do to improve American character.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>That has to come from within the people and that doesn’t appear very
imminent.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"> We will find out, immediately, if Paul Ryan is considered a good choice or not. The "mainstream media" will tell us by how severerly they rip into him.</span></div>Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-82841447000395685002012-08-02T09:39:00.001+08:002012-08-02T12:21:19.869+08:00The Queer Marriage ThingKudos to the people who supported traditional marriage by going to Chick-Fill-A yesterday. The queer marriage debate is just further evidence of the moral degeneration of the United States, but frankly, it's not that big of a deal, in my mind. Of course people of the same sex can't get "married." God created marriage and He alone can define what it is. But, keep in mind, that, according to Jesus in Matthew 19:9, anyone who divorces his/her mate, except for fornication, and marries again, is committing adultery. So, in God's eyes, those people aren't truly "married", either, they are living in adultery. Given feminism and the destruction of marriage and the family in America today, how many millions of people does that encompass? Adultery is just as soul-damning as homosexuality is, so the queers haven't got a monopoly on trying to re-define marriage and have society accept something that God rejects.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
There seems to be some concern in the major media--and joy among conservatives--about President Obama's re-election chances. I don't see it. To me, unless something really catastrophic happens, it's almost a slam-dunk that he's going to win. According to nearly every poll, he has way over 200 electoral votes pretty well sewn up; Rasmussen's projection has him at 247 electoral votes, and Romney with 191. Obama, of course, will win every state in the decadent North, as well as the left coast--California and New York alone give him 84 electoral votes. Given the current situation, he only needs less than 50 more electoral votes (23 if Rasmussen is accurate). There are a few "toss-up" states--CO, VA, NC, OH, FL, WI, and IA; if he wins Florida, he wins the election. A combination of 2 or 3 of the others would also put him over the top. It looks almost like a done deal to me. Get ready for 4 more years of Obama. America will never recover from that, but then, America is already too far gone or the country never would have elected him (or Bill Clinton) in the first place.<br />
<br />
Mitt Romney inspires nobody. The only thing he has going for him is he isn't Barack Obama. But he can't out-promise Obama, and with almost half the country on government support now, Obama and the Democrats will win. They won't do so well in a lot of local elections because, actually, there are more "red" states than "blue" states. But the population is greater in the "blue" states, so that carries the national election. <br />
<br />
Here's the link to Rasmussen's projection, if you want to read it and weep:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/2012_electoral_college_scoreboard">http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/2012_electoral_college_scoreboard</a><br />
<br />
**********<br />
As I write this, the Texas Rangers are getting slaughtered again by the Los Angeles Angels--the third straight night. At the moment, the Rangers are in first place, but I don't think that's going to be the case much longer. As Texas is again finding out, pitching wins championships, and the Angels have the better of that. The Astros, of course, are the dis-astros; they have one of the worst teams in major league history. But they are trying to rebuild, so they have traded away nearly all of their major-league caliber players to stock their minor league system. Right now, they are basically fielding a AA-AAA team, and it's pretty obvious that there is a major gap between major and minor leagues. Next year, when they enter the American League, it won't be any better. It's a long haul for the Astros.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
The country of India lost power to about 670 million of its citizens this week--that is one-tenth of the world's population. More socialism, folks?<br />
<br />
********** A little later in the day.....<br />
I'm going to have to eat a little crow here. Regarding the Rangers-Angels baseball game mentioned above, Texas made a remarkable comeback--two of them, actually--and won the game, 11-10, in 10 innings. Still, having to score 11 runs to win is not a good omen. They've got a great team and might make it back to the World Series, but my guess is they won't.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
And, regarding guessing, nobody knows whom Mitt Romney will choose for his Vice-Presidential running mate. Condi Rice and Marco Rubio are the glamor picks, but I'm going to guess he'll pick Rob Portman of Ohio. Ohio is one of those "swing states" with quite a few electoral votes that Romney needs. Of course, he needs Florida, too, and that's where Rubio is from, but to avoid a lot of distraction about Rubio's background and experience, Romney needs to make a "safe" pick, and one that gives him a good chance to win an important state. The Democratic propaganda wing, a.k.a, the "mainstream media," are obviously going to do everything they can to distract the election away from the incredibly incompetent and failed administration of Barack Obama. Romney doesn't need those distractions, so I think he would be wise to go with a solid, if unspectacular, pick. I don't know much about Portman, but from what little I've read, he seems to be a good man.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-62436080367302644012012-07-18T12:59:00.000+08:002012-07-18T13:00:18.425+08:00Obama vs. LincolnI've never especially been an Abraham Lincon fan, but he did have a lot of wisdom in his head and he spoke a lot of truth.<br />
<br />
Now, Barack Obama.....well, let's just consider the following:<br />
<br />
Obama: "If you've got a business, you -- you didn't build that! Somebody else made that happen."<br />
<br />
Lincoln: "That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence, is just encouragement to industry and enterprise."<br />
<br />
What Barack Obama is, and what the Democratic Party has become, is one of the saddest things in human history. The United States, never a perfect country, of course, began with great principles, a shining light, a gleaming hope for mankind. The restoration of New Testament Christianity arose from the ground planted by the men who founded America. Countless millions came to America to be what <em>they </em>could be, not what "somebody else made...happen." <em>That is the very thing they fled from in the first place!</em><br />
<br />
Barack Obama and the Democrats are doing everything they can to destroy that. And they are having an untold amount of success in doing so.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-82267765206789664402012-07-10T08:17:00.000+08:002012-07-11T21:24:55.578+08:00Baseball Trivia QuestionThe baseball All-Star game is tonight (well, Tuesday night in America), and in keeping with that spirit. I have a trivia question, the answer of which will probably surprise a lot of people.<br />
<br />
Who holds the American League record for most shutouts in a season by a left-handed pitcher (9)? (This man also led the league in ERA in 1916 and for pitching the longest shutout, 14 innings, in World Series history.)<br />
<br />
The answer?..........Well, I'll give it to you in Chinese first, and then tomorrow I will give it to you in English: 贝比鲁斯<br />
<br />
If you can't wait till tomorrow to know the answer, copy and paste that Chinese into an online translator.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
The answer to the trivia question is........Babe Ruth. A lot of people forget that, before he became perhaps the greatest hitter in the history of baseball, he was one of the greatest pitchers, including holding the records mentioned above (he won almost 100 games as a pitcher before he became a regular player and had a lifetime ERA of 2.28, which is also one of the lowest in the history of the game). He was almost exclusively a pitcher his first five years in the baseball (1914-18). Over his entire career, he averaged 46 homeruns per 162 games. Given that ratio, if he had been exclusively a hitter from 1914-18, he would have ended up with over 900 homeruns in his career (eat that Barry Bonds and Hank Aaron). He had a CAREER slugging percentage of .690 (total bases divided by at bats), a figure that Willy Mays, Hank Aaron, and Joe Dimaggio never reached even one time in their careers. Babe also had a lifetime OPS (on-base plus slugging percentage) of 1.164--that's for his entire career. Again, Aaron, Mays, and Dimaggio never got that high in any single season. <br />
<br />
Incidentally, the Babe's debut in baseball was on July 11, 1914, 98 years ago today. Mom, that was....a few years...before you were born....<br />
<br />
**********<br />
The National League won the All-Star Game, 8-0, which means they will get home field advantage again in the World Series this year. Bud Selig, in all his idiotic glory, may have cost the Rangers another championship...Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-5598329787110648922012-07-05T18:34:00.000+08:002012-07-05T18:41:02.740+08:00According to the United States Government........people who love freedom are terrorists.<br />
<br />
The Department of Homeland Security (perhaps George W. Bush's biggest mistake) recently released a study which defined the following people as terrorists (based upon <em>Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism, </em>a 2011 study by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, whoever they are...). Anyway, these frightening folks are "terrorists": <br />
<br />
--Americans who believe their “way of life” is under attack;<br />
<div align="left">
--Americans who are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”;</div>
<div align="left">
--People who consider themselves “anti-global” (presumably those who are wary of the loss of American sovereignty);</div>
<div align="left">
--Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”;</div>
<div align="left">
--Americans who are “reverent of individual liberty”;</div>
<div align="left">
--Americans who are opposed to killing unborn babies.</div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div align="left">
Hoooooo-huuuuummmm....</div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div align="left">
Why should anybody be surprised that <em>government </em>thinks that people who believe in freedom are "terrorists"? Government, intrinsically, is opposed to freedom. The very purpose of government is to limit freedom. That's what laws do--limit freedom. In some cases, that is a good thing, of course. We don't murderers having the "freedom" to murder. But, even with that, the laws against murder <em>limit the murderer's freedom to murder! </em>Every law passed by government, in some way, limits freedom. Again, in many instances, that's what needs to be done. But giving government the power to pass laws that restrict freedom makes government very, very dangerous to individual liberty. Our Founding Fathers knew that, which is why they wrote a document (the Constitution) which specified <em>exactly </em>what the federal government can and cannot do. They feared government and knew that it was the greatest enemy of individual liberty. Unfortunately, thanks to Abraham Lincoln and a few others of his ilk, it didn't work (read my recent "Village Idiot" post for further explanation of this). </div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div align="left">
The point is, it is in <em>government's </em>interest not to let freedom flourish. If I'm government, I want power, I want to limit freedom. That's good for me. But bad for the people's liberty. The more government, the less liberty for the people; the more liberty for the people, the less government control. This isn't rocket science; it's common sense, and even more, it's history. </div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div align="left">
So, how can it be any surprise that the United States federal government writes a document which defines people who believe in "individual liberty" and who are "suspicious of centralized federal authority" as "terrorists"? Hahaha. Are the American people ever going to wake up (no, they aren't) and realize that Washington, D.C., is a classic historical case of governmental power, and that it is the very thing the men who founded America warned about and tried to prevent? </div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div align="left">
And rebelled against.</div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div align="left">
Thomas Jefferson, where are you when we need you so badly?</div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div align="left">
**********</div>
<div align="left">
One more thought along this line; I've made it before on this blog, but I'll include it here for any new readers. Regarding liberty: the more that humans control themselves, the less government they need. If people would conscientiously live according the teachings of Jesus Christ, we wouldn't need government (or very little). As James Madison said, "if all men were angels, we wouldn't need government." But this is the major reason why liberals, "progressives", hate religion. Liberals, "progressives", believe in government as the solution to man's problems (with themselves in control of the government, of course). The more religious, i.e., "self-governing" people are, the less government they need. That is, they don't need liberals. Thus, it has been a major goal of liberalism to destroy Christianity in America. And in direct proportion to the success they have had, we have seen government grow in the United States. Remember the Benjamin Franklin quote I posted a few weeks ago: "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Do you think liberals don't know that? Well, the "intellectuals" do, and that's why they are so vicious in their attacks on Christianity and in their attempts to silence those who truly exalt the teachings of Jesus. Liberal, I don't need you. I have a higher Master than you, one a whole lot smarter and wiser, whose ethical standards put yours to shame, and, if they were applied properly, would solve every, single solitary problem America has. Without you, liberal. But I know that's why you hate God and Christianity. Well, there's one more reason.... </div>
<div align="left">
<br />
Sometimes words have to be defined to be understood. "Freedom" is one of those. To the men who founded America, "freedom" meant the absence of governmental control over the people. Moral law (God's) does exist, but people should <em>freely choose </em>to obey that law, for the betterment of themselves and respect for other people's rights. But that's not what the modern liberal means by freedom. To him, "freedom" means "sex." That is the only thing liberals don't want government to control--people's right to have as much sex as they want, with any adult they want, and without having any responsibility or consequences. And if an accident DOES happen (a baby conceived), somebody else's freedom should be limited (taxes) in order to pay to get rid of it. Otherwise, to the liberal, there is no such thing as freedom. You have only one course of action--obey to what the liberal tells you to do.<br />
<br />
Liberal=government=Department of Homeland Security=hatred of individual liberty...</div>Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-83816985099675621742012-07-04T13:02:00.000+08:002012-07-04T13:10:32.962+08:00The Village Idiot and the Village GeniusHere's a great quote from a recent article by Thomas Sowell:<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
"John Roberts is no doubt a brainy man, and that seems to carry a lot
of weight among the intelligentsia — despite glaring lessons from history,
showing very brainy men creating everything from absurdities to catastrophes.
Few of the great tragedies of history were created by the village idiot, and
many by the village genius." ("Judicial Betrayal," 7/3/12)<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
The last sentence bears repeating: "few of the great tragedies of
history were created by the village idiot, and many by the village
genius." I have often said--even told my students--that the stupidest
people in the world are so-called "intellectuals." Most of them have
no common sense, they rarely live in the real world where they themselves must accept
the responsibility and bear the consequences of their fallacies, and worse yet,
too many of them don’t believe in God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It hasn’t been the Gomer Pyles who have started wars and killed untold millions,
but Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and a whole host of such “intellectual”
leftists who thought they had the genius to re-make the world according to
their own vision (and, in their subjectivism, they never agreed on what that
vision is), and, all the while, they completely ignored history and the moral
and spiritual laws that the Creator handed man for his own good.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
That’s the quintessence of stupidity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>And barbarism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And human tragedy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And the reason why the United States, and most
of the world, is in a mess right now.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
**********<br />
I haven’t written on the Supreme Court’s decision on Obamacare because, to
me, it was ho-hum.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How could anybody be
surprised at the decision?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When was the
last time the SCOTUS was right about <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">any </i>major
decision?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why, why, why do we expect “intellectuals”
to do the right thing?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They rarely ever
do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So, of course, the Supreme Court got
it wrong.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ho-hum.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
**********<br />
Overlooked in all of this, and a point I haven’t seen anybody talk about, is
that nowhere in the Constitution does that document make the Supreme Court the
final arbiter of what is “constitutional” or not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I know that, from very early in the history
of the United States (actually from even before <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Marbury v. Madison</i><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast;">), the Court has taken it upon itself to
declares laws of Congress and/or the states unconstitutional, and it has been
accepted practice ever since.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But,
again, where does the Constitution give the Court that right?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That 9 (or 5) unelected, unaccountable scoundrels
have the ultimate power to decide what is to be bound upon the rest of the people
can hardly be considered in harmony with a republican form of government or the
intentions of the Founders.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In that
sense, Chief Justice Roberts was right—the legislature makes the laws,
regardless of how stupid they might be.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The executive “executes” (enforces) the laws, and the judiciary is to
apply the laws.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s by simple
definition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If Congress makes an
unconstitutional law, technically, it’s up to Congress to repeal it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If they don’t, the states have the right to
nullify it (nobody can be forced to obey an illegal law), as a warning to the
national legislature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If Congress still doesn’t
repeal it, and insists on continuing to enforce its unconstitutional
(tyrannical) mandates, the states have the right to secede from the Union—that’s
the ultimate Damocles’ sword the Founders put over the head of the national
government to help keep it in check.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If
Congress insists on going beyond the delegated powers given to it in the
Constitution, then the states, who created that Congress in the first place,
have the right to secede—Congress won’t have anybody to govern anymore!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The United States government exists by the “consent
of the governed,” and if all, or part, of those “governed” no longer consent to
that government, then they have the right to leave it and form their own. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(Abraham Lincoln concurred in that view, which
was, by far, the majority opinion of the Founders of the country.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It had to be <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">since that is exactly what they did to England!</i>)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Otherwise, those people are no longer free,
but enslaved.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s the way the country
was founded and intended.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Southern
states tried to make it work.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They
failed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now, the federal government
defines its own powers, so it is hardly surprising that there are virtually no
limitations on what it can do (keep in mind that the SCOTUS is a part of the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">federal</i> government, thus a major part in
allowing Washington, D.C., to determine its own dominion).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Article One, Section 8, of the Constitution
means nothing anymore because it can mean everything.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That is hardly what the men who founded the
country had in mind.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast;">Jefferson,
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">et al,</i> knew exactly what they were
doing, and it was the most brilliant governmental construction the human mind
has yet conceived.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The only thing is, it
didn’t work.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And it didn’t work because
of the very thing those men feared and tried to prevent—the undying,
unquenchable thirst that humans—especially so-called “intellectuals”—have for
power.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is an intoxicant that has
killed more of God’s creatures than any other vice in history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And it is the intoxicant that is the main
motivation of Barack Obama and the “progressives” whose one obsession is to
control the United States of America and to create a utopian vision that only
they can see.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That scares me to
death.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Because other such “progressive”
visionaries have been named…Robespierre, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot…<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<br />
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast;">History
teaches that man has been plenty barbaric even when he acknowledges there is a
God in heaven.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Man, without God, has
absolutely no boundaries and no controls—and no reason to have any.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And so much the worse for the countless,
nameless millions who have lived—and brutally died—under such a system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
Give me Gomer Pyle any day of the week.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-90099298788963429202012-06-27T17:42:00.001+08:002012-06-27T17:42:12.869+08:00The Supreme Court's Arizona Immigration DecisionFrom reading about it, one would think that the state of Arizona won 1 of the 4 decisions that the Supreme Court handed down a few days ago. Well, no, Arizona did NOT win 1 decision, simply because the Obama administration has made it plain that it has absolutely no intention of enforcing it. In fact, they are inviting people to snitch on Arizona law personnel if THEY try to enforce it.<br />
<br />
Rush has a fine explanation of it. Read it and gag.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/06/26/the_regime_refuses_to_enforce_the_border_and_tells_the_state_of_arizona_to_go_to_hell">http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/06/26/the_regime_refuses_to_enforce_the_border_and_tells_the_state_of_arizona_to_go_to_hell</a>Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-91326706544512183802012-06-24T23:15:00.000+08:002012-06-24T23:15:21.220+08:00The Man is an EmbarrassmentHere's the latest from America's Joke-in-Chief. It's called the "Obama Event Registry":<br />
<br />
"Got a birthday, anniversary, or wedding coming up?<br />
<br />
Let your friends know how important this election is to you—register with Obama 2012, and ask for a donation in lieu of a gift. It’s a great way to support the President on your big day. Plus, it’s a gift that we can all appreciate—and goes a lot further than a gravy bowl.<br />
<br />
Setting up and sharing your registry page is easy--so get started today."<br />
<br />
Here is a man who descries selfishness, has made attacks against it the chief cornerstone of his entire presidency, and yet he has the unmitigated gall to ask people, on one of the most important events of their lives, to forego receiving gifts from well-wishers and instead give the money to <em>him. </em>The man has absolutely no shame. What an embarrassment he is.<br />
<br />
What's next? Funerals? Donations in lieu of flowers? Well, the dead won't mind. If Eric Holder has his way, they'll all be able to vote for Obama anyway. Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-64328260009029642192012-06-23T12:52:00.002+08:002012-06-23T17:41:34.715+08:00What the Democratic Party Has BecomeRush had a couple of quote-worthy remarks yesterday. Here is the first: <br />
<br />
"We ask the question: 'Has the citizenry finally devolved to the point that they would rather not work and be taken care of?' That's what it boils down to. That's the overriding question that we ask, in fear, every time we start thinking about this next election. And Obama has clearly rolled the dice and said, 'Yeah. There's more people that want to sit around and be taken care of by me than there are people who want to assume responsibility for themselves.' That's what he's banking on."<br />
<br />
And Rush's second statement: "I don't think we've lost the country. I think we're close, but I don't think we've lost it."<br />
<br />
The election this year will detemine whether Rush is right or not.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
"Gay Activists Invited to WH 'Flip Off' Reagan." Last Friday, Obama held the first-ever queer pride reception at the White House. Some of the queers made a beeline to the portrait of Ronald Reagan and gave him their middle finger. Classy. But, obviously, people who wallow in a cesspool and keep their noses up somebody else's rear wouldn't know excellence when they see it. Don't forget, though; it's "progressive."<br />
<br />
**********<br />
And here is some more information that portrays the current Democratic Party. A few weeks ago, some kindergarten students were banned from singing Lee Greenwood's song, "God Bless the USA" at a graduation ceremony. The principal (a black woman) was afraid that other cultures might be "offended." Well, enough of the children's parents were offended by her blatant anti-Americanism that, a few days later, some of the children were taken to a nearby playground where they sang the song together. And were actually heckled by some adults.<br />
<br />
One of the protesters said, "The kids don’t even know what they’re singing. They got something you tell them to say. It’s ridiculous. It’s sad, sad, sad. You all are going to burn in hell. You all burn in hell. Shame on you. Shame on you." Another adult said--now notice this--"You Republicans go to a Republican area and do that. We don't want that here. Go to a Republican area." Ah. Singing a patriotic song is a "Republican" thing. Yes, it is....<br />
<br />
The "leadership" of the Democratic Party would, of course, deny that their party is "unpatriotic," but after years and years and years and years and years of bashing the United States, of telling people how unfair America has been, of criticizing and blasting the history of the country and its role in world affairs, how can anybody be stunned when the rank-and-file despise the country? And make no mistake about it--there are many, many people in the United States who hate America. All they have heard, all their lives, from people they respect and trust, is how bad America is, how wicked, immoral, racist, exploitative, and unfair the United States has been in its history (and at present); how could they NOT abhor it? They hate the rich because they've been told--by Democrats, academia, and the media, the "progressives"--that all the economic evils in the country are because the rich have exploited the poor, robbing, cheating, and swindling them. And so--back to paragraph one and Rush's statements--there are people who don't want to work in the first place, who don't want to assume responsibility for their own lives, and who Obama and the Democrats are happy to cater to by telling them they have a RIGHT to live off others because those others stole from them in the first place. Obama's recent immigration announcement, in effect allowing hundreds of thousands of people to break the law with no consequences, was nothing more than a politcal play to get votes. Barack Obama cares nothing, absolutely nothinig, for the United States; he's probably to be numbered among those who hate the country. Regardless of that, he is obsessed only with himself, only about his own re-election, and he is doing everything he can to build a coalition that will win him a second term. He has given up on the white working class, on decent, hard-working, mainstream America, the people who built the country and who made it the greatest nation in the world. He knows he isn't going to get many votes from them. So he's reaching out to every fringe group he can find--blacks, illegals, queers, potheads, Hollywood, welfare bums, left-wing environmental kooks--in hopes he can put together a big enough group to give him an electoral victory in November. <br />
<br />
And he's liable to do it.<br />
<br />
And if he does, Rush, the country will be lost for good. There will be no coming back. Well, given the way the demographics of the country are going--and who controls the education system--it's only a matter of time anyway.<br />
<br />
You've got to give the Democratic Party credit, though--they know how to win. They don't care if they destroy America in the process, but they do know how to win, gain, and keep political power. And, believe me, to the liberals, political power is what it is all about. Those fringe groups are people that they can <em>control. </em>And that's what they want. That's <em>all </em>they want.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
I have never been a proponent of democracy and, as I have noted on this blog before, neither were the men who founded America. I won't go into the reasons here; I've done that before. But I will present to you now another--perhaps the most powerful--argument against democracy. I can do it in two words: Nancy Pelosi. That any human being, as stupid, ridiculous, and witless as she is, could be elected to the House of Representatives is certainly one of the most damning indictments of any political system. And then....and then...the rest of the democratically-elected Democratic Party made her the Speaker of the House of Representatives--<em>two heart-beats away from being President of the United States!!!</em> That is a frightening thought, a scenario too horrifying to contemplate, a nightmare beyond even the most foreboding terrors of the ghoulish mind of a depressed, demonic Poe....<br />
<em> </em><br />
Nancy Pelosi. I rest my case against democracy. An utterly unanswerable argument.<br />
<br />
Oh. What's the best form of government, you ask? An aristocracy of virtue and merit. The people who rule must prove themselves worthy of it by their character. <br />
<br />
Let Jeremiah search Washington, D.C. with candles to see if he can find one such person...Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-35375458637546776922012-06-12T19:04:00.000+08:002012-06-12T19:06:27.685+08:00Is Obama a Socialist or a Fascist?In a relatively recent post, I indicated that Barack Obama is moving the United States towards fascism, not socialism. It is very popular, among conservatives, to refer to Obama as a "socialist," and some recent books have broadened the definition of "socialism" so wide as to include almost any intervention of government into the economy. I've never been comfortable with that because the classical definition of "socialism" is government ownership of the means of production, and Obama is not really pushing for that; he yearns more for government control of private production--leave business in the hands of private enterprise, but have the government order it what to do. That is fascism, not socialism. That's Mussolini and Hitler, not Stalin and Mao.<br />
<br />
I was pleased to note that, today, Thomas Sowell has published an article about this very thing, entitled "Socialist or Fascist?" He didn't come right out and call Obama a "fascist," (I didn't, either, though the implication is strong), but if you are interested in reading his article, here is the link: <br />
<br />
<a href="http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell061212.php3">http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell061212.php3</a><br />
<br />
Keep in mind that Thomas Sowell is a trained economist, so this is not the vision of an ignorant sap, but of an expert in the field.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-26804184583384178952012-06-10T09:37:00.000+08:002012-06-12T11:53:21.393+08:00Why Obama Can (Unbelievably) Still WinWell, what's been going on lately? I've been very busy with school, but finals are next week so it should slow down soon. I'm not exactly sure what I'm going to do during the summer holiday; I'd like to take a Chinese language course, but the one offered by the university here is more expensive than I want to pay. I might be able to get them to discount it some, but I don't know. I may do some traveling, and I certainly want to do some reading and writing. Regardless, I'm a little weary, so I'm looking forward to the break.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
As amazing at it might seem, Barack Obama still has a very good chance of being re-elected President of the United States this year. It really has very little to do with Mitt Romney, who actually is, so far, turning out to be a very level-headed and solid candidate. It is simply a matter of demographics. Obama and the Democrats have desperately been trying to get as many people as possible dependent upon government largesse, and then convince these people that the Republicans will steal their candy and leave them starving in the streets. Almost 50% of Americans are receiving some kind of government assistance now and almost the same number pay no income tax. Most of those piglets aren't going to turn away from the teat they suck on.<br />
<br />
But there is something deeper involved here. Self-government is, largely, a product of western European (basically English) Calvinism. The most stable self-governing countries in the world, for the most part, were former British colonies. Most other peoples simply have struggled with "self-government" because they have no history of it (the Japanese, Koreans, and non-communist Chinese are notable exceptions to this). As the United States has become more heterogeneous--especially rising black and Hispanic populations--the natural tendency of those ethnic groups is to drift towards dependence. Those two groups, especially, have no tradition of self-government, of independence, of making decisions on their own. They've been told all of their history, by some absolutist ruler, what to do, and thus it is easier for them simply to allow government to take care of them, rather than take the risk, responsibility, and consequences that freedom offers. This is not a racial argument, it is an historical one. The Latin American countries, for 200 years, have struggled with self-government because they were colonies of an absolutist Spain. Those Hispanics who are now gravitating to the United States have no idea how "self-government" works, so they lean on government. The Europeans spent only enough time in Africa to screw that continent up, not teach them self-government. America, of course, kept blacks subservient through slavery and Jim Crow laws--and liberals today want to continue that subservience--so they, too, look to government for support. A recent study which indicated that the birth of minority babies now exceeds that of Caucasian babies is a godsend to Democrats and a death knoll for freedom in the United States. What will happen in 20 years when all those people can vote? How can the private sector survive without a massive re-education program, extolling the virtues of the family, church, hard work, and individual responsibility--all of which are diametrically opposed to the very principles of government? And since the government controls the union-dominated education system, what are the chances of educational reform happening?<br />
<br />
There is also the "heathen" factor. Benjamin Franklin said, "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." The whole need for government is based upon man's unwillingness to control himself, and the more wicked man becomes, the more government he requires. This is not only history, it's common sense. As the left continues its unrelenting attacks on Christianity and everything decent, moral, and virtuous, it is no surprise that government continues to grow. <em>It is exactly what the secular left wants! </em> And yet, they have the unmitigated gall to call it "progressive." More wickedness is "progressive." Well, it is to some people, and those people will vote for Obama.<br />
<br />
Even Bill Clinton admitted that Mitt Romney's record at Bain Capital was "sterling" and that he was a well-qualified candidate. I never have especially liked Romney, but he is obviously far superior to the incredibly incompetent Obama. But that doesn't matter. In a democracy, superiority doesn't always win. In fact, because democracy caters to mediocrity, "superiority" is often frowned upon. Bottom line is, don't be surprised if Obama is re-elected.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
In one sense, it's really amazing that anybody would still support Obama. The job of President is way over his head, he was never qualified for the position in the first place, and thus it is absolutely no surprise that the country is floundering and directionless. Recently, he said “The private sector is doing fine. Where we’re seeing weaknesses in our economy, have to do with state and local government....cuts initiated by governors or mayors..." How anybody could be that stupid is...well, no, I realize that people can, indeed, be that stupid. He backed off the "private sector is doing fine" comment when everybody, including liberals, laughed at him. But to say that the economy is weak because of cuts in state and local government budgets is buffoonery of the highest order. But that is Barack Obama. He has no talent, no acumen, and he never did. He was a creation of media propaganda. The masses are easy to lead around by the nose; Adolf Hitler is a perfect example of that. He was democratically elected by the most educated people in the world at that time. As I have said before, that Obama has been a failure is no surprise to anyone who knows the first thing about history and economics. I knew he would fail before he ever got into office, simply because what he believes is wrong.<br />
<br />
But then, I guess it depends on what you mean by "failure." If more government power is considered "successful," then he has certainly been one of the most successful Presidents in American history. But if freedom, self-government, virtue, righteousness, industry, morality, and decency are the standards and criteria, then Obama has been exactly what could have been expected, because he and the Democratic Party don't believe in any of those things.Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5538125686302551204.post-40652698476859836042012-05-13T17:52:00.001+08:002012-05-13T18:28:19.811+08:00Current Events Ramblings, May 13Happy Mother's Day, mom! I love you. I wish I could be there to see you, though I am having an increasingly difficult time determining why anybody would want to live in the immoral cesspool liberals are turning the United States into. And I'm not the only one who has that sentiment....<br />
<br />**********<br />
Eduardo Saverin, the billionaire co-founder of Facebook, renounced his U.S. citizenship. It seems like he wants to get out of the country before his next tax bill is due. Apparently a lot of rich people have been fleeing America recently. Why not? Why stay there and give your hard-earned money to Barack Obama, who is going to turn around and give it to lazy bums who haven't worked for it? For that same reason, people have been leaving California in droves and now Jerry Brown finds the state is $16 billion in debt. A lot of wealthy Frenchmen are apparently planning on leaving France before their newly-elected Socialist President can tax them out of existence. (Incidentally, it's now being reported that Francois Hollande owns three homes on the Riviera and is immensely wealthy. Not only are most socialists tyrants, they are also hypocrites. Well, maybe he'll tax himself into oblivion--but don't bet on it.) Liberals seem to think that wealthy people are just dying to give their money to government and thus will sit around and wait for their taxes to be raised so that liberals can waste more of it on welfare programs that, for 80 years, not only haven't worked, but have been socially disastrous. But the rich didn't get rich by allowing themselves to be taxed out the wazoo by wasteful government. Tax receipts will not increase if Obama is successful in raising tax rates. He'll simply kill off initiative and prolong the recession. Recovery can only come through business investment and that will only happen under an administration that encourages entrepreneurial activity, not threatens to punish it with higher taxes and more regulations. Please study the 1930s to see why FDR failed to get America out of the Great Depression. Somebody needs to study it; Barack Obama obviously isn't.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
Albert Einstein once said, "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." More evidence of that, from the AP: "In a world weary of war and economic crises, and concerned about global climate change, the consensus is that President Obama has not lived up the the lofty expectations that surrounded his 2008 election and Nobel Peace Prize a year later." Awww, the world is disappointed in their "Messiah." But this simply shows the boundless ignorance--yea, stupidity--of humans. There is absolutely no way that Barack Obama could succeed as President. His policies are a direct violation of economic, historic, and moral law. Liberalism is doomed to fail wherever it is tried because it is simply wrong, it contradicts eternal truth. "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," and "the fear of the Lord" is the very thing liberalism despises more than anything else. And yet the world is "disappointed" that Obama has failed. There is no excuse for such ignorance and I don't feel one bit sorry for those who placed so much hope in Obama. They have the light in their hands--the Bible and the testimony of thousands of years of human history--but they refuse to look at it. They deserve what they get.<br />
<br />
**********<br />
Just a little anecdote confirming what I just wrote. The following was said by Roman orator and statesman Cicero in 55 B.C.: "The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."<br />
<br />
He said that 28 years before the fall of the Roman Republic. Anyone willing to learn from history?<br />
<br />Mark K. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13049998079571823584noreply@blogger.com