Recently, May 9th 2010, the President gave a commencement speech to the 2010 graduating class of Hampton University. In this speech he has spread quite a few falsehoods that are quite scary, especially coming from the office of the the President of the United States. This has no longer become a conspiracy to completely change the direction of America, it has become an agenda to forever alter the minds of America. Here are a few excerpts from the recent speech:
"So education is what has always allowed us to meet the challenges of a changing world. And Hampton, that has never been more true than it is today. This class is graduating at a time of great difficulty for America and for the world. You're entering a job market, in an era of heightened international competition, with an economy that's still rebounding from the worst crisis since the Great Depression. You're accepting your degrees as America still wages two wars -- wars that many in your generation have been fighting."
Really? Education is what has allowed us to meet challenges? Where did God go? Was it Jesus who said that we need to educate ourselves for our future? Or did He comfort us by saying, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the earth." In the book of Acts the disciples confounded the Pharisees and other leaders with their wisdom, which might I add, came from God, not some institution of "higher learning." These were simple fishermen with no formal education and they turned the world upside down in THEIR generation because they possessed some great education? Absolutely not, it was because they had been with God.
If knowledge is truly power then why do we need God? The remarks of this President and of many others in our nation are very similar. We need a greater emphasis on education. The REAL truth is we need a greater emphasis on who God is and what He has done for us! We have over the course of time perverted what our nation was founded on. Many of the first colleges in the United States were started as places to train young men to be pastors. Both Princeton and Harvard were started with this as the goal and America benefited from this directly. People were taught in school how to seek God and obey God, not seek the government and what it can do for you. Taking prayer and even God out of our schools, what has THAT taught us? If education is really so important Mr. President, let us educate ourselves and what has happened to our country since these things were taken out of our schools.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
The eroding of freedoms
How come in 1961 they had this figured out and then almost 50 years later we seemed to have forgotten our freedoms?
Thursday, April 22, 2010
You gotta be kidding me
Just in case paying taxes was not bad enough the US government has stooped to the level of passing the hat around for donations. They have provided a link for anyone to submit a payment to pay down the debt. Why? Because they insist on getting involved in every aspect of our lives. In my house, if my income goes down my spending goes down. I eat out less, I buy generic items, and of course we have less, or even no, out of town vacations. What the government is proposing through this is that they realize their debt is high and since they cannot be responsible to balance the budget and even pay back the deficit they want us to help them out. It is exactly like giving a drug addict more drugs instead of giving them what they really need.
Everyone in the United States realizes our governments debt problem. At last count we are $14 TRILLION in debt. Folks, that means we OWE that much money, and yet the governments answer in this depression ridden economy is two-fold. One, increase spending to accommodate others and give them services and claim it is a "right". Seriously, will that reduce the deficit? No it will not, but people can at least feel good about themselves.
Second, since the private sector is having their taxes increased to pay for the governments whims, they are having a difficult time creating jobs. So, to make things look good on paper our wonderful government came up with an ingenious plan of hiring these people themselves. Now the President claims that unemployment has declined and we are on a way to a steady recovery. So let me get this straight, the pool of the people in the private sector who pay for the salaries of the government employees has decreased and thus less tax money is coming in, and them the government increases THEIR payroll with less money coming in. How does THAT work as a recovery? We are just digging the hole deeper and one day we will not be able to get out no matter what we do.
If you would like to donate to the government beyond what you have already "donated" due to taxes please click here.
Everyone in the United States realizes our governments debt problem. At last count we are $14 TRILLION in debt. Folks, that means we OWE that much money, and yet the governments answer in this depression ridden economy is two-fold. One, increase spending to accommodate others and give them services and claim it is a "right". Seriously, will that reduce the deficit? No it will not, but people can at least feel good about themselves.
Second, since the private sector is having their taxes increased to pay for the governments whims, they are having a difficult time creating jobs. So, to make things look good on paper our wonderful government came up with an ingenious plan of hiring these people themselves. Now the President claims that unemployment has declined and we are on a way to a steady recovery. So let me get this straight, the pool of the people in the private sector who pay for the salaries of the government employees has decreased and thus less tax money is coming in, and them the government increases THEIR payroll with less money coming in. How does THAT work as a recovery? We are just digging the hole deeper and one day we will not be able to get out no matter what we do.
If you would like to donate to the government beyond what you have already "donated" due to taxes please click here.
Friday, April 16, 2010
No, I am not heartless
Recently in West Virginia there was a tragic accident in a coal mine. The initial explosion killed 25 miners and trapped 4 others. After days of trying to reach the stranded, time ran out and the remaining 4 miners passed away as well. This was a horrible accident no matter what way you look at it. These brave men gave their life in the line of their work. Truly a heart wrenching tragedy.
On Monday however President Obama issued a proclamation stating that all federal buildings in West Virginia needed to place their US flags at half mast. Even in the city I live in the firehouses have presented their flags at half mast to observe the President's proclamation. Not to sound heartless but why are we doing this? What is the criteria for placing these flags at half mast? None of those who perished were federal employees, so why is this treatment given to this group of people? In 2006 during the 4th of July weekend forty-eight people fatally died in car accidents in the state of Florida. That is a very large number of people who died in accidents, and yet there was not a time given for the lowering of the flags.
Where is the line drawn then? Is it because it was an accident in a coal mine? Is it because of the mass media coverage that was given to this? I understand the President is trying to do the right thing here, but he is using this tragedy to his advantage. He ordered the flags lowered and his next move will be to look into this situation to not allow a tragedy like this again to happen. Thus, again, intervening into the private sector and trying to regulate these companies into the ground, no pun intended.
But something more is at the heart of what our President is doing in this situation. The President, who pay the way did not even place his hand over his heart when the flag was being sung about during his run for office, is leaving prayer out of all of this. Why not say that we need to have some days of prayer for these families? Why not leave our patriotism and flag symbolism out of this and return our country to what has brought us the greatness we bask in today? Was it the lowering of the flag and remembering those who had given their life that made us a great nation or was it people who humbled themselves and prayed to God who made this country great? I think the answer is obvious, we have lost our way because we have lost His ways in our lives!! I pray we will return to God and not get so wrapped up in our country and flag.
On Monday however President Obama issued a proclamation stating that all federal buildings in West Virginia needed to place their US flags at half mast. Even in the city I live in the firehouses have presented their flags at half mast to observe the President's proclamation. Not to sound heartless but why are we doing this? What is the criteria for placing these flags at half mast? None of those who perished were federal employees, so why is this treatment given to this group of people? In 2006 during the 4th of July weekend forty-eight people fatally died in car accidents in the state of Florida. That is a very large number of people who died in accidents, and yet there was not a time given for the lowering of the flags.
Where is the line drawn then? Is it because it was an accident in a coal mine? Is it because of the mass media coverage that was given to this? I understand the President is trying to do the right thing here, but he is using this tragedy to his advantage. He ordered the flags lowered and his next move will be to look into this situation to not allow a tragedy like this again to happen. Thus, again, intervening into the private sector and trying to regulate these companies into the ground, no pun intended.
But something more is at the heart of what our President is doing in this situation. The President, who pay the way did not even place his hand over his heart when the flag was being sung about during his run for office, is leaving prayer out of all of this. Why not say that we need to have some days of prayer for these families? Why not leave our patriotism and flag symbolism out of this and return our country to what has brought us the greatness we bask in today? Was it the lowering of the flag and remembering those who had given their life that made us a great nation or was it people who humbled themselves and prayed to God who made this country great? I think the answer is obvious, we have lost our way because we have lost His ways in our lives!! I pray we will return to God and not get so wrapped up in our country and flag.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Most alarming
Vice President Joe Biden was on Meet the Press this past Sunday. The topic came up on very quickly about the hot topic in our country today, how to deal with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Here is part of the transcript between Mr. Gregory (the host) and our own Vice President.
MR. GREGORY: Let me turn to some of the issues that you and, of course, the rest of the administration are dealing with. Let me start with terrorism and the controversy surrounding the proposed trial of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The attorney general ordered a civilian trial to be held in New York. Now it appears that that decision has been withdrawn. It's unclear what's going to happen. The reason for a civilian trial as given by the president and others was a question of perception, that it was very important that the rest of the world see that we'd treated Khalid Sheikh Mohammed fairly. But hasn't the administration already made the decision that even if he were to be acquitted that he would never be released?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: Look, there's no doubt that he would not be acquitted; the facts we have are overwhelming. We're absolutely confident he will be convicted in whatever for he is tried. The attorney general made the decision that he should be tried in the court of the greatest jurisdiction, which was in New York City. There has been significant response coming from the city and congressional delegation requiring the president to have to take a look at this again. That decision as to where he's going to be tried and exactly when is something that is being considered right now. But he will be tried...
MR. GREGORY: But Mr. Vice President...
VICE PRES. BIDEN: ...he will be held accountable.
MR. GREGORY: But wait a minute, you--but the question I asked is whether a decision has already been made that even if he were to be acquitted, he would never be released.
VICE PRES. BIDEN: David, I'm not going to speculate on that. He will not be acquitted; he will be found guilty. He will be in jail, and he will stay there.
MR. GREGORY: But here is what the attorney general said last November on this question of what would happen if he were acquitted. This is what he said:
(Videotape, November 18, 2009)
ATT. GEN. ERIC HOLDER: If there were the possibility that a trial was not successful, that would not mean that that person would be released into, into our country. That, that would--that is not a possibility.
(End videotape)
MR. GREGORY: It's rather clear what he's saying: If he were acquitted, he's not going to be released in America. I can't imagine the United States is going to release him somewhere in the Middle East or elsewhere around the world. So isn't the conclusion that he's going to stay a prisoner of the United States. And, if that's the case, despite your confidence in his conviction...
VICE PRES. BIDEN: No, it's not the case.
MR. GREGORY: ...despite your confidence in conviction, what is--where is the fairness--the perception of fairness in our system?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: David, he--the, the--what the attorney general said, he would not be released into America, that is a fact. But we're not even going to have to get to that place. I'm not going to speculate on what would happen to him if, in fact, he were acquitted. I assure you, I assure you, acquitted or not, he will not be walking the streets of the United States of America. He will not be acquitted.
MR. GREGORY: By such statements, are you prejudging the trial, and doesn't that undercut the, the goal of fairness by the rest of the world in our judicial system?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: No, look, I'm part of a team that heads up the prosecutorial apparatus of the federal government. We are confident in our case.
MR. GREGORY: Are you ruling out a military commission?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: Name me a prosecutor--I am not ruling anything out. What I am telling you is he will be held accountable under the law. We have improved military commissions considerably. The fact of the matter is, the only reason there's any discussion going on about whether or not the trial will take place in an Article III court in the court of jurisdiction with the broadest jurisdiction, New York City, is because of the response of the Congress requiring the president to have to consider the consequences of failing to heed their, their, basically, their, their concerns. So this is a discussion taking place. The decision will be made by the president. He will be held accountable. A military tribunal is available. It is the less preferable way to go. But one way or another, he will be held accountable.
First of all, this man was caught in an act of war against the US, and thus needs to come before a military tribunal and answer for his alleged actions, not go to some sort of civilian trial in NYC.
Second, the Vice President of our country does not need to come on national television and no fewer than five times undo everything our 6th Amendment stands for. If this person is headed to civilian court he is always INNOCENT before proven guilty. Our very own Vice President is going against the very Bill of Rights that help make our country great saying things like, "He will not be acquitted; he will be found guilty." and "...he will be held accountable. He will be in jail, and he will stay there."
The Vice President is confronted on the show about the things he says, about the possibility of him prejudging the trial. HIs answer, "No, look, I'm part of a team that heads up the prosecutorial apparatus of the federal government. We are confident in our case." Well Mr. Vice President I am sure 90% of our country was sure OJ Simpson was guilty also, and we all know what happened in that trial.
Bottom line is what are you upholding? Are you upholding the Bill of Rights, the government, or heaven forbid the President who gave him this part on this so called "team."
It seems very clear that in the Vice President's eyes this man IS guilty. But as someone who is very well versed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, since he is a lawyer, I am ashamed that he forgets to abide by our highest law in the land. Mr. Vice President you are NOT above the law, and when you say these things you completely undermine the foundation of the United States of America. You are innocent until proven guilty, if we change that, America becomes no better than any other country.
MR. GREGORY: Let me turn to some of the issues that you and, of course, the rest of the administration are dealing with. Let me start with terrorism and the controversy surrounding the proposed trial of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The attorney general ordered a civilian trial to be held in New York. Now it appears that that decision has been withdrawn. It's unclear what's going to happen. The reason for a civilian trial as given by the president and others was a question of perception, that it was very important that the rest of the world see that we'd treated Khalid Sheikh Mohammed fairly. But hasn't the administration already made the decision that even if he were to be acquitted that he would never be released?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: Look, there's no doubt that he would not be acquitted; the facts we have are overwhelming. We're absolutely confident he will be convicted in whatever for he is tried. The attorney general made the decision that he should be tried in the court of the greatest jurisdiction, which was in New York City. There has been significant response coming from the city and congressional delegation requiring the president to have to take a look at this again. That decision as to where he's going to be tried and exactly when is something that is being considered right now. But he will be tried...
MR. GREGORY: But Mr. Vice President...
VICE PRES. BIDEN: ...he will be held accountable.
MR. GREGORY: But wait a minute, you--but the question I asked is whether a decision has already been made that even if he were to be acquitted, he would never be released.
VICE PRES. BIDEN: David, I'm not going to speculate on that. He will not be acquitted; he will be found guilty. He will be in jail, and he will stay there.
MR. GREGORY: But here is what the attorney general said last November on this question of what would happen if he were acquitted. This is what he said:
(Videotape, November 18, 2009)
ATT. GEN. ERIC HOLDER: If there were the possibility that a trial was not successful, that would not mean that that person would be released into, into our country. That, that would--that is not a possibility.
(End videotape)
MR. GREGORY: It's rather clear what he's saying: If he were acquitted, he's not going to be released in America. I can't imagine the United States is going to release him somewhere in the Middle East or elsewhere around the world. So isn't the conclusion that he's going to stay a prisoner of the United States. And, if that's the case, despite your confidence in his conviction...
VICE PRES. BIDEN: No, it's not the case.
MR. GREGORY: ...despite your confidence in conviction, what is--where is the fairness--the perception of fairness in our system?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: David, he--the, the--what the attorney general said, he would not be released into America, that is a fact. But we're not even going to have to get to that place. I'm not going to speculate on what would happen to him if, in fact, he were acquitted. I assure you, I assure you, acquitted or not, he will not be walking the streets of the United States of America. He will not be acquitted.
MR. GREGORY: By such statements, are you prejudging the trial, and doesn't that undercut the, the goal of fairness by the rest of the world in our judicial system?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: No, look, I'm part of a team that heads up the prosecutorial apparatus of the federal government. We are confident in our case.
MR. GREGORY: Are you ruling out a military commission?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: Name me a prosecutor--I am not ruling anything out. What I am telling you is he will be held accountable under the law. We have improved military commissions considerably. The fact of the matter is, the only reason there's any discussion going on about whether or not the trial will take place in an Article III court in the court of jurisdiction with the broadest jurisdiction, New York City, is because of the response of the Congress requiring the president to have to consider the consequences of failing to heed their, their, basically, their, their concerns. So this is a discussion taking place. The decision will be made by the president. He will be held accountable. A military tribunal is available. It is the less preferable way to go. But one way or another, he will be held accountable.
First of all, this man was caught in an act of war against the US, and thus needs to come before a military tribunal and answer for his alleged actions, not go to some sort of civilian trial in NYC.
Second, the Vice President of our country does not need to come on national television and no fewer than five times undo everything our 6th Amendment stands for. If this person is headed to civilian court he is always INNOCENT before proven guilty. Our very own Vice President is going against the very Bill of Rights that help make our country great saying things like, "He will not be acquitted; he will be found guilty." and "...he will be held accountable. He will be in jail, and he will stay there."
The Vice President is confronted on the show about the things he says, about the possibility of him prejudging the trial. HIs answer, "No, look, I'm part of a team that heads up the prosecutorial apparatus of the federal government. We are confident in our case." Well Mr. Vice President I am sure 90% of our country was sure OJ Simpson was guilty also, and we all know what happened in that trial.
Bottom line is what are you upholding? Are you upholding the Bill of Rights, the government, or heaven forbid the President who gave him this part on this so called "team."
It seems very clear that in the Vice President's eyes this man IS guilty. But as someone who is very well versed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, since he is a lawyer, I am ashamed that he forgets to abide by our highest law in the land. Mr. Vice President you are NOT above the law, and when you say these things you completely undermine the foundation of the United States of America. You are innocent until proven guilty, if we change that, America becomes no better than any other country.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Money talks
You need to know what truly motivates many in our Congress. Is it their people (constituents), power, or even principles? The answer is easily MONEY!
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) on Saturday chose to vote yes for the healthcare bill in the Senate soon after she was promised $100 million for her state. According to her however the figure is more like $300 million in FEDERAL funds. She "sold" her vote. Is this the kind of people we want running our government. In arguable the most important piece of legislation in our generation at least one Senator cannot vote without money changing hands. What a sad state of our Congress.
In other areas I can understand these kinds of tactics displayed, but when something is so vitally important to our nation, which everyone on both side of this issue agree, why do we have to auction our vote and sell it to the highest bidder?
If this bill is argued in the Senate and more compromises and "auctions" made for votes it will do nothing but add to the final price tag. These are things never mentioned in the mainstream media.
As of now the bill is estimated to reach into the hundreds of BILLIONS and yesterday $300 million was added to the final price tag, even though on paper it is not there.
Is this the sign of our times, or just politics? Either way it is wrong. People who are motivated by money are in leadership. Is socialism not far behind? What happened to principle driven people? President Obama promised to bring CHANGE to Washington, it sure seems like the same thing all over again, just a higher price tag!!
Friday, November 20, 2009
Is your future safe?
Yesterday Attorney General Eric Holder went before the Senate Judiciary Committee to defend the decision of President Obama to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed(KSM) in a civilian court in New York City. You should know that there are many problems associated with this.
First, in a civilian court people are innocent until proven guilty, and yet the Attorney General himself has implied that these people are guilty even before the trial when he stated, "Failure is not an option."
Second, the victims of 9/11 were those in the towers, plane, and the Pentagon. We do not need another round of victims to pop up here. KSM is living for this moment so he can once again propagate his cause, this time with an open forum in the courtroom. It does disjustice to those who gave their life that day in the attack to let this one man relive his "triumph" through our court system.
Third, a civilian trial is a trial of peers, for this is truly the American way. If his peers are honestly chosen then the prosecution has no chance of winning a conviction. For his true peers will wholeheartedly agree with his fundamental jihadist ways. We endanger not only our way of life but our way of freedom and the court system when we open this up to a civilian court.
Fourth, our current President has tried to down play this "War on Terror." He refuses to call it a war. If this current President had been living in 1941 what would he have called the attack on Pearl Harbor? Are not a direct attack on us a direct act of war? We are at war with an unseen enemy. One that does not wear a traditional uniform, but clothes themselves in a robe of violent ideology and dons these clothes against all who oppose them.
Fifth, why is this even brought to a civilian trial? Why are they brought before a system who tries murders, not soldiers who kill innocent lives? There are a lot of security issues at stake here. What a tragedy that in the effort to bring ONE person to justice many truly innocent lives are put at risk.
Our future generations are constantly being jeopardized by ONE man, and no, this man is not KSM. It is the person who promised to defend us from all harm. Opening a civilian case for a military act? Is this really protecting us, or trying to shift the climate of America to a more tolerant view against those who try to destroy us. Is our future truly safe when these kinds of actions are carried out? I think you know the answer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)