Granny with a Pitchfork

Under Informed is Uninformed

2010-09-17T19:37:00.000-07:00

For those who are paying attention, it is becoming clearer by the day that the mess we’re in can only be solved by a return to our founding principles. Removing the foundation from an edifice, no matter how high or how wide the edifice, will always result in its destruction. Since the days of Woodrow Wilson and perhaps before, America has raised generations of atheistic, agnostic, narcissistic, hedonistic, pampered infants. Now we are facing the alumni of the Karl Marx/Benjamin Spock school of ideology.

Unfortunately, with growing frequency, the very foundations for which our forefathers bled and died are crumbling in a heap of liberal, social, watered-down half-truths. The emergent church, the World Council of Churches, with its Communist underpinning, Rick Warren with his heretical teaching, and prosperity preachers who bask in the glow of their own ill-gotten gains, all have contributed to a "gospel" that bears no resemblance at all to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

At first blush, I agreed with nearly all of what the following article had to say. Then I re-read it through the prism of today’s feel-good, Kumbaya church, and highlighted what I consider to be well worth considering:

"TAKING AMERICA BACK 2010

Pastors taken to task for political apathy
'What we have in America is a preacher problem'

Posted: September 16, 2010

6:50 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

MIAMI – America has gone 'from one nation under God to a nation at war with God,' said Rick Scarborough, president of Vision America, at WND's 'Taking America Back Conference.' And who's to blame?

According to a pair of speakers at the Miami confab, one of most significant answers is also one the most uncomfortable for Christians.

'As the church goes, so goes the nation; as the pastor goes, so goes the church.' Scarborough said, 'What we have in America is a preacher problem.'

Scarborough, himself a former Southern Baptist minister, told the audience his story of recognizing the need for pastors to snap out of political complacency and get involved in the cultural war for the soul of the nation.

He had attended a sexual education presentation at his daughter's high school in the 1990s, only to discover a message of sexual license and perversity that shocked him. When he brought a transcript of the presentation to his church, the building was filled with people equally stunned.

Shortly thereafter, Scarborough explained at 'Taking America Back,' he began to free his congregation from excessive church responsibilities to take up civic duties. Members of his church were elected to the school board and city council and began to reassert Christian values in the public arena.

"We just got the people in the churches to stand up and do what they ought to be doing," Scarborough said.

The story is at the heart of his founding of Vision America, but he warns that the people will not rise up and get involved unless the pastors lose their fear and apathy toward political involvement.

Doug Giles, radio host and father of the undercover video journalist Hannah Giles, brought the same challenge, but with a much sharper tone.

'Somebody who waffles, quiet as a church mouse,' Giles said, 'that cat is about as useless as a pitch pipe to Yoko Ono.'

Giles further charged, referring to the heated politics surrounding the tea party movement and the 2010 election, 'If a pastor is not part of this crucial societal throwdown … this pastor is Dr. Evil and part of the problem.'

Giles listed 10 reasons pastors don't get involved in politics and refuted every one.

He warned pastors against thinking of their duties as primarily pious and spiritual: 'Your religious liberties are disappearing like a pack of smokes at an AA clinic.'

He warned pastors not to fear losing their 501(c)3 tax-exempt status: 'You're going to compromise the gospel because you don't want to pay taxes on hot dogs? Wow."'

Pulling no punches, Giles also slammed big-church pastors who are afraid speaking out on issues of liberty and morality for fear of losing their lucrative positions: 'Christendom has its shares of money-loving hookers … bowing to cash instead of convictions.'

'Saul Alinsky loves those pastors who don't get involved politically,' Giles concluded, 'and so does the guy written about in the dedication to his book ['Rules for Radicals']. Who was that again? Oh yeah, Lucifer.'

Scarborough argued that the culture wars won't be won unless both pastors and pew-sitters are willing to roll their sleeves up and get their hands dirty in the fight:

'The problem with us Christians today is that we're so afraid of offending our little ears that we've dug holes and buried our heads in them,' he said. 'The holes that the 'gays' came out of, the church went in, and it's not going to change until the church comes out.'

He wrapped up his speech with a challenge:

'If the church doesn't awaken now, if the tea party and everybody involved doesn't understand that God is at the heart of it all, then we lose,' he said.

The crowd then erupted in standing ovation with his final words, "It's now or never. It's time for the church to stand.'"

Drew Zahn makes some excellent points, and who am I to argue with a real writer? But I am not here to challenge his ability or his wisdom. I am simply coming at the matter from a different perspective. Consider this: today’s emergent church couldn’t possibly be any more involved in politics than it already is. As a tool of the far left, or Satan, if you will, it has been inexorably dragging Christians and non-Christians alike down the path to perdition. I believe this article speaks not to preachers as a whole, but to independent, fundamental, evangelical preachers who still preach the whole Gospel of Christ. Sadly, they’re becoming fewer and farther between in our world of hope and change.

Love

Granny

Is He Our Keeper?

2010-09-12T14:24:00.000-07:00

He said it again. It is probably the only Bible passage he knows, and he doesn’t know it all that well. Or maybe he does. I heard a brief clip on the radio yesterday. It was part of his radio address, the usual canned bleeding heart drivel punctuated it with, “On this day, we also honor those who died so that others might live: the firefighters and first responders who climbed the stairs of two burning towers; the passengers who stormed a cockpit; and the men and women who have, in the years since, borne the uniform of this country and given their lives so that our children could grow up in a safer world. In acts of courage and decency, they defended a simple precept: I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper.” (Emphasis mine)

How many times has a variation of this come out of his mouth in the last three years or so? Not quite as many as "Let me be clear." What comes after trillion?

Genesis 4:9 is probably one of the most misunderstood verses in the Bible. After Cain killed his brother, the Lord asked him the whereabouts of Abel. Cain answered, “I know not. Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Our president has taken this and run with it. In his drive to dictate every aspect of our lives from womb to tomb, perhaps this is exactly what he does mean: Orwellian control.

I always think of a zookeeper when I hear the word keeper. A zookeeper certainly has to have complete control over his charges: lions, tigers and bears. Not to mention reptiles, monkeys and rhinos. But maybe that’s just me. However, Bill Wink of An Inconvenient Blog fame had this to say about the phrase in 2008—way before the election:

“My Brother’s Keeper

I am not my brother’s keeper

And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

So how can I make this statement: I am not my brother’s keeper, a statement that goes against the preaching of mortal men?

When GOD inquired of Cain regarding the whereabouts of his brother Able in Genesis 4:9 The LORD GOD did not answer Cain directly when he asked: Am I my brother's keeper? God did not say yes you are or, no you are not.

So just what did GOD say?

HE said: What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto ME from the ground.

And from that many interpret an answer rather than heeding GOD’s response which in the first part was a question not an answer. However, in the second part of the phrase, if there is an answer, it is the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue that GOD set down for man: “Thou shalt not kill”. Then paraphrasing; What hast thou done? Thou shalt not kill they brother whose blood crieth unto ME from the ground.

An ulterior motive – control

It seems though, that in religion and for other convenient purposes, interpretation is a matter of preconceived answers to the questions.

Many want the answer to the question; “Am I my brother’s keeper?” to be yes; so in the scriptures they find the LORD’s answer affirms their preconceived yes.

I, on the other hand, do not. I do not because I do not wish to control you and I don’t accept that GOD wants me to control you either.

Keeper

The word “keeper” simply by definition allows for a lot of latitude to those who wish to be your “keeper” or by definition protector, custodian or guardian.

Will I defend or protect or help my sibling, child, wife, mother, father, relative or friend? To the extent they need me, yes, of course.

I will be there for you when you need me but I will not be your “keeper” as others want to be.

How this applies to the subverting of America

Collectivists (socialists) pass laws making me responsible for you.

Being someone’s “keeper” is a form of collectivism. Communitarians want to be your “keeper”. Socialists want to be your “keeper”. Liberals want to be your “keeper”. Only individualists want you to be responsible for you and for you to allow others the same in return.

Individualists will not pass laws requiring you to wear your seat belt, however, they will tell you what could happen to you if you don’t. But the actual hooking-up of the seat belt is your responsibility. Individualists will not pass laws requiring you to wear your safety helmet if you are an adult. Individualists will not pass laws telling you what to eat. Individualists will protect your individual rights. But those who subscribe to the philosophy of being their brother’s keeper will address all of these issues and make them a law and punish you like a child if you don’t abide.

The Ten Commandments

When I read the story of Moses and the Ten Commandments the Commandments were not directed at only a select few who were supposed to collectively enforce the Will of GOD on the remaining Israelites. But rather the Commandments were set down as Divine Guidance for each and every individual.

So just where in the Ten Commandments does it tell me I must be my brother’ keeper? No where. But there is a Commandment that tells us to let our brother live in peace.

The last Commandment states:

'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, not his manservant, not his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.' Ex. 20:17.

So what is 'any thing that is thy neighbor’s'? It is the rest of his property of course and his property goes beyond anything in a physical sense. His property includes those unalienable rights bestowed on him by his CREATOR and that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Therefore, I am not my brother’s keeper.”

Bill Wink © March 1, 2008

That about sums it up for me. Maybe Obama is right, after all. He is certainly making great strides toward achieving keeper status. His brother George should thank God Barack Obama is not his keeper.

Love

Granny

He’s Not My President

2010-08-30T18:44:00.000-07:00

Here are two direct quotes from somebody’s president in an interview on the NBC Nightly News.

“We’ve got a lot more work to do,” he said. “But the fact is because of the sturdiness and swiftness of the response, there’s a lot less oil hitting these shores and these beaches than anybody would have anticipated given the volume that was coming out of the BP oil well.” (Emphasis mine)

How out of touch with reality can he possibly get? Is there one person with half a brain out here who can believe even one word that comes out of his mouth? Oh yes, Robert Gibbs. No, come to think of it, Gibbs doesn’t have half a brain.

Here’s a piece from Mother Jones (!)

And this is a sort of devil’s advocate, apologetic article by Alex Wagner. See paragraph 3 and then see if you can find even one similar excuse for Bush’s response to Katrina. On second thought, don’t bother.

This next quote made me want to hurt someone. But I went out and pruned my roses instead, telling myself to consider the source:

“It’s not surprising that somebody like a Mr. Beck is able to stir up a certain portion of the country. That's been true throughout our history,” he said. But “what I’m focused on is making sure that the decisions we’re making now are going to be be not good for the nightly news, not good even necessarily for the next election, but are good for the next generation.” (Emphasis mine)

Barack Obama cares nothing for the United States of America. We the People have been ignored, ridiculed, snubbed, pushed aside, and lied to for as long as this uppity, arrogant puke has been wearing a suit. HE MUST BE STOPPED. Pray with me. Pray with your friends, your neighbors, your coworkers, your children, your parents. Pray for our republic and for the November election. Pray that the God who has been ignored, ridiculed, snubbed, pushed aside and lied to will hear “this portion of the country” and turn things around. I very much fear that if our cup of iniquity is indeed full, and God doesn’t hear—and why should He?—our children and grandchildren may grow up and die under an oppression so heinous, so absolute, that The United States Constitution will be just a footnote in the history books.

Love

Granny

Shame on Me

2010-08-23T11:35:00.000-07:00

Apparently I broken one of the laws of blogging. If I have stepped on anybody's toes, or face, or neck, I apologize from the bottom of my hard little heart. Here is my chastisement and my response for those of you who don't keep up with the handful of comments to my posts:

"Granny?
Do you ever read comments from folks who read your stuff?
I suspect not.
August 18, 2010 7:50 PM

One of the Moons said...

(Name omitted)
Yes, I read every comment. I'm not sure what your problem is today. Perhaps you're having a bad hair day. If so, I can relate. If I don't respond to every comment left on my blog it's not because I'm indifferent. Comments are the lifeblood of blogs and I apperciate every single one of them.

I happens that I have three blogs that I am challenged to keep up with and, due to work, trying to get through the summer with no rain, getting up every morning and having to face what is going in Washington, wondering what the next outrage will be, and trying to be more involved in church, seeing my husband through decision making regarding his prostate cancer, and a thousnad other things that make up my day (and no doubt everyone's day, with variations) I don't always keep up the way I should. But please know this: I'm every bit as concerned as the next blogger about what is happening to America. Maybe I'm not running my blog the way others would have me do. I'll try to respond to the comments more often. I am assuming your comment was loving criticism, since we're all in this together. Or, maybe it was roundabout way of telling me that I don't quite measure up to the other million or so bloggers.

I once told Old NFO that my traffic is about on a par with my shoe size. It remains so now. But that doesn't prevent me from researching when I should be sleeping, from signing petitions, handing out literature, and praying for a cure of the cancer that is spreading like wildfire across this great land of ours, and continuing to try to speak the truth on Granny with a Pitchfork.
I'm sorry you don't want to associate with me anymore. May God go with you.

Love
Granny
August 23, 2010 11:04 AM"

I realize I don't always get the comments posted in timely manner and you have all been very patient with me.
If I am abusing any other area of protocol please let me know and I will try to remedy it before I get gutshot again. I thought we were all in this together.

Love

Granny

It Is What It Is

2010-08-15T14:01:00.000-07:00

“Muslim American clerics have spoken out against terror and extremism, reaffirming that Islam teaches that one must save human life, not take it.” President Obama in a speech given at the iftar dinner at the White House

No matter how you slice this piece of camel dung, it still means one thing: they are rubbing our noses in it. They can stand around and say the mosque will be a gesture of brotherly love and a symbol of the Group Hug and a reaching out to all people, and more drivel, equally meaningless. The fact is, the presence of a mosque on that sacred ground will say, in our president’s favorite words, “We won.”

I don’t know about you but I remember how I felt on September 11th, 2001. And I’ll be willing to bet you remember down to the smallest detail where you were, what you were doing and how you felt. It’s etched in the minds of all patriots, which, incidentally, do not include all Americans. Alec Baldwin, Timothy Robbins, Michael Moore, Pelosi, Reid and most of congress come to mind. And let’s not forget the Muslim currently desecrating the oval office, when he’s not on vacation. But I’m betting the majority of us made a vow that what happened on that day would never happen again on our soil.

My friends, it is happening. While we have been sleeping, complacent and confident in our security, the enemy has been chipping away at the foundation our forefathers fought and died for. Islam is not “over there” anymore. It is in our towns, in our schools, in our places of business, and in New York City. Are they all bloodthirsty terrorists intent on beheading us at the slightest provocation? No. Are they followers of a religion of violence? Yes.

Here are the first three paragraphs Chapter 7: Islam is a Peaceful Religion, by Timothy W. Dunkin's Ten Myths About Islam:

“From a sociological standpoint, this is perhaps THE most widely propagated myth about Islam. For decades, Islam has put across to Westerners a peaceful, loving front. This false view of Islam has been spread all the more aggressively since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Muslim leaders in the United States and other Western nations had to push their efforts at hiding Islam's true nature into high gear, trying to counterbalance the impact that was made by the sight of Palestinians and other Muslims (some in this very nation) cheering and celebrating the destruction of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Unfortunately, many theologically liberal and compromising people in most of the mainline Christian denominations have gone right along with these attempts at whitewashing Islam's image, either out of blind ignorance or unthinking sympathy for Mohammed's religion. Even in many traditionally conservative Protestant churches, pastors have invited false teachers from Islam to present that religion to their congregants, and the image given is invariably that of a peaceful, loving, tender-hearted faith whose members are absolutely appalled at the violence committed by "a few fringe radicals".

I have personally witnessed this sort of bald-faced lying done in the name of Islam. On November 11, 2001, I attended a panel presentation on the campus of the University of North Carolina, in Chapel Hill, during which the several panel members each had the opportunity to take 15 minutes and give their thoughts on the events and responses to the September 11 attacks. One of the speakers was a Muslim imam from a local mosque in Durham. Naturally, he took twice as much time as was allotted for him, and did not even address the topic of discussion. Instead, he spent 30 minutes ranting and raving about how peaceful and loving Islam was, and how Islam respects people of other religions. This lying deceiver even went so far as to say that he would be morally obligated to stop a person from defacing or vandalizing a Christian church. In short, his entire diatribe was one giant lie, yet much of the (mostly leftist) crowd ate up every word of it like it was gospel truth. This response demonstrated the desperate need for education about Islam in this nation. Not education in Islam, but education about Islam, so that the majority of the population in Western societies who know little to nothing about the religion can learn the truth about it, instead of being fed sugar-coated lies from Islamic leaders and propagandists. People in the West need to know that the image of Islam as a violent, intolerant, wicked religion is in fact true, and growing more so every day.

So, to ask the question frankly: Is Islam peaceful or violent? To answer equally as frankly: It is violent. It is a religion which was born out of violence, propagated through violence, and which is still accustomed to violence even today. This can clearly be seen by examining the teachings and record of Islam. These are the two primary means by which to judge the character of a religion on some question. You look at the established, recognized, plainly understood teachings of that religion from its holy texts, and then you look at the manner and methodology by which those most faithful to that religion carry out their obedience to their belief system. So let us apply this test to the Muslim faith.”

I urge you to read this scholarly work. We all need to educate ourselves about the religion. As Dunkin says, not to educate ourselves in the religion, but about the religion. I include myself when I say we tend to be lazy when it comes to educating ourselves. When I graduated from college I said, “There! I don’t have to do that anymore.” As it turns out, I have learned more in the past nine or ten years, in spite of myself, than I did with all the book learning of my past, including college. But I’ve only scratched the surface. And if we don’t arm ourselves with enough knowledge to overcome the insidious and rapidly encroaching enemy on our doorstep, we are condemning our children and grandchildren to a lifetime of slavery.

If the Muslims really cared about good will and brotherly love they would move the site for the mosque. They don't give a fig about the right hand of fellowship. In fact, their purpose is to pound one more nail into the coffin of peace and liberty. Wake up, America.

Love

Granny

Reflections

2010-08-12T18:36:00.000-07:00

It was 105° on our shady deck today. Cec and I decided there was nothing outdoors that required our attention, so with the exception of his trip to the end of the driveway with the trash and my two trips out with the dogs, it was surf the net, crochet and read. Little Gus has pretty much recovered from his wasp stings. I guess the wasps are as grumpy about the weather as we are. Either that or they resented him sticking his nose in their brand new house under the downspout at the corner of the garage.

It is getting increasingly difficult to read anything at all on the net anymore without wanting to throw something large through a closed window. The ground zero Imam is still going to the Middle East on the American taxpayers’ dime; the president is still bashing Bush; Juan Williams is still sounding like a moron; and the U.S. Mexican border is still a wide open invitation. Brian and Bruce will soon be mincing to the altar in California. Same stuff, different day.

As I was considering all this today I thought of my father, who passed away twelve years ago last month. Dad was a Christian, a small business owner, and a staunch Republican all his life, in an area that was pretty much Democrat. However, in the late innings, I watched a slow and inexorable change. By the time I realized what had happened, it was too late. In all fairness to Dad, after Mom passed away there was very little to distract him. He went to church, which had long since fallen into the “emergent” maelstrom. He was, as millions are, also a captive of the mainstream media. While I enjoyed the company of a conservative, intelligent, patient husband, scores of liberal, self righteous, “educated” well-wishers surrounded poor Dad for the last five years of his life.

As I considered all this, and how much I miss him, I suddenly realized I would not have him back for the world. It would break my heart to have him see the demise of all the values he held so dear. From our socialist president to our immoral congress; from the stimulus to obscene taxation; from the bailouts to abortion; from government takeover of the auto industry and banks to the removal of God from every area of public life; from the rape of the private sector to socialized medicine, the list goes on ad nauseum. I would hate to think of him watching one small business after another go under. I would hate even more to see his life’s savings—which he earned by the sweat of his brow and the work of his hands—disappear overnight.

Now we are nearly to the eve of the midterm election. Have we learned anything? I looked at some poll numbers today. Three quarters of the voters polled believe that our socialist president should stop blaming Bush for everything from the economy to ingrown toenails. However, a large percent of voters think our socialist president is doing a good job. God help us. I thank God my Dad is not around to see this. Do I miss him? Yes. Even after twelve years. I still have the last shopping list he wrote; I have kept all the sympathy cards; I wear his old ratty bathrobe. Do I wish him back? No. I rejoice he is with the Lord and I look with anticipation to reuniting with him and Mom someday. Meanwhile, Cec and I will do all we can to spread the word about the sewage explosion in Washington.

Love

Granny

Does This Burqa Make Me Look Fat?

2010-08-03T11:52:00.000-07:00

Any fool who says Sharia Law hasn’t already ensconced itself in America has his head firmly implanted where the sun never shines. For those of you who haven’t seen these videos (for whatever reason I can’t imagine) here is what is going on in Dearborn, Michigan. You remember Michigan, home of Detroit, the result of the far left gone amok. Now, I understand that Islamists have every right to exercise their religious beliefs. Look at 9/11. However, apparently that means Christians do not have a right to exercise theirs. Just a year ago I would have bet that Sharia Law would not creep in soon enough to apply to me and my loved ones. Now I am not so sure. And, at the rate it seems to be coming, I see our children and grandchildren not only saddled with staggering taxes, but trying to pay them while wearing burqas and turbans

One of the headlines on my homepage this morning read: Panel Vote Could Clear Way for Ground Zero Mosque. The writers of the article pointed out that the panel was simply voting on whether or not to demolish an old building that has ceased to qualify as a landmark. If it is torn down, the mosque people would have their spot for a center for “moderate” Muslim Voices. Does this stink or what?

Just to prove that Satan never sleeps, while I was doing something else for a couple of hours today the panel voted unanimously to demolish the building. Now the headline says

New York City Panel Clears Way for Mosque Near Ground Zero

Daisy Khan, executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement said they want to “repair the breach and be at the front and center to start the healing.” Let me tell you something, Ms Khan: The healing is not going to come from a mosque or from Muslim advancement. And there are those of us who remember the horror of 9/11, and have witnessed what has transpired since the vile, bottom feeding, foreign-born minion of Satan slithered his way from the cesspool of Chicago into the oval office. There are those of us who uphold the sanctity and truth of the United States Constitution. We will never give in to this kind of hope and change. Our country diminishes day by day. I only hope the values that we hold so dear do not get swept away in the metastisis of progressivism.

Love

Granny

Barack Hussein Obama—Racist-in-Chief

2010-07-24T08:21:00.000-07:00

On the way home from work last night I turned on the radio and listened to Neal Boortz reading this, while frothing at the mouth. By the time I got home I, too was frothing at the mouth and muttering imprecations that cannot be repeated here. I don’t know the source and I’d like to give credit to the author. Unfortunately I don’t know either one. I Googled it as soon as I got home and came up with it on AOL Messageboards. Here it is in its entirety, as posted on the messageboard:

“The Obama administration, already under fire for unprecedented allegations of racial bias, faces a new bias claim from a most unlikely source: one of the administration's own inspectors general.

Decisions on which car dealerships to close as part of the auto industry bailout -- closures the Obama administration forced on General Motors and Chrysler -- were based in part on race and gender, according to a report by Troubled Asset Relief Program Special Inspector General Neal M. Barofsky.

Dealerships were retained because they were recently appointed, were key wholesale parts dealers, or were minority-or woman-owned dealerships. [Emphasis added.]

Thus, to meet numbers forced on them by the Obama administration, General Motors and Chrysler were forced to shutter other, potentially more viable, dealerships. The livelihood of potentially tens of thousands of families was thus eliminated simply because their dealerships were not minority- or woman-owned.

As has been widely reported, the Inspector General's study skewered the Obama Gang for strong-arming the companies into closing 2,000 dealerships, costing an estimated 100,000 people their jobs during a recession.

But the news media has ignored key elements of Barofsky's report -- elements that are far more damaging, if possible, to Obama. As we reported earlier in the week, a top Obama official, manufacturing czar and "Auto Team" leader Ron Bloom admitted that the dealerships could have been kept open, saving those jobs, "but that doing so would have been inconsistent with the President's mandate for 'shared sacrifice.'"

Barofsky says the administration insisted on the closings even though a GM official told him that GM would usually save 'not one damn cent' by closing any particular dealership. ... Furthermore, a GM official stated that removing a dealership from the network does not save money for GM -- it might even cost GM money-and that savings cannot be attributed or assigned to any one dealership.

And a reading of the IG's study makes plain that some dealership closings forced by the administration were based largely on politics.

The report is highly critical of how dealerships were selected for closure, or termination. Barofsky notes that experts said that while metro areas were oversaturated with GM and Chrysler dealerships and reductions were needed in these areas, this was not the case in rural areas where GM and Chrysler had an advantage over their import competitors. [...]

Although sales volume in small towns may be lower, the cost of operating dealerships in small towns is lower as well. In addition, closing dealerships in small towns could ruin the "historic relationship" that GM has had with residents in small towns and force buyers to drive to metro areas, where there are more competitors. In the worst case, the loss of market share in small and medium-sized markets could "jeopardize the return to profitability" for GM and Chrysler, the (the Center for Automotive Research) representative said. Representatives from the National Automobile Dealers Association also concurred that dealership terminations would cause GM and Chrysler to lose market share in rural areas. [Emphasis added.]

Nevertheless, as Barofsky notes, "ultimately close to half of all of the GM dealerships identified for termination were in rural areas."

That is where raw, hard, sewage-filled Chicago politics came into play.

Records indicate that in 2008, Obama lost the vote totals in the nation's 1,300 rural counties by nearly 80%. The Obama administration's insistence on radical numbers of closures ended up shuttering dealerships in those rural areas disproportionately, while dealerships and jobs in metro areas -- Obama's geographical base -- were left open.

Additionally, it has been widely theorized that dealers targeted for closure as a result of Obama's interference were predominantly those who donated campaign contributions to Republicans. Although evidence to date is largely anecdotal, given what we've already reported about the Obama administration's handling of the auto bailout, such speculation does have considerable grounds for support.

While that last point is leaves room for debate, the details contained in the Barofsky report are not. As Barofsky points out, the Obama administration was given an advance copy, and "Treasury [the Obama Treasury Department] might not agree with how the audit's conclusions portray the Auto Team's decision making or with the lessons that SIGTARP has drawn from those facts, but it should be made clear that Treasury has not challenged the essential underlying facts upon which those conclusions are based."

Included among those undisputed facts:

-Dealerships were retained because they were ... minority-or woman-owned dealerships";

-Thousands of jobs were lost, unnecessarily, due specifically to Obama's "mandate for shared sacrifice";

-A disproportionate number of Obama-forced closings were of rural dealerships, in areas unfriendly to Obama, even though such closures could "jeopardize the return to profitability" for GM and Chrysler.

The media, of course, remain mute about these serious allegations in the Barofsky report. They have limited their coverage to the job loss numbers and tried to place the blame on Treasury Secretary Turbo-Tax Tim Geithner.

For now.

Before long, we'll be reading that it was somehow Bush's fault.”

Keep in mind this was early on, within months after the oath of office. We watched it transpire, while the media skirted around the real truth—no surprise there. The media will continue to ignore every vile, underhanded act committed by Obama and his despicable administration, up to and including the (attempted) shutdown of talk radio and the (attempted) confiscation of our guns. Excuse me, but did our forefathers let matters get this far out of hand before they asserted themselves? We have pinned all of our hopes and dreams on the upcoming election. I pray that our dreams come to fruition concerning this. If not, I believe much stronger measures must be taken or we will succumb to a fate we cannot even imagine.

Love

Granny

God Save America

2010-07-20T08:08:00.000-07:00

Dr. Michael Youssef of Leading the Way is conducting a ministry dedicated to daily prayer of thousands of people for God to save the United States from tyrants and those who would destroy her. This is not to take the place of the fervent prayers we’ve been offering. It’s simply a focus on daily prayer between July 4th and November 2nd for an awakening in America. It’s not too late to sign up. You’ll receive a journal that will guide you in this endeavor as well as encouragement from Michael and the knowledge that tens of thousands are out there joining with you in imploring God to help us take back our country. Please join him, and me, in this desperate time, before we lose all that our forefathers died for. If you have any question about what those men did go to Charters of Freedom and read a little—or a lot.

Thank you

Granny

Two More Morons

2010-07-14T19:53:00.000-07:00

Not all verifiable dunderheads reside on U.S. soil. I found this yesterday, by Niall O'Dowd, and thought I'd share it with the world.

"Thank goodness for good journalism." ??????? My Aunt Fanny!When you consider his source (Dana Milbank) it will become clear just where this Irish upstart O'Dowd is coming from. Sitting too close to the Blarney Stone, no doubt.

So you won't all have apoplexy, read this from "Don't Press 'One' for English" and be encouraged.

It seems truth is something to be shunned at the Washington Post, and Irish Central as well. Here's another piece of news for your perusal.

I wonder if either Milbank or O'Dowd could find Arizona on a map.

Love

Granny

The Battle Hymn of the Republic

2010-07-06T09:13:00.000-07:00

The Battle Hymn of the Republic started out as a hymn, a camp song, then a marching song sung by Union soldiers. The tune was written by William Steffe in the mid 1850’s, and the lyrics were:

Say brothers, will you meet us?
Say brothers, will you meet us?
Say brothers, will you meet us?
On Canaan's happy shore?

Glory, glory hallelujah!
Glory, glory hallelujah!
Glory, glory hallelujah!
For ever, evermore!

It was quickly adopted by blacks and abolitionists after the dramatic insurrection at Harper’s Ferry in 1859, and the resulting trial and execution of its leader, John Brown.

John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave,
John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave,
John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave,
His soul is marching on!

In 1861, social activist and Christian, Mrs. Julia Ward Howe witnessed a skirmish between Union and Confederate troops while visiting a Union camp near Washington DC. These are her words following the encounter:

“I awoke in the grey of the morning, and as I lay waiting for dawn, the long lines of the desired poem began to entwine themselves in my mind, and I said to myself, “I must get up and write these verses, lest I fall asleep and forget them!” So I sprang out of bed and in the dimness found an old stump of a pen, which I remembered using the day before. I scrawled the verses almost without looking at the paper.”

It was published in the Atlantic Monthly and sung at the funerals of Winston Churchill, Senator Robert Kennedy, and Presidents Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon. It has become one of the most beloved hymns of America.

The Battle Hymn of the Republic – Lyrics by Julia Ward Howe

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword;
His truth is marching on.

Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! His truth is marching on.

I have seen Him in the watch fires of a hundred circling camps
They have builded Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;
I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps;
His day is marching on.

Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! His day is marching on.

I have read a fiery Gospel writ in burnished rows of steel;
“As ye deal with My contemners, so with you My grace shall deal”;
Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with His heel,
Since God is marching on.

Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Since God is marching on.

He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
He is sifting out the hearts of men before His judgment seat;
Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer Him! be jubilant, my feet;
Our God is marching on.

Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Our God is marching on.

In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,
With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me:
As He died to make men holy, let us [die] to make men free;
While God is marching on.

Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! While God is marching on.

He is coming like the glory of the morning on the wave,
He is wisdom to the mighty, He is honor to the brave;
So the world shall be His footstool, and the soul of wrong His slave,
Our God is marching on.

Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Our God is marching on.

We sang it in church Sunday and for some reason the song leader, who emigrated here from Ukraine when he was a child, left out the fifth verse. I can forgive him, as English is his second language. I would not understand if an American-born citizen did that. It’s the pivotal verse. The fact that pragmatists and not Christians have changed the word “die” to live” in the third line is far less forgivable. But I’m just a fussy old lady. What do I know? I know this: I will die to save this country if it comes to that. Am I being too melodramatic? In view of the events of the past eighteen months, I don’t think so.

God save America.

Love

Granny

Junk Panic!

2010-07-03T14:01:00.000-07:00

Today I was Googling the achievements of our pino (president in name only) with a completely open mind. I stumbled across an article in Esquire, which should tell you a lot. After reading a stellar effort by a progressive—or was he Marxist?—I reached a not-so-original conclusion: they are incapable of pointing out even one weakness or flaw in the present leader of the freak show without somehow dragging George W. Bush into it. I soon grew weary of the Obama-Bush act so I drifted on over to American Thinker where I found this article by Hoss Varad. Revisiting Cloward-Piven always gives me a reason to believe we’re doomed so I didn’t linger over the article. Instead I clicked on the link to Mr. Varad’s blog, Junk Panic! It’s well worth looking at if you need to have a grin on this rainy Independence Day weekend. How many still call it Independence Day? Has it been banned yet?

I’m really jealous of the guy who dreamed up Obama: One Big-Ass Mistake, America as his username.

Have a wonderful weekend, keeping in mind that it may be one of our last celebrations where we're allowed to remember our founding fathers and what they stood for.

Love

Granny

P.S. Don’t drink any Kool Aid.

More Dust Under the Bus

2010-06-28T20:55:00.000-07:00

When I read about General McChrystal's impending retirement I cried. The whole fiasco was so unnecessary. Yes, he showed poor judgment. No, he should never have allowed a Rolling Stone reporter near him or near any of his staff. Yes, he should have screened the article before it was published. But above all, he never should have apologized for telling the truth.

Having said that, and knowing how McChrystal voted in the 2007 election, I guess I can rejoice that he finally saw the light. Too bad he didn’t see what was right in front of him before the election. But it’s too bad, also, that the rest of the Obama voters didn’t see it before the fact. Now we’re stuck with a thin-skinned, henpecked, incompetent who never served one second in the military, and who wouldn’t know a battle plan from a boomerang.

Cec says maybe it was the only way he (McChrystal) could get out gracefully. Personally, I didn’t think it was so bloody graceful. But everything our pres. has been involved in since that black day in January, 2008, has been pathetically bumbling. Bumbling is fine for a cartoon character; but shouldn’t the Commander-in Chief of the United States of America have some modicum of class? No, I guess not. After all, his pals are a bunch of Chicago thugs; he was dragged off the streets and whipped into something resembling a human being at the time that America was ripe for “change”. George Soros did his work well. He’s always done well when it comes to bulldozing entire countries and regimes.

Back to General McChrystal. It’s not like he can’t get a job. But he doesn’t really need one. I’ll purchase and read his book, as will thousands of other patriotic Americans. And Pres. Sorobama can go back to kicking people under the nearest bus. God help us.

Love

Granny

Sociopath: It Takes One to Know One

2010-06-17T19:01:00.000-07:00

This came in an email the other day. I don’t know the source but apparently Steve Kroft put some, if not all of it, together. I also don’t have a date on it, but you know how these things recycle. It’s timely because right now George Soros, better known as Obama’s Puppeteer, is getting even more wealthy, if that is possible, on the suffering of the Gulf oil victims. But that’s his MO, and Obama plays along because he’s incapable of independent thought.

"Who is behind Barak Obama. Who is pulling the strings?"

Here is what CBS' Mr. Steve Kroft's research has turned up... It's a bit of a read, but it took 4 months to put it together:

GEORGE SOROS - TEA PARTY ENEMY #1

"The main obstacle to a stable and just World Order is the United States." - George Soros

"George Soros is an evil man. He's anti-God, anti-family, anti-American, and anti-good." Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson

Is it possible to lay the global financial meltdown, the radicalizing of the Democratic Party, and America's moral decline, at the feet of one man?

YES, it is indeed possible.

If George Soros isn't the world's preeminent "malignant messianic narcissist," he'll do until Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot are reincarnated.

What we have in Soros, is a multi-billionaire atheist, with skewed moral values, and a sociopath's lack of conscience. He considers himself to be an elitist world class philosopher, despises the American Way and just loves to do social engineering (change cultures). Soros is the power behind the throne of Obama. I accuse George Soros of being the PUPPET MASTER that is pulling Obama's strings.

György Schwartz, better known to the world as George Soros, was born August 12, 1930 in Hungary. Soros' father, Tivadar, was a fervent practitioner of Esperanto a language invented in 1887, and designed to be the first global language, free of any national identity.

The Schwartz's, who were non-practicing Jews, changed the family name to Soros, in order to facilitate assimilation into the gentile population, as the Nazis spread into Hungary during the 1930s.

When Hitler's henchman Adolf Eichmann arrived in Hungary, to oversee the murder of that country's Jews, George Soros ended up with a man whose job was confiscating property from the Jewish population. Soros went with him on his rounds.

Soros has repeatedly called 1944 "the best year of his life."

"70% of Mr. Soros's fellow Jews in Hungary, nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated in that year yet he gives no sign that this put any damper on his elation, either at the time or indeed in retrospect."

During an interview with Sixty Minutes' Steve Kroft, Soros was asked about his "best year:"

KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.

SOROS: Yes. Yes.

KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from your fellow Jews, friends and neighbors.

SOROS: Yes. That's right. Yes.

KROFT: I mean, that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?

SOROS: No, not at all. Not at all, I rather enjoyed it.

KROFT: No feeling of guilt?

SOROS: No, only feelings of absolute power.

(I’m including a link to Snopes here due to some question about whether the above is actually accurate. Snopes leans so far left that if they admitted that something like this might possibly have some truth to it you can pretty much take it to the bank, assuming you can find one that hasn’t either gone under or been bought out.)

In his article, Muravchik describes how Soros has admitted to having "carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble."

Be that as it may, after WWII, Soros attended the London School of Economics, where he fell under the thrall of fellow atheist and Hungarian, Karl Popper, one of his professors. Popper was a mentor to Soros until Popper's death in 1994. Two of Popper's most influential teachings concerned "the open society," and Fallibilism.Fallibilism is the philosophical doctrine that all claims of knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken. Then again, I could be wrong about that.

The "open society" basically refers to a "test and evaluate" approach to social engineering. Regarding "open society" Roy Childs writes, "Since the Second World War, most of the Western democracies have followed Popper's advice about piecemeal social engineering and democratic social reform, and it has gotten them into a grand mess."

In 1956 Soros moved to New York City, where he worked on Wall Street, and started amassing his fortune. He specialized in hedge funds and currency speculation. Soros is absolutely ruthless, amoral, and clever in his business dealings, and quickly made his fortune. By the 1980s he was well on his way to becoming the global powerhouse that he is today.

In an article Kyle-Anne Shiver wrote for "The American Thinker" she says, "Soros made his first billion in 1992 by shorting the British pound with leveraged billions in financial bets, and became known as the man who broke the Bank of England. He broke it on the backs of hard-working British citizens who immediately saw their homes severely devalued and their life savings cut drastically almost overnight."

In 1994 Soros crowed in "The New Republic" that "the former Soviet Empire is now called the Soros Empire." The Russia-gate scandal in 1999, which almost collapsed the Russian economy, was labeled by Rep. Jim Leach, then head of the House Banking Committee, to be "one of the greatest social robberies in human history." The "Soros Empire" indeed.

In 1997 Soros almost destroyed the economies of Thailand and Malaysia. At the time, Malaysia's Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamad, called Soros "a villain, and a moron." Thai activist Weng Tojirakarn said, "We regard George Soros as a kind of Dracula. He sucks the blood from the people."

The website Greek National Pride reports, "[Soros] was part of the full court press that dismantled Yugoslavia and caused trouble in Georgia, Ukraine and Myanmar [Burma]. Calling himself a philanthropist, Soros' role is to tighten the ideological stranglehold of globalization and the New World Order while promoting his own financial gain. He is without conscience; a capitalist who functions with absolute amorality."

France has upheld an earlier conviction against Soros, for felony insider trading. Soros was fined 2.9 million dollars.Recently, his native Hungary fined Soros 2.2 million dollars for "illegal market manipulation." Elizabeth Crum writes that "The Hungarian economy has been in a state of transition as the country seeks to become
more financially stable and westernized. [Soros'] deliberately driving down the share price of its largest bank put Hungary's economy into a wicked tailspin, one from which it is still trying to recover.

My point here is that Soros is a planetary parasite. His grasp, greed, and gluttony have a global reach.

But what about America? Soros told Australia's national newspaper "The Australian," "America, as the centre of the globalised financial markets, was sucking up the savings of the world. This is now over. The game is out," he said, adding that the time has come for "a very serious adjustment" in American's consumption habits. He implied that he was the one with the power to bring this about.

Soros: "World financial crisis was 'stimulating' and in a way, the culmination of my life's work."

Obama has recently promised 10 billion of our tax dollars to Brazil, in order to give them a leg-up in expanding their offshore oil fields. Obama's largesse towards Brazil, came shortly after his financial backer George Soros invested heavily in Brazilian oil (Petrobras).

Tait Trussel writes, "The Petrobras loan may be a windfall for Soros and Brazil, but it is a bad deal for the U.S. The American Petroleum Institute estimates that oil exploration in the U.S. could create 160,000 new, well-paying jobs, as well as $1.7 trillion in revenues to federal, state, and local governments, all while fostering greater energy security and independence."

A blog you might want to keep an eye on is SorosWatch.com. (I tried this website but can’t get on.) Their mission: "This blog is dedicated to all. who have suffered due to the ruthless financial pursuits of. George Soros. Your stories are many and varied, but the theme is the same: the destructive power of greed without
conscience. We pledge to tirelessly watch Soros wherever he goes and to print the truth in the hope that he will one day be made to stop preying upon the world's poor; that justice will be served."

Back to America. Soros has been actively working to destroy America from the inside out for some years now. People have been warning us. Two years ago Bill O'Reilly said on "The O'Reilly Factor" that "Soros [is] an extremist who wants open borders, a one-world foreign policy, legalized drugs, euthanasia, and on and on. This is off-the-chart dangerous..." In 1997 Rachel Ehrenfeld wrote, "Soros uses his philanthropy to change or more accurately deconstruct the moral values and attitudes of the Western world, and particularly of the American people. His "open society" is not about freedom; it is about license. His vision rejects the notion of ordered liberty, in favor of an [sic] PROGRESSIVE ideology of rights and entitlements."

Perhaps the most important of these "whistle blowers" are David Horowitz and Richard Poe. Their book "The Shadow Party" outlines in detail how Soros hijacked the Democratic Party, and now owns it lock, stock, and barrel. Soros has been packing the Democratic Party with radicals, and ousting moderate Democrats for years.

The Shadow Party became the Shadow Government, which became the Obama Administration.

DiscovertheNetworks.org (another good source) writes, "By his [Soros'] own admission, he helped engineer coups in Slovakia, Croatia, Georgia, and Yugoslavia. When Soros targets a country for "regime change," he begins by creating a shadow government... a fully formed government-in-exile, ready to assume power when the opportunity arises. The Shadow Party he has built in America greatly resembles those he has created in other countries prior to instigating a coup."

November 2008 edition of the German magazine "Der Spiegel," in which Soros gives his opinion on what the next POTUS (President of the U.S. ) should do after taking office. "I think we need a large stimulus package." Soros thought that around 600 billion would be about right.

Soros also said that "I think Obama presents us a great opportunity to finally deal with global warming and energy dependence. The U.S. needs a cap and trade system with auctioning of licenses for emissions rights."

Although Soros doesn't (yet) own the Republican Party, like he does the Democrats, make no mistake, his tentacles are spread throughout the Republican Party as well.

Soros is a partner in the Carlyle Group where he has invested more than 100 million dollars. According to an article by "The Baltimore Chronicle's" Alice Cherbonnier, the Carlye Group is run by "a veritable who's who of former Republican leaders," from CIA man Frank Carlucci, to CIA head [and ex-President] George Bush, Sr.

In late 2006, Soros bought about 2 million shares of Halliburton - Dick Cheney's old stomping grounds.

When the Democrats and Republicans held their conventions in 2000, Soros held Shadow Party conventions in the same cities, at the same time.

Soros has dirtied both sides of the aisle, trust me. And if that weren't bad enough, he has long held connections with the CIA. And I mustn't forget to mention Soros' involvement with the MSM (Main Stream
Media), the entertainment industry (e.g., he owns 2.6 million shares of Time Warner), and the various political advertising organizations he funnels millions to. In short, George Soros controls or influence most of the MSM. Little wonder they ignore the TEA PARTY, Soro's NEMESIS.

As Matthew Vadum writes, "The liberal billionaire turned philanthropist has been buying up media properties for years in order to drive home his message to the American public that they are too materialistic, too wasteful, too selfish, and too stupid to decide for themselves how to run their own lives."

Richard Poe writes, "Soros' private philanthropy, totaling nearly $5 billion, continues undermining America's traditional Western values. His giving has provided funding of abortion rights, atheism, drug legalization, sex education, euthanasia, feminism, gun control, globalization, mass immigration, gay marriage and other radical experiments in social engineering."

Some of the many NGOs (Non Government Organizations) that Soros funds with his billions are: MoveOn.org, the Apollo Alliance, Media Matters for America, the Tides Foundation, the ACLU, ACORN, PDIA (Project on Death In America), La Raza, and many more. For a more complete list, with brief descriptions of the NGOs, go to DiscoverTheNetworks.org.

Poe continues, "Through his global web of Open Society Institutes and Open Society Foundations, Soros has spent 25 years recruiting, training, indoctrinating and installing a network of loyal operatives in 50 countries, placing them in positions of influence and power in media, government, finance and academia."

Without Soro's money, would the Saul Alinsky's Chicago machine still be rolling? Would SEIU, ACORN, and La Raza still be pursuing their nefarious activities? Would Big Money and lobbyists still be corrupting government? Would our college campuses still be retirement homes for 1960s radicals? Yes, yes, yes, and yes (I thought this should be No, no, no, and no.)

America stands at the brink of an abyss, and that fact is directly attributable to Soros. Soros has vigorously, cleverly, and insidiously planned the ruination of America and his puppet, Barak Obama is leading the way.

The words of Patrick Henry are apropos: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"

In God We Trust/Good Day”

There you have it. Some of it may be old information but it never hurts to review and verify the course we are on. About the only plus in all this is George Soros is eighty; he can’t live forever. But you can be sure he has enough disciples to carry on his evil work for our lifetime and that of our children. Unless God intervenes.

Love

Granny

His mouth is Moving Again

2010-06-14T09:05:00.000-07:00

Cecil brought this to my attention after church yesterday. You can read his post about it on Zion Beckons. I Googled “Obama lies about offshore drilling” and got 252,000 hits including this one from Free Republic:

“Another Stumble in the Gulf (Obama lies)
Powerline Blog ^
June 11, 2010
John
Posted on 06/13/2010 1:04:09 AM PDT by XHogPilot

The administration has decreed a six-month moratorium on exploratory drilling in the Gulf, based on a report that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar wrote for President Obama. Salazar claimed that a panel of seven experts selected by the National Academy of Engineering had peer reviewed his report. It turns out, though, that the seven experts never saw the recommendation for a moratorium, and in fact oppose it:

The seven experts who advised President Obama on how to deal with offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon explosion are accusing his administration of misrepresenting their views to make it appear that they supported a six-month drilling moratorium -- something they actually oppose.

The experts, recommended by the National Academy of Engineering, say Interior Secretary Ken Salazar modified their report last month, after they signed it, to include two paragraphs calling for the moratorium on existing drilling and new permits.

Salazar's report to Obama said a panel of seven experts "peer reviewed" his recommendations, which included a six-month moratorium on permits for new wells being drilled using floating rigs and an immediate halt to drilling operations.

"None of us actually reviewed the memorandum as it is in the report," oil expert Ken Arnold told Fox News. "What was in the report at the time it was reviewed was quite a bit different in its impact to what there is now. So we wanted to distance ourselves from that recommendation."

Salazar apologized to those experts Thursday.

Carol Browner tried to claim that the administration did nothing wrong, but it is hard to follow her logic:

"No one's been deceived or misrepresented," Browner told Fox News, defending the moratorium as a safety measure. "These experts gave their expert advice, and then a determination was made looking at all of the information, including what these experts provided -- that there should be a pause, and that's exactly what there is. There's a pause."

That, of course, is very different from attributing the recommendation of a moratorium to the experts, or claiming that they had "peer reviewed" it. In fact, the expert panel made cogent arguments against the administration's moratorium:

In a letter the experts sent to Salazar, they said his primary recommendation "misrepresents" their position and that halting the drilling is actually a bad idea.

The oil rig explosion occurred while the well was being shut down - a move that is much more dangerous than continuing ongoing drilling, they said.

They also said that because the floating rigs are scarce and in high demand worldwide, they will not simply sit in the Gulf idle for six months. The rigs will go to the North Sea and West Africa, possibly preventing the U.S. from being able to resume drilling for years.

They also said the best and most advanced rigs will be the first to go, leaving the U.S. with the older and potentially less safe rights operating in the nation's coastal waters.

So this looks like one more instance where the Obama administration is neither honest nor competent, and where its first instinct seems to be to pursue the course that will most damage our economy.”

If you’re not completely outraged by now go to Mike Eden’s Blog Start Thinking Right. The problem with Obama and his administration is they have no concept of truth. Whatever comes out of their mouths makes no difference. Truth, lies, whatever works for the situation and the moment. And with Obama, the liar-in-chief, we can readily recognize the lies—whenever his mouth is moving.

My question is: how many more impeachable offences will he get away with before someone says, “Enough!” Isn’t there one person in Congress with the intestinal fortitude to stop this roller coaster from hell? We talk incessantly about November. Do we even have until November? Barack Obama is destroying us, and much faster than any of us anticipated. The ride is going to get a lot rougher if something isn't done soon.

Love

Granny

Responsibility? What Responsibility?

2010-06-12T19:39:00.000-07:00

I was sitting here surfing, trying to find a story about the declaration Obama made a couple of weeks ago in regard to the oil leak and his “taking full responsibility,” when I literally stumbled on this from The American Spectator. After reading the commentary by Robin of Berkley, which is on Storm’n Norm’n’s blog, I commented that maybe Obama needs an intervention—or an exorcism. I meant it to be a little humorous and then I thought it over. Is demon possession a mental illness or is mental illness demon possession? Don’t laugh or send me a tinfoil hat (I threw mine away after the election. You know—the one held in 2008? All about change you can believe in?)

Here’s Mr. Kaminsky’s very insightful contribution. Please go to the link and read the comments. It’s half the fun.

“The Obama Watch

A Leak in the Presidency

By Ross Kaminsky on 6.11.10 @ 6:09AM

Leave it to my wife to come up with a jewelry metaphor for Barack Obama. Obama is, according to my bride, the political equivalent of cubic zirconia. Usually sold to people who love the look of diamonds but can't afford a real one or are fooled into buying an imposter, cubic zirconia is superficially pretty and appealing. But when subjected to the scrutiny of an expert or when placed under great pressure, the falseness and weakness compared to the real thing become apparent.

The pressure analogy is particularly appropriate given that the source of Barack Obama's troubles lie a mile under the ocean's surface, where pressures are about one ton per square inch. The pressure of the situation is causing Obama's vaunted reputation as "competent" to crack like the false promise it always was.

Unlike the ring that accidentally falls into the garbage disposal and gets crushed, the destruction of Barack Obama's perceived competency is almost entirely self-inflicted. On May 28, he aggressively placed his own reputation under that literal ton of pressure down at the oil-spewing well-head by saying "I ultimately take responsibility for solving this crisis…I am the president and the buck stops with me." He was reinforcing his words of a day earlier: "The American people should know that from the moment this disaster began, the federal government has been in charge of the response effort… In case you're wondering who's responsible, I take responsibility."

What kind of CEO would stake his reputation, his power, and perhaps more importantly the reputation of the organization he runs -- in Obama's case, the federal government of the United States -- on something over which he has absolutely no control? Would the president of your company "take responsibility" for the Cubs not winning the World Series? (Assuming your company doesn't own the Cubs, of course.)

As I'm writing this, I'm watching a television ad by BP CEO Tony Hayward who is taking "full responsibility for cleaning up the spill in the gulf." That makes sense; BP has the technology and the know-how to at least attempt to clean up the mess they created. They're the players on the team, even if it is a team as historically hapless or mismanaged as the Cubs or BP. They, not Obama, are the ones who can and should be on the field.

Meanwhile, as we know, Obama has decided that his own taking of responsibility means he needs to figure out "whose ass to kick." Obama's message changes daily, from anger to frustration to ass-kicking, as it must when someone takes existential risk with his political capital in a situation which a college freshman in a political science class would recognize as posing far more risk than reward, far more opportunity to look bad than to be the hero. It's remarkable that Obama has so quickly forgotten the political peril demonstrated by the federal response to Hurricane Katrina. But having taken responsibility, Obama feels he must be seen as "doing something," perhaps the most dangerous mode of operation for a politician -- especially a wounded one.

So, back to the question: What kind of CEO would take responsibility for something entirely out of his control? The same kind who would say, as Barack Obama did two years ago, that "generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children" that his ascendency to power "was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow." God-complex much, Barack?

Some discussion of Narcissistic Personality Disorder from Psychology Today seems à propos: "People with narcissistic personality disorder are frequently perfectionists and need to be the center of attention, receiving affection and admiration, and controlling the situation."

And further: "Deep desire to be at the center of things is served by extreme self-confidence, a combination that makes narcissists attractive and even charming. Buoyed by a coterie of admiring friends and associates -- protected by the armor of positive self-regard -- someone with a mild-to-moderate case of narcissism can float through life feeling pretty good about himself. Since they feel entitled to special treatment, they are easily offended, and readily harbor grudges. Yet narcissists are often very popular -- at least in the short term."

A president who was not a narcissist might have taken a very different tack on the Deepwater Horizon spill: Rather than risking his political capital and popularity by taking responsibility for the clean-up, he would emphasize that government's capacities in the situation were limited but that government was doing what it could. He would inform Gulf Coast residents whose lives and businesses have been disrupted what federal resources are available to help them rather than looking for people to fire or asses to kick. In short, a wise and non-narcissistic president would not have made the issue about himself.

The wise approach, however, has an additional problem for President Obama beyond his deeply self-absorbed personality: As a Progressive, Obama believes that government should be able to do almost anything…and should do everything it can. Obama is part of a presidential Progressive lineage going back through FDR, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson who believed that technocrats should be in charge of most aspects of American life, that private citizens are too stupid to manage their own lives so we need Progressives to do so for us. One might say that Progressivism is an inherently narcissistic philosophy.

For Obama to admit, much less aggressively argue, that government's capability to plug an oil well is limited leads down a dangerous road for those who want government to appear omnipotent. After all, it's hard for even a Progressive to argue explicitly that government should do things in which it has no competence. (The fact that they do precisely that on such a large scale is a topic for another day.) Progressive politicians must therefore aggrandize themselves and the abilities of government in order to maintain the public's sadly resilient self-destructive belief in the power of politicians to fix things. Progressives' governing philosophy and psychology thus prevent Obama from doing anything other than what he's doing. Indeed, rather than saying "I can't fix this,", Obama has suggested that the federal government should acquire the technological capability to fix future deep-water oil well leaks. Again, his personality and Progressivism allow him no other path.

One Obama apologist suggests that people are "blaming Obama for not being a god." She forgets that Obama is the one who took responsibility for stopping the oil (and explicitly claimed that his "stimulus" would keep unemployment below 8%.) The end of his façade of competency is entirely self-inflicted. With luck, Obama has weakened people's blind faith in the competency of politicians generally and presidents specifically.

I can only hope that once discovered to be what it is, the recipient of that cubic zirconia -- or its political equivalent who resides today at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue -- will never again look at the semi-precious gem (once thought to be precious) with the same approval, satisfaction, or gratitude.”

Ross Kaminsky is a professional derivatives trader, a fellow at the Heartland Institute, and a frequent contributor to Human Events. He blogs at Rossputin.com.

I think I’ve figured out why Obama said he’d take full responsibility. It’s all about him. Good or bad, he has to be the center of the universe. He is incapable of capitulating to anyone, even in the face of disaster. However, he has lifted the blame game to Olympic status. Something must be done. Where are all those voters who claim to be suffering from buyer’s remorse?

Love

Granny

It Depends on Which Pot and Whose Kettle

2010-06-11T15:53:00.000-07:00

Susan Estrich is not someone I read on a regular basis, because I know which way she leans and nothing she says surprises me. But the title of her latest commentary intrigued me. I spotted it on Rasmussen and clicked on it. The Value of Experience. Aha, I thought. She’s on to Obama and his disastrous presidency. Wrong guess. It was pretty much business as usual: a snotty, snarky comparison of the winners of the Tuesday election versus “career” politicians. Using William Safire’s analogy about not hiring an inexperienced plumber, she proceeded to excoriate Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman for referring to career politicians.

I fail to see the big deal or the big gaffe in that statement, especially since it’s accurate. Career politicians who have been around the block several times have a tendency to forget just where in the world they left their platform way back when. Kind of like doctors. The fresh-faced guy or gal just out of med school is still retaining what old MDs have long since forgotten.

Then there’s the matter of the “hot” mike. This one is a two-edged sword. Here’s the quote from Estrich: “On her first day as the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in California, Carly Fiorina forgot lesson No. One: Always assume the mike is hot." Fiorina mentioned Boxer’s hair being so “yesterday” over a live mike. Well, isn’t that a shock. At least she assumed it was turned off. Remember when every left-wing blogger and media source in the universe blathered about Sarah Palin’s hair as well as every other millimeter of her body in front of the whole world? Goodness, silly me, I forgot about that pesky double standard.

And speaking of experience, didn’t a certain lady, a member of the White House press corps since Estrich was still being potty trained, very recently and suddenly “retire” because all of her experience couldn’t buy her an excuse for what she said over a hot mike? Experience, huh? Granted, Helen Thomas wasn’t running for office; she was just running her mouth. But experience has very little to do with some things. Something the lft has never "gotten" is that integrity counts.

Estrich also reminds us that “winning debates, scoring points against your rival – that’s tough, but not nearly as tough as getting things done once you’re in office.” Yeah, Susan, we know all about winning debates and scoring points against your opponent. That’s what our present hapless-in-chief did, and just see where we are now. The most inexperienced at anything president we’ve ever had and you’re busy with your petty little criticisms against people with far more history and integrity than our community organizing, narcissistic, out-to-lunch president.

Maybe you’d rather have a plumber with experience, but it seems to me we’ve been victims of the Washington Roto-Rooter pretty much on a daily basis for seventeen months. Apparently our fearless leader doesn’t need experience for that.

Here’s her commentary for your perusal and/or edification.

Love

Granny

The Disconnect of the White House and its Potentially Disastrous Results

2010-06-09T11:09:00.000-07:00

This is from the Wall Street Journal. It’s depressing but Ms Rabinowitz gives a clear picture of what is actually going on the the minds of Mr. President and his hand-picked Socialists. What really scares me is that our enemies are watching in wonderment the hapless antics of our “fearless leaders". They must be stopped. This should be required reading for all Obama enthusiasts out there:

"The Alien in the White House

The distance between the president and the people is beginning to be revealed.

By DOROTHY RABINOWITZ

The deepening notes of disenchantment with Barack Obama now issuing from commentators across the political spectrum were predictable. So, too, were the charges from some of the president's earliest enthusiasts about his failure to reflect a powerful sense of urgency about the oil spill.

There should have been nothing puzzling about his response to anyone who has paid even modest critical attention to Mr. Obama's pronouncements. For it was clear from the first that this president—single-minded, ever-visible, confident in his program for a reformed America saved from darkness by his arrival—was wanting in certain qualities citizens have until now taken for granted in their presidents. Namely, a tone and presence that said: This is the Americans' leader, a man of them, for them, the nation's voice and champion. Mr. Obama wasn't lacking in concern about the oil spill. What he lacked was that voice—and for good reason.

Those qualities to be expected in a president were never about rhetoric; Mr. Obama had proved himself a dab hand at that on the campaign trail. They were a matter of identification with the nation and to all that binds its people together in pride and allegiance. These are feelings held deep in American hearts, unvoiced mostly, but unmistakably there and not only on the Fourth of July.

A great part of America now understands that this president's sense of identification lies elsewhere, and is in profound ways unlike theirs. He is hard put to sound convincingly like the leader of the nation, because he is, at heart and by instinct, the voice mainly of his ideological class. He is the alien in the White House, a matter having nothing to do with delusions about his birthplace cherished by the demented fringe.

One of his first reforms was to rid the White House of the bust of Winston Churchill—a gift from Tony Blair—by packing it back off to 10 Downing Street. A cloudlet of mystery has surrounded the subject ever since, but the central fact stands clear. The new administration had apparently found no place in our national house of many rooms for the British leader who lives on so vividly in the American mind. Churchill, face of our shared wartime struggle, dauntless rallier of his nation who continues, so remarkably, to speak to ours. For a president to whom such associations are alien, ridding the White House of Churchill would, of course, have raised no second thoughts.

Far greater strangeness has since flowed steadily from Washington. The president's appointees, transmitters of policy, go forth with singular passion week after week, delivering the latest inversion of reality. Their work is not easy, focused as it is on a current prime preoccupation of this White House—that is, finding ways to avoid any public mention of the indisputable Islamist identity of the enemy at war with us. No small trick that, but their efforts go forward in public spectacles matchless in their absurdity—unnerving in what they confirm about our current guardians of law and national security.

Consider the hapless Eric Holder, America's attorney general, confronting the question put to him by Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas) of the House Judicary Committee on May 13.

Did Mr. Holder think that in the last three terrorist attempts on this soil, one of them successful (Maj. Nidal Hasan's murder of 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, preceded by his shout of "Allahu Akbar!"), that radical Islam might have played any role at all? Mr. Holder seemed puzzled by the question. "People have different reasons" he finally answered—a response he repeated three times. He didn't want "to say anything negative about any religion."

And who can forget the exhortations on jihad by John Brennan, Mr. Obama's chief adviser on counterterrorism? Mr. Brennan has in the past charged that Americans lack sensitivity to the Muslim world, and that we have particularly failed to credit its peace-loving disposition. In a May 26 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Brennan held forth fervently, if not quite comprehensibly, on who our enemy was not: "Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is just a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind, and as Americans we refuse to live in fear."

He went on to announce, sternly, that we do not refer to our enemies as Islamists or jihadists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam. How then might we be permitted to describe our enemies? One hint comes from another of Mr. Brennan's pronouncements in that speech: That "violent extremists are victims of political, economic and social forces."

Yes, that would work. Consider the news bulletins we could have read: "Police have arrested Faisal Shahzad, victim of political, economic and social forces living in Connecticut, for efforts to set off a car bomb explosion in Times Square." Plotters in Afghanistan and Yemen, preparing for their next attempt at mass murder in America, could only have listened in wonderment. They must have marvelled in particular on learning that this was the chief counterterrorism adviser to the president of the United States.

Long after Mr. Obama leaves office, it will be this parade of explicators, laboring mightily to sell each new piece of official reality revisionism—Janet Napolitano and her immortal "man-caused disasters'' among them—that will stand most memorably as the face of this administration.

It is a White House that has focused consistently on the sensitivities of the world community—as it is euphemistically known—a body of which the president of the United States frequently appears to view himself as a representative at large.

It is what has caused this president and his counterterrorist brain trust to deem it acceptable to insult Americans with nonsensical evasions concerning the enemy we face. It is this focus that caused Mr. Holder to insist on holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in lower Manhattan, despite the rage this decision induced in New Yorkers, and later to insist if not there, then elsewhere in New York. This was all to be a dazzling exhibition for that world community—proof of Mr. Obama's moral reclamation program and that America had been delivered from the darkness of the Bush years.

It was why this administration tapped officials like Michael Posner, assistant secretary of state for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Among his better known contributions to political discourse was a 2005 address in which he compared the treatment of Muslim-Americans in the United States after 9/11 with the plight of the Japanese-Americans interned in camps after Pearl Harbor. During a human-rights conference held in China this May, Mr. Posner cited the new Arizona immigration law by way of assuring the Chinese, those exemplary guardians of freedom, that the United States too had its problems with discrimination.

So there we were: America and China, in the same boat on human rights, two buddies struggling for reform. For this view of reality, which brought withering criticism in Congress and calls for his resignation, Mr. Posner has been roundly embraced in the State Department as a superbly effective representative.

It is no surprise that Mr. Posner—like numerous of his kind—has found a natural home in this administration. His is a sensibility and political disposition with which Mr. Obama is at home. The beliefs and attitudes that this president has internalized are to be found everywhere—in the salons of the left the world over—and, above all, in the academic establishment, stuffed with tenured radicals and their political progeny. The places where it is held as revealed truth that the United States is now, and has been throughout its history, the chief engine of injustice and oppression in the world.

They are attitudes to be found everywhere, but never before in a president of the United States. Mr. Obama may not hold all, or the more extreme, of these views. But there can be no doubt by now of the influences that have shaped him. They account for his grand apology tour through the capitals of Europe and to the Muslim world, during which he decried America's moral failures—her arrogance, insensitivity. They were the words of a man to whom reasons for American guilt came naturally. Americans were shocked by this behavior in their newly elected president. But he was telling them something from those lecterns in foreign lands—something about his distant relation to the country he was about to lead.

The truth about that distance is now sinking in, which is all to the good. A country governed by leaders too principled to speak the name of its mortal enemy needs every infusion of reality it can get.”

Ms. Rabinowitz is a member of the Journal's editorial board.

Please share this. Thank you. And thank you, Ms Rabinowitz, for such an insightful article.

Love

Granny

Israel Isn’t the Bad Guy Here

2010-06-08T16:49:00.000-07:00

The following article by Craig Chamberlain, from The Land of the Free.net, is the most coherent analysis I have yet seen of the Israeli “attack” against the poor, defenseless flotilla transporting humanitarian supplies to Gaza. From the stories you hear in the MSM, the Israelis are a bunch of bloodthirsty goons, ready to kill and eat newborn babies at any given signal.

Unfortunately, most Americans who still listen to CNN, MSNBC, and read USA Today and The New York Times, Reuters, etc., never go beyond the propaganda spewed out by the left. But, unfortunately too, they still think the government is our friend.

In the following article, Chamberlain lays out the truth about Islam, the Middle East, and the warped mindset of America and Europe.

Love

Granny

"The Unspeakable Turk Strikes Again

By: Craig Chamberlain

In the history of the world most peoples, sadly, have, in their past, a history of violence and death. Most peoples, though, have moved on from that. The Germans, no longer have concentration camps, Rwanda is working towards reconciliation after the genocide of 1994 and the U.S. fought a civil war to end slavery. Most look to such past barbarisms with a sense of shame. The Turks are an exception to that rule. Not only have they lived their entire history as bloodthirsty marauders who murdered, pillaged and raped wherever they went, they glory in their actions on the one hand, while denying any wrongdoing on their part with the other. Try getting them to confess to the Armenian genocide of 1915, and you’ll get some vague words about tragedies during that time. What they’re really saying is that, yes they did it and those Armenian dogs deserved it.

And these are the same people who have the chutzpah to criticize Israel for a “genocide” against the Palestinians. They condemn Israel for it’s “occupation” of “Palestine” and for their brutality. Ok, let’s set the record straight. The Israeli’s have never committed a genocide. Remember the “genocide” of Jenin? Yes, in April of 2002 those bloodthirsty Israelis ran wild over the city and massacred the city’s population. At least that’s what the Islamic world and their leftist allies would have you believe. In reality 53 people died when the IDF went in to deal with militants who had taken over the area. That’s a hell of a genocide.

And what about the poor suffering people of the Gaza strip? Well, the last time I checked Israel wasn’t in control of Gaza anymore. There is not one Israeli soldier, or settler, anywhere in the territory. In all truthfulness, someone is Gaza is more likely to be killed by their Hamas overlords than they are by the IDF.

The Turks, on the other hand, have turned genocide and ethnic cleansing to an art form. Aside from the Armenian genocide of 1915, they spent centuries, during the height of their empire, doing everything they could to wipe out the Christian populations of the Balkans. And what about the occupation of Cyprus? Israel has left Gaza and would leave the West Bank if they could do so safely. Turkey, on the other hand has been in control of a portion of Cyprus since 1974, drove thousands of Greek Cypriots from their homes. Where’s the outrage for that?

Why do I bring all of this up? What does this have to do with the current situation in the Middle East? It goes to credibility. The Turks don’t have any. When you spend centuries conquering, slaughtering, and wiping out anyone who stands in your way, you don’t have the right to scream genocide, or massacre, when a nation under constant attack decides to engage in an act of self defense.

The self styled “peace activists” were certainly well armed, well trained, and fully ready for the Israeli raid, and all too eager to use violence. If all they were doing were taking humanitarian supplies to the people of Gaza why were they so quick to turn violent? These “activists” were sent by the orders of Ankara and that filthy swine Erdogan. Erdogan(who I have said time and time again is nothing more than Bin Laden in a business suit) is all too eager to export his Islamist ideals and to pick a fight with Israel, which all Islamists( Erdogan included) believe has to be destroyed.

Sadly, Israel fell for the trap. The Islamic world knows that it can’t win a conventional war against Israel. It’s tried and failed. They don’t want a replay of the 1967 war. So they use terrorism, and public relations. The poor defenseless Muslims, who are struggling righteously to overthrow the cruel yoke of Israel. And typically the left in Europe, and America, have bought into that narrative. The European left is desperate to maintain good relations with the Arab world because of the large Muslim populations in their own countries, while the American left does it just because they hate Jews.

Turkey now has a causus belli to launch an attack on Israel. It’s not clear whether Erdogan will do it, yet. Israel is in the right but the world insists it is in the wrong. We see our own government side with dictatorships, terrorists, and nations that really have committed genocide, while scolding, and pushing around a democracy and a natural ally.

Peace in the Middle East will never come easy, but it will not be worth it if we throw Israel under the bus for defending itself. The U.S. and Israel are at war with the same enemy. How can we justify our attacks on Islamic militants, while condemning Israel attempts to fight the same war?

If there is any country in the Middle East that is a threat to peace in the region it is Turkey. Turkey, under that terrorist Prime Minister, has overthrown the secular republicanism of Ataturk and embraced the Islamist terrorism of Iran. Given its history of past genocides, and current occupations, it’s the unspeakable Turk that can bring about a Middle East war."

Hardly Qualifies Anyone

2010-05-31T15:00:00.000-07:00

Remember this? "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." –Joe Biden, referring to Barack Obama at the beginning of the 2008 Democratic primary campaign, Jan. 31, 2007

Here’s a list of Obama's qualifications, according to our now-Vice President:

African-American

Articulate

Bright

Clean

Nice-looking

For those who would jump all over this and call me—one more time—racist, keep in mind from whose mouth the above quote spewed. All I’m doing is looking at the qualifications.

African-American. First of all, he’s not African-American, but nobody remembers that. He decided to run as an African-American, a brilliant move on the part of his string-pullers, and it resonated with everybody from Blacks to guilt-ridden whites. So it was a good choice. Actually, I’d rather see a real African-American run for president. With the first qualification we hear the first lie.

Articulate: clear, coherent, lucid. In other words, he doesn’t sound like a pair of sneakers in a dryer when he speaks with the aid of a teleprompter. Extemporaneously? Not so much. Which is why most of his speeches are staged. But here’s the really interesting thing. I have spent the past two years, give or take, being force-fed myriad appearances and listening to him ad nauseum and I’ve never been able to pin down just what it is about his speeches that drives me to distraction. An email from a dear friend the other day solved it for me. I’m posting part of it here in hopes that she will forgive me and won’t sue for copyright infringement.

“. . . how is it that speaking in phrases gets him lauded as a great speaker? I find it painful to listen to him and not just because everything he says is a lie. I want to prod him on to the next whole sentence. The libs used to criticize Bush for his speaking; I always found him easy to listen to.”

The truth is he's not the great orator he's cracked up to be, thrill-down-the-leg notwithstanding. But he managed to fool some of the people all of the time, and that's all it took to catapult him into the White House.

Bright. I’m pretty sure Biden meant intelligent, clever, smart, sharp, etc. when he described Obama, although he may have meant vivid, intense, dazzling. I’m not so sure about optimistic, upbeat, or positive. Remember the doom and gloom about the economy resulting in the most expensive stimulus bill ever passed? The one that introduced us to a new word: trillion?

But back to intelligent, clever, smart, sharp. Have we seen any transcripts from any school he ever attended? Maybe “trainable” is a better word; his string-pullers knew a good foil when they saw it.

Clean. Um, I’m not sure where to go with this. I’m not familiar with his bathing habits, I’ve never gotten close enough to smell him, and I think I’d better leave it alone; it’s been drug through the mud enough. But is that a qualification for the presidency? I suppose if you want to keep the White House clean it would be good. But if you want a clean White House, better you take out the pond scum and putrid Chicago garbage he brought along with him, which has been stinking up the place for the past fourteen months, six days and approximately five hours.

Nice-looking. I suppose that goes along with clean. The last time I saw him he didn’t look, sound, or act so nice. He was trying to weasel his administration’s way around the biggest “man-made” disaster in American history. But, like George W. Bush, who also met his Waterloo on the Gulf Coast, there’s no getting away from it. Obama's stunning qualifications didn’t stand up to this event. I’m not sure whose would, but perhaps someone with less arrogance and more humility, less aloofness and more connection with the American people might stand a tad better chance.

If you haven’t already done so, read Peggy Noonan’s editorial, which is far more articulate than this post. Seems she's finally seeing the light, after the sappy, sickening, pro-Obama drivel we were forced to endure from her before the election. So take it with a grain of salt. The editorial is two days old, but I just got to it because I worked all weekend. Remember, I'm a working-class granny, clinging to my guns and my religion.

Love

Granny

God Save America

2010-05-18T06:44:00.000-07:00

Those of you who listen to Christian radio are familiar with Dr. Michael Youssef of Leading the Way. He has asked us to covenant with God and with him in praying for America between July 4th and November 2nd. Here is the video with a button you can click on at the bottom. Please consider this. Thank you.

God bless America

Love

Granny

Cross posted to Think on these Things

Be a Nobody; be a George Hewes

2010-05-16T11:43:00.000-07:00

Show me someone who refers to the tea parties as “tea bagging” and I will show you someone who knows nothing about American history. Show me a liberal who says he knows American history and I will show you a fool and a liar. Here is what happened then, and what we are protesting now. The representation we are forced to endure since the liberals took over Congress and Satan’s pawn and his motley horde of pagans began their desecration of the White House is nothing short of appalling.

An Eyewitness Account
of the Boston Tea Party

As Told By George Hewes

On a bright cold moonlit evening on December 16, 1773 a group of sixty colonists boarded three British ships in Boston Harbor. The ships contained a cargo of tea from The East India Company. Although the tea carried a tax that the colonists refused to pay, the Royal Governor of Massachusetts Thomas Hutchinson ordered that the ships should not return to England with their cargo but that the tea be unloaded.

Patriot Sam Adams immediately devised a plan whereby colonists, thinly disguised as Mohawk Indians, boarded the three ships. They broke open all 342 chests of tea and threw them overboard. This episode became a precursor on the road to independence, elevating as it did the most radical patriots in command throughout America.

George Hewes, a Boston shoemaker, was among those who boarded one of the ships dressed as an Indian. Sixty years later, as one of the last surviving members of the Tea Party, he recalled the events of that night and his participation in that historic moment. Author Alfred Young in his book "The Shoemaker and the Tea Party" described Hewes as "a nobody who briefly became a somebody in the Revolution and, for a moment near the end of his life, a hero."

As a participant in the Boston Tea Party, here is George Hewes' eyewitness account of that milestone event in Early America.

"The tea destroyed was contained in three ships, lying near each other at what was called at that time Griffin's wharf, and were surrounded by armed ships of war, the commanders of which had publicly declared that if the rebels, as they were pleased to style the Bostonians, should not withdraw their opposition to the landing of the tea before a certain day, the 17th day of December, 1773, they should on that day force it on shore, under the cover of their cannon's mouth.

"On the day preceding the seventeenth, there was a meeting of the citizens of the county of Suffolk, convened at one of the churches in Boston, for the purpose of consulting on what measures might be considered expedient to prevent the landing of the tea, or secure the people from the collection of the duty. At that meeting a committee was appointed to wait on Governor Hutchinson, and request him to inform them whether he would take any measures to satisfy the people on the object of the meeting. "To the first application of this committee, the Governor told them he would give them a definite answer by five o'clock in the afternoon. At the hour appointed, the committee again repaired to the Governor's house, and on inquiry found he had gone to his country seat at Milton, a distance of about six miles. When the committee returned and informed the meeting of the absence of the Governor, there was a confused murmur among the members, and the meeting was immediately dissolved, many of them crying out, "Let every man do his duty, and be true to his country"; and there was a general huzza for Griffin's wharf.

"It was now evening, and I immediately dressed myself in the costume of an Indian, equipped with a small hatchet, which I and my associates denominated the tomahawk, with which, and a club, after having painted my face and hands with coal dust in the shop of a blacksmith, I repaired to Griffin's wharf, where the ships lay that contained the tea. When I first appeared in the street after being thus disguised, I fell in with many who were dressed, equipped and painted as I was, and who fell in with me and marched in order to the place of our destination.

"When we arrived at the wharf, there were three of our number who assumed an authority to direct our operations, to which we readily submitted. They divided us into three parties, for the purpose of boarding the three ships which contained the tea at the same time. The name of him who commanded the division to which I was assigned was Leonard Pitt. The names of the other commanders I never knew.

"We were immediately ordered by the respective commanders to board all the ships at the same time, which we promptly obeyed. The commander of the division to which I belonged, as soon as we were on board the ship appointed me boatswain, and ordered me to go to the captain and demand of him the keys to the hatches and a dozen candles. I made the demand accordingly, and the captain promptly replied, and delivered the articles; but requested me at the same time to do no damage to the ship or rigging.

"We then were ordered by our commander to open the hatches and take out all the chests of tea and throw them overboard, and we immediately proceeded to execute his orders, first cutting and splitting the chests with our tomahawks, so as thoroughly to expose them to the effects of the water.

In about three hours from the time we went on board, we had thus broken and thrown overboard every tea chest to be found in the ship, while those in the other ships were disposing of the tea in the same way, at the same time. We were surrounded by British armed ships, but no attempt was made to resist us.

"We then quietly retired to our several places of residence, without having any conversation with each other, or taking any measures to discover who were our associates; nor do I recollect of our having had the knowledge of the name of a single individual concerned in that affair, except that of Leonard Pitt, the commander of my division, whom I have mentioned. There appeared to be an understanding that each individual should volunteer his services, keep his own secret, and risk the consequence for himself. No disorder took place during that transaction, and it was observed at that time that the stillest night ensued that Boston had enjoyed for many months.

"During the time we were throwing the tea overboard, there were several attempts made by some of the citizens of Boston and its vicinity to carry off small quantities of it for their family use. To effect that object, they would watch their opportunity to snatch up a handful from the deck, where it became plentifully scattered, and put it into their pockets.

"One Captain O'Connor, whom I well knew, came on board for that purpose, and when he supposed he was not noticed, filled his pockets, and also the lining of his coat. But I had detected him and gave information to the captain of what he was doing. We were ordered to take him into custody, and just as he was stepping from the vessel, I seized him by the skirt of his coat, and in attempting to pull him back, I tore it off; but, springing forward, by a rapid effort he made his escape. He had, however, to run a gauntlet through the crowd upon the wharf nine each one, as he passed, giving him a kick or a stroke.

"Another attempt was made to save a little tea from the ruins of the cargo by a tall, aged man who wore a large cocked hat and white wig, which was fashionable at that time. He had sleightly slipped a little into his pocket, but being detected, they seized him and, taking his hat and wig from his head, threw them, together with the tea, of which they had emptied his pockets, into the water. In consideration of his advanced age, he was permitted to escape, with now and then a slight kick.

"The next morning, after we had cleared the ships of the tea, it was discovered that very considerable quantities of it were floating upon the surface of the water; and to prevent the possibility of any of its being saved for use, a number of small boats were manned by sailors and citizens, who rowed them into those parts of the harbor wherever the tea was visible, and by beating it with oars and paddles so thoroughly drenched it as to render its entire destruction inevitable."

---- George Hewes

People, America needs the nobodies now more than ever. Pick up your flags. Pick up your Bibles. Pick up your copies of the Constitution. Pick up whatever else you think you may need and stand up for what you believe in. Because it’s nobodies like us, who pray and shout and march and stand firm, who will be the somebodies that, with God’s blessing, will take this country back.

Love

Granny

To Laugh or to Cry?

2010-05-11T10:40:00.000-07:00

Bordering on Insanity

If you cross the North Korean border illegally you get 12 years hard labor.
If you cross the Iranian border illegally you are detained indefinitely.
If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.
If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally you will be jailed.
If you cross the Chinese border illegally you may never be heard from again.
If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally you will be branded a spy and your fate will be sealed.
If you cross the Cuban border illegally you will be thrown into political prison to rot.
If you cross the U.S. border illegally you get:

• a job,

• a drivers license,

• social security card,

• welfare,

• food stamps,

• credit cards,

• subsidized rent or a loan to buy a house,

• free education,

• free health care,

• a lobbyist in washington

• billions of dollars worth of public documents printed in your language

• the right to carry your country's flag while you protest that you don't get enough respect

• and, in many instances, you can vote.

From Patriot Humor. I can't think for myself anymore so I have to borrow stuff.

Love

Granny

In Case it Matters

2010-05-05T06:14:00.000-07:00

Cecil does it so much better than I do. He can sit day after day and write and write and write and he doesn’t get all bent out of shape. I, on the other hand, have been physically sick since shortly before the 2008 election. After my most recent episode I have decided that nothing is worth my mental and physical health, least of all Barackalmighty. I can still keep up with what’s going on; it’s hard to avoid. But Granny is digging herself an early grave with that pitchfork.

So, after much prayer and a serious talk with Cec, I’ve decided to take a break. I’ll continue blogging, but it will be more Christian oriented, which is probably where I should have been in the first place. But that’s what it’s all about, isn’t it? And that’s what is tearing us apart: the fact that our heritage, as well as our future, is being ripped out of our hands.

I thought of starting another blog, but I have too much time invested in Granny, and I’m very attached to the few followers I have. You stick by me, and I would hate to lose you. So Granny will stay up, and I’ll probably have an occasional irresistible urge to type something political at some point in time. I just can’t do it for a day or two. Or a week or two. I spent the past few days reading up on modest clothing for women and I didn’t suffer from one single heart palpitation or attack of indigestion. How refreshing.

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. (Philippians 4:8 KJV)

Thank you for all your support.

God bless

Granny

If the Shoe Fits

2010-04-29T13:31:00.000-07:00

Mr. Graham, please step forward and declare your real affiliation.

Oh, You just did: “It is impossible for me and any other serious Democrat to get this body to move forward until we prove to the American people we can secure our borders and, quite frankly Madame secretary, we got a long way to go,” said Graham. “But once we get there, comprehensive reform should come up, will come up, and I believe we can do it by 2012.” (Emphasis mine)

That reminds me of our Campaigner-in-Chief when he blurted out “My Muslim faith” and was instantly corrected by his interviewer, George Step-on-all-of-us. It’s nice to have someone to cover your blunders when the truth comes bubbling out.

The above came out of the mouth of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), while the following was coming out of Napolitano’s mouth, as she testified at a recent Senate panel: United States’ southwest border is “as secure now as it has ever been.”

Well, now, if that isn’t a true fact I don’t know what is. They’re every bit as secure, with Border Patrol agents being assaulted on a regular basis, nearly daily kidnappings in Phoenix by agents of alien smuggling organizations and a continuous hemorrhage of humanity across our borders.

What galaxy are these Washington types from? What kind of Pablum were they fed as babies? Were they all dropped on their heads in the delivery room? Are they products of failed abortion attempts? Who told them the American people are too stupid to see through the lies?

Senator Graham, now that you’ve admitted to being a Democrat why don’t you just stay on your side of the aisle and quit trying to straddle; it’s unbecoming. Madame Secretary, since you are obviously deaf, blind and brain dead, you should file for disability. Immediately.

Love

Granny

When a Nation Forgets God—7 Lessons We Must Learn From Nazi Germany

2010-04-23T10:47:00.000-07:00

This is the title of Dr. Erwin W. Lutzer’s book which should be required reading for every American who gives a hoot. And there are millions of us. As a recipient of the news of the horror stories of Nazi Germany, although very young at the time, I can remember thinking all of my early life that it could never happen again. No such atrocities could ever be perpetrated on a people after this. I was wrong. The Soviet Union. Rwanda. Bosnia. Man’s inhumanity to man is alive, and well documented since Cain killed his brother.

Dr. Lutzer doesn’t pretend to make predictions; he is simply outlining what happened in Germany under Hitler’s regime. We can draw the parallels. Here is an excerpt from the book. Judge for yourself.

To use one of Obama’s tired, overused phrases, “make no mistake,” it could happen here.

Love

Granny

TAYLOR: The politics of intimidation - Washington Times

2010-04-23T08:10:00.000-07:00

Am I the only one who thinks the November election is not going to be such a shoo-in? We boldly speak of "voting the bums out," but do we really think they're going to sit back and let us? I think not. There's nothing that has happened in Washington since the infamous swearing-in that has not been cunningly calculated and craftily carried out. The socialist agenda is very old, very practiced and very evil. I think we need to stand back and look at the myriad events which have transpired while we have been screaming about liberty, freedom and voting the bastards out. Those serpents aren't ready to bow out and slither away. Here's just a small sample of what we might expect—again: TAYLOR: The politics of intimidation - Washington Times

Love

Granny

Colonoscopy—Proof That God has a Sense of Humor

2010-04-21T15:10:00.000-07:00

You want me to drink what? A half gallon of polyethylene? In under three hours? Oh, it’s flavored. That makes it all better. And nothing except clear liquids the day before the exam? And nothing the day of the exam? Oh, that’s right; I get to drink the other half of the polyethylene.

And so to bed after numerous trips to the bathroom and rediscovering baby wipes and diaper ointment. I wake at seven and start drinking again. This time it’s not so easy. It drags on until 10:30. Then I get to ride in a car for 40 minutes to the clinic. Now, normally a trip from Verona to Springfield isn’t so bad. But when you’ve panty liners, puppy pads, A&D Ointment and baby wipes to remember to take, plus you’re thirsty, headachy, dehydrated and other unmentionable things, it’s a little daunting.

So now we’re in the waiting room reading the pre-procedure information and disclaimers: bleeding, perforation, adverse reaction to sedation, undetected cancer, inability to perform the procedure because of improper emptying of the colon, death. Death? You mean I go in there, somebody starts a Versed drip and—WHAM—that’s it? That’s definitely something to ask the doctor about.

I’ll spare you the rest. Those of you who have been through it already know. Those of you who haven’t . . . well . . . your time will probably come. A word of advice: before Prep Day go to your local library and check out Dreams of my Father and The Audacity of ~~Dope~~ Hope. Don’t go out and purchase the books; you don’t really want him to get the royalties. No, I’m not telling you to read them. But they’ll save you money on toilet tissue and the library fine will be well worth the effort. If it feels a little rough just remember how rough things have gotten since the election, and how to vote this November. Forgive the scatological/political implications; they sort of go hand-in-hand.

Here’s a tasteful, sensitive video some dear friends in Independence sent me in anticipation of my great adventure. I believe it’s the procedure we can anticipate under Obamacare.

Have a very Socialist day.

Love

Granny

P.S. Let’s not forget the oldie but goodie, Dave Barry’s Colonoscopy, probably one of the funniest things I have ever read, and every word is true. I was only half asleep during mine, so I got to listen to the music. No idea what it was; thank God it was loud.

Taxed Enough Already…Not Yet

2010-04-13T16:16:00.000-07:00

In pondering the cataclysmic events which have transpired since Obama took office I see a common thread. Everything he stands for, everything he campaigns for, everything he stands up there and lies about point to one thing---taxes. Taxes=money. Money=power. He doesn’t care where the taxes come from; he’s very good at finding crises, the homeless, the entitled, the grifters and the idiots who would stand for him if he wore a clown suit and a fright wig.

So, who gets taxed, besides everyone who manages to grub one cent doing an honest day’s work? The old and infirm. Those lying in nursing waiting to die. Useless. Expendable. Ergo, cut senior care.

The unborn are not taxed. Yet. Useless. Expendable. If Mom doesn’t want the kid, kill it. Ergo, expand abortion spending.

Now, wasn’t that easy?

Love

Granny

Date-Rapist-in-Chief

2010-04-09T09:55:00.000-07:00

It almost happened to me once. To this day I don’t know how I escaped. I suspect, though, that the guy may have had a shred of decency which told him it might be wrong to continue to force himself on me.

This month’s issue of Whistleblower Magazine contains an article by David Kupelian entitled “Obama and the Date-Rape of America.” (You can scroll down and order a single issue.) In it he describes the sweet talk, lies and deceptions which got Obama into the highest office in the country. I still don’t get that but that’s just me. But he charmed his way in and continued to deceive us—for awhile. He got past the stimulus bill; he pushed through all the bailouts; took over the banking and auto industries; he spent an inordinate amount of time describing the United States to the world as arrogant, unchristian and weak.

Then came the health care bill. Then, from every city, village and township came the cry, “No! No!” and “HELL NO!”

To no avail.

We were date-raped. And will continue to be raped and pillaged and plundered until we put a stop the all the madness in November. Our power-mad narcissist currently occupying the oval office, when he’s not out campaigning for more spending, will continue his inexorable destruction of America until every one of his creatures is voted out of office.

I mentioned that my “date” may have had a modicum of decency that night so long ago that prevented him from raping me. Obama has none. He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing; he is evil personified, and he comes from evil; he has no choice but to continue to demolish everything that is truth and justice.

Finally, please read this poem again. I just read it with tears streaming down my face. If it doesn’t make you cry, it should. Unfortunately the enemy is closer; it’s in our schools, universities, government, news media and neighborhoods.

Paul Revere's Ride
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Listen my children and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere,
On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-five;
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year.

He said to his friend, "If the British march
By land or sea from the town to-night,
Hang a lantern aloft in the belfry arch
Of the North Church tower as a signal light,--
One if by land, and two if by sea;
And I on the opposite shore will be,
Ready to ride and spread the alarm
Through every Middlesex village and farm,
For the country folk to be up and to arm."

Then he said "Good-night!" and with muffled oar
Silently rowed to the Charlestown shore,
Just as the moon rose over the bay,
Where swinging wide at her moorings lay
The Somerset, British man-of-war;
A phantom ship, with each mast and spar
Across the moon like a prison bar,
And a huge black hulk, that was magnified
By its own reflection in the tide.

Meanwhile, his friend through alley and street
Wanders and watches, with eager ears,
Till in the silence around him he hears
The muster of men at the barrack door,
The sound of arms, and the tramp of feet,
And the measured tread of the grenadiers,
Marching down to their boats on the shore.
Then he climbed the tower of the Old North Church,
By the wooden stairs, with stealthy tread,
To the belfry chamber overhead,
And startled the pigeons from their perch
On the sombre rafters, that round him made
Masses and moving shapes of shade,--
By the trembling ladder, steep and tall,
To the highest window in the wall,
Where he paused to listen and look down
A moment on the roofs of the town
And the moonlight flowing over all.

Beneath, in the churchyard, lay the dead,
In their night encampment on the hill.
Wrapped in silence so deep and still
That he could hear, like a sentinel's tread,
The watchful night-wind, as it went
Creeping along from tent to tent,
And seeming to whisper, "All is well!"
A moment only he feels the spell
Of the place and the hour, and the secret dread
Of the lonely belfry and the dead;
For suddenly all his thoughts are bent
On a shadowy something far away,
Where the river widens to meet the bay,--
A line of black that bends and floats
On the rising tide like a bridge of boats.

Meanwhile, impatient to mount and ride,
Booted and spurred, with a heavy stride
On the opposite shore walked Paul Revere.
Now he patted his horse's side,
Now he gazed at the landscape far and near,
Then, impetuous, stamped the earth,
And turned and tightened his saddle girth;
But mostly he watched with eager search
The belfry tower of the Old North Church,
As it rose above the graves on the hill,
Lonely and spectral and sombre and still.
And lo! as he looks, on the belfry's height
A glimmer, and then a gleam of light!
He springs to the saddle, the bridle he turns,
But lingers and gazes, till full on his sight
A second lamp in the belfry burns.

A hurry of hoofs in a village street,
A shape in the moonlight, a bulk in the dark,
And beneath, from the pebbles, in passing, a spark
Struck out by a steed flying fearless and fleet;
That was all! And yet, through the gloom and the light,
The fate of a nation was riding that night;
And the spark struck out by that steed, in his flight,
Kindled the land into flame with its heat.
He has left the village and mounted the steep,
And beneath him, tranquil and broad and deep,
Is the Mystic, meeting the ocean tides;
And under the alders that skirt its edge,
Now soft on the sand, now loud on the ledge,
Is heard the tramp of his steed as he rides.

It was twelve by the village clock
When he crossed the bridge into Medford town.
He heard the crowing of the cock,
And the barking of the farmer's dog,
And felt the damp of the river fog,
That rises after the sun goes down.

It was one by the village clock,
When he galloped into Lexington.
He saw the gilded weathercock
Swim in the moonlight as he passed,
And the meeting-house windows, black and bare,
Gaze at him with a spectral glare,
As if they already stood aghast
At the bloody work they would look upon.
It was two by the village clock,
When he came to the bridge in Concord town.
He heard the bleating of the flock,
And the twitter of birds among the trees,
And felt the breath of the morning breeze
Blowing over the meadow brown.
And one was safe and asleep in his bed
Who at the bridge would be first to fall,
Who that day would be lying dead,
Pierced by a British musket ball.

You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,---
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.

So through the night rode Paul Revere;
And so through the night went his cry of alarm
To every Middlesex village and farm,---
A cry of defiance, and not of fear,
A voice in the darkness, a knock at the door,
And a word that shall echo for evermore!
For, borne on the night-wind of the Past,
Through all our history, to the last,
In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
The people will waken and listen to hear
The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
And the midnight message of Paul Revere.

This poem is one of many published by the EServer, a non-profit collective of students and faculty at Iowa State University.

Love

Granny

Isaiah 28:14-20

2010-04-05T15:07:00.000-07:00

A couple of weeks ago the pastor (visiting) used this text for his sermon. I was so intrigued by it that I looked it up in some other versions just to see if any of the meaning changed. Since we use the King James in our church I went online and used Bible Gateway to look up the others.

The message is the same. The strikethroughs are mine as is the blue text. I was going to do it in red but the words of our Lord are in red in most Bibles. And you may trust me when I say that what you read in blue are NOT the words of our Lord. I used "herself" and "her" so that there would be no mistake about the speaker.

“Isaiah 28:14-20 (King James Version)
14Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men [and women] that rule this people which is in ~~Jerusalem~~ the United States of America.

15Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:

16Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

17Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.

18And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.

19From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.

20For the bed is shorter than that a man [or a woman] can stretch himself [or herself] on it: and the covering narrower than that he [or she] can wrap himself [or herself] in it.

Isaiah 28:14-20 (New Living Translation)
14Therefore, listen to this message from the LORD,
you scoffing rulers in ~~Jerusalem~~ the United States of America.
15 You boast, “We have struck a bargain to cheat death
and have made a deal to dodge the grave.[a]
The coming destruction can never touch us,
for we have built a strong refuge made of lies and deception.”

Truer words were never spoken. The entire system is built on lies. It’s sad to see so many people believing these lies. But people have believed them for centuries. It is also heartening to see some are actually beginning to take a good look at the truth and see the lies for what they are. When the light of truth is shown on a lie there is no place for it to hide.

16 “Therefore, this is what the Sovereign LORD says:
“Look! I am placing a foundation stone in Jerusalem,[b]
a firm and tested stone.
It is a precious cornerstone that is safe to build on.
Whoever believes need never be shaken.[c]
17 I will test you with the measuring line of justice
and the plumb line of righteousness.
Since your refuge is made of lies,
a hailstorm will knock it down.
Since it is made of deception,
a flood will sweep it away.
18 I will cancel the bargain you made to cheat death,
and I will overturn your deal to dodge the grave.
When the terrible enemy sweeps through,
you will be trampled into the ground.
19 Again and again that flood will come,
morning after morning,
day and night,
until you are carried away.”
This message will bring terror to your people.
20 The bed you have made is too short to lie on.
The blankets are too narrow to cover you.
Isaiah 28:14-20

(Today's New International Version)
14 Therefore hear the word of the LORD, you scoffers
who rule this people in ~~Jerusalem~~ the United States of America.
15 You boast, "We have entered into a covenant with death,
with the realm of the dead we have made an agreement.
When an overwhelming scourge sweeps by,
it cannot touch us,
for we have made a lie our refuge
and falsehood our hiding place."
16 So this is what the Sovereign LORD says:
"See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation;
the one who relies on it
will never be stricken with panic.
17 I will make justice the measuring line
and righteousness the plumb line;
hail will sweep away your refuge, the lie,
and water will overflow your hiding place.
18 Your covenant with death will be annulled;
your agreement with the realm of the dead will not stand.
When the overwhelming scourge sweeps by,
you will be beaten down by it.
19 As often as it comes it will carry you away;
morning after morning, by day and by night,
it will sweep through."
The understanding of this message
will bring sheer terror.
20 The bed is too short to stretch out on,
the blanket too narrow to wrap around you.

Isaiah 28:14-20 (Amplified Bible)
14Therefore hear the word of the Lord, you scoffers who rule this people in ~~Jerusalem~~ the United States of America!

15Because you have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with Sheol (the place of the dead) we have an agreement--when the overflowing scourge passes through, it will not come to us, for we have made lies our refuge, and in falsehood we have taken shelter.”

If ever anyone ever made a pact with the devil it’s that nest of vipers in Washington DC, from Satan’s houseboy to the goat lady from hell to the senatorial snake. And before you get all over me for being racist know this: the campaigner-in-chief could be pink, blue, mauve, yellow, maroon, puce or chartreuse. It would make no difference. Still a houseboy for Satan. Besides, for those of you who haven’t bothered looking into it, he’s not black. He’d like to be, but he’s not. Black was what got him into the Whitehouse. Black is not what he is. But, I digress.

“Therefore thus says the Lord God, Behold, I am laying in Zion for a foundation a Stone, a tested Stone, a precious Cornerstone of sure foundation; he who believes (trusts in, relies on, and adheres to that Stone) will not be ashamed or give way or hasten away [in sudden panic].

17I will make justice the measuring line and righteousness the plummet; and hail will sweep away the refuge of lies, and waters will overwhelm the hiding place (the shelter).

18And your covenant with death shall be annulled, and your agreement with Sheol (the place of the dead) shall not stand; when the overwhelming scourge passes through, then you will be trodden down by it.

19As often as it passes through, it [the enemy's scourge] will take you; for morning by morning will it pass through, by day and by night. And it will be utter terror merely to hear and comprehend the report and the message of it [but only hard treatment and dispersion will make you understand God's instruction].

20For [they will find that] the bed is too short for a man [or woman] to stretch himself [or herself] on and the covering too narrow for him [or her] to wrap himself [or herself] in. [All their sources of confidence will fail them.]”

Isn’t it comforting to know who is really in control? Believe in Him or not He is in charge. Keep this in mind: What do a dead atheist and a born again believer have in common? They both believe in God. We may all get swept away into socialism for a season but in the end the others will be swept away into perdition.

He is risen!

Love

Granny

How Many Even Knew it was a Republic?

2010-03-29T18:07:00.000-07:00

Last night I posted an article which was sent to me by a very dear friend. I posted it here and on Conservative Firestorm. I was guilty of that which I accuse many others of: failing to verify. Fortunately Cecil checked it out and found that the writer to whom it is attributed denies any connection with it. So I deleted it. It was an excellent atticle and I wonder why the writer didn't choose to claim it, but chose instead to lie about it, thereby rendering him-or her-self a phony. It seems we have deceivers on both sides. Big surprise there.

The following was sent to me by the Bob Livingston people so I'm pretty sure he wrote it:

"It Was A Republic, But We Couldn’t Keep It

March 29, 2010 by Bob Livingston

Will it never end?

Will the daily, relentless assault on our freedoms by the current socialist-in-chief, President Barack Obama, and the socialist Democrat-controlled Congress never end?

Will the constant pounding and pounding on the Constitution by Obama and Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the socialist elite elected class—as they work to not just chip away at our nation’s foundation as progressives before them, but to obliterate it completely—never end?

Will the takeover of business and industry never end?

Will the calls for a cap-and-trade system that will raise taxes and energy costs and further erode out economic well-being never end?

Will the push for amnesty for illegal aliens never end?

Will the spending and the money printing and currency debasement never end?

Will the hubris of the elected class never end?

Apparently not.

Day by day; week by week; month by month the socialist Democrats pounded away at so-called healthcare reform. In office for 14 months, the Obama-Pelosi-Reid triumvirate worked to enact a socialist, European-style big government healthcare system on America.

The American people didn’t want what Obama, Reid and Pelosi were peddling. By 59 percent to 39 percent, according to the latest CNN/Opinion Research poll, Americans opposed Obamacare.

And they said so over and over. They said 'no' to the secrecy of the bills, which were crafted in smoke-filled rooms, behind closed doors and foisted upon the public at the moment of the vote. They said 'no' to the cost which kept growing and growing with each incarnation. They said 'no' to the Louisiana Purchase (to get Mary Landrieu’s vote), the Cornhusker Kickback (to garner Ben Nelson’s support) and to the Gator Aid (to secure the support of senior citizens).

They said 'no' by marching on Washington D.C., by the tens of thousands. They said 'no' through the Tea Parties. They said so through calls and letters. They said “no” at town hall meetings. They said 'no,' 'no,' 'No,' 'NO!'

They said “no” at the voting booth in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Yet the socialist Democrats passed it anyway.

So the people ask, 'What part of no don’t you understand?'

Know this: Pelosi, Reid and Obama—they understand. They just don’t care. It’s the progressive way.

Responding to questions about the special favors garnered by recalcitrant Senators in order to enlist their support, Reid replied with something to the effect of: That’s the legislative process. If a Senator didn’t get something he wasn’t doing his job.

Hey. It’s only money, and printing it is cheap.

As Pelosi responded when asked where Congress gets the authority to mandate United States citizens purchase health insurance: 'Are you serious?'

Well, yes Madame Speaker, Constitutional issues are serious business to us. They should be to you. But they’re not. That’s because the Constitution limits their power over the citizenry and power is what the socialist elected elites seek.

If the Constitution was important to the socialist elite there would have been an open process in putting together a bill that reformed the health insurance system by letting the free market system work rather than further empowering government. And certainly there would have been no talk of using parliamentary trickery—the Slaughter Rule, also known as Deem and Pass—to pass it.

If the Constitution was important to the socialists there would be no provisions mandating that people buy something simply for being American and no need for 14 states to file suit against the Federal government for violating the 10th Amendment.

If the Constitution was important to the socialists Americans wouldn’t be sitting back asking themselves, 'What’s next on their agenda: Another stab at amnesty for illegals, another run at cap-and-trade, a gun grab, a value added tax?'

If the Constitution was important the government wouldn’t own General Motors, Chrysler, the financial industry and now, insurance companies.

If the Constitution was important the government wouldn’t be in the business of setting the salaries of everyone from the lowest level employee to the CEOs of large companies.

To be fair, all of this can be laid at the feet of the socialist Republicans who blindly followed George W. Bush’s big government socialism over the economic cliff. They—the socialist Republicans—are claiming an epiphany now and appear to be standing up to the Democrat tyranny. But like all socialist elected elites, when they controlled Congress the socialist Republicans grew government, expanded its power to monitor its citizenry and supported Bush’s nation-building, empire-expanding war policies and his original $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

Though they—the socialist Republicans—claim to be strict constructionists when it comes to the Constitution now, they helped Bush enact his ridiculous 'compassionate conservatism' that increased government entitlement spending and therefore increased the roles of non-producers eager to sponge off the hard work of the producers.

But that’s what you get from the socialist elected elites. They ignore the Constitution because to them the “be all and end all” is government. They like big government and they like bigger government even better.
You can be sure that the Obama-Pelosi-Reid triumvirate isn’t going to rest on its laurels. More big government programs are on the way.

And Pelosi is not afraid to kick in a few doors to accomplish it. As she told a group of Leftwing bloggers leading up the passage of Obamacare, '…once we kick through this door there will be more legislation to follow.'

So this is only the beginning of the socialist takeover of America. It’s evidence that sovereignty is in the hands of but a few, just as the writer Brutus warned in Anti-Federalist No. 1: 'If the people are to give their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen, must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few.'

At the close of the Constitutional Convention a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what type of government had been created. Franklin’s reply: 'A republic, if you can keep it.'

We couldn’t."

My fellow patriots, the people in our government have sold their souls to the devil. You can laugh me to scorn; it really doesn't make any difference to me. I'm old enough to remember learning American history before it was revised. What's going on now wasn't in the plan.

Love

Granny

Unjust and Unfounded

2010-03-27T06:12:00.000-07:00

The accusations are flying like insects around a corpse. “They” (that would be you and me of right-wing terrorist fame) are getting violent. “They” are shouting the “N” word. “They” are hurling bricks, or stones, or gum wrappers. “They’re” threatening our congressmen and women. They must be stopped.

I don’t know about you but the most violent thing I’ve done lately is set my microwave for 1 hour instead of 1 minute to heat a cup of coffee. That was violent. But it wasn’t aimed at any of the sorry excuses for the people in control of the government, who swore to uphold the Constitution. True, they swear a lot, but they sure as h$%& don’t uphold the Constitution. Here’s a checklist of the minimum standard for any federal law to constitutional, which I found on The Betrayal.

1. It must be within the limited federal powers enumerated in the Constitution

2. It must enjoy the support of the vast majority of “the governed,” from which all federal powers are derived

3. It must not infringe upon the unalienable individual rights of any citizen

4. It must not infringe upon the rights of any state, protected by the Tenth Amendment

5. It must become law by way of legal legitimate legislative process

Well, heck, it doesn’t look like the newly-passed Soetorocare meets any of these, does it? Would someone please tell me why we, the majority of Americans, who vociferously opposed it for months and months, shouldn’t be angry? When did anger become a crime? When did right become wrong? Why is it that the people who shoved this down our throats are the biggest bunch of cowards that ever drew a breath?

If I have to look at that rerun of a tearful Speaker Pelosi talking about how dangerous we are one more time I probably will become violent and blow out the TV screen. Either that or blow my groceries all over my shoes. President Soetoro, Vice President Garbage Mouth, Senators, Congressmen, lend me your ears. Get a grip! We are mad as hell! Deal with it!

Love

Granny

In God we Trust

2010-03-24T08:15:00.000-07:00

I shamelessly lifted this from an email I received yesterday. I don't know if it really came from a predominently black church in Virginia or a Baptist church in Fargo, North Dakota, but it doesn't really matter.

"Genesis 47:13-27

RECENT VIRGINIA CHURCH SERVICE-STIMULUS SERMON
Genesis 47:13-27

I would love to give the Pastor of this predominantly black church in Virginia a hug and a high five. This guy is obviously a leader.
Perhaps we should each decide who our real leader is.....It is amazing to see that very little has changed in 4,000 years.

---------------------------------------------------

Good morning, brothers and sisters; it's always a delight to see the pews crowded on Sunday morning, and so eager to get into God's Word. Turn with me in your Bibles, if you will to the 47th chapter of Genesis, we'll begin our reading at verse 13, and go through verse 27.

Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us? ....(reading)...
Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray... So we see that economic hard times fell upon Egypt , and the people turned to the government of Pharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grain harvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built. So the people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, and gave it all to him willingly in return for grain. And this went on until their money ran out, and they were hungry again.

So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock -their cattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey - to barter for grain, and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year.

But the famine wasn't over, was it? So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they had nothing left, except their land and their own lives. "There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh.." So they surrendered their homes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh's government, and then sold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain.

What can we learn from this, brothers and sisters?

That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hard times only leads to slavery? Yes.. That the only reason government wants to be our provider is to also become our master?

Yes.

But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt , in the land of Goshen .. And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly." God provided for His people, just as He always has! They didn't end up giving all their possessions to government, no, it says they gained possessions! But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one.

We see the same thing happening today - the government today wants to "share the wealth "once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants to take control of health care, just as it has taken control of education, and ration it back to us, and when government rations it, then government decides who gets it, and how much, and what kind. And if we go along with it, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the people of Egypt did four thousand years ago - as slaves to the government, and as slaves to our leaders.

What Mr. Obama's government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh's government did then, and it will end the same. And a lot of people like to call Mr.Obama a "Messiah," don't they? Is he a Messiah? A savior? Didn't the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, "You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh"?

Well, I tell you this - I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah! No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh.

Bow with me in prayer, if you will...
Lord, You alone are worthy to be served, and we rely on You, and You alone. We confess that the government is not our deliverer, and never rightly will be. We read in the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel, when Samuel warned the people of what a ruler would do, where it says "And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day.."
And Lord, we acknowledge that day has come. We cry out to you because of the ruler that we have chosen for ourselves as a nation. Lord, we pray for this nation. We pray for revival, and we pray for deliverance from those who would be our masters. Give us hearts to seek You and hands to serve You, and protect Your people from the atrocities of Pharaoh's government.
In God We Trust... "

Love

Granny

Aside From that How did Your Weekend Work out for You?

2010-03-22T10:07:00.000-07:00

I'm glad Democrats are keeping up with their Bible reading but, but it looks like bribery works out for them better than it did for Judas. Let's face it, you scratch an earnest-looking liberal Democrat, who looks like he gives a hoot about abortion, and you've still got a liberal Democrat. It’s kind of like trying to pet a really cute rabid dog. He will hurt you.

I read a post by a liberal blogger last night. One was all I could stomach. His shtick seems to be that all Republicans are mean-spirited, hateful, epithet screaming, racist thugs. How dare they utilize their freedom of speech? How dare they protest the most blatant thwarting of the Constitution in the history of our country?Sound familiar? I guess that would include me except that, until the Republican Party gets its act together I don’t consider myself a Republican. But I do consider myself a conservative. No, not a moderate conservative. That’s like being slightly pregnant. I’m a full bore, Constitution, gun and Bible clinging, evangelical Christian conservative. I’m the liberals’ worst nightmare. And I won’t shut up. I’m here to stay until someone gets off a shot before I do, or until God says, “Enough, already.”

The so-called passage of the socialized medicine bill was just another link in the chain. But it’s not a fait accompli quite yet. So Nancy Pelosi can continue being seventy, Mr. Prez can continue high-fiving, and Harry Reid can continue sliming around the senate. The people are still out here. The people are pissed. And the people will speak. One way or another. It doesn’t much matter to me and I’ll wager that it doesn’t much matter to the millions of patriots who are restless, irritable and discontent.

Read this, which I borrowed from Mad Mom and let's do whatever it takes to reclaim our country. What are afraid of? A little bloodshed? I hope not. Our Founding Fathers and the brave men and women who won this land sure weren't afraid. What 's it going to take?

Love

Granny

Things I’d Rather be Doing

2010-03-19T15:28:00.000-07:00

Below is a short list of things I’d prefer to be doing rather than getting busy signals from the fence-sitters in Washington. After trying for a good part of the day (I actually got through to one but then got put on hold interminably) to call reps at random I finally called the White House again. This time I actually asked to speak to THE PRESIDENT instead of just B.O. But the volunteer I talked to assured me she would write down everything I said and see to it that it got to his desk this afternoon. Oh, yeah. So I said things like “political suicide” and “impeachment” with an “unconstitutional” thrown in, which I’m sure impressed her greatly.

So here’s what I’d rather be doing:

Waiting to pass a kidney stone

Having root canal

Explaining to my electric company why I can’t pay my bill

Jumping off a high dive into a basket of broken light bulbs

Being dragged down a cobblestone street naked, tied to the exhaust of a city bus

I hope the guys who are doing the straddling all have jock itch.

God bless America!

Love

Granny

Call Barack Obama

2010-03-18T10:50:00.000-07:00

I called the White House just now and asked to speak to Barack Obama. Figured he was through sqandering more of our money in the Rose Garden so he’d have a minute to talk to me. I guess he was still busy because the gentleman who answered the phone transferred me to the comment line. After an eight-minute wait I got a real person and I was actually very polite as I left my comment: essentially, as a senior citizen, I feel the health care bill should be trashed and we should start over; the Slaughter Plan is unconstitutional. The end. I didn’t even refer to the president as—well, never mind. The lady I talked to was very courteous and I’m sure she’ll get the message to him right away. I know how important our feedback is to him and that’s probably why he has volunteers taking our messages. What a guy.

To make it easier for you, the number of the White House is 202-456-1414. The comment line is 202-456-1111. If you make a phone call it doesn’t cost that much and you can feel you did your civic duty.

Love

Granny

Mope and Change

2010-03-17T17:00:00.000-07:00

I don’t like change. I’m not talking about the four seasons, although the agony of waiting for spring to come can be a bit trying. The continued cold, the sloppy slush, or mud, or intermittent ice storms at times make us wish that Al Gore would just go away. To Pluto. Come to think of it, I’ve wished that for a long time.

Nor do I mean the $.27 you get back from your twenty at McDonald’s, for two meals. But hey, that was your choice. You had to have the extra cheese, bacon, fries, and the extra large shake. That’s something you have some control over.

I don’t even mean the change that comes as you get older. When I was young I used to dread being over forty. Or fifty. Or sixty. But I find that as I approach death panel age, I become more philosophical. It happens. There’s absolutely nothing I can do about it. And the comfort is in knowing that it happens to everyone. Mr. Ponce de Leon actually didn’t have it quite right, and I think he also became a senior citizen at some point, before the poisoned arrow got him. To be honest, I have a secret place in my psyche that laughs uproariously at younger people who consider me not quite adequate because I’ve achieved the age of wisdom. I was once where they are. They’ll be here soon enough, and will have to deal with young snots who don’t know their collective asps from a hole in the ground.

No, the change I’m talking about is the folding, spindling, and mutilating of the United States Constitution. Remember the part where it says, “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal?” Do you have any idea how many members of our government remember that? Do you think Chris Dodd gave it even a fleeting thought when he said we need to take another look at the constitution? WHAT!!! Mr. Dodd, you need to take the first look at the constitution.

“We the people” have been screaming our heads off for months. Actually, years. “We the people” would like to know just where in the constitution it says we should share the wealth, as our Joke-in-Chief suggested to Joe the Plumber, who has more integrity under his fingernails than our closet camel hugger president could ever dream of having. “We the people” gathered by the tens of thousands in Washington DC last September 12th to protest the travesty of a government that is riding roughshod over us with proposed taxes we can never hope to pay, and the Communist news media and the dishonorable administration ignored them.

“We the people” are outraged at the repulsive campaigning of our chief narcissist for a so-called health care bill that is nothing but more socialism and control being force fed to an increasingly edgy population. This is change we don’t need; this is change we don’t like. And this is change we will not endure.

Mr. President, stop standing there with your sleeves rolled up, trying to look like a regular guy, while pointing and screaming at the people who are increasingly angry with you, your Marxist cronies, and your congress. Take a look at what we don't want and don't need, and if you can’t handle it, get out of office and let someone with honor and honesty take over. I don’t need your change.

Love

Granny

Watch the Lamb

2010-03-13T15:22:00.000-08:00

I've gotten sick to death of everything that's going on in this country. Words escape me right now, so I thought I'd put this You Tube video up for whoever stumbles across this blog. I first heard Ray Boltz sing it over ten years ago but had never seen the dramatization, which is extermely powerful. It eclipses whatever crimes are being committed in the name of socialism, Marxism, pro life, progression, liberalism, and Islam.

Watch the Lamb.

God bless

Granny

Where is our Focus?

2010-03-10T06:37:00.000-08:00

Found these two items on WND. The first is by former linebacker for the Dallas cowboys and the Seattle Seahawks. The second is an interesting piece just to warm you where you are right now.

"Popular Hymn "Amazing Grace" a 237-Year Inspiration

On March 10, 1748, during a church service in Warwickshire, England, the captain of the slave ship Greyhound converted to Christianity. John Newton, who was just 22 years old at the time, vowed to spend the rest of his life making amends for what he had done.

A quarter of a century later then ordained Rev. Newton delivered a New Year’s Day sermon on the subject of faith. Although the text of that sermon has been lost, a hymn he wrote based on his notes went on to become one of the most popular gospel songs of all time. “Amazing Grace” has been recorded more than 1,800 times by such disparate musicians as Aretha Franklin, Rod Steward, the Dropkick Murphys and the Blind Boys of Alabama. In the early 1970s, a version by Judy Collins spent 67 weeks on the single chart in the United Kingdom. In 1972 an instrumental version by the Pipes and Drums and Military Band of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards was No. 1 in England for five weeks.

In the past 237 years, Newton’s grateful, graceful lyrics have given comfort and inspiration to many millions of people. And they no doubt will continue to do so for many centuries to come. We're all familiar with the first stanza of that lovely, memorable hymn. But here is the complete text:

'Amazing grace, how sweet the sound
That sav’d a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

''Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears reliev’d;
How precious did that grace appear,
The hour I first believ’d!

'Thro’ many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
‘Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

'The Lord has promis’d good to me,
His word my hope secures;
He will my shield and portion be,
As long as life endures.

'Yes, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease;
I shall possess, within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.

'The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, who call’d me here below,
Will be forever mine.'

May you be richly blessed, too."

—Chip Wood

I know that God's amazing grace can extend even to Congress and the present administration. Intellectually I know this. But it's really hard to pray for these people. Someone once said to me, "Pray to be willing." I can do that. It's a start.

Dr. Charles Stanley gave us this on Inauguration Day, while I was hunkered down in my house wearing black and crying uncontrollably. I printed it off and hung it over my computer monitor for about a year. Finally took it down because I couldn't bear to look at it in light of what's going on in Washington now. But it really needs to be back up—now more than ever. Here it is:

"Most of us realize that we should be interceding for our country’s leaders. But sometime we have difficulty knowing what to ask. Below are a few suggestions.

Pray that our elected officials would:

1.Recognize their personal sinfulness and need for the cleansing power of Jesus Christ.

2.Understand their inadequacy for the task before them and their need to pray for God’s wisdom, knowledge and courage.

3.Reject all counsel that violates the spiritual principles of God’s Word and be willing to trust God to lead them in the right direction.

4.Resist the pressures of those who would lead them astray or tempt them to disobey the Lord and His will for their lives.

5.Work to reverse the trend towards ungodliness in our land and to restore America’s Christ-centered values.

6.Be prepared to make godly choices in the best interest of America, regardless of the cost.

7.Rely on the Word of God and prayer for strength and success.

8.Maintain dignity, honor, trustworthiness, and righteousness in office.

9.Strive to be a godly example to the men, women, and children of this land.

10.Remember that while in office, they are accountable to God for their attitudes, actions, and motives.

If God’s people pray consistently and passionately for those in authority, the entire nation will be affected.

'The effective prayer of a righteous man [or woman] can accomplish much (James 5:16)."

Love

Granny

Ripe for a Master

2010-03-03T19:58:00.000-08:00

Fact: Of the 55 original delegates to the Constitutional Convention of the United States 3 were Deists. It’s a matter of record. Of the other 52 delegates, 28 were Episcopalian, 8 were Presbyterian, 7 Congregationalist, 2 Lutheran, 2 Dutch Reformed, 2 Methodists, 2 Catholic, and 1 unknown. Back in those days church membership required a public profession of Biblical faith, exactly as I did two years ago when I joined an independent Baptist church.

Fact: The majority of the framers of the Constitution were Biblical Christians, not Deists. Although they did not set up a Christian theocracy, their aim was to set up a just society, where Christianity or any other religion could be practiced without fear of interference. However, what can’t be denied is that Christianity was America’s first faith. Not Judaism. Not Islam. Not Evolution. Not Secularism.

Fact: Although great men such as Ethan Allen and Thomas Paine, who were Deists, certainly were important revolutionary figures, they were not, technically, among the Founding Fathers. And, while the contesters of our Founding Fathers’ beliefs love to toss around the term “Deist” like it’s a bad thing, may I remind you that they also toss around the term “Atheist” like it’s a good thing.

The authors of The Declaration of Independence and framers of the Constitution, Christians with perhaps four exceptions, possessed the faith of biblical patriarchs, and of course they would have set up texts based on the solid truths of their faith. “We hold these truths to be self evident . . .” This is the reason the two documents make so much sense, even to non-believers, and also the explanation for its having worked for so long, despite being trampled over the years by the forces of pure evil out of Washington. These men were steeped in Christian principles, so certainly they would have used these principles to create a working plan for freeing us from tyranny and establishing a new country. “. . . that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness . . .”

Furthermore, our Founding Fathers were well acquainted with the depravity of man. As George Washington wrote in his Undelivered First Inaugural Address: Fragments 1789: "The blessed Religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best Institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even, in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes. Should, hereafter, those who are intrusted[sic] with the management of this government, incited by the lust of power & prompted by the supineness[sic] or venality of their Constituents, overleap the known barriers of this Constitution and violate the unalienable rights of humanity: it will only serve to shew, that no compact among men (however provident in its construction & sacred in its ratification) can be pronounced everlasting and inviolable--and if I may so express myself, that no wall of words--that no mound of parchmt[sic] can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other.

But until the people of America shall have lost all virtue; until they shall have become totally insensible to the difference between freedom & slavery; until they shall have been reduced to such poverty of spirit--as to be willing to sell that preeminent blessing, the birthright of Freemen, for a mess of pottage; in short, until they shall have been found incapable of governing themselves and ripe for a master those consequences, I think, can never arrive.”

How prophetic. And how tragic that it has come to this. There are those who say our country has been stolen from us. No, through our abject inertia, we handed it to the secularists, to Dewey, Marx, Darwin, Freud, Jacoby, and Obama.

The early Ivy League colleges in the U.S. were founded by pastors and/or founded as Christian colleges. Harvard, Dartmouth, Yale, Princeton and Brown, now hotbeds of secularism and, in most cases, Marxism, all have their roots in Christianity. As an example, Brown University, on its website, says this: “Brown was the Baptist answer to Congregationalist Yale and Harvard, Presbyterian Princeton, and Episcopalian Penn and Columbia. At the time, it was the only one that welcomed students of all religious persuasions (following the example of Roger Williams, who founded Rhode Island in 1636 on the same principle). Brown has long since shed its Baptist affiliation, but remains dedicated to diversity and intellectual freedom.” I’m sure they have congratulated themselves on having eliminated that pesky Christianity from their hallowed halls.

In the finalized version of his inaugural address George Washington stated: “Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station; it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official Act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the Universe, who presides in the Councils of Nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that his benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the People of the United States, a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes: and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success, the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own; nor those of my fellow-citizens at large, less than either. No People can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.”

Please visit this page sometime and bring yourself up to date on our Founding Fathers. Has America lost all virtue? Have we become totally insensible to the difference between slavery and freedom? Are we incapable of governing ourselves and ripe for a master? It looks that way, doesn’t it? Do we really want the man who is presently in the White House to be that master? Or the next man? Do we want to continue on the course we have set? Or are we prepared to do whatever it takes to change that course and take back the government our Christian Founding Fathers had in mind?

The lies will continue, and the manipulation and the encroachment on our freedoms will intensify unless we put a stop to them. I firmly believe our best hope is found in II Chronicles 7:14 and Malachi 3:7. Look them up if you’re not already familiar with them. And please join me in continued prayer for America.

In His amazing love

Granny

Mary Jane to the Rescue

2010-02-22T10:47:00.000-08:00

Why didn’t I think of this before I fired my doctor? It would have saved me the hassle of finding a new one and sharing my rather boring medical history with yet one more professional. I guess the biggest problem now would be access. Back in the seventies I was rather proficient at rolling joints, even though I never imbibed that much. “What is 'that much?'” you may ask. Not much.

But, fortunately, my new doc understands pain and has me on a half-baked medication which I take only occasionally. But wouldn’t it be nice to curl up with a good book , a warm blanket, a warm doggy, and a warm joint?

Oh, wait. It’s illegal, smelly, and semi-bad for your health. Guess I could go to a rock concert and enjoy the second hand smoke. It worked for me when I went to Jesus Christ Superstar in Hawaii about a thousand years ago. However, I rather like the pipe idea.

For all you seniors and senior wannabes here's the article from CNS News:

"More Senior Citizens Using Marijuana

Monday, February 22, 2010

By Matt Sedensky, Associated Press

Miami (AP) - In her 88 years, Florence Siegel has learned how to relax: A glass of red wine. A crisp copy of The New York Times, if she can wrest it from her husband. Some classical music, preferably Bach. And every night like clockwork, she lifts a pipe to her lips and smokes marijuana.

Long a fixture among young people, use of the country's most popular illicit drug is now growing among the AARP set, as the massive generation of baby boomers who came of age in the 1960s and '70s grows older.

The number of people aged 50 and older reporting marijuana use in the prior year went up from 1.9 percent to 2.9 percent from 2002 to 2008, according to surveys from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

The rise was most dramatic among 55- to 59-year-olds, whose reported marijuana use more than tripled from 1.6 percent in 2002 to 5.1 percent.

Observers expect further increases as 78 million boomers born between 1945 and 1964 age. For many boomers, the drug never held the stigma it did for previous generations, and they tried it decades ago.

Some have used it ever since, while others are revisiting the habit in retirement, either for recreation or as a way to cope with the aches and pains of aging.

Siegel walks with a cane and has arthritis in her back and legs. She finds marijuana has helped her sleep better than pills ever did. And she can't figure out why everyone her age isn't sharing a joint, too.

'They're missing a lot of fun and a lot of relief,' she said.

Politically, advocates for legalizing marijuana say the number of older users could represent an important shift in their decades-long push to change the laws.

'For the longest time, our political opponents were older Americans who were not familiar with marijuana and had lived through the 'Reefer Madness' mentality and they considered marijuana a very dangerous drug,' said Keith Stroup, the founder and lawyer of NORML, a marijuana advocacy group.

'Now, whether they resume the habit of smoking or whether they simply understand that it's no big deal and that it shouldn't be a crime, in large numbers they're on our side of the issue.'

Each night, 66-year-old Stroup says he sits down to the evening news, pours himself a glass of wine and rolls a joint. He's used the drug since he was a freshman at Georgetown, but many older adults are revisiting marijuana after years away.

'The kids are grown, they're out of school, you've got time on your hands and frankly it's a time when you can really enjoy marijuana,' Stroup said. 'Food tastes better, music sounds better, sex is more enjoyable.'

The drug is credited with relieving many problems of aging: aches and pains, glaucoma, macular degeneration, and so on. Patients in 14 states enjoy medical marijuana laws, but those elsewhere buy or grow the drug illegally to ease their conditions.

Among them is Perry Parks, 67, of Rockingham, N.C., a retired Army pilot who suffered crippling pain from degenerative disc disease and arthritis. He had tried all sorts of drugs, from Vioxx to epidural steroids, but found little success. About two years ago he turned to marijuana, which he first had tried in college, and was amazed how well it worked for the pain.

'I realized I could get by without the narcotics, 'Parks said, referring to prescription painkillers. 'I am essentially pain free.'

But there's also the risk that health problems already faced by older people can be exacerbated by regular marijuana use.

Older users could be at risk for falls if they become dizzy, smoking it increases the risk of heart disease and it can cause congnitive impairment, said Dr. William Dale, chief of geriatrics and palliative medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center.

He said he'd caution against using it even if a patient cites benefits.

'There are other better ways to achieve the same effects,' he said.

Pete Delany, director of applied studies at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, said boomers' drug use defied stereotypes, but is important to address.

'When you think about people who are 50 and older you don't generally think of them as using illicit drugs -- the occasional Hunter Thompson or the kind of hippie dippie guy that gets a lot of press maybe," he said. As a nation, it's important to us to say, 'It's not just young people using drugs it's older people using drugs.''

In conversations, older marijuana users often say they smoke in less social settings than when they were younger, frequently preferring to enjoy the drug privately. They say the quality (and price) of the drug has increased substantially since their youth and they aren't as paranoid about using it.

Dennis Day, a 61-year-old attorney in Columbus, Ohio, said when he used to get high, he wore dark glasses to disguise his red eyes, feared talking to people on the street and worried about encountering police. With age, he says, any drawbacks to the drug have disappeared.

'My eyes no longer turn red, I no longer get the munchies,' Day said. 'The primary drawbacks to me now are legal.'

Siegel bucks the trend as someone who was well into her 50s before she tried pot for the first time. She can muster only one frustration with the drug.

'I never learned how to roll a joint," she said. 'It's just a big nuisance. It's much easier to fill a pipe.'"

My only comment is this: At our age, what's it going to hurt? Our ability to reproduce? C'mon, Dr. Dale, give us a break. And if Ms Seigel is reading the New York Times, she's going to need more than that weed in her pipe.

Love

Granny

Just Some Ramblings

2010-02-15T17:08:00.000-08:00

At first blush this will appear to be about the most politically incorrect post I’ve put up. But, ya know what? I really don’t give a rip. It’s been eating away at me for years and now that I have my own blog I can pretty much say what I want. For now. That may change. And as I've said before, political correctness will blow us all to kingdom come.

When I was a kid we celebrated George Washington’s Birthday. It was a holiday. We got off school because it was a BIG DEAL. And we celebrated Lincoln’s Birthday. It, too, was a holiday. We got off school. It was a BIG DEAL. Now we celebrate Presidents Day. Or is it President’s Day? If so, which president? Or is it Presidents’ Day? That would be sort of an all purpose day celebrating all presidents, some of whom don’t and didn’t even deserve to be called by the name. So who, besides retail merchants, actually celebrates this day? I suppose President Obama can celebrate it because, after all, it puts him in the spotlight (again), and God knows that’s where he needs to be. The truth is, it’s been so long since it was changed to Presidents Day, hardly anyone knows what the heck it signifies—the observance of two of our greatest presidents.

In some states Washington and Lincoln, and all the other presidents have been thrown together like a miscellaneous box of used stuff at an auction sale. But Martin Luther King, Jr., now he gets his own day. Why? Did he put this country together when it could well have fallen apart? Nope. Did he free the slaves? Don’t think so. Now, I know he “did a lot of good.” But so did Ronald Reagan, who was instrumental in making MLK Day a national holiday. You’ll notice Reagan doesn’t have his own holiday. Well, heck, he was only responsible for stopping the cold war. No biggee.

Before you left wing, brain dead, politically correct nut jobs start coming out from under your rocks, let it be known that I would object to any private citizen having his own holiday. However, if there were to be a holiday celebrating a private citizen I would vote for Crispus Attucks Day. Google him for yourself and then attack me.

While you’re ruminating on this watch this video. It might help to clear your mind.

Love

Granny

Just Another Step Toward A Godless America

2010-02-11T10:34:00.000-08:00

According to Religious Tolerance.org as of 2008 79.9% of Americans considered themselves Christian. Religious Jews constituted 1.2%. Obama would disagree, and I'm not sure what folks mean when they claim Christianity. However, America was founded on Christian principles and remains a Judeo-Christian nation today, much to the consternation of liberals\progressives\communists (assuming there's a difference.)

So I found this article interesting from the standpoint of a Christian, married, working woman. As a Christian, I'm wondering what it would take for me to divorce my husband just to cater to the whim of the government. Fortunately I won't have that choice to make, because, at our age, Cec and I are more subject to Death Panels than penalties.
"DOCTOR'S ORDERS

It's ba-ack! Health-care plan redoubles 'marriage penalty'

Congressional proposals could penalize couples $10,000 for saying 'I do'

Posted: February 10, 2010
11:03 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Bills pending in Congress that would nationalize "health care" by setting up mandatory insurance purchases and fines for not complying could penalize married couples $10,000 annually and are a direct attack on marriage, families and the church because of their discriminatory provisions, according to a congressional candidate.

"This is as awful, I will say evil ... this is as evil as it gets," Allen Quist, who is running to unseat Democrat Tim Walz in Minnesota's 1st congressional district, told WND.

Quist said the fine print of provisions still alive in both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives deliberately create enormous pressure for couples to live together without marriage – or even get divorced – by charging married couples thousands of dollars more in premiums and fees.

"And it's deliberate," Quist added, "This is clearly not accidental."

"This is the most insidious attack on our country we have ever seen," Quist said earlier this week in an interview with David Barton of WallBuildersLive.com.

"In fact you have government policies tearing apart marriage," he said. "Marriage is the foundation of society. It's the foundation of our government and to a large degree the basic unit in the church. [The policy] undermines the church's teaching and undermines church structure.

"It weakens the family. It weakens the church, and it weakens our country," he said.

Quist is retired adjunct professor of political science at Bethany Lutheran College in Mankato, Minn., and has written five books, including his most recent, "America's Schools: The Battleground for Freedom." He played a role in legalizing home schools in Minnesota and was one of seven delegates elected from the state to the White House Conference on Families in 1980.

He currently writes and edits curriculum modules that can be used by teachers to supplement school texts. The material focuses on "exciting new information that will not be included in textbooks because the information contradicts politically correct worldviews including Darwinism and global warming."

Marriage penalty

The Democrats' health care legislation essentially would restore the old "marriage penalty," Quist said. Under the U.S. Tax Code for many years, people who were married and had two incomes paid income tax on the second income that started at the highest rate for taxes on the first income.

A husband's first $5,000 in income was taxed at the same – or next higher rate – as the wife's highest $5,000 in income in a year.

However, if the two people were living together without marriage, the incomes were separate, and the second income would be taxed starting at the lowest rate of the tax table.

Members of Congress worked for years to repeal the measure and take away the financial penalty for being married.

Quist said the new health-care provisions restore the penalty and double it. He said all he needed to figure that out was his knowledge of how government works – he's been a state representative for multiple terms – and a calculator. Under the two proposals pending, which are similar, two unmarried people with a combined income of about $59,000 would pay about $1,320 a year in medical insurance.

For a married couple with the same approximate income, the tab would be about $12,000.

It would hit young married couples hard and even would bite back at empty-nesters whose children have moved away from home, he said.

Two WND columnists previously have cited the disparity in the health care programs' recommended costs for couples. Phyllis Schlafly wrote, "Even though all evidence shows that marriage is the best remedy for poverty, lack of health care, domestic violence, child abuse and school dropouts, federal welfare programs continue to discriminate against marriage and instead give taxpayer handouts to those who reject marriage."

She cited tables revealing the House bill cost for an unmarried couple with $50,000 in combined income would be $3,076 a year. Married, they would pay $5,160.

Columnist Craige McMillan went further, noting that the head of a family making $44,000 a year would see periodic take-home pay of $2,854 reduced to $1,604 because of mandatory health insurance costs.

He reported, however, a single woman with the same income would have her income drop only from $2,687 to $2,603 because she could opt to pay a penalty instead of buying insurance.

"If she gets sick the new ban on pre-existing illnesses means she can sign up the month before she needs an expensive operation – and drop coverage a month later. And since emergency rooms will still have to treat the uninsured, no questions asked, why would she carry insurance?"

But Quist went further, charging that it is a deliberate attack on Christians.

"It's persecution of the church, because of the church's involvement with marriage," he said.

"Millions of families [will have the choice] of staying married and not making their house, their mortgage payments or getting divorced and making their payments," he said.

"This thing is designed to destroy marriage in the middle class – just as we've destroyed it on the poverty level," he said, citing aid programs that lend more benefits to a single mother with children than the same family with a father present.

Quist said. "It's going to come in like a freight train."

According to a Heritage Foundation analysis, the provisions in the Senate bill confirm that "saying 'I do' would cost some couples over $10,000 a year."

"At nearly all age and income levels, the bill profoundly discriminates against married couples, providing far less support to a husband and wife than to a cohabiting couple with the same income," the analysis said.

"Under the Senate bill, married couples in general would receive between $1,500 and $10,000 less in government health care support than would cohabiting couples with the same total income."

"For example, a young couple without children, age 20, each making $20,000, would receive $4,317 more in health benefits each year if they cohabit rather than marry. Slipping on the wedding ring would cut the couple's annual disposable income by more than 10 percent. Rather than pay this new wedding tax, the couple is likely to postpone marriage or forego it entirely," the analysis said.

Empty-nesters "would pay an effective tax of $5,000 to $10,000 per year for the right to remain married," the report continued. "For example, a 60-year-old couple, each earning $30,000 per year, would receive $10,425 per year less in benefits if they marry or remain married. Simply by divorcing and then living together, the couple can boost their post-tax, take-home income by nearly one-fourth."

The Heritage report warned, "The bill's wedding tax is perpetual. … Some couples who remained married throughout their adult lives would face cumulative penalties of over $200,000 during the course of their marriage."

Robert Rector, the author of the analysis and a Senior Research Fellow in Domestic Policy Studies at the foundation, concluded, "On the other hand, the bill establishes cohabiters as a privileged special interest, quietly channeling tens of thousands of dollars to them in preferential government bonuses. Offering couples massive financial rewards on the condition they jettison their wedding vows, or decline to make them in the first place, is absurd social policy. But that would be the established policy of the U.S. government if Obamacare becomes law."

Love

Granny

I think this was Supposed to be Serious

2010-02-09T10:17:00.000-08:00

I work nights in a nursing home and many of the residents like to keep their TVs on all night. I caught this in the wee hours of this morning and thought it was hilarious. For those of you who may have missed it here it is again. Try to count how many shovels you may need to get through it. (Hint: You may run out of fingers and toes.) Skip over the commercials.

Love

Granny

P.S. John Murtha is still dead.

Governor Jeremiah Nixon

2010-02-08T07:06:00.000-08:00

I've simply copied and pasted this from WND for your perusal. I can't add to it without violating my pledge not to use words which would offend my Lord.

"OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL

Gov. who linked Christians, violence latest Obama pick

Missouri report tied 'domestic terrorists' with opposition to abortion, immigration

Posted: February 07, 2010

9:24 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Missouri Gov. Nixon

President Obama has picked to advise him on military actions inside the U.S. the Missouri governor whose state "Information Analysis Center" last year linked conservative organizations to domestic terrorism and said law enforcement officers should watch for suspicious individuals who may have bumper stickers from Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin.

Missouri Gov. Jeremiah Nixon, a Democrat, is being joined on the Obama's special advisory panel by the governor of Puerto Rico, Luis Fortuno, and Arizona Gov. Janice Brewer, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's replacement when she moved to Washington.

They are among Obama's nominations for the 10 positions on Obama's new "Council of Governors" that he will use for advice on "military activities in the United States."

WND reported earlier when Obama announced the council to advise on military actions in the U.S. and "to protect our nation against all types of hazards."

A subsequent WND report confirmed when a rebellion developed to the order, and a new push was launched for states to adopt laws limiting the use of their National Guard units unless there is an invasion, insurrection or other limited circumstance.

The original announcement said the new council is to include governors and administration officials to review "such matters as involving the National Guard of the various states; homeland defense, civil support; synchronization and integration of state and federal military activities in the United States; and other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities."

However, there was no definition of the group's authority. Can the council recommend "military activities" and can the governors, who already are in command of their own state guard units, mandate activities outside of their areas of jurisdiction? The White House did not respond to WND questions on the issue.

A new announcement from the White House lists Nixon as one of the nominees.

"He is responsible for operating Missouri's innovative fusion center, the Missouri Information Analysis Center," the announcement confirmed.

It was in 2009 when the MIAC issued a report that not only linked conservative groups to domestic terrorism and warned law enforcement to watch for vehicles with bumper stickers promoting Paul and Baldwin, it also warned police to watch out for individuals with "radical" ideologies based on Christian views, such as opposing illegal immigration, abortion and federal taxes.

Ultimately, Chief James Keathley of the Missouri State Patrol said the release of the report caused him to review the procedures through which the report was released.

"My review of the procedures used by the MIAC in the three years since its inception indicates that the mechanism in place for oversight of reports needs improvement," he said at the time. "Until two weeks ago, the process for release of reports from the MIAC to law enforcement officers around the state required no review by leaders of the Missouri State Highway Patrol or the Department of Public Safety."

He said the report warning about those who hold Christian views was "created by a MIAC employee, reviewed by the MIAC director, and sent immediately to law enforcement agencies across Missouri. The militia report was never reviewed by me or by the Director of Public Safety, John Britt, at any point prior to its issuance. Had that report been reviewed by either my office or by leaders of the Department of Public Safety, it would never have been released to law enforcement agencies."

Keathley said the report simply "does not meet" the needed standard for "intelligence." So he ordered its distribution to be halted.

But that warning had prompted Americans for Legal Immigration to issue a "national advisory" against relying on any such reports.

The Missouri document, it said, "attempted to politicize police and cast suspicion on millions of Americans. The 'Missouri Documents,' as they came to be called, listed over 32 characteristics police should watch for as signs or links to domestic terrorists, which could threaten police officers, court officials, and infrastructure targets.

"Police were instructed to look for Americans who were concerned about unemployment, taxes, illegal immigration, gangs, border security, abortion, high costs of living, gun restrictions, FEMA, the IRS, The Federal Reserve, and the North American Union/SPP/North American Community. The 'Missouri Documents' also said potential domestic terrorists might like gun shows, short wave radios, combat movies, movies with white male heroes, Tom Clancey novels, and Presidential Candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin!" ALIPAC wrote.

"When many of us read these Missouri Documents we felt that the false connections, pseudo research, and political attacks found in these documents could have been penned by the SPLC and ADL," said William Gheen of ALIPAC. "We were shocked to see credible law enforcement agencies disseminating the same kind of over the top political propaganda distributed by these groups."

The Missouri situation was just the tip of the iceberg, however. WND reported only weeks later when a Department of Homeland Security report warned against the possibility of violence by unnamed "right-wing extremists" concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty and singled out returning war veterans as particular threats.

The report, titled "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," dated April 7, 2009, stated that "threats from white supremacist and violent anti-government groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts."

However, the document, first reported by talk-radio host and WND columnist Roger Hedgecock, went on to suggest worsening economic woes, potential new legislative restrictions on firearms and "the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."

The report from DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis defined right-wing extremism in the U.S. as "divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

Most notable was the report's focus on the impact of returning war veterans.

"Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists," it said. "DHS/I&A is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities."

Now Gov. Nixon will advise Obama on those military and National Guard actions inside the U.S.

"I am pleased that these governors of exceptional experience have agreed to join the Council of Governors," Obama said in the newest White House announcement. "This bipartisan team strengthens the partnership between our state governments and the federal government when it comes to ensuring our national preparedness and homeland defense."

"I look forward to working with them in the years ahead," Obama said of the council, which was created Jan. 11 by his executive order.

The nominees are:

• Gov. James H. Douglas of Vermont, a Republican who is chairman of the National Governors Association. He established his state's Homeland Security Advisory Council to review its security policies.

• Gov. Chris Gregoire of Washington, a Democrat who is on the National Governors Association executive committee as well as its special committee on Homeland Security.

• Gov. Janice Brewer of Arizona, a Republican who took office when Napolitano was named Homeland Security secretary. She served on the governor's Military Task Force dealing with base closures.

• Gov. Luis Fortuna of Puerto Rico, a Republican who is on the National Governors Association Economic Development and Commerce Committee.

• Gov. Brad Henry of Oklahoma, a Democrat on the Education, Early Childhood and Workforce committee for the governors association

• Gov. Robert McDonnell of Virginia, a Republican elected last year. He is on the governors' Health and Human Services committee.

• Gov. Jeremiah Nixon of Missouri, a Democrat on the governors' Health and Human Services Committee who operates his state's fusion center, the Missouri Information Analysis Center.

• Gov. Martin O'Malley of Maryland, a Democrat who serves on the governors' committee on Education, Early Childhood and Workforce as well as its committee on Homeland Security.

• Gov. Beverly Eaves Perdue of North Carolina, a Democrat who is a lead governor for the National Guard. She's on the governors' Economic Development and Commerce committee as well as the committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety.

• Gov. Michael Rounds of South Dakota, a Republican who previously headed the Western Governors Association.

The rebellion to Obama's plans regarding the Council of Governors had come from the Tenth Amendment Center, which is recommending a model legislation that states can use to limit the activities of their own National Guard members.

The model legislation states: "The governor shall withhold or withdraw approval of the transfer of the National Guard to federal control in the absence of: a) A military invasion of the United States, or b) An insurrection, or c) A calling forth of the guard by the federal government in a manner provided for by Congress to execute the laws of the union, provided that said laws were made in pursuance of the delegated powers in the Constitution of the United States, or d) A formal declaration of war from Congress."

The organization said the requests to state legislatures already have begun with a letter on the issue dispatched by Walt Garlington, founder of the Louisiana State Sovereignty Committee, to state Rep. Brett F. Geymann.

The model legislation proposed by the Tenth Amendment Center says the law is, "For the purpose of requiring the governor to withhold or withdraw approval of the transfer of this state's National Guard to federal control in the absence of an explicit authorization adopted by the federal government in pursuance of the powers delegated to the federal government in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the U.S. Constitution."

Los Angeles Times blogger Andrew Malcolm poked fun at the announcement, writing Obama "has determined that, a) there is an insufficient number of advisory bodies among the gazillion already in existence for the federal government in general and said president and his White House specifically."

Obama also, Malcolm said, "chooses to ignore the existence of the National Governors Assn., the Republican Governors Assn., the Democratic Governors Assn. and the secure telephones within arms-reach of virtually everywhere said president chooses to sit and/or recline."

Ultimately, he said, Obama has decided, "One more meaningless advisory body probably couldn't hurt anything, and might actually look good."

At Canada Free Press, commentary writer Judi McLeod said, "Like the 30-plus czars running America with neither the people's nor the Congress's blessings, the Council of Governors is already a done deal."

Blogger Nicholas Contompasis suggested it was the "first step towards martial law in America" because it sets up the "use of federal troops and the combination of state and federal agencies under the Defense Department."

Participants on his forum page said the order appears to be in defiance of posse comitatus, which restricts U.S. military action within the United States. One contributor noted the order talks about "hazards" but then addresses only military hazards.

"The very notion of the executive branch (good intentions or not) issuing executive orders/presidential directives that apply to anything or anyone not specifically within the executive branch is tyrannical," the forum participant said. " (Italics mine)

God help us.

Love

Granny

Native Tongue

2010-02-07T13:58:00.000-08:00

I received a comment on my last post “Why is this Guy in the White House?” (just below this) which I believe requires some sort of response. The first section of the post was missed entirely even though that was the thrust of the whole matter. But the comment addressed Obama’s mispronunciation of the work “Corpsman.” It was a “back to Bush” comment and referred to Bush’s mispronunciation of many words during his eight year tenure in the White House.

There are two problems here. The first is obvious: When are the liberals going to get past bringing up Bush when they run out of excuses for the hapless incompetent who now occupies the White House and has for the past thirteen months? I suspect the reason they do this is because they are desperate for something or someone to make their guy look a little less like the fool that he is. And a very dangerous fool at that. I also suspect they will never get over blaming Bush for everything from the earthquake in Haiti to ingrown toenails. Fine. Bush can handle it. He has more class in his little finger than the Community Organizer will ever dream of having.

The real point I was making was that every American school child, from the time he or she can start sounding out words, knows that the word “corps” is not pronounced “corpse.” This word has been around and used since the founding of our country. Name any soldier, sailor or marine who cannot say it correctly. Children—English-speaking children—begin learning the subtle nuances of the language early on. It’s just the way it is.

I will admit there are more people who use a hard “T” in the word “often” than do not. And there are those who cannot wrap their tongue around “nuclear.” I have a personal problem with the word “cellular” so I’m very grateful that I can shorten it to “cell” instead. But that doesn’t mean we don’t speak English natively.

What about Obama? Wouldn’t the Commander-in Chief of the armed forces of the United States of America, who is supposed to be an native-born American citizen, have learned how to say “corpsman” somewhere along the road to Washington? Just what is his native tongue that renders this word such a mystery to him?

You can laugh at Bush all you want, but you have never doubted his citizenship. You can ridicule, blame, reference and remember, but when it’s all said and done we have a man in the White House today who is going to bring our republic to an agonizing end if someone doesn’t step up and say, “Enough is enough. Get out of our house and give us back our Constitution. Then go back where you came from.”

Love

Granny

Why is this Guy in the White House?

2010-02-06T07:45:00.000-08:00

Among documentation which has not come forth for Obama:

1. Kindergarten Record
2. Punahou school records
3. Occidental College records
4. Columbia University records
5. Columbia thesis
6. Harvard Law School records
7. Harvard Law Review articles
8. scholarly articles from the University of Chicago
9. passport
10. medical records
11. files from his years as an Illinois state senator
12. his Illinois State Bar Association records
13. any baptism records
14. his adoption records

I took this off World Net Daily and put it in list form so we could better see what it entails. It’s a pretty impressive list. Notice it doesn’t include the birth certificate. I will admit there are items on the list that I couldn’t come up with, but I’m not running for POTUS. I’m not even running for dogcatcher, but I can guarantee if I were to run for anything I would be required to produce at least four of these items.

Cec got his driver’s license renewal notification the other day. Item number One is the following: NAME, DATE OF BIRTH, PLACE OF BIRTH—U.S. Citizen—One of the following:

U.S. Birth Certificate (certified with an embossed, stamped or raised seal issued by a state or local government)

U.S. Military Identification Card or Discharge Papers accompanied by a copy of U.S. Birth Certificate (issued by state or local government)

U.S. Certificate of Citizenship/Naturalization/Birth Abroad

U.S. Passport (valid or expired)

That’s just for a driver’s license. Think about it.

One comment before I end. Number "8" in the above list: scholarly articles from the University of Chicago—missing. Reason: He’s not a scholar. Any Commander-in-Chief who would pronounce “Corpsman” “Corpseman” should go straight to the back of the class. Or back where he came from. Or maybe straight to hell.

Love

Granny

Doctors and Death Panels

2010-02-01T12:40:00.000-08:00

I’m trying to fire my doctor of five-plus years. It’s turning out to be a little more difficult than I anticipated. I thought I could just call up a new one and make an appointment. No problem.

Wrong.

First of all, why am I firing my doctor? A few reasons. One: I told him I’m back at work after my back fracture and subsequent surgery but that I’m still having pain. His answer was, “How much longer are you planning on working?” Translation: “You’re an old, damaged hag and you should get out of the work force.”

Two: I told him the Tramadol and Robaxin I’m taking when I’m really, really in pain don’t work all that well. (I threw away my hydrocodone because I didn’t want to end up in drug rehab.) His answer: “How much are you taking daily?” Translation: “You’re probably dependent on them even though they’re non-narcotic.”

Three: He asked me, “How much longer are you planning on working?” Translation: See Number one. I told him a year or two. His answer: “If you continue working with pain the pain may become chronic.” Duh. I think it’s already chronic. See Number one translation. I think he really wanted to ask me how much longer I’m planning on living. The bottom line is he’s cold, unfeeling, plastic, and doesn’t seem to give a hoot about what he’s doing. Maybe it’s just me, but I’m not seeing a lot of compassion. Of course, he’s not seeing a lot of years left where I’m concerned. Or he might have been reading some of Ezekiel Emanuel’s famous quotes.

So a friend of mine recommended her doctor, who she says is very good, takes the time to listen, and happens to be a woman. I called this morning to make an appointment. The receptionist took all my personal information and then said, “So you want to see her because you have pain?” Translation: “You’re drug-seeking?” First of all, I didn’t know you had to apply to become a patient. I kind of thought it was the other way around. Aren’t we paying them?

As far as pain management, what ever happened to physical therapy? It seems to me that there must be something out there that doesn’t come down to quit work and sit home and join the rutabaga family. Maybe these people are gearing up for socialized medicine’s Death Panels. It’s always nice to have a leg up on something new. They’re certainly getting practice asking the end-of-lifequestions.

The irony in this is I work in a nursing home. Someday soon I’ll just climb into one of their beds and ask for a pain pill. I may just get it. Might even get some physical therapy, too.

Love

Granny

Small Dead Bird and Blue Screen of Death

2010-01-28T18:06:00.000-08:00

One of the drawbacks of starting a new job working nights (10:30pm-7:00am) is your life gets reduced to a series of brain bytes. Because I do very little but work and sleep, I pile up issues that need to be addressed when I have the time. In the case of the bird, it was fairly simple, but the source was a mystery to me until Cec got up this morning and explained.

I got up early (day off) to keep an appointment for a pre-employment physical—one of those “heart beating, at least one lung expanding, and able to stand upright”—deals required by corporate heads, who need to justify their existence. Walked the dogs, which in this case was a short one, still wearing my cotton jammies. We came in, I removed Gus’s leash and he headed for the warmth of the bedroom and I headed to the kitchen to make coffee. A while later I was on the way to the bathroom for a shower when I noticed Gus stretched out on the bed with a small dead bird stretched out beside him. For a small dog he has a disproportionately large mouth which has enabled him to smuggle a number of unpalatable specimens into the house over the years. In the case of this morning’s bird I was half asleep, which is probably why I hadn’t noticed the tail and/or the head sticking out of his mouth. Or maybe he had the whole thing crammed in there. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t in the bed when I retired last night; I would have noticed, I think.

Anyway, when Cec got up I mentioned it to him and he explained that the bird was a casualty of the side window, which is often mistaken for a flight pattern. Apparently it had ended up on the deck after breaking its neck and Maggie, our other dog, had relocated it to the front yard, and from there it found its way into Gus’s mouth. Small dead bird mystery solved.

The blue screen of death is another matter. Last week I was attempting to upload a few photographs from my documents onto my blog. I had succeeded in transferring two when that pesky blue screen appeared. You know the one: Fatal Error, indecipherable codes, lines and lines of white lettering that no one has time to even begin to read, much less translate, before the whole computer shuts down.

I tried again. Same thing. Then I decided to mail one at a time to one of our other emails. I got one loaded, hit send, and ten minutes later, got this message: “Unable to display this page.” The photo was gone, the email was gone, and the whole attempt was pretty much a bust. So, now I have files of pictures that I am unable to upload, download, or any other kind of load. I’m not computer savvy enough to solve this one. If anyone out there has even a modicum of knowledge in this area, I would appreciate any help I can get.

Meanwhile, I’ll continue to spend my life working and sleeping. Isn’t that how we spread the wealth?

Love

Granny

It Never Ends

2010-01-21T07:29:00.000-08:00

There are two things that really annoy me through this whole political travesty: One is my continued surprise at his continued arrogance no matter what transpires. The other is his continued arrogance no matter what transpires. I have a mental picture of the torches and pitchforks and the burning castle. As he goes up in a cloud of acrid smoke, he’s shouting, “Don’t I smell wonderful as I burn? It’s all Bush’s fault!"

He actually had the audacity—and I’m sorry, I run out of descriptive words—to say (paraphrasing) that the anger that swept Brown into office is the same anger that swept him into office, and that it goes back eight years. What??? Let me get this straight. The citizens of Massachusetts are angry at Bush so they elected a Republican senator.

Mr. President, get over Bush. The past eight years include last year, and that, my friend, was all yours. Since the entire universe is about you, let me validate this particular statement. LAST YEAR WAS ALL ABOUT YOU.

So, while the Democrats are setting world records for frenzy, the successor to the world class swimmer is going to Washington, hopefully to lend an air of sanity and credibility to the beleaguered city. No one knows what will happen, and the pundits, bloggers, and blowhards on both ends of the political spectrum have enough silage keep them busy until the next big news yarn comes along.

God bless America

Love

Granny

'Nuff Said

2010-01-19T19:05:00.000-08:00

There's absolutely nothing I can say about tonight's election except: "WE DON'T FEEL YOUR PAIN" and "IT'S NOT TED KENNEDY'S SEAT ANYMORE."

God bless America. The people have spoken.

Love

Granny

Review

2010-01-17T07:13:00.000-08:00

I'm putting this up as a review, lest we forget what he really is. How were we caught so unaware? Was it the black thing? Was it the hope thing? Was it the change thing? Now all we have is a "black" guy who is changing things so fast we're left with no hope at all. I would have no problem with his being black, but he isn't. He has lied about everything from the git go.

Love

Granny

A Crisis by Many Other Names

2010-01-15T09:22:00.000-08:00

There are two kinds of crises in the country: the “I’m gonna get something for nothing” crisis, and the “I’m gonna die” crisis. Notice that the word “I” is used, which tends to bring the whole thing down to where politics resides; with the individual.

Once upon a time, when Barack Obama was a little snot-nosed four-year-old, there were two youngish academics, who resided in New York and were associated with Columbia University. Radical socialists, they performed pretty much as one would expect from academia, and they were in the company of countless other socialist, Marxist haters of capitalism and America. Clintons, Ayers, Dohrn, and people of that ilk which the Viet Nam War and the race riots helped to spawn. Not that they gave a rip about either Viet Nam or the race riots as far as humanitarianism was concerned. Each event was simply an impetus for promoting their agenda: the tearing down of the United States. They all worked hard, and their programs, ideals and schemes have come to fruition in a variety of ways.

In 1965 Cloward and Piven took a ready-made crisis and transformed it into a leftist strategy of major proportions. When the Watts riots occurred they refined a plan that worked and has been gaining momentum for the past forty-four years. And our president (the snot-nosed four-year-old) has raised it to an art form. Imagine that.

Simply put, the Cloward-Piven strategy is a manufactured crisis. In the words of David Horowitz, it is “The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The 'Cloward-Piven Strategy' seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.” Or, as Michael Eden wrote, “(The Piven-Cloward strategy) was the brainchild of two leftist professors to take total control of America by overwhelming its social support structures to create a ‘crisis’” They were greatly influenced by Saul Alinsky, The Chicago Marxist community organizer.

And it has worked time after time, beginning with an article "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty" in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. Cloward and Piven outlined a plan to sabotage the welfare system by a massive drive to recruit the poor onto welfare roles. It worked. "From 1965 to 1974, the number of households on welfare soared from 4.3 million to 10.8 million, despite mostly flush economic times. By the early 1970s, one person was on the welfare rolls in New York City for every two working in the city's private economy." writes Sol Stern. As a result, New York City was forced to declare bankruptcy in 1975. America was horrified, and the road to welfare was paved. Lo and behold, the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act was signed by President Clinton, with Cloward and Piven standing by like proud parents.

Now President Obama, who may have been a student of Cloward, or at least closely connected with him at Columbia, has taken the crisis strategy and run with it. Using the economic panic of 2008, he started his presidency by scaring everybody to death with his unemployment predictions and presented a stimulus package to prevent these predictions. Here’s one result out of Oklahoma. And here’s the result as of December ’09.

2009 was a year of Crises. From the Stimulus package to the auto industry to the banking fiasco to H1N1, the technique is clear: scare everybody to death. Or promise them free stuff.

Now we have the healthcare bill being crammed down our throats, despite 57% of the citizens being opposed.

What we need to understand is that for more than fifty years the left has been hard at work dismantling the private sector, capitalism, and the constitution. This is a very personal opinion, but I see the healthcare “crisis” as the last straw. Remember the strategy: overwhelm, overwhelm, overwhelm. Bring down a system and erect a socialist substitute. Cloward and Piven should be household names. They are not. However, if you take the time to Google them you will find far more information than you want. Keep in mind that this strategy has been working in this country since its birth in the sixties.

While you’re at it, please go to this site and this one (which will help you see why I believe healthcare reform will bring down our country.)

My fellow Americans, it is time to take back our country by any means possible. We desperately need a Lexington moment:

Although the minutemen were far fewer than the British soldiers they stood their ground. Pitcairn fired his pistol, and called to his men, "Fire!" A few guns answered, and then followed a deadly discharge of muskets at short range.

Captain Parker, seeing that his men were too few to withstand so many, ordered them to retreat. Then a few of them, of their own accord, fired at the regulars, but did them no harm. Seven men of Lexington, however, were killed by the British fire, and nine wounded. Jonas Parker had sworn never to run from British troops; he stood his ground and was stabbed by a bayonet as he reloaded his gun. Robert Munroe, a veteran of earlier wars, was killed. Samuel Hadley and John Brown were followed and shot down after they had left the common, and Asahel Porter, who had been captured and was trying to escape, was also shot. Caleb Harrington, who had gone to the meeting-house for powder, was killed by a bullet as he came out, and Jonathan Harrington, Jr., was struck in front of his own house on the common. His wife was at the window. He fell, then got to his knees, and crawled to his doorstep. There he died as his wife reached him.

Daylight found Lexington Common stained with blood, and seven of the town's brave sons dead. Yet Samuel Adams, looking into the future, could exclaim, "Oh, what a glorious morning is this!" for he knew that the heroic stand of that little company was the first step towards the winning of their country's independence. (Emphasis mine)

***This analysis of "The Battle of Lexington" is reprinted from Historic Poems and Ballads. Ed. Rupert S. Holland. Philadelphia: George W. Jacobs & Co., 1912.

Following the Lexington and Concord episode, Lord Hugh Percy wrote of the Minutemen: "Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob will find himself much mistaken." (Emphasis mine)

Love

Granny

And the Answer is . . .

2010-01-08T18:07:00.000-08:00

While reading a CNS News article today I was struck by a statement by Janet Napolitano. No, not the “system worked” statement. That’s been kicked to death. This statement was a response to the declassified report issued by the White House yesterday. The report came in preparation for yet one more sorry excuse for why the government failed to prevent Umar Farouk Abdulmutallb’s terror plot from going as far as it did, presented by the guy with the recent Hawaiian tan. The guy who said words like, “The preponderance of the intelligence related to the plot was available broadly to the intelligence community.” Well, duh.

But I digress. Included in the report was a question: “what was the most shocking, stunning thing that you found” (That’s a direct quote.)

Does this sound like one of the questions posed to a Miss America candidate? “Tell me, Miss Muffy from the great state of Virginia, what do you feel is the most important thing you can do during your tenure as Miss America?”

“Well, Mr. Lopez, I want to travel to all the third-world countries, feed all the starving children, stop all the wars and rebuild Detroit.”

Janet Napolitano’s answer to “What was the most shocking and stunning thing that you found?”

“the tactic of using an individual to foment an attack, as opposed to a large conspiracy or a multi-person conspiracy such as we saw in 9/11 -- that is something that affects intelligence. It really emphasizes now the renewed importance on how different intelligence is integrated and analyzed, and threat streams are followed through. And again, it will impact how we continue to review the need to improve airport security around the world.”

I read it once. Then again. Then a third time. Aside from all those big words and absolute meaningless of most of them, I was completely taken aback by the one word “individual” in her answer.

Excuse me, Ms Nap, but do you remember Richard Reid, the individual who tried detonating a bomb in his shoe on board Flight 63 in December, 2001? How about Abdulhakim Muhammad, the individual who opened fire at a Marine recruiting station in Arkansas last June 1, killing one young soldier and wounding the other. Then there’s Nidal Malik Hasan the individual who shot and killed thirteen unarmed people at Fort Hood in November.

I suppose that, because most of these individuals don’t bring along their instructors, imams or camels and show up with prayer rugs tucked under their arms, they aren’t something worthy of scrutiny. Apparently our Director of Homeland Security believes all terrorists travel in packs, like cigarettes. What is she really saying, if anything? Why would she make such a brainless statement unless she simply isn’t counting these incidents as acts of terrorism? She’s already demonstrated to the American people that she is incapable of thinking on her feet, a terrifying concept when considering the gravity of her job.

What was the most shocking and stunning thing that you found?

Love

Granny

Terrorism in 2010 and Beyond

2010-01-06T07:25:00.000-08:00

For those of you who don’t subscribe to Dick Morris here is an article by him:

“THE CONSEQUENCES OF OBAMA: TERRORISM IS BACK By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN Published on DickMorris.com on January 5, 2010

Rev. Jeremiah Wright said that the "chickens came home to roost" on 9-11. He was wrong. But they have now, indeed, come home to roost as we witness the results of the unilateral disarmament President Obama has practiced in the war on terror. Beset once more by terrorism on our soil and in our airspace, we find ourselves suddenly overmatched by those who the Bush Administration kept away from our shores for seven years.

This new onset of terrorism is not the product of any change in the international environment or some new "systemic" flaw in our intelligence operations. It is due to the policy of President Obama in letting down our guard and inhibiting those charged with our protection.

Under Obama, the hunters have become the hunted as America inverted her priorities. Those who have been working to keep us safe have, themselves, come under scrutiny for profiling, harsh interrogation techniques, and a failure to give terrorists constitutional rights they don't have.

The result is predictable: Timidity and caution have become the order of the day in our intelligence community. In a world where hunch, guesswork, and a willingness to leap to conclusions by imagining the worst are vital to success, a cover your butt mentality has taken over. If you come to the wrong conclusion, if you profile without adequate justification, if you accuse incorrectly, you are finished. Your career and your pension will be gone. Guess right and you are accorded anonymity. Guess wrong and you're through.

The failure of the intelligence operatives to pass along the information about the Ft. Hood shooter or the airline bomber did not flow from a blind spot or a lack of co-ordination, they stemmed from terrorism of a different sort -- the terror of making a mistake and falling on the harsh mercies of Eric Holder.

Now Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutall sits, lawyered up, in a federal prison. His interrogation will proceed, if at all, under the watchful eye of his counsel. He will not finger other operatives nor warn us of other impending attacks. He will receive the full panoply of constitutional rights, none of which he is entitled to.

Barack Obama does not seem to understand that these terrorists come here to use our laws and our system, not to protect us, not even to shelter themselves, but to destroy us.

Abdulmutall should be interrogated by the military, without benefit of counsel. The evidence we obtain should not be admissible in a court of law nor used as the basis for his sentencing. But it must be used to ward off future threats and attacks.

But Obama is a true believer. His persistence in downgrading the war on terror to a criminal investigation will continue. And we will experience more and more attacks. Because pessimism is the bodyguard of liberalism, he will explain to us that the world has become more threatening and that he is doing all he can to keep us safe. But the truth will be that it will have been his policies and priorities that are leaving us exposed.

And the attacks will continue.”

And, may I add the government cover-ups and lying will continue. This is a new era. Say what you will about the Bush administration, after 9/11 we didn’t suffer a terrorist attack the whole time he was in office. Now, however, political correctness may just get us all killed, thanks to those whom Obama has put in charge. Count on it; 2010 won’t be pretty.

Find Dick Morris at http://www.dickmorris.com/

Love

Granny

What Could Possibly go Wrong?

2010-01-04T09:42:00.000-08:00

This is why I don't fly. To say the system sucks is such an understatement it doesn't bear saying. I have a 14-pound Brussels Griffon-Shih Tzu mix who could do better—and has:

"DHS Plans to Catch Only One in Four Travelers Committing ‘Major’ Criminal Violations While Entering U.S. on International Fights in 2010

Monday, January 04, 2010

By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano(CNSNews.com) - Documents produced by the Department of Homeland Security indicate that in fiscal 2010 the department is planning to catch only 26 percent of travelers committing major criminal violations while seeking to enter the United States through international airports.

DHS documents also indicate that the department believes it will fail to screen against law enforcement databases 15 percent of travelers entering the United States in 2010 through all official ports of entry.

In fiscal 2008, according to DHS, the department caught only 25 percent of those committing “major violations” while entering the U.S. on international flights. It also planned to catch only 25% in fiscal 2009, which ended on Sept. 30. For fiscal 2010, which began on Oct. 1, DHS set it sites slightly higher, planning to catch 26 percent of “major” violators entering the U.S. on international flights while letting 74 percent get away.

DHS each year calculates what it calls the “air passenger apprehension rate for major violations.” This apprehension rate is used as one measure of whether the department is achieving its goal to “improve the targeting, screening, and apprehension of high-risk international cargo and travelers to prevent terrorist attacks, while providing processes to facilitate the flow of safe and legitimate trade and travel.”

The “major violations” that DHS believes 74 percent of perpetrators will get away with when entering the U.S. by air in 2010, according to a 3,493-page document the department presented to Congress to justify its annual budget, involve “serious criminal activity, including possession of narcotics, smuggling of prohibited products, human smuggling, weapons possession, fraudulent U.S. documents, and other offenses serious enough to result in arrest.”

DHS determines the percentage of “major” violators it catches entering the United States at international airports by subjecting a random sampling of passengers to intensified scrutiny designed to detect any offense they might be committing. “The sample rate is used to estimate the ‘expected’ number of major violations in the general population,” DHS explained in its budget justification. “The major violations found during the regular primary inspection process are then compared to the ‘expected’ number to compute the apprehension rate for major violations among air passengers traveling to the U.S.”

The justification for its 2010 budget that DHS presented to Congress said the department had apprehended 40.3 percent of those committing “major violations” entering the United States on international flights in fiscal 2007, but that the number dropped to only 25 percent in fiscal 2008. For fiscal 2009, the document said, the department set a goal of apprehending 25 percent again, and then raised the goal to 26 percent for fiscal 2010.

An annual performance review updated by DHS in May also said the department caught only 25% of those committing “major violations” while entering the U.S. by air in fiscal 2008 and that the department had set goals of apprehending 25 percent of such violators in 2009 and 26 percent in 2010.

A statement provided to CNSNews.com on September 11, 2009 by Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the DHS agency responsible for screening international travelers entering the United States, said “the vast majority of passenger violations that fall into the ‘major violations’ category are narcotics violations.”

Another measure that DHS uses to determine whether it is achieving its goal of preventing terrorist attacks is called the “percent of individuals screened against law enforcement databases for entry into the United States.” The 3,493-page report DHS provided to Congress to justify its 2010 budget said, “This measure identifies the percent of individuals arriving at the ports of entry who have their names and other identification information checked against electronic law enforcement databases.”

According to the document, the department screened only 73.5% of international travelers arriving at all U.S. ports of entry in 2008, and set goals of screening 80 percent in fiscal 2009 and 85 percent in fiscal 2010.

In its annual financial report published on Nov. 16, DHS said it had done law-enforcement database screening on 83.4% of travelers entering the U.S. at official ports of entry in fiscal 2009 and was still planning to screen 85 percent in fiscal 2010—leaving 15 percent of travelers entering the United States unscreened.

A Homeland Security Department official, who spoke to CNSNews.com last week on the condition that his name not be used, said CBP screens 100 percent of international travelers entering the United States at international airports but is not as efficient in screening international travelers entering the country at land ports of entry.

Nonetheless, DHS officials told CNSNews.com that some individuals whose names are discovered on law enforcement databases before they board international flights to the United States are allowed to board the planes and fly to the United States. After they arrive, they are subjected to heightened scrutiny, sometimes being denied final entry into the country by CBP. DHS said individuals dealt with in this way are not included in its “air passenger apprehension rate”

“CBP officials are alerted to all travelers on the terrorist watch list, including those with outstanding criminal warrants, or criminal histories,” CBP told CNSNews.com in the September statement. “This screening is done prior to arrival at the U.S. port of entry. On arrival, such travelers are intercepted and their cases are handled immediately, removing them from the pool of passengers included in the air apprehension rate measure. This means that virtually all potential terrorists and criminal violators are interdicted in our first layer of enforcement, before the apprehension rate is determined.”

A Homeland Security Department official explained last week that international passengers who appear on the “No Fly” list are not allowed to board planes bound for the United States, but that officials at CBP’s National Targeting Center make judgment calls about whether other individuals “flagged” by the agency’s screening system will be permitted to board U.S. bound flights. The screening system checks names of passengers against multiple databases.

The official said that when passengers check-in for U.S. bound flights at foreign airports their names are automatically run against the “No Fly” list which is provided to the airlines. Then, depending on the system the airline is using, the passenger’s name is either instantly transmitted at check-in to CBP’s National Targeting Center or the airline provides CBP with a manifest of all passenger’s on a U.S.-bound flight either 60 minutes or 30 minutes before departure. CBP checks the names by computer and examines any that its system flags to determine whether the person in question should be allowed on the flight.

“The no-fly list is exactly that. They don’t get on a plane,” the DHS official said. “Everyone else that is on that plane and headed for the states, we get that information before the plane pushes back, we are starting our vetting against all these databases and they have different levels of complexity, depending on whose lists they are. So everyone is being vetted against those and that allows us to identify individuals that are coming to the United States that are interest to us for further screening.”

The DHS official stressed that passengers who are not on the “No Fly” list but appear on other databases that trigger more extensive screening after the passenger arrives at a U.S. airport are “not known terrorists” but have aroused the interest of the U.S. government for other reasons. “The individuals we are looking at are not known terrorists. They are not considered a threat to the country,” said the official. But because some law enforcement or federal agency is interested in them, CBP is “made aware of it so that we can talk to them when they do enter the United States.”

Some passengers may be flagged for fairly minor matters, the DHS official said. “I am from Michigan and I have a warrant for failure to appear and that shows up,” said the official, giving a hypothetical. “I am going to get talked to when I enter the United States because there is a law enforcement agency out there that has an interest in me. I am not a threat to national security. I am not on a no-fly list.”

When asked if people on the “No Fly” list were the only travelers automatically excluded from boarding international flights to the United States, the DHS official said travelers with invalid visas are also supposed to be automatically excluded from boarding flights to the United States.

The DHS official also said one reason the department sometimes waits until a passenger flagged by their screening system arrives in the United States before dealing with them is because the department has few resources and no jurisdiction in foreign countries.

“Most of our resources are at our ports of entry. That is where our officers have the authority and the ability to deal with these individuals,” said the official. “Just because someone is trying to get on a flight in a foreign country and they may have a past criminal history that is of interest, we have no authority to act on that at that time.”

The first line of defense in preventing bad actors from boarding planes to come to United States from foreign countries is the State Department, which is responsible for screening would-be travelers who apply for visas.

When CNSNews.com asked CBP in September why DHS’s annual performance report set a goal of apprehending only 26% of those committing “major violations” while entering the United States by air, CBP provided CNSNews.com with a written statement that said the apprehension rate is low because the majority of major violators are smuggling small amounts of drugs that are difficult to detect.

“CBP Officers are always attempting to catch 100% of the major violations occurring at the ports of entry,” said the statement. “This is extremely difficult to do since most major violations at the ports of entry are narcotics violations and narcotics smugglers are very inventive at finding new ways to hide contraband.”

The statement said the DHS conducts a “thorough physical inspection” of a random sampling of passengers to estimate the rate of major violations being committed by those arriving at U.S. international airports.

“We track the ‘results’ for this measure by taking a true random sampling of arriving passengers and conducting a thorough physical inspection of them, their luggage, and travel documents to identify all violations in our sample,” said the statement. 'This information is used to develop a statistically valid estimate of the number of violations occurring in the group of travelers arriving at the port of entry. We then compare the violations we actually find to this estimate to determine the overall apprehension rate.'"

Go here to read the rest. Yeah, there's more. You'll also get to see the picture of Janet, something I'm sure you're all aching for.

Love

Granny

I Guess it Depends on the Meaning of the Term “Smoking Gun”

2010-01-03T20:18:00.000-08:00

In an attempt to be as accurate as possible I actually looked up “Smoking Gun” and found the definition: indisputable evidence. I know that every blogger in the universe has something to say about this, but I’ve been steaming all day and I’m simply going to refer those of you who are not familiar with it to RBO which will refer you to Brenda Elliot, both of whom have a real handle on it.

Let me just add, what did Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan mean by “no smoking gun?” The fact that Umar Abdulmatallab’s father ‘s statement—to the American Embassy in Nigeria— held no credibility? Or that young Mr. Abdulmatallab’s association with Yemen meant nothing? (By the way, I hate that names like these are becoming household words.) The Keystone Cops and the Three Stooges would have done better! Oh, I forgot, two of the Three Stooges are already busy with the healthcare bill.

There’s no point in kicking the cash for the airline ticket and NO CHECKED LUGGAGE dead horse. It’s all water under the bridge and our president doesn’t give a hoot anyway. No smoking gun? How about smoking underwear? Does that have any meaning for you, Mr. Deputy National Security Adviser? How about a planeload of people meeting a fiery death because our hapless Director of Homeland Security doesn‘t know what the hell she‘s doing any more than our POTUS does? What’s it going to take?

My big resolution was that I would leave all my sarcasm and name-calling in 2009 and with the left-wing people. They’re better at it anyway because their vocabularies are limited. And yet . . . 2010 is going to be a long year. Heck, it's been a long year already. It must be nearly election day.

Love

Granny

Hey, Wikipedia Editors! You Need a Floor Jack

2009-12-31T10:07:00.000-08:00

Getting a little eager, aren’t you? Imagine that. Declaring Rush Limbaugh dead. IN YOUR WILDEST DREAMS, you left-leaning, liberal, lunatic lapdogs. Get yourselves some semblance of a life. Don’t you get tired of being inaccurate 99.9% of the time?

I think, if you put your ~~dunce~~ thinking caps on you might be able to straighten out some of the lies in this link. Oh, I forgot. That’s your M.O.—lie when the truth would do better.

Thank God (that’s who’s in control of the universe, including you, whether you like it or not) there’s Conservapedia. A little sanity is always refreshing. But you wouldn’t know, would you? When they handed out sanity you thought they said “Vanity” (2 Peter 2:18) and that certainly worked for you.

Happy New Year

Love

Granny

Snake or Wizard?

2009-12-29T08:48:00.000-08:00

The cold chills have dissipated. The seven stages of grief are nearly behind me. The fits of rage are less frequent now. I think I have finally joined the ranks of those who are thinking, “Three more years. If things keep going the way they are we’ll never survive.” It’s not a passionate thought; it’s more a cold, detached, brooding contemplation, much like a man lying in the desert with his hands and feet bound, exhausted from struggling, watching the coral snake gliding toward him. There’s escape available, but how? From what source? Suddenly he realizes he’s not alone. There are hundreds, maybe thousands of people just like him, seemingly helpless, wondering the same thing: how do we overcome this very clear and imminent danger?

What prompted this was this article which drove home the sad fact of a president who doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing. His blustering and bullying isn’t going to save Americans from the very people he’s been apologizing to for the past year. The curtain has been drawn back, much like the one Toto pulled in the Wizard of Oz, leaving a brisling buffoon, capable of one thing only: winning an election.

For example, from this article: While information is still coming out about the incident, President Obama stated, "Those who would slaughter innocent men, women and children must know that the United States will do more than simply strengthen our defenses: We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us." (Uh, Mr. President, does that include those at Fort Hood?)

The nation will do all it can to defeat these threats, according to Obama. "As Americans, we will never give in to fear or division," the president said. "We will be guided by our hopes, our unity and our deeply held values." (Well, if that isn’t just plain hogwash, I don’t know what is. I don’t think our unity got that guy with the loaded underwear. I think it was a brave Dutch citizen, after the cluster-muster that allowed the man on the plane in the first place.)

Back to the snake. Not only is he a very dangerous snake, he’s also a very stupid snake. And he has help: the heat of socialism ever at his side and the hundreds of congressional vultures circling overhead. Fortunately, we hapless creatures here in the heat have sheer numbers, and that’s what it will take to overcome the evil that is fast approaching.

Love

Granny

Coincidence? I Think Not

2009-12-27T16:34:00.000-08:00

It seems there was a dust up Las Vegas and other cities over Christmas involving some billboards erected byan Atheist group. As a former Las Vegan (not to be confused with the plant eaters) I’m always on the alert for stories coming out of Sin City, since what happens in Vegas does not stay in Vegas.

The group which calls themselves Freedom From Religion is responsible for putting up the billboards, which rang a lot of chimes that had nothing to do with the birth of Christ. The story is below, and if you want to click on the link you can watch the video. My comments are in red.

“Atheist Billboards Anger Las Vegas Christians

CBNNews.com

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Christians living in Las Vegas, Nev. want several atheist billboards taken down before Christmas.

For example, some of the messages on the signs include "Heathen's Greetings" and "Reason's Greetings."

A third billboard that read, "Yes Virginia, there is no God," was taken down after numerous complaints.

The man who paid for the signs says they were meant to make people question and not to offend.” Of course not

"There's an awful lot more signs that are religious intent than ours, and so to me, it's tit for tat," said Richard Hermsen.” Whose tit for whose tat? I thought you just said they were not meant to offend. Obviously you were offended by the Christian billboards, so were retaliating.

“But Christians are upset.” I only know about eight or ten Christians in Las Vegas, and I can understand how they feel. However, there are so many billboards in that city that are downright nauseating, these few could probably have blended into the bright lights and drive-by shootings.

"If I'd had a ladder I would have climbed up there and pulled it down myself," said Las Vegas resident Brenda Kempf. "I'm a Christian. I believe in God, and I didn't like it. I just didn't appreciate it." I’m glad she didn’t have a ladder. She would have gotten arrested and it would have turned into a big ugly mess, instead of just a pitiful attempt to annoy.

The item that really stands out like a huge carbuncle on the posterior of heathenism is the final sentence in the story. “They say it's just a coincidence that the signs were put up right before Christmas.” I suppose they’ll wait for Easter and say it’s a coincidence that their billboards say, “Who is risen” or “Hosanna in the Lowest.”

Hey, atheist groups, put up all the billboards you can afford. God is still in charge and Jesus is Lord. Hallelujah!

Love,

Granny

9%

2009-12-23T12:56:00.000-08:00

The first thing I do every morning is check the Rasmussen poll to see where our president stands among voters. This morning, after I noted that he is 18%—up (or down, depending on which way you want to look at it) 3 points from yesterday. Then I scrolled a little further down on the page and saw that 9% of adults rate the economy as good or excellent. So I toddled into the room across the hall, where my husband was holding forth before his computer, pecking out the latest in an ongoing series of government excoriations.

“Honey,” I said, “Do you know that 9% of the American people consider the state of the economy as good or excellent?”

He looked up from the keyboard and answered, “Yes.”

Huh.

So I pursued it. “Why would even one living person today think that?”

He took a breath and began: “Okay, take the guy who has a good job, whose wife is either incapacitated or dead, so she doesn’t spend all his money, whose kids have good jobs and have no kids in government schools. His house is paid for, his cars are paid for. He doesn’t have any credit card debt to speak of. Life is good.”

“But,” said I, “that means he doesn’t watch the news—any news—or read the newspaper—any newspaper.”

“Right,” he agreed.

Or maybe he’s a monk cloistered in one of those monasteries in a mountain. Or a spoiled starlet, who just had the world handed to her. But do they vote? Rasmussen only polls likely voters.

I guess there are people who are so self-absorbed that they have no idea what’s going on around them. They don’t listen to anyone but themselves; they don’t have any interest in what the government is doing because it doesn’t affect them yet. Their world is so small that the largest thing in it is their big screen TV, on which they watch only movies and MTV. Their favorite pastime is video games and many of them live in their parents’ basements. But again, do these people vote?

Maybe Cecil is right. It’s Mr. Happy Widower, pre-Medicare, with his job, his house, his grown kids, and his own world. But I’d like to meet one of the 9%, just long enough to ask him a few questions. Oh, that’s already been done. Jay Leno used to do it all the time.

The reason I left out the kids in school is that anyone who has children in a government school has to be at least peripherally aware of the creeping secularism and other perils over the past generation. Unfortunately, most don’t really care. But I’ll tell you this little story and then I’ll quit.

The church I attend has a Christian school attached to it. Many or most of the church kids are students at the school but a few are not. Our assistant pastor was recently invited to a “Winter Program” at our local government school (right here in the Ozarks) as a guest of one of the kids who attends our church. He reported hearing a number of secular songs sung by the students and then seeing a play based on “The Arabian Nights.”

Merry Christmas.

Love

Granny

The Whore of Nebraska and the Slaughter of the Innocents

2009-12-21T15:05:00.000-08:00

This is a collection of random thoughts which grouped together like sheep on a cold winter morning. It happens when I lie down to rest my healing broken back. I try not to do it too often because sometimes I go to sleep, and the sleeping dreams are far worse than the waking ones.

I was reading up on the alleged killing of babies under the age of two by King Herod. There is actually no written evidence to support this, except in the Bible, of course. Although that’s good enough for me, I realize there are those who need something written by Augustin or Josephus or someone of that ilk (rather than God) to solidify their belief. What we do know is that Herod wasn’t exactly a model father (he killed three of his sons) or husband (and at least one of his wives.) He brought dysfunction and narcissism (until B.O.) to a whole new level.

But someone did make the point that, if Herod did indeed order all male children under a certain age in that area killed, the number would be very small. In his very scholarly article, The Slaughter of the Innocents: Historical Fact or Legendary Fiction? Gordon Franz had this to say:

“Yet Professor William F. Albright, the dean of American archaeology in the Holy Land, estimates that the population of Bethlehem at the time of Jesus’ birth to be about 300 people (Albright and Mann 1971:19). The number of male children, two years old or younger, would be about six or seven (Maier 1998:178, footnote 25). This would hardly be a newsworthy event in light of what else was going on at the time. Please do not get me wrong, one innocent child being killed is a horrific tragedy.” (Emphasis added)

I agree. And that is why I am chronically horrified by the wholesale slaughter of the unborn and the use of the abortion issue as a volley ball in the game of Socialized Medicine. Here’s a paragraph buried in a Washington Examiner article, that tells us exactly how the Whore of Nebraska lies down:

“ In the end, though, Nelson treated abortion like any other of the dozens of shoddy little deals that have been the hallmark of the legislation. The final abortion compromise that won Nelson's support was not substantially different than the one he had despaired of the week before. The change was that Nelson got free Medicare money for his state and some stroking for his own ego.”

So I guess you could say, “Well, shucks, King Herod wasn’t such a bad old guy after all. Fewer than a dozen kids compared to 40 or 50 million? Of course, it takes more than just one king to carry out all that slaughter today. Good thing we have the likes of King-in-his-own-Mind Barack Obama, cabinet member Kathleen Sebelius, most of Congress, and doctors like George Tiller, now dead, and Nancy Pelosi’s pal, LeRoy Carhart, who is alive and well.

The slaughter goes on and the whores continue to spend a lot of time on their backs.

Love

Granny

Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh

2009-12-19T05:26:00.000-08:00

We three kings of Orient are
Bearing gifts we traverse afar
Field and fountain, moor and mountain
Following yonder star

As Christians, we have grown up with this beloved Christmas carol. I can remember as a little girl, sitting in church during the Christmas program and watching it played out by three of the men, my father included. They were dressed as Wise Men and each held a very ornate box or urn and on the appropriate verse, one would proceed down the aisle, holding the gift on high and singing about the particular contents. At that age—I think I was seven—I didn’t have any idea what frankincense or myrrh were. I only knew the Wise Men traveled a very long distance to bring these gifts to the Christ Child.

Here is a sermon by Dr. Neil Chadwick, pastor of Crossroads Church in Hamburg, NJ. I posted the entire text and inserted each stanza of the song in italics. It’s a beautiful concept and my hope for you is that it will take away some of the stress of this season and everything else that is eating away at us.

O Star of wonder, star of night
Star with royal beauty bright
Westward leading, still proceeding
Guide us to thy Perfect Light

“Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh

A Sermon by Dr. Neil Chadwick

Whenever the subject of the "Wise Men", or "Magi" comes up, most of the attention is placed either on the star they saw, or speculation about where they came from. What we want to concentrate on here is the gifts they brought, and what they might signify for us.

Of course, the simplest meaning is that what these men brought were those items which, in their experience, represented the greatest worth. All of these items were rare, precious and expensive. Whatever else we may learn from this story, we know that they gave their best in honor to the One they believed to be the King, the Messiah.

This story reminds us of another visitor to Israel, the Queen of Sheba who came to meet with Solomon. (I Kings 10:2) She also brought gifts including gold and spices. The Magi followed in the same steps, perhaps being spiritually aware that a "greater than Solomon was here" (Matthew 12:42).

There are several lessons about giving that we can note in this account.

1. It's interesting that we don't know their names, but we know what they gave. It's always a bit suspect to me when donors of large gifts want their names associated with their gifts. My daughter attended a college in South Jersey named "Glassboro State College". While she was a student, a successful industrialist gave to the college a gift of 100 million dollars. Suddenly the name of the school changed to "Rowan College". Guess who gave the large donation? On the other hand, it's clear to me that godly men and women who give out of a pure motivation of desire to honor the Lord, these people, like the Magi, don't care to have their names mentioned. That's why we work hard to provide an accounting system that protects the anonymity of each one who gives.

2. They also gave items which were local to their home area - Arabia. The Lord welcomes us to give to Him what is available to us. Unfortunately, in our culture, most of what we give to each other is what we have purchased somewhere in a store, or through a catalogue or over the internet. But there are many who would admit that it's really special when they receive something that has been made by the person who has given it to them. For example, one of the favorite gifts my children have received from their grandmother are the slippers she knits out of the odds and ends of yarn that are left over from other knitting projects.

3. The gifts were a part of their worship. They bowed down before Him, and they offered Him gifts. One commentator points out, "They had known Christ but one day; he had performed no miracles; he had none other to do him homage; he was but a helpless Babe, yet they fell down and worshipped him."

4. Together, the three types of gifts represent three roles of Jesus the Messiah: His kingly office is represented by gold, His divinity by frankincense, and His manhood by myrrh. "They offered him incense as their God; gold as their king; and myrrh, as united to a human body, subject to suffering and death."

5. Also, it's clear that the providence of God is seen in these gifts. It provided the means necessary for a long and expensive journey into Egypt, and to sustain Joseph, Mary and Jesus in a foreign land where they would stay for a considerable time.

But let me tell you a little more about the gifts brought by these unusual traveling companions - we'll look at each of these gifts separately.

The first mentioned gift was gold.”

Born a King on Bethlehem's plain
Gold I bring to crown Him again
King forever, ceasing never
Over us all to rein

“Gold was the usual offering presented to kings by their subjects, or those wanting to pay respect. It seems that the metal we know as gold has always held extremely high value - as long ago as 2,500 BC, gold was especially prized, and used as a medium of exchange. Perhaps you remember when the US Mint announced that a new dollar coin was to be released at the beginning of the year 2,000. It was larger than the quarter (unlike the previous dollar coin, circulated around 1979), and it was gold in color. Notice I said "gold in color", there wasn't any gold in it at all.

But why has gold always represented great value? For several reasons:

1. Gold is scarce, which adds immeasurably to its value. But let's not forget, gold is dug from the earth.

2. Gold is, as one writer put it, "warmly beautiful". Have you ever seen the dome of a capitol building, mosque or temple, coated with gold, shimmering in the sun? Or think about a long flowing robe bordered with a gold edging.

3. Gold is enduring, and can withstand all natural acids and even fire. We draw attention to this feature when we perform the wedding ceremony. The ring becomes the symbol of a marriage which will hopefully endure the tests of time, tribulation, hardships, disagreements, illness, bereavement, and - - - teenage children!

4. Gold is adaptable for shaping and readily alloyed with other metals. There's an ancient soldier's helmet on display at the Pennsylvania State University museum. This beautifully crafted head-piece was hammered out of one solid piece of gold. But if it is soft enough to be easily molded, gold can easily be combined with other metals to provide an even greater strength. The ring around my finger would have long ago been pressed out of shape if it hadn't been for the fact that the gold is combined with another, less pliable metal. Even gold, with all its beauty and virtues needs others to compliment it.

Wouldn't it be far better for us to want to be like gold, rather than wanting to have gold? Humility, beauty, endurance, adaptability - a person with these qualities would be rare indeed, and priceless.

In both the Old Testament Tabernacle and the Temple, gold was used plentifully, so we see that gold is also associated with worship. And we are told that in the heavenly city we will "walk on streets of gold." Let me tell you a funny story.

One day a very wealthy man learned that he was going to die. He was so upset at the thought of leaving all his possessions behind that he asked God if he could bring his money with him. To which God replied flatly, "No, you can't take it with you."

But this wealthy man, who never took "no" for an answer, persisted asking. Finally God relented and agreed to allow the man to bring one suitcase with him. The man was so excited he hurried to decide what to pack. First he filled the bag with cash. But decided that perhaps the exchange rates might not benefit him. Then he filled it with stocks, but didn't know how they would perform over eternity. Finally he decided to fill the bag with gold bullion and congratulated himself on his clever planning.

When the day finally came that he passed away, he was happily standing in line at the pearly gates when St. Peter saw him and asked about the suitcase. "You'll have to leave that behind," said St. Peter. "No way" said the man, "I have special permission from God. He told me I could bring one suitcase filled with anything I wanted." "This is highly unusual," said St. Peter, "but let me see what's inside." He opened the suitcase and scratched his head as he pondered the contents. "I don't get it. God said you could bring anything at all with you ... and you brought PAVEMENT?"

When the Magi presented gold, they were honoring Jesus with the very best that they possessed, and they were also recognizing that Jesus was King.

The story is told of an African chieftain who lived in a simple grass hut, and sat on an elegant, hand carved, wood throne. After ruling for a few years, he became a bit haughty and decided that wood wasn't good enough for him, he wanted a gold throne. So he commissioned his craftsmen to create a beautiful gold throne, and he took the wood one and stored it in the small attic of his hut.

A few months later, the sounds of warring natives from another tribe were heard approaching the village, and the African chief quickly assumed that they were probably going to come and steal his gold throne. So he exchanged the thrones, bringing the wooden one back down and hiding the gold throne in the attic. While he sat there anticipating the arrival of the enemy tribal warriors, suddenly the gold throne upstairs broke through the ceiling and came crashing down on the chief's head, and killed him.

So what is the morale of this story? "People in grass houses shouldn't stow thrones."

But what impresses me most about this first gift of the Magi, gold, is that this particular substance is able to survive the fire.

The Apostle Paul uses this analogy when he writes to the Corinthian church concerning Christian works, "For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work." (I Corinthians 3:11-13)

Job is the man in the Bible who was perhaps the most sorely tested man of all time. He lost all his worldly possessions, his children had died, and his health was gone, his friends made his burden heavier by trying to lay a guilt trip on him, and his wife advised euthanasia . But in the midst of his suffering, listen to what he says, "He knoweth the way that I take: when he hath tried me, I shall come forth as gold." (Job 23:10)

Job isn't the only one who uses this idea of gold surviving in fire.

In a wonderful Messianic passage in Zechariah, there's a prediction and a promise: "'In the whole land," declares the LORD, 'two-thirds will be struck down and perish; yet one-third will be left in it. This third I will bring into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, `They are my people,' and they will say, `The LORD is our God.'" (Zechariah 13:8, 9)

To the Laodicean church, the church whose members had become lukewarm in their relationship with God, the message is, "I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see." (Revelation 3:18)

But Peter gives a different slant on this, because he points out that there is something which, like gold is refined in fire, but unlike gold, this other substance never perishes.

"In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith -- of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire -- may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed." (1 Peter 1:6,7)

As by the action of fire gold is proved to be gold by its enduring the fire without losing any thing of its nature, weight, color, or any other property, so genuine faith is proved by adversities, especially such as the primitive Christians were obliged to pass through. "Yet even gold, in process of time, will wear away by continual use; and the earth, and all its works, will be burnt up by that supernatural fire whose action nothing can resist. But on that day the faith of Christ's followers will be found brighter, and more glorious. The earth, and universal nature, shall be dissolved; but he who doeth the will of God shall abide for ever, and his faith shall then be found to the praise of God's grace, the honor of Christ, and the glory or glorification of his own soul throughout eternity. God himself will praise such faith, angels and men will hold it in honor, and Christ will crown it with glory."

Then Peter points out that there is something more valuable than gold, or even the testing of gold - it is the process whereby our faith is tested and strengthened, the adversities, sorrows, hardships, trials of this life which test and strengthen our faith which will hold us through eternity. Notice this about faith, it grows, and bears fruit, unlike gold which, as enduring as we think it to be, will nevertheless someday perish.

The second gift brought out of the boxes by the Magi was frankincense.”

Frankincense to offer have I
Incense owns a Deity nigh
Pray'r and praising, all men raising
Worship Him, God most high

“Frankincense is a very costly and fragrant gum distilled from a tree that is found in Persia, India and Arabia, as well as the East Indies. It is a white resin or gum, and is obtained by slitting the bark of the "Arbor Thurisfrom", and allowing the gum to flow out. The word actually means "whiteness", referring to the white colored juice which flows out of the wound in the tree. This gum hardens for three months, and is gathered at the end of the summer, and sold in the form of "tears", or clumps of hardened resin.

Frankincense is highly fragrant when burned, and was, therefore, used in worship, where it was burned as a pleasant offering to God. ("Aaron must burn fragrant incense on the altar every morning when he tends the lamps. He must burn incense again when he lights the lamps at twilight so incense will burn regularly before the LORD for the generations to come. - Exodus 30:7,8) ("He is to take a censer full of burning coals from the altar before the LORD and two handfuls of finely ground fragrant incense and take them behind the curtain." Leviticus 16:12).

It was also used as medicine and as perfume.

The primary lesson from frankincense is that our worship is to be pleasing to God. Remember, this sweet smelling resin comes as the result of the tree's woundedness and pain. When we can worship God in the midst of our sorrow, our brokeness, then it is a sweet smelling offering. That's why David said, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." (Psalms 51:17 )

Much emphasis in worship today is on "celebration". No time for agonizing and tears, only for shouts of joy and victory. While joyful praise is acceptable to God, tears, like frankincense resin, oozing out of our hurts, broken hearts, and tears of repentance are especially pleasing - a sweet smelling sacrifice to the Lord. Anyone can dance and shout when their team is winning, and everything is going their way. But true worship happens when it must overcome feelings of self-pity, fear and doubt.

I've always been a bit mystified by this idea in the Old Testament that God wants a "sweet smelling sacrifice."

In the book of Leviticus, at least 16 times reference is made to the offerings being a "sweet savor". And when God pronounces His judgment on unfaithful Israel in Leviticus 26:31, He indicates that He will turn away from their offerings. "And I will make your cities waste, and bring your sanctuaries unto desolation, and I will not smell the savor of your sweet odors."

Do you really think God cares about the smell of the smoke? We might care - it wouldn't be very pleasant to attend a worship service where there is the horrible smell of burning flesh filling the air. So maybe it was for the benefit of the people that the burning of frankincense was instituted. On the other hand, God is interested in the condition of our hearts when we pray and worship Him. Is it with sweetness, or without of a sense of duty, or even bitterness because we don't feel that God is dealing with us fairly.

The last gift brought by the Magi was Myrrh.”

Myrrh is mine, its bitter perfume
Breathes of life of gathering gloom
Sorrowing, sighing, bleeding, dying
Sealed in the stone-cold tomb

“Myrrh is an aromatic gum produced from a thorn-bush that grew in Arabia and Ethiopia, and was obtained from a tree in the same manner as frankincense. This thorny tree, called "balsamodendron myrrha", is similar to the acacia. It grows from eight to ten feet high, and is thorny. When it oozes from the wounded shrub, myrrh is a pale yellow color at first, but as it hardens, it changes to dark red or even black color.

However, if frankincense represents sweetness, myrrh represents bitterness, at least to the taste. In fact, the name itself was given to it on account of its great bitterness. (The Hebrew word is similar to the name given the waters that were bitter when Moses and the people were coming out of Egypt. "And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were bitter: therefore the name of it was called Marah. - Exodus 15:23) Hear also what Naomi says to her daughters in law - "Call me not Naomi, call me Mara: for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me.” (Ruth 1:20)

It was used chiefly in embalming the dead, because it had the property of preserving them from putrefaction. (John 19:39) It was much used in Egypt and in Judea. It was at an early period an article of commerce, (Genesis 37:25) and was an ingredient of the holy ointment (Exodus 30:23). It was also used as an agreeable perfume (Esther 2:12; Psalms 45:8; Proverbs 7:17). For many of the ancients, myrrh was considered to be a favorite perfume, said to keep its fragrance for several hundred years when kept in an alabaster pot. Myrrh also had medicinal qualities, sometimes mingled with wine to form an article of drink. Such a drink was given to our Savior, when about to be crucified, as a stupefying potion, (Mark 15:23; Matthew 27:34).

It's also interesting to note that the Greek word for myrrh, "smurna", is the same as the name of the city and church which received a letter from the Apostle. Smyrna was the second of the seven churches of Asia that John was instructed to write to in the early chapters of the book of Revelation. This church was distinguished by it being persecuted (Revelation 2:8-11) - they understood the bitterness of being mistreated for the sake of the Gospel.

Myrrh then is brought as a gift to acknowledge the human suffering that Jesus partook of when He came into our world. Why did He refuse the drink? Because He had already drunk it. He had prayed at first that He could be spared the cup, but then He submitted to His father's will and drank it - the bitter cup of His suffering.

We too drink from the cup of suffering, and it is bitter. Knowing that He drank it too, and in a fuller amount than we can ever comprehend, helps give us courage to go on. But may we, like the Magi of old, also bring this as a gift to Jesus.

We bring gold to honor Him as King, and to yield to the purification process of the fiery trials.

We bring frankincense to worship Him even in the midst of our brokeness.

And we bring myrrh to recognize that He has identified with us in our pain and sorrow.”

Glorious now behold Him arise
King and God and Sacrifice
Alleluia, Alleluia
Earth to heav'n replies

O Star of wonder, star of night
Star with royal beauty bright
Westward leading, still proceeding
Guide us to thy Perfect Light

“Discussion Questions

Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh

1. Besides the Magi of Matthew 1, what other notable person made the pilgrimage to Israel from the east, bringing similar gifts? 2. What are some lessons about giving that are learned from the story of the Magi?

3. How do the three types of gifts of the Magi represent the three roles of Jesus the Messiah?

4. What are some of the reasons gold has always represented great value?

5. If a person wanted to be like gold, what characteristics would he or she possess?

6. How does "surviving fire" relate to the Christian?

7. If bringing gold represents giving honor to Jesus as King, what is represented by frankincense and myrrh?

8. Frankincense was used as medicine and as perfume; how was it used in worship, and for whose benefit?

9. If the sweet smelling frankincense resin comes as the result of the tree's woundedness and pain, what does this suggest for Christian worship?

10. In what way is myrrh different from frankincense?

11. In ancient times, as with frankincense, myrrh was used some for medicine and perfume; but what was the main use of myrrh?

12. The drink offered to Jesus contained myrrh - why was it refused?”

Love and God bless

Granny

Have a Merry Lying, Cheating, Reneging, Narcissistic, Audacious, Arrogant, Socialistic, Inconsiderate, Self-serving, Jihadist Christmas, Mr. Obama

2009-12-17T09:01:00.000-08:00

In keeping with the spirit of the holiday season I feel compelled to share Jane Chastain’s list of Obama’s presents. The page also leads you to her blog, where you can add ideas of your own. I can only come up with a couple at the moment, but I’m sure more will come to me as time goes on. He should receive, and be instructed in the use of, a teleprompter that has the lies removed. And to go along with that, a roll of duct tape to place over his lying mouth every time his lips start moving.

And now, I'll return to the real world of Christmas and the people who matter to me. I hope you do the same. Remember, no matter the person, God is in control. And God will never leave us or forsake us.

Love

Granny

The Meaning of Christ’s Birth

2009-12-15T09:46:00.000-08:00

This morning I was doing my usual perusal of the news: the outrage in Washington and Copenhagen; the continued shredding of Tiger Wood’s private life; and the clamorous and chaotic frenzy of a season gone mad, all of it signifying nothing but corruption, self aggrandizement, bad taste, gluttony and greed.

So I decided to slow down and see if I could lift myself out of the muck. I Googled “The meaning of Christmas” and found thousands of hits concerning paganism, St. Nicholas, decorations and shopping. Then I tried “The meaning of the birth of Christ" and found this:

"The True Meaning of Christ's First Coming

A Bible Helps Booklet No. 313

by Harold S. Martin

During the Advent Season there are so many things in our communities to distract one's attention, that we have a tendency to miss the true meaning of Christmas.

Some link Christmas with decorated trees, sentimental carols, and office parties. Sometimes folks are so occupied with candy and carols, and tinsel and toys, that the real eternal meaning of Christ's Advent is lost. Christmas often involves spending money people don't have for things they don't need. The average American uses seventy feet of Christmas paper and more than fifty yards of ribbon to wrap an average of thirty-two gifts. All this stands in stark contrast to the birth that took place in Bethlehem nearly two thousand years ago, a birth that was rugged and simple.

The good news of Christmas is not a date in history--for no one knows with certainty when Jesus was born. The good news of Christmas is not a festival, with its gifts, fun, feasting, yule log, and lighted Christmas tree--for these are but vestiges of a pagan culture that knows nothing of the true God. The good news of Christmas centers around a person--God's unspeakable gift, a Saviour who is Christ the Lord.

The Advent Season is a time to search hearts. We must think of Jesus Christ not merely as the baby Jesus, but as the risen, presently-living, soon-coming King of kings and Lord of lords. He makes demands on our lives; He is a threat to our smug and self-centered ways of living. Unconditional surrender to His lordship is the price believers need to pay in order to have a joyous testimony for Him.

Of all the titles attributed to Jesus, the one that should warm our hearts most of all, is the title Emmanuel, which means God with us. When Jesus was born, God became man. The One who flung the stars out into space, came to earth and dwelled among the human family. The tiny arms of that Baby in the manger were the arms of the One who laid the foundation of the universe. The coming of Jesus Christ into the world was the time when God came to earth. God took on a human body and dwelled among us.

There are a number of reasons given in the Bible which help us understand why Jesus came to earth. In this message we will take a look at His purposes for coming nearly two thousand years ago.

1. JESUS CAME TO REVEAL THE FATHER

We read this truth in John 1:18. The Bible says, "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he bath declared him." Jesus declared one time that those who see Him have seen the Father (John 14:9). Hebrews 1:3 tells us that Christ is the express image of the person of God.

God is a great spirit. He is invisible. He cannot be seen with the physical eye. All of us at some time or another have asked the question, "What is God like?" One of the ways we can know something about the nature of God is to look at Jesus. Jesus came so that we limited human beings might be able to see God, and so that we might better know what He is like. The Apostle John says, "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us" (John 1:14). The Apostle Paul says, "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, bath shone in . . . the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Corinthians 4:6). Ever since the birth of Jesus nearly twenty centuries ago, we have been able to see the glory of God.

A little boy, the child of missionary parents, was attending school in the United States of America more than a decade ago. He had not seen his parents since the preceding summer, and would not see them again until the next summer. A few days before Christmas, the principal of the school said to him, "Jimmy, what would you like to have most of all at Christmas?" There was a picture on the principal's desk of the boy's missionary father. The lad looked at the framed-picture for a little while-and then after a few moments he said to the principal-"I want my father to step out of that frame." And you know, that little boy voiced the cry of all humanity. The Greek philosopher Plato said many years ago that he hoped some day to see God walk down the streets of Athens. In Israel, generation after generation of people looked for the Messiah. Soon after Adam and Eve were driven out of the Garden of Eden, they looked for the promised Redeemer. And then one night nearly two thousand years ago, God stepped out of the frame of the universe, and appeared on earth in the Person of Jesus Christ. Before this, the eternal God had not been seen by mortal eyes. Even the Old Testament patriarchs did not see God in His real essence, but only in angelic form, or in what is more properly called a "theophany." Jesus came to this earth so that we might learn to know better what God is like.

2. JESUS CAME TO PUT AWAY SIN

The Apostle John assures us that we can know "that he was manifested to take away our sins" (1 John 3:5). Jesus was speaking of His crucifixion and death when He said, "For this cause came I into the world" (John 18:37). The Apostle Paul says, "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief" (1 Timothy 1:15). Jesus Christ came to Bethlehem primarily to die. He came to earth as the Baby of Bethlehem in order that He might later become the Christ of Calvary.

All humans have sinned. Every one of us has fallen short of the standard which God demands. And our sin places a separation between us and God. The gulf between us and God is so wide, and the separation is so great, that none of us by his own efforts is able to close it.

Many seem to think that the gulf between sinful humans and a holy God can be closed by good works. If you say so many prayers, and give so many alms. or make a pilgrimage to some holy place--these things somehow are supposed to erase a sinner's guilt. But this will never do. Take the man who drives his car faster than the speed limit. What can he do to atone for the wrong he has done? If he thinks good works will do it--if he thinks good deeds will atone for the wrong he has done--then he can diligently observe all the traffic laws for the rest of the day. But any policeman will assure us that this is not enough. There is a penalty for disobedience, and no amount of carefulness afterward will atone for the past disobedience. If we fall short of God's standard on Monday, we can never erase that guilt by walking straight on Tuesday. No person can erase his own guilt, and neither can any other human being erase it for him. All persons, no matter how upright and morally clean they are living-still have come short of God's demands and thus need to be saved. Mortal sinful men and women cannot save themselves.

Suppose an airplane is flying toward a base on the continent of Antarctica and suddenly it crashes into the frigid waters north of the continent. Three men are thrown into the ocean, and the plane sinks at once. Nobody is near the spot, and the closest land area is the country of New Zealand, a thousand miles away. One of the men can swim for ten minutes; the second man can swim for two hours; the third man is the world's champion long--distance swimmer. Which of these three men are going to reach safety? The answer is obvious. None of them will reach safety. The only difference between them is that the one man will drown in ten minutes, another in two hours, and the champion will drown a few hours later. And this is a parable of the human family. The criminal is like the swimmer who is able to keep afloat for ten minutes. The average person is represented by the swimmer who can stay on the surface for two hours. And the honest, unusually upright person who is a good citizen and has a tremendous personality, is like the champion swimmer-but is still unable to reach land.

All human beings need a Saviour, no matter how upright and sincere they are, and the message of Christmas is this: "For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord" (Luke 2:11). The brightest message that has ever been delivered to the human family is the glad news that in some mysterious way (which we will never be able to quite fully comprehend), Jesus Christ puts himself underneath our sin, and lifts it off from our souls, and takes it away. The Apostle John declares that Jesus Christ was manifested "to take away our sins" (1 John 3:5). The words "take away" simply mean that He removes the guilt and punishment of sin by paying the price. The angel said to Joseph, "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21).

God did not become a man merely to teach us how to live. Christ did not come into the world primarily to perform miracles. Jesus came into the world primarily to journey toward the cross. And Jesus' death on the cross was an act by which He made it possible for us to be delivered from the dominion of darkness and transferred into the kingdom of the beloved Son (Colossians 1:13).

3. JESUS CAME TO DESTROY THE WORKS OF THE DEVIL

We read in 1 John 3:8, "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." This message is a sentence filled with good news.

The devil is a murderer and a liar. The Bible says that he is lawless and deceitful and subtle. He alienates from God. He blinds to the truth. He promotes selfishness and jealousy and cruelty. But the Bible says that Jesus Christ came that He might destroy the works of the devil.

The "works of the devil" are the sins which human beings commit. Satan is the one who lures us into temptation, and then we find it easy to let unholy desires give birth to sin (James 1:13-15). The Apostle Paul calls them "works of darkness" in Romans 13:12 and again in Ephesians 5:11. The passage in 1 John 3:8 suggests that the works of the devil (our sins) can become like chains that bind us.

The word translated "destroy" is the Greek word "luo." It does not mean to demolish" or "to break up." Instead, it means "to loosen one who is bound," or "to set free." When Jesus raised Lazarus from the tomb, He said, "Loose him and let him go" (John 11:44). The word "loose" is the same Greek word as the one translated "destroy" in 1 John 3:8. Christ came that He might shatter the chains of sin that can bind us, and loose us from them. For this purpose was the Son of God manifested, that He might loosen and set people free from the works of the devil.

Eddie Taylor was once a drunkard that slept off his drunken stupors under the boardwalk at Atlantic City, New Jersey. He was about as far gone as a man can get. He staggered from tavern to tavern at the south end of the city, and then after he had soaked himself with liquor, he flopped beneath the boardwalk and slept off his stupor. He wrapped himself in old newspapers to keep warm. (The devil brings men and women into a sorry state when they once fall under his grip.) But one day Eddie Taylor responded to the Gospel invitation and became a new man in Christ Jesus. From that point onward beer and liquor no longer attracted him. Jesus Christ had delivered him. He had not touched alcoholic beverages during the rest of his days on earth. For this purpose was the Son of God manifested, that He might loosen human beings from the works of the devil (1 John 3:8).

One of the reasons Jesus came to earth was to destroy the works of the devil. And nothing that the devil has ever done is too hard for Jesus to undo. If you find yourself living under the power of the devil's grip, remember that Jesus Christ came to set you free. If you will surrender your life to Him, He will loosen the grip that Satan has over you, and set you free from the bondage of sin. He will give you power to more and more live a new kind of life. Jesus was manifested on earth that He might set people free from the works of the devil.

4. JESUS CAME TO PREPARE FOR A SECOND COMING

We learn by reading Hebrews 9:28 that "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him, shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." At this season of the year our thoughts turn with gladness to the first coming of Jesus. We are reminded of the songs that the shepherds heard, and of the hope that filled their hearts. We rejoice to read about the star that shone over the place where the child lay. And yet, we are all conscious of the fact that this present age cannot continue on like it has been going. Sin abounds on every hand. Crime is on the increase. Lawlessness and sexual immorality are sometimes even encouraged. Peace and righteousness have not been established. The weapons which technicians have developed threaten to wipe civilization off the face of the earth. Deep down within we realize that something more is needed.

The first coming of Jesus was merely the preparation for a great consummation that is still to come. The text in Hebrews 9:28 says that Christ shall appear a second time. One cannot read the New Testament carefully without coming to the conclusion that the Christ who came is still to come. The angel said at the time of Jesus' ascension into Heaven, "This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go" (Acts 1:11).

One main theme that recurs over and over again in the Bible is the teaching that Jesus Christ is coming to this earth twice. Most people live as if life as we know it today is going to continue on like it has been forever. They say that the grass is still green, cows still give milk, hens lay eggs, and dogs bark at the moon just like they always have done. This is the way things always have been. But we must remember that God's Word declares that the same Jesus who came to Bethlehem is going to come a second time. Life as we know it today will come to an end.

The Scriptures teach that Jesus Christ is coming to this earth on two different occasions for two different purposes. He has already come on one occasion and accomplished the first purpose-that of paying the price for sin. Hundreds of years before Jesus was born, the Bible revealed that He would be born of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10), that His mother would be a virgin (Isaiah 7:14) and that there would be a massacre of infants in Bethlehem (Jeremiah 31: 15). The prophet Micah named the very town where He was to be born (Micah 5:2). All these things were foretold about Jesus hundreds of years before He came to earth. And just so, the Scriptures prophesy that this same Jesus will come to earth a second time.

Jesus is not coming a second time to put away sin. He is coming a second time to complete our salvation. He came the first time as the Author of salvation. He is coming the second time as the Finisher of our faith. He came the first time to atone for our sins. He is coming the second time to execute judgment on earth. When He came the first time, there was no room for Him in the inn. When He comes the second time, the whole world is going to make room for Him, for the Bible says that "every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Philippians 2:10-11). (This does not speak of universal salvation, but of universal recognition that Jesus Christ is supreme over the universe.)

Jesus came the first time to deal with sin, and to pay the price for it. Jesus is coming the second time to set up His kingdom on earth, and to bring peace and order to this troubled planet. These two lines of prophecy are woven all the way through the Bible. The Apostle Peter says that the Spirit testified beforehand "of the sufferings of Christ" and "of the glory that should follow" (1 Peter 1:11). Jesus Christ came nearly two thousand years ago and lived and died to save men and women from Hell. Jesus Christ is coming again to redeem creation, to glorify the church, and to rule with a rod of iron (Revelation 19:15-16).

When Jesus came the first time, the world was ripe for His coming. The conditions on earth were ideal for penetrating the world with God's program of salvation. Alexander the Great, through his world conquests, had spread the Greek culture and language across the Mediterranean world. Greek was the universal language, and so people did not have to spend years studying new languages before they could preach in other parts of the world. The Romans had conquered most of Europe and the Mideast, and had built roads and established a monetary system which eliminated the need for travel visas and money exchanges when going from country to country. People were tired of the philosophies of paganism and as a result were hungering for truth about the great mysteries of life here and hereafter. The world was ripe for the first advent of our Saviour.

Just as the world was ripe for the first coming of Jesus nearly twenty centuries ago, so the world is ripe for the second coming of Jesus in our day. Every sign indicates that our world is ripe for the second coming of Jesus. Jesus predicted that violence would increase and lawlessness would abound as the age draws to a close. He said that people would be eating food and getting married and engaging in business, and not paying much attention to the lateness of the hour (Matthew 24:36-39). Our day might well be described as "The night before the second Christmas." And on that second Christmas day, when Jesus comes again, we are going to be like Him. Our redemption will be complete. Wars will cease and peace will reign on the earth.

As our minds go back across the centuries during this Christmas season to the time and place and setting where Jesus was born, let us try to remember the purposes for which He came:

He came to reveal God the Father.

He came to put away sin.

He came to set us free from the works of the devil.

He came to prepare for the second advent.

If during this Christmas season we concentrate on the real reasons for His coming, surely we will love Him more and we will be able to seive Him better. We can choose not to get caught up with all the frivolous decorations, and the frenzied shopping trips and the wasted weekends traveling to the malls. Instead, we can devote time to visiting friends and family. We can invite almost unknown "strangers" into our homes for a meal. We can sit by a nursing home bed and listen to older folks tell us about the good old days. We can spend time playing with children who need our friendship. It is sad to know that many a heart and home this Christmas will have no more room for Jesus than the Judean innkeeper had in Bethlehem. But each of us has the power of choice, and the greatest thing you can do this Christmas, if you have never done it, is to accept God's unspeakable Gift into your life. He stands at the door of every heart and seeks to enter, but you must open the door. It is not enough that Jesus was born in Bethlehem; He must be born in our hearts.”

Copies of this article sent free on request.

Ask for our sample packet of Bible Helps.

BIBLE HELPS
Amos Lehigh, Editor
P. O. Pox 391
Hanover, PA 17331 U.S.A.

It sort of puts things in perspective. I know I get a little harsh on this blog. Well, of course I do. We have a president who is headed straight to hell and doing his utmost to take us with him. He is evil personified and I’ll not stand by and murmur politically correct platitudes about him. Our congress consists of 95% power mad criminals and 5% losers. Our Constitution is a pile of ashes and there’s a war going on in Afghanistan that nobody seems to know what to do with. Islamic terrorism is creeping up our flower-lined front walks and we dare not call it what it is. Political correctness is rotting whatever was left of our integrity last November and the “messiah” who defrauded his way into office is Satan’s new best friend.

But there is hope. And that hope is not in the empty suit in the White House, who lies every time his mouth moves. Our hope is in that Little Baby in the stable, who was born to die and rise again so that He could do away with all the lies, outrages, atrocities and fetters of this pathetic world.

Those of you who still believe in God: if you haven't been to church lately, find yourself a Bible teaching one and go this Sunday. You won't be sorry. Meanwhile, have a Merry Christmas and a blessed season. It's okay to say Merry Christmas.

Love

Granny

President Pomp

2009-12-04T19:45:00.000-08:00

Having read both pros and cons regarding the president’s speech Tuesday night I have reached a few conclusions. Perhaps I should say I have come up with more questions than answers.

Many of us have wondered why he chooses a large audience and extremely high profile venues for his speeches. But West Point for a “surge” speech that could have and probably should have been made from the oval office? In my humble opinion presidents always look more “presidential” and appropriate when seated behind the desk from where, supposedly, the commander-in-chief addresses issues pertinent to the United States of America. I won’t even go into the cost of flying all over the United States at the drop of a hat; no one seems to take that into consideration anymore. After all, he is the president and if he is incapable of speaking from the oval office, I guess all that expense is worth it. But it bothers me that every time he address the American people it’s from a podium in front of a mass of hand-picked observers who are sure to provide him with the feedback which he apparently craves.

Apparently I am not alone in my ruminations. This is from Nile Gardiner concerning Charles Krauthammer’s comments on the speech. And this is from the Baltimore Sun.

It seems we have a traveling photo-op instead of a president. It could be funny if this photo-op were not the top rung of our teetering republic. His speech Tuesday should have been from the perspective of a take-charge leader promising an unmistakable victory, not a half baked, something-for-everyone non-plan, delivered to some who will die trying to carry out his caricature of a strategy. Let’s face it, this was just another finger-gesturing performance from a Chicago hood, which appeared to be more the scolding of a group of unruly eighth graders than an address to the people who put him where he is in the first place.

Love

Granny

Respectable Evil

2009-12-02T19:11:00.000-08:00

The following is an excerpt from The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian:

"C.S. Lewis’s seven-volume Chronicles of Narnia, the poignant and brilliantly insightful final book, The Last Battle, describes how the good-hearted but naïve inhabitants of Narnia throw away their cherished civilization—losing both their lives and their world itself—by falling for a shabby ruse perpetrated by a few cunning and unprincipled characters. When you read it you can’t help thinking, 'Oh, my gosh, this isn’t even a very clever con game; it’s crude, full of contradictions, and easily seen through from a thousand different directions.' You just want to shake them and say, 'Don’t you see what you’re falling for?' Nevertheless, as the con men ruthlessly play on the doubts and fears of the Narnia folk, their lies take hold, and the light of civilization goes out.”

He then goes on to point out that we in America are no different. For decades we’ve been suckered into the lie. We know the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes, but we’re too afraid of being labeled racist, judgmental, or homophobic. So whoever is playing emperor that day, or month, or year continues to flaunt his nakedness and we continue to cower under the threat of being politically incorrect.

Kupelian continues, “How strange. Out of the thousands of years of suffering and oppression that comprise human history, a light burns brightly for just a couple of hundred years. The American experiment: a revolutionary idea that the common man can be free, master of his own government, so long as he himself is ruled by God. For a short time this brilliant young country dazzles all the world and all of history, not just with its power and productivity and progress, but with its goodness.

“And then, out of pure hatred—the same rage and rebellion institutionalized in communism, Nazism, and all the other ‘isms’ that have paved the world’s roads with corpses throughout the last century—haters of truth scheme to extinguish this shining light. So they concoct an absurd, fantastic ruse—that animals should have the same rights as humans beings, that white people are inherently racist and oppressive, that self-destructive sexual compulsions are perfectly normal and noble. Each passing year brings new and more bizarre delusions being held up as truth.

How much stranger that we’ve bought it.”

In the 1983 movie The Dead Zone, based on Stephen King’s novel, Christopher Walken’s character Johnny Smith awakens from a five-year coma to find his girlfriend Sarah has married and that he has been imbued with strange powers: by touching someone he can see into their lives and futures. The end comes when he shakes the hand of a popular politician, Greg Stillson, and sees him as future president, starting the final war. He sets his sights on assassinating this guy, played by Martin Sheen—and he almost succeeds in shooting him—until Stillson, sensing danger, shows his true colors by grabbing Sarah’s baby, holding the child in front of him as a shield.

I remember how righteously outraged and horrified we were. Even though Johnny dies for his efforts, truth and justice prevail: Greg Stillson’s career is ruined. Keep in mind this was 1983. Ronald Reagan was president. There was still a modicum of sanity in Washington. Most sexual deviation was still considered a disease—or a sin. We still had dominion over the animals, or so we thought. It was okay to be white without apologizing. The Dead Zone spoke to the decency in all of us. It was easy to understand why Martin Sheen’s character had committed political suicide by one cowardly act.

The line between good and evil, already on its way to blurring even then, has now become nearly imperceptible. Two years ago we began watching a young, bright senator from Chicago, who burst on the scene in a blaze of glory, the promise of a new era in America. “Our next president,” we heard from every corner of the media. We began learning fascinating details of his life: that he was born in Hawaii to a white mother and black (sort of) father; that he attended a prestigious law school and shot his way up the political ladder; he would be the perfect candidate to inject new life into a bogged-down America. Then we learned still more: that he got his political start in the home of Bill Ayers, a known terrorist; that, for twenty years, he attended a church run by an America-hating, white-hating, vitriol-spewing radical. He used Saul Alinsky and Frank Marshall Davis as role models. He was closely connected to Tony Rezko, who gave his early bid for the senate a financial lift. During his run for the presidency he was stripped bare. Every day brought a new revelation about his socialist/Marxist commitment. As late as October of last year, bloggers were publishing lists of Obama’s friends and associates, dating back to his childhood. America haters all.

Ah, but this was the candidate of hope and change. This was the silver-tongued, spellbinding Black Man, who told us what we wanted to hear. This was America’s escape from guilt. Vote for the Black man; all your white responsibility will be swept away in the winds of change.

If you don’t vote for him you’re a racist.

Now we have a president who has no need to pretend anymore. His agenda is clear; his actions speak for themselves; his change is rapidly bringing America to the brink of extinction. He could hold up that baby to protect himself, but it wouldn’t make any difference; with a stroke of a pen shortly after the inauguration he sealed the fate of thousands of babies without a moment’s hesitation. What difference would one more baby make? Who would be outraged?

Love,

Granny

The Fat Calling the Prez Human

2009-12-01T16:24:00.000-08:00

This is weird on so many levels it overwhelms me just thinking about it. But the thing that struck me as absolutely hilarious was M.M. telling B.O. he still has a "few more hours" to listen to his heart. WHAT? Do either one of them even know what a heart implies? It implies life. Spare me.

Read it. It might make you go, "Huh? Or something else.

Love

Granny

Thanksgiving and God

2009-11-26T08:11:00.000-08:00

The following arrived today in my email from Christian Reader.

" Thanksgiving and God

by Gary DeMar

On Thursday, September 24, 1789, the First House of Representatives voted to recommend—in its exact wording—the First Amendment to the states for ratification. The next day, Friday, September 25, Congressman Elias Boudinot from New Jersey proposed that the House and Senate jointly request of President Washington to proclaim a day of thanksgiving for “the many signal favors of Almighty God.” Boudinot said that he “could not think of letting the session pass over without offering an opportunity to all the citizens of the United States of joining, with one voice, in returning to Almighty God their sincere thanks for the many blessings he had poured down upon them.” [1]

Roger Sherman spoke in favor of the proposal by reminding his colleagues that the practice of thanksgiving is “warranted by a number of precedents in holy writ: for instance, the solemn thanksgivings and rejoicings which took place in the time of Solomon, after the building of the temple…. This example, he thought, worthy of Christian imitation on the present occasion.” [2]

The colonists of another era were aware of the many instances of thanksgiving celebrations found in “holy writ.” Thanksgiving, as it was practiced by the colonists, was a religious celebration that shared the sentiments of their biblical forerunners, giving thanks to God for His faithful provision. For these devoutly religious people, thanksgiving would have come naturally. “Twice en route the passengers [aboard the Arbella] participated in a fast, and once (two days after sounding ground beneath the Arbella) a ‘thanksgiving.’ When the sailing season ended with all ships accounted for, ‘we had a day of thanksgiving in all the plantations.’” [3]

There are numerous claims to the first Thanksgiving. One of the earliest recorded celebrations occurred a half century before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth in 1621. “A small colony of French Huguenots established a settlement near present-day Jacksonville, Florida. On June 30, 1564, their leader, René de Laudonnière, recorded that ‘We sang a psalm of Thanksgiving unto God, beseeching Him that it would please Him to continue His accustomed goodness towards us.’” [4]

In 1610, after a hard winter called “the starving time,” the colonists at Jamestown called for a time of thanksgiving. This was after the original company of 409 colonists had been reduced to 60 survivors. The colonists prayed for help that finally arrived by a ship filled with food and supplies from England. They held a prayer service to give thanks.

This thanksgiving celebration was not formerly commemorated yearly. An annual commemoration of thanks came nine years later in another part of Virginia. “On December 4, 1619, 38 colonists landed at a place they called Berkeley Hundred [in Virginia]. ‘We ordain,’ read an instruction in their charter, ‘that the day of our ship’s arrival…in the land of Virginia shall be yearly and perpetually kept holy as a day of Thanksgiving to Almighty God.’” [5]

While none of these Thanksgiving celebrations was an official national pronouncement (no nation existed at the time), they do support the claim that the celebrations were religious. “Thanksgiving began as a holy day, created by a community of God-fearing Puritans sincere in their desire to set aside one day each year especially to thank the Lord for His many blessings. The day they chose, coming after the harvest at a time of year when farm work was light, fit the natural rhythm of rural life.” [6]

On October 3, 1863, Abraham Lincoln declared that the last Thursday of November 1863 would be set aside as a nationwide celebration of thanksgiving. His proclamation stated that

No human counsel hath devised, nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the most high God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy…. I do, therefore, invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday in November next as a day of Thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent father who dwelleth in heaven.

Starting with Lincoln, United States Presidents proclaimed the last Thursday in November for Thanksgiving. Franklin D. Roosevelt changed the celebration to the third Thursday in November “to give more shopping time between Thanksgiving and Christmas. At this point Congress enacted the ‘fourth Thursday’ compromise.” [7] Ever since this pragmatic and commercial approach to Thanksgiving was promoted, its original meaning has steadily been lost.

[1] The Annals of the Congress, The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, Compiled From Authentic Materials by Joseph Gales, Senior (Washington, DC: Gales and Seaton, 1834), 1:949–50.

[2] Annals of the Congress, 1:950.

[3] David D. Hall, Worlds of Wonder, Days of Judgment: Popular Religious Belief in Early New England (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1989), 166.

[4] Diana Karter Appelbaum, Thanksgiving: An American Holiday, An American History (New York: Facts on File Publications, 1984), 14–15.

[5] Jim Dwyer, ed., Strange Stories, Amazing Facts of America’s Past (Pleasantville, NY: The Reader’s Digest Association, Inc., 1989), 198.

[6] Appelbaum, Thanksgiving, 186. The celebration of Christmas, in addition to Thanksgiving, has become an ordeal in censorship. Silent Night and other sacred songs have been stripped from public school Christmas pageants and replaced with Jingle Bells and Frosty the Snowman. Public school officials and school teachers are made to substitute “winter holiday” for Christmas. In St. Paul Minnesota, an affirmative action officer for the state tax department, banned what she called the “unwelcome greeting of Merry Christmas” via the department’s electronic mail. (“‘Merry Christmas’ offense, bureaucrat rules,” Atlanta Journal/Constitution [December 11, 1994], A11).

[7] Edmund H. Harvey, Jr., ed., Readers Digest Book of Facts (Pleasantville, NY: The Reader’s Digest Association, [1985] 1987), 125.

This article is an appendix from Gary DeMar's bestselling book, America's Christian History: The Untold Story."

Love

Granny

You Might be a Racist

2009-11-20T16:23:00.000-08:00

As a white woman (haole) living in Hawaii during the Vietnam War I was embedded in a delightful multicultural blend. With a few rather insignificant exceptions, I was never aware back then of “diversity” as much as I am now every time I go to my local Wal-Mart. There was no in-your-face different-ness that made me want to apologize to everyone I met whose skin color or eye shape wasn’t like mine. For six years we lived among Japanese, Filipino, Portuguese, and yes, a few Blacks and I feel richer for the experience. I adopted the dress, the cuisine, the customs, the music, and much of the language. When we returned to the mainland I suffered greatly at the loss of a huge slice of my life.

Not so now. I live outside a very small community which consists of some white people, but mostly Mexican who work at the various chicken processing plants which dot the countryside in the Missouri Ozarks. I don’t know any of them. They keep to themselves and live their lives pretty much they way they were accustomed to but with all the benefits of living in the United States. They don’t speak English so we don’t have conversations. They don’t appear to want to blend with the local folks so we don’t bother them.

For most of my life I have considered myself racially tolerant. But even that doesn’t describe it. The term implies an awareness that demands a stand. I’ve had no stand. I’ve simply lived with people and they with me. I could cite countless examples but I won’t. To do so would only make it sound like I’m saying, “See how tolerant I am?” Nor will I use the term “colorblind” because that is just plain stupid. Black is black. White is white. But a couple of incidents come to mind. Recent incidents, and that’s what makes them all the more significant.

Last year, just before the election, we were talking at work about the candidates and some of the issues. One fresh-faced (white) kid, who would be voting for the first time, asked me if I was going to vote for Obama. I said no, that I was voting for John McCain. He replied, “Oh, you must be a racist.”

In a blog post some time ago I was giving my opinion of Colin Powell and what a disappointment he has turned out to be to us conservatives. I received a comment from a “lady” telling me that it must be terrible to be such a racist a**hole. Hmmm. Hadn’t thought about race as I was illustrating Powell’s walk to the left. Perhaps my use of the word “entitlement” struck a nerve. There is a growing list of words, phrases and definitions that have been left as bloody sacrifices on the altar of political correctness during the last few decades.

Several years ago I was employed as a nurse at a detox facility in a large Midwestern city. Most of the staff assistants with whom I worked were recovering alcoholics or addicts and many of them were black. Things often became tense given the nature of the work and the unpredictability of the clientele. At no time did we as nurses feel threatened by the patrons who passed through our doors. The staff with whom we worked was always diligent in adhering to their job descriptions and keeping us safe. Through the daily challenges there was no color. There was size; some of my assistants were well over six feet and I was always thankful for that. There was also a camaraderie that can only arise from a common purpose.

When I transferred to the hospital with which the detox was affiliated, the work became more rehab oriented and now we had clients who were at least dried out, if not completely motivated. During the time I spent there the third floor was being renovated and readied for a very special patron: the Black professional. The (white) staff on the second floor had no knowledge of what transpired upstairs with the exception of the occasional rumor that floated down. Exquisite decor, top-of-the-line furnishings, color-coordinated paints, a separate entrance. Whose money? Who knows? An administrator was hired from Chicago or St. Louis or God knows where and she arrived a week or two before the grand opening. She came by and introduced herself and later her assistant told us that if we had to come up there for any reason we were to call first and someone would meet us. The (white) staff from downstairs was not to hobnob with the (black) staff from upstairs.

Racism? Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines racism as: “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” If you really want to get involved here’s a link to Wikipedia, with all its prejudices and false information.

A concerned neighbor called the police one day when she saw two men apparently trying to break in to a nearby house. When the police (one black, one white) arrived one of the men (black) claimed it was his home but could or would not produce proof that this was true. He then became so abusive and belligerent that the officer (white) had no choice but to arrest him. In the firestorm that followed the arresting officer was called racist, bigoted, stupid (thanks to our open-minded president) and every other epithet that the poor downtrodden African Americans like to apply. Never mind that the (white) officer in question was simply doing what he was trained to do.

Racism? Against whom?

Now there’s a state highway patrol officer in Tennessee who hit the wrong key on his computer and sent an email to everyone on the address list. Here is approximately what was in the text of the email. Keep in mind Officer Gobbell did not compose it. I’m having trouble finding anything in it that is not true.

“Proud to be White

Michael Richards makes his point..............

Michael Richards better known as Kramer from TVs Seinfeld does make a good point.

This was his defense speech in court after making racial comments in his comedy act. He makes some very interesting points...

Someone finally said it. How many are actually paying attention to this? There are African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Arab Americans, etc.

And then there are just Americans. You pass me on the street and sneer in my direction. You call me 'White boy,' 'Cracker,' 'Honkey,' 'Whitey,' 'Caveman'... and that's OK.

But when I call you, ******, Kike, Towel head, Sand-******, Camel Jockey, Beaner, ****, or Chink ... You call me a racist.

You say that whites commit a lot of violence against you... so why are the ghettos the most dangerous places to live?

You have the United [Negro] College Fund. You have Martin Luther King Day.

You have Black History Month. You have Cesar Chavez Day.

You have Yom Hashoah. You have Ma'uled Al-Nabi.

You have the NAACP. You have BET... If we had WET (White Entertainment Television), we'd be racists. If we had a White Pride Day, you would call us racists.

If we had White History Month, we'd be racists.

If we had any organization for only whites to 'advance' OUR lives, we'd be racists.

We have a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, a Black Chamber of Commerce, and then we just have the plain Chamber of Commerce.

Wonder who pays for that??

A white woman could not be in the Miss Black American pageant, but any color can be in the Miss America pageant.

If we had a college fund that only gave white students scholarships... You know we'd be racists.

There are over 60 openly proclaimed Black Colleges in the US. Yet if there were 'White colleges', that would be a racist college.

In the Million Man March, you believed that you were marching for your race and rights. If we marched for our race and rights, you would call us racists.

You are proud to be black, brown, yellow and orange, and you're not afraid to announce it. But when we announce our white pride, you call us racists.

You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us. But, when a white police officer shoots a black gang member or beats up a black drug dealer running from the law and posing a threat to society, you call him a racist.

I am proud... But you call me a racist.

Why is it that only whites can be racists??

There is nothing improper about this e-mail. Let's see which of you are proud enough to send it on. I sadly don't think many will. That's why we have LOST most of OUR RIGHTS in this country.

We won't stand up for ourselves!

BE PROUD TO BE WHITE!

It's not a crime YET... but getting very close!”

It became a crime when Officer Gobbell pressed the wrong key on his computer. Now he’s been labeled, stereotyped, given a vacation without pay and thrown under the bus by left-wing hysterics, who have not bothered thinking through his “crime.” But we can’t give liberals credit for thinking, can we?

And finally, please read this article, which I lifted from Drudge this morning:

The comments are especially telling. Tell me that Jesse Jackson is not racist and then tell me why.

Racism comes in many colors. It’s just a fact. But when it comes from a black, or Hispanic, or Asian, it’s justified and called something else. If I say I’m not going to vote for someone because I’m conservative and he’s around the bend liberal, I’m racist. It doesn’t make sense to me. But why should I expect sense from a culture that is so driven by a history of hatred that there’s no room for reason? But sometimes I wonder about the (white) Jews who were enslaved for so long by the (black) Egyptians. I guess it’s the old double standard rearing its ugly head.

By the way, back to the hospital and its Black Professional treatment unit: they opened with all the horns, bells and whistles, and after several months and one (1) client, the entire hospital closed its doors on Christmas Eve.

Love

Granny

The Hypocrisy Never Ceases to Amaze

2009-11-17T08:48:00.000-08:00

It was one of those “OMG!” moments. I caught the headline early yesterday morning but in the hustle and bustle of the day I lost it again. So I had to Google it. No problem. I found this article from the Baltimore Sun, which will suffice in demonstrating the arrogance and hypocrisy (like we need one more demonstration) of the president. I particularly liked: "I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger a society becomes, " coming from the mouth of the man who has brazenly censored Fox News, and is succeeding in shutting the American people out of every aspect of his “transparent” administration.

Compare it with this with Don Storch’s post, published October 20th (that’s a month ago, folks) and then try to pin some lucidity on the prez’s speech to the Chinese. You can’t. Because the man is a dolt, a liar, and an embarrassment to thinking people worldwide. Of course, that excludes liberals, doesn’t it? Which is why he continues to lumber about like some out-of-control Frankenstein monster, destroying everything in his path that is good and pure and truthful. May God have mercy on his soul.

Love

Granny

The Connection—What Connection?

2009-11-13T06:56:00.000-08:00

Not to burden you with too much information, but this did happen after we went to bed last night. Sometimes we actually take all of 2.025 minutes to talk before I succumb to my muscle relaxant, pain med-induced coma and Cecil dives into the sleep of the just. He probably has the worst end of the deal. He puts my brace on to get me up, dresses me, walks the dogs, gets the meals, does the laundry, helps me shower, drives me to church (well, he goes, too,) does the grocery shopping, and still manages to keep up with his blog. Since October 13th, when my car morphed into a crazed being and dumped me into a ditch, then careened across the road and became airborne, diving nose first into an embankment, fracturing my T9 vertebra, I’ve been doing a pretty convincing imitation of a beached whale.

Back to last night. Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about our president’s non-reaction to the Fort Hood massacre by an Islamic Jihadist. From the nauseating “don’t jump to conclusions” to his copious use of the word “tragedy” he’s pretty much distanced himself from the outrage of patriots like you and me. Then I realized, heck, he’s been widening the gap by miles at a time ever since his swearing in ceremony. The only time he even attempts to connect with the American people is when he’s campaigning for one of his causes. And, fortunately for him, there are enough on the left to give him the feedback he needs to feed his self-centered ego. So I said, “Honey, has it occurred to you that our president doesn’t have any rapport with the people?” Or words to the effect; it was late. After several seconds my wide-awake spouse answered, “Yeah.” Validation. I felt much better.

But it’s not just a disconnect; it goes deeper than that. It’s more like an ineffable, untouchable, almighty god which has placed itself so far above its subjects that to try to communicate on any level would mean certain death. While countless critics, both right and left, have rhapsodized about his eloquent and riveting speeches—the ones with the teleprompter—I have never seen it. I see, and hear, choppy, stilted, cold words, delivered in a calculated, dispassionate and overly-efficient style. Maybe it’s my one (1) speech class that I took in college a hundred years ago that has left me so critical. But, I don’t see any warmth there. No heart, no soul, no—humanity. Okay, so that’s another post for another day, when I’ve got my tinfoil hat on.

I guess it was the Fort Hood massacre (Yes, it was a massacre) that drove it home. Remember President Bush on 9/11? Of course we do. The president everybody loved to hate had a way of bringing us together and causing us, for a time, to actually entertain a rational thought or two. He did it on 9/11; he did it when he visited the troops in Iraq; he did it briefly during Katrina, until somebody began yelling, “He didn’t do it soon enough!” Demonized by the mainstream media, excoriated by the liberal hate mongers, George W. Bush, with all of his faults, managed to present a dignified, composed and unifying demeanor even when the world was falling apart all around him. He didn’t give “shout outs” to someone in the audience when thirteen citizens lay dead; he didn’t tell us not to leap to conclusions after the carnage of 9/11. He didn’t bow to the Saudi Arabian king.

The danger is far more subtle than meets the eye. It isn’t just an arrogant, narcissistic lack of empathy; it is a cold, uncaring detachment, which diminishes not only the office of the President, but also the sovereignty of our nation. The lack of recognition of we the people—on any level—indicates the direction he and his comrades are going, dragging us along and shredding our freedoms along the way.

Love

Granny

Thank You

2009-11-11T09:40:00.000-08:00

Thank you from a grateful American.

To those who gave their all.

Any who gave up years of their lives, went through basic training and beyond, wore the uniform of the United States Military, defended the Constitution, and served at home and abroad gave their all.

Bush or Obama: The Quiz

2009-11-09T15:44:00.000-08:00

Bush or Obama: The Quiz

Socialized Medicine

2009-11-08T20:17:00.000-08:00

So the House has passed their beloved healthcare bill. More socialized medicine. $1.2 trillion. Now it goes to the Senate. If it passes and we become subject to government run health care anyone with half a brain knows what lies down the road: increased taxes, decreased Medicare, rationed healthcare doled out by someone who doesn’t know medicine from Marxism. Gone will be any modicum of quality of care because any doctor worth his salt will find another way to use his God-given talents. The cheering by those who believe this is the answer to the nation’s health woes will soon turn to questions, blank stares, and then anger when they realize they’ve been had once again. Of course, by then it will be too late and another one of our choices will have bitten the dust, mashed by another giant socialist footprint.

Think about this: a rough estimate of the number of protestors who marched on Washington DC on September 12th is 850,000. My husband was there; he should know. The number of people who participated in the tea parties all across our nation from the first whiff of Obamunism blowing in the wind is nearly impossible to estimate. The MSM was not interested in even acknowledging that they were taking place, and that they continue to take place, and will continue to take place until members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle realize just who employs them. The House passed socialized medicine despite an uprising of thousands of thinking citizens who saw the writing on the wall and despite a summer of town hall protests and despite the absence of any coherency in the so-called bill.

And who is bringing us the bill? A bill that will enhance the stranglehold on the American economy and American ideals and American freedom in every sector? Why, none other than the Marxist president and 536 members of a congress who already shoved that $787 billion stimulus bill down our throats in February. You remember the bill: the one that stimulated unemployment? Oops. Oh, yeah, it also stimulated John Murtha’s airport.

The same president and congress who took over the automobile and banking industries and are on the verge of doing a sleight of hand with the carbon tax. But we know all that, don’t we? We know how much they care for us and our wellbeing? Now let’s look at these people, who are employed by us, who sit in their hallowed halls, which are owned by us, pull in salaries paid by us, salaries which most of us could only dream of seeing in our entire lifetimes, with perks which are stolen from us. Let’s look at their health care benefits. With a wide range of choices and very reasonable premiums considering their salaries, they are set for life from the second they come on board until their dying gasp.

"Health Care for Members of Congress?

August 25, 2009

Q: What type of health insurance do members of Congress receive? Is it a single-payer, government-run system?

A: Members of Congress are covered by private insurance under the same system that covers all federal workers.

FULL ANSWER

Members of Congress have good health insurance by any standard, but it’s not free and not reserved only for them – and it’s not government insurance. House and Senate members are allowed to purchase private health insurance offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which covers more than 8 million other federal employees, retirees and their families.

It’s not a "single-payer" system where the government acts as the one and only health insurance company. As President Bush’s chief of personnel Kay Coles James said in 2003, while lecturing at the conservative Heritage Foundation, "the FEHB program is not centralized, government-run health care." It has drawn praise both from conservatives and liberals, including President Obama, who held it up as a model for his own health care proposals.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the FEHBP offers about 300 different private health care plans, including five government-wide, fee-for-service plans and many regional health maintenance organization (HMO) plans, plus high-deductible, tax-advantaged plans. All plans cover hospital, surgical and physician services, and mental health services, prescription drugs and "catastrophic" coverage against very large medical expenses. There are no waiting periods for coverage when new employees are hired, and there are no exclusions for preexisting conditions. The FEHBP negotiates contracts annually with all insurance companies who wish to participate. There is plenty of competition for the business; FEHBP is the largest employer-sponsored health plan in the U.S.

Those who don’t like their coverage may switch to another plan during a yearly "open season" period. To help with the choices, FEHBP conducts an annual "satisfaction survey" of each plan with more than 500 members and publishes the results.

Like other large employers, the government pays a large share of the cost of coverage. On average, the government pays 72 percent of the premiums for its workers, up to a maximum of 75 percent depending on the policy chosen. For example, the popular Blue Cross and Blue Shield standard fee-for-service family plan carries a total premium of $1,120.47 per month, of which the beneficiary pays $356.59. Washington, D.C.-based employees who prefer an HMO option might choose the Kaiser standard family plan. It carries a total premium of $629.46 per month, of which the employee pays only $157.36.

In addition, members of Congress also qualify for some medical benefits that ordinary federal workers do not. They (but not their families) are eligible to receive limited medical services from the Office of the Attending Physician of the U.S. Capitol, after payment of an annual fee ($491in 2007). But services don’t include surgery, dental care or eyeglasses, and any prescriptions must be filled at the member’s expense.

House and Senate members (but not their families) also are eligible to receive care at military hospitals. For outpatient care, there is no charge at the Washington, D.C., area hospitals (Walter Reed Army Medical Center and National Naval Medical Center). Inpatient care is billed at rates set by the Department of Defense.

-Brooks Jackson

Sources:

English, Barbara. "Health Benefits for Members of Congress." Congressional Research Service. 25 Sep 2007.

"Non-Postal Premium Rates for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program; Fee-for-Service Plans (FFS)." Office of Personnel Management. rates for 2009. undated, accessed 24 Aug 2009.

"Non-Postal Premium Rates for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program; Health Management Organizations (HMO)." Office of Personnel Management. rates for 2009. undated, accessed 24 Aug 2009.

Posted by Brooks Jackson on Tuesday, August 25, 2009 at 11:11 am

Filed under Ask FactCheck • Tagged with Congress, health insurance"

Why are these people so concerned about healthcare for the masses? Is it that they are really agonizing about all the pitiful uninsured, which are piling up in untreated heaps outside the emergency room doors? Do they really give a rip about the great unwashed who drag their infants and their grannies into clinics and get turned away in droves because they don’t have coverage? THEY COULDN’T CARE LESS! It’s about control. Only and always control. And we are circling the drain of the great and powerful toilet of totalitarianism. Wake up, folks. It’s almost too late. We need 2010 and we need it badly. And soon.

Love

Granny

Nancy's Busy Tonight

2009-11-06T20:54:00.000-08:00

I was somewhat disappointed that the cartoon didn't show up well on the blog. So here is the link to Erin Bonsteel's hugely entertaining blog, where you can view it in its entirety. What a talent.

Love

Granny

Fort Hood—The Diversion

2009-11-05T17:25:00.000-08:00

The timing is too perfect. “Never let a crisis go to waste.” For the next several days Fort Hood will occupy every TV screen, every talk radio show, every Internet news source, and every cell phone conversation. Americans are easily distracted.

Before you accuse me of just having acquired a brand new tinfoil hat think about this: What is this administration’s favorite strategy for slipping a BIG DEAL through right under our noses? Distraction.

So, while you’re glued to your TVs and computers this weekend, watching the drama unfold at Fort Hood, who does not deserve this, please keep the bigger picture in mind. Coincidence? Who knows? But I don’t trust the denizens of the darkness in Washington any more than I trust a rabid dog not to bite.

Planned? Who knows? But I wouldn’t put it past any of them. A small price to pay for successfully ramming a vile, obscene healthcare bill down our throats.

Love

Granny

Constitution? What Constitution?

2009-11-05T16:36:00.000-08:00

When you've got a blithering idiot for a press secretary you don't have to worry too much about what a drooling fool you look like when you're caught with your teleprompter down:

Gibbs Says He Doesn’t Know if White House Has Reviewed Constitutionality of Forcing People to Buy Health Insurance

Monday, November 02, 2009

By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

(CNSNews.com ) - White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs said today that he does not know if White House lawyers have reviewed whether it is constitutional for the federal government to order individuals to buy health insurance and said that the White House is not seriously considering the concerns of people such as Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah) who believe the mandate is not constitutionally justified.

This was the second time in two weeks that Gibbs had dismissed concerns that the Constitution does not give the federal government the power to force individuals to purchase items the government wants them to purchase.

Hatch told CNSNews.com last week that forcing people to buy health insurance cannot be justified under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause.

“But here would be the first time where our government would demand that people buy something that they may or may not want,” Hatch told CNSNews.com. “And, you know, if that’s the case, then we didn’t need a ‘Cash for Clunkers,’ all we had to do is have the federal government say you all got to buy new cars, no matter how tough it is on you. You know, they could require you to buy anything. And that isn’t America. That’s not freedom. That’s not constitutionally sound. Now, there may be some gimmicky way that they can do this, but I can’t think of a gimmicky way that would be constitutionally justified.”

Gibbs was asked by a reporter on Monday: “Have White House lawyers looked at this issue? Has this been examined in any way?”

Gibbs responded: “Not that I know of. I don’t think it has gotten to the point where anybody questions the legitimacy of it.”

The reporter followed up: “Well, Orrin Hatch questions the legitimacy of it.” Gibbs quipped, “Well, you should ask him.”

The reporter asked, “Do you not feel there is any concern at all about whether it is constitutional for Congress to impose a mandate?”

“No,” Gibbs said.

Both House and Senate versions of the health care bill would mandate that individuals purchase health insurance.

While the executive branch is apparently not reviewing the constitutionality of the proposal, a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report issued on July 24 looked at it and did not arrive at a definitive answer.

“Despite the breadth of powers that have been exercised under the Commerce Clause, it is unclear whether the clause would provide a solid constitutional foundation for legislation containing a requirement to have health insurance,” the CRS report said. “Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or a service.”

The CRS report also addressed one of the most frequently used arguments in favor of allowing a mandate.

“Although the federal government provides health coverage for many individuals through federal programs such as Medicare, it has never required individuals to purchase health insurance. While a requirement to transfer money to a private party may arise in other contexts (e.g., automobile insurance), it has been noted that these provisions are based on exercising a privilege, like driving a car,” the report says.

Mandates that drivers buy auto insurance are enacted on the state, not the federal level and are therefore not based on any interpretation of the Commerce Clause, which is a part of the federal Constitution and applies to federal laws.

Former Justice Department Attorney David Rivkin was among the first to raise the issue of whether requiring people to buy a product is constitutional. He predicts if the health care bill is enacted, the question of the mandate will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which he predicts would probably take up to four years.

“This is a mandate that would apply to millions of Americans,” Rivkin, who served in both the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, told CNSNews.com. “A good number of them are going to run to district courts and start a lawsuit. It would eventually go to the Supreme Court. It would take several years. There will be lots and lots and lots of cases. And people will have standing. We’re not talking about taxpayer standing. We’re talking about a mandate that applies to them personally. It will take several years to get to the Supreme Court, probably at least four.”

Rivkin believes if this is upheld, it would set a precedent to mandate the purchase of other products.

“Not one person has emerged to tell me what would be the limiting principal for the purchase of health care. You can mandate the purchase of health club memberships,” Rivkin said. “You can mandate the coverage of mental wellness. You could mandate the purchase of new cars every couple of years. That sure would stimulate the automotive sector.”

The non-partisan CRS analysis points to several U.S. Supreme Court precedents.

The high court in United States vs. Lopez rules that prohibiting the possession of a firearm near a school zone is not justifiable under the Commerce Clause. Also, in the case of United States vs. Morrison, the high court determined that Congress did not have the authority to pass the Violence Against Women Act ruling that “gender-motivated crimes are not, in any sense of the phrase, economic activity,” and that expanding such regulation of a non-economic activity would enable federal regulation of almost any activity, including “family law and other areas of traditional state regulation.”

Love

Granny

It Will all Become Chrystal Clear

2009-11-01T14:07:00.000-08:00