Friday, December 30, 2011

Why Attack Religion!

Dear Comrades,
Comrade Aldred’s reply to the somewhat stale exhortation conveyed under the above query leaves little to be desired. It so happens that the Neue Zeit for August 4, contains an article by a German comrade (H. Salzmann) on the same subject, and to much the same effect. There seems to be a growing sentiment in the German Party that the favourite “tag,” that “religion is a private matter,” will have to be taken with a very considerable grain of salt, The phrase undoubtedly often covers an unworthy and somewhat hypocritical shirking of a necessary question – and, moreover, for the most part a perfectly useless one. In spite of the attempts sometimes made, no-one is really deceived into thinking that Socialism is compatible with any of the traditional systems of dogma termed religions. Thus, the old “tag” is in short a conventional lie, and surely the of these conventional lies we can do with the better When we find persons calling themselves Socialists like Mr. Ramsay MacDonald trying to make themselves “practical,” with Nonconformist voters and the like, by protesting their zeal for the “religious” indoctrination of children as an apology for their advocacy of secular education, I think it is about time for the thorough-going Socialist or Social-Democrat of the S.D.F to think twice before entrenching himself on the “Why attack religion?” attitude. Modern religion, like modern politics, is a part of the modern capitalist system – one of the wings of the vampire (cf. Walter Crane’s well-known cartoon).
E. Belfort Bax

yes... why attack religion?... because attacking religion is the best way to destroy Conservative politics and Capitalist economics... they knew this over 100 years ago in Germany... and yet, we let it happen again.

E. Why Attack Religion! by E. Belfort Bax - Justice, 25th August 1906, p.6. (letter) - Marxists Internet Archive

Thursday, December 29, 2011

there is no war on religion... promise!

Dept. of the Navy - Walter Reed National Military Medical Center
WRNATMILMEDCENINST 5720.4C - NAVMED Policy Memo 10-015
Partners in Care Guidelines

Section 8.f - "No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials, and/or artifacts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit."

maybe it's me, but if the United States Navy has been put on the task, it sure looks like a "war on religion" to me.

but maybe this war is winnable:

We are in the process of rewriting our policy and would like to offer the following statement:

Bibles and other religious materials have always been and will remain available for patient use at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. The visitation policy as written was incorrect and should have been more thoroughly reviewed before its release. It has been rescinded. We apologize for any confusion the policy may have caused.

Please know that at admission, all patients are asked for their religious preference and a chaplain associated with their preference visits them regularly to provide spiritual services. In addition, their families may also bring religious material.

WRNMMC provides multiple venues at WRMNMC for religious expression and worship. There is daily Catholic Mass as well as Protestant, Hindu, and Muslim services. Eucharist is also available at the bedside. There are weekly Torah studies, multiple weekly Christian bible studies, as well as weekly Qur'an study. Furthermore, chaplains coordinate spiritual needs for those whose faith groups are not represented by staff chaplains (such as Latter-Day Saints, Buddhist, and Christian Scientist).

Walter Reed National Military Medical Center remains committed to supporting the religious preferences of all our patients and we will continue to ensure their spiritual needs are met.
- Walter Reed National Military Medical Center

meanwhile, in other news...

If you think this is an isolated incident, consider the following dozen-plus examples reported in the past six months alone by the FRC and Rep. Forbes' office and a few of my own I found, which document how religious freedom and Christian liberty in particular have been limited, quarantined, omitted or outright obliterated.

--The Air Force Academy apologized for merely announcing Operation Christmas Child --a Christian-based charity and relief program designed to send holiday gifts to impoverished children around the world.

--Yet the Air Force is building an $80,000 Stonehenge-like worship site for "earth-based" religions, including "pagans, Wiccans, druids, witches and followers of Native American faiths."

--The Marine Corps considered tearing down a Camp Pendleton cross meant to honor fallen heroes.

--Air Force officials stripped religious curriculum from a 20-year-old course on "just war theory."

--The Department of Veterans Affairs censored references to God and Jesus during prayers at Houston National Cemetery.

--The Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate passed the $662 billion National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which included a repeal of Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which states: "Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy."

--The Department of Health and Human Services unveiled new health care rules that ignore basic conscience protections for medical workers with faith-based objections to abortion and contraception.

--Officials at HHS denied funding for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' successful program for sex trafficking victims because of the church's teaching on human life.

--Administration officials refused to intervene in the closing of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

--President Barack Obama has lobbied for the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would trample on the faith of employers in hiring, firing and promotion decisions.

--The Pentagon released new regulations that force chaplains to perform same-sex "weddings" despite their religious objections.

--Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demonized other countries' religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights.

--Just this past week, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation sent a letter to officials at Travis Air Force Base, demanding the removal or transfer of a Nativity scene and a menorah that are part of a larger holiday display on the base.
- by Chuck Norris, at, on December 20, 2011


Wednesday, December 28, 2011

dangers of IUD's

first-hand account from Abby Johnson, an ex-Director of Planned Parenthood, and her experience with intrauterine devices (IUD)... i wonder why the dangers are never discussed; but i know why... money is more important than people's health.

While working at Planned Parenthood, I decided an IUD would be the best method for me. After 3 years of use, I had no side effects…so I thought. After I had my IUD removed, I realized there might be a problem with my body. I had never had a problem getting pregnant, but several months had now passed, and every pregnancy test came back negative. What was going on? I had some blood work run and was told I didn’t produce several hormones. My body had tried to produce the hormones while the IUD was in…but the IUD won. My body couldn’t compete. I am only pregnant now because of NFP, supplemental hormones and an amazing doctor.

IUDs…the worst choice. - by Abby Johnson

Thursday, December 22, 2011

thoughts on manners

A man's manners are a mirror, in which he shows his likeness to the intelligent observer.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Good manners are part of good morals.
- Richard Whately

What a rare gift, by the by, is that of good manners! How difficult to define, how much more difficult to impart! Better for a man to possess them than wealth, beauty, or talent; they will more than supply all.
- Edward G. Bulwer-Lytton

Better were it to be unborn than to be ill-bred.
-Sir Walter Raleigh

A man's worth is estimated in this world according to his conduct.
- Jean de La Bruyère

  • It is wonderful how much talent runs into manners.
  • Fine manners need the support of fine manners in others.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

  • Civility is but a desire to receive civility, and to be esteemed polite.
  • Many young persons believe themselves natural when they are only impolite and coarse.
- François de la Rochefoucauld

Manners easily and rapidly mature into morals.
- Horace Mann

Manners are of more importance than laws. Upon them, in great measure, the laws depend. The law touches us here and there, and now and then. Manners are what vex or soothe, corrupt or purify, exalt or debase, barbarize or refine us, by a constant, steady, uniform, insensible operation, like that of the air we breathe in. They give us their whole form and color to our lives. According to their quality, they aid morals; they supply them or they totally destroy them.
- Edmund Burke

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

ReBlog - The Jewish Case for "Merry Christmas"

You may find the title confusing. After all, religious Jews don’t celebrate Christmas. So why should a Jew care if a store clerk says “Merry Christmas”? Why should the public disappearance of Christmas matter to the Jewish people?

Patience. All will be explained in due course.

In the meantime, ‘tis the season to be politically correct – a coast-to-coast harkening-free zone and the tyranny of hyper-sensitivity.

The increasingly successful effort to purge Christmas from our culture (correctly called the War on Christmas) proceeds apace – municipal Christmas trees are re-christened (no pun intended) “holiday trees,” schools ban Christmas decorations and the singing of Christmas carols during holiday programs. Christmas – excuse me -- holiday parades are excluding Santa Claus, and, everywhere, stores (which derive 20% of their annual revenue from Christmas sales) are in Grinch overdrive.

This year, Lowe’s employees are permitted to say “Merry Christmas,” but only in response to a customer initiating the greeting. On its website, Barnes & Noble offers a “Gift Guide” which includes “Holiday gift baskets,” “holiday sleds” and “holiday delivery.” FYI, the “holiday” celebrated by 95% of the American people at this time of the year is called Christmas.

The Best Buy website offers “unique gifts for the season.” According to Liberty Counsel (a Christian legal action group), a company spokesman claims the use of the word “Christmas” is disrespectful.

Disrespectful to who? The 5% of the American people who don’t celebrate Christmas? But how many of them actually care? (For years, people said “Merry Christmas” to me, without inflicting severe emotional harm.) Would it be disrespectful for a clerk in Tel Aviv to wish someone a “Happy Hanukkah”?

(FYI, according to a Rasmussen poll (conducted November 18-19), 69% of Americans prefer “Merry Christmas” to the generic “happy holidays” (favored by 23% -- doubtless all card-carrying members of the ACLU.)

Eddie Bauer’s customer service department doesn’t acknowledge Christmas because, says a spokesman, the retailer doesn’t “want to offend Jews, those who celebrate Kwanza, and those who have no religious preference.” And what about the Christians whose holiday is intentionally ignored? The retail giant isn’t overly concerned about offending them.

Earlier this year, the no-religious-preference crowd (who nonetheless are into decking the halls) rejoiced when K-Mart again started selling “Holiday trees” – under which “holiday presents” could be placed and around which the family could gather on holiday eve to sing “um-um-um, um-um, um-um-um um” – until that too is banned as somehow disrespectful. Sadly for them, under consumer pressure, the store just did an about-face.

The refusal of retailers to wish 95% of the American people a “Merry Christmas,” is but a seasonal manifestation of the secularist jihad.

But the unholy war is most apparent at this time of the year:
  • The City of Chicago pressured organizers of the annual Cristkindlmarket (literally: Christ child market) to drop New Line Cinema as a co-sponsor. The studio was going to show clips from its just-released film “The Nativity Story,” at its booth. A city official determined it would be terribly “insensitive to the many people of the many faiths who come to enjoy the market for its good and unique gifts” to encounter a booth showing clips from a movie about Jesus – at a Christmas fair. Might spoil their shopping experience, don’t you know. (And if someone went to a Hanukah party they might – oh no! – see a menorah. And wouldn’t that be just too awful for words.) By the by, Chicago always gives a warm municipal welcome to the annual Gay Pride Week (including “Mr. Leather”). Again, religious people apparently have no sensibilities.
  • The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review a lower court ruling that New York public schools can refuse to display crèches at Christmas, while putting up menorahs at Hanukah and crescents at Ramadan. Celebrating minority religions is cool, multicultural and sensitive. Acknowledging the religion of the overwhelming majority is callous, not inclusive – hence, un-cool.
  • There’s an ongoing game of pc one-upsmanship. Employee “holiday parties” are no longer permitted at the University of Colorado. (Christmas parties were ditched last year.) Obsessive administrators decided that during a holiday party someone might be thinking about that holiday which is the focus of the season. Henceforth, the school will have “staff appreciation parties” or “good-will functions” -- as long as the good will referenced in no way relates to (you, know) peace on earth, good will toward men.
The War on Christmas is one front in the War on Christianity -- which itself is part of the war on religion and religious-based values.

The same ideologues who want to take Christmas out of Christmas, also want to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance, “In God We Trust” off our currency and bibles out of presidential inaugurations. They want to pretend that the Ten Commandments had no more to do with the founding of this country than the Koran, The Humanist Manifesto II or “The Earth In Balance.”

The foregoing should matter to Jews principally for two reasons:

The Jewish mission is to spread God-based morality –

This has been true since the time of Abraham. God expects Jews to spread knowledge of Him and his commandments. We are told to stand against a morality of convenience. (We are expected not to change with the times, but to change the times – as we did in the ancient Near East.) Judaism was the first religion to embrace a universal moral code – one for all people, at all times, in all places.

Just as in the 19th century most American Jews opposed slavery and in the early 20th. century, Jewish reformers supported child-labor laws, today, morality-from-Sinai requires us to support the family and oppose sexual license and the destruction of innocent human life (including abortion-on-demand, cloning to kill and euthanasia).

Serious Christians – whose morality comes from our Bible – recognize the same ethical injunctions. That’s why they’re under relentless attack by the cultural elite. The secular left wants to extinguish God-based morality. The only way to do that is to drive Christianity underground. Hence, the War on Christianity. Hence, the War on Christmas.

How well the left has done its work of deconstructing marriage, the American family and traditional morality may be seen in three statistics. In the 1930s, married couples comprised 84% all households. Today, the figure is just under 50%. Since 2000, the number of cohabitating couples increased by 14%.

That’s why, Jews -- as Jews -- must oppose revisionist efforts to deny our nation’s Christian heritage, must stand against the drive to decouple our laws from Judeo-Christian ethics and must counter attacks on public expressions of the religion of most Americans – Christianity.

Jews are safer in a Christian America than in a secular America.

Look at the fate of Jews in post-Christian Europe.

Stephen Steinlight, former director of the U.S. Holocaust Museum, says there are an average of 12 assaults a day on Parisian Jews – comparable to Nazi attacks on Jews in the dying days of the Weimar Republic. In recent years, synagogues, Jewish day schools and kosher restaurants have been targeted by Europeans of the jihad persuasion.

In a commentary in the October 17th Jerusalem Post, David Meyer (a French-born rabbi serving a synagogue in Brussels) writes: “I am frightened not just by the anti-Semitism (resurgent in Europe) but by the collective European response of indifference and appeasement. Today, Europe worships compromise. It is ‘fanatical’ in its non-violence. It is a Europe that, in the face of Islamist fanaticism, is ready to stay silent.”

Nature abhors a spiritual vacuum. In a Europe where churches are empty, mosques are filling and new ones are being built every day.

Muslims are having children, while child-like Europeans embrace childless lifestyles. If Christianity fails on the Continent, it won’t be replaced by secular nothingness, but by a creed that both Jews and Christians should fear.

It’s no surprise that the nation with the highest church attendance in the industrialized world (30% to 40%) is the strongest in its support for Israel. In general, support for Israel in the U.S. ican be predicted by frequency of church attendance, with Evangelicals, -- whose faith is deep-rooted -- most devoted to the Jewish state.

And, please don’t tell me about the Spanish Inquisition and the expulsions of 1492. That was half a millennium ago. The principal threats to Jews in the mid-20th century were creeds which sought to replace God with secular ideologies, based on evolutionary race theory or a maniacal class consciousness.

While Christmas isn’t part of my religion, I’m all for public acknowledgements of a religious holiday celebrated by 95% of the American people.

What’s the alternative -- an America dominated by the twisted theories of Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, Michael Moore and George Clooney? Instead of the red and green of Christmas, how about an America where chador black is the dominant color?

So, what do you prefer to saying “Merry Christmas”? “Workers of the world unite?” Or “Allah Akbar”?

The commentary originally appeared at

THE JEWISH CASE FOR “MERRY CHRISTMAS” - By Don Feder, posted December 8, 2006

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

ain't no party like a Hanukkah party

The story of Hanukkah recalls the miraculous victory of a small band of patriots against tyranny, and the oil that burned for eight nights. Through centuries of exile and persecution, Jews have lit the menorah. Each year, they behold its glow with faith in the power of God, and love for His greatest gift -- freedom.

This Hanukkah we celebrate another miraculous victory -- the 60th anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel. When President Harry Truman led the world in recognizing Israel in May of 1948, many wondered whether the small nation could possibly survive. Yet from the first days of independence, the people of Israel defied dire predictions. With determination and hard work, they turned a rocky desert into fertile soil. They built a thriving democracy, a strong economy, and one of the mightiest military forces on earth. Like the Maccabees, Israel has defended itself bravely against enemies seeking its destruction. And today, Israel is a light unto the nations -- and one of America's closest friends.
- President George W. Bush, December 15, 2008

So while it is not yet Hanukkah, let’s give thanks for our blessings, for being together to celebrate this wonderful holiday season. And we never need an excuse for a good party.
- President Barrack Obama, December 08, 2011

keeping it classy, Obama... way to go.
and the left claims Bush was classless and bumbling... Obama obviously doesn't know/understand/care about the first thing about Jewish history.

of course, he doesn't know where he is half the time:
THE PRESIDENT: So we are going to see all of you in a second downstairs --
MRS. OBAMA: Aren't we in the Blue Room?
THE PRESIDENT: Or wherever we are. I think we're downstairs. We are downstairs in the Map Room. So as I look around, I see a whole bunch of good friends. We can't wait to give you a hug and a kiss and wish you a happy holiday. The guys with whiskers, I won't give you a kiss.

classy... always classy.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

"Here is my creed"

You desire to know something of my religion. It is the first time I have been questioned upon it. Bit I cannot take your curiosity amiss, and shall endeavour in a few words to gratify it. Here is my creed. I believe in one God, creator of the universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That He ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable service we render to Him is doing good to His other children. That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental points in all sound religion, and I regard them as you do in whatever sect I meet with them.

As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think his system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received carious corrupting changes, and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble. I see no harm, however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequence, as probably it has, of making his doctrines more respected and more observed; especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in his government of the world with any peculiar marks of his displeasure.

From a letter by Benjamin Franklin to Ezra Stiles - Philadelphia, March 9, 1790

ReBlog - why have one standard?

Americans need only to open the daily newspaper or turn on the nightly news in order to see the media’s double standard. Each day we continue to hear the Occupy Wall Street movement’s hijacked the slogan of "the 99 percent" which has been forced it into our lexicon and the media’s daily lingo. And almost comically, Time magazine has decided that "The Protester" is 2011's Person of the Year.

The Daily Caller's Mary Katharine Ham, reminds us to travel back in time to appreciate the media double standard as she points out that:

Obamacare critics flooding town halls to make their dissent known had been called "extremist mobs" by the Democratic National Committee, pawns of the insurance industry by Senator Dick Durbin, "un-American" by Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, "brownshirts" by Representative Brian Baird of Washington, "manufactured" and "Astroturf" by White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, "evilmongers" by Senator Harry Reid, accused of "fear-mongering" by the president, and been deemed ‘political terrorists’ by Representative Baron Hill of Indiana.

During the Tea Party’s peak, the media seemed to inflame the rhetoric and acted as if the Tea Party movement was about to toss America into revolutionary violence. Despite the denigrating rhetoric and descriptions of the Tea Party movement in the media, there were little or few arrests or acts of violence. While many commentaries have expressed that both movements were birthed from anger over the nation’s bailouts and perceived unfairness, each group has used vastly different tactics in pushing forward their agendas.

Why has the mainstream media vilified the peaceful Tea Party all the while praising and celebrating Occupy Wall Street as a second wave of the civil rights movement despite clashes with police, violence, and general lawlessness? Tea Party organizations and rallies were initially ignored by the press and then dismissed as radical zealots as the Occupy Wall Street crowd was immediately recognized as leading the voice of "the 99 percent."

Our national media should be held accountable for their performance, just like any other institution. We need to remind the media of their profound obligation to provide the American people with the facts, rather than tell them what to think.

The Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party movements may both have legitimate grievances with our country, but distorting their images does not move us towards positive solutions. We can work together to increase awareness of bias in the media and encourage Americans to confront it and demand fair reporting.

Such a Double Standard: Tea Party Was 'Extremist' But OWS 'Protester' Is 'Person of the Year' |

Thursday, December 15, 2011

thank you Burt

What truly astonishes me is the patience and good grace with which Christians have dealt with this attack on so many things they hold sacred.

It is, I think, a tribute to their religion.


Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Madalyn Murray O’Hair

My mother, brother and daughter were murdered.

There is no getting around the evidence. For almost three years the national atheist organization my mother once led has claimed she left the country with a large amount of money. This was false and I will tell you in this letter why they told this lie over and over again.

First, I want to talk to you about spiritual matters that the general media does not understand.

My mother was not just Madalyn Murray O’Hair, the atheist leader. She was an evil person who led many to hell. That is hard for me to say about my own mother but it is true.

When I was a young boy of ten or eleven years old she would come home and brag about spending the day in X-rated movie theaters in downtown Baltimore. She was proud of the fact she was the only woman in the movie house watching this filth. My mother’s whole life circulated around such things. She even wrote articles for Larry Flynt’s pornographic magazine, Hustler. My mother lived in spiritual death as Paul writes: "But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." I Timothy 5:6

My mother delighted in hiring unrepentant criminals to work in her atheist office. She particularly enjoyed hiring convicted murderers who had served their time but were unrepentant about what they had done. She got a sense of power out of having men in her employ who had taken human life. It was love of power over people that finally caused not only her death, but the deaths of my brother and my daughter.

My mother had complete power over my brother, Jon, and my daughter, Robin. Although I was able to break away from the evil of this family, an evil that had been there for generations, they could not. My mother did not permit either my brother or my daughter to speak to me. She had total control of them.

My brother would have been forty years old the month he was murdered. He lived with my mother. He had breakfast with my mother. He went to work with my mother. He had lunch with my mother. He had dinner with my mother. He went on vacation with my mother. He never married. He never really even had the opportunity to have a serious relationship with a woman because Of the control my mother possessed over him. My mother had the same control over my daughter. She was just thirty the year she was murdered. She also lived with my mother. My mother used food to control her and make her unattractive to men. By the time she was murdered she was so heavy she had to purchase two airline tickets because she could not fit in one seat.

For twenty years I could not talk to my brother. He would hang up the phone on me or tear up my letters and send them back. The same was true of my daughter. They both called me "TRAITOR" because I had accepted Christ and changed my life. By "traitor" they meant that I no longer followed the absolute direction of my mother as they did.

The house they lived in had statuettes of mating animals on virtually every piece of furniture. There was a full cabinet of booze and a refrigerator full of foods high in fat and sugar. They liked to live a life which my mother called "high off the hog".

I must admit that toward the end I had lost hope for my mother’s conversion. The last ten years of her life she became even more profane and vulgar as the demons she courted got their final hold on her. The media stopped courting her because of the number of profane words she would use which they had to edit out.

My hopes and my prayers remained for my brother and my daughter. I honestly believed that nature would take its course and that my mother would die naturally, leaving them behind. In my heart I believed that without her constant evil influence they would start to move toward the light of God. I had even written letters to Jon and Robin that I had planned on sending them when my mother died. Those letters will never be mailed, nor will they be read, because they died with her.

My mother was an evil person ... Not for removing prayer from America’s schools ... No ... She was just evil. She stole huge amounts of money. She misused the trust of people. She cheated children out of their parents’ inheritance. She cheated on her taxes and even stole from her own organizations. She once printed up phony stock certificates on her own printing press to try to take over another atheist publishing company. I could go on but I won’t. All the money my mother made in this manner stayed behind. It did not go with her. "For we brought nothing into this world and it is certain we can carry nothing out." I Timothy 6:7

My mother simply believed, "Do what thou wilt shall be the only law."

Regardless of how evil and lawless my mother was she did not deserve to die in the manner she did.

Yes, I understand that the circumstances were of her own making. She hired convicted murderers to work for her. She put one of those murders in charge of her office and he stole more than $54,000 from her. That same murderer is now suspected of killing her and Jon and Robin. He is also suspected of murdering and decapitating one of the men he recruited to kidnap my family.

Still, she was 77 years old when she was kidnapped. She and my daughter were held for almost 30 days, probably tied and gagged, while my brother desperately tried to obtain ransom money. At all times my brother was escorted by one of the kidnappers. Should he have run? Should he have tried to get help? I would have.

But, my brother was a total slave to my mother. He saw himself as her provider and rescuer. All his life she had talked down to him and made fun of him and now, in his mind, he would show her his worth by single-handedly rescuing her. He was murdered for his faithfulness.

Both my brother and daughter believed in my mother’s "importance" because she declared it constantly. Many times a day my mother would declare, "I am Madalyn Murray O’Hair." She honestly believed she had singled handedly removed prayer from school. She honestly believed she had "liberated" America sexually.

In reality my mother did not create the times, the times created her. She was what America was about in the sixties and seventies. There were several cases going to the Supreme Court to remove prayer. Her case just got there first. The left-wing Court of the day wanted prayer out of the schools and to allow abortion on demand. They virtually were advertising for cases to change America. But my mother saw the secular and sexual turn in America as centered around her.

I can see her now looking down the barrel of a gun and saying, "You don't dare shoot me, I AM MADALYN MURRAY O’HAIR." Of course, the killers did not care who she was just as most Americans didn’t care. To the majority of Americans and to the media she was just another celebrity fruit cake, sort of the Hulk Hogan of atheism.

The media asked me if I would hold a funeral and if so would there he prayer. My answer was simple but Biblical and sort of surprised them I am sure. I said, "They are already either in heaven of hell, praying over them now will not make a difference."

I made that statement knowing the torture they must have gone through the last thirty days of their lives. Did Robin pray to receive Christ as she was bound and gagged? Perhaps. Did my mother or brother cry out to the Lord just before they were murdered? I don’t know.

Christ is there for the vilest offender. The serial killer whose prayer at the hour of his death is genuine is also forgiven. My mother, my brother and my daughter may well await me in heaven. On the other hand, they may have stood their ground defying God to the end, in which case they are now spending yet another day of eternity in hell. If that is the case I will never see them again.

The deaths of my mother, brother and daughter should make all too clear the need for Christ to others that proclaim atheism. But those who would follow my mother continue to fight against God and His authority. "Fools make a mock at sin... " Prov. 14:8

During Easter, what is left of my mother’s American Atheist organization held a convention in New Jersey. My ministry placed an advertisement in the newspaper there to tell them about Jesus. The new atheist leader, Ellen Johnson, ranted and raved against me, against Christ and against the Holy Spirit.

Johnson told the media that the whole idea of my mother being murdered was a fabrication. She told the newspapers that I had "manufactured" the story using my connections to Congress to trick the FBI into getting involved. Why does this woman protest so much? Why does she not even shed a tear for her departed leader?

The FBI is involved because one of the individuals has confessed. How many others he will point his finger at I don’t know. But I do understand the "wisdom" of Ellen Johnson. Her "wisdom" is found in Psalm 14:1 "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God."

Please continue to pray for this ministry and for my family. This is a difficult time. The news media calls day and night about my mother. The FBI even offered to provide a counselor for my wife Nancy and me. I said no thank you, I told the agent my family already has a counselor - the Great Counselor, Jesus Christ.

This statement was written by William Murray in May of 1999. The dismembered bodies of Madalyn Murray O’Hair, Jon Murray and Robin Murray were found in January of 2000 near Camp Wood, Texas. One of the killers, David Waters, led the authorities to the site in return for a guarantee he would serve his time in a Federal rather than in a Texas state prison. He died in prison of liver disease in 2003. A second killer was sentenced to life in prison.

The Madalyn Murray O’Hair Murder

"no right to profits" - Obama

You don't have some inherent right just to-- you know, get a certain amount of profit. If your customers-- are being mistreated. That you have to treat them fairly and transparently.
- President Barack Obama

what a suprise... business owners aren't allowed to set their own prices and profits... customers are being "mistreated"... because in a capitalist society, people are forced to buy products.

that was suposed to be sarcasm, but i forgot we're being forced to purchase health insurance.

Transcript: George Stephanopoulos' ABC News / Yahoo! News Exclusive Interview With President Obama - ABC News

who believes this?

1) The Federal Government can force you to purchase whatever the hell they want.
2) Tax dollars should be given to unions.
3) Republicans just "kinda sorta do what they're told."
4) The cops acted "stupidly" for detaining a belligerent man.
5) Illegal immigrants didn't commit any crime.
6) "Defense cuts" mean we have to open the border
7) "Leading from behind" is the wave of the future.
8) Israel should go back to indefensible borders.
9) The American people can be deceived with temporary tax cuts while permanent tax hikes are out in place.
10) War is bad, but "kinetic action" is good.
11) Reading a teleprompter brings change to the world.
12) The Government is in charge of your diet.
13) The internet should be regulated.
14) Self-reliance is bad.
15) America's place in the world is deferring to everyone else.
16) Raising taxes on medical equipment lowers healthcare costs.
17) Cutting money from Medicare Advantage somehow means those people can keep their coverage.
18) Local news stations are out to get him, because they're not MSNBC.
19) "God damn America."

And last, but not least...
20) You're a racist.

now, some of this is hyperbole... much of it isn't.

this list is from the AttackWatch facebook page, which is a spoof of the real Attack Watch website set up by the Obama Administration... Attack Watch is made by Obama For America which is Obama's main fundraising group... they also run the express purpose of the real Attack Watch site is to encourage citizens to "report" other citizens who make claims (with or without merit) which are against the Obama adminstration... i seem to recall something like this happened once before... in Germany.

regards to Ernst Röhm.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

full of class

"Obama for America"... always keeping it classy.

this is what liberal supporters received from Obama's fund-raising group... typical liberal denigration.

Friend –

Everyone’s got that special conservative in their life.

Maybe it’s your dad, who forwards you every chain email about the President’s birth certificate, or your neighbor, who just put up a Mitt Romney sign.

Dealing with these folks can be … frustrating.

This holiday season, we’re giving you a chance to have a little bit of fun at their expense. Let a Republican in your life know they inspired you to make a donation to the Obama campaign — chip in $3 or more today.

When you give to the campaign, simply enter your Republican friend’s email address and they’ll get a note letting them know that they motivated you to donate — which will surely make their day.

Not only that, but when you donate today, you’ll be entered to win a chance to have dinner with the President and First Lady. Just picture how good it’ll feel to let your honoree know about those dinner plans.

The other side is busy scrambling for the Iowa caucuses and a long string of primaries, trying to find a nominee. Meanwhile, we’ve got our candidate — and we’re already doing the work to get ready for November.

Give your conservative friends the gift of knowing they’ve inspired you to donate. After all, actions speak louder than words.

Please donate $3 or more today:


Julianna Smoot
Deputy Campaign Manager
Obama for America

P.S. — Really want to fire up your GOP friends? Buy them a gift from the 2012 store. I recommend the birther mugs — they get the message across pretty well.

i'd be offended if it weren't so pathetic... maybe the NRA should start a similar campaign... how much would a liberal froth at the mouth if i donated money to National Right To Life in their name?


Sunday, December 11, 2011

Happiness is.

what is happiness?... Aristotle had quite a bit to say on happiness... and so it seems do conservatives.

PBS (oft-thought as liberal) had a recent discussion about happiness and your ideological beliefs... this may come as a surprise to the liberals out there, but conservatives are happier on average... and the reasons may surprise you... below are some selected portions of PBS's findings:

One of the biggest correlates with happiness in our surveys was the belief of a meritocracy, which is the belief that anybody who works hard can make it. That was the biggest predictor of happiness. That was also one of the biggest predictors of political ideology. So, the conservatives were much higher on these meritocratic beliefs than liberals were.
belief in your own merit makes you happier... the belief that you are owed something makes you unhappy... this is what conservatives call "common sense".

Now, optimism alone doesn't determine contentment. Religion boosts happiness. So does marriage. But Napier's research accounted for that.

JAIME NAPIER: "We adjusted for education, for income, for marital status, religion, people who lived urban vs. rural, all kinds of things. So, you know, on average, just your ideology alone is an independent predictor of your subjective well-being."
did you get that?... i know the jokes about marriage, but it makes you happier... it makes me happier... just ask my wife; she'll tell you what i think.

and "religion boosts happiness"?... oh, the compounding effect of a religious conservative.

they even adjusted for education and income... this means that even poor, stupid conservatives are happier than rich, educated liberals... alternatively, a well educated conservative is still happier.

Napier says American economic malaise of the past few decades disheartened everyone, but liberals most of all.

So, everybody was decreasing in happiness as there was more inequality, but liberals to a significantly greater extent than conservatives.

And, in 1974, the difference between liberals and conservatives on happiness wasn't statistically significant. It was, basically, ideology didn't predict happiness in 1974.
so, the Summer-of-Love liberals were equally happy as their conservative counterparts... and while the inequality of wealth became greater, only the liberals became unhappy... apparently, they seem to think they aren't getting their fair share... the conservatives, on the other hand, aren't looking for a hand-out, so they are content to work for what they earn.

It's not true that conservatives are richer than Liberals. Liberals are actually richer than conservatives.

The reason that conservatives tend to be less concerned with income inequality is not because that they're ignorant. It's not because they're calloused. It's not because they have less of a sense of a morality. It has to do with the fact that they see the world differently.
sorry to take away all of your arguments, liberals... apparently, statistically speaking, you're the rich ones... but, somehow, you've made the claim that the conservatives are the 1%... not true... you've claimed they're ignorant, callous, and immoral... not true.

what is true is that liberals are the cause of their own problem... the expectation that someone else owes you anything sets up a logical fallacy... Person A expects value V from society Z... society Z is the sum total of all persons, "n"... for all persons "A" to each receive V from Z, then Z owes a total of V*n (split equally to A*n)... simple math... (V*n)/(A*n)= V/A or 1V per 1A... however, for society to have V*n to give, it must receive from A*n the total amount for distribution... that means, each A must contribute 1V to Z prior to receiving their 1V in return... liberals don't want to give into the system from which they expect to receive... but if no one puts into the society, it is fallacious to think you can get anything out of it... maybe you've heard of squeezing blood from a turnip?

liberals would have you believe that there are two groups giving into society and two receiving... person A is poor and needy (proletariat)... person B is rich and needless (bourgeoisie)... therefore, the above math goes something like this: 0A+2B=V1 (value put into society Z)... V1=V2 (value taken from society)... V2=2A+0B... "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need." - Karl Marx

With regard to what happiness is (men) differ, and the many do not give the same account as the wise. For the former think it is some plain and obvious thing, like pleasure, wealth, or honor. They differ, however, from one another -- and often even the same man identifies it with different things, with health when he is ill, with wealth when he is poor.

Happiness is desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else. But honor, pleasure, reason, and every virtue we choose indeed for themselves, but we choose them also for the sake of happiness, judging that by means of them we shall be happy. Happiness, on the other hand, no one chooses for the sake of these, nor, in general, for anything other than itself. Happiness, then, is something final and self-sufficient.

Why Are Conservatives Happier Than Liberals? PBS NewsHour Dec. 9, 2011 PBS

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

at one time, it wasn't broken

The accompanying graphic shows a fascinating correlation. In the years before New Deal regulation of banks and after the easing of regulations began in 1980, bank failures were quite high. So was income inequality.

But from about 1933, when the federal regulation of banks was put in place, to 1980, when Chicago School theories began to shape policy, bank failures were rare. During those years incomes were much more equal, with a prosperous middle class.

Correlation is not causality, but the fact that income inequality rose as banking regulations were eased makes sense. Freed of restraints, banks got into all sorts of activities that generated fees and saddled clients with high-interest debt. And once banks could collect fees for mortgages without having to worry about repayment — because the mortgages were sold off by Wall Street — the crucial link between reward and responsibility was severed.

The taxpayers’ burden - David Cay Johnston - Dec 3, 2011
The author is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.

ReBlog - join the Banks-Are-Evil-Bank... capitalism for socialists

The inevitable culmination of the Occupy movement has finally arrived: The protesters at Occupy San Francisco just announced that they are becoming bankers, by filing papers to form a credit union (for real — not satire):

Members of Occupy SF announced their ambitious plans to turn protesters into bankers by creating the People’s Reserve Credit Union. According to Occupy SF’s Facebook page:

The goal of this project is to encourage San Francisco residents, businesses, as well as nonprofit and city agencies to keep their money out of the big banks and to redistribute that money locally. Initial services will include micro-loans for the working poor and homeless, and subsidized student loans at low interest rates.

The credit union is being created with the help of San Francisco’s Glide Community Church and Supervisors John Avalos and Eric Mar. The group filed its paperwork and has already crafted a thoughtful mission statement: The credit union will serve as a replicable model for other financial institutions to reinvest wealth in their local communities. They will support microenterprise, provide educational loans, and foster community improvement projects.

My suggestion for the People’s Reserve Credit Union logo: a “dollar and sickle” in anarchist black.

The difference between the People’s Reserve Credit Union and the other banks is that other banks are eeeeeevil whereas the People’s Reserve Credit Union is good.

Welcome to the real world, Occupiers. The world of regulations and accounting and laws and audits and trying to meet payroll. This should be entertaining.

Of course, there are plenty of credit unions around the country already, and they usually make up for their small size by parking members’ deposits in ultra-safe financial instruments, to minimize the risk of failure during unstable economic times, since they don’t have the resources to diversify, as big banks do.

Will the People’s Reserve Credit Union invest safely, and follow reassuring business practices? Er, not exactly:

  • The credit union will employ students and homeless, creating 60 part-time jobs.
  • Issue 300 to 500 micro-enterprise loans (max. $5,000).

Occupy SF will soon learn that micro-enterprise loans are incredibly risky, because most micro-businesses fail. Risky loans are what caused the banking crisis in the first place — remember? Or was that too long ago for you?

It’s all fine and dandy to start your own banking institution with good intentions, but at the end of the day, if you are hemorrhaging money due to risky investments, while calming depositors with the reassuring “Don’t worry, everyone’s money is safe in the hands of the students and homeless transients on our staff,” you’re not likely to last a year. That is, unless, you learn the hard way why banks do the things they do to survive and thrive, in which case Occupy SF will become the very “banksters” they loathe.

my commentary:

The PJ Tatler » If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em: Occupy SF launches its own bank

Monday, December 5, 2011

Welcome to Gomorrah

sodomy and bestiality in the military is now legal... sodomy on a child, indecent assault on a child, and indecent acts on children by a person in the military is no longer punishable by court martial... welcome to Gomorrah!

the Senate has passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012... in it, they have removed from the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) any notion of sodomy being a crime... and with it, bestiality... separately, they have removed much of the protections children have against abuse... primarily, sodomy on children is no longer punishable by court-martial... of gravest concern are the repeals of the murder definition... so if you kill some one in an attempt to hide an act of sodomy, aggravated assault, or aggravated sexual contact, it no longer falls under the UCMJ's definition of murder... and worse, killing someone while engaged in an act of sexual assault, sexual abuse, or sexual contact with a child is also no longer under the definition of murder.

most people don't take the time to sift through the legal jargon... but this one is straight forward... but it is cleverly disguised as simple line-items... each one destroying a little more of the foundation of our legal system... one-by-one they remove safe-guards which were put in place to protect the innocent and punish the guilty... but, in the new society of Gomorrah, there are no guilty... and, if this continues, there will be no innocence left.

read the text of S.1867 below... then read the UCMJ as it has been "repealed"... you can tell a lot by what was removed; more so than by what is left... you can see what the true target has been.

  • (d) REPEAL OF SODOMY ARTICLE.—Section 925 of such title (article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is repealed.
  • (e) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Chapter 47 of such title (the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is further amended as follows:
    • (1) STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.—Subparagraph (B) of section 843(b)(2) (article 43(b)(2)) is amended—
      • (A) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘section 920 of this title (article 120)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 920, 920a, 920b, or 920c of this title (article 120, 120a, 120b, or 120c)’’;
      • (B) by striking clause (iii); and
      • (C) in clause (v)—
        • (i) by striking ‘‘indecent assault’’;
        • (ii) by striking ‘‘rape, or sodomy,’’ and inserting ‘‘or rape,’’; and
        • (iii) by striking ‘‘or liberties with a child’’.
    • (2) MURDER.—Paragraph (4) of section 918 (article 118) is amended—
      • (A) by striking ‘‘sodomy,’’; and
      • (B) by striking ‘‘aggravated sexual assault,’’ and all that follows through ‘‘with a child,’’ and inserting ‘‘sexual assault, sexual assault of a child, aggravated sexual contact, sexual abuse of a child,’’.
looks pretty benign, doesn't it?... but look at the wreckage it leaves behind:
USC CH. 47 - § 843. Art. 43 (b)(2)(B)
In subparagraph (A), the term “child abuse offense” means an act that involves abuse of a person who has not attained the age of 16 years and constitutes any of the following offenses:
(i) Any offense in violation of section 920 of this title (article 120).
(ii) Maiming in violation of section 924 of this title (article 124).
(iii) Sodomy in violation of section 925 of this title (article 125).
(iv) Aggravated assault or assault consummated by a battery in violation of section 928 of this title (article 128).
(v) Kidnapping, indecent assault, assault with intent to commit murder, voluntary manslaughter, rape, or sodomy, or indecent acts or liberties with a child in violation of section 934 of this title (article 134).

so, sodomy with a child is no longer "child abuse"?... what kind of monster requests that be stricken from the law?... and why remove indecent assault and "liberties with a child" from the language?

sounds like someone has a predilection for little children.

USC CH. 47 - § 918. Art. 118
Any person subject to this chapter who, without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when he—
(1) has a premeditated design to kill;
(2) intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm;
(3) is engaged in an act which is inherently dangerous to another and evinces a wanton disregard of human life; or
(4) is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of burglary, sodomy, rape, rape of a child, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault of a child, aggravated sexual contact, aggravated sexual abuse of a child, aggravated sexual contact with a child, robbery, or aggravated arson; is guilty of murder, and shall suffer such punishment as a court-martial may direct, except that if found guilty under clause (1) or (4), he shall suffer death or imprisonment for life as a court-martial may direct.

so, if you kill someone to cover up the sexual abuse of a child, it is no longer considered murder... oh, i know it's still a crime... but it isn't murder... it doesn't carry the same penalties any more... we've taken away an important measure of safety for our children... what's next?

USC CH. 47 - § 925. Art. 125
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.
(b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

shit... now they've legalized bestiality... first, they want to decriminalize child abuse... now they want to give Rover the bone.

this isn't only an assault on our morals (which it is) like many pundits are claiming, but this is an assault on our society... now, many of you may laugh and call "Chicken Little", but this is how you destroy a culture... bit-by-bit remove the reins and restrictions... slowly let the lowest common denominator rule... let baser instincts take precedence over morality... don't take on the top of the tower; dig out its foundations.

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (pg. 174-175)

USC CHAPTER 47 - UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE § 843. Art. 43. Statute of limitations

USC CHAPTER 47 - § 918. Art. 118. Murder

USC CHAPTER 47 - § 925. Art. 125. Sodomy

Friday, December 2, 2011

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus

"DEAR EDITOR: I am 8 years old. Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus. Papa says, 'If you see it in THE SUN it's so.' Please tell me the truth; is there a Santa Claus?


VIRGINIA, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except [what] they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men's or children's, are little. In this great universe of ours man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect, as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, VIRGINIA, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus. It would be as dreary as if there were no VIRGINIAS. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas Eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if they did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You may tear apart the baby's rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived, could tear apart. Only faith, fancy, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, VIRGINIA, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No Santa Claus! Thank God! he lives, and he lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood.

Newseum - Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus - Sept. 21, 1897 by Francis Pharcellus Church

Tuesday, November 29, 2011


i once thought i was wrong, but i was mistaken.

i have to retract my previous post regarding President Obama's Thanksgiving Day proclamation... apparently, i did something i often criticize others for doing; getting my facts wrong... in my self-righteous zeal at calling out a hypocrite, i became one, myself... i compared apples to oranges... both are tasty fruits, but they are not equal in all ways (otherwise, we'd call them both by the same name).

here's what i did... i read the transcript of Obama's weekly address, entitled "On Thanksgiving, Grateful for the Men and Women Who Defend Our Country" which was issued on November 24, 2011... i leaped to the conclusion that this was the same as the annual Presidential Proclamation for Thanksgiving Day.

turns out; not so much... apparently, he had previously issued the proclamation a week earlier on November 16, 2011.

egg; meet face.

plus, my over zealousness knew no bounds, so i looked up previous proclamations going back eight years, into the G.W. Bush era... i gleefully pointed out the quantitative differences between Bush and Obama.

oy vey.

after all of that, you would have thought it would have occurred to me that a weekly address is not equal to an official proclamation... but, zeal often knows no bounds... i was so pleased to see the mote in another's eye, i could not see the log within my own.

well, all i can do is apologize... i will try to do better research.

Friday, November 25, 2011

thanks for nothing

i hate to nit-pick (not really), but did anyone else notice that, in the annual Presidential Thanksgiving Proclamation, President Obama did not mention God, nor did he make any religious reference whatsoever... i'm not saying Thanksgiving is a religious holiday; by no means... but Obama has made claims of his religious beliefs... how he and his family attended one church for 20 years.

if Obama would profess atheism, agnosticism, or Buddhism i would not say anything about his omission... just like i don't expect Jewish people to pray to Jesus, i wouldn't expect it... but i find it hypocritical of someone to professes Christianity on one hand, and deny it on the other.

Presidential Proclamation--Thanksgiving Day 2005 (x3)
Presidential Proclamation--Thanksgiving Day 2006 (x2)
Presidential Proclamation--Thanksgiving Day 2007 (x3)
Presidential Proclamation--Thanksgiving Day 2008 (x4)

Presidential Proclamation--Thanksgiving Day 2009 (x1 quoting G.Washington)
Presidential Proclamation--Thanksgiving Day 2010 (x2)
Presidential Proclamation--Thanksgiving Day 2011 (x0)

no wonder OWS wants their debts removed

Earlier this week the liberal media reported that the Occupy protests cost taxpayers over $13,000,000.
But the actual cost is much higher.

Verum Serum updated the total cost estimates on Wednesday.

Total: $18,450,999
And, here is the latest total of Occupation costs using Verum Serum’s totals plus more recent figures:
Total: Over $21,273,499

Occupy Movement’s Price Tag Tops $20 Million …Much Higher Than the $13 Million That Was Previously Reported | The Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft, November 25, 2011

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

happy Thanksgiving

While we commiserate the cause of the unfortunate and sympathize in their distresses, let us endeavor wisely and thankfully to improve our privileges and blessings to the glory of God and the best good of our fellow-men. Let us diligently cultivate habits of “sobriety, order, morality and piety” and study to lead “quiet and peaceable lives in all godliness and honesty” [1 Timothy 2:2].

And may the God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Israel – the God in Whom our fathers trusted and found deliverance – continue to be our God and to bless us. “There is none like unto the God of Jeshurun, Who rideth upon the heaven in thy help and in His excellency upon the sky” [Deuteronomy 33:26]. “The eternal God is thy refuge and underneath are the everlasting arms” [Deuteronomy 33:27]. “Happy is that people that is in such a case; yea, happy is that people whose God is the Lord” [Psalms 33:12].


The Response to President Washington’s 1795 Thanksgiving Proclamation: Sermon by Rev. Thomas Baldwin « The Founder's Blog

a most perfect and sublime system of morals

In a comparative view of the Ethics of the enlightened nations of antiquity, of the Jews and of Jesus, no notice should be taken of the corruptions of reason among the ancients, to wit, the idolatry & superstition of the vulgar, nor of the corruptions of Christianity by the learned among its professors.

Let a just view be taken of the moral principles inculcated by the most esteemed of the sects of ancient philosophy, or of their individuals; particularly Pythagoras, Socrates, Epicurus, Cicero, Epictetus, Seneca, Antoninus.

I. PHILOSOPHERS. 1. Their precepts related chiefly to ourselves, and the government of those passions which, unrestrained, would disturb our tranquillity of mind. In this branch of philosophy they were really great.

2. In developing our duties to others, they were short and defective. They embraced, indeed, the circles of kindred & friends, and inculcated patriotism, or the love of our country in the aggregate, as a primary obligation: toward our neighbors & countrymen they taught justice, but scarcely viewed them as within the circle of benevolence. Still less have they inculcated peace, charity & love to our fellow men, or embraced with benevolence the whole family of mankind.

II. JEWS. 1. Their system was Deism; that is, the belief of one only God. But their ideas of him & of his attributes were degrading & injurious.

2. Their Ethics were not only imperfect, but often irreconcilable with the sound dictates of reason & morality, as they respect intercourse with those around us; & repulsive & anti-social, as respecting other nations. They needed reformation, therefore, in an eminent degree.

III. JESUS. In this state of things among the Jews, Jesus appeared. His parentage was obscure; his condition poor; his education null; his natural endowments great; his life correct and innocent: he was meek, benevolent, patient, firm, disinterested, & of the sublimest eloquence.

The disadvantages under which his doctrines appear are remarkable.

1. Like Socrates & Epictetus, he wrote nothing himself.

2. But he had not, like them, a Xenophon or an Arrian to write for him. On the contrary, all the learned of his country, entrenched in its power and riches, were opposed to him, lest his labors should undermine their advantages; and the committing to writing his life & doctrines fell on the most unlettered & ignorant men; who wrote, too, from memory, & not till long after the transactions had passed.

3. According to the ordinary fate of those who attempt to enlighten and reform mankind, he fell an early victim to the jealousy & combination of the altar and the throne, at about 33. years of age, his reason having not yet attained the maximum of its energy, nor the course of his preaching, which was but of 3. years at most, presented occasions for developing a complete system of morals.

4. Hence the doctrines which he really delivered were defective as a whole, and fragments only of what he did deliver have come to us mutilated, misstated, & often unintelligible.

5. They have been still more disfigured by the corruptions of schismatising followers, who have found an interest in sophisticating & perverting the simple doctrines he taught by engrafting on them the mysticisms of a Grecian sophist, frittering them into subtleties, & obscuring them with jargon, until they have caused good men to reject the whole in disgust, & to view Jesus himself as an impostor.

Notwithstanding these disadvantages, a system of morals is presented to us, which, if filled up in the true style and spirit of the rich fragments he left us, would be the most perfect and sublime that has ever been taught by man.

The question of his being a member of the Godhead, or in direct communication with it, claimed for him by some of his followers, and denied by others, is foreign to the present view, which is merely an estimate of the intrinsic merit of his doctrines.

1. He corrected the Deism of the Jews, confirming them in their belief of one only God, and giving them juster notions of his attributes and government.

2. His moral doctrines, relating to kindred & friends, were more pure & perfect than those of the most correct of the philosophers, and greatly more so than those of the Jews; and they went far beyond both in inculcating universal philanthropy, not only to kindred and friends, to neighbors and countrymen, but to all mankind, gathering all into one family, under the bonds of love, charity, peace, common wants and common aids. A development of this head will evince the peculiar superiority of the system of Jesus over all others.

3. The precepts of philosophy, & of the Hebrew code, laid hold of actions only. He pushed his scrutinies into the heart of man; erected his tribunal in the region of his thoughts, and purified the waters at the fountain head.

4. He taught, emphatically, the doctrines of a future state, which was either doubted, or disbelieved by the Jews; and wielded it with efficacy, as an important incentive, supplementary to the other motives to moral conduct.


Monday, November 21, 2011

crazy discount prices!

there are so many things wrong with this, but do you laugh or cry?... here is an abortion clinic giving discount abortions... as if that isn't scary enough, they are giving out $50 coupons... hawking like a used car salesman, they also offer "Free Deep IV Sedation"... in a somewhat creepy fashion, the coupon is good for "Sundays only", as if they are losing their sunday business and need a few more walk-in customers.
Well, I was going to go to church this morning, but I saw this Sunday-Only sale going on at the Abortion Clinic.
makes me wonder what they're going to do for Black Friday!

and can i get an "OMG" for the last line of the 'sale advert'?... "One Coupon Per Patient"... as if someone is coming in every sunday to have one... anyone who wants to use a $50-off abortion coupon should be getting counselling, not an abortion... but anyone using TWO coupons, needs to have their head examined.

i know the "women's choice" people will scream and yell... but what kind of person is getting pregnant so often as to require multiple discounts on abortions?... what does this say about their moral fiber (or lack thereof)?

and what kind of doctor is giving incentives to come in on sundays to get abortions?... if they're going to give a discount, shouldn't it be all week long?... by chosing sundays, are they making a decision based on an anti-religious basis?... or is it because they know the religious zealots will be in church, and maybe they can sneak in a few more clients without having them sullied by anti-abortion propoganda?... perhaps both.

Orlando Women's Clinic - Abortion Clinic, Orlando, Florida. Second-Late Term Abortion Clinic.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

99% = minority

By autumn of the year, a million people across the land had gathered in various places to protest against the politics that had led to their misery. Unemployment. Inflation. The cost of living was unbearable.The nation had borrowed an unprecedented amount of money from foreign nations, and now faced the impending threat of bankruptcy. Unrest roiled the nation. Peasants rose up by the thousands in protest against wealthy landowners. City dwellers, too, met by the thousands to protest, peacefully at first, violently later as the government cracked down on them. It was a leaderless movement driven by the people's passion for national reforms.

sounds familiar?... it's Occupy Wall Street, right?... wrong.

it's the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.

here's a little history... the Bolshevik name meant "The Majority", which was a misnomer, because they represented a tiny fraction of the Russion populace... they named themselves this because they narrowly defeated members of their own party (the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party) in a decision of party leadership... but when the Menshevik ("Minority") won vote after vote regarding party membership and rules, the Bolshevik split from the party... the Bolshevik minority held on the the "Majority" title.

For at that time we were fully aware that the Soviets were not yet ours, that the peasants still trusted the Lieber-Dan-Chernov course and not the Bolshevik course (uprising), and that, consequently, we could not have the majority of the people behind us, and hence, an uprising was premature.
- Vladimir "Lenin" Illich Ulyanov (emphasis added)

and now we come full circle... we have the "99%" demanding change and revolution, yet they represent the minority of Americans... they claim to represent the laborers and workers, yet they are comprised of college students, aged "hipsters", and criminals.

there is a visible arc to history... try not to stand where it falls.

Today's Thought: 11.1 A Bolshevik Look at Occupy Wall Street

ReBlog - selective prosecution

Dear Attorney General Holder:

I’m deeply concerned with the Department of Justice’s selective enforcement of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), including in my state, Louisiana. News reports indicate that valuable resources were used to send undercover investigators to my state of Louisiana to interview welfare recipients to determine if state welfare offices are urging them to register to vote. The Department later filed a lawsuit against Louisiana alleging that the state has violated its obligations under Section 7 of the NVRA.

However, at the same time, absolutely no effort is being made to enforce Section 8 of the same law. Section 8 requires states to conduct voter roll cleaning to purge ineligible felons and dead voters from corrupting the election process. The two provisions act together as counterparts, but it is evident that the Justice Department is not enforcing them equally.

Section 8 is a key component of the law, because the longer these fraudulent names remain on a registration list, the greater the chances that a fraudulent vote will be cast in their names. As we approach an important presidential election in 2012, your dedication to enforcing both sections of the law to avoid fraud is paramount.

In recent years there have been reports that the administration is not interested in enforcing the Section 8 provision of the law. Christopher Coates, former Chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division, testified before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission that Julie Fernandez, who was appointed as the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights in 2009, told the Voting Section that the Obama administration was not interested in issues related to Section 8 and list maintenance enforcement activity.

In 2009 the administration dismissed without explanation a lawsuit filed against Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan during the Bush administration over her failure to comply with Section 8. Former Voting Section lawyer Christian Adams confirmed this in his 2010 testimony before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission. Since returning to private practice, Adams has sent a series of warning letters to sixteen states in obvious violation of the law. These allegations are not based on mere speculation, but on a report filed with Congress by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission in June 2009 on the impact of the NVRA. The report includes voter-registration statistics for 2006-2008. According to the data, several states including Maryland, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Tennessee did not remove a single dead voter during that two-year reporting period.

Adams has utilized the private right of action under the NVRA because the Justice Department has inexplicably refused to sue any of these states for violation of Section 8. Even worse, South Dakota, Mississippi, Texas, Kentucky, and Indiana all have more registered voters than people of voting age according to the Census. According to the EAC report, eight states appeared to be in major noncompliance with the list maintenance requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA, yet the Civil Rights Division failed to take any action. Christopher Coates has also testified that while he was Chief of the Voting Section, he actually assigned attorneys to work on this matter but was never given approval to go forward with Section 8 list maintenance investigations in any of these states.

I agree with Coates’ statement that it is an abuse of discretion to “decide not to do any enforcement of a law enacted by Congress, because political appointees determine that they are not interested in enforcing that law.” I can think of no justifiable reason why the section of the Justice Department tasked with the responsibility of enforcing the NVRA failed to do so. It’s appalling that a private citizen has to carry out the responsibility of the Justice Department. I am especially concerned that the Department appears to have refused to fulfill its duty for ideological and political reasons that have nothing to do with the impartial administration of justice.

When Tom Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, announced the lawsuit against Louisiana, he stated: “The department is committed to enforcing the National Voter Registration Act so that neither income nor disability status stands in the way of equal voter registration opportunities for all citizens.” Justice must fully enforce this law, rather than refusing to enforce the voter list integrity provisions while making the welfare agency registration law its top priority. The Civil Rights Division does not have the right to pick and choose which laws are worthy of enforcement and which ones are not. I urge you to personally ensure that the Justice Department does not enable voter fraud by neglecting to enforce Section 8 of the NVRA.

I look forward to your response, detailing exactly how the Department of Justice will ensure full enforcement of all sections of the law, including Section 8.


David Vitter
United States Senator
(emphasis added)

Vitter: DOJ Can’t Just Pick and Choose Which Voter Registration Laws to Enforce - Press Release - Senator David Vitter, November 15, 2011

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Tea Party and their guns

The Secret Service searched Occupy D.C. on Monday for a man suspected of firing bullets at the White House on Friday

let's ask the obvious question: "What if this was a Tea Party rally?"... the media has been very lackadaisical about the fact that bullets hit the White House... with arrests at the Occupy DC site including assault and drug possession, and now gun shots, when does the media call for the disbanding of Occupy DC?... when do they begin the disparaging remarks, like they did during the Town Hall meetings?... i'm looking for something like "clinging to their guns and drugs".

So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them... or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
- Barack Obama, April 6, 2008
all you have to do is replace "religion" with "drugs", and you have a new slander... maybe throw in some comment about their anarchist political motivations... but i'll leave the defamation to the professionals.

Secret Service Searched Occupy D.C. Camp For Person Who Shot At White House - Talking Points Memo blog - Ryan J. Reilly - November 16, 2011, 6:00 AM

Monday, November 14, 2011

welfare debunked: the crisis of our time

[The welfare state] is the outcome of a three-stage development during the last one hundred years, beginning with the stage of individual relief graded according to genuine needs, passing through public social insurance, and ending up in today's stage of universal, all encompassing security.

Social demagogues use the promises of the welfare state and inflationary policy to seduce the masses, and it is hard to warn people convincingly of the price ultimately to be paid by all. All the more reason for those who take a more sober and longer view to redouble their efforts to undeceive the others, regardless of violent attacks from social demagogues, who are none too particular in their choice of means, and from the officials of the welfare state itself.

Few people can still close their eyes to the contrast between the extraordinary successes of a social and economic order relying on the regulating and stimulating forces of the market and free enterprise, on the one hand, and on the other the results of a continuous redistribution of income and wealth for the sake of equality. It is a contrast which is intolerable in the long run. One or the other will have to yield -- the free society and economy or the modern welfare state. To use the words of another distinguished British economist, Lionel Robbins, a man who weighs his words carefully, "the free society is not to be built on envy."

Government-organized relief for the masses is simply the crutch of a society crippled by proletarianism, an expedient adapted to the economic and moral immaturity of the classes which emerged from the decomposition of the old social order. This expedient was necessary as long as most factory workers were too poor to help themselves, too paralyzed by their proletarian position to be provident, and too disconnected from the old social fabric to rely on the solidarity and help of genuine small communities.

People regard as progress something which surely derives its origin and meaning from the conditions of a now all but finished transition period of economic and social development. They forget that if we are to take respect for human personality seriously, we ought, on the contrary, to measure progress by the degree to which the broad masses of the people can today be expected to provide for themselves out of their own means and on their own responsibility, through saving and insurance and the manifold forms of voluntary group aid.

Are we to call it progress if we continuously increase the number of people to be treated as economic minors and therefore to remain under the tutelage of the state? Is it not, on the contrary, progress if the broad masses of the people come of age economically, thanks to their rising incomes, and become responsible for themselves so that we can cut down the welfare state instead of inflating it more and more?

A short time ago, a member of the House of Commons movingly described her father's plight in order to prove how inadequate the welfare state still is. But this is not proof of the urgency of public help; it is merely an alarming sign of the disappearance of natural feelings in the welfare state. In fact, the lady in question received the only proper answer when another member of Parliament told her that she should be ashamed if her father was not adequately looked after by his own daughter.

Today's welfare state is not simply an improved version of the old institutions of social insurance and public assistance. In an increasing number of countries it has become the tool of a social revolution aiming at the greatest possible equality of income and wealth. The dominating motive is no longer compassion but envy.

Crisis of the Modern Welfare State by the US House Joint Economic Committee in July, 1994
As excerpted from the book "A Humane Economy: The Social Framework of the Free Market" by Written by Wilhelm Röpke in 1960. Excerpts are from the chapter, "Welfare State and Chronic Inflation."

Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
- The Life of Reason: Volume I by George Santayana, 1905

History, in par, repeats itslef.
- Mr. Kuhlman, high school history teacher