Ahmadinejad Thanks Obama for Not Interfering

President Obama, the glorious leader of the free world, has been so careful to side step support for those risking their lives in protest against their totalitarian state and to make certain that the world knows that he is not interfering in Iranian affairs and handing Iranian leaders propoganda fodder, that the landslide-winning Iranian president has now come out and expressed his appreciation:

******
"I hope that you (Obama) will stop interfering in Iran's affairs and ask for forgiveness so that the Iranian people know," Ahmadinejad was quoted by the agency as saying, adding: "Mr. Obama made a mistake when he said that...We would like to know why he has fallen into the same trap by saying the same thing [former U.S. president George] Bush said." (The Financial, 6/26/09)
******

Yes, Mr. Obama deserves everyone's appreciation for keeping America safe from undeserved criticism. Saaalute!

Con Games

State Attorney General offices alert their citizens to con games and scams and provide educational material aimed at helping their citizens recognize some warnings that a solicitation might be a scam. Consider some of the red flags:

Con artists pressure potential victims to make a decision right away with no time to think it over. If you hesitate, the opportunity will be lost with no second chance.

Con artists pressure potential victims into paying for the service and/or providing sensitive personal information without providing a written contract.

Con artists deliver high pressure offers that promise high returns for no risk.

As BHO, his administration, and our Democrat Congress pitch their health care, climate change, and economic recovery proposals to the American people, do their techniques have a familiar ring to them?

The Indiana Attorney General site warns, "If you have any doubts, or if the offer made to you seems too good to be true, trust your instincts. Decline the offer and hang up immediately."

How Will You Pay for It?

"How will you pay for it?" This is the question I am going to ask each and every Congress person in my state concerning any proposed nationalized healthcare plan (ie, Obamacare). Before any of my elected representatives agree to any Obamacare plan, I want each and every one of them to explain to me the cost and how it will be paid for. And I want an answer that is clear, concise, and comprehensive. Think that's even remotely possible?

Here's what prompted me to think of this:
Overspending May Block Obamacare

Here is the text of my letter to my Congress-people:

*****

Dear (Senator)/(Representative):

Once again, my government is in a head-over-heels hurry to pass massive, expensive, and liberty limiting legislation and policy without allowing adequate time for vigorous debate. This time, it is health care legislation. I have three simple questions for you concerning health care legislation.

(1) How much will this health care legislation cost?

(2) How do you propose the cost of this health care legislation will be covered?

(3) Are you going to forego your current health care plan and join the one mandated for most Americans by the health care proposals being initiated and pushed by this administration?

Sincerely,

*****

Use it as you see fit.

Let Freedom Ring

Liberal freedom fighters (an obvious oxymoron as we shall see), led by supreme commander Obama, refrain from condemning the Iranian mullah regime and distinguishing good from evil in this clash between totalitarianism and dissent because they are not certain how this "vigorous debate" will all "play out." Here's a clue, folks: The brutalization of the protestors will continue to escalate until the dissent will be bloodily put down. And those brave, daring Iranians who have put their lives on the line will wonder in sad, dispirited amazement how the world's leading free nations abandoned them to the ravages of totalitarianism.

Moral relativists like Stephen Dick cower behind their supreme commander and support his every nuanced move. Writes Mr. Dick, "In the US, President Obama has taken a measured approach. He has questioned the results of the election but not separated the protestors and the mullahs into good and evil... Last week, the Republicans in the House offered up a useless resolution to back the Iranian protestors, but it served as a political thumb in the eye to Obama who wants to open up a dialogue with Tehran." (Kokomo Tribune, 6/25/09, p. A4) Later in his article, Mr. Dick goes on to make the typical liberal rant that this all America's fault anyway because we helped Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ascend to power in 1953 - all for nasty oil, of course. The lack of logic by those like Mr. Dick amazes me: Today's events in Iran are "America's fault," but we dare not intervene because they are Iran's problems, not ours.

This president, along with his adoring minions, is determined to ally himself with brutal totalitarian regimes and turn his back on allies and devoted freedom fighters. In just as confusing, tenuous, threatening times, an oppressed people rose up against their oppressors. The leader of the free world then did not fail them. Polish leader Lech Walesa writes, "When talking about Ronald Reagan, I have to be personal. We in Poland took him so personally. Why? Because we owe him our liberty. This can't be said often enough by people who lived under oppression for half a century, until communism fell in 1989." (Freedom Eden) He also said, "The Polish people, hungry for justice, preferred 'cowboys' over Communists."

Mr. Obama certainly does not have to worry about being mistaken for a "cowboy" as he stands on the sidelines waiting for it all to "play out."

(BTW, google has some of the lamest images of the Iranian protests imagineable. Amazing.)

Stop the Hate Crimes Bill

I have recently received warnings about the status of S. 909, "The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act." Although the actual bill no longer exists because it could not be passed in its existing form, there is concern that the legislation will be added as an amendment to another necessary bill. (Even though S. 909 does not exist as a formal bill, I will refer to this bill number simply for ease of reference).

There are two very major concerns about S. 909 legislation. First, it includes protection for "sexual orientation" but does not define what that means. For this reason, the bill was dubbed "the pedophile protection act." CitizenLink, a publication of Focus on the Family, notes, "Also concerning is the fact that House Democrats voted down an amendment to their bill that would have excluded pedophilia from the definition of 'sexual orientation.'"

Second, the broad, unspecific language of this legislation raises concerns that any speech, especially religious, that criticizes or condemns particular sexual behaviors will become treated as "hate speech." More info on these concerns is available at Operation Save America.

Members of leftist organizations are howling at such accusations and concerns, of course. Child molestation will never be legal and free speech will never be threatened, they tell us. I invite any interested reader to consider the track record of liberal "promises" when it comes to violating established moral and ethical boundaries. What they seek is a start so that they can continue to push their immoral agendas further and further into our lives. For instance, abortion began with emotional pleas about protecting innocent victims from having to bear a child resulting from rape or incest (which will likely become protected through "hate crime" legislation). It began with promises that abortions would be limited to the first trimester. Flash forward to the present: abortion is now demanded as a right for any woman at any time up to and including post-birth (infants born alive following an abortion attempt have been allowed to die through intentional neglect).

The last time I was privileged to host the Peter Heck Radio Talk Show, I raised the issue that the very arguments used to justify the legal standing of homosexual behavior would eventually be used to justify the legal standing of pedophile behavior and any form of adult-child sexual relationship. It does not seem possible to reasonable Americans, but this is exactly the tact being taken by those who are pressing their agenda through a variety of means. I invite you to read the responses of "porlaverdad3" at the MorganWrites blog.

Our Senators need to know that giving legal status to deviant sexual behavior is not acceptable. I urge you to contact your Senators about this. I include my draft of a letter that you can use below. You can find contact information for your Senator at senate.gov. Please take action.

*********

Dear Senator:

I request that you OPPOSE AND FILIBUSTER ANY "HATE CRIMES" AMENDMENT, which was until recently labeled S. 909. The original bill was so dangerously crafted that it could not be passed standing alone; instead, indications are that it will become a hidden amendment to another "must-move" bill.

This so-called "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act" must be defeated. This amendment will mirror the House bill passed as H.R. 1913, which makes "sexual orientation," "gender," and "gender identity" federally-protected classes under the law, and thereby codifies protection of up to 547 types of sexually deviant behaviors, including but not limited to:

Incest - sex with one's offspring (a crime, of course)
Necrophilia - sexual relations with a corpse, also a crime
Pedophilia - sex with an underage child, another crime
Zoophilia - bestiality, a crime in numerous states
Voyeurism - a criminal offense in most states
Fronteurism - a man approaching an unknown woman and rubbing against her buttocks
Coprophilia - sexual arousal from feces
Urophilia - sexual arousal from urine

This legislation also begins to lay the legal foundation and framework to investigate, prosecute, and persecute anyone whose religious or secular speech and thought is based upon and reflects the truths found in religious texts or medical, psychiatric, and psychological studies.

S. 909 broadly defines "intimidation," thus a pastor's sermon or a doctor’s recommendation could be considered "hate speech" under this legislation if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on any "sexual orientation." Prosecution could be based upon "conspiracy to commit a hate crime."

If you vote for this bill, you will be responsible for elevating pedophiles and other bizarre sexual orientations to unprecedented and unwise levels of protection. I believe that violence against another person should be prosecuted in accordance with appropriate law, BUT SEXUALLY DEVIANT BEHAVIOR SHOULD NOT BE ELEVATED AND PROTECTED BY LAW. Please OPPOSE AND FILIBUSTER any amendment similar to S. 909.

Sincerely,

[YOUR NAME]
[ADDRESS]

[CITY], [STATE] [ZIP]

*********

Assimilating Big Media

Government and Big Media are one. How nice that after eight years of adverarial relationship with the White House, Big Media can now cuddle up with an administration. I wonder what kind of floral arrangement they'll bring for the Mrs.?

"ABC turns programming over to Obama"

Culture of Violence 2

Following my post on the "Culture of Violence," which was published as a letter in the Kokomo Tribune, a column by Stephen Dick entitled "Conservative Voices Promote Violence" motivated me to offer a reasoned response because, once again, this perspective and logic fail at every turn.

Mr. Dick blasts conservatives for promoting violence. How do they do that? Well, by telling the truth. Mr. Dick is angry with conservatives because of their audacity to declare that abortion kills human life. Is this not the truth, though? Mr. George Tiller’s daily occupation was to destroy human life just as certainly as his own life was destroyed in an alleged murder. In order to paint conservatives with his broad brush of culpability, Mr. Dick has to set up a completely fabricated foundation upon which to build his fanciful accusations. He does this early in his column: “…but deep down right-wing true believers agree with the violence.” Making such an indictment would lead one to believe that his column would be filled with the empirical evidence to substantiate his audacious claim. He provides none.

Instead, Mr. Dick attempts to equate an incident involving willful armed robbery and subsequent self defense with support for pre-meditated murder and turn that into his basis for declaring that conservatives promote violence. Does that not strike you as one of the most ludicrous arguments you have ever heard? The alleged murder of Mr. Tiller had nothing to do with self defense. No conservative he cites, and no conservative I have read or heard, has come anywhere close to condoning the shooting death of Mr. Tiller. The simple truth is that conservative ideology honors the rule of law. In one of the few statements of pseudo-fact in his column, Mr. Dick writes, “Whatever your point of view, Tiller was operating under protection of the law.” Conservatives recognize this. We also recognize that it is bad law and are motivated to correct it by legitimately petitioning our government as provided in our federal and state constitutions. The truth is that abortion is currently protected by court ruling, not by properly legislated law. Nevertheless, it is currently protected. But even that truth cannot mask the reality that the action protected is one that cruelly and violently tears asunder in the womb a human life in the fetal stage of development. The closer the innocent life is to the time of birth, the more cruel and violent the abortion procedure becomes. Operating under the protection of law though he was, Mr. Tiller specialized in the cruelest of abortion procedures.

Not only did Mr. Dick not see fit to mention the violent cruelty inherent in the act of abortion, he goes so far as to write that “to many women, Tiller had been a savior.” How very interesting that the act of dismembering a human life in the womb should result in sainthood for the perpetrator of such violence. Following this line of logic, then, Mr. Dick should have no problem accepting the coronation of Jerome Ersland as “savior” as well. After all, Mr. Ersland’s action resulted in the protection of an unknown number of innocent victims from the deadly danger of further armed robberies by the criminal he shot in self defense. If the world is so much better off because of the dismembering of an innocent human life in the womb, then how much better off is the world by the eradication of one who willfully and purposefully endangered other’s lives through armed robbery? Simply applying Mr. Dick’s logic leads both liberals and conservatives to only one conclusion.

From start to finish, Mr. Dick sets himself up as judge, jury, and executioner of conservatism. Only through his incredibly flawed indictment of what “true right-wingers” believe can he even begin to tie the actions of a lone gunman to an entire ideology that respects our constitutional rule of law. Only through his flawed indictment can he suggest that shining the light of truth on the vicious actions of a cruel industry is a promotion of violent behavior. If Mr. Dick is so concerned about a rising level of violence in our culture, then perhaps he needs to do what I do: actually address one of its principle sources. Pro-abortion advocates want us to believe that they are concerned about eliminating acts of violence in our culture. This is difficult to accept given that they espouse foundational ideologies and actions that have handed our culture the license to treat other human beings without respect, without compassion, and without justice.

Moral Law

I am rather certain that many jokes are making their way through cyberspace about the nature of David Carradine's death. I haven't actually pursued finding any, so I don't have absolute proof. Still, I would be more surprised if no smart-alek comments exist than if they do.


Mr. Carradine's tragic death highlights a significant truth: those who insist on violating the moral law of God run the risk of very significant consequences. The Associated Press reports, "Pornthip Rojanasunand, director of Thailand's Forensic Science, said Carradine may have died attempting a sex act known as auto-erotic asphyxiation - cutting off oxygen to the brain for sexual arousal. The practice is said to result in a form of giddiness and euphoria - similar to alcohol or drug intoxication - that enhances the sexual experience. 'If you hang yourself by the neck, you don't need so much pressure to kill yourself. Those who get highly sexually aroused tend to forget this fact,' Pornthip said." (Kokomo Tribune, 6/6/2009, p. A6)

"Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry." (Colossians 3:5) Perhaps some visitors to my blog would want to deny that Carradine's action fits a literal Biblical concept of "sexual immorality." Fine. Protest if you want, but the result speaks for itself. Mr. Carradine is still dead because he engaged in unnecessarily risky behavior. Had he been pursuing an active relationship with the Living God, he would likely still be alive.

Americans have become fascinated with the concept of moral relativism to the point of wishing away the reality of moral law. Indeed, President Obama "quietly" issued a proclamation that June is now Lesbian, Gay, bisexual, Transgendered (LGBT) pride month. The actions of these so-called "sexual minorities" continue to spread a significant array of deadly diseases - HIV, hepatitis, and other sexually transmitted diseases. These are all diseases that rulers like President Obama say they want to see "stamped out" ("We must also commit ourselves to fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic by both reducing the number of HIV infections and providing care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS across the United States." -- President Obama from the cited proclamation). Well, a great way to reduce the number of HIV infections is to refrain from legitimizing the behavior that provides the environment for its spread.

The truth is that the moral law of God will not disappear just because of policy and legislation. Mr. Carradine's death is tragic, and it should be told how dangerous it is to willfully violate moral law. Just as tragic are all of the continuing suffering and deaths that will result from officially recognizing and legitimizing behavior that spreads terrible disease.

"Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows." (Galatians 6:7)

(photo: David Carradine)

Liberal Jokes: Warning North Korea

If it was not such a sobering situation, I would be rolling on the floor with laughter every time I heard an American administration or U.N. official issue a “stern warning” to North Korea. This administration was propelled to power by organizations that believe that military force is always unnecessary, and the world is quite aware of the value of U.N. resolutions. We can be certain that totalitarians are really worried about these “stern warnings.” Besides, everyone knows that North Korea had nothing to do with 9/11. So what’s the big deal? Maybe the president will send Michael Moore over there so that we can get the real picture.

Culture of Violence

Have some American citizens lost all sense of perspective and logic? With Big Media as willing accomplices, the move is on to use the death of George Tiller as a means to silence pro-life individuals and organizations. The connection being made is that pro-life rhetoric is as responsible as the alleged murderer for Mr. Tiller’s death. Such connections completely fail several tests of logic and common sense. Consider, for example, if Mr. Tiller had been a child molester. Would his death be a reason to call for the silencing of all who continue to oppose child molestation? Proceeding on the basis that readers of this blog are an intelligent group, I will answer for us: of course that would not be a reason for opposition to child molestation to cease. We would continue to seek to defend and protect the most vulnerable among us. In fact, I have heard and read comments from quite a few who espouse various ideologies of the left describe what they would like to see done to convicted child molesters. Trust me, their descriptions of punitive retribution fall well outside the current boundaries of “cruel and unusual punishment” as defined in today’s legal system. Yet there seems to be no concern that such expressions of opinion contribute to a widening culture of violence.

Pro-abortion individuals and organizations concerned with rooting out sources of cultural violence would do well to look in their own mirror. Their whole reason for being is permeated with acts of tremendous violence against the most innocent and vulnerable in our culture. Their violence toward children in every stage of fetal development, including post-birth, is completely reprehensible. For pre-birth abortions, the fetal child is literally ripped apart. For post-birth abortions, the newborn child is left to die from neglect and dehydration. Such actions clearly fall outside the current boundaries of “cruel and unusual punishment” as defined in today’s legal system, but pro-abortionists demand that this violence done to the most innocent and vulnerable in our culture continue unabated as a legal right for the sake of convenience.

Pro-abortionists want us to believe that they are concerned about eliminating acts of violence in our culture. This is difficult to accept given that they espouse foundational ideologies and actions that have handed our culture the license to treat other human beings without respect, without compassion, and without justice.

(Image: Fetal hand grasp photo. For full story, click here.)

Different Than Bush?

Gasoline has hit $2.75 per gallon in my neck of the woods. This brief report tells us that OPEC has no intent of backing down from keeping current production levels relatively low.

******

Wed Jun 03 2009

Morning Perspective

Powered by Minyanville: OPEC Not Budging

OPEC's Secretary General Abdullah al-Badri said yesterday the price of crude oil could spike to $80-90 a barrel by early next year. But even if prices were to reach that level, the cartel won't be expanding production until an over-supply has been absorbed. In a story by Reuters, al-Badri said last week that he expected to see crude around $70-75 a barrel by the end of 2009, and acknowledged that at current prices there is some speculation but nowhere near the levels when the commodity spiked to a record $147 last July. But continued speculation as well as a falling US dollar could help push prices near triple digits by the beginning of 2010, al-Badri said. He also added that until oil inventories in industrialized countries fall from a current 62 days to 52 days worth of future demand, the cartel won't be making any moves.

******

So how does this differ from the administration under former Presidnet Bush? I thought that all those cronies who benefited from high gasoline prices were out of office now. It couldn't be that we have been fed a line, could it?