Personal Responsibility: A distinctly Mormon teaching…

If there was ever a time for a particular minority trait to be brought to the fore in America it is now.  We, as a culture, have sunk to such a low ebb of expecting others to solve our problems, provide our food, take care of our health, find us a job, teach our kids, and guarantee our safety.  And of course, disciplining our kids is now taboo as is any attempt at condemning immorality. 

We expect government to keep on growing so that it can satisfy our ever-increasing expectations and demands of it. 

The proportion of Americans dependent on some sort of government subsidy, welfare, dole, or salary is nearing 50%.  And this does not include those who expect some sort of government service.  Many suggest our nation is near an irreversible “tipping point” where so many are dependent on government that a majority will insist on its continued growth.  Additional revenue for government will be demanded until its coercive taxing power will become as oppressive as any tyrannical power in history.   At the same time, we have a large and growing portion of our population who pay NO taxes whatsoever.

This points to the plague of a dearth of personal responsibility.

Now enter a group of people into the political spotlight whose faith represents a concept that has become increasingly foreign to too many Americans:

Personal responsibility.

One of the first speakers at the Republican National Convention was Mia Love,   the Mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah, and the Republican Party 2012 nominee in Utah's 4th congressional district.  She is also Mormon and the first black mayor of any Utah city.   Her speech was all about personal responsibility.

Here is a small part of what she said:

“Hope and change is turned into fear and blame. Fear that everybody is going to lose everything and blaming Congress for everything instead of taking responsibility."     

Personal responsibility: A refreshing concept for Americans

And what did she get for her efforts?  Her Wikipedia page was savaged with these comments:

“…dirty worthless whore…house nigger…aunt Tom…”

Next we have Ann Romney, the wife of Mitt, the mother of 5 boys who she most likely raised without the dad being around a whole lot, and the humbling recipient of breast cancer and multiple sclerosis, and her miscarriages.

Her speech emphasized her own sense of personal responsibility as a mom and of moms around the country.  By almost all accounts, her speech received high praise, except from one.

Juan Williams, a FOX commentator critiqued her comments with:

"Ann Romney ... looked to me like a corporate wife.  The stories she told about struggles — eh! It's hard for me to believe. I mean, she's a very rich woman, and I know that, and America knows that."

From Huffington Post: 

There was a distinct pause, and then host Bret Baier said, "Wow, OK." Host Megyn Kelly asked, "What does that mean, 'corporate wife?'"

"It looks like a woman whose husband takes care of her, and she's been very lucky and blessed in this life," Williams replied. "...She did not convince me that, you know what? I understand the truggles of American women in general."

“Is that the same speech you heard, Brit?” Baier asked colleague Brit Hume. “I think that was the single most effective political speech I’ve ever heard given by a political wife,” Hume replied, adding, "I think a lot of women could look at her ... and find her utterly admirable and utterly credible."

According to Juan Williams, personal responsibility and hard work do not matter, do not count, if you are successful as a result of it.  Or perhaps Juan was experiencing a fit of passive aggressive racism or jealousy.  I don’t know.

And of course we have the example of Mit Romney.  He exhibited a huge measure of not only personal responsibility and hard work throughout his life but a spirit and practice of giving and helping as well.

Each of these people exhibit the common trait of assuming and promoting personal responsibility.  And the left, the progressives, and the ignorant mock them all for it.

The other thing each of these practitioners and advocates of personal responsibility have in common is that they are all Mormon.  It is no coincidence that their personal values have so much in common.  Their faith teaches and promotes personal responsibility and self-sufficiency as one of their highest ideals – pretty much on the same plane as “cleanliness is next to Godliness.”  One of the expressions they often use as I recall from the time I spent with Mormons is this:

"For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do."

This verse from Mormon Scripture is central to their concept of grace.  The unique part of it is “…after all we can do.”  The hard work necessary to endure both the hardships of pioneering as well as the severe persecutions they endured created a great emphasis on their “after all we can do” part of the Scripture.

Mormon theology may not be orthodox, but it sure provides some decent lessons for the rest of us.

Too many of us believe we are saved by grace despite doing nothing.  Doing nothing is as bad as in His face blasphemous disobedience.  Doing nothing, expecting Him to save us – no matter what we do or don’t do – is absolute presumptuousness.  If we believe God and His Word, we will be motivated to act on what he is telling us – not just sit back and act helpless.  By their fruits you will know them.

The perverse “social gospel” tells us the opposite.  The modern version tells us screw personal responsibility and personal effort and personal involvement in the lives of others, let’s get the government to do it.  It’s ok to tax the most productive among us a larger part of their income to help “those of us who are less fortunate.”  Yup, it sure is easier than doing it ourselves.

If there was ever a time in American history where we could use a strong dose of leadership that believes in, practices, and promotes personal responsibility, this is the time.  And if such character happens to come from a faith that is outside or orthodoxy, that tells me that orthodoxy has some catching up to do.

Tea Party Questions: Two folks who don’t get it

From the “there IS such a thing as a dumb question” department…

Mat Staver, the Dean of the Liberty University School of Law and  founder of Liberty Counsel, was the guest speaker at the local Tea Party meeting.  Mat‘s specialty is representing the Christian foundation of the United States, and naturally, confirms and promotes the idea that our nation could not long endure without the moral foundation enabled by our Judeo-Christian roots.

Mat gave a great presentation on the road to ruin our anti-American, socialist, Christian-loathing president is leading us down.  After his fine presentation, the floor was opened to questions from the audience.

Out of the dozen or so questions posed, here are the two that likely come from the two most out of touch people in the room (names changed to protect the guilty):

First, the “haven’t you been listening” question from Apos Tate: 

Mat.  Why does religion and Christianity have anything to do with this election?  Shouldn’t we stay focused on jobs and prosperity?

Mat’s answer:  You’re right,Apos, we should maintain that focus.

God’s answer:   No, Apos and Mat.  You are both mistaken.  Your country would not exist except for Me when your founders had the faith to base their new nation’s governing principles on My word.  Mat, you, especially ought to know better than to answer Sam’s question so carelessly.  Your entire organization, and the University you work for, stands for My principles that served as the basis for the founding of your nation.  You need to defend the grace that I shed on your country much more clearly, consistently, and forcefully.   You understand that there are growing numbers of apostates in your country that are disavowing and denying My influence.  As you have declared many times in other forums, I am on the verge of removing My grace from your country because of the lack of concern of the nation’s people, like Apos,  for my commandments.  Godly principles of governance have EVERYTHING to do with this election.  If your people continue on their immoral path, you will have nothing but dishonest crooks and perverts and Satanic Muslims running your country.  So stand up for the truth.  Defend My role in the good fortune your nation has enjoyed.  Make the connection between faith in Me and the goodness of your nation – especially in your politics and elections. 

And second, the “you’ve got things backwards” question from Dhim Mi: 

Mat, aren’t you concerned that there may be a second holocaust where the people of the United States turn on Muslims and murder them en masse?

Mat’s answer:  No, Dhim.  That is not the nature of this country.  Our legal system will not permit it.  But that doesn’t mean we need to ignore the nature of the Islamic threat to us and our way of life.

Yours truly’s answer:  You have got to be kidding, dumb ass.  The way our political leaders and media are so ignorant about Islam, Muslims are more likely to gain control and subjugate our sorry asses before we even wake up from our entertainment-obsessed, drug-induced stupor.  Dhim, are you, too, so ignorant of Islam that you don’t know that they are the ones who will subject you and the rest of us to a holocaust way before we discover what’s going on?  Hey Dhim, look up the word Dhimmi!

Afghan population rife with those who behead dancers…

…from the “we still don’t get it” department

17 Afghans were beheaded at a party – for dancing.  Afghanistan is heavily populated by Muslims who take Muhammad seriously, aka devout, orthodox, practicing Muslims.  These are what our media refer to as “radicals” and “terrorists.”  But in reality, they are merely devout followers of Islam.  Hey, any of you  Christian-bashing atheists out there – DO NOT equate devout Muslims with devout Christians.  Devout Christians typically become monks, are busy in food pantries, rebuilding communities in third world countries or praying all the time.  No no no.  Don’t pull that ignorant bull crap.  You will absolutely show your biased ignorance.

Orthodox Islam is the majority ideology throughout Afghanistan.

Oh, and as an afterthought, not that anyone really cares, 2 more US soldiers were killed by what the media labels a “rogue” Afghan solder.  Rogue?  I really doubt it.  It is "the way they are” coming out of the closet.  Hey, if it is therapeutic for suppressed homosexual behavior to come out of the closet, why not suppressed Muslim behavior?  I suspect most of the Afghan military would like to do the same.

So, let’s take a look at what rights we are defending here.  The folks we are attempting to assist behead their fellow countrymen for dancing.  And the soldiers we are training kill their US trainers – several dozen at this point.  Do you see anything wrong with this picture?  Do you sense any kind of cultural disconnect here?  This huge disconnect between our suppressed military and the absolutely vile Islamic culture is documented in THIS article by Diana West.

Following are the possible solutions to this.  You pick the one you find most inspiring:

- Nuke all of Afghanistan.  This would be effective in the short run, but the US would be condemned for centuries.

- Send in 50,000 shrinks to psychoanalyze the Afghan military and the Taliban – actually, the entire Muslim Afghan population.  The problem with this is most of the shrinks we send in would likely be Muslim sympathizers and join them in massacring our soldiers or would simply urge them to feel good about themselves.

- Implement another surge to show them we really mean business this time.  But this time don’t tell them we’ll pull out in six months.  Keep them there for the 500 years necessary to allow enough time for our reeducation and “nation-building” to take effect.

- Leave Afghanistan immediately, understand and accept the truth of the Muslim mindset and Islamic ideology, and bolster our borders and national security capabilities.

If none of these options appeal to you, let’s hear your suggestions.  Oh, I hear the progressive mantra now:  Embrace diversity, respect everyone, cultural diversity is the answer.  Note that in the 60’s the hippies had to be on drugs to motivate their “flower power” and “all we need is love” beliefs.  Those who embrace diversity and all the rest of the Pollyanna BS are likely on drugs, too.

 

Another demonstration of Islamo-ignorant US policy in Afghanistan

Our military's failure in Afghanistan is a consequence of the ignorance of our nation’s leaders about the true nature and motives of Islam.

Our role in Afghanistan borders on insanity.  We are equiping and training Islamists in this 100% Muslim nation to fight independently of US presence.  Fight what?  Fight whom?  They already know how to fight on their own.  They have already shot dozens of their US military trainers.  The other insanity is we are surprised.

The latest insanity was demonstrated by General John R. Allen who, according to the Associated Press, stated that “while the reasons for the killings are not fully understood…the burden of fasting during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan combined with the summer heat may have prompted more Afghan soldiers and police to turn their guns on their American partners.”

This misguided, excuse-making, Islamo-ignorant General is ignoring the history of Islamic hatred toward the West and concluding that it is the heat and self-imposed hunger that causes them to kill.

This means that we better be on high alert this hot summer for people in the vicinity of Weight Watcher weigh-ins.  Or wary of Mormon missionaries in the steamy south on fast Sundays.

This general has to be awarded the Dumbest Excuse of the Month (DEM) award.  The sad part is 1) He is a US Marine General, 2) He is leading our forces in Afghanistan, 3) He represents US policy and understanding of our enemy in Afghanistan.   How many ways can I state how pathetic and sad and disheartening this stupidity is?

Excellent commentator and author Diana West agrees in THIS essay.  She is right.  He ought to be fired.  Except there is no grown up in this administration to do it.

HERE  is a list of 7 reason why General McChrystal, Allen’s predecessor, should have been fired back in 2009.  Allen is a clone – or is it “clown.”

HERE is the guide that instructs US troops in Afghanistan how to be dhimmis if attacked.  It advises “be polite, respectful and don’t offend.”

Have churches become irrelevant?

…the fight for an honest and moral America

The video, below (an interview of a young “lady” upset about being caught stealing money from a group of Girl Scouts selling cookies), prompted a “cultural Christian” church-loathing friend and I to have a conversation about the moral decline in our country over the past several decades.  I noted that many of our churches are becoming as morally untethered as the agnostics and atheists.

Our moral future?

Sensing that I might be inferring that Churches have been better repositories of moral goodness than agnostics and atheists have been, he replied, “I’m not sure I totally agree with you.  Morals belong to people; not churches.  I don’t profess to be “holier than thou” but I don’t belong to any denomination and although I don’t demonstrate my faith in God graphically, I try to live by His standards.  I know a lot of people who follow the same guidelines.  I may go to hell, but I’ll be satisfied that although I don’t come close to WWJD, I was an OK human being.  No one—in my opinion—can hide behind a “religion.”

Here is my reply back to my friend:

My point is that THE CHURCHES are now doing what they have never done before:  Many are now denying the basis for traditional morality.  Many no longer consider the Bible and their historical creeds to be inerrant.  For example, active homosexuality, a grave sin for 3,000 years, is not a sin any more in many, and a growing number, of churches. Gay marriage is now routine in several denominations.   The outward display and promotion of homosexuality is now a protected human behavior not only in our society at large, but even in many churches.  It won't be long before other historically moral taboos are erased...we can only imagine what they may be (Polygamy?  Adultery? Pedophilia?)  A sense of honesty that that girl in the video above lacked is a clear example.  Morality certainly didn't “belong” to that girl.  And it is doubtful she had much of a church experience, either personally or handed down from her folks.

Even “cultural Christians” who believe morality resides only in individuals and not in churches have several generations of Christian influence and tradition that preceded and influenced them from their parents and grandparents, plus their own generation's moral influences that caused them to believe what they believe and act on.  If we didn’t have those familial influences and those peer influences that had similar moral, mostly Christian Church-informed and promoted, influences, we would be somewhat different than we are.  Some of us may disdain "churches", but the influence of churches on our forebears and upbringing is undeniable.  We enjoy the remnants of the beliefs and morality of our forefathers.  As we see in our culture, the moral influence is slowly decaying because the churches are self-destructing in the morality department, and faith is generally waning in our culture compared to what it was 50 or 100 years ago.  Without the morality taught in churches (or through agreed upon moral doctrine, whatever the source), we will become uncivilized and more animalistic.  Look at aboriginal tribes and their version of "morality."  Look at the moral teachings of Islam that advocate lying (taqqiya) to defend and promote their faith, and the civil penalties involving the chopping off of body parts, and their treatment of women, and their hatred of Jews.  These moral precepts did not bubble up from inside individual people; they were taught as part of a coercive religion.

Christianity is a voluntary religion.  It is not coercive, a huge distinction from Islam.  As elective as Christianity is, I realize if I didn't have the history of family and cultural peer influence that I had, I might prefer atheism, or Islam, or who knows what.  Morality is not genetic.  It is learned.  It is a choice.  We learn from those whom we respect.  We choose based on what we have been taught and experienced is right. We act on what we continue to experience.   I will not deny the teaching and the experiences that guided me to the choices I make.  When those influences cease being significant in our lives (and historically they have come from devout priests and pastors who promote church doctrine and Christian morals) each generation will have less and less remembrance of the Judeo-Christian morality we take for granted until the next pattern of group think emerges.  And that will likely take a lower form than what we currently know.  Maybe some think it will take a higher form without "religion" and without "churches."  But I doubt it, and that is apparently where we differ.

I find it interesting that we pay billions of dollars a year to advertisers and marketers to promote and sell goods and services.  Yet priests and pastors and the institutions they serve (churches) which are the repositories and promoters of western morality and principles of civil behavior are dismissed out of hand as being irrelevant.  Fascinating indeed.

Perhaps it is because of this very feeling of irrelevance that most churches are adapting themselves to our degrading culture rather expecting themselves to help inform and shape the culture.  And that is a great loss.   It was a unique period in world history when, for over a hundred years, the US had relative unity of religious and moral thought in the midst of a permissive and amazingly diverse society.  It is a wonder it lasted that long.

Karzai to the rescue? And pigs can fly.

This story is from the Department of Wishful Thinking, aka “desperate days are here again.”

Here is the headline:

US Military Chief’s Plane Hit by Afghan Militants at Air Base

And here is the heart of the story:

Gen. Dempsey placed a telephone call to Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai Tuesday morning before leaving Afghanistan to reiterate US concerns about the spate of insider attacks on US and NATO troops, urging Karzai to do more to prevent such attacks. 

The words of this story shine a bright light on our problems not only in Afghanistan, but our problem of failing to acknowledge the identity of our enemy.

Find the Muslim.  I don’t see any.  Do you?

First, the politically correct headline.  US plane hit by whom?  “Afghan militants?”  It might as well have read “Plane hit by humans” for all its imprecise, handwringing vagueness.  What American-hating ideology comprises 99.9% of Afghanistan’s population?  Exactly right:  “peace-loving” Muslims.  Afghanistan is an Islamic nation.  Why doesn’t the headline cut to the chase and say “militant Islamists?”  Oooooh, but to admit this might be construed as “hate speech.”  Hey, the odds that the rockets were fired by Iranian  or Sudanese Muslims are much greater than they were fired by Afghan Catholics.  “Muslims” is by far the most likely descriptor of who fired the rockets – but saying so is unacceptable, still.  This is problem one:  An ignorant and politically correct media.

Then we have problem two (this is rich):  Military leadership who is relying on an Islamist puppet (Karzai) to solve our Islamic problem that we fail to acknowledge.  I can hear the secure phone conversation between Obama and Dempsey:  “Hey, Dempsey, buddy!  Why don’t you give your pal Karzai over there a call and see if he can call off his dogs…err, wait, we Muslims don’t have dogs…have him call off his people so I don’t look quite so bad before my election.  Would you do that for me, man?”  And that is what Dempsey, good buddy, did.  He gave good ol’ Karzai a buzz to call off his folks.

The world of Islamo-ignorance – or taqiyya.

What do you think are the odds of anything happening from that call?  I’m figuring something equivalent to the odds of Islam suddenly becoming a religion of peace:   1 in 500050 – about the same odds as pigs flying.

Impressions and photos from Ryan’s visit to The Villages…

After passing through security at 8:30 am, one of the first things I noticed was in the air.  The banner behind the small plane read:  “Ryan:  Keep your hands off our Medicare.”  Whoever paid the pilot the big bucks to have that plane fly around for three hours with that ignorant message is clueless and wasted someone's money.   First. it was directed to the wrong crowd. Oh, wait.  It was directed to the gullible viewers of CNN, CBS, NBC, and ABC news where it was indeed shown.   Most seniors in The Villages are not gullible enough to believe that message.  That message needs to be directed to B. Hussein Obama.  He is the one who screwed around with our Medicare. 

The crowd was legion and energized.  There were at least several thousand, perhaps as many as 10,000.  I particularly enjoyed the music, especially the 6 or 7 famous numbers Lee Greenwood performed.  He gets better with age.

Better than I expected, Ryan was emotional, captivating, engaging, and gave an inspirational message promoting common sense health care, rebutting Obama’s nonsense and lies.  He has no intention of throwing his 78-year-old mom under the bus, who was there by his side.

Unstoppable momentum toward Sodalon…

…from the “why I am not an optimist” department

Many republicans and conservatives and tea partiers are expressing breathless anticipation that our nation will be turned around by a Romney/Ryan victory in November.

Here is why I believe that is naïve and wishful thinking.

But first, to identify with my point of view, one has to have these qualities:

• Believe that there is a living God who has established moral standards for his people
• Believe that our nation was founded on Godly principles and cannot survive when these principles are ignored or violated by a large portion of our population.

Without belief in at least these basics, there is no point of reference for where our nation ends up.  It simply matters very little.

OK.  Here goes:

Momentum has been building for a hundred years.  First, the sources of our nation’s decline have been at work for over a century.  Our increasing prosperity has led to a decline in personal faith, in personal responsibility and productivity, an increase in expectations, and an increased reliance on the government to provide for what we fail to accomplish to meet our expectations.  Obama is correct:  In the world of way too many of us, we cannot and will not accomplish anything without the help of the government.

Academia’s growing hostility to Christianity and conservative ideals.  Next, what started out as Christian universities 100 to 150 years ago have become training grounds for liberals, socialists, communists, and atheists.  Christianity is mocked in just about every school that was founded to promote Christian ideals.  The public universities are just as bad – they cannot be much worse.  The cult of most professors welcome tolerance only of their liberal, anti-Christian ideas, and are intolerant of students who demonstrate a Christian faith.Liber  These amoralist professors are turning out likeminded students, many of whom will carry to torch of faithlessness, big government, socialism, and communism to future generations.

The hateful rejection of morality.  Our culture is showing distinct signs of hating those who advocate moral principles.  They call such advocacy “intolerance”, “bigotry”, or some sort of “-phobia”.  Moral relativity is in vogue and growing.  Tolerance is the new god – tolerate EVERYTHING!  Nothing is worthy of judging as unworthy.

Human nature (greed and self-satisfaction).  The Church has it right.  Call it original sin, or human predisposition to sin.  Or call it greed and avarice or jealousy, or self-absorption, or self-satisfaction, selfishness, or greed, or lust.  Without moral absolutes and some culturally endorsed system of promoting and enforcing those absolutes, these propensities of human nature will take over.  And right now, such culturally endorsed and enforced systems are on a steep decline, with no sign of reversing.

Entitlement tipping point.  Human nature has demanded much from our various governments.  We demand not just roads and schools, and courts, and national defense, and police and fire and water and sewer.  These are just the basics.  Now we demand that state take our children from age 2 and feed them three squares a day.  We demand the unemployed be stripped of their incentive to work by giving them over two years of unemployment insurance.   We issue food stamps without caring whether the recipients work or not or for what purpose they are used.  We provide funding for abortions and birth control to even for our kids.  We spend our tax money on NPR and PBS that promote bigger government along with other progressive causes.  Some estimate that up to 50% of population are now dependent to one degree or another on some sort of unearned dole from the federal government.  This does not include social security benefits that recipients have contributed to for 30 or 40 years of their lives – which, by the way, are in jeopardy because Congress has repeatedly redirected those earned benefits toward the myriad of incentive-destroying government programs.  We are one election away from reaching the electoral “tipping point” where welfare handout-demanding voters will triumph in every election until society turns into a human version of a parasitoid that consumes its host.

The silence of the pulpits.  I have heard many suggests that the pulpits of the churches in America are a hopeless cause – that there needs to be a “bottom up” reassertion of Biblical morality and Christian ideals from parishioners.  Most priests, pastors, and ministers have no interest in the truth and relevance of God’s word.  They are preoccupied with being “nice”, helping their flocks to feel good about themselves, being a “go along to get along” part of our putrefying culture, and increasing attendance for the primary purpose of increasing revenues and payrolls.  The promotion of moral principles is pushed to the back of the bus.  Likewise, theats from the invading and subverting intentions of Islam as described HERE are also ignored so as not to offend anyone.

There is little doubt in my mind that our nation is accelerating in an irreversible direction that will ultimately lead to a place few of us can imagine, anticipate, or survive; a combination of Sodom (personal immorality) and Babylon (government replacing God):  Sodalon.

God has demonstrated time and time again that His people often have to be brought low before they can rise up again.

If I were to pick a song that depicted our hapless direction it is this [90 Miles an Hour Down a Dead End Street]:

His “affair” is our amorality and self-absorption. The results are the same.

The Throckmorton Agenda: Bashing Barton

Anyone familiar with Christian literature has heard of Thomas Nelson Publishers (TNP).  And anyone familiar with the Christian role in American history has heard of David Barton. 

The first paragraph of Wikipedia says of Barton:

“David Barton (born 1954) is an American evangelical Christian minister,^[1] conservative activist, and best-selling author. He founded WallBuilders, a Texas-based organization which advocates the view that U.S. constitutional separation of church and state was not supported by the founding fathers.^[2][3]

The next paragraph of the Wiki article cites Barton as guilty of “historical revisionism, pseudoscholarship and outright falsehoods.”  These criticisms started over six years ago. 

I looked up the references to those accusations and guess what.  They are quotes from Arlen Specter (who proposed the repeal of the “defense of marriage act in 2009), The People for the American Way, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and get this: Paul Harvey.  Not the Paul Harvey we all knew and loved, but a left-wing, counter-traditionalist, college professor who is the ideological opposite of David Barton.  Here is a quote of Harvey’s from “Religious Dispatches'” magazine against the observation that Obama is the most anti-Christian president we’ve had:

News flash: we have plenty of arguments about religion and politics all through American history, including now, but there is no “war on religion” going on. Indeed, as the excellent historian John Fea has recently explained, Obama may be the most explicitly Christian president in American history…”

So, in essence, we have the revisionist left accusing David Barton of revisionism. 

Now enter Warren Throckmorton, a college professor of psychology.  He has taken up the cause of dissing the accuracy of Barton’s latest book, “The Jefferson Lies” published, until August 8th, by Thomas Nelson.  Warren is joined by several others of the revisionist left who prefer to scrub American history of its Christian roots.  HERE is Throckmorton’s critique.

These revisionist criticism of Barton’s latest book were enough for Thomas Nelson Publishers to revert publishing rights back to Barton and recall all TNP-published “The Jefferson Lies” books from local bookstores.

Needless to say, David Barton is defending his work.  A portion of his defense is on a series of videos HERE.  There is certain to be more to come.

Among Barton’s many defenses, are these:

1. Thomas Nelson Publishers, who also edited the book, eliminated roughly 20% of the total manuscript submitted by Barton, much of which provided substantiating references to many of the facts being disputed by the critics.
2. The critiques ignore the complex laws of Jefferson’s days which made it nearly impossible to free the slaves he inherited as a teenager due to the taxes and bonds required by the government for freed slaves, compounded by Jefferson’s relative poverty.
3. The critics have their own agenda which causes them to shade the facts and revise history to support their own preconceived ideology.   Common to most of them is the recurrent theme of liberal or apostate Christianity, a progressive, atheistic political bias, or a homosexual, counter-morality bias.  Each of these predispositions attempt to justify their existence by devoting themselves to discredit those who promote the idea of Biblical moral absolutes.  Moral standards, not too oddly, cause them a degree of discomfort.

Throckmorton has backed off of his former position promoting “gay reparative therapy”, a method of counseling homosexuals toward a normal gender orientation.  His current position is explained HERE.  While he **claims** to be a conservative Christian, he certainly does not allow his “conservative Christian” beliefs get in the way of his professional practice.  In proclaiming he is NOT a gay reparative therapist, he states “My approach is to ask clients to explain the problem as they see it, clarify their objectives and then pursue those objectives by whatever means we agree are consistent with their values.”  In essence, he is now “value neutral.” 

His change of attitude is due in part to what is happeining to many Christian evangelical leaders:  They are suffering from a watering down of their former faith -  jettisoning their prior orthodox Christian beliefs to a more liberal, quasi-Christian position.  In short, Throckmorton is in the process of separating himself from key doctrines of traditional Christianity and Biblical interpretation and filling the void with a bigger dose of his profession value-neutral psychotherapeutic dogma.  This explains to me why he has devoted so much of his energy on David Barton. 

To preserve his own secular professional paradigm, he has to engage in historical revisionism of the faith of America’s founding fathers.  So now he has devoted a major chunk of his life to discrediting anyone who portrays that our nation’s founders were Christian, either orthodox or nominal.  His professional allegiance now outstrips his Christian allegiance.  He has found an avenue for doing this through David Barton.  Yes, I am not a psychotherpist, just as Throckmorton is not a historian.  I admit we are both motivated to exceed our skill sets to further our own agenda

So, in reaction to all of the above, below is my email to Thomas Nelson Publishers, and their reply back to me.

Dear Thomas Nelson Publishers:

I find I must avoid purchase of Thomas Nelson books in the future for one or more of the following reasons:

1)  Unlike most major publishers, you have failed to vet the accuracy of the books you publish on American history, subjecting them to withering criticism from those not even versed in the field of American history; or

2)  You chose to eliminate 20% of the detail of an author's factual submission and supporting documentation from the publication during your editing process, and later throw the author of the book under the bus in response to criticism of the lack of substantiation in the book that you edited;

3)  You engage in the equivalent of BOOK BURNING by recalling the sale of a book by our nation’s premier author of the history of America’s founding fathers in response to complaints from those who have an opposing agenda and moral compass.

I find your company to have an intolerant and disrespectful attitude toward David Barton, that you breached your contract with him, and that I will be glad to see his new publisher become Mercury Arts.

I await your boilerplate reply to the above problems I note with your firm.

Sincerely,
Gerald Mucci
Former customer

Here is the boilerplate reply from Thomas Nelson:

[#FMH-490-33938]: Sloppy publishing or...

FROM:

• Rick Desmond

TO:

• gfmucci@yahoo.com

Message flagged

Friday, August 17, 2012 9:43 AM

Thank you for your inquiry and comments regarding The Jefferson Lies.
Because we have reverted the publishing rights back to Mr. Barton and no longer have ties to publishing that book, we can no longer comment or discuss the book, other than give you the company statement that we have already released publicly.

Below is the press release that was issued last week regarding the subject.

During the week of July 30th, Thomas Nelson made the decision to cease publication and distribution of The Jefferson Lies. The company was contacted by a number of people expressing concerns about the book. We took all of those concerns seriously, tried to sort out matters of opinion or interpretation, and in the course of our review learned that there were some historical details included in the book that were not adequately supported. Because of these deficiencies we decided that it was in the best interest of our readers to cease its publication and distribution.

With warmest regards.
Help Request Details

---

Help Request ID: FMH-490-33938
Department: General
Type: Question
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Support Center: http://help.thomasnelson.com/index.php?

Yes, I’m sure the “regards” are very warm.

Obama proudly points to Jefferson’s Qur’an…

During the recent Iftar dinner celebrating the end of the Ramadan fast, Obama displayed Thomas Jefferson’s Qur’an, as if to suggest that Jefferson was a Muslim sympathizer too.

Hey, even I own a Qur’an.  And I am anything but a sympathizer.  In fact, I think that Islam is a spawn of Satan, an evil that rivals Fascism and Charles Manson and the Face Eater rolled into one – except perhaps a bit more deceptive and clever and backed up by obedience to a perceived god, Allah.

The truth is, Jefferson probably felt the same way after he read the Qur’an and gained more of an understanding of the Islamic ideology than most in Washington today.

What was Jefferson’s purpose in owning a Qur’an?  Here is the rest of the story from Atlas Shrugs:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/08/president-taqiya-misrepresents-jeffersons-quran-at-white-house-iftar-dinner.html

Accusing while practicing…

Joe Biden recently accused “the right” of ads promoted by right wing ideologues.  See HERE.

Bill O’Reilly often complains of “ideologues”, both right and left.

Those who defend the perverse behaviors of themselves or others accuse others of “judging.”

How ironic.  Biden is demonstrating that he is an ideologue, too, by maintaining the ideology that accuses others of being ideologues.

O’Reilly is being an “anti-ideologue” ideologue by accusing everyone else of being an ideologue. 

And the perverts are judging their “accusers” of being judgmental.   Here is where the old playground mantra “if I am, what does that make you” gains some credibility.

What do these three examples have in common?  They are all guilty of being exactly what they are accusing the other of being guilty of.

Instead of focusing on the issues, e.g. the value and benefits of varying political philosophies or moral standards, the accuser attacks with some inane, broad-brush personal attack using words like “ideologue” or “judgmental.”  These words easily bounce right back and apply to the accuser.  I think this is what intellectuals call ‘ad hominem’ attacks: 

1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.

2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

From Dictionary.com

Such attacks are a specialty of the left and progressives.  To avoid revealing the true agenda of their own position as well as avoid  discussion of the broader values at stake, they resort to words like, “ideologue”, “killing grandma”, and “insensitive” that attempt to personally discredit their opposition.  Sure, others do this occasionally to some degree, too.  But the true experts at it come from the left. 

Can I be so judgmental as to suggest that they are “leftist ideologues?”

MSM going into bias overdrive…

No surprise here, except that it is so brazen.

Not 24 hours after the announcement of the selection of Paul Ryan as VP on  the Romney ticket and the  main stream  media (MSM), aka main-socialist media, comes out with scare tactics mimicking Chicago politics fear mongering, innuendo and lies . 

The latest example of this fear mongering was displayed by CBS this evening.  Their main storyline depicted the purpose of the  separate campaign tracks of Romney and Ryan over the next several days – Romney in Florida, Ryan in Iowa – as being to avoid discussion of alleged “massive Medicare cuts to Florida seniors” that they erroneously attribute to the Ryan plan.  Aside from the overt bias of CBS’s evening news, HERE is Bob Schieffer casting the first stone.  And HERE is where CBS’s “60 Minutes” edited out Ryan’s example of his Florida mom.  From Hotair:

“This is the part that readers claim was edited out of the broadcast, which if true would be journalistic malpractice:

Ryan added, ‘My mom is a Medicare senior in Florida. Our point is we need to preserve their benefits, because government made promises to them that they’ve organized their retirements around. In order to make sure we can do that, you must reform it for those of us who are younger. And we think these reforms are good reforms. That have bipartisan origins. They started from the Clinton commission in the late ’90s.’”

The media are going full hog in portraying the Republicans as destroying the health and future of seniors.  But the media FAIL to recognize that the Ryan plan doesn’t touch anyone over the age of 55 AND is designed to SAVE Medicare.  They fail to inform voters that it is Obama-care and existing federal polices that will DESTROY any hope of sustaining Medicare beyond several more years.

Obama is right in one thing:  There are two distinct visions for America:

The Obama vision is to  increase government involvement and coercive policies in as many areas as possible while raising taxes and reducing personal responsibility and  initiative. 

The Romney/Ryan vision is to decrease government involvement and coercive policies in as many areas as possible while reducing taxes  and enhancing personal responsibility and initiative. 

It can’t get any clearer than that.

Those who favor the Obama plan have the following personal attributes:

Those who -

• Have grown accustomed to strong unions with their unsustainable, bankrupting benefit packages;
• Have reached a low grade comfort level in reliance on government handouts for food stamps, unemployment compensation, housing assistance and other tax-payer funded freebies that reduce or eliminate motivation to pursue meaningful work;
• Remain clueless about the founding principles of our nation grounded in personal initiative, freedom from government interference and coercion, and individual liberties;
• Believe it is the responsibility of government to provide for the needs AND wants of individuals BEYOND that which parents, non-profits, businesses, and individuals currently provide;
• Are oblivious to what is going on because of their aversion to “politics” and current events.  In other words, they are content to remain ignorant.

Those who favor the Romney/Ryan plan have the following personal attributes:

Those who -

• Understand that continuing on the current tax and spend course is unsustainable, leading to catastrophic monetary devaluation and Greek/Italy/Spain types of social upheaval;
• Realize that the level of government paternalism imposed on society over the past several decades robs individuals of personal initiative and robs businesses of innovation that would otherwise enhance the productivity and competitiveness of our nation;
• Believe it is better to promote individual responsibility for the needs and wants of EVERY class of society; parents for their children, brother for their brother, neighbors for their neighbors, churches and synagogues for their communities, businesses for their cities, rather than relying on or allowing government in these domains;
• Understand that government involvement in personal lives is coercive and inefficient and robs individuals of freedoms and initiative;
• Agree that the best government is that closest to the individual:  first self (personal morality and self-discipline); then family; then neighborhood’ then community; then city; then county; then region; then state; and THEN the Federal Government.
• Appreciate that the intended constitutional role of the Federal Government was to address matters that were essentially federal in nature:  national defense, interstate commerce (e.g. interstate highway system and commerce law), currency, postal service, international treaties and trade.  The Federal Government, long ago, has usurped the roles of the states, counties, and individuals.

It is maddening to me to see so many otherwise “intelligent” people favor government paternalism and coercion and failing to understand the benefits of a culture that elevates the value of individual  motivation, effort, resourcefulness, perseverance, and success.

How do I know this?  From personal experience and observation.  I am typical of the majority of us.  There have been times in my life when I looked for the easier way via handout from someone - government, merchant, friend or family – and then took it for granted.  This is human nature.   It has been so easy to be lulled into a comfort zone with handouts, loans, gifts - whatever you want to call them – and expect them to continue with little commensurate effort on my part.    Sadly, that’s what our government has enabled too many millions of Americans to do.  The damage is greater than the benefit.  It’s taken me a couple of decades to realize this.  What can I say, I’m a slow learner.

We did not become a great nation these past 200 years through the top down policies and dictates of government.  It was through the bottom up unity and inspiration of the people who shared generally common purpose and values.  It is common purpose and values that must be restored to reignite the energy the socialist-style Obama administration believes comes from government – aka “you didn’t build your business – someone else did” referring to government.  No Barack, government is in the way.  It needs to be cleared out.

Great leadership is required.  The only hope for this that I see is in the Romney/Ryan ticket. 

Ryan as VP: Preliminary thoughts…

After an hour or two for the news of Ryan’s selection as VP to digest, here are my initial thoughts:

1.  I am pleasantly surprised because the selection was NOT one of the top 3 who I thought were too bland, too inexperienced or too moderate.

2.  The ticket now has 1 Mormon and 1 Catholic – an interesting combination.

3.  The “media” and the left will demean, marginalize, and criticize whoever Romney picked, even if it was God; ESPECIALLY if it was God.

4.  The focus on this country’s material need at the moment is the economy.  Ryan is the best pick to address and focus on this need.

5.  Ryan is not well known for ANY position on Islam or on foreign policy.  This is something to watch and may be a weakness in the ticket.  But compared to those currently in power, it is not relevant.

6.  I don’t know how faithful of a Catholic Ryan will be:  One who says “I am personally against abortion; but hey, if that’s what the people want I’ll support it” or one who says” “I am personally against abortion, that is against all morality and human decency and I will do everything I can to defund it and marginalize it.  Romney is already caving on the Homo issue.  Will Ryan follow?  I don’t know.

7.  Ryan will help solidify the conservative base, and he will attract thinking independents.

8.  Neither candidate is aware of the fact that this nation’s problems are part of a larger spiritual battle.  Politics and national policy may ultimately have the effect of spitting into the wind unless a Godly spiritual renewal overtakes the current momentum toward amorality and faithlessness.

Neil Boortz and Jamie Dupree: 2 jokes on us

From the Department of Moral Equivalence*…

I inadvertently tuned into the Neil Boortz show today because he is on the same station Rush Limbaugh is on.  Neil’s  shtick is his attempt to make outrageous and morally offensive comments based on his libertarianism without being fined by the FCC or losing stations.  Conservatives, especially social conservatives, might mistake Boortz as an ideological ally.  He is anything but.

His sidekick, Washington insider reporter Jamie Dupree is the perfect Boortz straight man. 

Here’s the thing.    Dupree was discussing his career as a reporter in DC and, especially, how “objective” and “neutral” he can be so that he can retain access to provide the Washington goings on through the media. 

One comment Dupree made was particularly disarming and exhibited his self-perception of supreme superiority over the biased masses.  He declared words to the effect of:  “Yes, I’ve been able to retain my neutrality on Washington politics, siding neither with the left nor the right, while those who consume the news, the general public, are the ones full of their political biases.”

He continued, “I even had someone accuse me of practicing moral equivalency.”   Nooooooo!  Tell me it ain’t so, Dupree!

Hey, that “someone” could have been me HERE.

Boortz quickly came to his defense with “You don’t believe that’s true, do you?”  Jamie: “Of course not.”

If Dupree doesn’t practice moral equivalency, I don’t write blogs.

Point one:  Anyone who believes they are “neutral” in their view and depiction of political events is a fool and is self-deceived.  We all have our biases.

Point two:  Anyone who believes they are “neutral” and its only other people who are biased one way or the other believe themselves to be morally superior (even though they disavow the concept of morality) to all others and exaggerate their self importance.  Psychopaths often exhibit this trait.

There is no “truth” for Dupree because “truth” is just someone’s opinion.  And everyone has an opinion and each opinion is valid to someone.   There is no truth worth proclaiming rises above the noise of anyone’s opinion in the world of Dupree.  Yes, Jamie, that is “moral equivalence.”

Boortz and Dupree:  Portraying the perfect examples of “moral equivalence”, aka “amorality.”  That is also the essence of extreme libertarianism.

_______________

*  Also known as “moral relativity or relativism”:  Denial of the existence of any absolute truth or rejection of the idea of a “best” position, answer or solution on any subject or topic.  Everyone’s opinion is as good as another’s.

Romney refuses to discuss key cultural issues…

 

When asked to comment on both the Chick Fil A first amendments rights controversy, and Michelle Bachmann’s concern about Muslim Brotherhood influence in the Obama administration, this is what he had to say:

“I’m not going to tell other people what things they talk about.  Those things are not part of my campaign.”

Given his speech to the NAACP, I thought Romney had more courage than that.  If not a lack of courage, three more possibilities come to mind:

1) He sees both issues as “no-win” political lightening rods – his application of pure political motive to avoid discussion,

2) He was ignorant of both issues, though not likely, or

3) For this event he wanted to stay focused on his “jobs” message.

The reasons for his silence might be better diagnosed if the issues were separated.

I can understand his avoiding discussion of Bachmann’s concern about Muslim Brotherhood influence.  His ignorance of Islam and their front groups causes his lack of concern; he is naively more in tune with Obama than those like Bachmann who see a problem.  And, like most politicians, he fears Muslim/main stream media accusations of “Islamophobia”, or worse, “McCarthyism”, although as it turns out, McCarthy was right.

On the Chick Fil A controversy, I am sincerely puzzled why he did not overtly take sides on this one.  It could be he is excessively concerned that he might be too closely associated with the views and actions of his Mormon church - their pumping millions of dollars into California’s anti-gay marriage legislation.

Could he be afraid of losing the gay vote?  He never had it.

Showing an amazing lack of conviction on critical issues.

Contrast this non-feasance with Allen West’s comments on Chick Fil A:

Illegal to finish raw materials in US

Another way to screw the American worker…

Gibson Guitars was fined $300,000 because it imported raw materials from India to enable workmen in the US to craft the materials into finger boards here.  No violation would have existed if Gibson contracted with overseas workers to finish the material, IN INDIA and THEN import the finished product.

This is one screwed up piece of legislation and a prime example of how our over-reaching environmental policies are strangling our economy.  And this is an environmental policy that does not even address the environment in the US.  It allegedly protects the environment in foreign countries – that is, unless foreign workers also finish the product over there.  Then it apparently doesn’t matter.

My informed opinion is that if the Justice Department proposed this enforcement in a Romney administration, such enforcement would have never occurred and legislation would have been introduced to eliminate that job killing piece of United Nations inspired one-world legislation.

Since when are we beholden to other nation’s environmental/job promoting policies at the expense of workers in the US?

HERE is the complete story.

EMP attack more likely than Cat 5 Hurricane ripping through central Florida…

I’ve lived in Florida for over 55 yeas and experienced many hurricanes.  
While Category 5 hurricanes are rare, they do occur.  Can a Cat 5 rip through central Florida?  Certainly.  Do I thnk it will happen?  Not likely.

What I think is more likely than that is an Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) attack on the US by an Islamic nation or a sympathetic Islamic organization.  High tech is not required.  Means, motive, and opportunity are required.  Current technology, existing rockets and available nukes, make it possible.  Motive certainly exists since we are Islam’s “great Satan.”  The opporutnity has to be just right, but how do when know?
Take a look at the following article to see how this event has a better than remote chance of playing out, and its consequences:
Courtesy ow World Net Daily:  http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/emp-would-give-america-government-by-disaster/

LOW-TECH EMP TO SEND U.S. BACK TO 'STONE AGE'?

Experts: Attack with 50-year-old SCUD would turn America into 'government by disaster'

Published: 2 days ago
by STEVE ELWARTEmail | Archive
Steve Elwart, P.E. is the Senior Research Analyst with the Koinonia Institute and a Subject Matter Expert for the Department of Homeland Security. He can be contacted at steve.elwart@studycenter.com.More ↓

Eid-ul-Fitr, the Muslim holiday celebrating the end of Ramadan, was an appropriate setting for a panel discussion today on the threat of an Electromagnetic Pulse, or EMP, attack on the United States.

The live event, hosted by Florida-based The United West, was held to raise awareness of the looming threat.

The warning presented was startling: A crude nuclear device placed on top of a 50-year-old SCUD missile and launched by a tramp steamer could cause the collective collapse of the nation’s power grid in a matter of minutes.

It is estimated that Iran could launched such an attack in just a few years, and it would leave the U.S. essentially in the “Stone Age.”

Tom Trento, founder of The United West, called an EMP attack the equivalent of an “Electronic Armageddon.”

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, both believe that the coming of the last Islamic messiah, the Shiites’ 12th Imam Mahdi, is near and that Iran is called upon to bring about his arrival.

They believe Iran must lead the way for a worldwide Islamic revolution. Leaders in the Iranian government have stated that the Islamic revolution is moving forward, advanced by the Arab Spring, and will reach the shores of America for an eventual takeover.
Intelligence sources have indicated Iran is within two years of bringing the revolution to the United States in the form of an EMP attack.

Ambassador R. James Woolsey, former director of the CIA during the Clinton administration, told the conference that an Iranian nuclear attack would not have to be sophisticated or complicated. He cited the estimated damage from a crude device mounted atop a SCUD and launched from somewhere near the U.S. shores.

R. James Woolsey
The missile “need not be accurate, it just needs altitude” to be successful. He went on to say that the effects of EMP are known, because the nation already has experienced them.
“Starfish Prime” was a high-altitude nuclear test conducted by the U.S. on July 9, 1962, before the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban treaty banned nuclear weapons testing in the atmosphere.

A two megaton nuclear device approximately 100 times the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was launched via a Thor rocket and exploded 250 miles above a point 19 miles southwest of Johnston Island in the Pacific Ocean.
The results included surprises and raised still-unanswered questions.
William Graham, another member of the panel, said the EMP was 100 times larger than predicted and no one understood why.

William Graham
Sophisticated electronic equipment on the island of Oahu, almost 900 miles away, was severely damaged, but vacuum-tube based devices were unharmed. Over 300 streetlights stopped working, burglar alarms were activated and one telephone company’s microwave link was destroyed.

“The street lights on Ferdinand Street in Manoa and Kawainui Street in Kailua went out at the instant the bomb went off, according to several persons who called police last night,” as reported July 9, 1962, in the Honolulu Advertiser.

The same article reported that a brilliant flash turned Hawaii’s night into day, with the “spectacular pyrotechnic aftermath” lasting seven minutes.

“It was like turning on all the lights all over the Hawaiian Islands for a super-super athletic contest.”

A city-county streetlight department official in Honolulu also attributed blown circuit fuses in nine areas to the energy released from the bomb.

Today’s worldwide nuclear arsenal is much more powerful.

According to the Brookings Institution, nuclear bombs have been constructed that range in size of 0.02 megatons to 15 megatons, seven times larger than the Starfish Prime warhead.
Iran would not need anything nearly as large as a 15 megaton bomb to destroy the U.S. infrastructure. A nuclear device built using 1940s technology would suffice. Iran’s nuclear program is already capable of building such a device.

Woolsey said, “All this discussion about whether [the Iranians] have a (nuclear) program ignores the fact that in enriching uranium up to 20 percent (purity), you have done 85-90 percent of the work you need.”

He went on to note that when Iranians say they are not interested in nuclear weapons, they are “lying through their teeth.”

With a nuclear device in hand, either produced locally or purchased from North Korea, all Iran would need is a delivery system.

As Woolsey noted, a SCUD would do the job.

Since an EMP only affects electronics within its line of sight, the higher the detonation, the larger the affected area. A device detonated 100 miles over Indianapolis would put 70 percent of the population of the United States in the dark.

Such a missile could be launched from a fishing boat off the East Coast.

The Aegis missile system is designed to only fire at a target at mid-course or in its terminal, or reentry, phase.

Woolsey claims President Obama has made it harder to design the missile system to strike targets in the ascent phase due to promises he has made to the Soviet Union.

Graham, a member of the Department of Defense’s Defense Science Board and President Reagan’ science adviser, saw firsthand the effects of an EMP on critical infrastructure.
In 1962, Graham went on active duty to look at the data generated from the last of the above-ground nuclear tests. He concluded that an “EMP super-weapon” would not need to generate a large blast. It could be a small weapon that would effectively neutralize conventional forces.

He concluded that an EMP attack would result in “Government by Disaster.”
At the conference, Fritz Ermarth, former chairman of the National Intelligence Council, said EMP has changed the face of modern warfare.

“While the Cold War strategy of blasting cities is still in portfolio,” EMP is getting new emphasis. A major advantage they have is that they are cheap and easy to produce. He went on to say that because of its lack of preparation, the United States is way behind in terms of defense against an EMP threat.

He claims that the U.S. is “tremendously vulnerable to catastrophic blackmail.”
Ermarth painted the following scenario: President Ahmadinejad calls the United States president and says Iran has enough nuclear material to make several bombs and they have deployed them in ships and trucks around the country. He then goes on to say that Iran intends to destroy Israel and then invade Saudi Arabia. He threatens the American president that if the United States responds, Iran will launch its missiles. Ahmadinejad claims that at least two or three missiles will get through.

Even without a demonstration, Iran’s threat has to be taken seriously, he said.
The president would ask his advisers, “Is it a plausible threat?” To which the advisers would have to say “yes,” given the state of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program and access to ballistic delivery systems.

This would also hold true for any bioweapon which could be transmitted by air.
“What do you think the U.S. will do?”

Ermarth concluded his remarks by saying, “Don’t discount coercion and blackmail as a weapon.”

Ambassador Henry F. Cooper, director of the Department of Defense’s Strategic Defense Initiative Organization under President Reagan, concluded his own remarks by saying that EMP is an “existential problem,” and it is “ludicrous that our representatives are not providing comprehensive defenses that are needed.”
______________________
My own observation is this.  Just as we might prepare for the remote possibility of a category 5 hurricane, we are capable of preparing for an EMP attack that may even be more likely.   Water storage and filtering capabilities, food storage, sanitation, and personal defense are all measure we are perfectly capable of taking.  We should not wait for the government to save us.  We are capable of preparing for our own benefit and with our own resources.

Chick Fil A, amorality, and “tolerance”…

What were the leaders of Chicago thinking? 

In the name of “tolerance” for the amoral demands of homosexuals, Chicago’s leaders became intolerant of a company (Chick Fil A) expressing their support for centuries-old traditional Biblical morality.  This behavior is not new among the liberal amoralists among us.  It has been building.  And  this demonstration of “the Chicago way” portends much more to come nationwide.

I am in the midst of reading a new book titled “The Intolerance of Tolerance” by D. A. Carson.  Carson defines two different versions of “tolerance”:  the old version and the new.

The “old” version:

If you disagree with my beliefs, you believe I still have  the right to them unencumbered by your actions or that of government.

The "”new”version:

If you disagree with my beliefs that conflict with your version of “tolerance”, you don’t believe I even have the right to have a different view.  I am subject to ridicule and persecution, and possibly legal sanction.  This is intolerance of tolerance.

What has changed over the last decade or two?  It is the belief that morality is no longer a value to be tolerated.  We must not ever say that anyone is “wrong.”  Tolerance has become a higher value than morality.  Tolerance now requires intolerance toward any value that claims moral absolutes.  What progressives do not tolerate any longer is traditional moral values.  Such values are considered “intolerant” and “bigoted.”  The highest “morality” now is “tolerance.”   This version of “tolerance” has become an “oxymoron.”

The “new tolerance” extends to domestic security threats as well.  Islam is a legitimate domestic security threat.  But those who express this legitimate concern as Michelle Bachmann recently has done is not tolerated.   See HERE.  Her informed opinion conflicts with the view of “tolerance” held by our current government leaders and most media.  So her views are castigated and marginalized.

The root of this twisted version of “tolerance” is the relatively recent view of our prevailing culture that truth is relative.  If there is no absolute truth, everything can be tolerated.  There is no room for intolerance of anything because everything is worthy of tolerance – everyone’s view of truth is equally valid and equally tolerated, except those who hold that there is absolute truth.

Those of us who are especially at risk in this new upside-down world are those Christians who hold to the truths of the Bible – especially Bible inerrancy.  Shame on us!  We interpret God at His word, as billions of souls have for over two thousand years.  Man, are we out of touch.

Or is it the other way around. 

The “Stand to Reason” website has a lot to say on this topic.

Obama’s Islamism tips scales in the Middle East

Are we at all surprised that Obama is supporting the “opposition” in Syria?  Is anyone concerned that this will turn out just like Egypt, with the result being much worse for US interests than the status quo?  Do we not yet “get it” that Middle East uprisings aren’t comprised of little George Washingtons  fighting for liberty.  They are comprised of little Osama Bin Ladens fighting for Islamism and Sharia and the annihilation of Israel.

Before Obama was elected president there was a delicate balance of power in the Middle East based on decades of prior US policy. Now, with Obama's undeniable, overt pro-Islamist presence, he has used US intelligence, diplomatic, and military resources – and his own pro-Islamic persona - to upend that delicate balance in favor of Islamist (Brotherhood and Sharia) governance in opposition to US and Israel interests.

We have known for some time (I have known from the time I read  his book "Audacity of Hope" five years ago) that he was an Islamist.)   I wrote last month, HERE, that he supports the Brotherhood in Syria.  We all should know this from his action in assisting the ouster of the Egyptian president Mubarak who was much more of an ally than foe.

And THIS is the reason why his administration goes along with his Islamicism.  We are infiltrated up to our gills with sedition-minded Muslims in the Obama administration and it seems few of our leaders really care.

Obama’s middle name really should have tipped us off.  He wasn’t even a Trojan Horse.  He was a Trojan on the outside in full daylight  and we totally ignored it.  Obama is one hell of a seditious Islamist.  But, as I said before, our nation is getting what it deserves for its gullible and lazy ignorance.

HERE is more from one who is more expert on these matters than I, Robert Spencer.