Vice President Joe Biden was very clear about the Swine Flu pandemic; "I wouldn't go anywhere in a closed area."
I don't know why that is so hard for the press to understand. It took the White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs to explain it today.
"Well, uh, what the V.P., er, meant to say was uh, if you are, uh, feeling, uh, sick, you should, you know, uh, go see a doctor or something. Weren't you, uh, listening? Why can't you dummies, er, ever get it right?"
In this clip (O'Reilly Factor - Miller Time) yesterday, Dennis caught my attention when he talked about how we conservatives must develop some RHINO SKIN.
This President is showing true leadership. He is taking the bull (pun intended) by the horns. As another president once said, “The buck stops here,” so Obama is assuming personal responsibility to curtail runaway spending and massive debt. He is going to save our economy with real fiscal responsibility.
Not by employing meaningless, symbolic gestures like that last Democrat president. Does anyone remember when Clinton tried to convince our children that the nation's budget deficits were everyone’s responsibility? Does anyone remember how thousands of school children were encouraged to conduct penny drives and to raid their piggy banks and voluntarily send their change to Washington? Remember how proud those ignorant kids were for doing their part to "save the country?" Do you remember how their liberal teachers encouraged them by saying, "every little bit helps?" What a bunch of happycrap.
Well, not this president. Obama is rising to the occasion and demanding that His cabinet bite the bullet and make massive cuts. Atta boy, Chief. That’s what responsible leadership looks like. That’s true statesmanship. That is what we expect from the greatest leader in the history of the world.
One hundred million dollars! Say that over to yourself a few times. "ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS!" Look at that in numerals; $100,000,000.00.
That's how much He is demanding in budget cuts. Isn’t that encouraging? I know, it is a big number. It’s hard to visualize just how much that is. It is hard to visualize how much of an impact that will make on our country’s deficit. It is hard to imagine just how brave and daring and drastic those cuts will be to our national budget.
If you are still having trouble visualizing how great this is, this short video clip should help put things into perspective.
Is that the "change" He promised?
Don't you feel a lot better now?
Come to think of it, all the change collected by the children for Clinton's budget deficit might have more substance.
This wasn't the first teleprompter gaffe and I'm sure it won't be the last but there is something about this that reminds me of that moment in The Wizard Of Oz when the great and powerful wizard was discovered behind the curtain to be just a weak, frail man with a giant ego.
"I do not come to this pulpit hoping that perhaps somebody will, of his own free will, return to Christ. My hope lies in another quarter. I hope that my Master will lay hold of some of them and say, 'you are mine, and you shall be mine. I claim you for myself.' My hope arises from the freeness of grace and not from the freedom of the will."
It’s me again. I see where you are cracking down on your administration to cut spending at all levels. Atta boy; give it to 'em. You have rightfully acknowledged that most individuals, families, and businesses in America must tighten their belts during these hard times and that a responsible government must lead the way.
I have been trying to convince my friend, who is living beyond his means, that he must take personal responsibility to make some meaningful sacrifices. He and his wife are struggling to make ends meet; their monthly obligations are about $1,500.00 more than their income since his wife was laid off and his salary has been reduced. So, by following your lead to cut one hundred million dollars (approximately one twentieth of one percent) from the federal budget, they have decided to deprive themselves of one candy bar per month thereby proportionately cutting their expenditures by 75 cents per month. That’s a good start, don’t you think. Thank you for your example and courageous leadership; I feel a lot better now.
On another note, I do appreciate your recent willingness to listen to suggestions for cutting expenditures. I have a great idea for saving millions (maybe billions) of dollars. Here it is:
Decriminalize the printing of counterfeit money. Think about it. The savings to law enforcement agencies, the courts, and the penal institutions would be mind-boggling. But the greater savings would occur by shutting down the government presses and closing the mint. Why should the government spend so much money printing bogus, worthless paper money when there are so many talented people out here who can do it for free? Private businesses would benefit too. Think about how much they would save if they didn't have to buy all those little brown marking pens to test for funny money.
You are welcome to use this idea and take credit for it as your very own. You don’t have to thank me for it; I just want to do my part to help.
Today is income tax day and I was just lamenting how much of my earnings are extorted from me to be wasted by my tyrannical government. Other than the TEA Parties, the one bright spot in the news was the report about President Obama filing his personal tax return and how much he paid. I thought about how he is leading by example. Hopefully you and the rest of his cabinet and top appointees will follow his example and PAY YOUR TAXES (including penalties).
Now I have heard that you have been quoted to say that you don’t understand the tax code so let me see if I can help you with this simple little, easy-to-understand formula.
Enter the amount of money you earned last year $________________
There is so much that I want to say to you and so little time. But today, I want to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt sorrow for the way so many mean-spirited conservatives are shamefully trying to make some big thing about your posture before King Abdullah.
I watched both video clips several times and, I have to admit that, even though you seemed to be hinged at the waist, your torso was parallel with the floor, and your face was close enough to lick his shoe, that doesn’t prove that you bowed to Saudi-Arabia’s evil king. I mean, who am I to judge?
On your behalf, your spokespersons have issued an official statement declaring that it was NOT a bow; that you, in fact, were simply looking for the king's hand. That’s a good enough explanation for me, man. I believe you.
And I also believe that O. J. did not kill his wife, that Bill did not have sexual relations with that woman, that the world is flat, and that, even though he looks and walks and talks like one, Donald is not a duck.
Respectfully Yours,
Ralph M. Petersen
(emailed to the White House at 8:22 AM, April 10, 2009)
Here it is folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is already laid and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many of these you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did. Please send this to everyone you can. It will come up for a vote, and it might even be a secret vote if Madame Pelosi has her way, and then it will be a done deal.
Concerning your right to own a gun, remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.
Subject: Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin, author of Gun Laws of America. Jan 5, 2008.
Under the Bush administration, even when they knew it had no chance of passage, Democrats crafted HR 1022, 110th Congress that now serves as a framework for the new list the Brady's plan to introduce shortly. It's horrific. They're going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They've made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states' rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment.
Here is the Democrat's current gun-ban-list proposal (the final list will be worse):
Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
M1 Carbine
Sturm Ruger Mini-14
AR-15
Bushmaster XM15
Armalite M15
AR-10
Thompson 1927
Thompson M1
AK
AKM
AKS
AK-47
AK-74
ARM
MAK90
NHM 90
NHM 91
SA 85
SA 93
VEPR
Olympic Arms PCR
AR70
Calico Liberty
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU
Fabrique National FN/FAL
FN/LAR, or FNC
Hi-Point20 Carbine
HK-91
HK-93
HK-94
HK-PSG-1
Thompson 1927 Commando
Kel-Tec Sub Rifle
Saiga
SAR-8
SAR-4800
SKS with detachable magazine
SLG 95
SLR 95 or 96
Steyr AU
Tavor
Uzi
Galil and Uzi Sporter
Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz)
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110
MAC-10
MAC-11, or MPA3
Olympic Arms OA
TEC-9
TEC-DC9
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10
Uzi
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG
SPAS 12 or LAW 12
Striker 12
Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
Any semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
a folding or telescoping stock
a threaded barrel
a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below)
a forward grip or a barrel shroud
Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles)
Any semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has:
a second pistol grip
a threaded barrel
a barrel shroud or can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip
a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds
Any semiautomatic shotgun with:
a folding or telescoping stock
a pistol grip (see definition below)
the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds
a revolving cylinder. ames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.
Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will:
Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any "semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General." Note that Obama's pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan.15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.
In making this determination, the bill says, "there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event." In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.
The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn't have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose -- is that devious or what? And of course, "sporting purpose" is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.
The Second Amendment is pretty clear. It is short and to the point. It says what it says and it means what it means. It doesn’t need to be interpreted or reinvented. The Second Amendment is NOT about sport shooting, target practice, or hunting; it’s about your safety. It is our first freedom and it is necessary to secure all our freedoms and protect us from the tyranny of an out-of-control government.
Get your own copy of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and READ it.
The lefties will never get this and conservatives had better wake up and start thinking right about this. If you think our government can (or even wants to) protect us from the bad guys, you are delusional. This current administration wants to disarm and defund our military at a time when there are real threats to our national security. When some sawed-off little Korean runt with elevator shoes and a super-sized ego starts rattling his nuclear sabers, Obama’s response is that "the United States has a moral responsibility" to lead disarmament efforts because America is "the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon."
So it should come as no surprise to anyone with an I.Q. higher than an idiot, that they also want to disarm you and leave you personally vulnerable and unprotected. Gun control advocates in this country have an insatiable desire to outlaw every kind of gun (including your child’s Red Ryder BB gun) and when those are gone, they’ll come after your slingshots, bows and arrows and pitchforks.
WARNING!!
The following video clip is one of the best explanations of the second amendment I have ever heard. I don’t care for the gross vulgarity of Penn and Teller but, on this subject, they get it right. Caution, at very end of this clip (at 57 seconds), Penn drops the F bomb so beware if you are prone to being more outraged by vulgarity than you are by tyranny and please, spare me the critical comments; you have been forewarned.
The statistic are in; the Christian church is losing its influence and impact in the world. That is because we have largely ceased being what we are supposed to be in preference to trying to be relevant. In this post, The Reforming Baptist makes this startling indictment against the man-centered philosophy of market driven church movements: The mantra for the church by its biggest name leaders is "relevance!" but I am convinced that American Christianity in western culture is absolutely irrelevant no matter how hard they try to engage the world by trying to relate with them.
Who do they think they are anyway? Isn't congress elected by the people to represent the people and protect the people. Doesn't the Constitution limit the power of the Federal Government? In this video clip, Neil Cavuto takes one of to them task for overreaching their control and for their frightening expansion of government power.
In this next clip, Alan Keyes issues a sober warning. We had better stop the laughing and Kool-aid drinking before we lose this country.
In one of my favorite rants this week, Glenn Beck challenges the Attorney General of the State of Connecticut to stop trying to make or interpret the law and just ENFORCE THE LAW.
My friend, Pastor Ron Livesay, has started his own blog, Buffalo Noise, where he is posting many of his archived position papers, articles, and random thoughts from his years of Christian School Administration.
With the arrival of the eight day Passover Festival, I was preparing some material for our family-reunion Seder meal when I stumbled across one of the most important of all verses in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Leviticus 19:15 declares: "You shall not commit a perversion of justice: you shall not favor the poor and you shall not honor the great, with righteousness shall you judge your fellow."
About fifteen years ago I engaged in a memorable public debate with my friend Dennis Prager in which he rightly identified this passage as perhaps the most crucial conservative verse in the whole Bible. It should, indeed, come as a revelation and a rebuke to all liberals that Holy Scripture identifies "favoring the poor" as "a perversion of justice."
As I argued in my townhall column about the essence of liberalism (posted on March 21st), the outlook of the left insists upon favoring the poor and the unfortunate—and thereby injecting unfairness and discrimination into the very core of politics and government. Favoring the poor, like favoring the rich, brings unequal treatment based on status, not actions. Justice requires rewarding good behavior, no matter its source, and discouraging and punishing bad actions, no matter who performs them.
Concerning the crucial sentence, Rabbi SchlomoYitzhaki (Rashi), the great 11th Century sage commented: "'You shall not favor the poor' means that you should not say that a wealthy man is obligated to help the poor, therefore it is proper for a judge to rule in favor of the poor litigant. Torah insists that justice be rendered honestly; as important as charity is, it must not interfere with justice."
Jewish tradition goes on to clarify the apparent contradiction between numerous Biblical injunctions to act compassionately to the poor, to the widow and the orphan, and this unequivocal insistence on avoiding favoritism. The essential point is that it's the individual that's primarily commanded to display compassion and give charity, while the government, particularly in its judicial aspect, must judge actions, not persons.
The profound significance of Leviticus 19:15 becomes apparent with the other hugely important commands that follow it almost immediately. The next verse states: "You shall not be a gossipmonger among your people, and you shall not stand aside while your fellow's blood is shed- I am The Lord." Then one verse later comes perhaps the most famous statement of all the Hebrew Scriptures (Leviticus 19:16): "You shall not take revenge and you shall not bear a grudge against the members of your people; you shall love your neighbor as yourself – I am the Lord." Leftists should take note: "loving your neighbor" doesn't involve protecting him against the just consequences of his own mistakes, or giving him special dispensation if he's unlucky, or punishing the productive in the name of helping the less fortunate.
A just and loving society, in other words, doesn't enshrine victimhood and doesn't see a contradiction between justice and compassion. Both are attributes of the living God but they shouldn't be confused.
For conservatives who are regularly pilloried by the religious left for their harsh, un-Godly attitudes, these sentiments should feel liberating – an appropriate reminder for this holy season in the ancient Biblical calendar, when we celebrate freedom from bondage and even from well-intended mistakes.
Michael Medved is a film critic, best-selling author and nationally syndicated radio talk show host.
To: The Chief Executive Officer of the Government Motors Corporation (GM) and the current resident of the White House.
Dear Mr. Obama:
I am the CEO and president of a small corporation located in the southern region of the Socialist Republic of California. Last month at a board meeting, one of the directors suggested that it was time for me to get a salary increase. I expressed my appreciation for their thoughtfulness but prevented the action from moving forward because I did not think it was timely. Besides, I have some questions that need to be answered before my board entertains that idea.
So, Mr. Obama, here are the questions. Will you be replacing me anytime soon? If not, is it O.K. with you if my board gives me a salary increase and, if so, how much? Please let me know A.S.A.P. Your quick response will be appreciated.
“But ask the animals, and they will teach you, 
"I do not come to this pulpit hoping that perhaps somebody will, of his own free will, return to Christ. My hope lies in another quarter. I hope that my Master will lay hold of some of them and say, 'you are mine, and you shall be mine. I claim you for myself.' My hope arises from the freeness of grace and not from the freedom of the will."
good enough explanation for me, man. I believe you.
