The following is a synopsis I compiled detailing the recent passage of the Health Care Bill.
1) Obama’s agenda
a) The Health Care Bill has been President Obama’s main issue that he has pushed during the first year of his administration. He has devoted countless hours to speeches pushing support of the issue and encouraging congressmen to support it.
2) Abortion Clause & Democrat Congressmen’s Dilemma
a) Many Democrat Senators held off on their commitment to vote for the bill because they did not feel that it sufficiently fit their agenda. In some cases they wanted even stronger federal empowerment to be enforced by the bill, or various issues that were important to them to be addressed by the bill.
b) Other Democrat Senators held off their support because they opposed the clause that contained the ability to fund abortions with tax-payer dollars. However, as was visible when it came down to the final vote, Stupak and his fellow “pro-life” Representatives are no more pro-life than their other Democrat colleagues.
c) They immediately cast their support for the bill as soon as Obama issued an executive order which stated that no abortion would be funded. However, this executive order means nothing more than as if he’d written a statement on his executive desk; it is not legally binding whatsoever and will NOT override a law passed by Congress and signed by the president. The executive order will by no means prevent the harm caused by the abortion clause.
d) These “pro-life” Democrat Senators only claimed to be pro-life so as to keep their pro-life constituents happy. Now they can say that they supported the bill only because they were under the impression that it would not fund abortion.
e) The passage and implementation of this bill will commence the greatest increase of abortions in America since Roe v. Wade.
3) Exorbitant Federal Spending Will Increase
a) The Congressional Budget Office has configured that the ten year cost of implementing this new Health Care coverage will be $940 billion, once again proving that it is NOT free health care; Americans will pay for it.
b) This is tragic as our country is already $12 trillion plus in debt.
3) Increased Taxes
a) America will pay for this via exorbitant taxes. Those whose taxes don’t increase will feel the impact by the likely effect of lowered wages or even losing their jobs. Businesses simply cannot afford to bear up under the cost of the taxes that will be imposed on them while maintaining the same level of treatment for their employees.
5) Government Control—America’s Descent into Socialism
a) Once this Health Care Bill has been implemented, the government will have the control to choose which doctors should work where and in what department, essentially forcing many good doctors out of the industry due to such coercive actions as being forced to work in locations away from their families. This will, of course, create a shortage of good doctors and so naturally the quality of health care will drastically decrease.
6) The Bill is NOT Free and Will NOT Provide Health Care for All
a) The government will also be making the decisions about who can receive the health care, what kind of care they can receive and when they can receive it. If you read the 2,000 page bill you will see that this care will often marginalize the elderly, disabled and young.
b) In countries, such as Canada, that enforce a government controlled Health Care system, people are occasionally forced to wait for months and months to have an immediately necessary operation or surgery performed. In some cases, this forces many lower income individuals to choose between living with serious health issues, or even death in the worst cases, or going tens of thousands of dollars into debt in order to receive health care from a private service outside the country.
c) Whenever the government takes control of a public service the end result is always the same. Take the Post Office or Education for example; the employees are paid less and placed in coercive situations many times, and since the treatment of the employees and the treatment of the recipients of the service is all administered from a top down, impersonal source with ultimate power, the quality of service received by those under the system drastically decreases.
d) For example, when the health care system that just passed is implemented, the government will have control over which doctors and nurses can work where and what they will do and how they will do it. Suppose that I am the government and you are Angela, a brain surgeon. According to my charts we need 5 more brain surgeons in Manhattan and I'm picking you, a Virginia resident, as one of them. Oh, you're getting married in 7 months in a local venue and you can't make the move? You have deep family and lifestyle ties to that part of the country? Tough luck! I'm your boss and I will fire you if you don't. My job security depends on how effectively I'm able to administer the proportional distribution of doctors and nurses, so I have no sympathy for you. Oh you're quitting? Well, join the hundreds of other experienced and talented professionals in your field who have quit. We'll just hire less experienced individuals who are willing to receive less pay in your place. True, it's been a challenge finding people who actually want to enter your occupational field, but hey, Socialized medicine is worth it. :) Sure your mom may have died of cancer last year because her doctor sent her away repeatedly, giving her nothing but pain pills and telling her that nothing was wrong. (true story, I've spoken with her cousin in DC--Canadian situation) Your wife had to fly 3 hours to deliver her baby because no doctor was available at that time in your location. But, what about all of the poor people who can't afford health care? This is what we designed this for right? Listen to how beneficial it has been for them. :) Oh wait, I forgot that your newly married, struggling brother and his wife brought their daughter in to the doctor and were placed on a 4 month waiting list to meet with a specialist regarding her illness, which turned out to be terminal. Her life WOULD have been saved if she'd received treatment 2 months earlier, but again, please, stop complaining. Take one for the team. Their neighbors with more money could have afforded to get private care, JUST BARELY, they would have gone bankrupt, but they would have done it. They would have had to fly out of the country and to have the testing and procedures done. Just like in Canada, it is against the law to receive private care from within the country. Adding thousands of dollars in plane tickets and hotel costs to the already 10s of thousands of dollars that you have to pay for the actual procedure.
7) Conclusion
a) In conclusion, this bill would essentially institute a Socialist-oriented, government controlled, inefficient, wasteful system of health care in the United States that would increase the already-exorbitant taxes that Americans are required to pay.
b) It will hurt everyone who holds a job by imposing horrendous taxes. Those whose taxes don't increase will be probably have either their wages decreased because their employers can’t afford to pay them as much due to the severe taxes they will be subjected to, or, they may be laid off because their employers simply can’t afford to pay them anymore.
c) It will further bankrupt $12 trillion in-debt country.
d) People who don't make much money will, in some cases, be forced to live with serious health issues, go in irrecoverable debt, or die.
Welcome to the Socialist States of America.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Unpardonable Media Fabrication, Exploitation and Abuse of Sarah Palin
One of the main reasons why Sarah Palin is so qualified to be a political leader is because she is not in politics for political power and personal or financial gain, but rather to serve her fellow citizens and maintain the common sense, conservative values of limited government, free enterprise, energy independence, and Reagan-type foreign policy.
Her substantial experience far outweighs that of Obama’s. She served on the Wasilla, Alaska City Council from 1992-1996, as Mayor of Wasilla from 1996-2000, on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission chair from 2003-2004 and as governor of Alaska from 2006-2009. This is a stark contrast to Obama’s experience which is confined merely to 8 years in the U.S. Senate and chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Foundation. I find it interesting that nearly 130 times during his years in the Senate Obama voted neither yes nor no on issues but chose to vote as “present.” He’s definitely keeping in step with that neutral, non-committal tradition as President! Even if his experience had surpassed hers, it is ridiculous that the media was constantly haranguing on her political experience and forever comparing her supposed lack of experience to Obama’s supposed extensive experience when she was running for Vice President and he was running for President!
Contrary to the erroneous misconception that Sarah Palin is unintelligent and inexperienced, her intellect, achievements and competence are remarkable. These are a few in-depth descriptions of how this woman was completely misrepresented and brutalized by the mainstream media. (One should read Sarah Palin’s book, “Going Rogue,” for the full details on these stories.)
Mark and Nicolle Wallace worked for the Sarah Palin campaign team. Nicolle used to work for CBS and repeatedly insisted that Sarah do a series of interviews with Katie Couric on CBS. This was to be the public’s first real view of Palin, and unfortunately it was one of the few media outlets that “headquarters” would allow. John McCain had nothing to do with the unfair treatment of Palin during the campaign as the leading campaign staff and the “headquarters” they constantly referred to called the shots. But back to my story. Sarah Palin ended up filming hours and hours of interview tape with Couric who twisted and turned every word of Sarah’s possible. She would ask her the same question at least a dozen times and then she would edit out most of her answer in the final cut making Sarah sound unintelligent. Also, after being asked the same questions about a dozen or so times each, after being asked incredibly condescending questions by Couric that pertained very little to the actual issues of the campaign and after being subjected to hours and hours of this time-wasting nonsense when she could have been doing more important things, Sarah became slightly frustrated at moments. Of course in the final edit Couric entered those few minutes as a supposed representation of the entire series.
As I said earlier, Couric would also ask her questions and then cut her off before she could finish, or just leave the rest of her answers out of the final cut. For instance, we all know the SNL quote, “I can see Russia from my house.” Unfortunately, many people assumed that the SNL humor was reality. In the interview, Couric was questioning Palin’s foreign policy experience, and Sarah started to explain the various ways that Alaska has an impact on foreign policy and her experience in dealing with those issues as governor. At the beginning of her explanation she began to speak of the geographic positioning of Alaska and mentioned that you could even see Russia from some parts of the Alaskan shoreline (which is indeed true). Regardless, she was definitely not using that statement as proof of her foreign policy experience; it was merely a random side note within an introductory premise with which she was explaining the geographic positioning of Alaska. Couric interrupted Sarah before she was able to finish her explanation, edited out most of her response and presented that one statement as Sarah’s supposed primary explanation for why she was qualified in foreign policy. Go figure. There are dozens and dozens of situations where she was used and abused by the mainstream media as well as some individuals from within her own campaign team.
Here is another brief illustration. One of the leading individuals on the campaign staff, Steve Schmidt, has made statements in the press lately that Sarah thought that Saddam Hussein was the main factor behind 9/11 and that she didn’t know who her son was going off to fight in the war. Again these accusations are completely unscrupulous lies. Undoubtedly, Schmidt is trying to save his own reputation because he doesn’t want any of the scorn and hate that Palin has incurred to have a negative effect on his future campaign leadership opportunities. Let me explain why he said those things in particular. During his first meeting with Palin they extensively discussed the situation in Iraq and the history of the war. During that session Palin asked him several questions, one of which was whether there were possible ties between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. Schmidt twisted those questions around and stated that she blatantly and repeatedly claimed that Saddam was the main cause of 9/11. What a jerk is all I can say! What people do for power and money and self-preservation.
Regardless, many have wondered why Sarah Palin, of all people, incurs so much hate and scorn. This is my opinion. Yes, the Liberals are afraid of her common sense conservative values of free enterprise, limited government, energy independence, Reagan-like foreign policy etc. However, what really terrifies them is the dynamic energy and honesty that she brings to the Republican ticket because she is not afraid of what people think of her and “says it like it is.” The Liberals’ biggest asset, the mainstream media, is therefore powerless to manipulate her into giving mediocre, vanilla and neutral non-answers and statements. Her unrelenting honesty and prioritization of practical values and the good of her fellow citizens over her reputation, financial profit or political advancement terrifies those who crave power and the fulfillment of the Liberal agenda. She is a threat to them and that is why they sought so desperately to destroy the reputation of her and her family.
While we are on the topic of financial profit, I have a couple of other enlightening stories to relate. Most people remember the rumor, which the media claimed to be fact of course, that Sarah Palin had rendezvoused on exorbitant shopping sprees and rung up a bill of $150,000 for the RNC. This is perhaps the most laughable rumor of all. She had nothing to do with any of the purchases that they made for her or her family. Campaign staffers purchased a great deal of clothes for them which Sarah considered to be far too expensive and would have preferred to wear her own clothes, but they insisted that she wear what they wanted her to. Also, most of the clothes were returned because a variety of different sizes were purchased so that they would be sure to have the right sizes on hand for her and her family.
Then of course there is the reason why she resigned as governor. Most people accepted explanations like this, given by Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse, "Either Sarah Palin is leaving the people of Alaska high and dry to pursue her long shot national political ambitions or she simply can't handle the job." He referred to it as a "pattern of bizarre behavior." Let’s take a more in-depth look. Throughout the course of the campaign and even for months and months afterwards, she was accused of dozens of supposed ethics violations from wearing a jacket with a logo on it to answering reporters’ questions in the governor’s lobby to the supposed fact that some Alaskan women were wearing their clothes too tight. As Sarah Palin says in her book, “After the string of nutty complaints she’d already hit us with, this one just cracked us up. I told Nizich and Kris, ‘Yep, that’s my job. I’m the state Cleavage Czar. I’ll get right on it.”
As a more extensive example of one of these charges, she was accused of firing Commissioner Walt Monegan for refusing to fire a trooper who was an ex brother-in-law of Palin’s. In the first place, Sarah did not fire Monegan but reassigned him, a perfectly legal action; he chose to resign. The reasons that this trooper, Mike Wooten, should have been fired extended far beyond the fact that he was an abusive ex-brother in law who threatened to put a f@#$&^% bullet through her father’s head etc. etc. This trooper was a failure at his job. He would drink alcohol on the job, shot his nephew with his taser gun, and was involved in illegal activities such as poaching etc. etc. And here the media claimed that she wanted him fired merely because he was an ex brother-in-law?!
Another of these “ethics violations” was that she and her family had taken trips on Alaskan tax payer dollars that were outside of the parameters of her job as governor. Some of the trips that they accused her of neither she nor her family had ever taken! And ALL of the trips that actually did exist were definitely within the parameters of official business. Interestingly enough the traveling expenses that Sarah’s family incurred were FAR smaller than the two previous governors who even had smaller families than her too! The cost to Palin personally of these illegitimate and ridiculous charges that were continually thrown at her, even after the campaign, amounted to over $500,000. She also adds in her book, “Just one of these requests for a certain batch of e-mails generated 24,000 individual sheets of paper. So instead of doing our jobs, my staff, including attorneys, spent thousands of hours and wasted more than $2 million of public monies to sort through it all one sheet at a time.” She had two choices: stay in office and waste most of her time dealing with these cases and take away Alaska’s precious tax payer dollars dealing with the court/lawyer charges, or resign. She chose the most honorable choice of course and resigned.
I am so happy that she is now on Fox News and can speak freely without being micro-managed by power-hungry and paranoid-of-revealing-any-true-substance campaign managers and that she is now free to speak her own mind on the issues that challenge our country during these crucial times.
P.S. I would also like to add that among some of the abuse that Sarah and her family endured were threats that her 14 year old daughter was going to be gang-raped and her oldest daughter was going to have her pregnant body shot from a helicopter, rumors that she and Todd were divorcing, that supposed porn pictures and videos of her were going to be released, that Trig was not really her son and crude references to her daughter having been “knocked up in the seventh inning by Yankee infielder Alex Rodriguez.” When Sarah Palin did not take too lightly to that last tasteless reference to her daughter she was accused of not being able to take a joke. She says, “No, I guess I can’t take a joke that suggests it’s funny to humiliate a young girl and pretend that statutory rape by a thirty-four year old man is something to laugh about. More telling, though, was the reaction by some women’s groups and feminists, who, as usual, stayed silent too long. If they couldn’t articulate some concern, if not outrage, that this kind of ‘humor’ was still acceptable—to the detriment of young women, who are already too often made to feel like sex objects by sexist older men—then these women’s rights activists were hypocrites.”
Her substantial experience far outweighs that of Obama’s. She served on the Wasilla, Alaska City Council from 1992-1996, as Mayor of Wasilla from 1996-2000, on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission chair from 2003-2004 and as governor of Alaska from 2006-2009. This is a stark contrast to Obama’s experience which is confined merely to 8 years in the U.S. Senate and chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Foundation. I find it interesting that nearly 130 times during his years in the Senate Obama voted neither yes nor no on issues but chose to vote as “present.” He’s definitely keeping in step with that neutral, non-committal tradition as President! Even if his experience had surpassed hers, it is ridiculous that the media was constantly haranguing on her political experience and forever comparing her supposed lack of experience to Obama’s supposed extensive experience when she was running for Vice President and he was running for President!
Contrary to the erroneous misconception that Sarah Palin is unintelligent and inexperienced, her intellect, achievements and competence are remarkable. These are a few in-depth descriptions of how this woman was completely misrepresented and brutalized by the mainstream media. (One should read Sarah Palin’s book, “Going Rogue,” for the full details on these stories.)
Mark and Nicolle Wallace worked for the Sarah Palin campaign team. Nicolle used to work for CBS and repeatedly insisted that Sarah do a series of interviews with Katie Couric on CBS. This was to be the public’s first real view of Palin, and unfortunately it was one of the few media outlets that “headquarters” would allow. John McCain had nothing to do with the unfair treatment of Palin during the campaign as the leading campaign staff and the “headquarters” they constantly referred to called the shots. But back to my story. Sarah Palin ended up filming hours and hours of interview tape with Couric who twisted and turned every word of Sarah’s possible. She would ask her the same question at least a dozen times and then she would edit out most of her answer in the final cut making Sarah sound unintelligent. Also, after being asked the same questions about a dozen or so times each, after being asked incredibly condescending questions by Couric that pertained very little to the actual issues of the campaign and after being subjected to hours and hours of this time-wasting nonsense when she could have been doing more important things, Sarah became slightly frustrated at moments. Of course in the final edit Couric entered those few minutes as a supposed representation of the entire series.
As I said earlier, Couric would also ask her questions and then cut her off before she could finish, or just leave the rest of her answers out of the final cut. For instance, we all know the SNL quote, “I can see Russia from my house.” Unfortunately, many people assumed that the SNL humor was reality. In the interview, Couric was questioning Palin’s foreign policy experience, and Sarah started to explain the various ways that Alaska has an impact on foreign policy and her experience in dealing with those issues as governor. At the beginning of her explanation she began to speak of the geographic positioning of Alaska and mentioned that you could even see Russia from some parts of the Alaskan shoreline (which is indeed true). Regardless, she was definitely not using that statement as proof of her foreign policy experience; it was merely a random side note within an introductory premise with which she was explaining the geographic positioning of Alaska. Couric interrupted Sarah before she was able to finish her explanation, edited out most of her response and presented that one statement as Sarah’s supposed primary explanation for why she was qualified in foreign policy. Go figure. There are dozens and dozens of situations where she was used and abused by the mainstream media as well as some individuals from within her own campaign team.
Here is another brief illustration. One of the leading individuals on the campaign staff, Steve Schmidt, has made statements in the press lately that Sarah thought that Saddam Hussein was the main factor behind 9/11 and that she didn’t know who her son was going off to fight in the war. Again these accusations are completely unscrupulous lies. Undoubtedly, Schmidt is trying to save his own reputation because he doesn’t want any of the scorn and hate that Palin has incurred to have a negative effect on his future campaign leadership opportunities. Let me explain why he said those things in particular. During his first meeting with Palin they extensively discussed the situation in Iraq and the history of the war. During that session Palin asked him several questions, one of which was whether there were possible ties between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. Schmidt twisted those questions around and stated that she blatantly and repeatedly claimed that Saddam was the main cause of 9/11. What a jerk is all I can say! What people do for power and money and self-preservation.
Regardless, many have wondered why Sarah Palin, of all people, incurs so much hate and scorn. This is my opinion. Yes, the Liberals are afraid of her common sense conservative values of free enterprise, limited government, energy independence, Reagan-like foreign policy etc. However, what really terrifies them is the dynamic energy and honesty that she brings to the Republican ticket because she is not afraid of what people think of her and “says it like it is.” The Liberals’ biggest asset, the mainstream media, is therefore powerless to manipulate her into giving mediocre, vanilla and neutral non-answers and statements. Her unrelenting honesty and prioritization of practical values and the good of her fellow citizens over her reputation, financial profit or political advancement terrifies those who crave power and the fulfillment of the Liberal agenda. She is a threat to them and that is why they sought so desperately to destroy the reputation of her and her family.
While we are on the topic of financial profit, I have a couple of other enlightening stories to relate. Most people remember the rumor, which the media claimed to be fact of course, that Sarah Palin had rendezvoused on exorbitant shopping sprees and rung up a bill of $150,000 for the RNC. This is perhaps the most laughable rumor of all. She had nothing to do with any of the purchases that they made for her or her family. Campaign staffers purchased a great deal of clothes for them which Sarah considered to be far too expensive and would have preferred to wear her own clothes, but they insisted that she wear what they wanted her to. Also, most of the clothes were returned because a variety of different sizes were purchased so that they would be sure to have the right sizes on hand for her and her family.
Then of course there is the reason why she resigned as governor. Most people accepted explanations like this, given by Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse, "Either Sarah Palin is leaving the people of Alaska high and dry to pursue her long shot national political ambitions or she simply can't handle the job." He referred to it as a "pattern of bizarre behavior." Let’s take a more in-depth look. Throughout the course of the campaign and even for months and months afterwards, she was accused of dozens of supposed ethics violations from wearing a jacket with a logo on it to answering reporters’ questions in the governor’s lobby to the supposed fact that some Alaskan women were wearing their clothes too tight. As Sarah Palin says in her book, “After the string of nutty complaints she’d already hit us with, this one just cracked us up. I told Nizich and Kris, ‘Yep, that’s my job. I’m the state Cleavage Czar. I’ll get right on it.”
As a more extensive example of one of these charges, she was accused of firing Commissioner Walt Monegan for refusing to fire a trooper who was an ex brother-in-law of Palin’s. In the first place, Sarah did not fire Monegan but reassigned him, a perfectly legal action; he chose to resign. The reasons that this trooper, Mike Wooten, should have been fired extended far beyond the fact that he was an abusive ex-brother in law who threatened to put a f@#$&^% bullet through her father’s head etc. etc. This trooper was a failure at his job. He would drink alcohol on the job, shot his nephew with his taser gun, and was involved in illegal activities such as poaching etc. etc. And here the media claimed that she wanted him fired merely because he was an ex brother-in-law?!
Another of these “ethics violations” was that she and her family had taken trips on Alaskan tax payer dollars that were outside of the parameters of her job as governor. Some of the trips that they accused her of neither she nor her family had ever taken! And ALL of the trips that actually did exist were definitely within the parameters of official business. Interestingly enough the traveling expenses that Sarah’s family incurred were FAR smaller than the two previous governors who even had smaller families than her too! The cost to Palin personally of these illegitimate and ridiculous charges that were continually thrown at her, even after the campaign, amounted to over $500,000. She also adds in her book, “Just one of these requests for a certain batch of e-mails generated 24,000 individual sheets of paper. So instead of doing our jobs, my staff, including attorneys, spent thousands of hours and wasted more than $2 million of public monies to sort through it all one sheet at a time.” She had two choices: stay in office and waste most of her time dealing with these cases and take away Alaska’s precious tax payer dollars dealing with the court/lawyer charges, or resign. She chose the most honorable choice of course and resigned.
I am so happy that she is now on Fox News and can speak freely without being micro-managed by power-hungry and paranoid-of-revealing-any-true-substance campaign managers and that she is now free to speak her own mind on the issues that challenge our country during these crucial times.
P.S. I would also like to add that among some of the abuse that Sarah and her family endured were threats that her 14 year old daughter was going to be gang-raped and her oldest daughter was going to have her pregnant body shot from a helicopter, rumors that she and Todd were divorcing, that supposed porn pictures and videos of her were going to be released, that Trig was not really her son and crude references to her daughter having been “knocked up in the seventh inning by Yankee infielder Alex Rodriguez.” When Sarah Palin did not take too lightly to that last tasteless reference to her daughter she was accused of not being able to take a joke. She says, “No, I guess I can’t take a joke that suggests it’s funny to humiliate a young girl and pretend that statutory rape by a thirty-four year old man is something to laugh about. More telling, though, was the reaction by some women’s groups and feminists, who, as usual, stayed silent too long. If they couldn’t articulate some concern, if not outrage, that this kind of ‘humor’ was still acceptable—to the detriment of young women, who are already too often made to feel like sex objects by sexist older men—then these women’s rights activists were hypocrites.”
Monday, January 11, 2010
Frustrated by Ignorance-Induced Injustice
I am incomprehensibly frustrated by ignorance-induced injustice. It would be more beneficial to society if there were merely intelligent, evil individuals and intelligent, decent individuals. As it is, there is an overwhelming class of ignorant, naive and complacent citizens who, though deep-down share a lot of the same values and essential beliefs as the intelligent, decent people, are brainwashed to believe a distorted version of the truth by the intelligent, evil people. Please don't give me any of that politically correct garbage about "truth depending on one's perspective." I'm not a relativist; I believe in absolutes and I'm willing to debate anyone on my beliefs so that logic and facts will determine what those absolutes are.
Is there hope for a society whose educational system and media are stupendously lopsided towards the agenda of evil people? In Iran, at least the majority of the citizens (who have learned the hard way) can see through the blatant media and educational bias and are willing to fight and die for truth, but here in America I am discouraged by the realization that many of our citizens are so tightly bound by the chains of complacency, materialism and dependency that they can't see the noose tightening around their necks while they puppet the lies they are fed by the media and their education (or lack thereof).
The only thing that can spare them is a voracious and exhausting fight for truth by the intelligent, decent people in society or, tragically, they will learn the hard way after the very last of their liberty is stripped away and they are left defenseless against a tyrannical monster called unlimited government. Yeah, that's right, the same guys who were supposed to be your friends and promised to pay your mortgages, create eternal peace by banning self-defense, save the planet and win your country an international popularity contest by consenting to the demands for appeasement of evil as opposed to forceful opposition of evil.
If the underlying Liberal agenda, parading under your sacred values of "multiculturalism, tolerance and diversity," wins out in the end, it will bring you only ultimate submission to evil and not "co-existence with a very different but very similar and equally decent religion or culture." This same agenda will also bring Socialist-induced dependence (and eventually devastating poverty), human rights violations and the final collapse of any sanctity for life and liberty our social structure still possesses. Nicely done America.
Is there hope for a society whose educational system and media are stupendously lopsided towards the agenda of evil people? In Iran, at least the majority of the citizens (who have learned the hard way) can see through the blatant media and educational bias and are willing to fight and die for truth, but here in America I am discouraged by the realization that many of our citizens are so tightly bound by the chains of complacency, materialism and dependency that they can't see the noose tightening around their necks while they puppet the lies they are fed by the media and their education (or lack thereof).
The only thing that can spare them is a voracious and exhausting fight for truth by the intelligent, decent people in society or, tragically, they will learn the hard way after the very last of their liberty is stripped away and they are left defenseless against a tyrannical monster called unlimited government. Yeah, that's right, the same guys who were supposed to be your friends and promised to pay your mortgages, create eternal peace by banning self-defense, save the planet and win your country an international popularity contest by consenting to the demands for appeasement of evil as opposed to forceful opposition of evil.
If the underlying Liberal agenda, parading under your sacred values of "multiculturalism, tolerance and diversity," wins out in the end, it will bring you only ultimate submission to evil and not "co-existence with a very different but very similar and equally decent religion or culture." This same agenda will also bring Socialist-induced dependence (and eventually devastating poverty), human rights violations and the final collapse of any sanctity for life and liberty our social structure still possesses. Nicely done America.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Please Contact Your Leaders: Regime Change in Iran
Please write to your Senators, Congressmen, the White house etc. and say something like this (you can copy/paste this if you like):
Dear ----,
The ongoing situation in Iran calls for massive international support for the Iranian dissidents who seek to live in a free country. These brave men and women risk their lives on a daily basis to achieve this end. Please voice your support for the Iranian people by helping them in any capacity possible. Denounce the regime at once and cut diplomatic ties with the mullahs. The Iranian revolutionary guards are also the key to the resolution. If they switch sides, the entire Iranian regime will fall. Please help us in our fight against tyranny and oppression. The least you can do is to contact the heads of the Iranian revolutionary guards and urge them to join the Iranian people. The benefits of a free and democratic Iran is enormous. Please do not let the Iranian people's struggle fade. We need your support now. Please have your intelligence agencies talk to the leaders of the Iranian armed forces and ask them to switch sides and join the people of Iran.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Here are the websites from which you can contact your leaders:
Committee on Foreign Affairs: http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/contact.asp
US Senators: http://tinyurl.com/b1lm
US House of Representatives: http://tinyurl.com/5nexf4
Contact the President: http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/
Pictures from the streets in Iran:
Dear ----,
The ongoing situation in Iran calls for massive international support for the Iranian dissidents who seek to live in a free country. These brave men and women risk their lives on a daily basis to achieve this end. Please voice your support for the Iranian people by helping them in any capacity possible. Denounce the regime at once and cut diplomatic ties with the mullahs. The Iranian revolutionary guards are also the key to the resolution. If they switch sides, the entire Iranian regime will fall. Please help us in our fight against tyranny and oppression. The least you can do is to contact the heads of the Iranian revolutionary guards and urge them to join the Iranian people. The benefits of a free and democratic Iran is enormous. Please do not let the Iranian people's struggle fade. We need your support now. Please have your intelligence agencies talk to the leaders of the Iranian armed forces and ask them to switch sides and join the people of Iran.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Here are the websites from which you can contact your leaders:
Committee on Foreign Affairs: http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/contact.asp
US Senators: http://tinyurl.com/b1lm
US House of Representatives: http://tinyurl.com/5nexf4
Contact the President: http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/
Pictures from the streets in Iran:
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
"Accomplice to Evil"--Washington DC Event
At the beginning of this week I had the privilege of attending an event in honor of the release of Dr. Michael Ledeen's latest book, "Accomplice to Evil: Iran and the War Against the West." The event took place in Washington DC at the Ritz Carlton hotel. Among those present were long-time family friends of the Dr., co-workers from the FDD (Foundation for Defense of Democracies) and various Jews, Persians and others who are politically acquainted with him.
Dr. Ledeen is a brilliant scholar and has been studying the situation in the Middle East (particularly Iran) for decades. He is the Freedom Scholar at the FDD, a contributing editor at National Review Online, and a regular contributor to the Wall Street Journal. He previously served as a consultant to the National Security Council, the State Department, and the Defense Department. He was also a friend and adviser to President Ronald Reagan and served as a special adviser to the Secretary of State. He holds a Ph.D. in modern European history and philosophy from the University of Wisconsin, and has taught at Washington University in St. Louis and the University of Rome.
With this wealth of experience and knowledge, he has written over twenty books which deal primarily with the foreign policy and defense of the United States. I finished reading his latest book on Iran right before I attended the event and was very impressed with the depth of his perceptive observations, his analytical policies and tactics and the breadth of his historical and political knowledge.
In the video that I posted below you will hear some of the points that Dr. Ledeen made during his brief speech at the event. He discusses the fact that, contrary to popular opinion, we are not all "basically good," but many on this planet are incredibly evil. Unfortunately these evil people have an agenda; in the case of the Islamic Regime in Iran that agenda is to eliminate Israel and America and to continue brutally oppressing their own people in a totalitarian dictatorship style mullahcrocy.
In brief, Dr. Ledeen's battle plan to counter-act that agenda is to take a strong stand in support of the Iranian dissidents as they struggle to topple the regime, strengthen the people technologically in order to achieve more efficient and effective communication among the dissidents, incorporate strategic policies designed to weaken the regime financially and militarily and to "destroy the assembly sites for the weapons Iran is providing to the Taliban, Mahdi Army, and al-Qaeda."
Clearly, the approach that the Obama administration is taking is tremendously counter-productive to a successful victory against the regime. One of Dr. Ledeen's fellow contributors to the National Review Online, Mona Charen, says, "The Obama administration, seasoning its approach with fawning genuflections, is taking accommodation to a new level — a fact that is not lost on the Iranian people who chant, 'Obama. Obama. Either you’re with us or you’re with them,' as they dodge the batons and bullets of the Basij militia."
The good news is that the regime suffered a tremendous blow this summer as the whole world witnessed the obvious inequitable results of the sham "election" and the regime's brutal attacks on its own people. As evidenced by their paranoid words and actions, the regime is visibly anxious and apprehensive about the survival of their tyrannical rule. They are losing the battle against the courageous and brave people of Iran and are growing weaker by the moment. I hope and pray with all my heart that the evil regime will topple soon.
Dr. Ledeen is a brilliant scholar and has been studying the situation in the Middle East (particularly Iran) for decades. He is the Freedom Scholar at the FDD, a contributing editor at National Review Online, and a regular contributor to the Wall Street Journal. He previously served as a consultant to the National Security Council, the State Department, and the Defense Department. He was also a friend and adviser to President Ronald Reagan and served as a special adviser to the Secretary of State. He holds a Ph.D. in modern European history and philosophy from the University of Wisconsin, and has taught at Washington University in St. Louis and the University of Rome.
With this wealth of experience and knowledge, he has written over twenty books which deal primarily with the foreign policy and defense of the United States. I finished reading his latest book on Iran right before I attended the event and was very impressed with the depth of his perceptive observations, his analytical policies and tactics and the breadth of his historical and political knowledge.
In the video that I posted below you will hear some of the points that Dr. Ledeen made during his brief speech at the event. He discusses the fact that, contrary to popular opinion, we are not all "basically good," but many on this planet are incredibly evil. Unfortunately these evil people have an agenda; in the case of the Islamic Regime in Iran that agenda is to eliminate Israel and America and to continue brutally oppressing their own people in a totalitarian dictatorship style mullahcrocy.
In brief, Dr. Ledeen's battle plan to counter-act that agenda is to take a strong stand in support of the Iranian dissidents as they struggle to topple the regime, strengthen the people technologically in order to achieve more efficient and effective communication among the dissidents, incorporate strategic policies designed to weaken the regime financially and militarily and to "destroy the assembly sites for the weapons Iran is providing to the Taliban, Mahdi Army, and al-Qaeda."
Clearly, the approach that the Obama administration is taking is tremendously counter-productive to a successful victory against the regime. One of Dr. Ledeen's fellow contributors to the National Review Online, Mona Charen, says, "The Obama administration, seasoning its approach with fawning genuflections, is taking accommodation to a new level — a fact that is not lost on the Iranian people who chant, 'Obama. Obama. Either you’re with us or you’re with them,' as they dodge the batons and bullets of the Basij militia."
The good news is that the regime suffered a tremendous blow this summer as the whole world witnessed the obvious inequitable results of the sham "election" and the regime's brutal attacks on its own people. As evidenced by their paranoid words and actions, the regime is visibly anxious and apprehensive about the survival of their tyrannical rule. They are losing the battle against the courageous and brave people of Iran and are growing weaker by the moment. I hope and pray with all my heart that the evil regime will topple soon.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Decline
Recently a friend of mine asked me to give her some examples of how America has strayed from the vision of our founding fathers. I see three main examples: 1) Moral decline 2) Economic irresponsibility/Government control 3) Infringement on Constitutional rights.
1) Moral decline: Any country that has murdered 50,000,000 of its babies is headed for trouble. A woman has the right to do what she wants with her body, but when there is another human being in her body, she does not have the right to destroy its life. Interestingly enough, the woman who received an abortion and was used as a pro-abortion example in the original Roe vs. Wade case, has since come to deeply regret her abortion and her involvement in that case and is now a very strong human rights advocate against abortion because she feels like she has the blood of 50,000,000 babies on her hands. I look forward to meeting her in the upcoming week as she is visiting my university for "Pro-Life Week" and I will be attending a luncheon with her, the Chancellor and his wife, a few of my student government classmates and some politicians. I could give countless other examples of the ways in which America is steadily spiraling downwards morally, but I think they are fairly obvious to anyone who still believes that there are such things as evil and morals and has not succumbed to the lies of moral relativity and no absolutes that are so prevalent in our classrooms and are propagated through the media.
2) Economic irresponsibility/government control: As an example of the fiscal irresponsibility of our government, we are currently 11 trillion dollars in debt. That means that you and I and our peers and our children and grandchildren already have an outrageous amount of debt on our hands that we will be required to pay back to the government through taxes. The government relentlessly continues to tax more and more, but the services we are receiving are inefficient, wasteful, self-destructive and unevenly distributed. The latest example is the proposed National Health Care bill. This bill is 400 pages long and unfortunately, most of the senators haven't even read it. It contains the ability for our tax payer dollars to fund abortions. This ability can be ascertained if you read between the lines, because although the word "abortion" is never used, there are other ways to subtly indicate it. This health care plan is a Socialist program, but they pass it off as being "free health care for everyone". Of course I would support free health care for everyone if it were possible for such a program to exist, but the problem is that such an existence is impossible. It is neither free and nor is it for everyone.
Perhaps we should take a look at the countries that already have similar national health care programs and investigate the results. Canada's program gives unlimited power to the government to make decisions about what doctors can do and where they can work as well as making decisions about what kind of medical attention patients can receive and how long they have to wait for it. They force doctors to work wherever they want them to regardless of where their families live and where the doctors prefer to work. Hence, the doctors hate the system and so there are fewer and less experienced and less educated doctors available to offer patients quality service.
Another significant downfall of this system is that patients often have to wait for months to receive operations that are needed immediately. I have met people who have lost family members to death because of this inefficiency. I met a woman in D.C. whose Canadian cousin repeatedly visited the doctor because she was not feeling well and was clearly jaundiced in the eyes. However, her doctor told her that she had nothing to worry about and sent her home with some pain pills. Eventually the woman died of the cancer that the doctor didn't have the intelligence to ascertain that she had, or quite possibly he was just so overworked because there are so few doctors anymore due to how unfairly they're treated through the system that he just didn't have time to see her and sent her away even though he knew that she had a serious affliction.
Sometimes it is necessary for women to fly for hours while in labor to reach a hospital where there is a doctor available to deliver their baby. Also, people with immediate, emergency health issues are put on month long waiting lists. Just because you are guaranteed a spot on a waiting list does not mean that you are guaranteed quality, free health care.
Although from a financial/tax-based standpoint this system hurts those who make more money the most because it takes a large portion of their income to fund health care for an entire society, in reality it hurts the lesser income individuals even more. Instead of taking an exorbitant amount of money out of their pockets, it takes their well-being and/or lives in some cases. People with money can afford (well not really, but when the only other option is death they have little choice) to go have a $50,000 operation done by a private health care service or travel to a different country to have it done, but the poorer people can't, and so their only option in some cases is serious permanent health damage and sometimes death. Ironically, the Prime Minister of Canada actually came to the US to have his heart surgery performed because he doesn't trust the Canadian system; this happens frequently among Canadians. Sadly, America has strayed from a limited government, free enterprise society that bases its principles off of the Constitution to a more socialized, government controlled society.
For more info on Socialism you can visit this link where I posted more information about it: http://questfreedomjustice.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html
3) Infringement of constitutional rights: This is exemplified by the sentiments of recently appointed Chief Justice Sotomayer in her statement declaring that judges should be able to interpret the court cases based off of our own personal beliefs and preferences as opposed to basing them off of the principles and rights laid out in the Constitution. An example of a serious breach of 1st amendment rights can be found in this link which i posted earlier this year. It is an example of how a woman's freedom of speech was violated. The Liberals in America have progressively become more and more oppressive towards any who disagree with them, and they hide this suppression under the names of "tolerance," "diversity," "moral equivalence" etc.
http://questfreedomjustice.blogspot.com/2009/07/down-with-islamic-regime-in-iran.html
God help our country. However, America has rejected Him so completely that the damage may be irreversible unless our nation turns its heart back to God and returns to the Biblical values that our Constitution was founded on. You can lead a blind horse to water but you can't make it drink.
1) Moral decline: Any country that has murdered 50,000,000 of its babies is headed for trouble. A woman has the right to do what she wants with her body, but when there is another human being in her body, she does not have the right to destroy its life. Interestingly enough, the woman who received an abortion and was used as a pro-abortion example in the original Roe vs. Wade case, has since come to deeply regret her abortion and her involvement in that case and is now a very strong human rights advocate against abortion because she feels like she has the blood of 50,000,000 babies on her hands. I look forward to meeting her in the upcoming week as she is visiting my university for "Pro-Life Week" and I will be attending a luncheon with her, the Chancellor and his wife, a few of my student government classmates and some politicians. I could give countless other examples of the ways in which America is steadily spiraling downwards morally, but I think they are fairly obvious to anyone who still believes that there are such things as evil and morals and has not succumbed to the lies of moral relativity and no absolutes that are so prevalent in our classrooms and are propagated through the media.
2) Economic irresponsibility/government control: As an example of the fiscal irresponsibility of our government, we are currently 11 trillion dollars in debt. That means that you and I and our peers and our children and grandchildren already have an outrageous amount of debt on our hands that we will be required to pay back to the government through taxes. The government relentlessly continues to tax more and more, but the services we are receiving are inefficient, wasteful, self-destructive and unevenly distributed. The latest example is the proposed National Health Care bill. This bill is 400 pages long and unfortunately, most of the senators haven't even read it. It contains the ability for our tax payer dollars to fund abortions. This ability can be ascertained if you read between the lines, because although the word "abortion" is never used, there are other ways to subtly indicate it. This health care plan is a Socialist program, but they pass it off as being "free health care for everyone". Of course I would support free health care for everyone if it were possible for such a program to exist, but the problem is that such an existence is impossible. It is neither free and nor is it for everyone.
Perhaps we should take a look at the countries that already have similar national health care programs and investigate the results. Canada's program gives unlimited power to the government to make decisions about what doctors can do and where they can work as well as making decisions about what kind of medical attention patients can receive and how long they have to wait for it. They force doctors to work wherever they want them to regardless of where their families live and where the doctors prefer to work. Hence, the doctors hate the system and so there are fewer and less experienced and less educated doctors available to offer patients quality service.
Another significant downfall of this system is that patients often have to wait for months to receive operations that are needed immediately. I have met people who have lost family members to death because of this inefficiency. I met a woman in D.C. whose Canadian cousin repeatedly visited the doctor because she was not feeling well and was clearly jaundiced in the eyes. However, her doctor told her that she had nothing to worry about and sent her home with some pain pills. Eventually the woman died of the cancer that the doctor didn't have the intelligence to ascertain that she had, or quite possibly he was just so overworked because there are so few doctors anymore due to how unfairly they're treated through the system that he just didn't have time to see her and sent her away even though he knew that she had a serious affliction.
Sometimes it is necessary for women to fly for hours while in labor to reach a hospital where there is a doctor available to deliver their baby. Also, people with immediate, emergency health issues are put on month long waiting lists. Just because you are guaranteed a spot on a waiting list does not mean that you are guaranteed quality, free health care.
Although from a financial/tax-based standpoint this system hurts those who make more money the most because it takes a large portion of their income to fund health care for an entire society, in reality it hurts the lesser income individuals even more. Instead of taking an exorbitant amount of money out of their pockets, it takes their well-being and/or lives in some cases. People with money can afford (well not really, but when the only other option is death they have little choice) to go have a $50,000 operation done by a private health care service or travel to a different country to have it done, but the poorer people can't, and so their only option in some cases is serious permanent health damage and sometimes death. Ironically, the Prime Minister of Canada actually came to the US to have his heart surgery performed because he doesn't trust the Canadian system; this happens frequently among Canadians. Sadly, America has strayed from a limited government, free enterprise society that bases its principles off of the Constitution to a more socialized, government controlled society.
For more info on Socialism you can visit this link where I posted more information about it: http://questfreedomjustice.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html
3) Infringement of constitutional rights: This is exemplified by the sentiments of recently appointed Chief Justice Sotomayer in her statement declaring that judges should be able to interpret the court cases based off of our own personal beliefs and preferences as opposed to basing them off of the principles and rights laid out in the Constitution. An example of a serious breach of 1st amendment rights can be found in this link which i posted earlier this year. It is an example of how a woman's freedom of speech was violated. The Liberals in America have progressively become more and more oppressive towards any who disagree with them, and they hide this suppression under the names of "tolerance," "diversity," "moral equivalence" etc.
http://questfreedomjustice.blogspot.com/2009/07/down-with-islamic-regime-in-iran.html
God help our country. However, America has rejected Him so completely that the damage may be irreversible unless our nation turns its heart back to God and returns to the Biblical values that our Constitution was founded on. You can lead a blind horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Is President Obama Correct: Is America No Longer a Christian Nation?
By David Barton (slightly edited in length by Yours Truly)
Paragraphs enclosed by double parentheses were added by me.
Over the past several years, President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that America is not a Christian nation. He asserted that while a U. S. Senator, repeated it as a presidential candidate, and on a recent presidential trip to Turkey announced to the world that Americans “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.” (He made that announcement in Turkey because he said it was “a location he said he chose to send a clear message.”) Then preceding a subsequent trip to Egypt, he declared that America was “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world” (even though the federal government’s own statistics show that less than one-percent of Americans are Muslims).
The President’s statements were publicized across the world but received little attention in the American media. Had they been carried here, the President might have been surprised to learn that nearly two-thirds of Americans currently consider America to be a Christian nation and therefore certainly might have taken exception with his remarks. But regardless of what today’s Americans might think, it is unquestionable that four previous centuries of American leaders would definitely take umbrage with the President’s statements.
Modern claims that America is not a Christian nation are rarely noticed or refuted today because of the nation’s widespread lack of knowledge about America’s history and foundation. To help provide the missing historical knowledge necessary to combat today’s post-modern revisionism, presented below will be some statements by previous presidents, legislatures, and courts (as well as by current national Jewish spokesmen) about America being a Christian nation. These declarations from all three branches of government are representative of scores of others and therefore comprise only the proverbial “tip of the iceberg.”
Defining a Christian Nation
Contemporary post-modern critics (including President Obama) who assert that America is not a Christian nation always refrain from offering any definition of what the term “Christian nation” means. So what is an accurate definition of that term as demonstrated by the American experience?
Contrary to what critics imply, a Christian nation is not one in which all citizens are Christians, or the laws require everyone to adhere to Christian theology, or all leaders are Christians, or any other such superficial measurement. As Supreme Court Justice David Brewer (1837-1910) explained:
[I]n what sense can [America] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within our borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all. Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions. Nevertheless, we constantly speak of this republic as a Christian nation – in fact, as the leading Christian nation of the world.
So, if being a Christian nation is not based on any of the above criterion, then what makes America a Christian nation? According to Justice Brewer, America was “of all the nations in the world . . . most justly called a Christian nation” because Christianity “has so largely shaped and molded it.”
Constitutional law professor Edward Mansfield (1801-1880) similarly acknowledged:
In every country, the morals of a people – whatever they may be – take their form and spirit from their religion. For example, the marriage of brothers and sisters was permitted among the Egyptians because such had been the precedent set by their gods, Isis and Osiris. So, too, the classic nations celebrated the drunken rites of Bacchus. Thus, too, the Turk has become lazy and inert because dependent upon Fate, as taught by the Koran. And when in recent times there arose a nation [i.e., France] whose philosophers [e.g. Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, Helvetius, etc.] discovered there was no God and no religion, the nation was thrown into that dismal case in which there was no law and no morals. . . . In the United States, Christianity is the original, spontaneous, and national religion.
Founding Father and U. S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall agreed:
[W]ith us, Christianity and religion are identified. It would be strange, indeed, if with such a people our institutions did not presuppose Christianity and did not often refer to it and exhibit relations with it.
Christianity is the religion that shaped America and made her what she is today. In fact, historically speaking, it can be irrefutably demonstrated that Biblical Christianity in America produced many of the cherished traditions still enjoyed today, including:
* A republican rather than a theocratic form of government;
* The institutional separation of church and state (as opposed to today’s enforced institutional secularization of church and state);
* Protection for religious toleration and the rights of conscience;
* A distinction between theology and behavior, thus allowing the incorporation into public policy of religious principles that promote good behavior but which do not enforce theological tenets (examples of this would include religious teachings such as the Good Samaritan, The Golden Rule, the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, etc., all of which promote positive civil behavior but do not impose ecclesiastical rites); and
* A free-market approach to religion, thus ensuring religious diversity.
((Interestingly enough, a recent study was performed to ascertain where the ideals and principles laid out in the Constitution had originated, and so a group of individuals decided to research the documents and letters of those who created the Constitution. 15,000 writings were amassed and out of these they discovered approximately 3,500 direct quotes. Approximately 34% of these quotes came from the Bible and the rest were divided among other sources with the second-most commonly used source ranking at only about 8%.))
Consequently, a Christian nation as demonstrated by the American experience is a nation founded upon Christian and Biblical principles, whose values, society, and institutions have largely been shaped by those principles. This definition was reaffirmed by American legal scholars and historians for generations but is widely ignored by today’s revisionists.
American Presidents Affirm that America is a Christian Nation
With his recent statement, President Barack Obama is the first American president to deny that America is a Christian nation – a repudiation of what made America great and a refutation of the declarations of his presidential predecessors. Notice a few representative statements on this subject by some of the forty-three previous presidents:
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity.--JOHN ADAMS
[T]he teachings of the Bible are so interwoven and entwined with our whole civic and social life that it would be literally….impossible for us to figure to ourselves what that life would be if these teaching were removed.--TEDDY ROOSEVELT
America was born a Christian nation – America was born to exemplify that devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelations of Holy Scripture.--WOODROW WILSON
American life is builded, and can alone survive, upon . . . [the] fundamental philosophy announced by the Savior nineteen centuries ago.--HERBERT HOOVER
This is a Christian Nation.--HARRY TRUMAN
Let us remember that as a Christian nation . . . we have a charge and a destiny. --RICHARD NIXON
There are many additional examples, including even that of Thomas Jefferson.
Significantly, Jefferson was instrumental in establishing weekly Sunday worship services at the U. S. Capitol (a practice that continued through the 19th century) and was himself a regular and faithful attendant at those church services, not even allowing inclement weather to dissuade his weekly horseback travel to the Capitol church.
Even President Jefferson recognized and treated America as a Christian nation. Clearly, President Obama’s declaration is refuted both by history and by his own presidential predecessors.
((In order not to make this post more tedious than it already is, I will not include examples of the literally hundreds of similar cases at both federal and state levels affirming that America is indeed a Christian nation, but for more information visit the website: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=23909 ))
American Jewish Leaders Agree with History
Jewish leaders, although firmly committed to their own faith, understand that by defending Christianity they are defending what has provided them their own religious liberty in America. For example, Jeff Jacoby, a Jewish columnist at the Boston Globe explains:
This is a Christian country – it was founded by Christians and built on broad Christian principles. Threatening? Far from it. It is in precisely this Christian country that Jews have known the most peaceful, prosperous, and successful existence in their long history.
Aaron Zelman (a Jewish author and head of a civil rights organization) similarly declares:
[C]hristian America is the best home our people have found in 2,000 years. . . . [T]his remains the most tolerant, prosperous, and safest home we could be blessed with.
Dennis Prager, a Jewish national columnist and popular talkshow host, warns:
If America abandons its Judeo-Christian values basis and the central role of the Jewish and Christian Bibles (its Founders’ guiding text), we are all in big trouble, including, most especially, America’s non-Christians. Just ask the Jews of secular Europe.
Prager further explained:
I believe that it is good that America is a Christian nation. . . . I have had the privilege of speaking in nearly every Jewish community in America over the last 30 years, and I have frequently argued in favor of this view. Recently, I spoke to the Jewish community of a small North Carolina city. When some in the audience mentioned their fear of rising religiosity among Christians, I asked these audience-members if they loved living in their city. All of them said they did. Is it a coincidence, I then asked, that the city you so love (for its wonderful people, its safety for your children, its fine schools, and its values that enable you to raise your children with confidence) is a highly Christian city? Too many Americans do not appreciate the connection between American greatness and American Christianity.
Don Feder, a Jewish columnist and long time writer for the Boston Herald, similarly acknowledges:
Clearly this nation was established by Christians. . . . As a Jew, I’m entirely comfortable with the concept of the Christian America. The choice isn’t Christian America or nothing, but Christian America or a neo-pagan, hedonistic, rights-without-responsibilities, anti-family, culture-of-death America. As an American Jew. . . . [I] feel very much at home here.
In fact, Feder calls on Jews to defend the truth that America is a Christian Nation:
Jews – as Jews – must oppose revisionist efforts to deny our nation’s Christian heritage, must stand against the drive to decouple our laws from Judeo-Christian ethics, and must counter attacks on public expressions of the religion of most Americans – Christianity. Jews are safer in a Christian America than in a secular America.
Michael Medved, a Jewish national talkshow host and columnist, agrees that America is indeed a Christian nation:
The framers may not have mentioned Christianity in the Constitution but they clearly intended that charter of liberty to govern a society of fervent faith, freely encouraged by government for the benefit of all. Their noble and unprecedented experiment never involved a religion-free or faithless state but did indeed presuppose America’s unequivocal identity as a Christian nation.
Burt Prelutsky, a Jewish columnist for the Los Angeles Times (and a freelance writer for the New York Times, Washington Times, Sports Illustrated, and other national publications) and a patriotic Jewish American, gladly embraces America as a Christian nation and even resents the secularist post-modern attack on national Christian celebrations such as Christmas:
I never thought I’d live to see the day that Christmas would become a dirty word. . . .How is it, one well might ask, that in a Christian nation this is happening? And in case you find that designation objectionable, would you deny that India is a Hindu country, that Turkey is Muslim, that Poland is Catholic? That doesn’t mean those nations are theocracies. But when the overwhelming majority of a country’s population is of one religion, and most Americans happen to be one sort of Christian or another, only a darn fool would deny the obvious. . . . This is a Christian nation, my friends. And all of us are fortunate it is one, and that so many millions of Americans have seen fit to live up to the highest precepts of their religion. It should never be forgotten that, in the main, it was Christian soldiers who fought and died to defeat Nazi Germany and who liberated the concentration camps. Speaking as a member of a minority group – and one of the smaller ones at that – I say it behooves those of us who don’t accept Jesus Christ as our savior to show some gratitude to those who do, and to start respecting the values and traditions of the overwhelming majority of our fellow citizens, just as we keep insisting that they respect ours. Merry Christmas, my friends.
Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center unequivocally declares
[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.
In fact, with foreboding he warns:
Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!
President Obama’s declaration that Americans “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation” is a repudiation of the declarations of the national leaders before him and is an unabashed attempt at historical revisionism. Of such efforts, Chief Justice William Rehnquist wisely observed, “no amount of repetition of historical errors . . . can make the errors true.”
Americans must now decide whether centuries of presidents, congresses, and courts are correct or whether President Obama is, but historical fact does not change merely because the President declares it.
The best antidote to the type of revisionism embodied by President Obama’s statement is for citizens (1) to know the truth of America’s history and (2) share that truth with others.
Paragraphs enclosed by double parentheses were added by me.
Over the past several years, President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that America is not a Christian nation. He asserted that while a U. S. Senator, repeated it as a presidential candidate, and on a recent presidential trip to Turkey announced to the world that Americans “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.” (He made that announcement in Turkey because he said it was “a location he said he chose to send a clear message.”) Then preceding a subsequent trip to Egypt, he declared that America was “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world” (even though the federal government’s own statistics show that less than one-percent of Americans are Muslims).
The President’s statements were publicized across the world but received little attention in the American media. Had they been carried here, the President might have been surprised to learn that nearly two-thirds of Americans currently consider America to be a Christian nation and therefore certainly might have taken exception with his remarks. But regardless of what today’s Americans might think, it is unquestionable that four previous centuries of American leaders would definitely take umbrage with the President’s statements.
Modern claims that America is not a Christian nation are rarely noticed or refuted today because of the nation’s widespread lack of knowledge about America’s history and foundation. To help provide the missing historical knowledge necessary to combat today’s post-modern revisionism, presented below will be some statements by previous presidents, legislatures, and courts (as well as by current national Jewish spokesmen) about America being a Christian nation. These declarations from all three branches of government are representative of scores of others and therefore comprise only the proverbial “tip of the iceberg.”
Defining a Christian Nation
Contemporary post-modern critics (including President Obama) who assert that America is not a Christian nation always refrain from offering any definition of what the term “Christian nation” means. So what is an accurate definition of that term as demonstrated by the American experience?
Contrary to what critics imply, a Christian nation is not one in which all citizens are Christians, or the laws require everyone to adhere to Christian theology, or all leaders are Christians, or any other such superficial measurement. As Supreme Court Justice David Brewer (1837-1910) explained:
[I]n what sense can [America] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within our borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all. Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions. Nevertheless, we constantly speak of this republic as a Christian nation – in fact, as the leading Christian nation of the world.
So, if being a Christian nation is not based on any of the above criterion, then what makes America a Christian nation? According to Justice Brewer, America was “of all the nations in the world . . . most justly called a Christian nation” because Christianity “has so largely shaped and molded it.”
Constitutional law professor Edward Mansfield (1801-1880) similarly acknowledged:
In every country, the morals of a people – whatever they may be – take their form and spirit from their religion. For example, the marriage of brothers and sisters was permitted among the Egyptians because such had been the precedent set by their gods, Isis and Osiris. So, too, the classic nations celebrated the drunken rites of Bacchus. Thus, too, the Turk has become lazy and inert because dependent upon Fate, as taught by the Koran. And when in recent times there arose a nation [i.e., France] whose philosophers [e.g. Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, Helvetius, etc.] discovered there was no God and no religion, the nation was thrown into that dismal case in which there was no law and no morals. . . . In the United States, Christianity is the original, spontaneous, and national religion.
Founding Father and U. S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall agreed:
[W]ith us, Christianity and religion are identified. It would be strange, indeed, if with such a people our institutions did not presuppose Christianity and did not often refer to it and exhibit relations with it.
Christianity is the religion that shaped America and made her what she is today. In fact, historically speaking, it can be irrefutably demonstrated that Biblical Christianity in America produced many of the cherished traditions still enjoyed today, including:
* A republican rather than a theocratic form of government;
* The institutional separation of church and state (as opposed to today’s enforced institutional secularization of church and state);
* Protection for religious toleration and the rights of conscience;
* A distinction between theology and behavior, thus allowing the incorporation into public policy of religious principles that promote good behavior but which do not enforce theological tenets (examples of this would include religious teachings such as the Good Samaritan, The Golden Rule, the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, etc., all of which promote positive civil behavior but do not impose ecclesiastical rites); and
* A free-market approach to religion, thus ensuring religious diversity.
((Interestingly enough, a recent study was performed to ascertain where the ideals and principles laid out in the Constitution had originated, and so a group of individuals decided to research the documents and letters of those who created the Constitution. 15,000 writings were amassed and out of these they discovered approximately 3,500 direct quotes. Approximately 34% of these quotes came from the Bible and the rest were divided among other sources with the second-most commonly used source ranking at only about 8%.))
Consequently, a Christian nation as demonstrated by the American experience is a nation founded upon Christian and Biblical principles, whose values, society, and institutions have largely been shaped by those principles. This definition was reaffirmed by American legal scholars and historians for generations but is widely ignored by today’s revisionists.
American Presidents Affirm that America is a Christian Nation
With his recent statement, President Barack Obama is the first American president to deny that America is a Christian nation – a repudiation of what made America great and a refutation of the declarations of his presidential predecessors. Notice a few representative statements on this subject by some of the forty-three previous presidents:
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity.--JOHN ADAMS
[T]he teachings of the Bible are so interwoven and entwined with our whole civic and social life that it would be literally….impossible for us to figure to ourselves what that life would be if these teaching were removed.--TEDDY ROOSEVELT
America was born a Christian nation – America was born to exemplify that devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelations of Holy Scripture.--WOODROW WILSON
American life is builded, and can alone survive, upon . . . [the] fundamental philosophy announced by the Savior nineteen centuries ago.--HERBERT HOOVER
This is a Christian Nation.--HARRY TRUMAN
Let us remember that as a Christian nation . . . we have a charge and a destiny. --RICHARD NIXON
There are many additional examples, including even that of Thomas Jefferson.
Significantly, Jefferson was instrumental in establishing weekly Sunday worship services at the U. S. Capitol (a practice that continued through the 19th century) and was himself a regular and faithful attendant at those church services, not even allowing inclement weather to dissuade his weekly horseback travel to the Capitol church.
Even President Jefferson recognized and treated America as a Christian nation. Clearly, President Obama’s declaration is refuted both by history and by his own presidential predecessors.
((In order not to make this post more tedious than it already is, I will not include examples of the literally hundreds of similar cases at both federal and state levels affirming that America is indeed a Christian nation, but for more information visit the website: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=23909 ))
American Jewish Leaders Agree with History
Jewish leaders, although firmly committed to their own faith, understand that by defending Christianity they are defending what has provided them their own religious liberty in America. For example, Jeff Jacoby, a Jewish columnist at the Boston Globe explains:
This is a Christian country – it was founded by Christians and built on broad Christian principles. Threatening? Far from it. It is in precisely this Christian country that Jews have known the most peaceful, prosperous, and successful existence in their long history.
Aaron Zelman (a Jewish author and head of a civil rights organization) similarly declares:
[C]hristian America is the best home our people have found in 2,000 years. . . . [T]his remains the most tolerant, prosperous, and safest home we could be blessed with.
Dennis Prager, a Jewish national columnist and popular talkshow host, warns:
If America abandons its Judeo-Christian values basis and the central role of the Jewish and Christian Bibles (its Founders’ guiding text), we are all in big trouble, including, most especially, America’s non-Christians. Just ask the Jews of secular Europe.
Prager further explained:
I believe that it is good that America is a Christian nation. . . . I have had the privilege of speaking in nearly every Jewish community in America over the last 30 years, and I have frequently argued in favor of this view. Recently, I spoke to the Jewish community of a small North Carolina city. When some in the audience mentioned their fear of rising religiosity among Christians, I asked these audience-members if they loved living in their city. All of them said they did. Is it a coincidence, I then asked, that the city you so love (for its wonderful people, its safety for your children, its fine schools, and its values that enable you to raise your children with confidence) is a highly Christian city? Too many Americans do not appreciate the connection between American greatness and American Christianity.
Don Feder, a Jewish columnist and long time writer for the Boston Herald, similarly acknowledges:
Clearly this nation was established by Christians. . . . As a Jew, I’m entirely comfortable with the concept of the Christian America. The choice isn’t Christian America or nothing, but Christian America or a neo-pagan, hedonistic, rights-without-responsibilities, anti-family, culture-of-death America. As an American Jew. . . . [I] feel very much at home here.
In fact, Feder calls on Jews to defend the truth that America is a Christian Nation:
Jews – as Jews – must oppose revisionist efforts to deny our nation’s Christian heritage, must stand against the drive to decouple our laws from Judeo-Christian ethics, and must counter attacks on public expressions of the religion of most Americans – Christianity. Jews are safer in a Christian America than in a secular America.
Michael Medved, a Jewish national talkshow host and columnist, agrees that America is indeed a Christian nation:
The framers may not have mentioned Christianity in the Constitution but they clearly intended that charter of liberty to govern a society of fervent faith, freely encouraged by government for the benefit of all. Their noble and unprecedented experiment never involved a religion-free or faithless state but did indeed presuppose America’s unequivocal identity as a Christian nation.
Burt Prelutsky, a Jewish columnist for the Los Angeles Times (and a freelance writer for the New York Times, Washington Times, Sports Illustrated, and other national publications) and a patriotic Jewish American, gladly embraces America as a Christian nation and even resents the secularist post-modern attack on national Christian celebrations such as Christmas:
I never thought I’d live to see the day that Christmas would become a dirty word. . . .How is it, one well might ask, that in a Christian nation this is happening? And in case you find that designation objectionable, would you deny that India is a Hindu country, that Turkey is Muslim, that Poland is Catholic? That doesn’t mean those nations are theocracies. But when the overwhelming majority of a country’s population is of one religion, and most Americans happen to be one sort of Christian or another, only a darn fool would deny the obvious. . . . This is a Christian nation, my friends. And all of us are fortunate it is one, and that so many millions of Americans have seen fit to live up to the highest precepts of their religion. It should never be forgotten that, in the main, it was Christian soldiers who fought and died to defeat Nazi Germany and who liberated the concentration camps. Speaking as a member of a minority group – and one of the smaller ones at that – I say it behooves those of us who don’t accept Jesus Christ as our savior to show some gratitude to those who do, and to start respecting the values and traditions of the overwhelming majority of our fellow citizens, just as we keep insisting that they respect ours. Merry Christmas, my friends.
Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center unequivocally declares
[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.
In fact, with foreboding he warns:
Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!
President Obama’s declaration that Americans “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation” is a repudiation of the declarations of the national leaders before him and is an unabashed attempt at historical revisionism. Of such efforts, Chief Justice William Rehnquist wisely observed, “no amount of repetition of historical errors . . . can make the errors true.”
Americans must now decide whether centuries of presidents, congresses, and courts are correct or whether President Obama is, but historical fact does not change merely because the President declares it.
The best antidote to the type of revisionism embodied by President Obama’s statement is for citizens (1) to know the truth of America’s history and (2) share that truth with others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
