iPandora

So . . . I spent some time browsing and have some news to share.

Iran is working on nuclear capabilities and has the neccessary nuclear material.Should we be worried? I honestly do not think we need to be worried about our own safety, but world politics could change. After all, India will be the first target.

We all knew this was comming, but Proposition 8 in California, the ammendment defining marriage as a man and a woman (not directly banning homosexual marriage) is being challenged in courts.Now let me get this right. Prop 8 was a Constitution amendment that passed . . . So, why are courts considering these cases? After all, Prop 8 is now basically the law of the land in California. The California Supreme Court may interpret the Proposition (scarry thought) but may not rule is Unconstitutional (because it is part of the Constitution). So, in light of this logic, what does the California Supreme Court think they can do?

Here is a very revealing quote from the article:

All three cases claim the measure abridges the civil rights of a vulnerable minority group. They argue that voters alone did not have the authority to enact such a significant constitutional change.

I am sorry, this just gets my blood up. If voters, the most fundamental part of our governmental system, do not have the authority to enact such legislation (more importantly, a constitutional amendment, than who does? Because, even though the legislature and courts have enacted similar legislation, they have done it outside their authority. All I can do is shake my head.

Change we can believe in has become change that always was.Obama, in a further effort to show his bipartisanship, continues to appoint Clinton and Democrat stalwarts. And the Republican party grows smaller.

Hey, there is some good news though. A disabled man in California who has filed over 400 suits against businesses for not totally complying with the American’s With Disabilities Act (not enough disable parking spaces, no hand rails . . .), has been barred from filing and more suits. The man would sue and ask the courts to fine the businesses $4,000 a day till the changes were implemented. So, your might be thinking, that is a little crooked, but he isn’t making anything off it. Well, it turns out that a lot of businesses were afraid of him and would settle out of court, earning him hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

We all like being generous, right?Well turns out that the people that have managed our money for years . . . and years, are asking for us to be generous again . . . to the tune of $1 Trillion. Yep, we gave them our earning and investments, they screwed us over, and now they want more of our money so that they can somehow “get back” what we initially invested in them. On a side note, there is only $350 Billion left from the $700 Million bail out package. It is good that the money has gone to help . . .  to help . . . to help . . . hmm . . . that is funny, I don’t know what the $350 Billion dollars helped. Probably created another bureaucracy somewhere and is helping pay for salaries. Hey it could be anything seeing as there is no oversight board.

And lastly, Obama is already voting “Present” in high profile public policy.It seems that Obama does not mind changing our anti terror policy by releasing inmates from Guantanamo, but is wary of change when it comes to taking a stand on bailouts for under producing, over paid auto companies. Maybe if they made a better product their revenue might be better. Just a thought.

Michael Medved opened my eyes.

On his radio show he was trying to explain on “Disagreement Day” to disheartened conservatives that trying to “purify” the Republican is not the correct course of action. The root of his argument:

You win by making your group bigger, not smaller.

First: you should not win by selling out. A win bought at so dear a price may not be worthwhile.

Second: you should not compromise your deepest principles either.

But, in my stands and beliefs there is a hierarchy: Abortion is one of my strongest concerns, to not value life is to not value life, there is no grey area. The issue of homosexual privilege is strong, though not as strong as abortion. Abortion is more external and more obviously a violation of laws and human rights and can be dealt with more legislatively than homosexual privilege.

The economy is a matter of principle: free market economics benefit the most people in a way most conducive to supporting Free Will as divised by God. But we can witness to people regardless of thier economic station and a faulty economy is less of a harm to people’s souls than abortion or homosexuality.

By balancing the hierarchy of beliefs and convictions and principles I can find ways to include people who I may have less in common with in reaching my goals.

I have no qualms working with members of the Mormon church to work for significant reinforcement of traditional marriage and the preventing of special privilege for homosexuals beyond the privilege accorded to heterosexuals, despite my serious disagreements with their beliefs.

I have no qualms working with Catholics to further the protection of the innocent unborn despite my belief that most Catholics are decieved and not Christians.

I have no problem working with athiests in pursuit of a libertarian economic policy despite serious disagreements on probably every other issue due to our differences in root beliefs.

The point is: Being wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove, I will work with any I can to achieve the ends which follow my convictions. I will be accepting and friendly to all as people so that none will have reason to say that I’m not for them as they could be for me.

With the devious I will be devious, with the narrow I will be narrow. The goal being that by any and all means, except those which violate my conscience and God’s law, we can advance the cause of physical and economic freedom here on earth for as many as possible, and hope and eternal freedom in the life hereafter for as many as will believe.

Refining this ideal is the fact that people follow a leader with a vision. It does not have to be a clearly defined vision so much as a stirring vision (or at least one spoken of stirringly, see Barack Obama). Reagan was the “Great Communicator” and people followed his visions. Barack Obama has a way with words, a visible empathy that stirs people to want to believe what he says.

Individually, we need to be ready and willing and able to act in concert with all kinds of people, making the “big tent” an actual Big Tent. Seek common ground more than ideological purity within the bounds of our own individual abilities to accept differences. Instead of finding people most like us, find people most able to bring most of us along with them in a path headed towards truth.

As a group we need to find those people who have strong and principled stands we can agree with mostly who are also strong communicators and vibrant individuals. Vision and passion have few foes who can stand against them working together.

That is my plan for real change.

I just met a real, live, Obama Republican.

The nurse sent by the life insurance agency was a tall, strong, friendly black man of African descent. He saw the piano in the apartment an immediately asked me to play something.

He proceeded through his sample collection and interview with my wife and part way through asked who I was voting for this election. I said “McCain and Palin”.

He then proceeded to, with great excitement, tell me all the failures of Bush, how inexperienced Palin was, how certain it is that she’ll be president at the imminent demise of McCain due to Melanoma. His only argument for Obama was that he found he responded better to changing circumstances.

He is socially and fiscally conservative, but he’d feel safer with Obama in charge.

I found it hard to believe that on ideology and observation, this good man found he could stomach Obama as a significantly preferential choice to McCain in most aspects of the American Presidency.

He was parroting the talking points I’ve only heard of as they are torn apart on talk radio and my good blog friends. I realized that he believed so strongly in the person of Obama that he’d swallowed his aversion to homosexual “marriage”, abortion, and financial liberty, to follow the train of the ‘messiah’ of our time.

Moving to home-state politics: California Proposition 8, the new, second, again, same ol’, do we have to, stupid judges, Marriage Protection initiative on the California ballot.

David Blankenhorn, a self-described Liberal Democrat, says he supports California Prop 8 and correspondingly does not support homosexual marriage because of the children:

Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving. But there is one constant. In all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood. Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children.

I like the physical aspects of my marriage, but it is the focus on what is currently mostly a potential for us, the ability to have children and raise them, that directs and focuses our growth as a couple in our marriage. It is because I want her to be the mother of my children that I married her. She’s the right one.

David’s money line:

…Marriage says to society as a whole:

For every child born, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other.

Disregarding the difficulties and ironies of Jesus voting for anybody, there is key information in the Bible which gives us a clear understanding of policies that God does not condone and by extension, would not vote for.

Besides the obvious ugly sin policy of legal abortion, the fiercely debated but no less wrong homosexual ‘marriage’ policies of various states, and the not-governments-responsibility of most social programs and pet projects, there are the social welfare policies. Policies which allow and even encourage people who will not work to continue in idleness. Policies which discourage people from earning their food and keep. Policies which encourage people to believe they are owed something merely for their existance.

Couched in the phraseology of “neighborliness” by Senator Barack Hussein Obama and “patriotism” by Senator Joseph Biden, those of us who make money are told we ought to pay more of our money to allow those ‘less fortunate’ to thrive.

How are they less fortunate?

My financial counselor asked me a key question on our first consultation: what was my greatest asset? It was my self, and now, my wife and I together. As long as we are and exist, our greatest asset is not one of our possessions or investments, but our potential.

True fortune is measured not by what we’ve achieved but by our potential. Every man’s potential is vast and unmeasured. By choosing a goal and doing all that is necessary to achieve that goal, man can change his fortune to wealth.

By choosing to live on the scraps of others, a man is squandering his fortune. By his own choice.

So what does Jesus have to do with this and why would He not support Obama?

Here are just three of the many Bible verses which speak regarding Social Welfare programs:

Don’t you remember the rule we had when we lived with you? “If you don’t work, you don’t eat.” And now we’re getting reports that a bunch of lazy good-for-nothings are taking advantage of you. This must not be tolerated. We command them to get to work immediately—no excuses, no arguments—and earn their own keep. Friends, don’t slack off in doing your duty.

2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 (The Message)

Is that not obvious? “If you don’t work, you don’t eat.” There is not much wiggle room there.

There are definitely cases where the rule ought to be applied with grace, such as the case of widows or the truly infirm. But even then, all work is not hard or demanding, and some things are capable of being done by anybody, almost regardless their condition.

Besides the obvious and immediate benefits of food, work and accomplishment encourage a healthy self-image as well as a correct view of the worth and value.

Appetite is an incentive to work; hunger makes you work all the harder.

Proverbs 16:26 (The Message)

Again, the need for food drives the will to work.

Don’t be misled: No one makes a fool of God. What a person plants, he will harvest. The person who plants selfishness, ignoring the needs of others—ignoring God!—harvests a crop of weeds. All he’ll have to show for his life is weeds! But the one who plants in response to God, letting God’s Spirit do the growth work in him, harvests a crop of real life, eternal life.

Galatians 6:7-8

God apparently takes this personally. To not work is to reap slothfulness. To succeed while not exerting yourself in good pursuits is something God does not smile upon.

All this to say, to those who couch their support for Obama in terms of his being most attuned to “WWJD” it would be well worth your while to check again your assumtions regarding what He would really do.

I work that I may support the necessary functions of government and then to support myself, my family, and those to whom I choose to give. Does a man who has trouble giving the smallest percentage of his own extensive wealth to charity have the right or deserve the ability to determine where I ought to spend mine?

I make no claim that Jesus would vote for McCain, but I know He has some deep questions to ask of Obama.

Found this on a pro-homosexual blog from the California Central-Valley city of Visalia:

I found this through a member of the International Court System emails.

Can you believe a company can actually get away with this?

I choose not to shop here until they change their policies and who knows. Maybe I will take my business elsewhere from now on.

Michael

Read more at the Manteca Bulletin…

California Proposition 22 stated:

“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

Sounds clear and unequivocal to me, but apparently perversions of a sexual nature tend to affect the linguistic comprehension ability as well.

In November 2000 the measure was approved by a resounding majority of votes, 61.4%, a landslide no matter how you look at it.

I was involved in the debate over Prop 22 due in part to my participation in a debate/speech class at the local Junior College during the Fall 2000 semester.

California is often considered a Socialist state, but when you get down to serious issues, there is a significant and vocal Conservative, Classical Liberal, and Christian population which have and will be mobilized.

When the California Supreme Court swept away the true voice of the people in June by declaring the words of Prop 22 invalid, the fire was lit once again.

A ballot iniative has been submitted again, with the exact same wording as Prop 22 because it is strong and unquestionable, despite what the California Supreme Court claims.

Prop 8 has received an incredible level of support across the state, submitting nearly twice the number of signatures needed to quality for the November Ballot.

The presidential contenders have weighed in on this critical issue: Barak Hussein Obama is against it and for Homosexual Marriage, while John McCainis for Prop 8 and supports Real Marriage.

Those who would expand the government and silence the vote of the people filed a lawsuit to block this initiative, which was just denied.

JPennStar: What is your take on the pulse of the people regarding this initiative? Is it generating the buzz that existed for Prop 22?

Work hard. Pray, but don’t stop just with that. California needs to be pulled back to it’s mooring once again.

First, the Duh!

Gay men get HIV, and they’re getting it faster. 12% faster, says a new CDC report.

And of course, to remind those hotheads whose brains have boiled out: HIV is the disease the US Government released in Africa to desimate the black population.

The rest of us know it’s transmitted by homosexual relations between men. And that it’s not bias or bigotry that caused it, but pride, willful ignorance, and the natural result of an unnatural act.

Now the Interesting Stuff

Investor’s Business Daily reports that an architect the the Canadian socialized health-care system, that one we hear is so incredible and worthy of emulation from the leftist socialist running for POTUS, has had a change of heart:

“We thought we could resolve the system’s problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it,” says (Claude) Castonguay. But now he prescribes a radical overhaul: “We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice.”

Counteracting the tales of woe and terror which are peppering the debate south of our northern border, the IBD tells a tale of truth which ought to give those considering the proposed socialized utopia pause:

Sick with ovarian cancer, Sylvia de Vires, an Ontario woman afflicted with a 13-inch, fluid-filled tumor weighing 40 pounds, was unable to get timely care in Canada. She crossed the American border to Pontiac, Mich., where a surgeon removed the tumor, estimating she could not have lived longer than a few weeks more.

Because she’s a woman, and it’s her ovaries, it’s a real tear-jerker.

No, the point is that the capitalistic, profit-based system provides better care to a greater number of people with two primary reasons:

1. The costs cause people to evaluate themselves whether they really need that procedure, freeing the system from a glut of unnecessary and frivolous procedures.
2. Those same costs entice more skilled labor and research and development into medical/technological advances, enhancing quality and quantity of available care.

Read more at IBD.

Republican ‘”Obama”, Only With History And Substance’ Jindal takes the hard line

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who has actually accomplished things in his life, was outraged over the Supreme Court’s liberal judges finding the death penalty is not applicable or valid for use in extreme cases of child rape, so he signed a bill allowing chemical castration in certain specific cases of rape and sexual abuse.

Sponsored by Democrat Senator Nick Gautreaux of Meaux, LA, arguments surrounding the bill were mostly on scope and effect, rather than validity and right.

It sounds like, unlike the members state houses in many of the states, the members of the Louisiana State House are a group who actually have backbones connected to their brains.

Think the issue of homosexual marriage isn’t that important, or that it is not indicative of such terrible possibilities as many seem to say? Think again:

From the AFA

Here’s the link: LINK

For some two years now Lt. Chessani, who had been accused for a massacre of Iraqi innocents, has been before military court. With only 4 defense marine attorneys and one million dollars (mostly provided by Michael Savage and his radio listeners the Savage Nation) against 65 NCIS (Naval Criminal Investigative Service) agents and 36 million tax payer dollars, Lt. Chessani’s case is almost over after the military judge dismisses case. There is only 72 hours left to appeal the decision; please pray that the case is over.

This man was wrongly accused by a reporter who believed Iraqi insurgent propaganda – a make believe massacre. This disinformation was propagated during 2006 (Congress election year) by John Murtha. LINK. Over and over John Murtha, a former marine, condemned these marines who had not yet had a trial – likely for political reasons.

CNN – The Situation Room (Wolf Blitzer)

BLITZER: There’s an investigation of what happened at Haditha. …you’ve suggested this week that there in effect was a massacre. …

MURTHA: Well there was. There’s no question about it…

BLITZER: The Marines say they’re still investigating. They don’t know what happened yet. The pentagon says the same thing. How do you know what happened?

MURTHA: Wolf, you read the “Time” magazine articles. There are pictures, there are photos. You don’t have to talk to the military about the proof.

Yet it is now clear that Murtha was wrong and so was the media; but you will NOT see one iota of apologies from either of them. Nor will you see this great news in the main stream media; no you will see homosexual marriage.

Something else very interesting is Lt. Chissani is a devote Christian, married, with six homeschooled children and it has been his case that has lasted longer than nine other marines. Also this case sets a precedence over all other military trail cases since Vietnam and possibly even beyond (as told by his Chief defense agent during an interview on Michael Savage’s radio broadcast).

In 72 hours The Chief defense attorney will be back on Michael’s show, tune in at KSTE.com durning the hours of 3pm pst and 6pm pst for updates or his site Savage Homepage. Additionally Savage has commited to opening an education fund for Chissani’s six children to help put them through school because they will not get those two years back. Although some may disagree with some of Savage’s politics and radio approach I believe it is reasonable to say God bless him and his listeners for helping this innocent man return to his family.

ADDED: Euphoric Reality has been posting an exhaustive series on the military court cases. Here’s the latest.