With all the so-called health care nationalization "debate" (read: railroading) cluttering the airwaves in Washington, you might have missed a critique of Obamacare from an interesting source: no, not Rush, Hannity or Beck, but CHINA. You read that right. The homeland of Anita Dunn's favorite inspirational leader is expressing its concerns over the viability of the plan, according to Reuters' reporter James Pethokoukis:
"Guess what? It turns out the Chinese are kind of curious about how President Barack Obama’s health care reform plans would impact America’s huge fiscal deficit. Government officials are using his Asian trip as an opportunity to ask the White House questions. Detailed questions.
"Boilerplate assurances that America won’t default on its debt or inflate the shortfall away are apparently not cutting it. Nor should they, when one owns nearly $2 trillion in assets denominated in the currency of a country about to double its national debt over the next decade."
Get that? China owns $2 trillion in US debt. Our lender, if you will, is raising a red flag--it's a like a banker noticing that you're behind on your car payments, and wondering why you suddenly have a hankering to buy a boat.
President Obama and his health-care nationalizers should check out the Bible (which would be a great start) and consider Proverbs 22:7 (ESV): "The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender."
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Friday, October 23, 2009
Obama politics, the Chicago Way
If you like quoting from classic movies as much as I do--while at the same time trying to stop your head from spinning with all the Obama administration attacks against anyone who opposes them--you'll want to check the article here by Kim Strassel at the Wall Street Journal.
There, you'll find out about how Chicago thuggery is being used against Obama's opponents--and even those who go along with his socialistic transforming of our society--using lines from the classic 1987 Brian De Palma movie The Untouchables (which earned Mr. 007, Sean Connery, his first-ever Oscar).
President Obama's blasts against his opponents would have made Nixon blush. And the hypocrisy is just plain blatant. During a recent news coneference, White House Press Secretary (and laughing stock)Robert Gibbs was forced to defend his boss's labeling Fox News as not a "real" news organization, since it has a "perspective," against probing questions by ABC's Jake Tapper and veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas. The kicker: attending an off-the-record briefing with the president that week was Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow--two commentators from the "non-perspective" MSNBC.
Could this all be a purposeful distraction, a sleight of hand move to take the public eye off the flailing health care nationalization and Obama's dithering on whether to send more troops to the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan?
So in this great war of words that the Great Bipartisan Unifier has declared on his critics, remember the true philosophy of Chicago politics from which he draws his inspiration: "They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way"--Malone (played by Connery), The Untouchables.
There, you'll find out about how Chicago thuggery is being used against Obama's opponents--and even those who go along with his socialistic transforming of our society--using lines from the classic 1987 Brian De Palma movie The Untouchables (which earned Mr. 007, Sean Connery, his first-ever Oscar).
President Obama's blasts against his opponents would have made Nixon blush. And the hypocrisy is just plain blatant. During a recent news coneference, White House Press Secretary (and laughing stock)Robert Gibbs was forced to defend his boss's labeling Fox News as not a "real" news organization, since it has a "perspective," against probing questions by ABC's Jake Tapper and veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas. The kicker: attending an off-the-record briefing with the president that week was Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow--two commentators from the "non-perspective" MSNBC.
Could this all be a purposeful distraction, a sleight of hand move to take the public eye off the flailing health care nationalization and Obama's dithering on whether to send more troops to the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan?
So in this great war of words that the Great Bipartisan Unifier has declared on his critics, remember the true philosophy of Chicago politics from which he draws his inspiration: "They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way"--Malone (played by Connery), The Untouchables.
Friday, October 9, 2009
A Nobel joke
It's official--the Nobel Peace Prize is now a joke. Keep in mind, President Obama was nominated for the prize within 10 days of his inauguration (Jan. 30 is the deadline for nominations). Okay, so maybe the Nobel Peace Prize committee has some supernatural foresight about Obama's "future" achievements we are not privy to (more than likely, the committee--drawn from the leftist Norwegian parliament instead of the Swedish-based committees--wanted to prop up a prominent fellow "progressive").
Please tell me what "accomplishments" Obama has, that put him in the same category as Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Teresa or Norman Borlaugh (the scientist whose research and promotion of genetically-enhanced wheat and maize is credited with saving ONE BILLION LIVES). Sure there have also been dumb choices over the years (does the name Al Gore ring a bell?) But even some Obama supporters were astonished by this choice.
Let's see, by the way, what our president does with the $1.4 million prize (will he "spread the wealth"?).
Please tell me what "accomplishments" Obama has, that put him in the same category as Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Teresa or Norman Borlaugh (the scientist whose research and promotion of genetically-enhanced wheat and maize is credited with saving ONE BILLION LIVES). Sure there have also been dumb choices over the years (does the name Al Gore ring a bell?) But even some Obama supporters were astonished by this choice.
Let's see, by the way, what our president does with the $1.4 million prize (will he "spread the wealth"?).
Friday, October 2, 2009
Obama's Olympian flop
"The Ego Has Landed."
This Drudge Report headline sums it up--the ousting of Chicago from the 2016 Olympic running (in the first round) is a major pushback by the IOC against President Obama's overweening pride.
A friend had asked me this morning what were Chicago's chances of landing the games. I responded that based on the presentation I saw on late night TV, chances were not very good. The video presentations were slick enough, and it probably would have been best to end it on First Lady Michelle Obama's sharp speech. But the Chicago team had to go "over the top" with bringing in the president (dragging him away from less urgent matters like, say, Iran's nuclear weapons quest, the increasing downturn in the war in Afghanistan, and his flailing health care nationalization; then again, that last point might have made his trip to Copenhagen worthwhile after all).
But two points of the presentation convinced me that the Windy City's quest was all but lost:
1)During the final video clip, a bunch of children kept repeating "Yes We Can!"--the official Obama worship mantra...I mean campaign slogan. Dragging in a political slogan into the Olympic bid was not a very bright move.
2) Then there was this incredible line from the president's speech to the IOC: "Nearly one year ago, on a clear November night, people from every corner of the world gathered in the city of Chicago or in front of their televisions to watch the results of the U.S. Presidential election. Their interest wasn't about me as an individual. Rather, it was rooted in the belief that America's experiment in democracy still speaks to a set of universal aspirations and ideals. Their interest sprung from the hope that in this ever-shrinking world, our diversity could be a source of strength, a cause for celebration; and that with sustained work and determination, we could learn to live and prosper together during the fleeting moment we share on this Earth."
This statement is akin to Obama's claim during the presidential campaign that when he was elected, the oceans would stop rising (you know, from that global warming that's allegedly melting the polar ice caps).
Such self-love was probably a little too much for the delegates to throw in their lot with Obama's hometown. Now, there more than likely were other reasons: the tape of some Chicago gang thugs beating an honor student to death; recent polls showing that the city was split on whether to hold the games; a streak of anti-Americanism among IOC members that goes back to the 90s; and even the current economic woes in America (remember, during the economic slump in the 70s, Denver was awarded the 1976 Summer Olympics--but that city's voters rejected the games because they did not want the tax burden. Wise move, since most Olympics run into serious debt or only barely break even).
Here's hoping that, however the state-run media spins this latest Obama flop, his worshippers (including his highness) will see that the world doesn't revolve around him.
This Drudge Report headline sums it up--the ousting of Chicago from the 2016 Olympic running (in the first round) is a major pushback by the IOC against President Obama's overweening pride.
A friend had asked me this morning what were Chicago's chances of landing the games. I responded that based on the presentation I saw on late night TV, chances were not very good. The video presentations were slick enough, and it probably would have been best to end it on First Lady Michelle Obama's sharp speech. But the Chicago team had to go "over the top" with bringing in the president (dragging him away from less urgent matters like, say, Iran's nuclear weapons quest, the increasing downturn in the war in Afghanistan, and his flailing health care nationalization; then again, that last point might have made his trip to Copenhagen worthwhile after all).
But two points of the presentation convinced me that the Windy City's quest was all but lost:
1)During the final video clip, a bunch of children kept repeating "Yes We Can!"--the official Obama worship mantra...I mean campaign slogan. Dragging in a political slogan into the Olympic bid was not a very bright move.
2) Then there was this incredible line from the president's speech to the IOC: "Nearly one year ago, on a clear November night, people from every corner of the world gathered in the city of Chicago or in front of their televisions to watch the results of the U.S. Presidential election. Their interest wasn't about me as an individual. Rather, it was rooted in the belief that America's experiment in democracy still speaks to a set of universal aspirations and ideals. Their interest sprung from the hope that in this ever-shrinking world, our diversity could be a source of strength, a cause for celebration; and that with sustained work and determination, we could learn to live and prosper together during the fleeting moment we share on this Earth."
This statement is akin to Obama's claim during the presidential campaign that when he was elected, the oceans would stop rising (you know, from that global warming that's allegedly melting the polar ice caps).
Such self-love was probably a little too much for the delegates to throw in their lot with Obama's hometown. Now, there more than likely were other reasons: the tape of some Chicago gang thugs beating an honor student to death; recent polls showing that the city was split on whether to hold the games; a streak of anti-Americanism among IOC members that goes back to the 90s; and even the current economic woes in America (remember, during the economic slump in the 70s, Denver was awarded the 1976 Summer Olympics--but that city's voters rejected the games because they did not want the tax burden. Wise move, since most Olympics run into serious debt or only barely break even).
Here's hoping that, however the state-run media spins this latest Obama flop, his worshippers (including his highness) will see that the world doesn't revolve around him.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Prayer... to OBAMA?
Breitbart TV recently turned up this unbelievable December 2008 clip from The Gamaliel Foundation, the community organizing group that helped sponsor Barak Obama's initial work in Chicago. If THIS doesn't cause you to cry out to our Lord Jesus for our nation, I'm not sure anything else will.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Obama worship (again)
“Barack Hussein Obama
“Red and yellow, black and white
“All are equal in his sight …”
This is part of a song that children in a New Jersey school were taught--a song of praise to President Obama (I wonder, are they allowed to sing Christmas songs?). Watch the video and pray to the TRUE God for our children. Never has this nation been taught to idolize any leader in such a way (and as Glenn Beck asked on his show, is the word “his” in the third line capitalized or not? We are all equal in WHOSE sight?).
Someone please explain to me what the difference is between this, and having children sing to some despot in North Korea or Cuba, or some other cult leader. On a side note: I've wondered about whether Matthew 25 Network was an actual religious group or mere political stooges. Now it's settled: they're religious--and we know who they REALLY worship. Why else would they not stand against such anti-Christian idolatry?
“Red and yellow, black and white
“All are equal in his sight …”
This is part of a song that children in a New Jersey school were taught--a song of praise to President Obama (I wonder, are they allowed to sing Christmas songs?). Watch the video and pray to the TRUE God for our children. Never has this nation been taught to idolize any leader in such a way (and as Glenn Beck asked on his show, is the word “his” in the third line capitalized or not? We are all equal in WHOSE sight?).
Someone please explain to me what the difference is between this, and having children sing to some despot in North Korea or Cuba, or some other cult leader. On a side note: I've wondered about whether Matthew 25 Network was an actual religious group or mere political stooges. Now it's settled: they're religious--and we know who they REALLY worship. Why else would they not stand against such anti-Christian idolatry?
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Cult of personality?
This video was recently shown at an elementary school assembly in Utah, outraging parents. Take a good long look at it: never in our history have Americans been urged by our government to promote a specific leader in such a cultic manner. With the health nationalization taking a dive (although that battle is not yet over), the arts community--at the urging of the White House and its newly acquired propaganda arm, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)--is coming to the Great Leader's rescue.
Imagine the outcry it George W. Bush ad urged the arts community to do this: an ad that features his voice over his presidential campaign art (the famous drawing that adored one too many t-shirts), and ends with one of the glittering participants pledging, "I pledge to be of service to Barack Obama," after peppering the video with crude and leftist hotbutton comments.
It's all too appropriate here to quote the German theologian and martry Dietrich Bonhoeffer, from a 1933 radio address (that was mysteriously cut off near the end): "Should the leader allow himself to succumb to the wishes of those he leads, who will always seek to turn him into an idol, then the image of the leader will become the image of the misleader. This is the leader who makes an idol of himself and his office, and thus mocks God."
Imagine the outcry it George W. Bush ad urged the arts community to do this: an ad that features his voice over his presidential campaign art (the famous drawing that adored one too many t-shirts), and ends with one of the glittering participants pledging, "I pledge to be of service to Barack Obama," after peppering the video with crude and leftist hotbutton comments.
It's all too appropriate here to quote the German theologian and martry Dietrich Bonhoeffer, from a 1933 radio address (that was mysteriously cut off near the end): "Should the leader allow himself to succumb to the wishes of those he leads, who will always seek to turn him into an idol, then the image of the leader will become the image of the misleader. This is the leader who makes an idol of himself and his office, and thus mocks God."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
