What the bang dang diddly is goin on?

Thursday, September 24, 2015

Beware of the false prophets

"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits." (Matthew 7:15-16)
Major newspaper editorials and some columnists have their knickers in a twist over remarks by Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson. Appearing last Sunday on "Meet the Press," Carson was asked by host Chuck Todd whether he believes Islam is consistent with the Constitution. "No, I don't," he said. "I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation." Asked whether he could vote for a Muslim for Congress, Carson said Congress is a different story, but that it "depends on who that Muslim is and what their policies are."
Carson critics are quick to mention Article VI of the Constitution, which prohibits a "religious test" for office, but that means no one can be barred from office because of their faith; it does not and could not prevent citizens from voting for or against someone for religious reasons.
Two years ago, The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom reported that 10 of the 15 "worst violators of religious freedom" in the world are nations in which Islam is the dominant religion.
If you prefer the thoughts of a cultural icon, consider what singer Art Garfunkel said. As reported on Daily Mail.com, Garfunkel noted that Muslims are transforming Europe. He referenced "Reflections of the Revolution in Europe," a 2009 book by Christopher Caldwell, which argues, "that mass immigration by Muslims is altering the culture of Europe because of their reluctance to join the culture of their new homelands." The book claims Muslims do not so much enhance European culture as supplant it, and are "patiently conquering Europe's cities, street by street."
Is that bigotry, or reality? Is it bigotry to quote what various Islamic leaders say are their intentions when it comes to establishing a worldwide caliphate and replacing the U.S. Constitution with Sharia Law, or is it a warning we should take seriously and respond to as we would react to any other invasion?
"Mina" (not her real name to protect her family) is a U.S. citizen and longtime friend who was born in Tehran and still has family there. She wrote me about the intentions of the mullahs and their nuclear deal with the U.S. and five other nations: "The mullahs are buying time ... (to) finish their nuclear program. Americans underestimate these people. It will be Hezbollah, ISIS, or al-Qaida doing their dirty work. They will give them the nuclear bomb. They are very shrewd. They'll sit back and watch."
"Mina" says the Iranian regime has been a huge supporter of President Obama, whose name in Persian, she notes, translates as "he is with us." She asks why Arab and Muslim countries don't take in the migrants now fleeing their native lands for Europe (and now thanks to President Obama the U.S.). It's a good question and the answer ought to be obvious to anyone not afraid of being labeled a "bigot." They support the invasion.
While not all Muslims are terrorists, Breitbart recently revealed a startling statistic. "In a recent survey conducted by AlJazeera.net, the website for the Al Jazeera Arabic television channel," it writes, "respondents overwhelmingly support the Islamic State terrorist group, with 81 percent voting 'YES' on whether they approved of ISIS's conquests in the region." Eighty-one percent.
We are at war with a radical ideology that wishes to destroy the West and drastically alter our way of life. That is what Ben Carson was getting at when he made his remarks about a Muslim president in the White House.

What Is Your Sign ?

I know I'll get a lot of hate for this, but I think someone needs to say it anyway. We are not primitive pagan astrologers. We don't need to derive superstitious omens from natural solar and lunar cycles to know what God is saying. God's word is not a divining rod - it's a "Lamp for our feet and a light for our path." Yes, the signs of the times are all around us, clearly proclaimed in Scripture. But this sensationalism masquerading as "prophecy" needs to stop. I would encourage our leaders to be more grounded than this.
I still remember the 88 reasons book (“88 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Be in 1988”). Everyone was terrified, altars were flooded, but the author was wrong. He made a lot of money on people’s gullibility and fear. But rather than apologize, the next year published a sequel, “The final shout: Rapture report 1989” - predicting that the rapture would take place in 1989. Can you believe, people still bought into it?! This latest round of predictions will be another one we look back and shake our heads at down the road.
In the meantime, cynics will be made, hearts will be hardened to the true signs and the credibility of men of God will be undermined. Nineveh didn’t repent because Jonah preached to them about blood moons. Jeremiah didn’t use solar eclipses as evidence that God’s judgment was coming. This sort of superstitious nonsense has no precedent in Scripture. (Joel does say, “The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.” [Joel 2:31] But Revelation also says of that event that the stars will fall from the sky, the heavens will recede like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island will be removed from its place [Rev. 6:12-14]. This is clearly speaking about something extraordinary, not a normal astrological event as predictable as seasons and lunar cycles.)
John said, “Little children, this is the last hour…” That was 2000 years ago. If that was the last hour, we are living in the last second of the last minute of the last hour. This is enough knowledge for me to work even harder to preach the Gospel and “occupy” till He comes.
When the disciples asked Jesus after His resurrection, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” Jesus said, “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:6-7). In other words, Jesus said, these things are not in your power. You can’t do anything about them. Your job is to preach the Gospel until I return.
If you say, “We need to recognize the signs so that we can be ready for His return.” I would say, 1) we should stay ready anyways and 2) there are plenty of legitimate signs of the times, clearly outlined in Scripture. Then again, these signs won’t sell as many books so I doubt anyone will bother.

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Monday, September 21, 2015

GOP's Muslim Moment: Why Trump, Carson Are So Unsettling To Party

The presidential race’s “Muslim moment” has arrived, and it is graphically laying bare, once again, the Republican dysfunction that is convulsing American government.  On the face of it, Mr. Trump’s refusal last week to silence a supporter who called Muslims a “problem” – and added that President Obama is a Muslim – would seem to have little to do with the potential gridlock in Congress this week. Nor would presidential candidate Ben Carson’s comment to NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday that “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation.”  And yet these snapshots of Trump and Mr. Carson both have at least one thing in common with House Republicans’ threats to shut down the government – this time over federal funding to Planned Parenthood, an abortion provider. They drive establishment Republicans fruitcake.

Fundamentally at issue in both the new shutdown talk and in the insurgent candidacies of Trump and Carson is a tension that has driven Republican politics since the tea party revolution of 2010.  Establishment Republicans want to win elections, Republican voters want to feel they are being heard.
Recent evidence suggests that, at crucial times and in important ways, the two goals have been mutually exclusive. But they are clashing dramatically on the presidential campaign trail and in Congress this week.  Recent polls have found that 43 to 54 percent of Republicans think Mr. Obama is a Muslim, and only 45 percent say they would vote for a Muslim. Some 63 percent of Republicans want the main focus of United States immigration policy to be stopping the flow of immigrants and deporting those already here. And 53 percent support defunding Planned Parenthood.
All are in contrast with the broader American population, and by wide margins.  In other words, to give many Republican voters what they want on several key issues is a recipe to win House races in safe, localized districts, but to risk losing broader races for the Senate and White House. Indeed, Republicans’ success in the 2014 Senate elections began with rigorously weeding out antiestablishment tea party candidates.
Now, Trump and Carson are giving frustrated rank-and-file Republicans their voice again. And in doing so, they are forcing the Republican Party to come to terms with its own contradictions – an uncomfortable discussion the party has hoped to avoid for years.  Trump’s “willingness to say what other Republicans won’t has forced out into the open genuine policy debates among Republicans that had previously been shrouded in vagueness or imprisoned within party orthodoxy,” writes Greg Sargent of The Washington Post’s “Plum Line” blog.
Recently, the Republican establishment had also sought to tamp down potentially inflammatory talk on abortion. Comments about abortion likely lost Republicans Senate seats in Missouri and Indiana in 2012 and fed Democratic claims of a Republican “war on women.”  But a video from an antiabortion group has stirred the issue again, leading to calls for shutting down the government if Planned Parenthood is not defunded. The video shows a Planned Parenthood official talking about selling tissue from an aborted fetus. The process is legal as a part of scientific research, but the video – and the revelation of the practice – shocked many viewers, particularly for the casual tone of the conversation.
House Speaker John Boehner (R) of Ohio is strongly against abortion. But he sees more political damage than gain in shutting down the government over the issue.   So as he tries to head off a shutdown that he believes could damage the Republican brand more broadly, Republican leaders and strategists stand appalled by a Trump campaign they believe could damage the Republican brand more broadly.
The deeper concern is that there is no obvious “solution” to the disconnect between the Republican Party and many of its voters. The party cannot abandon its most passionate, partisan supporters, who can be reliably counted on to go to the polls, even in low-turnout midterm elections. But the direction of the country appears to be moving inexorably away from the worldview of these voters.  Latino voters were not a decisive voting bloc in the 2012 presidential election, an analysis by The New York Times found, but they tipped several key states into Obama’s column. And their influence is growing.
Meanwhile, Millennials, now the largest generation in the country, are significantly left of Republican orthodoxy on immigration, gay rights, business profits, and environmentalism, one Pew Research Center studyfinds. Another suggests that such differences might be culturally ingrained and persist even as Millennials age.
In other words, there is evidence that what many Republicans of today want on a host of key issues runs counter to what the emerging America of tomorrow would appear to want. Establishment Republicans want to start pivoting to that potential future with candidates like Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio. Many Republican voters are having none of it.
Almost always, the establishment wins. But this year, the supporters of Trump and Carson – like the candidates themselves – are making a bold and unapologetic statement.   USA POLITICS

Friday, September 11, 2015


     At one time we were not taxed on our income, property, clothes, medical 
items including drugs, gas, and it goes on and on. Just think our former citizens of this 
great country rebelled because of a tax on their tea. 
    What in the world has happened to us? How did we reach such a state of 
    Just ask the big bankers all over the world. I think they just might have 
the answer.  
    From A Florida Doctor,  
    I live and work in a state.....which is now, completely overrun with 
    They make more money having kids than we earn working full-time. 
    Today I had a 25-year old with 8 kids - that's right 8, all illegal anchor 
babies and she had the nicest nails, cell phone, hand bag, clothing, etc.  
She makes about $1,500 monthly for each; you do the math. (That's 
$12,000 - plus what she personally gets for own "benefits" !!) 
     I used to say, "We are the dumbest nation on earth," Now I must say and 
sadly admit:  

WE are the dumbest people on earth (that includes ME) for we elected the idiot 
ideologues who have passed the 
bills that allow this. Sorry, but we need a revolution. 
     NOW, GET THIS: 
    If the immigrant is over 65, they can apply for SSI and Medicaid and get 
more than a woman on Social Security, who worked from 1944 until 2004. 
    She is only getting $791 per month because she was born in 1924 and there's 
a 'catch 22' (notch) for her.  
    It is interesting that the federal government provides a single refugee with 
a monthly allowance of $1,890 . 

    Each can also obtain an additional $580 in social assistance, for a total of 
$2,470 a month . (Seeing RED yet ????)  
    This compares to a "legal American Citizen single pensioner ", who after 
contributing to the growth and development of America for 40 to 50 years, 
can only receive a monthly maximum of $1,012 in old age pension and 
Guaranteed Income Supplement. ( Seeing more RED? )  
    Maybe our pensioners should apply as refugees! Consider sending this to all 
your American friends, so we can all be ticked off and maybe get the refugees 
cut back to $1,012 and the pensioners up to $2,470. Then we can enjoy some 
of the money we were forced to submit to the Government over the last 40 or 50 or 60 years.  

Sunday, September 6, 2015

That Dog Does Hunt

Gun manufacturer Spike’s Tactical has introduced a new AR-15, which it is determined to keep out of the hands of Islamic terrorists. To that end, they etched the magazine with a bible verse.
Oh, and the AR-15’s name is “The Crusader.”
Company spokesman Ben “Mookie” Thomas, a former Navy Seal and former Blackwater security contractor, explained:
“Right now and as it has been for quite some time, one of the biggest threats in the world is and remains Islamic terrorism. We wanted to make sure we built a weapon that would never be able to be used by Muslim terrorists to kill innocent people or advance their radical agenda.”
The semi-automatic rifle’s magazine is etched with the words of Psalm 144:1:
”Blessed be the Lord my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle.”

Saturday, September 5, 2015

The Devastated Land According to the Prophet Isaiah 7:17-24

17 The Lord will bring upon you, upon your people, and upon your families days unlike any that have come since the day Ephraim broke away from Judah—the king of Assyria.”

18 On that day, the Lord will whistle for the flies from the remotest streams of Egypt and for the bees that are in the land of Assyria. 19 They will come and settle in the steep ravines, in the cracks of the cliffs, in all the thornbushes, and in all the watering holes.

20 On that day, the Lord will shave with a razor hired from beyond the Euphrates—with the king of Assyria—the head and the pubic hair, and will cut off the beard as well.
21 On that day, one will raise a young cow and two sheep 22 and will eat butter because of the abundance of milk, for all who remain in the land will eat butter and honey.
23 On that day, there will be thorns and thistles in every place where a thousand vines worth a thousand silver shekels once grew. 24 Only those with bows and arrows will go there, because the entire land will become thorns and thistles. 25 As for the hills that were once farmed with hoes, you won’t go there for fear of the thorns and thistles. They will become places where cattle are turned loose and sheep wander.

These Are The Times That Try Mens' Souls

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the NBA's all-time leading scorer, is a former cultural ambassador for the United States and the author of several bestselling books. His latest novel, "Mycroft Holmes," comes out this month.
Ernest Hemingway once said that courage was “grace under pressure.” Two presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have recently tested this proposition. And how each man responded revealed the type of person he is and the type of president he would make: Trump authored his own doom, and Sanders opened immense new possibilities as a compassionate person and serious candidate for president.
Here’s where it went fatally wrong for Trump. During the GOP debate on Fox, when Megyn Kelly famously queried him about his attitude toward women (whom he has called “fat pigs,” “dogs,” “slobs” and “animals”) he hit back by threatening the questioner: “I’ve been very nice to you, although I could probably maybe not be, based on the way you have treated me. But I wouldn’t do that.”  Bad enough to alienate women in this way, but there’s even more insidious political crime here: attacking the First Amendment’s protection of a free press by menacing journalists. “I wouldn’t do that,” he said coyly. If you wouldn’t do it, why bring up that you could? For no other reason than to stifle other journalists who might want to ask tough but reasonable questions. If Americans learned that a leader in another country was threatening reporters, we would be outraged. Yet here it is. Right here. Right now.

Later, after Trump had blamed her attitude on her menstrual cycle, Kelly went on what Fox says was a planned vacation. Nevertheless, Trump suggested he may have been the cause. What kind of candidate takes credit for bullying the media? And last week, Trump allowed Univision reporter Jorge Ramos to be ejected from a press conference for asking questions about immigration without being called upon. Ramos was later readmitted and permitted to ask about immigration, during which he said Trump could still deport immigrants compassionately. “I have a bigger heart than you do,” Trump replied. Trump’s non-specific answer to the question ended with a personal insult directed at the reporter.
Trump’s vendetta against the press extended to the Des Moines Register. When the paper issued an editorial calling for Trump to withdraw from the campaign, he refused to give the paper’s reporters credentials to attend his campaign event in Iowa in July. He also called the paper “failing” and “very dishonest.” Other journalists he thinks have treated him harshly he refers to as “losers” or unintelligent, as if the definition of lack of intelligence is to not agree with him.   Attempting to bully the press to silence criticism of him is anti-American. He followed up this salvo on the First Amendment with a strike at the 14th Amendment, asserting that he’d like to deny those born in the country their citizenship. The biggest enemy to the principles of the Constitution right now is Trump.
Trump’s rationale for avoiding Kelly’s debate question – that neither he nor America has time for “political correctness” – taps into a popular boogeyman. The term “political correctness” is so general that to most people it simply means a discomfort with changing times and attitudes, an attack on the traditions of how we were raised. (It’s an emotional challenge every generation has had to go through.) What it really means is nothing more than sensitizing people to the fact that some old-fashioned words, attitudes and actions may be harmful or insulting to others. Naturally, people are angry about that because it makes them feel stupid or mean when they really aren’t. But when times change, we need to change with them in areas that strengthen our society.
It’s no longer “politically correct” to call African Americans “coloreds.” Or to pat a woman on the butt at work and say, “Nice job, honey.” Or to ask people their religion during a job interview. Or to deny a woman a job because she’s not attractive enough to you. Or to assume a person’s opinion is worth less because she is elderly. Or that physically challenged individuals shouldn’t have easy access to buildings. If you don’t have time for political correctness, you don’t have time to be the caretaker of our rights under the Constitution.
It’s easy to buy into the Trump mirage because his rising poll numbers indicate he’s actually doing well. But polls are historically misleading, and his supporters will eventually desert him. Many, such as Tom McCarthy in the Guardian, have laid out the statistical reasons Trump can’t win, complete with graphs that show polls from past presidential candidates who were doing even better than Trump at this stage of an election, only to fade into political irrelevance, like Rudy Giuliani, Howard Dean and Ross Perot. In 2008, Hillary Clinton was also a front-runner who unexpectedly got beat for the nomination by Obama.
Americans may flirt with the preppy life of the frathouse partier because he’s poked sacred cows, said stuff we all wish we could say (except that reason keeps us from doing it), and acted buffoonishly entertaining. But when you wake up the next morning and he’s saying you’re now in a four-year relationship, reason comes rushing in, and it is time for the “it’s me, not you” speech. With over a year until the elections, there are too many Republican hopefuls that dilute the polls. Once the herd thins out (Rick Perry seems out of money; Bobby Jindal out of breath; Huckabee out of touch), other candidates with more substance will have their voices heard. And when it comes down to just three or four candidates, Trump’s blustering inarticulation and dodging of questions will seem untrustworthy.
Although each absurd, uninformed or just plain incorrect statement seems to give Trump a bump in the polls, there are only so many times supporters can defend his outrageous assault on decency, truth and civility. Yes, a few will remain no matter what. (One 63-year-old woman told CNN that the Republicans were out to discredit Trump: “They twisted what the words were, because they’re trying to destroy him.” No one has to twist his words because what he says is twisted enough. He speaks fluent pretzel.) But voters will eventually see the light.
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders faced his own challenge at a political event last month, when two African American women pushed in front of him to use the microphone to demand four and a half minutes of silence to honor the death of Michael Brown. Sanders left the stage and mingled with the crowd. Later, Trump criticized Sanders as being “weak” for allowing them to speak, but truly he showed grace under pressure by acknowledging their frustration and anger. Instead of bullying their voices into silence or ridiculing them as losers, pigs or bimbos, Sanders left. After all, it was not his event; he was a guest. Besides, his voice was not silenced, but came back booming even louder: The next day, Sanders posted a sweeping policy of reform to fight racial inequality. (The timing coincided with Michael Brown’s death and had nothing to do with the two women.)

The two approaches reveal the difference between a mature, thoughtful and intelligent man, and a man whose money has made him arrogant to criticism and impervious to feeling the need to have any actual policies. Trump threatens to run an independent campaign (he won’t; that’s a negotiating ploy). Trump is a last-call candidate who looks good in the boozy dark of political inebriation.
There’s a lot of complaining about the lengthy process in the United States of winnowing candidates, but this year has shown its great strength. It gives a wide variety of people the chance to have their voices heard, and it gives voters a chance to see the candidates over a period of time when their political masks slip. Some rise to the challenge, others deflate under the pressure of nothing to say.
Two roads diverged in a political wood, and one man took the road of assaulting the Constitution and soon will be lost forever. The other will be a viable candidate who, regardless of whether he wins the nomination, will elevate the political process into something our Founding Fathers would be proud of.