Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Sunday, December 22, 2013

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Friday, October 04, 2013

Global Persecution Of Christians

Here Are Two Of The Reasons Why The Ongoing Global Persecution Of Christians Is Not Trending
By Mike Obel
on October 04 2013 10:33 AM

When a large group is subject to murder, robbery, rape and vandalism and also denied civil liberties, property rights, the ability to vote, as well as education, healthcare and access to legal redress, you’d think it might be trending … especially if it’s been going on for decades. But you’d be wrong. The fact is, in Egypt, Pakistan, Sudan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Cuba, Syria, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Malaysia, Indonesia, North Korea, Uzbekistan, China, Vietnam, and Lebanon (to name just a few places) it’s been open season on Christians for decades.

One reason it’s not trending is because of the silence of the victims’ natural allies. "Christians in the Middle East and Africa are being slaughtered, tortured, raped, kidnapped, beheaded and forced to flee the birthplace of Christianity,” Kirsten Powers wrote last week in the Daily Beast. “One would think this horror might be consuming the pulpits and pews of American churches. Not so. The silence has been nearly deafening."

At least as deafening, though, has been the silence of Western secular journalists. Sometimes, yes, reporters cover the murder of Christians, at least when the fatalities get into double or triple figures. But mostly there is just silence. There are at least two reasons the Fourth Estate ignores the global, chronic abuse of Christians.

First, it’s a matter of virtual religious faith that Christianity’s essential quality is its utility as a tool of the "white European oppressor." No journalist would ever say this in an editorial meeting, but it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world if this vestige of colonialism ceased to taint any non-Western region where it has taken root. That same tacit “good riddance” sensibility permeates a field related to journalism. Writing last year in the New York Times, Paul Elie said, “Christian belief figures into literary fiction in our place and time, as something between a dead language and a hangover.”

Secondly, reporters tune this out because of who is doing the slaughtering. Perhaps it's a relic of the George W. Bush era, but Westerners feel (rightly so) that our government has the blood of hundreds of thousands of Muslims on its hands. Think Iraq, Afghanistan and wherever else our drones patrol and our cruise missiles cruise. As the guilty party, we must speak ever so gingerly about our government’s victims, even when -- or especially when – those victims behave badly. Thus, a videotaped torture and murder by Muslim insurgents of a Syrian Christian because he wouldn’t say “Allahu akbar” ["God is great"] barely registers in many Western newsrooms. That guilt also underlies journalism’s insistence on obscuring rather than illuminating news. When lots of people die in a Muslim suicide attack, the culprit is never described as a Muslim but rather as a "terrorist,” as if we might be dealing with a mob of angry Presbyterians. Given where the secularized West sees itself in this moral hierarchy, to use the "M" word in reference to a mass-murdering suicide bomber would smack of moral chauvinism or even Islamophobia, not serious journalism.

Of course, there are other reasons the media isn’t paying attention. But these two – seeing Christianity as essentially a tool of white colonialism for which penance or at least contrition is due and guilt over the slaughter of Muslims – need not in every situation hinder the press from its reportorial duty or force it into using euphemisms. Imagine if members of Greece's neo-fascist Golden Dawn Party started killing Greek Orthodox priests en masse. Is there any media outlet that would tip-toe around that? Of course not. And why not? Because Golden Dawn is beneath Western journalists in the secular world's moral hierarchy. Raking fascists – and you can bet that reporters would use the word “fascists” -- over the coals in public would be the opposite of moral chauvinism; it would be genuinely serious journalism.

Friday, September 27, 2013

Sarah Palin Speaks

How Syria Was Lost

 Americans unsure what to think about President Obama's plans for Syria should remember that all military action undertaken by Democrats for the last half-century has led to utter disaster. (With the possible exception of the Village People's "Y.M.C.A." video, which I say still holds up.)

Democrats are gung-ho about deploying the U.S. military provided only that it will harm the national security interests of the United States, but vehemently oppose interventions that serve American interests.

Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, the supreme commander of the Allied forces in World War II, said he could conceive of no greater tragedy than the U.S. getting heavily involved in Vietnam. He sent aid to the anti-communist forces, but no troops.

Democratic President John F. Kennedy sent troops. But in short order he was conniving to assassinate South Vietnamese president Ngo Dinh Diem -- also known as "our ally in the middle of the war."

More Gun Control

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

China Spying in the USA

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew is in Beijing asking China to stop its increasingly aggressive cyberattacks. But maybe he should come home. Once again, another Chinese spying operation has been uncovered here in America.

Friday, a defense contractor was arrested in Hawaii. He was charged with passing secret information to a Chinese agent regarding America's war preparations and nuclear weapons. But that's not all.

Sunday Bo Jiang, a contractor at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, was arrested at Dulles International Airport. He was carrying several laptops, hard drives and memory cards.

Yesterday Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) exposed the fact that the Obama Administration has allowed hundreds of Chinese nationals to work at the Langley Research Center -- a key facility that conducts classified research for America's space defense technologies. But this was not a cultural exchange program.

The Chinese do not allow American nationals to work in their space program because the Chinese space program is owned lock, stock and barrel by the People's Liberation Army. That very likely means that the people China is sending here, who we are allowing into the Langley facility, are controlled by the Chinese military.

We've been down this road before. Remember the Loral Space scandal during the Clinton Administration? This is just another example of the ongoing naivety when it comes to protecting America's national security from the Chinese.

Monday, March 18, 2013

The Autopsy (the Lie)

Hey hey, today the Republican Party "Leaders" released a report discussing the failures of Mitt Romney during the 2012 election, and why Barack Hussein Obama won. This report, to me, is utter BS because regardless of the conclusions, Mitt wasn't as well liked as Obama was by the masses. Also, the key to all future elections is who can offer the masses the most goodies (and money). That and that alone is the sole issue which future American Presidents will win. The electorate has finally figured out that they have their piggy snout in the trough of government, from free welfare and free food to now free medical care. Who in the world wouldn't vote for the guy who gave you free money, free food, and free meds? You'd have to be a total idiot to not vote for that guy. Sadly, this also means the end of the American Republic and the beginning of "mob rule". Whatever the mob wants, they will get. We are headed rapidly into a period of economic decline and wealth destruction. Within the next 10 years the USA will be bankrupt as the Democrats wage war on the wealthy (who are fleeing the country in larger and larger numbers). The war on working will also continue, coached in the words of "protecting the planet" and "greenhouse gases". In the end it will become either an all-out civil war between left-learning Democratic states and Republican ones (and we know who has the guns) or else a massive financial collapse since no one seems willing to fight for their children's future (and their children's children). God save us all....

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Saturday, February 23, 2013

Thursday, February 14, 2013

The REAL SOTU Address

So what I decided to do, ladies and gentlemen, is we got hold of Paul Shanklin and we decided to do a condensed version of last night's State of the Union. This is an honest, condensed version of last night's State of the Union...

JOHNNY DONOVAN: (Hail to the Chief) And now, the honest, condensed version of President Obama's State of the Union Address.

PAUL SHANKLIN AS OBAMA: My fellow Americans, fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy said something profound at his State of the Union. I... will not. Thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, there isn't enough progress to my agenda. Corporate profits are evil, and we need a middle class to tax. It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country: The idea that if you work hard, you can get ahead no matter whatcha look like or how you sneaked in or who you love in a cheap motel -- or whether you have a thing for feathers, high heels, or wigs with bangs.

Now, the American people don't expect us to solve every problem. I haven't solved any, so don't worry. But they do expect us to put the nation's interests before our party. You first! In 2011, Congress passed my plan to have sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts called a "sequester" that would jeopardize our military readiness, and would most certainly slow our recovery and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs. So let's set party interests aside, and work to pass a solution to end the sequester crisis I manufactured right here in America.

The biggest driver of our long-term debt is old people. The Unaffordable Care Act is slowing their access to medical care, but not fast enough. We must do more! Now, our government shouldn't make promises we can't keep, but we must keep the ones we already made -- unless it was to turn a budget in on time after four years. Every day I ask myself three questions about this nation: "How do we attract more jobs to our shores?" "How do we equip our people with skills they need to get those jobs?" and "How to do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living?"

Well... Well, how do we?

We now produce more oil and gas right here in America, so we must do more to combat climate change -- and if Congress won't act, I will do what I want, whenever I want. Why does Congress even exist? We need more infrastructure like roads and bridges! (Sorry. Heh, heh. I couldn't help myself.) Today, too many families with solid credit are being turned down for home loans because of unnecessary regulation, and I just now noticed.

So, uh, free pre-school for everybody! Now... Now, we all know what needs to be done. Send me a comprehensive immigration bill, in Spanish, and I will sign it. There are still places in America where you can't get ahead, like Chicago. America will run away in Afghanistan and declare victory no matter what happens. Today, the organization that attacked us on 9/11 -- no, not Benghazi; the other 9/11 -- is a shadow of its former self.

Cyber attacks are bad. There are many places where people live on little more than a dollar a day. Ask my brother George. Now, women deserve combat duty. And honestly, people: Just give up your guns and we'll protect you about as well as we can protect a small child on a playground in Chicago where they have plenty of gun control already. In closing, my fellow Americans, we are citizens. Honest. I have the birth certificates for both of us! God bless you, and God help the United States of America, because I won't.

(Hail to the Chief)

Thank you.

Obama's Term

Why Obama Won't Be Blamed for Anything

I realize in the opening segments of the broadcast that I had a little fun with this, but I do want to tell you something here that has been sort of an eye opener for me.  Now, it may have been something that you understood long ago. It may have been something you put together long ago.  I must confess that I only just realized this today.  And it's about trying to understand how could so many people say they disagree with Obama's policies and yet reelect him.  I know that you and I have expressed our puzzlement and our curiosity over the great disconnect there is in this country. The people that vote for Obama don't like where we're going, the direction of the country, the policies of Obama, yet he wins elections.

So we've all been taking our stabs at trying to explain why.  Well, he won reelection because he did such a good job of demonizing Romney that he made everybody afraid to vote for Romney and they settled and just voted for Obama, vote for the guy who's already there, at least he's a known quantity.  But the New York Times story today finally opens my eyes to what we're dealing with, at least for me.  And, as I say, you may have understood this long ago.  "Polls Show Dissatisfaction With Country's Direction, but Support for Obama's Agenda."

Now, you and I, in what I would call the high-information voter sector, understand what a giant disconnect that is.  How in the world can people be dissatisfied with the country's direction while at the same time support the very agenda that's causing it?  This just doesn't compute to you and me.  We recognize that it is Obama's agenda which is leading to the problems this country has and thus the dissatisfaction that people have regarding the country's direction.  But the majority of people who vote, there is no connection of those two things whatsoever.  They support Obama's agenda, and they are terribly unhappy about the direction of the country, and, therefore, they do not associate Obama's agenda or his policies with the direction of the country.

They do not associate Obama's policies with what has happened to the country.  They don't associate all the spending and all the debt with the lack of jobs.  They don't make that connection, they don't see any connection, they don't see it at all.  Now, to me this is an eye-opener, and it's going to force me to assess exactly how to go forward here in dealing with these people.  The idea is to persuade them.  I mean, they are the low-information voters.

Now, if they're unhappy with the economy, if they're unhappy with jobs, if they're unhappy with the debt, if they're unhappy with the housing market and yet support Obama's agenda, then they obviously do not connect Obama's policies as being in any way related to or responsible for the country's direction that they don't like, which means a number of things.  It means that they see Obama as working really hard to try to fix everything, rather than Obama as the reason for things worsening.  They just do not see that.  And to you and me it's a slam dunk.  It's one plus one is two.  These are people, outcome-based education, two plus two is five and we'll give 'em an A for trying.  They don't see it.

So Obama is not at all connected to the tragic destruction of this country.  He is seen as somebody who wants to fix it.  It's the same thing as people seeing Colonel Sanders as a guy running a hospital to save chickens.  Wouldn't compute.  It wouldn't make any sense.  But that's how he's viewed.  Now, maybe one reason is that he's successfully blamed Bush all these years and the exit polling data last November, vast majority of people still do blame Bush for the economy, but it's more than that.  It's that Obama never, ever, allows himself to be seen as governing.  He is constantly campaigning.

Obama is constantly seen as in competition with what's happening in Washington.  It is though there are straw men. There are men behind curtains. There are invisible, evil people doing all this to the country.  He's trying to expose them and he's working very hard. Romney is one of them.  Bush was one of them.  There are a bunch of other people, we don't know who they are. But Obama is trying to find them. He's trying to expose them and trying to fix all this.  Obama is not seen as the guy behind the curtains pulling the levers. Obama is not seen as the guy who does not like the way the country was founded and is trying to take this country in a different direction. He's not seen at all in the way he really is.  It can't all be because of the media. By Rush

Wednesday, February 13, 2013


My take on the SOTU Address

**47% of congress are millionaires. That would be 249 politicians. Only 1% of Americans are. THINK ABOUT IT!!!

Sunday, February 03, 2013

Tuesday, January 15, 2013