#96 – The Pullout Speech - Declaring Victory Doesn’t Make It So

Can We Put a Timeline on Victory in Afghanistan? Askheritage.org (The Heritage Foundation)

In the face of an unpopular war and an upcoming re-election campaign, President Barack Obama addressed the American people last night from the East Room of the White House to inform them of his plans to rapidly withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan. The President’s decision, though politically expedient, jeopardizes the successes made in Afghanistan over the last 10 months and will signal to allies and enemies alike that the United States is more committed to extricating itself from the fight than it is to ensuring that stability in the region is achieved.

The President’s decision to bring home 10,000 troops by the end of this year and a total of 33,000 troops by next summer comes despite requests from the Pentagon and General David Petraeus to limit the initial withdrawal to 3,000 to 4,000, as the L.A. Times reports. And as The Washington Post writes this morning, the President’s decision isn’t based in a “convincing military or strategic rationale.” Rather, it is “at odds with the strategy adopted by NATO, which aims to turn over the war to the Afghan army by the end of 2014.” … The Heritage Foundation’s Lisa Curtis writes that apart from denying his military commanders flexibility to determine the pace and scope of withdrawal based on conditions on the ground, the President “also risks upending the major achievement of eliminating Osama bin Laden across the border in Pakistan.”

Killing bin Laden, though, was one justification the President cited as grounds for pulling out troops, in effect declaring victory before the war is even over. That move comes with significant risks, Curtis writes:“It is short-sighted to use bin Laden’s death as justification for hastening the U.S. troop draw down in Afghanistan. Announcing rapid withdrawal of U.S. forces will likely bolster the morale of the Taliban and encourage them to stick with the fight. Since al-Qaeda has not yet dissolved as an organization and its relationship with the Taliban remains strong, reducing military pressure on the Taliban in Afghanistan could benefit al-Qaeda and provide it a lifeline at a critical juncture in the fight against terrorism.

The withdrawal plan will signal to both our Afghan allies and enemy forces that the U.S. is more committed to withdrawing its forces than the long-term goal of stabilizing the country. The U.S. made a grave error in turning its back on Afghanistan after the Soviets departed in 1989. President Obama’s speech will stoke fears that the U.S. is getting ready to repeat a similar mistake.”

Instead, though, the President is patting himself on the back for a job well done, even though the job is not finished. But rather than ensure that America finishes the job it started in Afghanistan–a mission intended to protect the American people from the threat of al-Qaeda’s terrorists bent on ripping apart this country’s foundation–President Obama articulated what he sees as the U.S. government’s primary purpose: not to secure the homeland but to create government-backed programs to spur the economy and fund research for green energy:“Over the last decade, we have spent a trillion dollars on war, at a time of rising debt and hard economic times. Now, we must invest in America’s greatest resource –- our people. We must unleash innovation that creates new jobs and industries, while living within our means. We must rebuild our infrastructure and find new and clean sources of energy.”

Nation-building at home might be the President’s ideal job, but he has a responsibility abroad. As Curtis notes, the President’s decision to rapidly withdraw from Afghanistan will “further discourage Pakistan from cracking down on the Taliban leadership that finds sanctuary on its soil” and “reinforce Islamabad’s calculation that the U.S. is losing resolve in the fight in Afghanistan and thus encourage Pakistani military leaders to continue to hedge on support to the Taliban to protect their own national security interests.”

The United States is combating terrorism in Afghanistan to keep it from reverting to a safe haven for terrorists like those who struck on September 11, 2001. While U.S. troops have achieved successes in the region, their sacrifices could be squandered under a hasty withdrawal that is calculated for political gain, not for victory on the battlefield. The President ought to act based on the conditions on the ground and the advice of his military commanders — not on an electoral timeline [all emphases mine]

See Also:
The Afghanistan Drawdown Speech, John Hayward http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44392 06/22/2011
Mission Accomplished - Just Don\'t Ask How. by Jeff Emanuel http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2011/06/22/empty-sophistry-when-directed-at-the-war-in-afghanistan-is-still-empty-sophistry/June 22

#95 - Sunday Special – Nothing Like A Good Story; My Choices for Great Summer Reading or for Anytime

In today*s world of the Internet, DVDs, music videos, and television that continually “pushes the envelope,” its discouraging to me how few conversations are about the latest book someone read. I especially hope youth do not miss out on the simple pleasure of just reading a good story. Of course, there are many trashy and titillating books that reflect the sensational and reality type of genre found throughout the media that are definitely NOT worth the trees that were sacrificed to print up such drivel.

Over the years, I have discovered that there are scores of novels that can inspire and teach while being very entertaining. I particularly like books by Christian writers and especially books with stories written n the context of American historical events and sometimes involving historical figures. These being the summer months, I thought I’d share with you some of the Christian writers I’ve been drawn through the past few years as I’ve been able to enjoy many dozens of novels. I’ve been surprised to find all of them available at my public library (the best entertainment bargain these days!) – at least for those of us here in Orange County, Florida, and I’m sure you’ll not be familiar with most of them.

I. Authors that present not just Scriptural truths, but even present the gospel itself:

Gilbert Morris – He is a former pastor and Bible college teacher who over just several decades has written over 200 novels! (That’s about one novel every other month!) I particularly like his Liberty Bell series that cover the period of the American Revolution. Also, his more extensive House of Winslow series contains dozens of books from the pre-Revolution years through World War II. One of his latest series is the Winslow Breed Series that looks at the period of English history and the persecution of Christians during the English Tudor period. Volume one, Honor in the Dust, describes the efforts of William Tyndale to translate the Bible so common people could read it. I’ve easily read several dozen of Mr. Morris’ historical novels and can’t remember one that does not weave the Scripture into the story, and will sometimes so grab your emotions so that you find yourself tearful as you turn a page. And, if you like romance, there is always one if not several of them woven into the stories. The series I was most amazed by is the Singing River series (book #1, The Homeplace)about a family in Arkansas’s adventures during the Great Depression. I lost count of the number of Biblical lessons that are presented in each of the four volumes. Mr. Morris has also written several Christian adventure books for teens. The man is an incredible Christian storyteller; I don’t believe you can be disappointed no matter which of his vast writings you choose to check out.

Jack Cavanaugh – He wrote 8 novels spanning American history from the Puritans to the Vietnam War. The Puritans and The Colonists both won high acclaim. Of The Puritans (which I thought was the best and which won an award), one reviewer said, *… While it may be Christian historical fiction, please don't think that plot and character have been sacrificed. In fact, Cavanaugh does a superb job of creating characters we really care about, and the plot is anything but predictable. Plus, all this is happening in front of a historically accurate setting. Well worth your time to check out the first volume especially.

Mark Mynheir – This author is a Christian police officer in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. (The action often focuses in the Central Florida area) and his Truth Chasers series all contain some kind of Biblical redemptive theme. Fast moving police crime adventures that are hard to put down. His first volume is entitled Rolling Thunder is a tremendous story of God’s incredible grace and forgiveness.

Jerry Jenkins – Yes, I know, he’s the one who co-authored the Left Behind series of novels. But he’s also written some on his own. (He has one involving footbal and one on baseball and a new one that's a crime drama. The one I particularly want to refer you to is entitled Riven. It’s a fast paced modern day story of Christian redemption with an unexpected climax that takes your breath away. If they ever come up with a screen play and make a movie based on this book, WOW! Please take the time to check out this particular novel. Unbelievable! (No, it has nothing to do with end times prophecy.)

II. Authors whose stories have Christian characters but focus more on page-turning, action packed stories:

Joel Rosenberg – The best writer of Christian fiction centering on the problems of contemporary Middle East. His Last Jihad series was eerily incredible as I think each novel dealt with scenarios that actually took place shortly after the book was published. His latest book, The Twelfth Imam deals with the explosive events in modern day Iran. Each book is like reading the latest action movie – almost impossible to put down once you start. Unfortunately these are not stories heavy with Christian themes but they are there.

Jeff Nesbit – I just finished reading LAST NIGHT the first of his trilogy dealing with events in the Middle East. It’s entitled Peace,though you don’t have a moment of it in reading it. It has 68 chapters! and so you know it’s fast paced. The following is from the cover: “Israel has just decided to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. What happens next takes the world to the edge.” Wow, if this were a movie, you’d really be sitting at the edge of your seat from the start. It’s scary to think this scenario could play out today. Hint: World War III?

Tim Downs – He formerly wrote the syndicated comic strip Downstown but has since written 8 novels. The best has to be The Plague Maker, the best Christian Booksellers Associaition mystery/suspense novel of 2006. Just an incredible book on the theme of forgiveness woven in a page turning thriller. Of his novels, this one is a definite standout. All his characters are flawed and his writings are filled with dialogue of sharp wit and sarcasm (though nothing nasty).

[In two weeks, I hope to post some of my recent favorite non-fiction, as well as the FEW new movies I've seen on DVD, again, all found at the public library! I hope you visit yours regularly.]

#94 - We Do Know Jack

Physician-Assisted Suicide
By:Chuck Colson|Breakpoint.com, June 20, 2011

Dr. Death has died. But the battle over physician-assisted suicide lives on.

Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a.k.a., “Dr. Death,” died earlier this month in a hospital in Royal Oaks, Michigan. He was eighty-three. The location of his death is worth noting, because while he died in a hospital, many of the 130 people he helped kill themselves took their lives in or near his VW bus.He was the subject of HBO film starring Al Pacino called You Don’t Know Jack which, as the title suggests, portrayed him as a misunderstood figure. In his Emmy-Award acceptance speech, Pacino called Kevorkian “brilliant and interesting and unique.” Like the HBO biopic, the New York Times obituary went to great lengths to portray Kevorkian in a positive light. In an almost comical attempt at “balance,” the Times said that both his critics and supporters generally agreed” that his “advocacy of assisted suicide helped spur the growth of hospice care in the United States.” That’s like saying that John Dillinger helped spur the growth of bank security.

As Times columnist Ross Douthat noted in his excellent column, one study found that 60 percent of Kevorkian’s “patients” weren’t terminally ill. In fact, autopsies revealed that some of them weren’t sick at all!So what was Dr. Death up to? Ultimately, “physician-assisted suicide” isn’t about compassionate care of the sick and dying, it’s about personal autonomy. As Douthat wrote, the case for it “depends much more on our respect for people’s own desire to die than on our sympathy for their devastating medical conditions.” Ludwig Minelli, who founded Dignitas, a Swiss organization that facilitates suicides, calls the ability to determine the time and manner of one’s death “a marvelous possibility given to a human being” -- a “possibility” that shouldn’t be confined to the terminally ill. Thus, one study found that 21 percent of the approximately 1,000 people Dignitas has helped commit suicide were not terminally ill.

As a devout Christian, Douthat takes solace in the fact that fourteen years ago, in Compassion in Dying v. Glucksberg, the Supreme Court rejected the idea of a constitutional “right to die.” I’m not so consoled. The Court didn’t decide the case on its merits, only that people had not yet settled the question in democratic debate. But any time it wants to the Court can raise the question again and base their decision on Justice Kennedy’s infamous ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey: “At the heart of liberty,” Kennedy wrote, “is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” That passage is, as once critic put it, a “thing of almost infinite plasticity” that could justify almost anything. And the Court often does change its mind. When Casey was decided in 1992, for example, no one thought Kennedy’s passage would create a constitutional right to sodomy, but it did. Seventeen years after ruling there was no such right, the court reversed itself in Lawrence v. Texas.

People who think that it can’t happen with physician-assisted suicide, especially as public opinion shifts on the issue, not only don’t know Jack, they don’t know what the courts are capable of. We who believe in the sanctity of human life from conception through natural death must speak out in every public forum. Otherwise we will have thrust upon us the constitutional right to die.

FURTHER READING AND INFORMATION
Jack Kevorkian's Legacy Lives on After Death, Letters to the Editor | The Seattle Times | June 17, 2011
Dr. Kevorkian Leaves Mixed Medical Legacy, Carolyne Krupa | American Medical News | June 20, 2011
Do You Know Jack?, John Stonestreet | The Point | June 14, 2011

---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Art to Die For - The Kevorkian Exhibit
By Chuck Colson|Breakpoint.com, Date: July 17, 1997

... What is this, the latest outrage funded by the National Endowment for the Arts? No, it’s an exhibit of paintings by Jack Kevorkian. And you couldn’t have asked for a better illustration of the real Dr. Death.Many Americans have been drawn in by sympathetic media accounts, and view Kevorkian’s suicide machine as a rational and compassionate solution for the sick and suffering. Or they view him as at worst a harmless crank. But in a recent article in the New Republic, Michael Betzold says reporters have kept Kevorkian’s background and true agenda firmly under wraps.[IN ONE PAINTING, SOLDIERS HOLD A BLEEDING, SEVERED HEAD BY THE HAIR.]

For example, Kevorkian was given the nickname "Dr. Death" decades ago—not because he favored assisted suicide, but because he enjoyed photographing patients’ eyes as they lay dying. Kevorkian also campaigned for the legalization of medical experiments on prison inmates. As a young pathologist, he conducted bizarre experiments, such as transfusing blood from corpses into live volunteers.But the most chilling of Kevorkian’s private compulsions is his conviction that doctors alone should make life-and-death decisions.

During his murder trials, Kevorkian frequently reassures the public that "the patient always has… absolute autonomy;" that doctors are ethically bound to honor the patient’s decision. But listen to what he said during a 1993 interview. When asked who should determine when someone’s life is no longer worth living, Kevorkian snapped, "That’s up to physicians, and nobody can gainsay what doctors say." In other words, if Kevorkian says it’s time for you to check out, don’t even think of arguing. Even worse, Kevorkian once testified that his goal was to implement "a rational policy of planned death for the entire civilized world." A chilling scenario.

Americans have been taken in by Kevorkian’s rhetoric of autonomy—the idea that the patient should decide if he wants to live or die. But this is a classic diversionary tactic. Ever since the great founder of medicine, Hippocrates, doctors have been morally committed to preserving life. The current talk of autonomy is nothing but a ploy to get rid of the traditional ethic in favor of a deadly new one. As bioethicist Nigel Cameron puts it, "Autonomy is a smokescreen for the introduction of a new substantive ethic… [for] sinister new values."

Kevorkian exemplifies this ethical sleight of hand. He’s been so dressed up by the media and by his own slick language that we don’t realize what’s really behind his actions. In fact, maybe we ought to be grateful for Kevorkian’s grotesque artwork, because it’s helping to expose the real Jack Kevorkian. As one art lover put it: "I used to respect what [Dr. Kevorkian] did. These paintings changed my mind. He’s a sick person." She added: "How do I know he doesn’t do what he does because he enjoys killing people?" In light of what we now know about Kevorkian’s history, that’s an excellent question.

#93 - Democrats--The Real Party of 'No'

[This article was originally published as the editorial in the June 13th issue of Human Events newspaper.]

Ah, what a life being a Democratic member of Congress these days. Forget about that thing called, er, governing, as the country is aboard a bullet train racing toward financial ruin. Nope. That would take what is often referred to as “leadership.” Instead Democrats in the nation’s capital have chosen the path of embracing the lowest common denominator with perversely crafted scare tactics: lying incessantly to voters that Republicans conspire to destroy Medicare and wheelbarrow seniors into a lake (literally), as one TV ad argued.

And what makes these rote talking points even sicker is that the liberals in Congress have failed to produce a plan of their own. Let’s walk through the steps, shall we. It is now more than two years since Senate Democrats passed a budget. Two years! In fact, if you’re keeping count, the last time Harry Reid actually did his duty as majority leader and adopted a budget was back on April 29, 2009, which is more than 760 days ago. Nothing since. And then there’s President Obama’s budget, which was defeated 97 to 0 in the Senate. Not one single senator voted for the President’s budget—not even avowed Socialist Bernie Sanders, because the proposal was considered “stale.”

Even the hyper-liberal New York Times cannot stomach the Democratic inaction. “What exactly are the Democrats proposing as their alternative to get the budget back into long-term balance?” the Times editorialized recently. “Rather than coming up with original ideas and sensible policies to counter the extreme ones pouring out of the House, it simply votes down House bills, or refuses to take them up.” The nonsense about the House bills aside, the Times’ editorial board is spot-on: Democrats have glided through Congress bereft of ideas, yet they are heavy on attacks. And in large part, so far, the Democrats are getting away with this strategy.

Hey, remember when all we heard on television was how the GOP was the party of “No?” What now? At best, the Democratic Party has “No” plan for dealing with Medicare and skyrocketing deficits. At worst, the default plan of ObamaCare is to raid the already-insolvent Medicare “trust fund” to pay for an entirely new entitlement program. Heck, even Bill Clinton agrees that something needs to be done about Medicare, going as far as to call out the Democrats for their demagoguery. “I think the Democrats are going to have to be willing to give up, maybe, some short-term political gain by whipping up fears on some of these things, if it’s a reasonable Social Security proposal, a reasonable Medicare proposal,” he said in an interview. “We’ve got to deal with these things. You cannot have health care devour the economy.”

To recap, the New York Times and Bill Clinton, demigods to modern-day liberals, are both unloading on Democrats for sitting on their derrieres when it comes to this nation’s debt. For Obama’s part, he’s happy to just give speeches and try to scare the life out of seniors. His budget, the one that was unanimously rejected by the Senate, didn’t deal with entitlement spending. So he gave a speech, redoubling his efforts to tackle backbreaking entitlement costs. From that speech, the White House offered up a press release, devoid of any specific numbers or policy proposals. Nothing since.

As one House Republican official told Human Events, “It’s not a matter of him agreeing with Rep. Ryan, but the President is a leader, and leaders need to act, not simply talk, and he has not done that yet.”

[bold emphases mine]

#92 – Sunday Special - Reflections On Being 60 years and About 9 Months Old

Note: Today, June 19th is my 6oth birthday. As I wrote in my 21st posting on this blog – “Think About It - What’s With Birthdays?,” the day represents the number of years since the day I was born but it does not indicatre the length of my life since I (and every other person) was created by God in my mother’s womb around 9 months previous to that. (I invite you to revisit this posting on my blog site.)[If those who are pro-life could celebrate their “Creation Day” and not just (or instead of ) their birthdays, I believe it would help greatly to remind the world that life begins not at birth but at the moment God first gives it to us. That reminder would surely make all thought of abortion unthinkable.]

I praise God for much I can look back on in my life but especially for the following:

1) I was blessed to have had a Mom and Dad who modeled sacrificial hard work, thriftiness, and the other solid values of a traditional Japanese- American family living in Hawaii. (My Mom’s grandparents emigrated from Japan to Hawaii early in the last century.)

2) I’m grateful that by the end of middle school, I knew that I would not live my life seeking to attain some fortune (as my parents wanted their oldest son to do) but would be involved in some kind of work to help others. I can’t help but wonder if, even though I had no spiritual roots, God had already been working in my heart at that young age.

3) I was blessed to have God lead me to hear a presentation of the gospel just as I was finishing my years of college and I have no doubt that may have been the final time I might have heard and been open to the gospel. Incredibly, I made the right decision to trust in Christ that first time I heard the gospel presented!

4) Even though I was barely a year old as a Christian at the time and had very little ministry experience, God called me into full-time lay Christian ministry less than a year after graduating from college for what would be 33 years beginning in January, 1975. I will always be especially grateful for the innumerable opportunities I had as a result to share my faith with individuals as well as with the largest of groups. I never got to see much fruit from my efforts and mainly fulfilled the role of a sower during those years. It taught me to just be faithful and “leave the results to God.”

5) I will always be grateful for the many people I got to minister to, do ministrry with,and who enabled me through their prayers and financial support to do the work of minsitry those many years. So many good people who became friends that I long to see again at that great reunion one day in Heaven. What a great time that will be!

6) Undoubtedly, my years working directly with students - my first decade with college students (the first 5 in Hawaii and then 4 years in Japan) and then my final decade with high school and middle school students - were those I enjoyed most. I’ve always felt “at home” working directly with individuals and will always wish more of my years of ministry could have been doing just that. (When I began working with youth in 1999, I asked God to be able to do so for at least 25 years. It will always be one of the great disappointments of my life that I only got to do it full time for only two years.)

7) It will surprise you, but a true highlight of my life were the days I spent under arrest in Los Angeles with hundreds of others after participating in non-violent blockade at the entrance at a large abortion clinic. (I participated in 6 others later.) Of all the retreats and worship services I’ve attended throughout my life, none have equaled the sense of God’s power and presence that I experienced during those days in jail – honest. (I will share the details sometime in a future blog posting.)

8) I had never had a chance to share the gospel with my extended family and had not seen most of them for about 30 years. Then, after the sudden deaths of my Mom and Dad 6 weeks apart at the beginning of 2003,I suddenly found I had the opportunity to present the gospel to almost all of them when they gathered for each of my parents’ funeral. While I was scheduled to just offer a prayer each time, I tried not to be preachy but there was no way I could pass up on the opportunity to instead share the gospel at each opportunity. I thank God for how h e blessed me with a distinctive way to share the gospel at each funeral. (:

9) My two companions, my cats Squeaky (1986-2006) and Purrty (4 years as of this past April) have filled innumerable lonely moments over the years with such warmth as none have. They have been God’s special gifts to me and their companionship is something I greatly treasure.

10) For the past 2 years, my blog site (at one time two sites) has given me the opportunity to research and write postings that give me a sense of helping others and using my giftedness that I otherwise would not have. I trust God that what I have been led to share has been and will prove to be informative and encouraging to those who have taken the time to read my postings.

(I hope that in a future blog postings I can share some other highlights too numerous to mention here.)

For the Future – I am trusting God to:

1) ...Fully restore my health soon to where I can first volunteer to help in different capacities in the community.
2) ...One day find a church where my gifts, ministry experiences, and my desire to work directly with people – especially with youth – will be recognized with opportunities to serve.
3) ... Eventually find a job that will best use my special gifts, talents, and life experiences. I especially pray that I might be able to work with a ministry in which I could eiher help to impact youth - to share with them the many things I have experienced and continue to learn about the adventure that it is to walk with God - or to assist the pro-life efforts in my community. If not, I just pray it will be a job where I can feel God use me to somehow touch the lives of others.
5) ...Once again be able to use my home to be a place of ministry, especially to youth but also to adults in the area.
6) ...Make the final years of my sojourn on this earth to be even more productive than the 60+ years I have lived so far.

today'sTHOT (from MikeysFunnies.com) ============================
I used to watch golf on TV but my doctor told me that I need more exercise, so now I watch tennis.

#91 – “Barack Obama Thinks an ATM Ate Your Job“

[Note: Please check out my Sunday Special posting this week. In it, I will share some reflections on my past I have not shared before. ]

[This posting is based on a comment made by our President the other day that got little mention in the mainstream media even though it speaks of how he and other leftist Americans errorneously view our economy and the consequences of that. It provides an insight that you rarely get into the thinking of this administration and helps to explain the economic policies they pursue on our behalf and the tragic results of which we see more and more.] [bold emphases mine]

by Erick Erickson http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/06/15/barack-obama-thinks-an-atm-ate-your-job/ Wednesday, June 15th

Yesterday, Barack Obama gave away the game. Without actually using the words, Barack Obama admitted he is completely and utterly ignorant about job creation and economics. In an interview with the Today Show, Barack Obama declared that the unemployment rate remains so high because of ATMS.

Sadly, many people will agree with him because they lack the vision to see the whole picture. They see less bank tellers and more ATMs — much as Barack Obama does — and presume this must mean higher unemployment. This myth, and it is a myth, is older than even the great lament that cars put blacksmiths on the unemployment line by getting rid of the need for horse shoes. This left-wing populist thinking does not create jobs and often leads to dangerous policies that stifle the innovation that create the jobs that spring forth from the ATM’s replacing the bank tellers. Barack Obama sees less tellers at the banks because of ATM’s. But he does not see new IT workers at the bank to manage the ATM — higher paid than the tellers. He does not see the computer programmers. He does not see the manufacturers of the machines and their component parts.

Barack Obama should read Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson. The book was written in 1945 and debunks Obama’s myth succinctly. K. E. Campbell links to the relevant portion: Among the most viable of all economic delusions is the belief that machines on net balance create unemployment. Destroyed a thousand times, it has risen a thousand times out of its own ashes as hardy and vigorous as ever. Whenever there is a long-continued mass unemployment, machines get the blame anew. This fallacy is still the basis of many labor union practices… The belief that machines cause unemployment…leads to preposterous conclusions. Not only must we be causing unemployment with every technological improvement we make today, but primitive man must have started causing it with the first efforts he made to save himself from needless toil and sweat…

For starters, this Obama comment really is odd when he wants the government to subsidize the production of electric cars, which would destroy whole sectors of the economy centered around gas fueled cars. If he believes ATM’s destroy jobs, why does he want to subsidize government innovation in green jobs, which would destroy other jobs? Of course, the answer to that is that he wants to destroy the other sectors. There, in fact, is the most important and revelatory bit of this whole statement. Barack Obama premises his world view that innovation kills jobs. But, Barack Obama wants to innovate and advance technology in certain areas of the economy, e.g. government and green jobs. Therefore, we can conclude based on his own presuppositions about innovation that Barack Obama is intending to kill off sectors of the economy by forcing government to fund innovation in other areas of the economy.

It all makes sense now, even though it is an ignorant and wrong presupposition. Machines do not cause unemployment. They just move employment elsewhere — from the bank teller line to the IT line to the manufacturing line, etc. What’s more troubling about Barack Obama’s statement though — and the White House doubling down on it — is that it leads to one of two conclusions, both of which are horribly wrong. The first conclusion is that we should get rid of technology, declaring a veritable Butlerian Jihad. Doing so would cause companies to allocate resources more inefficiently, which might increase the labor pool in one sector of the economy, but assuredly wipe it out in another.

The second conclusion is that we must settle for this. It is arguable that we are in a period of stagnation with regard to innovation, invention, and technological progress. But settling for this as fact will most likely lead the government to take public policy steps to strengthen and expand the social safety net to compensate for lost jobs than to get government out of the way and fire up the private sector to move beyond the stagnation and innovation plateau. We can see already that Barack Obama has decided to go with the second option — to accept a decline and prepare for the decay caused by the decline instead of taking proactive steps to get the economy firing up again.

Barack Obama shows himself to be clearly ignorant of the way a free market economy works and innovates. Consequently, his economy policy is founded on that ignorance, accepts as gospel the decline of the United States, and, until he is replaced, we’re screwed.

#90 – The Media’s Sarah Palin – And the Truth!

You don’t have to be a Sarah Palin supporter – and there are countless millions (over 3 million on her Facebook page) – and almost 95 MILLION listings is indicated when you type her name in Google – and have to have been hiding under a rock for almost 3 years now to know she is the most villified politicianin recent memory. Papers from the UK to Africa are looking at her 24,000 pages of emails as Governor! And, they found nothing they could spin into a negative attack on her.) You also have to be totally cut off from all news to know that everything she says and does (even to the eyeglasses or the clothes she wears) is analyzed and often criticized and ridiculed. The question any fair-minded person has to ask is simply – Why?

“But she says so many crazy things”. Oh, does she. Let’s look at just 3 items:

1) Do you remember how Gov. Palin continues to be ridiculed for saying “I can see Russia from my house! to boast of her foreign policy statement. Did you know that is that she was asked in an interview before the ’08 election about the proximity of Russia to Alaska. It was in response to THIS question that she replied that Russia “could “actually be seen from Alaska”(which is true). The statement attributed to her was actually said in a comedic routine on an episode of “Saturday Night Live” whose intention was clearly to ridicule her in the midst of the ’08 Presidential campaign..

2)Then, on Aug 7, 2009, Sarah Palin was concerned about the possibilities for euthanasia in the Obama health care bill that was being proposed. She specifically mentioned Section 1233, a provision providing for Medicare funding for “end of life” sessions. “The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.” Liberals such as Howard Dean said that Palin had “just made that up… There’s nothing like euthanasia in the bill.” Columnist Andrew Sullivan (who theorized that her Downs Syndrome baby was actually that of her eldest daughter) called it a ‘”fantasy.” Even a “conservative” David Brooks called it “crazy.” Months later, PolitiFact.com [you do have to be careful even when a site uses the word “fact” in their name] , a website associated with the St. Petersburg Times, chose her statement as “Lie of the Year..” And yet on August 13, less than a week after her statement, the Senate quietly dropped Section 1233 without debate or public announcement. And of course, do you recall the media reporting this? Hmm...

3) More recently, on June, 6, 2011, this appeared in THE BOSTON HERALD by Chris Cassidy: “Sarah Palin yesterday insisted her claim at the Old North Church last week that Paul Revere "warned the British" during his famed 1775 ride — remarks that Democrats and the media roundly ridiculed — is actually historically accurate. And local historians are backing her up. Palin prompted howls of partisan derision when she said on Boston’s Freedom Trail that Revere "warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free."Palin insisted yesterday on Fox News Sunday she was right: "Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there. That, hey, you’re not going to succeed. You’re not going to take American arms." In fact, Revere’s own account of the ride in a 1798 letter seems to back up Palin’s claim. Revere describes how after his capture by British officers, he warned them "there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up”
In these and other instances, Gov. Palin statements were either misquoted, taken out of context, or simply proven to be true. But of course, the TRUTH was not reported (not widely any way) and the public was left with the intended negative impression from her media and other detractors. But again, the question to be asked is “Why?” Well, the answer is obvious when it comes to liberals. Even then we have to ask, “If she is as silly and as unpopular as not to be a serious candidate for President, why do they care so much in attacking her? Why did they chase her bus as it recently toured historical sites, looking for something to get on her? Why did the major news outlets send people to Alaska last week to each bring back 200 pounds of printed copies of the 24,000 emails she sent as Governor.? Have they come anywhere close to analyzing any politican in recent memory, in particular President Obama when he ran in ’08?

I agree with many people that the real reason for the unprecented media attention Sarah Palin receives is simply that people DO believe she could defeat President Obama if she were to run and that they are trying to destroy her before she ever officially enters the race. And what of those from her own party that attack her? I believe that her willingness to do things apart from the party establishment desires and simply in response to what she senses America needs and wants scares them.

In closing, I could share a lot more (and may in a future blog) but I invite you to check out at the library one of Sarah Palin’s books, “Going Rogue” and while I encourage you to read the entire book, do check out the third chapter that talks about what she did as Governor (VERY impressive for just 2 years) and the chapter towards the end that explains the reason why she left office before she completed her term. (Her other book, “America By Heart” explains her postions on many issues and is also a good read. Also, I just learned my library carriees a copy of an ’09 book entitled “The Persecution of Sarah Palin” that should be interesting reading.)

#89 - SUNDAY SPECIAL: Moral Lessons From Congressional Scandal

[I hope youll remember to tune in to *The Coral Ridge Hour]
[Note: While the following is in part a political story, I belief the two writers below share the moral implications for all the nation that the recent Congressional scandal points out. For that, I believe it deserves mention as part of a Sunday Special.]

June 9, 2010 John Hayward HumanEventsDaily@gmail,humanevents.com

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion,” wrote John Adams. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” It’s not hard to appreciate the wisdom of Adams in practical terms. A profoundly immoral people would be an unruly mob. Huge amounts of compulsive, often violent, force would be needed to maintain the most basic order. The American Constitution is among the highest achievements of human enlightenment. It is not a cage designed to hold a nation of brutal savages. If we would live as free people, governed with the minimum possible degree of compulsion, we must strive to deal with each other in a moral way, because we have to trust each other.

How can a moral people suffer the presence of deeply immoral leaders?
Discussion of these matters is often dismissed as the stuffy chattering of moralistic busybodies, but it’s actually a question of cold logic. We live beneath a gigantic government, so huge that it consumes or controls more than half of what America produces. Much of this government is justified in explicitly moral terms. We are always being lectured that everything from government-run health care, to vast subsidies for “alternative energy,” is the “right” or moral thing to do.

That’s one of the reasons it matters when someone like Rep. Anthony Weiner of New York is revealed to be utterly reprehensible – a compulsive liar who betrayed the trust of his wife, beginning not more than a month after they were married, and tried to ruin those who exposed him [On Monday he finally admitted to sending sexually explicit text messages to at least 6 women for years and then lied to colleagues and the public last weekend until forced to confess his lies.]

Even by the Left’s standards of collective ethics and submission to the State, it makes no sense to expect proper moral engineering from deeply immoral people. His sins of betrayal, deception, and negligence are the exact opposite of everything liberals expect us to believe about the demigods they would empower to manage our lives.[bold and italics emphases mine]


Symptoms of an Age-old Problem
By Chuck Colson nationalreviewonline.com http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/269055/symptoms-age-old-problem-chuck-colson June 7, 2011

The world is “a-twitter” over the latest case of a high-profile political figure having a moral failure. In this case, we’re hearing a lot about how the digital age contributes to many of the shameful acts we are witnessing in our culture. But all technology does is to magnify. What we see in this case is the age-old problem of human sin, along with the modern problem of refusing to recognize it and, therefore, restrain it.

The tragedy here is that congressmen, like schoolboys, have bought the modern myth: Life is all about us and our desires, and whatever we want to do is okay as long as we feel good doing it. We’ve lost the restraints of conscience and have abandoned the understanding of right and wrong that has been the foundation of Western ethics.
We are in an ethical mess today, caused by our embracing of relativism and abandoning truth and moral certitude. Nothing less than a total restoration of ethics can save us. People will recklessly pursue their passions as the consequence of what we Christians call “original sin” or “the Fall.” They can only be restrained in two ways: 1) personal integrity coupled with personal responsibility, or 2) the power of the state and the law. The less you have of the former, the more the latter becomes essential.

Freedom cannot be maintained without the cultivation of virtue. Whether it be Mark Sanford or Anthony Weiner or whoever will be the butt of jokes tomorrow, their follies are nothing more than symptoms of a false view of life that we embrace today in America — at our great peril.

— Former special counsel to President Nixon, Chuck Colson is the founder of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and has just produced a DVD series on ethics called “Doing the Right Thing.”_

today's THOT from MickeysFunnies.com

Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense.

#88 - Paul Ryan: The Truth About Medicare Will Wiin Out

1. As always, I encourage you to watch this week's broadcast of "The Coral Ridge (half)Hour" this Sunday. (in Orlando, 5 p.m., ch. 55.1) Also try to cast a broadcast of their other program "Cross Examine" that looks at todays issues from a Biblical worldview. (Check www.crossexamine.org for a listiing.)
2. Please check on Sunday for a Sunday Special posting.
3. I hope you will visit the site of Worldmag.com for more Christian views on the news. And be sure to check their great collection of political cartoons at: http://www.worldmag.com/editorialcartoons/ Remember: one picture is often worth a thousand words.]

[Note: This the third item this week focusing on the debate about reforming Medicare. The mainstream media rarely mentions what the Republicans are really proposing and then not necessarily with accuracy. People can be easily frightened and the shameless liberal strategy of MediSCARE needs to be countered with the truth. The consequences of not are just too dangerous.]

by Jason Mattera
05/27/2011 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=43761
Paul Ryan rejects the narrative being pushed by the liberal media that his proposal to reform Medicare is toxic for the Republican Party. “Demagoguery can work for a short period of time, but it doesn’t last because the truth comes out,” he told Human Events. “Time is on our side. Truth and the facts are on our side, and all we have to do is get the truth out there.” He added: “It just takes time because you’ve got to get the facts out. If you have a tight time compression, if you have a short period of time, the demagoguery can work, but it can’t last.”

Mediscare can work in the beginning, Ryan told Human Events, “but it doesn’t have any endurance because it’s based on total falsehoods.” And those falsehoods are numerous, which is why Human Events gave Ryan the opportunity to respond to his critics. Even so, when your opponents are accusing you of murder for offering up gradual reforms to a system everyone knows needs revamping, you’re admittedly in a tough position. In other words, Ryan’s opponents are perverse. That being said, let’s go-ahead with some myth busting.[1] When liberal politicians aren’t accusing their Republican colleagues of forcing the elderly into a life of eating cat food and living in refrigerator boxes, they cite a Congressional Budget office analysis that claims seniors would have to pay on average $6,000 more per year under the Ryan plan. “That CBO analysis forgot to include $7,800 in additional support for low-income seniors,” the Wisconsin Republican pointed out to us in a phone interview.

[2] The second point is, and this is an important one, the CBO “doesn’t put any credence into competition.” As Ryan points out, pumping competition and free-market principles into the GOP’s “prescription drug” plan resulted in the program’s coming in 41% under budget. “CBO just does a very crude analysis where they don’t even bother assuming that competition works.” The thing is: Competition clearly does work in bringing down the price of… anything, really.

[3] What about insurances companies? Critics argue that Ryan’s “premium support” model in which seniors get to choose from a list of different private plans is a boon to the insurance industry and thus must not be implemented. “The whole premise of that argument is that we should not have a private health insurance company and that the government should run healthcare. I reject the entire premise of it,” Ryan fired back. “We already have great examples in healthcare today of how you can increase quality and lower costs with private plans competing against each other.” Under “premium support,” Ryan continued, “the senior is the chooser and the decision maker, not the bureaucrat.” ...

...Democrats have decided to abandon trying to fix the coming debt tsunami and instead are trying to exploit his solutions for political advantage. But will it work? Hardly, says a confident Ryan: “I believe that is going to backfire on them. And I believe that the Republicans are way ahead of the political class. This whole conventional wisdom of running ‘Medi-scare’ is not going to work in a day and age when people know that Medicare is going bankrupt and they know that we have a debt crisis.”
Mr. Mattera is the editor of HUMAN EVENTS and the author of Obama Zombies: How the Liberal Machine Brainwashed My Generation (Simon & Schuster). He also hosts The Jason Mattera Show on News Talk Radio 77WABC. Previously, he was the Spokesman for Young America's Foundation and a TV correspondent for Michelle Malkin. Follow Jason on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

#87 - Lost at Sea; Save Medicare Now, or Go Under Later

[While there are more timely things in the news that I'd like to comment on, I will instead continue the theme of "caring for the elderly" that was introduced in this past Sunday's posting. I think the analogy presented is so dead on; talk about one story worth a thousand warnings.]

By: Chuck Colson|Breakpoint.com May 31, 2011

Medicare as we know it will change. The question is how. Because we sacrificed, or because we went bankrupt.

We really don’t get it, do we? A recent Associated Press poll reports that more than half of Americans believe we can balance the budget without cutting Medicare spending. As the late great Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.[I love that quote!]And the facts are clear. By the year 2024, unless we make real changes, Medicare will go broke. Done. Kaputt.

This is not a doomsday prediction like Harold Camping [who recently erroneously predicted the end of the world on May 21st]. It’s reality. Go ahead and Google “Medicare 2024” and read the results. Oh, and for the 6 out of 10 Americans who believe we don’t have to make any changes in social security, well, at least we have until 2036 before it runs out of cash. The urgent question before the American people is this: Are we willing to restrain ourselves now in a reasonable way or wait until bankruptcy forces us to -- with disastrous consequences?

Given the recent congressional election in New York, if the political pundits are right, the answer is frightening. In fact, Democratic politicians seem emboldened to hammer Republicans on Medicare reform, while many Republicans are becoming contortionists trying to avoid the topic. They’re both dead wrong. Even the liberal New York Times gets it. “Sooner or later,” it opined last Thursday, “Democrats will have to admit that Medicare cannot keep running as it is -- its medical costs are out of control.”

So, we fix things now, or we go under later. It’s like the old mariner's tale of the ship lost in a storm. The captain and eight surviving crew members found themselves in a small lifeboat far out to sea. By the captain’s calculations, given their position and the currents, it would take 24 days to reach shore. But the boat only had enough food and water to last 12 days. So, if all aboard agreed to half rations, they might just make it. But the crew refused. They demanded full rations, and they made it very clear to the captain that he had no choice in the matter.

The captain kept a diary of their perilous journey. By day 6 it became even more clear that they would run out of provisions before reaching safe harbor. Yet still the crew would not agree to reduce rations. Even though the sun beat down on them mercilessly, at least their bellies were full and they had yet to feel real thirst. By day 12, the captain recorded that the food and water were gone. Yet shore was nowhere in sight. By day 13, panic set in among the crew. It took every ounce of leadership skill to keep order on that little boat, surrounded by the endless expanse of the sea. On day 24, just as the captain had predicted the currents had dragged the boat ashore. At least that’s what the recovery crew surmised after they found the captain’s diary aboard. Along with eight dead sailors. The captain was nowhere to be found -- unless the gnawed bones found on board...well, that’s another story.

Folks, the moral of the story -- and of our predicament today -- is that we can make it to safety if we marshal our resources wisely. Or we can starve to death later. We must save Medicare and Social Security. But to do so, the American people will have to summon the courage to make sacrifices. And to do that, we’ll have to re-learn the what was once called the Protestant work ethic, and re-invigorate a nearly lost Christian virtue called delayed gratification.[emphases mine]

FURTHER READING AND INFORMATION
Running on Medicare the Right Way,The New York Times | May 25, 2011
Medicare to be Broke by 2024, Joe Wiesenthal | The Business Insider | May 13, 2011

#86 - Sunday Special - Caring for the Elderly - A Biblical Look

Chuck Colson|Breakpoint.com. May 24, 2011

[It pains me to see how so many seniors react when people who have no intention of "driving grandma over the cliff" are shamelessly accused of such when they try to explain the insolvency of Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid unless some changes are made. What started out under FDR as charity has predictably turned into an entitlement that those in government who want to corall the "senior vote" to hold onto their power continually exploit. What should be the church's role in caring for seniors? The following is a good starting point for such a needed discussion.}

What to do with mom or dad when they cant take care of themselves any longer?... I was traveling in Texas recently when I bumped into an old friend -- a man whose opinion on financial matters I really value. We got into a fascinating conversation; let me share it with you. My friend said, “I’m in a very good position financially. But both my parents, and my wife’s parents, are on Social Security. One night I sat down and thought about the cost to the taxpayers of the members of my own family. And then I realized that my wife and I could easily pay for those benefits ourselves. But somehow it had never occurred to us that we ought to.”

His comments really struck me. I remembered that when I was ten years old, my grandparents moved in with us. During the Depression, there were no government programs or nursing homes for the elderly. When relatives got sick, their families took care of them. But it wasn’t easy. My grandmother had terminal cancer. My mother exhausted herself caring for her day and night and never complained, even though she had so many other responsibilities, including me. But my point is that it never occurred to my parents that they were making any special sacrifice. This is just what you did for your family.

How different things are today. Now, when an elderly person becomes ill, it’s typical for relatives to strip him of all his assets, and then put him on Medicaid. Is this the right thing to do? Is it honest to take away everything from a sick loved one, and then claim he or she has no assets? And how do our parents feel when we choose to put them in a home instead of bringing them into our home? A bigger question is, what is our country’s philosophy now, given our current debt crisis? Do we go back to caring for our own, or do we palm everybody off on Uncle Sam?

Well, the Biblical model is quite clear: You care for your own family if you possibly can. Centuries of church history back up this view. I know what many of you are thinking: If I take care of mom, I’d have to quit my job. And if we pay for all of her care -- prescriptions, doctor bills -- we’d lose everything we put away for our children’s education. These are legitimate concerns. But we ought to be talking about it in the church. So far, all we’ve seen is religious believers attacking lawmakers for cutting programs for the poor and sick, bankruptcy or no bankruptcy. It doesn’t seem to have occurred to these folks to ask what the Bible says about this.

Families are responsible for sick and elderly relatives, certainly if they can well afford to help. (The Bible has a lot to say about the evil of debt, too, I might add.) I have to admit: My own mother died in an accident before I had to make any difficult decision about her care. Although, as many of you know, I do have an autistic grandson, and I’m not about to let the state take over our job. But most Christians will have to face this choice. Do we know what the Bible teaches? Are we prepared to follow God’s commands? [bold emphases mine]

A Senior HaHa - You know you're growing old when the bag boy volunteers to help load groceries into your car-in the "ten items or less" lane.

#85 - Is Washington Doing Enough to Save the Economy?

From AskHeritage.com June 3, 2011 (The Heritage Foundation)

Newsflash from The New York Times: President Barack Obama’s stimulus did not work. No, the Times doesn’t say that in so many words, but in an op-ed this morning, the paper laments the sputtering economy and the fact that Washington just isn’t doing enough to help the economy grow. The problem, of course, is that Washington has done too much of the wrong things to get the economy moving again.

The economic news that’s really sticking ... is revised data released last week that shows the economy’s growth stuck at 1.8 percent, slow consumer spending, stagnant wages, higher prices for gas and food, the poor housing market, flagging consumer confidence and a recent Labor Department report showing a higher-than-expected rise in claims for jobless benefits. The Times complains:
*The grim numbers tell an unavoidable truth: The economy is not growing nearly fast enough to dent unemployment. Unfortunately, no one in Washington is pushing policies to promote stronger growth now.*

What the Times forgot to mention, though, is that Washington over the past two years has done a lot—a whole lot—with the biggest ticket item being the Obama-Reid-Pelosi $787 billion stimulus that was designed to “create or save” 3.5 million new jobs by 2011. Despite the extraordinarily high cost, that didn’t happen, and unemployment has increased to 9 percent....

For the American people,... that reality is hitting home.Joseph Lupton, an economist at JP Morgan Chase and Company, says, “There are pretty big costs to not really generating a sizeable recovery.” And as The Wall Street Journal reports, those costs are high unemployment, with 5.8 million people out of work for more than six months.
The House GOP last week issued a proposal to spur job growth, including reducing regulation and taxes and promoting free trade – essentially aimed at making it easier for businesses to grow, thereby growing the economy and reducing unemployment. And, like clockwork, the left went on the attack claiming that it’s nothing more than “old ideas, fancy new clip art,” while the Times described it as “more of the same ‘fixes’ that Republicans always recommend no matter the problem.” Ironically, though, the left is calling for more of their same ideas –“government help” must come to the rescue, the Times says.

And how do they plan to pay for it? Higher taxes to finance more spending, with “a combined federal and state top tax rate on earnings of 62%.” The government needs to stay home. Brian Riedl explained why government intervention to boost the economy doesn’t work: *Removing water from one end of a swimming pool and pouring it in the other end will not raise the overall water level. Similarly, taking dollars from one part of the economy and distributing it to another part of the economy will not expand the economy.*

There are no-cost ways to get the economy moving again, such as reforming regulations to reduce unnecessary business costs, reforming the tort system, removing barriers to energy production, reducing taxes on companies’ foreign earnings if they bring their earnings home, and passing pending free trade agreements. And with Congress confronting spiraling debt, they need to get their economic house in order. Despite all the “help” President Obama delivered in the first two years of his presidency, the economy is stuck in the mud and can’t get out. It is overburdened by taxes and regulations, and businesses don’t want to move forward into the dark abyss absent some certainty that the government won’t shackle them with more taxes and regulations down the road. America has had enough of that brand of “help.” It’s time for something different.