Let me set the record straight for any of you wondering. I do not believe in global, conglomerate governments. I do not think the US should concede any of her liberties, freedoms, or rights to a global courts system, government, or organization. I do not care what other countries think about my country. I think the EU was a horrible choice for Europe and applaud Switzerland's continued isolationist stand.***see footnote*** I have lived there. They are self contained, peaceful, and take care of their own (yes, they are socialized, that is for another essay). While living there in 1991 Swiss citizens celebrated their country's 700th anniversary. It was a huge celebration and rightfully so. They have survived two world wars by remaining neutral. They had, until recently, an unsurpassed banking system that guaranteed your privacy, and they live the boy scout motto:
Be Prepared. (ie their military and fortifications)
Don't get me wrong. I don't think the US could be neutral, or completely isolationist like Switzerland, who has made some concessionary agreements with the EU which I think have come about mostly out of necessity. However, the minute we give up our rights to a global court or organization like the UN, we are in for a giant, stinking heap load of Ship High In Transit. Before looking at Obama's plans for change on the global level let's review some of the current policy and suggestions.
From the Citizens for Global Solutions website:
Our Vision:
Citizens for Global Solutions envisions a future in which nations work together to abolish war, protect our rights and freedoms, and solve the problems facing humanity that no nation can solve alone. This vision requires effective democratic global institutions that will apply the rule of law while respecting the diversity and autonomy of national and local communities.
Our Mission:
We are a membership organization working to build political will in the United States to achieve our vision. We do this by educating Americans about our global interdependence, communicating global concerns to public officials, and developing proposals to create, reform, and strengthen international institutions such as the United Nations.
Sounds good right? Ideologically, who could argue with this position? The problem is completely wrapped up in what Thomas Jefferson stated so many years ago: "Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. " The fear that the ICC would have an anti-American prosecutor who would miss no opportunity to prosecute and find guilty any American citizen while traveling abroad of committing crimes of various nature, is not misguided.
"The International Criminal Court represents even greater threats to American sovereignty and Constitutionally-guaranteed liberties. Unlike the American system of justice, the ICC would not perform trials by juries of peers; would not guarantee bail; and would not grant prisoners the right to face their accusers. The United States judicial system would not be permitted to intervene on behalf of American citizens.
More frightening is the manner in which the UN will choose the eighteen judges who will each serve for nine year terms. They will be elected by a two-thirds vote of the nations which ratify the court. This was the same process used to oust the United States last Spring from its long-held seat on the United Nations Human Rights Commission. The United States would hold one vote against the likes of Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria, the very nations which now protect and even foster terrorists. Will the court elect a judge from Red China, where American rights aren’t just foreign, but represent the enemy? It doesn’t take a genius to see the direction the UN’s court will take when American soldiers stand on trial.
There is one more important point that must not be overlooked concerning the overwhelming power that the ICC will hold. The Court can prosecute anyone who violates UN treaties, including environmental agreements like the Biodiversity Treaty and those covering World Heritage Sites. This one provision makes the ICC a direct threat to ALL American citizens. Case in point was the Crown Butte Gold Mine that was shut down by UN intervention in 1997. Crown Butte was located on private property, miles from Yellowstone National Park. Yellowstone was designated by the UN to be a World Heritage Site. The UN determined that the mine was a direct threat to Yellowstone and declared it the first ever "endangered" World Heritage Site. Had there been an International Criminal Court in place, there is little doubt that the Crown Butte owners would have been put on trial for violating a UN treaty." (http://www.americanpolicy.org/un/uncriminalcourt.htm)
History has shown the UN to be corruptible. Look at the oil for food program that helped Sadaam Hussein continue his regime. Many leaders of the UN have proven themselves to be corrupt and dishonest individuals. "The members of the U.N. staff administering the program [Food for Oil] have been accused of gross incompetence, mismanagement, and possible complicity with the Iraqi regime in perpetrating the biggest scandal in U.N. history." (http://www.heritage.org/research/Internationalorganizations/bg1748.cfm)
A new task force to ferret out corruption in the UN was supposed to deliver it's report last week to the General Assembly. In it "the report said that 22 vendors had been sanctioned by the United Nations during its years in operation and that it had identified more than 20 fraud and corruption schemes involved in about $630 million in contracts." (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/22/america/nations.php)
What does this have to do with our President Elect, Barack Obama you ask? Here ladies and gentlemen, is part of Barack Obama's vision for the US's role in the UN and a one world global government. Bill S.2433. "Obama's bill S2433 would require the U.S. to initially direct .7 percent of our GNP into the United Nations coffers for distribution as they see fit, for 'food' to third world nations. Under earlier agreements this would evolve into a national tax on the U.S. with the UN attempting to levy this on all first world nations.
The U.N. would have the power to increase this rate of taxation.
The U.S. would be required to surrender some of its sovereignty over foreign aid by putting it under UN control. The bill would force the U.S. to sign onto the U.N.'s Millennium Declaration, which would commit us not only to 'banning small arms and light weapons' but also to adhere to the International Criminal Court Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol."
Furthermore, "In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that (U.N.) declaration commits nations to banning 'small arms and light weapons' and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention of Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of the Child.
Those U.N. protocols would make U.S. law on issues ranging from the 2nd Amendment to energy usage and parental rights all subservient to United Nations whims." (http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/united_nations/news.php?q=1210170368)
If you haven't heard about the UN's Convention on the Rights of a Child, you really should look into it. "It's purpose was to craft a new system to resolve relationship and children's disputes.
The impact of the CONVENTION is particularly ominous in light of the fact that the United States Constitution declares treaties to be the law of the land. Under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause of Article VI, all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution of laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
The CONVENTION would give children the "right" to disregard parental authority. Although several of the treaty's provisions offer generally positive, non-offensive platitudes, a substantial portion of this charter undermines parental rights. The U.N. CONVENTION would: (1) transfer parental rights and responsibilities to the state. (SB 1051-B passed by the 1993 Oregon legislature), (2) undermine the family by vesting children with various fundamental rights which advance notions of the child's autonomy and freedom from parental guidance; and (3) establish bureaucracies and institutions of a national and international nature designed to promote “the ideas proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations and to investigate and prosecute parents who violate their children's rights. The state will determine the child's "best interest" (SB 1051-B from the 1993 Oregon legislature and SB 689 from the 1997 Oregon legislature).
All children must be immediately registered after birth. Severe limitations will be placed on the parent's right to direct and train their children. Section 1 of Article 13 declares a child's right to "seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice." Article 14 says children have a legal right to object to all religious training. Alternatively, children may assert their right against parental objections to participation's in other religions.
Parents could be prevented from forbidding their child to associate with people deemed to be objectionable companions, i.e. gangs, cults, racist organizations, etc.
Article 18 says the state must assist parents in the raising of children (SB 1051 and SB 689). It calls on the State to co-parent by rendering "appropriate assistance to parents and legal guardians in the performance of their child-rearing responsibilities and shall ensure the development of institutions, facilities and services for the care of children", i.e. Parent training, Family Resource Centers, etc. Corporal punishment is prohibited. Article 43 says international experts will parent our children (SB 689)." (http://www.comeandtakeit.com/unchild.html#RITEOKID)
So far, we have avoided ratifying this convention due to legal arguments over sovereignty and federalism. You can thank President George W. Bush for protecting your right's as a parent. His administration has opposed this measure. What will Obama do? During the Walden University Presidential Debate, both candidates were asked specifically about this convention. Obama's broad answer was, "It is important that the US return to its position as a respectable leader and promoter of Human Rights. As President I will review this and other treaties and assure the US assumes it’s global leadership of human rights." However, it is clear in his bill S.2433 he wants the US to completely ratify this convention as it currently is written.
Michael Ferris, a writter for Christian News Wire believes, "Obama's wants to turn every family and every state legislature over to the supervision of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. They will condescendingly tell us why our traditional desires for our children are not acceptable in this day and age. They will explain us to ourselves and to others while usurping control of our family and utterly destroying the principle of American self-government."
To further this point take into account what Austin Ruse, president of the New York and Washington DC-based Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM) has said.
"There is growing pressure both internationally and domestically for the United States to get with the new international program. The charge that America is isolationist rests largely on our refusal to ratify these treaties. Ignoring them is now seen as a remnant of the discredited Bush days.
Obama has endorsed CEDAW as has his vice presidential running mate Joe Biden. Both are in favor of the ICC, too. It is likely that, with a larger and more left-leaning Senate, a whole slew of left-leaning treaties will be ratified.
Besides existing treaties there is also the threat that an Obama administration will rejuvenate what has been a fairly sleepy United Nations. In the Clinton years, there were repeated global conferences on social policy. That died out in the Bush years. There is a lot of pent-up energy that will explode if Obama takes the oath of office.
But there are even larger issues than these particular treaties or new UN conferences. There is larger mischief afoot. It is called global governance.
The traditional understanding of international relations and international law is that they regulate behavior among and between sovereign states. By contrast, global governance holds that international relations and international law should have more to do with regulating the behavior of individual citizens within each state and that these decisions should not be left to sovereign states, but to international bodies like the United Nations and its various commissions and committees."
I fear that change is surely coming. Not just an increase in our taxes and our big brother government that will take care of you by spreading the wealth, but change that will strip us all of the rights our fore fathers fought so long and hard to ensure that we had. Our very constitution, which Obama has already stated is fundamentally flawed, will be under attack. I call for an uprising of voices, ideas, and grass root movements that will uphold the founding principals of our great country. We need to stand united against the tyranny that may well be coming our way. Will you join me? Where do we start? Share your ideas and let's get rolling before it is too late.
***It should be noted that Switzerland had applied for membership to the EU, but that was halted due to their referendum on the EEA. Also of note, they have made some bi-lateral agreements with the EU, but still remain their own independent country
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
My Point of View
Jeff Scrieber at America's Right posted an excellent essay that really sums up my feelings very well. Since I am tired and need to hit the gym to burn off some of this pent up frustration, I will post his words. You can echo them as mine. Chin up. It's not bad yet.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
The 44th President of the United States
For two hours now, I have been trying to put words on paper. It hasn't been easy.
As a man who believes in the virtue of fundamental fairness, I am delighted that the United States of America will, come January, see its first African-American president. I was oddly moved by seeing Jesse Jackson's tears in the Grant Park audience tonight. As much as I may dislike the man, as awful as he may be on so many levels, it must have been an incredible experience for him and seeing him overcome by emotion without a camera directly in his face weighed heavily on me. It was not so long ago, after all, that black men were denied the right to vote and, tonight, one was elected president of the United States. That alone is a testament to the freedoms and opportunity afforded by the United States of America and everything for which She stands.
As an American, however, I wish that president could have been someone else. My God, we elected a socialist tonight. My God, we elected a man who has done nothing to show that he actually likes this country, nonetheless has its best interests at heart.
Still strugging for words, looking to connect my head with my fingers, I find myself disheartened because, if tonight is an indication of the near future, my daughter will not grow up in the same America I did. I find myself disappointed that my fellow Americans were not able to see past the rhetoric, past the spin, past the cloud of Bush Derangement Syndrome enough to do the right thing yesterday. I find myself angry knowing that more could have been done to prevail, that it was a better-run campaign and not a better candidate which won this race. I'm embarrassed that the electorate freely elected a man who, even in his victory speech, said that American "cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers" and somehow managed to speak of humility while delivering a speech before more than a million people. Humility, as Charles Krauthammer later said, is not one of Obama's strong points.
Yet, oddly, I find myself optimistic. Sure, I know full well that this loss will be blamed on Sarah Palin and the conservative movement as a whole, that news cycles for the next few days will focus on how the GOP needs to transmogrify itself into more of a big-tent party, that it was the religious right which lost this election for John McCain, ever concerned about their petty values and driven by their mindless faith in God. I also know, however, that this past evening's loss in reality falls squarely on the shoulders of a party and campaign mechanism that was, just like we saw party-wide in 2006, somehow hesitant and afraid to fight hard from its own traditional principled foundation.
We can Monday-morning quarterback as much as we want. We can talk about the inevitable, below-the-fold piece in the New York Times commending John McCain for his "respectful" campaign, and how the very presence of that piece will run to the heart of what is wrong with the Republican party and what needs to be done to retake the Senate, the House, and the residence and offices at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Strangely enough, it is that inevitable battle within the party which has be so optimisic. The GOP has some 'splainin to do, a real knock-down, drag out fight. The debate will be between (1) those who believe that moving the party to the center, that expanding the pie and building a bigger tent is the answer to the question posed tonight when America willingly elected a radical socialist to the presidency, and (2) those who believe firmly that America is a right-of-center nation and pandering to the center and left through La Raza events and cap-and-trade programs and the socialization of economic losses does nothing to benefit the GOP or the country as a whole.
I'm confident that the latter faction will prevail, that actual conservatives like Bobby Jindal and Mike Pence and Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin and Eric Cantor and Jim DeMint will be able to guide the conservative movement to, once again, the forefront of American politics by aggresively stressing and eloquently articulating the merits of fiscal conservatism, of smaller government, of free market principles, of a strong national defense and solid family values. Aided by the disastrous effects Obama's policies are sure to have on the economy, on our security and more, the process may not take as long as originally thought.
Six years, a good friend of mine said tonight, until we retake Congress. I think it will be less.
As corny as it may sound, it IS always darkest before the dawn. From Harry Truman came Dwight Eisenhower, from Jimmy Carter came Ronald Reagan. Tomorrow and the next day, the news cycles will surely not be easy and the pundits will be nothing short of ruthless -- but rest assured that news of the death of conservatism has been greatly exaggerated.
What these pundits, critics and know-it-all types fail to understand is that conservatism is bigger than John McCain, bigger than Grant Park, bigger than 2008. Conservatism wasn't invented by Reagan, by Barry Goldwater, Theodore Roosevelt or anyone else. Conservatism is not a trend, not a fashion or a theory designed for fleeting consideration before fading into fodder for books forever doomed to collect dust on the shelves of the elites. Yes, it will be written off tomorrow as out-of-touch, as antiquated, as too rooted in religion and the free market, but conservatism has been written off before -- it was written off in 1976 after the disappointment of Gerald Ford and Bob Dole; it was written off in 1992 after Democrats obtained control of the House, Senate and the White House; it was written off again in 1996 after Bob Dole's anticlimactic presidential run.
Barack Obama's victory a few hours ago was a turning point, a sea change pending for the Republican party as a direct result of the so-called "Big Tent" approach to party politics, a widely-inclusive but short-sighted approach which blurred the lines of the basic tenets of conservatism -- strong national defense and foreign policy, responsible and pro-growth fiscal policy, rich and grounded family and moral values. The more people, the more factions and more groups the GOP tried to cram into the left side of the Big Tent, the more those on the right side, the ones that had been there from the start and the ones who can deliver America to prosperity and keep Her there, were pushed out into a deluge of apathy and spite.
In these upcoming news cycles, the debate among those on the political left and right will surely include analysis of the relevance of conservatives and conservatism. If conservatives are so plentiful and so powerful, they'll ask, why wasn't it Barack Obama who was delivering the concession speech, why isn't it Cindy McCain measuring the drapes and preparing for her White House Christmas Special? Over the next few months, the pundits and pinheads will put forth the proposition that the country as a whole is moving to the left at a rapid pace. Look at the turnout numbers in the primaries, they'll say, pointing to the popular vote count discrepancy between democrats and republicans. Look at the general election, they'll maintain, pointing to numbers which show that Obama won by a larger margin than any democrat since Lyndon Johnson.
Don't believe what you hear. Don't let the same bitterness seen in so many liberals, that nasty venom and vitriol so artfully concealed behind empty smiles and yoga pants and gritty spirulina smoothies, don't let it seep into your daily lives. Don't allow it to happen. The core principles of conservatism--starting with a limited central government--are the very principles on which America was founded and, so long as we survive the next four years, those principles will be the reason that the party, and America as a whole, emerge stronger than ever.
Remember that the movement transcends the candidate. Remember that the principles transcend the election.
Keep your chin up, America -- Bobby Jindal is headed to Iowa next month.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
The 44th President of the United States
For two hours now, I have been trying to put words on paper. It hasn't been easy.
As a man who believes in the virtue of fundamental fairness, I am delighted that the United States of America will, come January, see its first African-American president. I was oddly moved by seeing Jesse Jackson's tears in the Grant Park audience tonight. As much as I may dislike the man, as awful as he may be on so many levels, it must have been an incredible experience for him and seeing him overcome by emotion without a camera directly in his face weighed heavily on me. It was not so long ago, after all, that black men were denied the right to vote and, tonight, one was elected president of the United States. That alone is a testament to the freedoms and opportunity afforded by the United States of America and everything for which She stands.
As an American, however, I wish that president could have been someone else. My God, we elected a socialist tonight. My God, we elected a man who has done nothing to show that he actually likes this country, nonetheless has its best interests at heart.
Still strugging for words, looking to connect my head with my fingers, I find myself disheartened because, if tonight is an indication of the near future, my daughter will not grow up in the same America I did. I find myself disappointed that my fellow Americans were not able to see past the rhetoric, past the spin, past the cloud of Bush Derangement Syndrome enough to do the right thing yesterday. I find myself angry knowing that more could have been done to prevail, that it was a better-run campaign and not a better candidate which won this race. I'm embarrassed that the electorate freely elected a man who, even in his victory speech, said that American "cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers" and somehow managed to speak of humility while delivering a speech before more than a million people. Humility, as Charles Krauthammer later said, is not one of Obama's strong points.
Yet, oddly, I find myself optimistic. Sure, I know full well that this loss will be blamed on Sarah Palin and the conservative movement as a whole, that news cycles for the next few days will focus on how the GOP needs to transmogrify itself into more of a big-tent party, that it was the religious right which lost this election for John McCain, ever concerned about their petty values and driven by their mindless faith in God. I also know, however, that this past evening's loss in reality falls squarely on the shoulders of a party and campaign mechanism that was, just like we saw party-wide in 2006, somehow hesitant and afraid to fight hard from its own traditional principled foundation.
We can Monday-morning quarterback as much as we want. We can talk about the inevitable, below-the-fold piece in the New York Times commending John McCain for his "respectful" campaign, and how the very presence of that piece will run to the heart of what is wrong with the Republican party and what needs to be done to retake the Senate, the House, and the residence and offices at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Strangely enough, it is that inevitable battle within the party which has be so optimisic. The GOP has some 'splainin to do, a real knock-down, drag out fight. The debate will be between (1) those who believe that moving the party to the center, that expanding the pie and building a bigger tent is the answer to the question posed tonight when America willingly elected a radical socialist to the presidency, and (2) those who believe firmly that America is a right-of-center nation and pandering to the center and left through La Raza events and cap-and-trade programs and the socialization of economic losses does nothing to benefit the GOP or the country as a whole.
I'm confident that the latter faction will prevail, that actual conservatives like Bobby Jindal and Mike Pence and Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin and Eric Cantor and Jim DeMint will be able to guide the conservative movement to, once again, the forefront of American politics by aggresively stressing and eloquently articulating the merits of fiscal conservatism, of smaller government, of free market principles, of a strong national defense and solid family values. Aided by the disastrous effects Obama's policies are sure to have on the economy, on our security and more, the process may not take as long as originally thought.
Six years, a good friend of mine said tonight, until we retake Congress. I think it will be less.
As corny as it may sound, it IS always darkest before the dawn. From Harry Truman came Dwight Eisenhower, from Jimmy Carter came Ronald Reagan. Tomorrow and the next day, the news cycles will surely not be easy and the pundits will be nothing short of ruthless -- but rest assured that news of the death of conservatism has been greatly exaggerated.
What these pundits, critics and know-it-all types fail to understand is that conservatism is bigger than John McCain, bigger than Grant Park, bigger than 2008. Conservatism wasn't invented by Reagan, by Barry Goldwater, Theodore Roosevelt or anyone else. Conservatism is not a trend, not a fashion or a theory designed for fleeting consideration before fading into fodder for books forever doomed to collect dust on the shelves of the elites. Yes, it will be written off tomorrow as out-of-touch, as antiquated, as too rooted in religion and the free market, but conservatism has been written off before -- it was written off in 1976 after the disappointment of Gerald Ford and Bob Dole; it was written off in 1992 after Democrats obtained control of the House, Senate and the White House; it was written off again in 1996 after Bob Dole's anticlimactic presidential run.
Barack Obama's victory a few hours ago was a turning point, a sea change pending for the Republican party as a direct result of the so-called "Big Tent" approach to party politics, a widely-inclusive but short-sighted approach which blurred the lines of the basic tenets of conservatism -- strong national defense and foreign policy, responsible and pro-growth fiscal policy, rich and grounded family and moral values. The more people, the more factions and more groups the GOP tried to cram into the left side of the Big Tent, the more those on the right side, the ones that had been there from the start and the ones who can deliver America to prosperity and keep Her there, were pushed out into a deluge of apathy and spite.
In these upcoming news cycles, the debate among those on the political left and right will surely include analysis of the relevance of conservatives and conservatism. If conservatives are so plentiful and so powerful, they'll ask, why wasn't it Barack Obama who was delivering the concession speech, why isn't it Cindy McCain measuring the drapes and preparing for her White House Christmas Special? Over the next few months, the pundits and pinheads will put forth the proposition that the country as a whole is moving to the left at a rapid pace. Look at the turnout numbers in the primaries, they'll say, pointing to the popular vote count discrepancy between democrats and republicans. Look at the general election, they'll maintain, pointing to numbers which show that Obama won by a larger margin than any democrat since Lyndon Johnson.
Don't believe what you hear. Don't let the same bitterness seen in so many liberals, that nasty venom and vitriol so artfully concealed behind empty smiles and yoga pants and gritty spirulina smoothies, don't let it seep into your daily lives. Don't allow it to happen. The core principles of conservatism--starting with a limited central government--are the very principles on which America was founded and, so long as we survive the next four years, those principles will be the reason that the party, and America as a whole, emerge stronger than ever.
Remember that the movement transcends the candidate. Remember that the principles transcend the election.
Keep your chin up, America -- Bobby Jindal is headed to Iowa next month.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
A truly sad day
Can't sleep. I'm sure tomorrow will be all the worse for lack of it, but I can't sleep. I cannot wrap my head around the fact that 1/2 of the voting public just helped perpetrate the largest fraud ever committed against their own country. A truly sad day indeed. My next biggest worry is how long will it take for Israel to preemptively strike Iran. Have we just voted for the true beginnings of WWIII?
My hope and peace is in knowing that God has a plan for our country. And although we have our free agency and may make choices that hurt us, I am secure in my knowledge and testimony of the gospel. No one can take that away from me. The most important thing now is to continue to raise up the new generation to be a righteous one. Families are forever. Governments come and go.
My hope and peace is in knowing that God has a plan for our country. And although we have our free agency and may make choices that hurt us, I am secure in my knowledge and testimony of the gospel. No one can take that away from me. The most important thing now is to continue to raise up the new generation to be a righteous one. Families are forever. Governments come and go.
One of the most Distgusting Displays of Religious Bigotry I've Ever Seen
My daughter and I were watching a video of voter intimidation posted on Breitbart TV online and she noticed this headline about the mormon church. Stand up for yourself, your beliefs, and your faith. Write a letter of complaint to this group couragecampaign.org
My Lucky Day
Yesterday was officially my lucky day. I am counting on this luck continuing into today ushering in a McCain/Palin victory.
My first order of business after dropping the oldest three at school was to head to the church for the official start of yoga. I will be teaching 2 yoga classes a week for anyone who wants to attend. I only had 3 show up, but one was so grateful that she brought me a warm plate of brownies "for FHE. I appreciate you spending your morning here for us, so I know you won't have time to bake anything for FHE so I wanted to bring something for your family." How sweet. I'm still eating them this morning. Yummy.
After yoga class I headed to Sam's Club to stock up. My kids really like their pork loin marinated in portabello mushroom and something. It sells for $3.87 a pound. While looking through the selection I noticed a number of them marked at $1.88 a pound. Strange. I knew it had to be a mistake, but loaded up on 5 or 6 and headed to the checkout lane. I notified the clerk that this price was probably wrong (part of my obsessive need to be brutally honest at all times) and asked her to check it. She called over the supervisor and sure enough, they had been tagged with the assorted pork chops price. However, they honored the price on the sticker so that I paid $23 for pork loins that should've cost me over $60. Wow. How lucky can one get? Obviously it wasn't everyone's lucky day.
As I was checking out I received a frantic phone call from Wade stating that he had ONCE AGAIN locked his keys in his car, could I please come rescue him. (This happens quite routinely with Wade. Maybe I should by him one of those grandpa/janitor belt key clippy things that keep your keys safely attached to your pants?) When I told him it would be 1/2 hour because I was in a different city he was irate. "Why are you in Lakeland? You should just shop in Winter Haven!!!" Well, yes that would an option IF WINTER HAVEN HAD A COSTCO OR SAMS CLUB!!!! Sorry. Back to my story. After rescuing Wade, I headed to my local gun shop.
Yes, you read that correctly, my local gun shop. I have been wanting to buy a semi-automatic rifle now for a few months and decided to take matters into my own hands since Wade hasn't had the time to shop around with me. I had talked with this particular gun shop owner a few times in the past week. He had a good idea of what I was looking for, since I really didn't. I am now the proud owner of a Ruger, Mini 14, semi-automatic, .223 gauge range rifle with a 30 round ammo clip. (Now all I need to do is learn how to load and shoot the damn thing.) Back to my lucky day. When I was looking at the rifle the owner told me it would be $399. Fine. I could do that. As he was writing it up he looks at me and says, "wow. This is your lucky day. I told you $399. The tag says it is actually $499." I look at the tag, sure enough, $499. "Okay," I said, "I'll pay you the actual price." "No, no. I told you $399. That's what you'll pay." I made up the difference in ammo. Firing range, here I come. for a great web page about this baby check out http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger_RanchRifle.htm
I was sorely tempted to press my luck and make a quick stop at a local car dealer to see if I could get my promised Ferrari for a Camry price.
My first order of business after dropping the oldest three at school was to head to the church for the official start of yoga. I will be teaching 2 yoga classes a week for anyone who wants to attend. I only had 3 show up, but one was so grateful that she brought me a warm plate of brownies "for FHE. I appreciate you spending your morning here for us, so I know you won't have time to bake anything for FHE so I wanted to bring something for your family." How sweet. I'm still eating them this morning. Yummy.
After yoga class I headed to Sam's Club to stock up. My kids really like their pork loin marinated in portabello mushroom and something. It sells for $3.87 a pound. While looking through the selection I noticed a number of them marked at $1.88 a pound. Strange. I knew it had to be a mistake, but loaded up on 5 or 6 and headed to the checkout lane. I notified the clerk that this price was probably wrong (part of my obsessive need to be brutally honest at all times) and asked her to check it. She called over the supervisor and sure enough, they had been tagged with the assorted pork chops price. However, they honored the price on the sticker so that I paid $23 for pork loins that should've cost me over $60. Wow. How lucky can one get? Obviously it wasn't everyone's lucky day.
As I was checking out I received a frantic phone call from Wade stating that he had ONCE AGAIN locked his keys in his car, could I please come rescue him. (This happens quite routinely with Wade. Maybe I should by him one of those grandpa/janitor belt key clippy things that keep your keys safely attached to your pants?) When I told him it would be 1/2 hour because I was in a different city he was irate. "Why are you in Lakeland? You should just shop in Winter Haven!!!" Well, yes that would an option IF WINTER HAVEN HAD A COSTCO OR SAMS CLUB!!!! Sorry. Back to my story. After rescuing Wade, I headed to my local gun shop.
Yes, you read that correctly, my local gun shop. I have been wanting to buy a semi-automatic rifle now for a few months and decided to take matters into my own hands since Wade hasn't had the time to shop around with me. I had talked with this particular gun shop owner a few times in the past week. He had a good idea of what I was looking for, since I really didn't. I am now the proud owner of a Ruger, Mini 14, semi-automatic, .223 gauge range rifle with a 30 round ammo clip. (Now all I need to do is learn how to load and shoot the damn thing.) Back to my lucky day. When I was looking at the rifle the owner told me it would be $399. Fine. I could do that. As he was writing it up he looks at me and says, "wow. This is your lucky day. I told you $399. The tag says it is actually $499." I look at the tag, sure enough, $499. "Okay," I said, "I'll pay you the actual price." "No, no. I told you $399. That's what you'll pay." I made up the difference in ammo. Firing range, here I come. for a great web page about this baby check out http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger_RanchRifle.htm
I was sorely tempted to press my luck and make a quick stop at a local car dealer to see if I could get my promised Ferrari for a Camry price.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
The Constitution Hangs By a Thread?
Prophecy of Joseph Smith, according to Orson Hyde:
The time would come when the Constitution and the country would be in danger of an overthrow; and . . . if the Constitution be saved at all, it will be by the Elders of this Church. (Source: Journal of Discourses, Vol.6, p. 152, January 3, 1858)
I wonder what Ann Coulter would think if she knew she had agreed to a prophecy of the LDS church when asked by Glenn Beck, "I mean, Ann, any doubt in your mind that the right to free speech is in real jeopardy and our Constitution hangs by a thread?" Her answer? "Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah."
I am not an expert in scriptural knowledge nor am I a scholar of my own faith. I know what I believe through personal revelation, prayer, and sacred experiences. I know I believe in the 2nd coming of Christ and I wonder when it will happen. I know I am not 100% ready and fall short of many of my personal goals in bettering myself. With all of the political hype and fanfare I can't help but wonder: are we, as a nation, on the verge of a constitutional crisis? Are we, with an Obama presidential campaign, ushering in the final stages before the 2nd coming? It's hard to know anything definitively. However, here are a few things that I have been reading which make me go Hmmmm.
From American Thinker, author Augustus Goddard: The Arab-Israeli conflict is likely to be more strident, if only because Obama's candidacy has raised hopes to a very high level in the Arab world. Muslims expect Obama to act in their favor, and Obama would have the freedom to act in ways that no president -- especially a Democratic president -- could act. Should he act in a way that is perceived as harmful to the basic interests of Israel, dissent on a large scale would begin, for such a policy would unite two groups hitherto at political poles: liberal Jews and evangelical Christians.
It seems that the final days of the presidential campaign have made Erica Jong and her friends more than a little anxious. She said, "If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it's not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets." For those of you who don't know, Erica Jong is a feminist who wrote "Fear of Flying" and "Seducing the Demon". I am proud to say I have not read either book as they would probably make blood spurt out of my eyes. She is a good friend with Jane Fonda and Naomi Wolf. Enough said.
From World Net Daily: Seven years before Barack Obama's "spread the wealth" comment to Joe the Plumber became a GOP campaign theme, the Democratic presidential candidate said in a radio interview the U.S. has suffered from a fundamentally flawed Constitution that does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.
In a newly unearthed tape, Obama is heard telling Chicago's public station WBEZ-FM in 2001 that "redistributive change" is needed, pointing to what he regarded as a failure of the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in its rulings on civil rights issues in the 1960s.
The Warren court, he said, failed to "break free from the essential constraints" in the U.S. Constitution and launch a major redistribution of wealth. But Obama, then an Illinois state lawmaker, said the legislative branch of government, rather than the courts, probably was the ideal avenue for accomplishing that goal.
A commentator on the website American Thinker said Obama "wishes to scrap the limits placed on government powers because they get in the way of his redistributive schemes."
"What powers are we talking about? Private property rights for one. Since property is distributed 'unequally' in Obama's world, policies must be shaped and laws passed to deal with that situation."
And the petition going around: Stop the Obama Constitutional Crisis
Sign the Petition : 65,987 Letters and Emails Sent So Far
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads: "No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States."
There are numerous allegations to Obama's claim of natural birth in the U.S. On the web and in the media, all raising suspicion and doubt as to Obama's actual place of birth and qualification to run for president.
A lawsuit in Honolulu in the First District Court is seeking a court-order to open Obama's secret birth records. Obama has thus far neglected a Freedom of Information request for the records at two hospitals in Hawaii.
Lawsuits in Washington, Georgia, California, Florida, New York and Connecticut are seeking state Superior Courts to force the states' Secretary of State, as the chief state elections officer, to perform their state constitutional duties to require original certifying birth records from Mr. Obama that would verify his birth in Hawaii.
Philip Berg's months-long lawsuit in Federal Court in Philadelphia reached a dramatic plateau as Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) failed to respond to the court that Mr. Obama is not a natural born U.S. Citizen and therefore not qualified to run for office of President of the U.S. They admitted to Obama's non-qualification by their failure to respond to a 30-day court ordered discovery in which Obama and the DNC were ordered to answer a petition by Berg. Mr. Berg has stated that if the Federal court chooses to dismiss he will appeal all the way to the Supreme Court.
These allegations will not go away until Mr. Obama produces proof to State and federal authorities. If he will not do so voluntarily he must be compelled by every means available. You, as an employee of The People, have sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We The People are demanding you to make every effort, both public and private, to resolve this fundamental Constitutional question.
There are many other quotes I could cite, but these are what stick out in my mind. My gut is telling me McCain/Palin will win. Regardless of the outcome of Tuesday's historic vote, what will be the consequences? It seems likely that there will be violence in many major metropolitan areas around our nation. Will the violence spread to the suburbs and more rural areas? I don't think so. But will our food services and distribution be interrupted? Will our financial centers shut down for awhile? Will our energy products and distribution be interrupted? I don't know. But I do know that I am preparing for some pretty crazy scenarios and feeling like I'm living in the Twilight Zone. Wade wants to know when I'm moving into Bo Gritz's compound.
The time would come when the Constitution and the country would be in danger of an overthrow; and . . . if the Constitution be saved at all, it will be by the Elders of this Church. (Source: Journal of Discourses, Vol.6, p. 152, January 3, 1858)
I wonder what Ann Coulter would think if she knew she had agreed to a prophecy of the LDS church when asked by Glenn Beck, "I mean, Ann, any doubt in your mind that the right to free speech is in real jeopardy and our Constitution hangs by a thread?" Her answer? "Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah."
I am not an expert in scriptural knowledge nor am I a scholar of my own faith. I know what I believe through personal revelation, prayer, and sacred experiences. I know I believe in the 2nd coming of Christ and I wonder when it will happen. I know I am not 100% ready and fall short of many of my personal goals in bettering myself. With all of the political hype and fanfare I can't help but wonder: are we, as a nation, on the verge of a constitutional crisis? Are we, with an Obama presidential campaign, ushering in the final stages before the 2nd coming? It's hard to know anything definitively. However, here are a few things that I have been reading which make me go Hmmmm.
From American Thinker, author Augustus Goddard: The Arab-Israeli conflict is likely to be more strident, if only because Obama's candidacy has raised hopes to a very high level in the Arab world. Muslims expect Obama to act in their favor, and Obama would have the freedom to act in ways that no president -- especially a Democratic president -- could act. Should he act in a way that is perceived as harmful to the basic interests of Israel, dissent on a large scale would begin, for such a policy would unite two groups hitherto at political poles: liberal Jews and evangelical Christians.
It seems that the final days of the presidential campaign have made Erica Jong and her friends more than a little anxious. She said, "If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it's not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets." For those of you who don't know, Erica Jong is a feminist who wrote "Fear of Flying" and "Seducing the Demon". I am proud to say I have not read either book as they would probably make blood spurt out of my eyes. She is a good friend with Jane Fonda and Naomi Wolf. Enough said.
From World Net Daily: Seven years before Barack Obama's "spread the wealth" comment to Joe the Plumber became a GOP campaign theme, the Democratic presidential candidate said in a radio interview the U.S. has suffered from a fundamentally flawed Constitution that does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.
In a newly unearthed tape, Obama is heard telling Chicago's public station WBEZ-FM in 2001 that "redistributive change" is needed, pointing to what he regarded as a failure of the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in its rulings on civil rights issues in the 1960s.
The Warren court, he said, failed to "break free from the essential constraints" in the U.S. Constitution and launch a major redistribution of wealth. But Obama, then an Illinois state lawmaker, said the legislative branch of government, rather than the courts, probably was the ideal avenue for accomplishing that goal.
A commentator on the website American Thinker said Obama "wishes to scrap the limits placed on government powers because they get in the way of his redistributive schemes."
"What powers are we talking about? Private property rights for one. Since property is distributed 'unequally' in Obama's world, policies must be shaped and laws passed to deal with that situation."
And the petition going around: Stop the Obama Constitutional Crisis
Sign the Petition : 65,987 Letters and Emails Sent So Far
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads: "No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States."
There are numerous allegations to Obama's claim of natural birth in the U.S. On the web and in the media, all raising suspicion and doubt as to Obama's actual place of birth and qualification to run for president.
A lawsuit in Honolulu in the First District Court is seeking a court-order to open Obama's secret birth records. Obama has thus far neglected a Freedom of Information request for the records at two hospitals in Hawaii.
Lawsuits in Washington, Georgia, California, Florida, New York and Connecticut are seeking state Superior Courts to force the states' Secretary of State, as the chief state elections officer, to perform their state constitutional duties to require original certifying birth records from Mr. Obama that would verify his birth in Hawaii.
Philip Berg's months-long lawsuit in Federal Court in Philadelphia reached a dramatic plateau as Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) failed to respond to the court that Mr. Obama is not a natural born U.S. Citizen and therefore not qualified to run for office of President of the U.S. They admitted to Obama's non-qualification by their failure to respond to a 30-day court ordered discovery in which Obama and the DNC were ordered to answer a petition by Berg. Mr. Berg has stated that if the Federal court chooses to dismiss he will appeal all the way to the Supreme Court.
These allegations will not go away until Mr. Obama produces proof to State and federal authorities. If he will not do so voluntarily he must be compelled by every means available. You, as an employee of The People, have sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We The People are demanding you to make every effort, both public and private, to resolve this fundamental Constitutional question.
There are many other quotes I could cite, but these are what stick out in my mind. My gut is telling me McCain/Palin will win. Regardless of the outcome of Tuesday's historic vote, what will be the consequences? It seems likely that there will be violence in many major metropolitan areas around our nation. Will the violence spread to the suburbs and more rural areas? I don't think so. But will our food services and distribution be interrupted? Will our financial centers shut down for awhile? Will our energy products and distribution be interrupted? I don't know. But I do know that I am preparing for some pretty crazy scenarios and feeling like I'm living in the Twilight Zone. Wade wants to know when I'm moving into Bo Gritz's compound.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)