The News for 2007

Ever since the "low-keyed" meeting between Fox, Martin, and Bush took place through the same time frame that Terri Schaivo's fate was making the headlines, a thought now enters my mind regarding the news and the media. I just wonder what we're missing, when we are hearing about something that evokes intense emotional division, or worse, when tabloid interests become news headlines. I remember reading about 'the North American this or that' and realized while America watched a family torn apart in grief, the US was becoming just a part of the "new lay of the land," so to speak.
And this year, while the life and death of Anna Nicole swept the headlines, what was really going on that we missed. How did Anna Nicole become an indepth national interest? I realize she was famous for being famous, but when the fighting in Iraq intensified, was America too mesmerized with Anna to question that there might be a correlation between the murder of Saddam Hussein and the increase of American military casualties? When Petraeus came back and reported that the military surge really wasn't producing the desired results, and I do remember that; Brittany Spears became the new national interest. Brittany became the headlines, her divorce, her custody battle, her wild night life, even her panties were mentioned on the home page of most News sources, FOX was no exception. And now suddenly, after the not so great report in September, the troop surge was a success . . . How did that happen and when? Call me cynical, but I really think 'we the people' might just be on the business end of a bit of news filtering. Maybe, 'we the people' want our news filtered and sorted. I know the people that listen to conservative talk radio aren't even aware of much of the news in the world, only what they hear from their one source, and most of that is so incredibly biased; the news itself is lost in repetitive editorializing and criticizing. I've spent the past two and a half years absolutely certain, for those of us that listen to more than one news source, that the information we call news is nothing more than a diversion from greater facts. I've thought the media, be it internet, TV or talk radio wants to program the thinking rather than actually inform, and the headline of the past few days have given confirmation. There has been something just absolutely haunting about the death and the reports of the death of Benazir Bhutto. Today, I realized the haunting factor. I read a headline that said the video clips of the last few minutes of her life do not align with the reports. I also read that her husband did not choose to have an autopsy performed because he didn't believe a true report would be issued. And I realized, this sounds just like November of 63, here in America. I don't know what Pakistan will do, but I do know the majority of the American citizens chose then, to believe what the media reported and what their government claimed, regardless of what the film clips showed. It just seems that 2007 News confirms that the American public would rather be told what to think or simply believes that celebrity gossip is news!
Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. New Testament

Things That Make One Pause and Question . . .

I don't understand why America didn't surround the Tora Bora mountains six years ago. That's the place that Osama bin Laden has supposedly hidden, if there really is an Osama bin Laden . . . I realize the FATA region of Pakistan is some sort of "hands off" zone for everyone, well aparently everyone but the Taliban and Osama bin Laden . . . The Pakistani government has very little jurisdiction over this area, and since the Pakistani government is supposed to be a strong anti-terrorist ally with the US, I would think that government would have welcomed the military presence of the US right after the invasion of Afghanistan, but that isn't what happened. Now, as I've read the headlines of the past 24 hours, I just don't know what to think. The woman that was under house arrest by Musharraf's "state of emergency," has been killed, but we are going to blame the Taliban and alQaida, without offering a military presence in that country? So, into what sort of democracy have we fed nearly 10 billion dollars, and where is their ally in anti-terrorism? Musharraf leans toward tyranny and there is no question about that throughout the world. I've found it interesting that now that Bhutto has been killed, her house arrest was for her own protection . . . I think we're all becoming more familiar with that "lock down for freedom" version of democracy, here in America. Perhaps that's why our President has found Musharraf to be such an ally, as they are both willing to hold their people captive to "protect" their liberty.
I'm also wondering as the story changes of what she died of and how . . . I've read three different headlines in the past 24 hours and none of them agree on the cause of death. First, it was said that it was a direct shot to her head or neck. Next it was shrapnel from an explosion. Now I read she hit her head on her vehicle. It's listed almost like a simple accident in the middle of chaos, now. She was, after all, the leader of the opposition party. The more I hear about the democracy the US has spread, and the more I read about the two parties here that are campaigning, the more I see how divisive our brand of democracy truly is.
These six things doth YHVH hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto Him . . . and he that soweth discord among brethren. a Proverb of Holy Scripture

A "Star" . . . the East

I read that Mars is going to be highly visible and quite bright this evening and it "got me thinking." As I read the article and the writer had changed the words to Rudolph, since Mars would be so bright, I thought of shepherds and wise men coming to offer gifts to the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes. And tonight while I look for the brightness in the sky, that is what I will be thinking of. I celebrate Hanukkah, but I do believe the Messiah has come. I don't quite understand that message in America's version of Christmas celebration, however. Yesterday, I spoke with a Christian woman that doesn't celebrate Christmas, but she's going to be with her family tomorrow and she's already told them she won't be bringing gifts. Sounds like a fun guest doesn't it? I don't really believe the Messiah was born on December 25 and I have very compelling evidence to support my belief. The Gregorian calendar didn't exist at the time of his birth, so there was no December 25, that year. I, personally, as do many, believe the Messiah was born in the fall, but Scripture doesn't say specifically, so the date is conjecture at best and it shouldn't be a doctrinal issue for anyone. This same woman proceeded to tell me, she knew it wasn't in December because it can snow in Israel and the shepherds were wearing short sleeves . . . hello? I couldn't find that in Scripture either. I realize it can snow in Israel, the weather there is very similar to the weather where I live in the states, and you know, today, our livestock are out grazing . . . So, who knows?
I didn't buy Christmas gifts and I'm not going to, because I don't know anyone that was born on December 25 and as I used to explain to my daughter when she was young. December 25 isn't her birthday and I don't buy other people gifts on hers. But we have always had a wonderful tradition, and this year will be no different.
We bake a cake, I don't add candles, but we do sing HAPPY BIRTHDAY to Messiah. I don't believe this is the anniversary of the exact day, but I can't think of a single reason to not celebrate his birth!
Glory to G~d in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. Luke 2: 14

A Few Concerns About Travel . . .

Well, the TSA (Transportation Security Administration) is certainly going to be in their height of glory for the next few days. These people with badges and control issues really offend me; to the point, I no longer travel. When I first began blogging, we had recently done some international traveling and until we travelled outside of the US after 9/11, I didn't realize what a crazy place the US airports had become. I was treated with more respect at a Palestinian checkpoint than I was at KCI. Dealing with TSA did change one thing in my life for the better. I gave up underwire bras. I certainly wasn't groped in any other country, but I digress. It really has concerned me that people have died in US airports and it doesn't seem to bother Americans. I've read blogs and comment posts after articles and for the most part, the American readers feel that TSA can just treat American travelers like dumb animals and if someone doesn't like it, they need to know their life may depend upon their ability to stuff their frustration.
Now, on a different note, we have some Congressman that isn't happy about the US requiring passports for visitors entering from Canada. It's been postponed for at least another year and a half, which truly offends me also. The Congressman thought the passport matter was a terrible way to treat "our neighbors." NO KIDDING! Our government treating foreigners like they do us? Where was this Congressman when our state driver's license became national ID cards? I'm guessing, since Canadians don't have to put up with America's rules, they simply won't. I think we are going to discover very soon, the more stringent the regulations of Homeland Security become, the fewer foreigners will be visiting. And the republican constituents, at least the faithful followers of Bush will utter a collective, "Good, if they had nothing to hide . . ." Meanwhile, we Americans will just come to accept the fact that we are being held captive for our own good, but since we're Americans, nobody is going to come rescue us from our government. The whole world is sick of dealing with our government.
And my last concern regarding travel is this new Congressional matter about the auto makers. The pundits have just been like old dogs with bones. They've chewed and 'wollered' and dug and scratch and chewed and 'wollered' some more, all the while salivating and growling about the new car regulations and how many people will die over oil. Really, now! That's what those of us against the Iraq war have been concerned about for the past five years! Our President doesn't like what Congress has handed him for a bill, or so he says . . . So why doesn't he veto this one? Without the last health care bill, the American kids may not stay healthy enough to live long enough to pay for this one he doesn't veto. I thought a 3 branch system of our government was to protect the people from being discounted by the government.
And for those of us that are considering going back to the old fashioned method of transportation, I have already heard, the government plans to inject radio frequency chips in horses and everyone must report by phone or by computer any time the horse leaves the place, for any reason.
All of this pseudo travel security is simply about our government knowing our every move.
And yet the TSA is defined by our government as: Transportation Security Administration (TSA) protects the nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.
and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces . . . a prophecy of Holy Scripture

The Unity Behind The Division

Is a half trillion dollar budget, not a joke? Sadly, the fact that they are serious, is overwhelming. I'd like to blame Congress and I'd like to blame President Bush, but basically they are just taking care of themselves. How did our country get so far away from the hands of the common citizen? Easy, we let go, and those behind the scenes that have joined in their quest for absolute power, have thrown out just enough nonsense in just the right voices that the people have divided, blaming each other. You know the old saying, "divide and conquer?" Well, the powers that be know that old saying, too. If I take a step back and look at this, I find that President Bush and a democratic Congress actually work quite well together, in this theatre against "we the people." Bush gets a few more months of his war and Congress gets more of their pet issues and somebody said it all happened without raising taxes! If they've been collecting enough taxes to cover all this, what have they been doing with the excess up until now? I'd like to know . . .
Another of the "issues" is this animal rights stuff. Now the conservatives are blaming PETA, but it's not PETA that is insisting upon radio frequency chips in our livestock to buy and sell; oh contrare, that insistence is coming from corporate political America, but if the people will continue to just throw the blame back and forth, "they" will get away with the next step of tyranny and "we the people" will find ourselves that much further under the fray.
Part of this budget and bill is about changing the auto manufacturing, and I heard Mark Levin discussing the fact that America has a smaller percentage of change in fuel emissions than China. The fact that China has dramatically increased in their oil consumption and fuel emissions is pretty simple. One, they've only been included in the stats of global data in the past few years, and two, Mr. Levin, as they have become a key player in the global economy of materialism, cars use more oil and emit more carbon than rickshaws. And the environmentalists are hollering about not drilling and you know what, everyone is missing the point. America has always had more emissions, so the fact that there is increase at all, tells me much of the population just isn't worried about it, or doesn't believe the political propaganda from either side. The big 3 are already on their way out, so with SUV's having no resale value with this new fuel regulation, a.k.a. CAFE, this is the moment of truth for auto manufacturing in America, the fork in the road. Now which path is not the dead end? They can pour tons of money into new engineering and sell all new vehicles or they can stop in their tracks, give up and lay off the rest of the AutoWorkers Union. Only time will tell which was the best plan, but meanwhile back behind the scenes, there is one auto manufacturer that will ultimately have the global solution for energy and emissions.
Behind the scenes, someone is benefiting from the liberal outcry and the pundits keeping the conservatives stirred up. Behind the scenes someone is getting all their ducks in a row, while we in the stands are cheering opposite sides like some sort of sporting event.
This is no sporting event, this is no game, this is real life! We've been divided and we are being conquered!
So are the ways of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof. a Proverb of Holy Scripture

Congress is Losing More Ground than the President

Congress has lost ground dramatically. I mean, they were just elected in November of '06. The party leadership has been changed less than one year and already they have gone from 50 + percent down to 20 - 25%. I use the figure 50 + simply in reference to the results of the election, but the current polls are clear. Nearly everyone thinks Congress is doing a very poor job, and they are. Congress hasn't done anything they promised to do, and the momentum of damage is overwhelming, already. Their political aspirations are merely fodder for the pundits. Why is Congress going down more rapidly than President Bush ever thought of? Because, very early on in Bush's administration, we were informed there would be war and rumors of war. He's lived up to the expectations we were led to believe. Now, I don't agree with most of his choices, but at least he's consistent with his promise. Congress, on the other hand is simply full of promises and bluster and then not only caves, but adds a ton of expensive overbearing earmarks that only serve to devastate what is left of our pathetic economy. Every time the President has asked for more, they have blustered and fussed and said something about "no blank checks" and "no rubber stamp." Then, what does Congress do? They add a ton of extra expenses onto the outrageous demand for warring and then send it for White House approval. That is another area that President Bush has not been wishy-washy. Although, he's a republican, there's nothing fiscally conservative about him, and he never presented himself as such. You can look at him and see that he'd "buy a round for the house," then ask his friend to loan him the money after everybody ordered, 'cause he didn't have any small bills. So, when Congress adds on these billions of dollars of expenses, he's not going back on his word when he signs. Congress loses both ways, in more war funding and irresponsible spending. This last mid-term election was America's last hope for any semblance of logic in Washington, and possibly the democrat's last hope of being taken seriously. This last mid-term election result has been a great disappointment. And that's why the polls show a lower approval rating for Congress than for the President. We quit expecting anything good out of him, ages ago. Congress, however; made campaign promises to the American people that aren't being kept. The biggest one, being, accountability in Washington. Congress wasn't supposed to get elected, then gripe about the President's decisions, then go along and fund them all. They could have stayed home like the rest of us and done that! That's why they have plummeted in the polls. They were elected to rein him in, not reign with him.
but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation. - James, brother of Messiah

Bush or Gore . . . Who Has More Power?

As I've listened to all the "hate comments" aimed at both men through these last 7 years, I just can't help but think, it was really only a coin toss by the real powers that be. I feel like we are living the moment of truth in the Emerald City with the Wizard of Oz. Remember, when the big booming voice said, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain ?. . ." Then that man behind the curtain came out and gave certificates and baubles of sentiment that supposedly gave the recipient the valued trait or recognition, he had requested. Now, let's consider Al Gore and George W. Bush, in any of the three roles you choose. There are of course, the munchkins, a.k.a. "we the people," that hoop and cheer or run for cover at every possible situation. And so far, the designation of the "wicked witch" just has too many contenders, and her role is not significant in this commentary, so we'll leave all those women in the news that act like someone just dropped a house on their sister, for another day. Let's get back to our two stars. The republicans will go to their graves knowing George W. Bush won the election and Al Gore was a disgruntled, poor sport, lacking gentlemanly qualities. The democrats on the other hand will go to their grave knowing George W. Bush was appointed as president and Al Gore was denied the presidency. I, as an independent, think it was already decided and the people's vote had no bearing on the outcome. I lived with this hunch for 4 years, until the same but slightly different thing happened in '04. In 2000, it was Florida, the deciding state for the electoral college, with their pregnant chads. In 2004, Ohio, with their electronic ballot mishap, was the deciding electoral college votes. Anyone that can't follow that simple point A to point B is probably simply going to live and die an unquestioning republican, and would prefer to not be bothered with the facts. Now, the flip side of this situation is not that Kerry lost. Get real. If the dems really wanted to be in the White House, the ticket would have been reversed to begin with, but I digress. Al Gore was already on his environmental warpath. It would have been counter productive for Gore's purpose, if there was a fellow party member in the White House. Al wouldn't have needed to go global . . .
This is no longer a republican/democrat issue. This is not a matter of stopping terrorists or global warming. This is the foundation of two issues that will never be resolved and both men have assumed their responsibility beautifully in that they rally the hatred for the other so well. George W. Bush has given the world, the war on terror. Now, if there is an organized alQaida, let me tell you this, there is no end to the ideology. Every warrior that doesn't blow himself up for 70 virgins in the after life has about 12-15 in this life, and they are prolific. That means, each of these children born are born under the teaching that they are a people at war. This war cannot be ended militarily or politically, it will require divine intervention and neither side seems to be able to access that.
Now, for our ecological concerns. There will never be a balance, there will never be a safe and friendly poison emission level. There are tons of people who all want to use, use, use. Oh, I know, there are those that are willing to recycle and buy hybrid vehicles, and vote to not drill for oil, but they keep buying gas, and if we suddenly discover their microwave and i-pod are causing irreparable damage, will they be so zealous? This environmental cause is perfect. There is no way to ever get 6 billion people to come to an agreement about this at all. The most they will do is sell expensive light bulbs and teach the kids to tell grown ups how to throw trash away.
Bottom line on this tandem ideology of George and Al. If the terrorists don't kill you, the lack of oxygen from the trees will suffocate us all. We're all going to die, either way. My thought here is simple. The terrorist countries have most of the crude oil and fewest of the trees. Let's give them all the gas hogs and in a few years, the ecological crisis should resolve the terrorist problem.
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with G~d. New Testament

Can the Majority Be Wrong?

I remember laughing out loud when my sister-in-law said this to my husband. It's so memorable in that it was the one and only time she's ever brought humor into my life. Thank G~D, I was just overhearing the phone conversation and she didn't hear my laughter, as she was certainly in high volume, and didn't sound like she intended to be funny. They were discussing their view of my beliefs and she loudly asked, "Can all of us be wrong?" I could share many examples, Scripturally and historically, in which the answer to that question would be an emphatic "YES!" The topic today is not religious but political, however; and I think everybody can clearly be wrong.
Hillary and Barack are both obviously needing something. If Barack really had anything to offer, would he need the Oprah hype? I think not. And if Hillary had any real political solutions, could she be diminished in the polls by the queen of daytime TV? Again, I think not. So the two front running democrats obviously lack substance . . .
I like Edwards, in that he is the only candidate that doesn't bow down to the medical profession and the power of pharmaceuticals, but that hardly puts him in touch with mainstream America.
Moving right along to John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, and Mitt Romney. American Republicans don't want John McCain, they didn't in 2000 and they don't now. They are grateful that he was a war vet, but the warmongers don't want him, and that's plain and it's simple. Now, Rudy has gained the endorsement of some religious leaders, but he's still lacking the moral rigidity of the mainstream right and that will be a problem for him, especially now that Hillary is beginning to look "defeatable." When it looked as if Hillary was untouchable, Rudy was the right wing, moderate hope, but if Oprah can beat Hillary, Rudy will need to do better on his social moral issues. On to Fred. So many of the right wing are disappointed in the impact Fred has had on the race. They expected him to come in and shake up the race. And he did, about like a speed bump. I'm sure they saw the potential Ronald Reagan in Fred Thompson. He's a bit older, obviously preoccupied with other matters in life, so we can just write him a script and he can stand there and be authoritative . . . I think they should move on to alternate Plan B, although many pundits are still giving Fred good coverage. As for Mitt Romney, America does like a certain appearance for the White House. He and his wife have an air of aristocracy in their presence. And we know that much of the republican constituency is pretty comfortable with moral and financial superiority. I think Mitt Romney commands the same presence as Billy Graham. He's sure in what he believes, and that does touch a number of Americans emotionally and passionately.
I guess I shouldn't leave Ron Paul out of the race. I just have a hard time taking him seriously. He claims to have Libertarian values, but running as a republican because 3rd Party candidates don't get the backing . . . so if he's willing to answer to another party and present himself to be associated just for the sake of the popular vote, what would he agree to while saying otherwise, if he truly had power?
This blog just wouldn't be complete without mentioning the rising star of the GOP that was once considered the absolute long shot of the race, Mike Huckabee.
Obviously the powers behind the pundits are not happy about Mike Huckabee's rise in the polls. Although, I disagree with much of Mr. Huckabee's religious and political views, he's the one candidate that has personified the hope that the entrance to the White House does not have to be purchased. This guy has literally campaigned and appealed to the American public, the old fashioned way. He simply meets them where they are and speaks their language. What a concept in America, electing someone that is in touch with the common people . . .
Considering the questions regarding Mitt Romney's religion and Fred Thompson's church affiliation, I just don't see how the religious right can not vote for Huckabee.
As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith. New Testament

Can We Talk About Drugs?

I heard that the Clinton camp and the Obama camp have exchanged a few comments regarding drugs. I also heard the President comment on the drug use of American teens and frankly, I think drug use in general has increased dramatically.
There are people still wanting to feel something or not feel something. There are tons of people that use drugs out of fear and still there are those that simply think a pill should solve everything.
So, where are we, here in America after Obama discovered his youthful drug experimentation was not a good path? And will we all find out where Hillary was when Bill didn't inhale? And what about this report from the President about drugs with teens? He said that illegal drug usage is down, but abuse of prescription meds are dramatically increased. Now, I'm not a rocket scientist here, but from the listener's perspective, this is what I have gleaned regarding drug use and American teens.
It would seem to me, that American teens have figured out how to have legal suppliers. The pharmaceutical industry has done what no ordinary street pusher could manage. Mom and Dad or insurance or medicaid are providing the drugs. No longer does a teen have to spend his hard earned wages and worry about getting caught or busted. Simply have mom or dad take them to the doctor and see what euphoria is offered in the way of a small tablet or capsule for whatever symptoms a teen manages to convey or a concerned or frustrated parent describes. The frightening statistic was something like 54% of prescription drugs are abused. That sounds like a bigger drug problem than America has had with percentages of teens and illegal drugs in the past.
And only G~d knows where Hillary and Barack will settle things before they just manage to give the GOP more ammunition. I am glad that Obama made the comment about Bill C's drug experimentation. I wondered when Bill said he didn't inhale, why someone would take a toke but not inhale. It was just proof to me then, that Bill Clinton could "participate" and completely miss the purpose.
I'd like to share an interesting fact about drugs. The Bible doesn't differentiate between legal and illegal, but the word sorcery, pertaining to the occult and magic, in the New Testament is translated from the Greek word: pharmakeus . . . which of course is the source for the English word for pharmaceutical.
And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee . . .for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived. the Revelation

Experience or New . . .

I've wondered for some time just what the big difference between Obama and Clinton really are, when it comes to these words: EXPERIENCE and NEW. Hillary claims to have years of experience, while Obama was relying on his fresh new, no stale old politics approach. Well, I see things a bit differently than either of them have projected. First, I find Obama's use of the race card to be nothing fresh or new. The only thing new I have found about his campaigning and fund raising, is that it is even more invasive and high pressure than anyone previous. As far as Obama rallying Hollywood, what's new about the dems relying on Hollywood backing? And last, but certainly not least, the guy grew up outside of the country . . . Why does he continue to try to present himself with regular middle class American roots?
Now, on to Hillary. What exactly does her resume say? She is an attorney. She is the farthest thing from a feminist you could have in this country. She lived in the Governor's Mansion, because her husband was elected. She lived in the White House because her husband was elected. She stayed with an unfaithful husband for whatever reason, but considering her ongoing political aspirations, it would seem that marriage has provided her with the same security it does the rest of us "stand by your man" kind of women. So, what's the message for feminists. 'Women, you can be anything you choose to be, if you marry the right man, and stay with him.' Now, as to her experience to prepare her for the White House. If being married to a President is what has provided her experience, then by that same logic . . . My husband is a retired electrician, would you like me to wire your house?
Give her credit for what her hands have made . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture

Transparency in Government

I guess by now, we've all heard the latest on our "intelligence" gathering about Iran. Pertaining to nukes in Iran: they were, now they're not, but they could be again, any time.
I find it interesting that right after we assembled and hosted as much of the Arab world as would attend, in a meeting where many of them refused to even recognize the State of Israel, we have now announced to the world that Iran doesn't have the potential to be as dangerous as we previously said, but they still need to be watched . . . All this announcement has done is let Israel know, once again, with the US as her friend, she just doesn't need any more enemies. And as for the rest of the world listening to our latest intelligence, don't you just wonder how intelligent they think we are by now? I mean no WMD in Iraq, still no bin Laden, and now Iran stopped pursuing the making of nukes in 2003??? I had to laugh when some pundit said Iran stopped their nuke program when they saw the US meant business in Iraq. Excuse me, Iran watched us tell Israel we were too busy to help them defend themselves against Hezbollah, whom America named as a terrorist organization and if you're not for us you're against us and blah, blah, blah.
Now, I find the spin from the White House, just priceless. The President says, this latest intelligence report is an example of transparency in government. When the intelligence changes, we don't change our stand, we just announce that the information is different. So which information would we call intelligence? And Dr. Rice has mentioned our transparency in government as something the rest of the world should aspire to. So, I looked up the word transparent in WordWeb and I'd like to share my findings, which I consider to be "intelligence." I found a myriad of synonyms which I will share and then the definition.
Synonyms for TRANSPARENT: cobwebby, crystal clear, diaphanous, filmy, gauzy, gossamer, sheer, vaporous. Now in my mind, that eludes to several possibilities for transparency in our government. On to the definition and there were four listed, and the fourth used the word in sentences for greater clarity and understanding.
TRANSPARENT: 1. transmitting light, able to be seen through with clarity.
2. so thin as to transmit light
3. free of deceit
4. easily understood or seen through
as in: "a transparent explanation" or "a transparent lie"
Now, doesn't that explain our transparent government, clearly?
. . . Put the vision in writing and make it clear . . . a prophet of Holy Scripture

Video Games

I have been doing a bit of reading about some new video games. I am not an advocate of them, in any form, really, as I see them as a major waste of time, but some headline caught my attention, so the search for information was on. There's just really nothing like spending time learning about something you think is a waste of time, now is there? Back to my information though. Actually, it's a question that covers not just video games, but movies, and TV as well. I'm not much of a movie fan, and to be honest, I just don't have time to own a TV, but I have a real concern about the "virtual interest" of the American observer regarding entertainment. What has happened to us, to make violence so entertaining? I remember when video games began as Atari, and the days of the Mario brothers. There was always a special household that had the latest and greatest in techno-toys and that is where the neighborhood children gathered. I was a mom by then and what I recall of these video games at the neighbor's, was a goal to get somewhere or rescue a princess or something. Albeit, there were some battles and dragon slaying and various forms of aggression, it wasn't the point of the game. The prize or the princess's rescue was the point! Somebody tell me, how has it happened that video games had to get more grotesque to be interesting? Why is more violence needed to sell the games? And do the children playing these "virtual" games become desensitized to violence and gore? I'm not saying there isn't still some sort of a goal involved in these games and movies, but must the quest be so fraught with violence? Perhaps I'm missing the intended goal, as many recruiting stations are right next to arcades and video exchanges.
Gone are the days of the blood baths in the coliseums, the public executions, and community viewed duels.
Does our society view itself to be more civilized and less barbaric that other cultures or ancient civilizations simply because our interest in violence, blood, and gore is neatly packaged in the entertainment industry? Is this really the legacy our sophisticated society intends for our children?
. . . take forth the precious from the vile . . . a prophet of Holy Scripture

HAPPY HOLIDAYS !

Chanukah begins this evening and I am very excited about it this year. I don't really know any specific reason why this year, more than last, but I simply am excited. Perhaps, it's because I actually got to see our grandchildren's faces light up when they saw their gifts. We don't live in the same city, so usually their Chanukah gifts are packed into a huge box and shipped, but this year I had their gifts ready before their visit, the end of November. So maybe that's the excitement. Next year Chanukah and their school Christmas vacation overlap, so they can actually visit through the eight days next year. But today's blog isn't about the joys of being a grandma, it's about the holidays and everyone's varying concerns to keep everything politically correct.
I think political correctness and pseudo-tolerance is just silly through the holidays. I don't expect the stores and malls to be playing "Chanukah, Oh Chanukah" or "I Have a Little Dreydle." When I am shopping between Thanksgiving and the New Year, I expect to hear Christmas Carols, even if I don't understand the religious significance of Santa. I would think in this economic slump we're going through, the stores and malls would be doing everything they could to appeal to their customer base at this time of year, which is predominantly those that celebrate Christmas. It doesn't offend me, it makes good business sense. And I really don't need to hear about a holiday tree, it's a Christmas tree. The holiday I celebrate doesn't have a tree. As a matter of fact, decorated trees are forbidden in our faith and festive observance, so again, no need for a generic term that truly doesn't apply.
I realize for many, this time of year has become a time to take joy in being offended. Some non-Christians are offended by Merry Christmas and some Christians are offended that everyone isn't observing properly. And you know, to these people that take holiday joy in being offended, I hope to bring them some of that joy, myself.
I say, this year, since all the holidays are times of joy and good will, everyone should simply and specifically celebrate what they believe and not devalue the celebration with vague and generic terms! Every day can be special.
This is the day which YHVH hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. a Psalm of Holy Scripture

FAIR: Another Four Letter Word

I heard, once again, the advantage to the Fair Tax. The advantage is completely for the government, which only makes sense, since it is the government that will be collecting. If it was to benefit the tax payer, we could just keep our money and the politicians could get honest work, but, I digress. I can't wait to find out what the word FAIR becomes an acronym for, or already is.
Let's start with the basic premise that we will be paying taxes, one way or another. Income tax was originally set up for states to pay to the federal government, and as the general population comes to realize the IRS is not part of the government, the government knows, it's only a matter of time before the sheeple start balking about dealing with the IRS, so . . . it is now imperative that the pundits get the public sold on voting in a tax! Then there will officially be an individual Federal TAX on the books! If it's voted in, it's "by the people, and of the people." Moving right along to the math portion of this proposal, we must consider. We are being told with the FAIR tax, there will be no payroll tax withheld, low income earners will receive a refund, regularly, and we will all pay a national sales tax that will more than sustain the cost of our federal government. Obviously, our government officials have come to realize America spends more than it makes, so if we pay tax on purchases rather than income, the government will have more money. How does that sound fair? American households already need two incomes just to make it, and now the idea of everything taxed? Again, how does the word fair enter into this concept? Fair implies equality, which is never the case when individuals deal with the government.
Middle class, two income households will be paying credit card interest on the national sales tax for years. I haven't read all the books about FAIR Tax and I don't listen to all the pundits' rhetoric, but if our government officials are going to continue to spend at the present rate and promise to eliminate income taxes, only the very rich will be able to afford the tax on any purchases above the bare necessities. It looks to me, that the FAIR Tax will help solidify the caste system here.
One more variable for the math portion of our problem. Consider FICA, alone, in payroll tax. From 1935 until before the turn of the 21st Century, the payroll withholding rose from 1% to over 7%. That is a 700% increase in 65 years, which is not even an expected lifespan. Can we really afford a federal sales tax that will potentially increase at that rate?
Be wary! If we are hearing about it, the odds are, it's just about a done deal. This isn't to tax the rich, this is to put all American workers on an allowance. FAIR?
Whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard. a Proverb of Holy Scripture

No NAIS

I attended a meeting last night and I came away so angry I was shaking and crying . . . and praying. I'm sure there is some stupid clause in the Patriot Act to declare my reaction, illegal or questionable, but for now, with what's left of the First Amendment, I will proclaim my disdain! NAIS is an acronym, that is certainly a FOUR LETTER Word, and the meaning is more hideous than any swear word ever forbidden in my home. NAIS is the National Animal ID System and it is vile. The paperwork is fraught with vague, cagey terms and deceptively misleading inuendo for what is left of American agriculture. I first addressed this "marking of the beasts" back in April of '05 here at write-wing. It's gained momentum, and all the while the reasons and the "benefits" of this program continue to change. Of course, everything our government does is for our protection and safety, so the first presentation of this evil plan is for disease control. You know what? Before there was NAIS, we tracked a single calf, supposedly with BSE, back to it's birth stall. I have included a link above to an article about a farmer in Michigan and here is the link for the home page www.nonais.org
This is clearly nothing more than an out of control government seeking more control of the people. I should have realized the administration put in power by the religious right would do everything possible to bring about the apocalypse prophesied in the Revelation. NAIS is in clear violation of the 1st and 4th Amendment, just for starters. I am hearing alot about "America's herd" like it's all just one big group of animals. I sure don't see any politician showing up at chore time. I spoke with a dear gentleman at MFA this morning and he admitted that they are promoters of NAIS. Of course the vetranarians in our state, and most states are on board. Along with the control factor, there is big money in this project for pharmaceutical corporations, digital technology companies, and vets that are willing to sell their souls and sell out those that trust them. And of course, the more, "we the people" fight this, the more the corporate lobbyists wine and dine and line the pockets of the politicians. Farming is down to just 2% of the national population and for those of us that want to remain small, hobby, and organic, FORGET ABOUT IT! We can't afford to be in this new plan. The chips, equipment, and the reports cost more than chickens and goats, to begin with. And oh, there is the GPS for monitoring the moves of all the farm animals. Just for the sake of curiosity, I'll make mention of this . . . I have no idea why the USDA that claims this is all to protect our food supply, feels the need to chip, monitor, and mark horses and llamas . . . who is eating them? Anyway, if this plan is implemented beyond voluntary, I learned it will include 29 species. All movement must be reported within 24 hours. That's right, if you and a friend decide to ride your horse outside of your own property, like on the road or something, the horse's chip is traceable by satellite and the owner is required by law and at a cost, to report that the horse left the property and when it returned. There is no paper invovled in all this, simply phone, computer, and satellite. Isn't this where some politician or blind follower should say "G~D bless America?" Our government is taking care of us by marking every animal and registering every property to be a "premise" with a "number." Just a note for those that haven't read the Constitution, lately. The Constitution of the United States protects property and property owners, but it doesn't say a thing about a premise! You'd think think with a global war on terror, our government would have better things to do than keep track of a 4-H trail ride or monitor when a free range chicken crosses the road.
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark . . . the Revelation

Petersons in the News

I've had a nagging feeling for some time regarding Scott and Laci Peterson, even to the point, I Google Searched his attorney's name. I've done nothing more, but the nagging feeling won't go away, especially with the new headlines containing the name Peterson.
First, we "allegedly" have the teacher that ran away with her student while leaving her own child here in the states. I guess the word "alleged" is required before a deal or a trial occurs. Anyway, the reports of this alleged incident seem crazy. What in the world was she thinking? What about her child? And what in the world does someone in their mid-twenties think they have in common with a 13 year old? He called her his "baby gurl" and she was a teacher, twice his age! That has always made me crazy. The entire, immature, misspelled mess. Okay, that being said, let's get down to the other two Peterson's in the news.
This former Sgt. Drew Peterson evokes a much different emotion in me than Scott did a few years ago, as I read the investigation reports. Drew Peterson was getting a divorce in 2004 from the now deceased Kathy Savio. Drew Peterson began dating Stacy when she was 17, she is now 23. So, let's start with a bit of basic math. Sgt. Peterson, a man sworn to uphold the law,
was dating a teen-ager while still married. The wife has a bizarre "accidental drowning" in an empty bathtub, that leaves her corpse bruised and bloody, right before the divorce settlement and it's ruled an accident? I think several things need to be investigated there, including whomever performed the autopsy. And obviously, there is reason to wonder if Stacy is even alive, or we would not have all the rest of these details and Sgt. Peterson's resignation. Yet, he's still free and making statements. I realize in this country we are presumed innocent until proven guilty, but there has to be a piece of evidence that hasn't been connected publicly. Exhuming a body doesn't usually happen on the presumption of innocence. I know there are two very small children involved and I have no idea what they might know, but according to the dispatcher that received a call from Sgt. Peterson that evening, he already knew his wife was "missing" before he was to go work at 5pm. Her family reported her missing the following morning. When asked if she took anything with her, he mentioned cash, her passport, and a bikini. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't have thought to look for a swimming suit in October, if I were looking for clues for a missing person. But then, I'm not a trained professional. It would take me awhile to tell you what was missing in the way of clothing. I don't know if I could find my own swimming suit in the first place I looked. So, if we can ascertain anything here, we know that Drew Peterson was dating a teen-age girl while married. We also know that his wife at that time met with an untimely passing, and we know that he has two small children whose births must fit into the time frame between his 3rd wife's death and the present. I've been wondering if Stacy knew something about Kathy's questionable death, and today I read that she had gone to a clergyman about this very matter, just a couple of months before she disappeared. Since her disappearance, Drew has received an "anonymous letter," been on TV, made statements, and resigned. Does he look guilty? Well he's presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Even his step-brother has raised some concern, but Drew has done his best to discredit him. I guess witnesses don't have to be presumed truthful until proven otherwise, or are simply all dead.
Now, back a few years to Scott and Laci Peterson. I remember awakening to the news. The morning after she didn't return home Laci's absence was national news. I remember telling my husband then, that seemed odd. An adult woman that didn't come home one evening was national news as a missing person, the next day? I'd always heard, unless it was a child, you had to wait 48 hours to file a missing persons report. I didn't buy it then and I don't buy it now. I've had a couple of theories, but I'll not make a point of those, I'm just raising questions. Undoubtedly, Scott Peterson ran his mouth and ran around way too much. I remember there was a Monday night movie before he even went to trial. This case was huge! And remember Laci's mom ended up at the White House watching President Bush sign the bill into law about prosecuting for murder in the case of an unborn child. But back to the case as it built. As evidence to Scott's affairs continued to emerge, the notion that he was a cad was gaining momentum and as the massage therapist, Amber, gained notoriety, the mystery took on a life of it's own. The case lingered without clues or evidence, just gossip and speculation for more than three months. Then, suddenly in less than a week, a baby's corpse was found, a woman's body was found, DNA verified, and Scott was up on double murder charges.
On a sidenote regarding DNA, I just checked a FOXNews report about the little girl that was found "Baby Grace" and with her DNA and the father's DNA, Texas expects the results back in 2 weeks and will not verify for certain they have identified the little girl, but they are reasonably sure.
Yet, in the Peterson case, after months under water, and frankly, as a former funeral director, I'm surprised there were bodies at all, considering the aquatic life, the DNA test was conclusive between finding the bodies on the 13th and 14th and Scott's arrest on the 18th. As to the rest of the story . . . He was proven an unfaithful cad, he was proven to be in financial distress, but he was sentenced to death on nothing but circumstantial evidence. There was no evidence at all, and no witnesses with any clue, actually linking him to the death of Laci. I watched as the events unfolded and it just seemed like a really bad Lifetime Channel Movie.
Anyone causing the death of another is himself to be put to death on the word of witnesses: but the word of one witness is not enough. Torah of Holy Scripture

Condi's Tea Party . . . a.k.a.

The Annapolis Conference.
I have a real problem with this whole thing. We keep reading in the news just how little respect the Arab nations have for women, so what do we do? Two things. We call the media, liberal and misleading, then choose to believe what is reported, even by this "liberal media." The second thing we do is send a hard-line woman to broker peace, where men and true diplomats have failed. If only one politician truly believed the Bible, America could be taking an all together different stand, but it appears that we lack any Bible believers in Washington D.C. I am not, for a moment, suggesting that politicians set the moral standard for this country with religious beliefs, I am simply suggesting that if someone in authority actually believed the Bible, they would understand the conditions of the Middle East and realize, we cannot spend our resources and commit our reputation and economy, and pressure Israel to something that will not happen. Genesis clearly states that Ishmael, the father of the Arabs would have 12 mighty nations, that would fight amongst themselves. So simply stated, the Arabs will obviously stand together against another entity, such as Israel and possibly even the US, but they will not find the terms of any offers, agreeable to all of them. So, what do we do? Apparently, we have now promised to push Israel into concession, which is not the same thing as defending Israel, although the religious right seems blinded to that fact. History has already proven that once Israel begins to broker off the land, then there are more requirements to stop the rockets, and America has already proven when Israel is under attack, we're busy. We aren't too busy to host an "outnumbering" for Israel and we won't be too busy to pressure Israel into giving away the Golan Heights in a peace effort, and we won't be too busy to help Lebanon against some of the "members" of their own parliament, but we have always been too busy to back Israel, as an ally. Hamas has already said that Abbas does not represent them, so they will not agree to what Abbas has accepted, and oh, by the way, Abbas also wants part of Jerusalem. Wake up call to America and Israel. According to Scripture, Jerusalem isn't Israel's to negotiate. According to Scripture, Jerusalem belongs to G~D.
Whether Israel is simply set up for an attack or gives away the land in hopes of peace, how much of Israel will stand as a sovereign state under those circumstances? I don't think America should offer a "clean hand" back door support to Ahmadinejad's statements regarding Israel. Israel, will in fact be missing from the map, if we continue to pressure the land give away. As a matter of fact, even in this Annapolis conference, this administration has referred to itself as neutral. I believe that was the same stand taken in the late 30's and early 40's when much of Europe was under siege. If we have an ally, don't we owe them more than neutral? If we claim allies on both sides, that doesn't make us neutral, that makes us untrustworthy to both.
For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them . . . New Testament

Isn't It Still Racism?

Well, didn't we all expect the democrats to start fussing amongst themselves? I mean the campaign just started way to soon to stay positive. Besides, campaign promises have to be vague enough to not actually be a breech of promise if elected. There isn't an American politician that is really going to make a straight out policy statement or regimented plan for the office in which they are campaigning. So why did they start so soon, when they had no plans to keep discussing? All of the democrats are telling us part of a health care plan, but certainly not enough about one, to truly be sure what to expect. Of course, there is the Iraq war to discuss, but we all know, truly nobody, right or left, red or blue, has a solution without potentially negative ramifications. Now that I mention red and blue, let's talk black and white. Oprah is going to stump for Obama. Oprah is a middle aged successful woman, that spends a great deal of time espousing the concept that girls can be successful in what has been a traditionally man's world, so why aren't the "girl-friends" sticking together? Why isn't Oprah stumping for Hillary? Did Oprah have the most difficult choice to make in regard to all of her statements? Whom to support, the first woman president or the first black president? I guess we can all see what Oprah has decided. America can wait a bit longer for a female president, no matter how much Bill is loved by African-Americans. Bottom line is Hillary is not Bill and she's not black.
Jesse Jackson really put his foot in his mouth today. I was reading a political ticker and he has also come out in great support of Obama, but is disappointed that the democrats are not addressing a major issue among blacks, which is poverty. Then Jesse went on to mention the fact that John Edwards is addressing poverty and has made it a key plank in his platform. So Jesse Jackson, why are you not supporting John Edwards? If he's the candidate that is addressing the issue that is near and dear to your heart, why would you not support him? Is it simply because he is wealthy and white? Surely not . . .
When something or someone is promoted due to race, even when the color issue is reversed, isn't it still racism?
Are ye not then partial in yourselves . . . New Testament

Politicizing Someone's Pain

I've been following the reports about the young woman in Saudi that has been sentenced to an outrageous punishment. First, I find the Saudi government to be obviously barbaric in their treatment of women, but I also see a great deal of dictatorial tyranny on the part of some judge that apparently doesn't approve of free speech. I have no positive comment to make about the Saudi government at all. They issued passports for terrorists, they have hiked the oil prices out of reach, they appear to be above being "global team players" and yet, our government continues to minimize the tyranny and simply cajole in our so called disapproval. Since 9/11 is more than six years past, I'm not going to focus the blog on that topic again, today, because it seems apparent that the followers of the present administration simply do not care that the Saudi government provided the majority of the 9/11 terrorists with access to American Visas. I continue to be "astonished" that this information falls on such deaf ears. As the revisionists continue to present the false connections between 9/11 and Iraq, there is simply no voice of logic to be heard. Perhaps some Americans can see this oil deal for what it is. While this administration schmoozes the Saudi government, calling them friends, and keeps the Texas oil wells capped, our country is going broke with our oil dependency. And that may not be all Saudi, as I just cannot believe the Texas oil tycoons are willing to miss out; when oil is $100.00 a barrel. I really don't think they are just tipping their Stetson's back and saying "Oh well!" I'm sure they are not happily reminiscing about the old days when it was $20.00 a barrel. So, is there a deal somewhere? My guess would be yes, just like we agreed to attack the other direction, in spite of where the terrorists came from, but I'm going to talk about this young woman today and what would be different for her, here in America.
American stats already indicate that only 1 rape in 4 even get reported, and the stats are more dismal in regard to the reported ones that actually get prosecuted. Then, if some woman actually manages to be heard to that point, she is then put on trial for any and every possible sexual indiscretion she may have ever experienced. Unlike the American judicial system, this woman in Saudi is not being punished for being raped. She's being punished for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, which in her country is illegal. And now, her punishment has been increased for speaking to the media. I believe the punishment is hideous, but I also believe that the protection of rape victims is substandard in this country. I guess what I find even more hideous and more substandard is the spineless response issued by the White House press secretary. I just don't understand why the American administration has wreaked havoc all over the Middle East, but continues to kowtow to Saudi Arabia. According to the Bible shouldn't it really be the other way around between a Christian nation and Arabia?
. . . and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of G~d. the Acts

What If . . .

I'm not going to close this blog with Scripture today, because this is just my rambling, and I don't believe in using G~D's Word to justify my ranting.
Today, as most of America sits down to celebrate Thanksgiving, I've had some questions run through my mind. I don't celebrate the "Extreme Make-over of the New World."
I remember learning in school that the wild turkey was almost the "National Bird," rather than the bald eagle. So, if the decision had gone the other way, what would be the traditional Thanksgiving meal?
I've also been wondering as illegal immigration is in the news every day, how things would have been for those Mayflowerians at the shore. What if the Indians had turned them away, like the Haitians or Cubans have been denied and their boats turned away?
What would this country be like now, if the near genocide of the Native inhabitants had not occurred?
What would have happened if the "immigrants" would have been met with the same standard their descendants now expect of new immigrants? What language would someone have been expected to learn? Would a single language have been a huge issue? Europe's land mass isn't really larger than the US, yet there are many languages spoken there. We have a President that says he speaks "Texan." Why couldn't we have citizens that speak Montanan or Georgian, as well?
And speaking of a President and Texas; it was forty-four years ago today that President Kennedy died in Dallas. Which always raises a question in my mind. If the country had not bought into the magic bullet theory or unquestioningly received the report of the Warren Commission would this nation have become the fearful, undiscerning sheeple that it has?
Oh, I realize America has laws and authorities, and we are told to "love it or leave it" and all the rest of what has been established and come to be expected, but I was just wondering . . . What if the Native Americans had met the Mayflower with the rule of law, rather than compassion and sustenance?

The Shades of Perspective

As I sit here getting ready to blog my last for the week, I think . . . my mind has wandered to just how many issues are viewed from opposite perspectives, depending of course, on one's religious persuasion and or ancestry.
I read an interesting perspective by Ruben Navarette, Jr. regarding NY driver's licenses for the illegals. He of course was for it, with some very interesting arguments, and he is Hispanic or whatever the PC term is for someone of his blood line. I loved the point he made, and he used several examples to prove his point. His point, virtually was, we need to legalize what is already being done illegally. Well, now, how far could we go with that line of thinking? Just one more opportunity to demonstrate just how disrespectful the illegal immigrants are of this nation's laws. Legalize, illegal activities. Bet the Mafia would have appreciated his argument on their behalf. Of course, there is always something in the headlines that is racial regarding African Americans. I, personally believe that any color of people or race that believes they are deserving of special treatment or special status is racism. Granted, the pendulum certainly swung toward the European bloodlines for a number of years, but swinging to the opposite extreme is not eradicating racism, it is simply changing the complexion of racism. I have known several professional men, that also happened to be black, and they have made reference to unfair treatment in the past, but I've never heard a black professional attribute their success or achievement in the business world to the color of their skin.
And of course, there is now the fact, that for twenty years, middle aged, middle class white guys have no special treatment and no recourse for that fact, and that is "shaded" from their perspective. It would seem, long before the recognition of so-called equal rights, they lost their standing, but it wasn't until feminism actually had a label that they realized it.
And I also have a perspective from both my religion and my heritage. I don't celebrate Thanksgiving, I celebrate Sukkot, which is a time set aside in Scripture to give thanks each year, for the bountiful harvest and take note of G~D's provision. I don't have any idea why the Puritans had to establish their own time of thanks, when the G~D of the Bible had already designated the time. And, from a Native American perspective, I really don't see any reason to celebrate the fact that my ancestors kept some half starved, half sick, European wanna be's alive long enough to become the aristocracy here, that they couldn't be in Europe. Of course, we all know how the rest of that story has gone . . .
Isn't everyone's perspective shaded by color and/or envisioned by their religious ideals?
You are not to be moved in your judging by a man's position . . . Torah of Holy Scripture

Things I Just Don't Understand in America . . .

I don't understand why this American administration has taken upon itself to single-handedly transform the Middle East into democracies, with the interesting exception of Saudi Arabia. Why, when 15 of the 19 Passports attributed to the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi, was it decided that Saddam Hussein was a greater threat? Let's see, there has been no attack on American soil by Iraqis or the Iraqi leader at that time. As a matter of fact, he was our ally against Iran, which is also something I don't understand. Before this administration invaded Iraq, Hussein was pretty much the buffer between Iran and the rest of the world, and according to this administration, Ahmadinejad must be kept in check, which is exactly what Saddam Hussein was doing before he was murdered. I did not agree with Hussein's politics, but then I don't agree with King Abdullah's either, but my opinion doesn't change the fact that there were many Saudi Passports on those flights that day in September. And what about beating a woman that has been raped? Also a deal in Saudi. I thought this American administration was determined to raise the status of women in the Middle East . . . So how do we figure this one? Another thing, I don't understand is the number of American men who are now labeled sex offenders for life because of some sexual activity with a girl friend when they were teen-agers. Why is that not a juvenile offense that is erased when they become adults? I'm just sickened at the number of men that have a label for life because of a stupid indiscretion as a teen-ager with another teen-ager. I could name several adult men that were once teen age boys that married their younger teen age pregnant girl friend back in the 50's and 60's and that was called doing the "right thing." They weren't called sex offenders. So, does marriage make a wrong thing, right? And if so, should divorce be forbidden in this circumstance? If it's a life label, then it's a life sentence, either way . . . Of course I'm not truly suggesting that divorce be disallowed in the case of pregnant teen-age marriage, but how did it become so extreme in 50 years? I've looked all over the internet to find the age of Fred Thompson's first wife, but I haven't been able to locate that information. Dr. Bill Bennett said Fred did the right thing back then, and married her, becoming a husband and father at the age of 17. Well, what if these younger men, are no different, they just are living in a society that hasn't taught them that a shotgun marriage to the wrong person makes premarital sex, the right thing?
And another thing . . . Why are we listening to these pundits tell us that according to cost indexes, $3.00 a gallon now compares with 79 cents a gallon back then, and we are not using the word inflation? Consumer cost increase is inflation and it is out of control, but so much of everything else it out of control, we just keep listening while "they" keep the hamster wheels turning.
My son, . . . keep sound wisdom and discretion: a Proverb of Holy Scripture

More Math . . .

I wouldn't ordinarily blog about someone else's personal opinion or life and be specific as to who they are, but I'm making this exception. I'm very proud of my husband for being a true contributor to America and not changing his view, when his circumstances changed. Several years ago, knowing I had MS, I went ahead and applied, as a minister to be out of the Social Security system. Ministers can do this, based upon their religious beliefs that G~D rather than the government will provide for them, but there are two governmental stipulations. 1. Any income made outside of ministry is still taxable and 2. If this request is apprroved there is no collection of Social Security, regardless of payment in or need. Well, the powers that be, didn't approve my request, so I continued to have withholding and that's fine, because they left my option open as well. But, I made the decision based upon G~D, not the gov, so even though my withholding status didn't change, I have continued to stand on the belief that I would not collect Social Security. Although I must render unto Caesar, I do not have to receive. And I have covered this before in previous blogs. We do not pay in for ourselves to collect. We pay, for the ascending generation to collect, but originally it was only for those elderly, in need, but old people "have come along way, baby." Now, on to my point. My husband decided, also aware of 20th Century American history, that he also would forgo his plans of collecting Social Security. We do not believe retirement is Scriptural and there is nowhere that we are commanded to collect from our government. Funny, I don't think anyone over 65 in America remembers anything from the 20th Century, except Chappaquiddick and "they paid into it." But I digress. So, nearly five years ago, my husband and I changed our entire course of living. We still pay our taxes, but we changed the dynamics of our income, dramatically, and he left the secular, tradition work force, much to the chagrin of all meddling bystanders, but that only served as confirmation for our decision. Well, this summer, he met with a horrible situation that has rendered him physically challenged. It hasn't changed our income, and it hasn't changed what he believes he is "called to do." What it has changed is his physical ability to get around, easily and it has changed his social status to a person having a disability. My husband and I are both very mathematical and so are most members of our families. But through all of this, somehow our family members have all come to the conclusion that Bob should collect disability. Not to discount the physical trauma that my husband has endured, but the only thing that has changed as far as physical work is concerned, is the fact that I now do the chores alone. My dad did build him an access deck to get back to the work he loves and he did, and our income hasn't changed. So, why would my husband suddenly need a check from the government for me doing his outdoor work? The family has reminded him that "he paid into it" and all of these people that have reminded him, are collecting it themselves, along with enjoying their pensions, investments, and inheritances. If any mathematician considered this equation, they could clearly see, there is absolutely no formula to even combine these variables, much less, justify the solution.
Then Daniel made answer and said to the king, Keep your offerings for yourself, and give your rewards to another; the Prophets of Holy Scripture

What Is It They Say About Learning from History?

Is the only thing we can learn from history, is that we don't learn from history . . . ? Now, as we all know, a good conspiracy theorist will continue to accumulate evidence and "recognize" the signs in order to build their theory. I don't like to call myself a conspiracy theorist, but I am still thinking the Republicans are open to "throwing the election." And here's my latest evidence. Remember the Nixon years? It was the anti-establishment and war protesters against the capitalist establishment. The difference, so far is terminology. The anti-establishment war protesters are "liberals" and the capitalist establishment is, as always, conservative. I have to make mention of something one of the republican candidates said, though. I find it just priceless, and quite unique to his party. Mike Huckabee said he is conservative, but he's not angry about it! I find that refreshing, but back to my theory. Although everyone chooses to blame the Carter years for inflation, I happen to remember the gasoline "situation" through the republican White House. I remember noticing that the price of gasoline increased dramatically, the year I got my driver's license, which was 1974, the same year Watergate concluded. And we had two more years of a republican White House that nobody elected. Remember, a hand picked vice president was decided, not elected, then when Mr. Nixon resigned, less than a year later, we had a President that was chosen, not elected. Of course, we know, that's not what happened in 2000 . . . And if we consider who the anti-establishment and establishment are, we will find it is pretty much the same group of people, respectively. The establishment are now living off of their capitalistic investments and our taxes, and the anti-establishment for the most part are still the boomers, and as usual are dismissed as big uncooperative, anti-patriotic noise, that deserves no respect. Not to say that some boomers didn't go ahead and embrace the establishment . . . the present and most recent past President come to mind. But the republicans have now realized, the party is lagging in support of the present White House, much in the same way as through the Nixon, Vietnam years. As a matter of fact, President Bush's approval rating is not much more than Mr. Nixon's was, when he resigned from office, so the GOP has to be considering something. If they are looking at history, then maybe a one termer from the other party will cinch the 2012 election and hold the control for a good number of years to come. I still realize with the potential for Hillary to be in the White House, Corporate America will still be in control, so technically the same people will run things that are doing so now, but the "libs" will be the fall guys. Look how many years later, the pundits are still trashing Jimmy Carter. Consumer products were already outrageous in 1977. Now, that we are facing recession and inflation, and foreclosure, it's called a natural cycle in the American economy . . . it sure wasn't called that in 1979. It was called out of control inflation and it was all Jimmy's fault. I, personally, think the GOP has done their homework. They can let the White House go for a term and feather their nests with investments through the low stock market trend, and enjoy the connections with oil cartels, and then the White House will be a shoo-in in the next election. It won't matter who they run, Hillary will make everybody mad. She did before and she didn't even have the office. And maybe it won't be Hillary, but we do all know, the promises we are hearing from the democrat camp cannot come to pass in the manner in which they are promised. There is no way to clean up all that has been done, and balance all that has been spent since January 2001. The republicans don't want in this time, I'm just sure of it. If the republicans sit one term out, perhaps that will give the party time to get the blame shifted back where they want it. Last I read, Giuliani hadn't spent a dime or bothered with Iowa, Fred Thompson was given a huge build up, and it's been more like just another presence. Mitt Romney is spending money like he's got it, oh that's right, he does, but I don't think his religion will garner the republican base, and the rest, well, they are getting just a little more press than I am, and I am not running for President.
Have mercy on me, O Lord; for my cry goes up to you all the day. a Psalm from Holy Scripture

Contributing Factors of Road Rage

I didn't blog yesterday, because I was afraid, after the day I had endured, and the topic of the blog, I'd just be too mean, so I decided to get a little rest, think it over and blog about it today. With that being said, I may still have difficulty with tact and diplomacy. I go to town about twice a month and in that excursion, I make several stops and tend to as much business as I can. Yesterday, I had banking to do, feed to buy, a bit of shopping, and make a donation at the local shelter, and go to the DoR. It used to be the DMV, Dept. of Motor Vehicles, but since it really is about revenue, it makes more sense to just have all of our required payments under the big umbrella of Department of Revenue. We purchased a trailer a couple of years ago when we were moving and we finished hauling the last of our belongings when we moved, and it's made several fun trips to auctions and livestock purchases and right now, it's full of hay for the winter, but it still needs current license plates. We got our renewal notice in the mail and I thought, the middle of the month would be the best time to endure the procedures of the DoR. I also discovered that my driver's license could be renewed early and finally have all my "stuff" in order. This is the big ID system change, when I had to take my passport and my marriage license, and proof of my address. And that alone just makes me angry! I mean really angry. My driver's license is now my national ID, I don't care what any political preacher or religious politician says, I went in the national data base for sure, yesterday afternoon. And although that topic alone is blog worthy, it's not my topic. I have a genuine gripe that literally aggravated me beyond words yesterday.
I have been told my entire life to respect my elders, well, if that's what elders expect, then elders need to get respectable.
While I was checking to make sure, I had all my information, I discovered that seniors get special treatment in this driver's license drama. If you are over 65, you don't have to bring all your paperwork to the DoR, simply your current license and proof of address. Now, not only do these seniors get special paperwork privilege, I happen to be privy to 5 examples of blatant disrespect for the rest of us who have to meet the standard of the rules and survive driving with these people that do not. I watched, in line, as these seniors could not read the letters on the eye chart, could not identify the road signs, and needed the person administering the test, to let them know when they were going to "put on the flashing lights." I heard one elderly woman tell the official, "I can't see a thing to the left, that's my bad eye." The official immediately asked when this woman had last been to the eye doctor. I, personally, know two woman that got a special slip from their eye doctor to be excused from taking the eye test. One has done it for years and the other opted for this special plan because she didn't know the signs and failed in her first two attempts to renew. So, are these people ready to react, safely in a split second to avoid traffic problems?
Now, are you ready for the really irritating part. All of these people left the DoR with driver's license in hand. Don't you feel safe, just knowing, for our safety and protection, our government had to see my Passport and Marriage License, and the senior citizens don't even have to see!
So give us knowledge of the number of our days, that we may get a heart of wisdom. a Psalm of King David

Harrying Headlines

Have you noticed how many headlines grab your attention, but in reading the article, you can't help but feel you were misled? I have one that I just have to share, because it makes the point so well, and this isn't from that "liberal media" that's trying to influence and scare everyone! No, this is from the "fair and balanced" camp! It's just another example of the media's resolve to keep this nation in an uproar over something. The Headline reads: Report: Car Company Considers Vehicle for Exclusively for Muslims

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310677,00.html
Upon reading the report, I discovered that the car company is a Malaysia-based car maker that appears to make cars in a region of the world that is predominantly Muslim. The article also reveals that many Muslims in that part of the world do not own cars, so to enhance marketing, the car maker is considering some "features" to appeal to the Muslim world, like a compass that points to Mecca, and a special compartment for the Quran and head scarves.
Although, I have no use for these particular features, I was shocked that FOXNews found this newsworthy, and I did suffer a pang of guilt that accomodations for religious articles are not an issue in making a car purchase, here. American car makers have been adding features to their products for years to appeal to their customers, but never of a religous nature. And Japanese car makers have added features that are not specific to a culture or demographics, per se, but appealed to efficiency and economics. So, with that being said, let's analyze for a moment just what a car company is promoting when they offer features that appeal to a certain group of people. Awhile back, I remember the Eddie Bauer name of vehicles, and I drive a Cadillac, which is all about appealing to comfort rather than economy. My last Cadillac had cigarette lighters on every door and one in the dash. Now that smoking is no longer politically correct, many American vehicles come equipped with beverage holders, phone adapters, CD holders, DVD players and monitors, and GPS screens. It really is all about accomodating the purchaser. It's called free enterprise. I guess what I learned from the Fair and Balanced Report was the difference of priorities that the auto manufacturers were attempting to accomodate. The Muslim car is being considered to accomodate their religious priorities, where as the rest of the automakers are trying to appeal to different ones. I would guess if money, luxury and entertainment were not the main priorities of most American car purchasers, our auto makers would also have to consider other factory incentives.
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. New Testament

The Justification of Martial Law

The news is just getting scary. Why are Americans supporting martial law in Pakistan? Why does this Musharraf get American support to have an election in February? Does anybody know how much can be done or undone or caused in 3 months? And that can be good or bad, but 3 months is a lot of time for someone to be unaccountable to the people of his country, while another country supports him. I hate the fact that I am about to say this, but a free election is no indication that the nation will have freedom. We all saw what a great influence America had in the Palestinian elections, eh? In that election Hamas got promoted from terrorist organization to political party. Now the whole world has to deal with Hamas as a political party to be reckoned with. Now, I'm going to use America for the example, because I live here. We have free elections, we do not have martial law, and we defend freedom at gun point and keep it under lock and key . . . So, if we have such freedom, why are so many Americans afraid of the IRS? Why are so many Americans afraid of law enforcement officers? Why are so many Americans afraid to say what they really think on their cell phones and cordless phones? Why are so many Americans afraid of their governnment? Why are so many Americans living in so much fear when we have free elections? And when Americans live in this much fear, why do we feel the rest of the world should be living like we do? What are we afraid of? Are we afraid of losing our stuff? Are many Americans truly secure or afraid that the war on terror, Homeland Security, and FEMA will step in, if "determined" necessary with the same method that our government is now supporting Musharraf? It's already been demonstrated in New Orleans, at the request of the mayor with much bi-partisan blind support. So, when and if it happens here, will the explanation be: that it's to protect us from another attack or potential anarchy? This situation in Pakistan is certainly garnering American support regarding martial law, as the lesser of two evils.
It's probably only a matter of time until the preachers are quoting Romans 13:1 as the sheeple are led to submit to their "ruling authorities."
The joy of our heart is ceased; our dance is turned into mourning. the Prophets of Holy Scripture

"They" Say the Economy Will be Slowing . . .

Wow! Now that oil is nearly $100.00 a barrel, and mortgages are crumbling, and plants and factories have been closing for years, and the family farm is either a thing of the past or mortgaged into the next century, "they" used the word "inflation" today. Ya think??? I haven't been able to understand this denial for the past several years. I remember through the Clinton years, when the deficit from the Reagan/Bush years was suddenly gone and the budget was balanced. I asked then, in passing, "Who bought us, out?" My guess back in the mid 90's, was China. If we go back a little further in time, to the 'recession' in the Reagan years; the demise of the union, the wage reductions in company negotiations, and the addition of the military to the employment/unemployment statistics, we can clearly see the point in time that America determined to alter the terminology and realign the statistics, rather than actually address the issues or repair the problems, and the neocons still refer to this time as the great time in America and a truly great President. Well, I have great sympathy for Mr. Reagan, in that it was clearly obvious by the middle of his second term that he suffered from Alzheimer's disease. Now, on back a bit further to the Carter days. I realize now, from the neocon perspective, just about everything that has happened in recent US history is Jimmy Carter's fault, and I would disagree. As I listen to the aggression of the neocons, I remember the skit from Saturday Night Live when Dan Aykroyd did a great "Jimmy" and told us, that with inflation, we could all be millionaires, and you know what . . . American millionaires are so common, now, that to make the Fortune 500, you have to be a billionaire. I'd love to have a dime for every current neocon that was a democrat then, or managed to gather enough inflation affected assets, otherwise known as appreciable investments, to be worth a million, now. Just a dime for each of them, would put me in a new tax bracket! So, where are we going from here? We have relabelled inflation, we have focused our bounty on a war effort and ultimately, we are now facing the fact that it costs the average young family 2 incomes to just survive and own nothing. As for founding fathers? Well, the previous generations have to take care of their own old age and they paid into it and blah, blah, blah . . . They aren't about to make the same sacrifice the patriots are said to have made. The worst of democracy is about to rare it's ugly head. We are entering a new place where fascism and communism meet, where every generation claims their own entitlement and every person touts their own special accomplishment, contribution or need and it's called: "socialistic selfism."
But G~d said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward G~d. New Testament

Statistically Speaking, a Group of 50 Men and 50 Women all Have One . . .

Statistics and research can be fascinating. They can also render exactly what someone chooses them to "reveal," depending upon the number of variables considered. I listened this morning to Kevin Wall, "sitting in for Dr. Bill Bennett" and three thoughts entered my mind, which isn't bad for 6am. 1. The republicans "pro Constitution" is a serious agenda against the Bill of Rights. and 2. Dr. Bill gives the favored "students" a wonderful opportunity to learn the fine art and skill of programming their audience. and 3. Keeping the country politically divided keeps the country from seeing the entire picture.
Kevin had two topics that he kept hammering. He wanted his caller's views of the "Fair Tax" and he wanted to keep taking jabs at the arrogance of the Free Press. Now, considering this is a man that aspires to rub elbows and to attain the status of peer and contemporary with the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, I found the fact that he used the term "arrogance" in a negative way, absolutely laughable. Can you imagine . . . passing judgment and using the term arrogant when attempting to align yourself with those gentlemen? I realize the free press is really in trouble, and not so much by what they publish, but from the fact that America would rather be told what to believe than to actually exercise any literary skill or logic. Will the internet or talk radio be the end of the Free Press? Who knows, but if America doesn't choose soon, to be informed, rather than simply programmed and mentally massaged, we will see the end of the free press? Now, on to the real statistics. As Kevin continued to drone on about the "Fair Tax" and I listened to the stats, I realized there was more to the statistics than he shared. I checked and sure enough, there was a study done from the other perspective, but I never found a source that combined the two sets of statistics, so here we go.
Kevin and Rush say that those that earn in the top 1% pay over 30% of the nation's taxes. I can't argue with that, so I checked into the national income percentage of the top 1%, and you know what I discovered? I found a reference, actually more than one that said the top 1% had more than 50% of the national income. The trick here, is that not all of it, is earned through wages. Some of the income of the top 1% is through investment and trade.
So, what would we all discover if we didn't have to listen and read according to red and blue, but simply could see what was black and white?
Our leaders want us divided. They don't want us to see the full picture, and unfortunately, many would choose to be programmed with a single, predetermined report of statistics, rather than the full reality of the correlation of statistics.
Where no counsel is, the people fall: a Proverb of Holy Scripture

Let's Talk About Torture

It truly bothers me that so many in our country are so comfortable with the concept of "harsh interrogation methods." And because they are comfortable with the concept, it isn't torture! How many things in life are like that. It isn't bad if I approve . . . and the flip side, if I feel it's appropriate, then it's fine. I read that our beleaguering Congress had issues with confirming a new Attorney General because of his potential to define torture too conservatively, but they've since resolved those concerns, and it looks like he's in. And so we've heard about water boarding. I read that the military doesn't use it, it's a CIA operation. Well, I heard someone call in on Mark Levin, saying he was in the military and he'd had it done to him in training, so the military is doing it, according to him. Now, are they training our military to counter the effectiveness? Who knows? Who will ever tell us? What concerns me, is how open we are to "doing whatever it takes" to get someone to talk. You know, I pray, I would never denounce my faith under pressure, but anything else . . . I'd tell them whatever I thought they wanted to hear and I'm serious. Don't you think people just make stuff up to make it stop? Now, the way I understand water boarding is it creates the illusion and fear of drowning. Don't you wonder what sick mind in the intelligence department thought this one up. Anyway, conservative America just doesn't think that's torture, so we should quit talking about our techniques so the enemy can't figure out how to counter the effort. It is truly sick and disgusting and it's always framed in the mantra of the war on terror and the scary world in which we live. Well, I think the people that think this stuff up make the world a pretty scary place to be. And I don't know how I feel about a group of people that reclassify and use euphemisms for these acts. From what I've read, just having to deal with the CIA or Congress could go in the category of torture, anyway. And I've not had too many pleasant experiences with the staunch conservatives. I remember seeing the title, although I didn't read the book, by Ann Coulter, "How to Talk to a Liberal (If you Must)" and so I usually just think to myself when the conservative rants begin "No Need to Talk to Conservatives, They Aren't Listening." How can our general public hear about a technique that is used by our government and not cringe? How can we not fear for what will happen to our children? Even if we were to win this war on terror that cannot be won, how jaded will the next generation be? How horrible does treatment have to be, to be defined as torture?
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them . . . New Testament

The Powers Behind The Powers That Be

I'm beginning to have a glimpse of where this GOP is headed. I truly believe the GOP is establishing their power and pooling their clout behind the scenes. I'm not saying that the Democrats, at least some of them, aren't also hedging their bets in a similar way. I'll address that in the next paragraph or two, but for now, I want to point out the fact that the Bush administration almost needs a revolving door for official posts, these days, and I think those leaving are going to be in positions of greater power in business. I've already written about Tommy Thompson on the board of VeriChip and John Ashcroft now has an LLC that basically has made him a very powerful lobbyist for some very prestigous corporations. It is my firm belief that many that have held positions in this administration have gone on to secure power from a different perspective, but power, none the less. I don't have enough information or "evidence" to come right out and say the GOP is going to "throw" the 2008 election, but it certainly has crossed my mind. They have to at least have considered, that if Hillary gets into the White House, she may do their bidding as well as her husband completed many of the proposals of Bush 41. As a matter of fact, I stumbled over some very disheartening information about wiretapping and governmental access to the public communications corporations in 1994, when we had a democrat President and Congress, before the GOP takeover. And when I watch the way the Clintons have operated, it is clear that they value the big corporate pockets of America. As a matter of fact, as I listen to this proposed health plan that Hillary supposedly has, I have wondered. But the, it is actually the conservative pundits that are talking so much about it and seem to know more about it than anyone, but I wonder none the less. Who, that is backing Hillary would benefit from socialized medicine? I remember moving to a retirement/welfare community in the early 90's and finding our family "outside network coverage" and my husband's insurance required that we find a physician in that town. That was back in my "we need doctors" days, before I became a believer. Anyway, every physician's office that we called informed us that they were not taking new patients. So, that was my little taste of socialized medicine. Many of the doctors in that community, dealt primarily with medicare and medicaid, and they had all the patients they could manage. So, if Hillary gets her universal health plan the pundits are talking about, who benefits? I can't imagine that the doctors want to give up their 'god status' and become employees of the government. I have wondered as hospitals have changed, if they would be the major beneficiaries of this plan? They are actually a very bureaucratic system, already, so perhaps that is the aim. And the pharmaceutical companies? Well, it might be a bit tougher to program the self diagnosing hypochondriacs to ask their doctor for the latest prescription they saw advertised through the news, but on the other hand; maybe that will just pressure the FDA to make more pharmaceuticals available over the counter. This would not only increases the profit margin, but also eliminates the liabilities. Now that sounds like a win/win solution for the pharmaceutical corporations and we know Hillary does concern herself with their best interest. I think we are finally going to realize what we've been shown through the last two presidencies, and the GOP already knows. Much of the power belonging to the White House is negative. The power that draws the people and their allegience is elsewhere behind the scenes, obtained through money and the power of the lobby. So could it be, if Hillary wins, the powers behind the GOP win?
When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying I am innocent . . . New Testament