President Obama's Foundation of Straw

This just in, from The Heritage Foundation this morning:

 

Stealing from the Sermon on the Mount to defend his administration's economic record this Tuesday, President Barack Obama urged Americans to "build our house upon a rock" instead of "the same pile of sand" it had been built on before. In Obama's hands, the teachings of Jesus become just another way to tell the story of the Three Little Pigs. And a close examination of Obama's new "five pillars that will grow our economy" shows that Obama is trying to build our new foundation with straw.

  The problems begin with the fact that Obama continues to link his pre-existing policy preferences to our current economic problems. The Washington Post editorial board writes: "The agenda focuses on education, renewable energy and health care. ... But as his admirable summation of recent history made clear, these pursuits have little to do with the economic crisis, and they are not the key to economic recovery." Worse, in all "five pillars" Obama cites, his administration already has, or is proposing, to make economic recovery more difficult.

  New Rules for Wall Street: Our financial sector is long overdue for regulatory consolidation and simplification, but so far all of Obama's actions have only increased market uncertainty by extending government's fumbling hand. Using the Treasury Department's TARP slush fund, the Obama administration has taken over major firms, set employment practices for entire industries, and laundered money to failing firms.

  New Investments in Education: No policy area has better exposed the administration's hypocrisy than education. Despite the administration's vow to support "what works" in education, mere days after a Department of Education study showed that students in the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program out performed their peers, Education Secretary Arne Duncan took scholarship money away from low-income families. This brazen act makes it clear no real education reform has any hope in this administration.

  New Investments in Renewable Energy: President Obama admitted last year that his energy plan would cause electricity prices to "skyrocket." His cap and trade plan would amount to an economy-killing trillion-dollar energy tax. A new study from Spain shows it will generate a huge net job loss.

  New Investment in Health Care: Obama says the key to reducing future deficits is health care reform that contains costs. But his own budget admits his plan will require $634 billion more in new spending just as a down payment. How do you decrease trillion dollar deficits by spending trillions more?

  New Savings in Our Federal Budget: The most widely acknowledged untruth in Obama's budget is the phantom savings he claims by first making spending projections that no one else ever proposed and then cutting them. Remember this is the candidate who in October of last year was still promising the American people a "net spending cut" before enacting a purely deficit spending "economic stimulus" that was larger than the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.

  As Charles Krauthammer points out today, Obama's "New Foundation" rhetoric is a mirror image of President Jimmy Carter's 1979 State of the Union speech and his energy and education policies are no different either. And we know how well that presidency worked out.

Read Dr. Krauthammer's The Sting in Four Parts at the Wasnhington Post.

Another view from the Post's editorial staff: Clarity in Need of Courage.

And Eugene Robinson describes The Bases Obama Didn't Cover.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Protesters or Terrorists? Update

Fox News interviewed Steven Robertson, Director of the National Legislative Commission at the American Legion, and got his opinion of the report issued by the Department of Homeland Security.

 

Then this morning, the Fox News team interviewed Janet Napolitano, who is in Mexico with the President for talks about the border.  She was asked about the DHS report.  After a lot of stammering and stuttering, she gets pushed to admit she had not even read it, but said she was briefed (although she wouldn't admit to having "signed off") on the report.

 

Steven Robertson interview:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FixBaPxUFs

Janet Napolitano interview:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78wulwAB5b0

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Protesters or Terrorists?

Does anyone else remember Hillary Clinton's speech when she railed against those who thought her criticism of George Bush was a bit "over the top"?  I know it was on YouTube, but a persistent search failed to find it this morning.  Hillary's speech came to mind yesterday as I read about the current administration's take on political dissent.  Apparently Obama doesn't feel the same way about those who would criticize him.

 

The Department of Homeland Security put out an Assessment document (dated 7 April 2009) titled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgance in Radicalization and Recruitment.  If you try to find the document on the DHS web site you will be directed to a press release (dated April 15, 2009) by Director Janet Napolitano about the document, but probably not the document itself.  We can, however, thank WorldNet Daily for publishing the entire PDF document -- http://wnd.com/images/dhs-rightwing-extremism.pdf -- which should be read by anyone who values liberty and would like to see it remain for our grandchildren.

 

Roger Hedgecock reported on the DHS assessment Monday and Michelle Malkin did so the next day. Michelle also provides the document for your inspection.  Ed Morrissey provides more commentary, building on what Roger and Michelle reported.  Let me just add this:  I saw an interview this morning with Napolitano, who is in Mexico today with the current occupant of the Oval Office, and heard her use the word "terrorist" in the same sentence with the term "military veterans."  I sincerely hope that I misunderstood what she believes about those of us who have honorably served our country in uniform.

 

We reported here on 23 March that the current administration had chosen not to use the term "Terrorism" for the actions of those Islamo-fascists who pose a violent threat to the security of our country, instead choosing to call it "Man-Caused Disasters."  It is extremely discouraging that the Director of the Department of Homeland Security would now think it acceptable to use the term "terrorist" for members of our own honorable military services.

 

Intelligence Assessment Document, dated 7 April 2009 -- http://wnd.com/images/dhs-rightwing-extremism.pdf

Napolitano Statement dated April 15, 2009 "clarifying" -- http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1239817562001.shtm

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

To Exorcize or Not To Exorcize...

On the same day that Terry Mattingly writes an article titled "American Exorcist 2009," George Barna releases a report on a survey of 1871 Americans (all self-described Christians) titled "Most American Christians Do Not Believe that Satan or the Holy Spirit Exist."

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

22weeksthemovie

What actually goes on inside an abortion clinic?

 

Mark Earley, president of Prison Fellowship Ministries, talks about a film on abortion called 22 Weeks in today's BreakPoint article.

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Rick Warren's Holy Week Crisis

Sandy Rios is host (hostess?) of a radio talk show in Chicago.  In an article posted Friday on Townhall.com she addresses a "flip-flop" made by well-known Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church regarding Proposition 8, a reforendum on marriage put before the voters in California in 2008. Read the article at Townhall.com (along with comments) or below:

    "Even if others do, I will never deny you," declared the Apostle Peter some 2000 years ago just hours before he did exactly that, three times, when the heat was on. Ten others boasted the same, but when the risk was more than theoretical, all deserted Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. Only one was seen at the cross.

    A fascinating story - the "old story" as the secularists like to call it. Barack Obama alluded to this in his speech in France. We need a new story, a discovery of "new ways" of thinking. We must throw off the old and embrace a much more enlightened, intelligent point of view. By doing so, we remove inconvenient barriers, cumbersome moral values and achieve self-determination with our new understanding of the world guiding the way. Surely we cannot be bound in this advanced new age by the old moral codes or put plainly, by what Jesus taught. Certainly not if we are to curry favor with the world in which we live.

 

    This Holy Week, a key portion of the "old story" has been revisited in a very contemporary way. The last instruction Jesus gave as he left earth was Christ followers should tell His story of forgiveness and redemption not only in their communities, but to the "ends of the earth." And as His followers told the "old story" they should not leave out all the other things as well. In the second part of the Great Commission, Christ admonished his followers to teach others "to obey all the things I have commanded you." He wanted future generations to go beyond mere intellectual understanding and move to actually living out the principles ... walking the walk.

    One of those principles was marriage. "For this reason shall a man leave his parents and join with his wife and the two shall become one flesh," Jesus instructed. One man, one woman, for a lifetime, with no sex outside of that union.
    Fast forward to 2009: California voters of various religious persuasions, in a ballot measure called Proposition 8, held to the traditional view of marriage - a union between a man and a woman. Subsequently challenged in court, as the battle ensued, Pastor Rick Warren, author of "The Purpose Driven Life" and pastor of Saddleback, one of the largest churches in the country, deeply influential, rightly told his congregation ..."if you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8. I never support a candidate, but on moral issues I come out very clear." Until this week ... Holy Week.

    On the first Holy Week Peter promised Jesus, "Though others may turn away, I will never deny you." But then in the chill of night in a courtyard just outside the place of Jesus' trial, as others around the fire began to probe his relationship to Jesus, he quietly denied even knowing him. No one was threatening his life, but the derision increased and with every barb, until Peter's denial escalated to a curse as he emphatically denied he had ever known Jesus.
    Peter was worried about his reputation. He didn't want to be the odd man out in the courtyard over the fire ... it wasn't a Roman soldier with a sword who challenged him, it was a mere servant girl.

    "On moral issues I come out very clear," declared Rick Warren when writing in the safety of his office. But when confronted by homosexual friends and Larry King this week, he folded just like Peter. Now, to be clear, he did not deny Christ, but he backpedaled so fast from where he previously stood and reinterpreted his previous statements in a way that strains credulity. He went on to describe how he has "apologized" to his homosexual friends for making comments in support of Proposition 8. He "never once gave an endorsement" of the marriage amendment, he declared.

    And in one fell swoop, he not only separated himself from the biblical teaching on marriage, but distorted the past in the process. Seduced by the pressure of fame? Driven by the desire to please his friends? Afraid to be seen as bigoted to a national television audience? Whatever the motivation, the behavior is no less significant.

    Rick Warren did not deny Christ on Larry King. But every believer who was watching had to question whether Rick was being faithful to the commission Christ left him with: Teaching others to "obey all the things I have commanded you." And obedient biblical teaching on marriage is not a particularly difficult matter. Unpopular? Yes. Unclear? Hardly.

    After Peter executed his betrayal, he went out and wept bitterly. On Larry King, Rick Warren went on to tell about his profuse apologies to his gay friends. In the broad scheme of things, I don't think Rick Warren needed to apologize to them at all. An apology to Christ? Now that would be entirely in order.

    This Holy Week, let's pray America's Pastor Rick Warren will not let this story end here.

It's time for each of us to determine what will guide our life: popular cultural opinion or Biblical Truth.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Marriage as Stereotype

From the Heritage Foundation last Monday:

 

This past Friday the Iowa Supreme Court rewrote the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. Justifying their rejection of the argument that "the optimal environment for children is to be raised within a marriage of both a father and a mother," Justice Mark Cady wrote: "The research ... suggests that the traditional notion that children need a mother and a father to be raised into healthy adjusted adults is based more on stereotype than anything else."

 

First of all, the court is just wrong on the facts. Children whose parents marry and stay married have been found to have better health and are less likely to be depressed, are less likely to repeat a grade in school, and have fewer developmental problems than other children. If poor women who have children out of wedlock were married to the actual fathers of their children, nearly two-thirds would be lifted out of poverty immediately.

 

But let's leave the social science aside for a moment. The real story here is the court's dismissal of the traditional family as a mere stereotype which unmasks the left's true agenda here: the rejection the nuclear family as the core of civil society. Heritage's Matthew Spalding explains:

 

What is happening is no minor adjustment... It does not expand marriage; it alters its core meaning, for to redefine marriage so that it is not intrinsically related to the relationship between fathers, mothers, and children formally severs the institution from its nature and purpose. Expanding marriage supposedly to make it more inclusive, no matter what we call the new arrangement, necessarily ends marriage as we now know it by remaking the institution into something different: a mere contract between any two individuals.

 

And as the New York Times reported last week, the sanctity of contracts are under assault everywhere. Raising kids today is a challenge even for "stereotypical" mothers and fathers. As mother of three and syndicated columnist Rebecca Hagelin details in her new book, 30 Ways in 30 Days to Save Your Family, often it seems as though popular culture seems to want to turn your children against you. But Hagelin also offers a practical 30-day plan to help all busy moms and dads fight back. 30 Ways in 30 Days to Save Your Family is filled with simple steps that parents can take to help their children become healthy adjusted adults. Because it isn't just parents who are hurt by decisions like the one last week in Iowa, it is also our kids who are being bombarded by a contaminated culture. Lucky for America, Hagelin's book hits the stores today.

"What Were You Thinking?

What Causes Partisanship?

Some folks think that Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread.  Others ask, "What was the greatest thing before sliced bread?"  Whichever group you find yourself in, a new report by the Pew Research Center tells the informed observer that Barack H. Obama has the "most polarized early job approval rating of any president in the past four decades."  More than even George W. Bush, who was widely accused by Democrats of being a totally partisan president, totally divisive.

 

You can read the statistics for yourself; I must say I've often thought it interesting that when George W. Bush was in office, the Democrats were continually calling for "bipartisan" approaches to issues of national import.  Since the recent election and installation of the current occupant of the Oval Office, I've seen no such calls reported in the major media outlets.  What's up with that?

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Obama's Treasury Secretary

 Honest Mistake?

"What Were You Thinking?"

You Voted for Obama?

Our local fish-wrapper had this editorial cartoon in today's edition.  Thanks to Chuck Asay; you can find an archive of Chuck's work here.  You'll also find a link there where you can thank Chuck for his political acumen.

I think I'll go buy a car today ;-) 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Judicial Watch: Corruption at Fannie Mae

    Judicial Watch is a private government oversight organization dedicated to "Promoting Integrity, Transparency and Accountability in Government, Politics and the Law."  They do so, in the words on their masthead, "Because no one is above the law."  Anyone can sign up on their website for a weekly News Update.

    Today's update included information that should give pause to those who continue to blame the previous administration for the problems in the housing finance markets.  Here's the lead-in to the article:

    New Documents Uncovered by Judicial Watch Show Congress Ignored Corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for Years

    Barney Frank and his liberal allies in Congress have more explaining to do.

    According to new documents we uncovered this week, members of Congress for years were aware that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were playing fast and loose with accounting issues, risk assessment issues and executive compensation issues even while liberals in Congress (led by Frank) continued to block attempts to regulate the two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs).

    We obtained these documents from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request we submitted back on December 4, 2008. This is part of our comprehensive investigation of the government's role in the financial crisis, but our particular concern in this case was the policy of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase lending to individuals with poor credit risk, as well as correspondence and records about contacts between FHFA and Fannie and Freddie.

You should read the entire article, and also read and evaluate the original documents.  If this isn't enough evidence to convince you that voting for this current bunch was the wrong thing to do, I don't know what will.

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Veritas ... on Campus?

A lot of you will already be aware of The Veritas Forum.  If not the forum, you probably remember the founder, Kelly Monroe Kullberg, who wrote Finding God At Harvard (1996). A brief review:  "She presents the compelling testimonies of forty-two faculty members, former students, and distinguished orators at Harvard. Their candid reflections explode the myth that Christian faith cannot survive a rigourous intellectual atmosphere."  Today's To The Source column has an interview with this interesting lady, who also wrote a book titled Finding God Beyond Harvard (2006).

 

This article at To The Source begins with the destructive riots we've all seen yesterday and today in London, protests against the meeting of the G-20 powers.  Then this paragraph:

When Kelly Monroe Kullberg arrived at Harvard Divinity School in 1992, she saw that many of her fellow students felt isolated in their search for meaning and truth. She found that, despite a great hunger, the university had jettisoned such deep and essential topics. There was a yawning chasm facing the sincere seekers yearning to know more about ultimate truth and goodness. Ironically, at Harvard, whose motto is Veritas, there was a longing for truth. So Kullberg founded the Veritas Forum. The inaugural event in Cambridge drew 700 participants for a weekend of lectures and discussions about how the pursuit of knowledge in the university relates to the truth claims of Jesus Christ. The momentum has only grown since then.

 

Read the To The Source article.  Check out The Veritas Forum.  Remind yourself what Veritas means.  Then consider what "True Truth" is.  How about a couple more quotes?

    Academicians tend to reduce "knowing" to data analysis and lab results. They often feel the need to do this     because most grants require quantified results. So we see a growing surplus of information but a scarcity of wisdom.

    Harvard was founded in 1636 For Christ's Glory (In Christi Gloriam) and later Veritas (Truth) in Christ and the Church, and yet today we see a rise in depression, disease and even suicide. Ironically, the earth-shattering life and brilliant mind of Jesus Christ are rarely explored in the classrooms.

    Our presenters include Dallas Willard, William Lane Craig, John Stott, Tim Keller and many humble scholars who explore questions and connect them to the person and story of Jesus Christ. The world's story is too small to live in. We want to help one another consider the reality of a larger and more wonderful story, the Gospel, which provides an ample place to live.

 

God Bless,

Ron

Texas Forges Compromise Over Creationism

WorldNet Daily yesterday reported that public schools in Texas will no longer be able to teach only that science coursework that supports evolution, but must now also provide their students with arguments critical of the Darwinian theory.

    Public school students in Texas will be called on to "analyze, evaluate and critique" evidence that undermines Darwin's theory of evolution as well as evidence that supports the belief man and all other modern life has developed from primordial sludge, following a vote by state officials.

    "Texas has sent a clear message that evolution should be taught as a scientific theory open to critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can't be questioned," said John West, senior fellow at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, which had argued before the Texas Board of Education for students to have the right to review all of the evidence, not just what evolutionists want presented.

    The decision initially was praised by pro-evolution factions for the board's decision to remove the guidance that students should study the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific evidence. However, West told WND the replacement policy now includes requirements for students to "analyze, evaluate and critique" all such provisions in evolution, such as the concept of common ancestry and natural selection.

It seems to me that an honest and open discussion is the best way to approach any such issue, with both sides clearly presented for critical evaluation.

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

A Rookie President...

Scholar, author, economist, columnist -- all titles well-earned -- Dr. Thomas Sowell has again hit one out of the park in today's column published at Townhall.com and on the Jewish World Review.  And now, of course, here.

    Someone once said that, for every rookie you have on your starting team in the National Football League, you will lose a game. Somewhere, at some time during the season, a rookie will make a mistake that will cost you a game.

    We now have a rookie President of the United States and, in the dangerous world we live in, with terrorist nations going nuclear, just one rookie mistake can bring disaster down on this generation and generations yet to come.

    Barack Obama is a rookie in a sense that few other Presidents in American history have ever been. It is not just that he has never been President before. He has never had any position of major executive responsibility in any kind of organization where he was personally responsible for the outcome.

    Other first-term Presidents have been governors, generals, cabinet members or others in positions of personal responsibility. A few have been senators, like Barack Obama, but usually for longer than Obama, and had not spent half their few years in the senate running for President.

    What is even worse than making mistakes is having sycophants telling you that you are doing fine when you are not. In addition to all the usual hangers-on and supplicants for government favors that every President has, Barack Obama has a media that will see no evil, hear no evil and certainly speak no evil.

    They will cheer him on, no matter what he does, short of first-degree murder-- and they would make excuses for that. Even former Reagan speech writer Peggy Noonan has gushed over President Obama and even crusty Bill O'Reilly has been impressed by Obama's demeanor.

    There is no sign that President Obama has impressed the Russians, the Iranians or the North Koreans, except by his rookie mistakes-- and that is a dangerous way to impress dangerous people.

    What did his televised overture to the Iranians accomplish, except to reassure them that he was not going to do a damn thing to stop them from getting a nuclear bomb? It is a mistake that can go ringing down the corridors of history.

    Future generations who live in the shadow of that nuclear threat may wonder what we were thinking about, putting our lives-- and theirs-- in the hands of a rookie because we liked his style and symbolism?

    In the name of "change," Barack Obama is following policies so old that this generation has never heard of them-- certainly not in most of our educational institutions, where history has been replaced by "social studies" or other politically correct courses.

    Seeking deals with our adversaries, behind the backs of our allies? France did that at Munich back in 1938. They threw Czechoslovakia to the wolves and, less than two years later, Hitler gobbled up France anyway.

    This year, President Obama's attempt to make a backdoor deal with the Russians, behind the backs of the NATO countries, was not only rejected but made public by the Russians-- a sign of contempt and a warning to our allies not to put too much trust in the United States.

    Barack Obama is following a long practice among those on the left of being hard on our allies and soft on our enemies. One of our few allies in the Middle East, the Shah of Iran, was a whipping boy for many in the American media, who vented their indignation at his regime-- which now, in retrospect, seems almost benign compared to the hate-filled fanatics and international terrorism sponsors who now rule that country.

    However much Barack Obama has proclaimed his support for Israel, his first phone call as President of the United States was to Hamas, to whom he has given hundreds of millions of dollars, which can buy a lot of rockets to fire into Israel.

    Our oldest and staunchest ally, Britain, has been downgraded by President Obama's visibly less impressive reception of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, compared to the way that previous Presidents over the past two generations have received British Prime Ministers. President Obama's sending the bust of Winston Churchill in the White House back to the British embassy at about the same time was either a rookie mistake or another snub.

    We can lose some very big games with this rookie.

 "What Were You Thinking?"

Cheap (and Expensive) Political Theater

Scholar and columnist Thomas Sowell has a column (March 24, 2009 -- alternate source) that should be required reading for those who think the previous administration is responsible for the meltdown in the housing industry and the associated difficulties in the economic sphere.  An excerpt:

    We are not yet a banana republic, though that is the direction in which some of our politicians are taking us - especially those politicians who make a lot of noise about "compassion" and "social justice."

    What makes this all the more painfully ironic is that it is precisely those members of Congress who have had the most to do with creating the risks that led to the current economic crisis who are making the most noise against others, and summoning people before their committee to be browbeaten and humiliated on nationwide television.

    No one pushed harder than Congressman Barney Frank to force banks and other financial institutions to reduce their mortgage lending standards, in order to meet government-set goals for more home ownership. Those lower mortgage lending standards are at the heart of the increased riskiness of the mortgage market and of the collapse of Wall Street securities based on those risky mortgages.

    Senator Christopher Dodd has played the same role in the Senate as Barney Frank played in the House of Representatives. Now both are summoning government employees and the officials of financial institutions before their committees to be lambasted in front of the media.

    Dodd and Frank know that the best defense is a good offense. Both know how hard it would be to defend their own roles in the housing debacle, so they go on the offensive against others who are in no position to reply in kind, given the vindictive powers of Congress.

It boggles my mind that people would rather ignore the truth and believe proven liars such as Frank and Dodd than do the simple research that puts the lie to their offensive rant.  Now they've elected a president and congress that are running this country directly to socialism.  Themselves willfully ignorant, they trust in big government rather than themselves.

"What Were You Thinking?"

The Religious Beliefs of Liberals and Conservatives

The Barna Group today released a new report on the relationships between peoples political views and their Christian profession of faith.  Read the entire article here at Barna's web site; here's a tease for you:

    People's interest in - and reactions to - the social and political actions being made by President Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress have heightened awareness of the different perspectives held by liberals and conservatives. A new study conducted by The Barna Group indicates that those differences are related to substantially different spiritual beliefs, behaviors and alignments.
    Overall, the research shows that nearly one-third of all adults (32%) consider themselves to be "mostly conservative" on social and political matters, and about half as many (17%) claimed to be "mostly liberal" on such matters. The other half of the adult population generally takes a position somewhere in between those opposing viewpoints.
    Based upon an evaluation of more than a dozen religious beliefs of liberals and conservatives, consistent and significant differences are evident. Liberals are less than half as likely as conservatives to firmly believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches (27% versus 63%, respectively); to strongly believe that Satan is real (17% versus 36%); and to firmly contend that they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs with others (23% versus 48%).

While these paragraphs lead from the political to the religious beliefs of the respondants, later in the article the report starts with the respondant's religious belief and goes on to draw some conclusions about their political leanings.

What Do You Worry About?

    Have you ever heard the "talking heads" on the news use that question whenever they interview some political personage?  Have you ever heard friends talk about what's worrying them?  In early March Gallup, conducted a poll on eight so-called "green" issues. Here's the way they posed the question:

"I'm going to read you a list of environmental problems.  As I read each one, please tell me if you personally worry about this problem a great deal, a fair amound, only a little, or not at all.  First of all, how much do you personally worry about ... ?"

    Last Wednesday they published their assessment of the responses.

The Bible tells us not to worry. Jesus Himself gave the following instructions to His disciples:

²⁵"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? ²⁶Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? ²⁷Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?

 ²⁸"And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. ²⁹Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. ³⁰If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? ³¹So do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' ³²For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. ³³But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. ³⁴Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own. [NIV]

    So maybe we shouldn't worry so much about these little things, like whether the planet is about to come apart -- after all, "... your heavenly Father knows that you need [these things]."  Seems to me that when we worry, we're displaying a lack of trust in our heavenly Father.

    God Bless us, every one.  And help us not to worry about such petty, temporal matters, but rather seek the kingdom of God.  After all, eternal life is forever.  Amen?

Barney "Porker" Frank

    Representative Barney Frank (D-Mass) has been named Porker of the Month for March by Citizens Against Government Waste.  Newsmax reports the following:

Chairman Frank has never been shy about rewarding failure in the past and he generally favors using taxpayer dollars to do it.  He was front and center in support of enactment of TARP, which noticeably had no enforceable strings attached related to executive compensation.  Indeed, he helped promote perks for bank executives.  According to a January 24, 2009 Boston Herald editorial, Chairman Frank made sure "one of the recipients of a $12 million infusion of federal cash was the troubled OneUnited Bank in Boston - a bank that had already been accused of 'unsafe and unsound banking practices.'  Its CEO, Kevin Cohee had also been criticized by regulators for 'excessive' pay that included a Porsche."  Chairman Frank included specific provisions in TARP aimed at bailing out OneUnited and spoke directly to Treasury officials about it.

    This shouldn't be a big surprise to thinking folks who follow the news.  Unless they only follow the mainstream media, that is.  Two-faced Barney is notable only for the extreme partisanship he exhibits in his public dealings.  It's a sad day for Massachusetts when they can't find a better person for the job.

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Deism vs. Creationism vs ..BioLogos?

    To The Source, an Internet resource dedicated to Challenging Hardcore Secularism with Principled Pluralism, has conducted an interesting interview with Dr. Francis Collins, the physicist who was a driving force behind the Human Genome Project.  Dr. Collins, born to nominal Christian parents, became an atheist in school but during his work with dying patients found himself turning toward Evangelical Christianity.  He has written a book, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (read a book review at Evidence for God) and developed his belief system in the BioLogos project.

    This interview runs the gamut from Miracles to Moral Law and compares the Atheist view with a Christian Worldview.  The article also prompts an investigation and attempt to understand this "BioLogos" that Dr. Collins presents in his book, definitely a hard sell for this young-earth creationist.  YMMV.

Slouching toward Mediocrity

Thomas Sowell, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute, points out the rabble-rousing Mob Mentality involved in the conduct of those most invoolved in creating the current economic situation in today's article at Townhall.com titled "Cheap Political Theater."

 

A couple of excerpts from this illuminating article:

    Death threats to executives at AIG, because of the bonuses they received, are one more sign of the utter degeneration of politics in our time.

    Congressman Barney Frank has threatened to summon these executives before his committee and force them to reveal their home addresses-- which would of course put their wives and children at the mercy of whatever kooks might want to literally take a shot at them.
    Whatever the political or economic issues involved, this is not the way such issues should be resolved in America. We are not yet a banana republic, though that is the direction in which some of our politicians are taking us-- especially those politicians who make a lot of noise about "compassion" and "social justice."

    What makes this all the more painfully ironic is that it is precisely those members of Congress who have had the most to do with creating the risks that led to the current economic crisis who are making the most noise against others, and summoning people before their committee to be browbeaten and humiliated on nationwide television.

Read the entire article and then ask yourself, "Is this the kind of America I want my children and grandchildren to inherit?"

"What Were You Thinking?"