Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for January, 2014

Putin: America Is Godless, Has Turned Away from Christian Values

by Robert Wilde 29 Jan 2014

Russian President Vladimir Putin condemned the West, including the United States, for eschewing Christian values and opting instead for a “path to degradation.”

In his State of the Nation speech last month, Putin asserted that, “Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values… Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan.” Russia has adopted new laws that ban homosexual propaganda and criminalizes the insulting of religious sensibilities.

The law on religious sensibilities was approved in the wake of a protest in Moscow’s largest cathedral by a female punk rock group, Pussy Riot. State-run television said the group’s “demonic” protest was funded by “some Americans.” Russia’s newfound embrace of traditional values has prompted a rise in Orthodox vigilantism. Extreme groups such as the Union of Orthodox Banner Bearers, an ultraconservative faction who adopted a slogan “Orthodoxy or Death,” are gaining prominence.

It was not that long ago that the United States was accusing Russia for being a “godless nation.” On March 8, 1983, Ronald Reagan said this about Russia to an audience of evangelicals:

Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness–pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the Earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.

History supports the 40th President of the United States’ remarks. According to a 1995 Russian presidential committee report, Soviet authorities executed 200,000 clergy and believers from 1917 to 1937, many of them crucified, scalped, and otherwise tortured. Thousands of churches were destroyed, and those that survived were turned into warehouses, garages, or museums of atheism.

Moreover, another 500,000 religious figures were persecuted and 40,000 churches destroyed in the period from 1922 to 1980, the report said. Half the country’s mosques and more than half the synagogues were also destroyed. “Clergymen were crucified on churches’ holy gates, shot, scalped [and] strangled,” said Alexander Yakovlev, head of the Commission for the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Political Repression. “I was especially shocked by accounts of priests turned into columns of ice in winter,” Yakovlev said. “It was total cruelty.”


Political Cartoon of the Day

Give peace-chance-590-LI

Watch as Employees Experience Obamacare Sticker Shock for the First Time

Posted by Joshua Cook

A news station visited a local Pennsylvania small business which showed the devastating impact of Obamacare. One employee said, following his Obamacare sticker shock, “they call it the affordable health plan? There is nothing affordable about it … wake up America. This is not acceptable.”

Watch below:

Sticker Shock

About Joshua Cook

Joshua Cook lives in Travelers Rest SC. He received his BA from Southeastern University and MBA from North Greenville University.  Follow Joshua Cook on Facebook and on Twitter: @RealJoshuaCook


A biblical perspective of Islamic totalitarianism

Written by Allen West on January 20, 2014


In chapter two, “God Builds a Nation,” the focus was on Abraham and his willingness to pick up his family and all possessions to follow God’s direction. Pastor Scott Eynon gave us this definition of faith, “obeying God even when you don’t know where you are going, even when you are not sure where He is leading. It is walking with God during doubts, delays, and difficulties. It is trusting God when the story He presents makes no sense.”

Think about it. God told two senior citizens, Abraham and Sarah, they would have a child and their heritage would populate the earth. Even in their full faith they still doubted God. After all, at Sarah’s age, how could God’s promise for conception come to fruition? So Sarah offered up to Abraham her Egyptian maid, Hagar. Sarah did as we often do in our lives today – think we know what God intends but try to control the means to the end. Abraham complied, slept with Hagar and she conceived a son.

And here is the residual effect from the impatient decision of Sarah and Abraham from Genesis 16:10-12:

The angel added, “I will increase your descendants so much that they will be too numerous to count.” The angel of the Lord also said to Hagar: “You are now pregnant and you will give birth to a son. You shall name him Ishmael, for the Lord has heard of your misery. He will be a wild donkey of a man, his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.”

Abraham was 86 when Ishmael was born, and it was from Ishmael that all Arab people descended. Some 14 years later, Sarah conceived and bore a son, Isaac, from whom the Jewish people descended.

If you view the Middle East from this biblical perspective, it is God’s direction playing out in the conflict between Ishmael and Isaac, the Arabs and the Jews, the West and Islamic totalitarianism. Nonetheless, there was relative peace in the Middle East until Mohammad appeared on the scene around 612 AD and introduced a new belief system, Islam.

For 10 years Judaism, Christianity, and this new belief did indeed “coexist.” However when Mohammad was rejected by his own tribe, he departed Mecca for Medina. With new permission from Allah to fight back, this once “peaceful religion” turned violent and spread throughout the Arab nation not by peaceful proselytization, but by the sword. Mohammad returned to Mecca in 628 AD and conquered the city, and as the Angel of the Lord foretold some 2500 years earlier, raised his hand against his brothers and massacred thousands of Jews at what was called the “Battle of the Trench.” Subsequently, Mohammad turned his bloodthirsty quest towards the Byzantine Empire, sending a letter to Emperor Heraclius demanding he convert, submit and be subjugated, or be destroyed — and we know what eventually happened to Constantinople in 1453.

And so it continues to today, not just in the Middle East, but across the world. I am so thankful to have a Pastor like Scott Eynon who makes the Bible relevant and forces us to think in not only a biblical but also a historical perspective. Interesting, isn’t it?

Two Major Headlines That Will Make You Detest the Liberal Media EVEN MORE…

Written on Wednesday, January 29, 2014 by

Poor George Orwell, spinning in his grave like a gyroscope on steroids; little did he know that what is euphemistically called news reporting would turn, instead, into bold-faced creative writing projects.  Two headlines from Monday’s slop bucket (number 1 courtesy of NewsBusters, number 2 from Breitbart), illustrate the point:

  1.  “Face the Nation’ Edits Out Senator Cruz Condemning Obama’s ‘Abuse of Power”
  2. “Ezra Klein’s New Website Vox Will Tell You What to Think About the News”

Senator Ted Cruz appeared on Face the Nation Sunday. Chief Inquisitor, Bob Schieffer, wanted an admission of responsibility from Senator Cruz for The Lyin’ King’s government shutdown and accused Senator Cruz of fomenting it.  According to NewsBusters: “…it also appears that Mr. Cruz was the victim of editing by CBS. Based on video from Senator Cruz’s YouTube page and what aired on (Sunday’s) Face the Nation broadcast, the senator’s comments surrounding President Obama’s ‘abuse of power’ were edited from the program. Instead what aired was a segment that ignored many of the senator’s complaints directed at President Obama.” For those who might be skeptical of the lengths to which an unashamedly partisan CBS went in order to advance her own viewpoint, videos of what was actually said and what was ultimately broadcast are available at NewsBusters:

The Breitbart piece is even more telling.  Ezra Klein, poster boy for progressive dogma, was given the heave-ho from Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post earlier this month on January 2. Klein insisted that the paper fund his-web based pet project, to the tune of $10,000,000. The Post refused after a legion of accountants unanimously found Klein’s project would never recoup a fraction of the expense. Klein had a hissy fit. The Washington Post countered with a pink slip, summarily handing Klein his hat and expressed concern that the door not hit his behind. Klein has subsequently roosted at Vox Media and aired his true goal. Breitbart reports: “Saying he intends to ‘fix the news’ with Vox, Klein bemoaned the failure of the Internet to make the news better at delivering the ‘crucial context’ people need. ‘Today, we are better than ever at telling people what’s happening…but not nearly good enough at giving them the crucial contextual information necessary to understand what’s happened…’ Klein and crew intend to create a site that is as good at ‘explaining the world as it is at reporting on it.’”

The news has always been subject to creative enhancement, and was officially dubbed “yellow journalism” during the Spanish-American War. Papers, desperate to grab a majority share of readership, created ever-more lurid and fanciful embellishments on the truth. But today’s motives are far more insidious. “Reporters” make up stories out of whole cloth or suppress facts. They aren’t reporting; they are inventing news in order to realize their opinions of events. And they are determined to shape our opinions by telling us what to think. Remember the television show “The Gillmore Girls?” Early in this millennium, Rory Gillmore tells her mother, with fanatical conviction that would credit Jean d’Arc, that she intends to become a reporter, “like Christiane Amanpour,” because she “want(s) to change the world.” Reporting events had self-righteously morphed into creating events.

Both stories share a common caution. Events, such as deliberate editing and blatant prevarication, are becoming more commonplace. Spinning news is “out of the closet.” The MSM does not feel compelled to offer apologies once they are found out. It has, sadly, become a given that reporters no longer state what has happened; they cut, compose and tell us what to think about events, all at the same time. The MSM insists that we aren’t qualified to think for ourselves.

Presuming the color of journalism has a correlation to bodily waste, it’s no longer yellow.  It‘s brown. Dark brown.

More Wisdom from Mr. Thomas Sowell

13014 01 13014 02 13014 03 13014 04 13014 05 13014 06 13014 07 13014 08

The MOST Important Article You Will Read This Week

Ann Coulter Letter

GOP crafts plan to wreck country, lose voters

GOP crafts plan to wreck country, lose voters

 By: Ann Coulter   1/29/2014 08:39 PM

As House Republicans prepare to sell out the country on immigration this week, Phyllis Schlafly has produced a stunning report on how immigration is changing the country. The report is still embargoed, but someone slipped me a copy, and it’s too important to wait.

Leave aside the harm cheap labor being dumped on the country does to the millions of unemployed Americans. What does it mean for the Republican Party?

Citing surveys from the Pew Research Center, the Pew Hispanic Center, Gallup, NBC News, Harris polling, the Annenberg Policy Center, Latino Decisions, the Center for Immigration Studies and the Hudson Institute, Schlafly’s report overwhelmingly demonstrates that merely continuing our current immigration policies spells doom for the Republican Party.

Immigrants — all immigrants — have always been the bulwark of the Democratic Party. For one thing, recent arrivals tend to be poor and in need of government assistance. Also, they’re coming from societies that are far more left-wing than our own. History shows that, rather than fleeing those policies, they bring their cultures with them. (Look at what New Yorkers did to Vermont.)

This is not a secret. For at least a century, there’s never been a period when a majority of immigrants weren’t Democrats.

At the current accelerated rate of immigration — 1.1 million new immigrants every year — Republicans will be a fringe party in about a decade.

Thanks to endless polling, we have a pretty good idea of what most immigrants believe.

According to a Harris poll, 81 percent of native-born citizens think the schools should teach students to be proud of being American. Only 50 percent of naturalized U.S. citizens do.

While 67 percent of native-born Americans believe our Constitution is a higher legal authority than international law, only 37 percent of naturalized citizens agree.

No wonder they vote 2-1 for the Democrats.

The two largest immigrant groups, Hispanics and Asians, have little in common economically, culturally or historically. But they both overwhelmingly support big government, Obamacare, affirmative action and gun control.According the 2012 National Asian American Survey, as well as a Kaiser Foundation poll, only 40 percent of the general public holds a favorable opinion of Obamacare, 42 percent unfavorable. Meanwhile, 51 percent of Asians have a favorable opinion of Obamacare, 18 percent an unfavorable one. Even Koreans support Obamacare by 57 percent to 17 percent.

Overall, 69 percent of immigrants like Obamacare, according to a 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

That same survey showed that only 35 percent of native-born Americans support affirmative action, compared to 58 percent of immigrants, including — amazingly — 64 percent of Asians (suggesting they may not be as smart as everyone thinks).

Also surprising, a Pew Research Center poll of all Hispanics, immigrant and citizen alike, found that Hispanics take a dimmer view of capitalism than even people who describe themselves as “liberal Democrats.” While 47 percent of self-described “liberal Democrats” hold a negative view of capitalism, 55 percent of Hispanics do.

Pew also found that only 27 percent of Hispanics support gun rights, compared to 57 percent of non-Hispanic whites. According to Latino Decisions, large majorities of Hispanics favor a national database of gun owners, limiting the capacity of magazines and a ban on semiautomatic weapons.

Seventy-five percent of Hispanic immigrants and 55 percent of Asian immigrants support bigger government — also according to Pew. Even after three generations in America, Hispanics still support bigger government 55 percent to 36 percent, compared to the general public, which opposes bigger government 48 percent to 41 percent.

How are Republicans going to square that circle? It’s not their position on amnesty that immigrants don’t like; it’s Republicans’ support for small government, gun rights, patriotism, the Constitution and capitalism.

Reading these statistics, does anyone wonder why Democrats think vastly increasing immigration should be the nation’s No. 1 priority?

It would be one thing if the people with these views already lived here. Republicans would have no right to say, “You can’t vote.” But why on Earth are they bringing in people sworn to their political destruction?

Republicans have no obligation to assist the Democrats as they change the country in a way that favors them electorally, particularly when it does great harm to the people already here.

Yes, it’s great for the most powerful Americans to have lots of cheap, unskilled labor. Immigration definitely solves the rich’s “servant problem.”

(Approximately 5 million times a day, MSNBC expresses bewilderment that any Republicans oppose amnesty when it’s supported by the Chamber of Commerce. Wow! So even people who profit by flooding the country with cheap labor are in favor of flooding the country with cheap labor!)

It’s terrific for ethnic lobbyists whose political clout will skyrocket the more foreign-born Americans we have.

And it’s fantastic for the Democrats, who are well on their way to a permanent majority, so they can completely destroy the last remnants of what was once known as “the land of the free.”

The only ones opposed to our current immigration policies are the people.

But are they going to give John Boehner a job when he’s no longer House speaker, as some big business lobbyist will?

Will they help Marco Rubio run for president on the claim that, as a Cuban, he can appeal to Hispanics? (Fat chance.)

Will they bundle contributions for Eric Cantor’s re-election, as well-heeled donors will?

Will they be enough to re-elect Kevin McCarthy to Congress so he can keep his gold-plated government health insurance?

Will they be the ones writing Darrell Issa’s flattering New York Times obituary?

Sorry, Americans. You lose.

Ann Coulter is author of the new book, Never Trust a Liberal Over Three – Especially a Republican (Regnery 2013).

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: