Saturday, February 28, 2009

Mexico Wants What?

image Mexico is now crying fowl because of all the violence in their country and they are asking the United States to do something about all the guns coming into their country from the United States. I have a solution to this problem. STOP THE ILLEGALS FROM COMING HERE!  How do you think the guns are getting back to Mexico? Mexico needs to take care of their own problems. We are taking care of enough of their problems for them already.

We are feeding, giving medical care, welfare, and providing tax payer’s dollars for illegal's to come to this country and to be better cared for than some of our own citizens. More jobs are being lost to them everyday.That is a fact. We have their gangs roaming every state selling drugs and nearly twenty percent of crimes committed in the United States are committed by illegals. That is a fact anybody with a computer can look up.

The are working for less because most of them are living five and six families to a house splitting all the expenses. In most towns living like this is not allowed, but nothing is never said, But Mexico needs our help. How much more help do they need. Here is the best way to help Mexico.

We need to pack every illegal a brown bag lunch and send them home. Then we need to do the fence along the border and all the problems would be solved for Mexico and also the United States. There would be no more illegals in this country driving our way of life down and there would be no more guns going back to Mexico. Problem solved you would think, but no, this country will only past more gun control laws to hurt the American citizen while the illegals will still run wild. It is time for this country to say enough is enough.

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Does Gun Ownership Deter Burglaries?

 

       FROM THE STUDY ON SUBURBAN BURGLARY:   Although there is no evidence to indicate gun ownership deters overall burglary rates, gun ownership may be a factor in deterring burglars from entering occupied dwellings ("hot" burglaries).  In studies involving interviews of felons, one of the reasons the majority of burglars try to avoid occupied homes is the chance of getting shot. (Increasing the odds of arrest is another.) A study of Pennsylvania burglary inmates reported that many burglars refrain from late-night burglaries because it's hard to tell if anyone is home, several explaining "That's the way to get shot."  The study and the book was wrote by G. Rengert  and J. Wasilchick. The book was published in 1985.

To go even further by comparing criminal victimization surveys from Britain and the Netherlands (countries having low levels of gun ownership) with the U.S., Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck determined that if the U.S. were to have similar rates of "hot" burglaries as these other nations, there would be more than 450,000 additional burglaries per year where the victim was threatened or assaulted. (Britain and the Netherlands have a "hot" burglary rate near 45% versus just under 13% for the U.S., and in the U.S. a victim is threatened or attacked 30% of the time during a "hot" burglary.) Realizing these facts listed above why would anybody want to take away the gun of a law abiding citizen of this country and put them at a much higher risk for burglary and assault.

How many people reading this article have in their lifetime stopped someone from breaking into their home by having a hand gun or shotgun in the house. It would be very interesting to know I’m sure.

Some of the quotes from the founding leaders of this country during the ratification period of the constitution are these: [The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. ---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46. and then look at this eye opener: {Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. ---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution - Philadelphia 1787}. Here is another good quote: “ Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.”---Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788 and the last one that I want the reader to read is this one;

“When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...” ---George Mason. Go here if you want to read all the quotes from our founding fathers. There is a lot more quotes for you to read.  Quotes from the Founding Fathers and Their Contemporaries

Now we have a president that is for gun control and his own words can tell you were he is coming from on this subject. Look at this page and you will see some of his quotes.   Obama's Anti-gun Record. After reading this page you the reader will see what our founding fathers was thinking about as they made their statements. After reading their views and then reading Obama’s views you decide who is right. My personal believe is this: The government should enforce the laws already on the books for the criminal and we would see a big reduction in crimes. Alternatives to Gun Control. What is going to happen very soon if we do not stand up and let our voices be heard is no one will even be allowed to own even a shot gun. This is government control for sure.

In closing let me say this one last thing. I am a gun owner. I am a law abiding citizen. I have never used either gun that I legally own in violence or against the law. There are thousands and thousands of people in this country that could say the same thing. So tell me who’s rights are going to be violated by these proposed gun laws? Is it the criminal or is it the law abiding American citizen.

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Obama Releases Al-Qaeda Terrorist

The below is a article from town hall.com and it is so unbelievable that I thought that this is something that I would pass on for all to read.

A mere 24 hours ago, Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed landed in England - a free man.  Mohamed was captured in Pakistan in April, 2002, and has admitted to training at various Al-Qaeda training camps and is alleged to have plotted multiple attacks on American soil.
 
Included in his laundry list of terrorist activities are:

  • Training at various Al-Qaeda training camps, where he specialized in firearms and explosives
  • Being taught by senior Al-Qaeda leaders how to falsify documents
  • Receiving money by Al-Qaeda leaders to travel to the United States
  • Tasked by senior Al-Qaeda leaders to blow up high-rise apartment buildings in the United States
  • Holding meetings with Saif al Adel (a top level al Qaeda planner and leader) and Khalid Sheik Mohammed (9/11 mastermind) 
This unprecedented release puts the national security of our country and our allies at SERIOUS risk. Now that Binyam is back in England, British police have proclaimed the unfathomable – that it is “unlikely Mr. Mohamed would be arrested.” 

We have to take action now before more terrorists are released and rejoin the fight to kill innocent Americans. Please visit www.DontFreeTerrorists.org and sign the petition that lets President Barack Obama know that we need to protect our country and keep terrorists locked up.


 


The Change is Coming





As Americans we all want change. Change for the better. Makes no difference if you are Republican, Democrat, Independent, black, Asian, or white. The problem is that we all see the change in a different context. There are a lot of Americans who agree with our new President with the changes that he wants for this country. I for one and a vast amount of Americans do not like the changes that we see coming. But that is me and other people have their right as American citizens to agree with the President because it is the right of every American to do so. By the way he is my president also even though I did not vote for him. At my age I can get by until the Lord takes me home, but it is for the younger generation that I worry. To be very honest with you the republicans as well as the democrats are certainly not doing the Job that they were elected to do.

I was reminded by a reader's comment that during the last eight years even though congress made a lot of mistakes congress had a leader and his name was Bush. I'm sorry to disagree with you. You are right that is how it should have been, but in my opinion Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were the ones that controlled the majority of congress. You can only have one leader and that should be the president. I'm an independent voter and will always be that way. So that means even though I did not vote for Obama and I'm totally against his socialist ideas he still is the leader of this country and I can only hope that his leadership will take us in the right direction.

There were a lot of issues that I disagreed on with Bush, but he was still my president and that is the way it should be with all Americans. Why he let the illegal's come across from Mexico by the thousands and not do one thing about it I will never know. But the democrat congress wanted the same thing. Obama wants the same thing. The democrats wanted them for the votes and the republicans for their cheap labor. So now we have a bigger crime rate and higher welfare rolls because congress would not do the right thing. In later years our kids will be paying the bill for this. A lot of us are already paying the bill.

This president that we have now and the congress, I believe, are taking this country in a socialist direction. To me this is bad for our country. Soon the government will be taking over everything. Our president already wants to spread the wealth around. In other words take hard earned money from some people and give it to people who will not work. That will take away the incentive for anybody to work. We already give until we cannot give. We are taking care of millions from Mexico now with no end in sight.

We are already bailing out the big corporations and the banks to the tune of billions of dollars that this country really does not have. We are giving and now they are asking for more. When is this going to stop? What we need is, as Steve Forbes said, is to cut taxes 50 per cent and let the taxes payer end this mess that we are in. The rate this country is going the federal government will own everything and will control everything. It is called communism or to make it easier and less offensive we can call it socialism. Is this the road that you want to head down?

We have Mrs. Clinton just getting back from her official visit to Communist China. During her visit there she asked that communist country to buy more of our treasury bonds and increase the trade so this country can sell more of their goods. My answer to that is to buy American and you would not have to beg a communist country to buy our treasury bonds.

The finial comment that I want to make is this and it is in the form of a question. Isn't it time the American people elected and sent to Washington people who will use good judgment, no matter if they are independent, democrat, or republican. We all want change but, is this the kind of change we want? I love this country and I think that it is the best country in this world, but let us endeavor to keep it that way, free form too much government control, socialism, terrorist, and illegals all of which threaten our very way of life.




Saturday, February 21, 2009

Uncle Sam Wants to Know




What Are You Doing To My Country: I wonder how the politicians would answer that question if they were asked that by Uncle Sam? I believe if He could ask that question today there would be a lot of questions that would go unanswered. What would the modern day people in our Congress say if our leaders of old ask that question? I'm sure they would come up with something. They always have their excuses for their actions. It is all a part of modern day politics. I cannot say what the leaders of old would say, but I can imagine what they would say!

The first thing that they would probably do is de throne Obama for all his anti American friends, and that is what they are. For his socialist views and wanted to change our way of life. Of course Obama says it is a better way but is it? His better way is not the standards that this country was founded on. The old leaders would say that the liberals in congress would have to go also because their ideas are the same as Obama's and are not in the best interest of this country. They would also say that we are turning our back on our Creator. God was always in the middle of their decisions and for that reason this country prospered as no other nation ever has. When you have God on Your side you cannot lose. We will reap what we sow.

Here are some of the things our leaders of old would do if they were here today: First they would return God again to this country by putting him in back in our schools, court rooms, and government buildings. They would reject political correctness for the right way and call Christmas what it is and not just a holiday. They would then say that this nation was founded on God and that is the way it is and if you do not like it go somewhere else. If you would take time to read the rich history of this country and the history of its early leaders you would find that they put Christ in the center of everything they did. You don't believe me? Research some of our old leaders and see what they did and you will see that I have spoke the truth!

The next thing they would do would be to put a stop to the legalized abortions in this country that are killing millions of unborn babies every year. There just would not be any more of it. They would stop the homosexuals from parading down our streets and tell them to get back in their closet or get out. There would be no more same sex marriages and our kids would not be taught it is okay in school. There would be no more brain washing in our schools. There would be no more mass killings in our schools all over this land. There would be no more passing out of condoms in school, no more police patrolling the halls; no more shooting in the hall ways and there would be no more disrespect for the teachers. Let me tell you what it would be. There would be Bible reading, prayer, and strict discipline in the schools across our land. There would be no more sex education classes because it would be done in the home. Why, because we would have Conservative Christian people in charge of our country. For you liberals who think that I'm saying Republican, no I'm not. I'm saying we would have people in the government who were Democrats, Republicans, independents, and just plain good old Americans that know the right way to govern a nation.

The next thing they would do is stop the illegals from coming across our borders if it meant using the army to do it. They would stop the drug trade and not play silly games about doing it. These old time leaders would use the strong arm of this republic instead of trying to be politically correct and watch our nation go down the tube. They would then say to the millions of free loaders in this country: "It's time to work or you do not eat" It is exactly what they would say. They would also say if you do not want to learn our English language and fly our flag then go back where you come from or we will help you go back.

There would be no more fire arm control, but it would be control over people who used fire arms in the commission of a crime. There would be no more slapping the criminal on the wrist and letting them do it again. The laws of this country would be upheld. In other words if you do the crime be aware that you will do the time. Then Americans would feel free to walk the streets again and not made to feel they are a criminal for owning a gun. The American people cling to their Bibles and guns not because they are scared but it is their right as God fearing Americans who would fight and die for their country. Listen my dear friends I cling to my Bible every day for the instruction, comfort, and to learn more about my Lord. It has been and is a daily part of my life.

Lastly without a second thought, they would tell the United Nations to pack up and get out. No more money would be given to them for their policies of doom and corruption. No more tax payer's money would be going down the sewers to a united group of nations that can't do one thing without a lot of articles of this and that. Our leaders of old would say we are American Citizens and do not want to be a subject to the United Nations with all their socialist policies. They would also say that we are Americans first and allies second. They would also call right, right, and wrong, wrong. You would not hear such statements from them like you are now hearing from our current president such as: "There are some portions of the Bible that are not for today and some parts of the constitution needs to be re written. They would not want to re design a new American Flag or say we are scared because we cling to our Bibles and guns. They would not want to spread the wealth around, as our new president said he wants to do, by taking someone's hard earned money and giving it to somebody that will not work in a pie shop no matter how much they like pies.

Bill Patchett



Monday, February 16, 2009

The Kool-Aid Drinkers


As I was reading The Star Democrat I happen to come across the following comment which I just do not understand. In that article the writer is putting Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, when they called for a war crimes trial, in the same category as Stalin, Hitler, and many other war criminals. What nonsense. Have they forgotten 911 and the death total on that day? Have they forgotten the attack on the Marine Barrack in Lebanon? Have they forgotten the attack on the USS Cole and the loss of life there? I could go on and on but I think that I have made my point. Here is an insert of that article from the paper

("Bringing Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, and the rest to justice should be an extremely high priority for anyone committed, no matter how minimally, to the rule of law. In addition to their actionable constitutional crimes, they should be brought before a competent tribunal on charges of war crimes, crimes against the peace, and crimes against humanity.")

I have to ask this question: What Actionable Constitutional crimes? Since when is it a crime for the elected officials of this country to do whatever it takes to protect this country against a people that hate us, that would make us slaves, who would cut our heads off because our religion is not like theirs. These people are out to destroy us and you say we must bring our past leaders to justice for trying to protect us. You call it crimes. What crimes? Since when is it a crime to protect our homeland from such violence? No pun intended but what kind of kool aid have you been drinking? I ask you what are the bases for someone to take legal action against these public servants who took the measures to keep you and the rest of America safe. All I see is some great Americans who met the challenge head on and did something about it.

Do you say the same thing for the other great leaders in our past? For just one example was President Truman wrong for using the A-Bomb against Japan? Do you say that he should have also been brought up on actionable constitutional crimes? Remember those two bombs killed hundreds of thousands of people in the blink of an eye. No he was not wrong! He saved hundreds of thousands of American Soldiers lives who would have been killed if we had to invade Japan. The Japanese people at that time were a country that would do anything to help its cause. Remember the death march on Bataan? Remember Pearl Harbor? We must remember that an adequate response to terror is always the best protection against future terror.

The American people must never again take weak measures such as blowing up aspiring factories, or making air strikes in places of no importance. We cannot give every terrorist that tries to destroy us their Miranda Warnings. There is a difference between an act of war by a terrorist society and an American Citizen breaking the law. I can see now the American soldiers on D-Day giving all the German soldiers their Miranda warnings before firing on them. I must say that the remarks made by Dick Cheney below are my thoughts exactly and the thoughts of most Americans.

"When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an al-Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are committed...to kill Americans, then I worry. Protecting the United States from terrorist attacks sometimes...requires us to take actions that generate controversy. I'm not at all sure that's what the Obama administration believes." - Former Vice President Dick Cheney, as quoted in Politico

What better way of saying what most Americans believe. I'm glad that the majority of the American people have not drunk any of this kool-aid.

Bill Patchett

February 16,2009

The Pork Package





The Recipe for Disaster: There is a new name in Washington for what our congress calls stimulus. It is called PORK. The list of ingredients in the making of this bill can spell disaster. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that the voters of this country do not like what they see so far as to what congress is doing to fix the economy. Only 12 percent said that congress is doing a good job while 54 percent rate their performance as bad. I have to agree with them. It only takes a fairly educated man to see that the congress is not handling the economy very well with their stimulus package. Millions of dollars are going for just plain pork projects that will not help this nation at all and will in the end even hurt us more. There is a question that I must ask. Why put the added expense of extra pork on a bill that is supposed to help out the economy. How is that going to help?

Anybody with any plain sense sees that this plan of congress and our President is not going to help one bit. I believe the people at the local coffee shop could come up with better answers than our congress. In fact I have heard some pretty good ideas from my local coffee shop that most likely would do more good than this pork bill from congress. We must start doing better with whom we elect to public office or we really will see bad times such as we have ever known. What we need to do is let the American people decide their self how we are going to get out of the mess that congress has got us unto instead of letting us get deeper into it. The problem is our elected officials who we send to congress will not listen to the American people's voice. How much longer will we allow congress to put special interest groups, pork for their own agendas, and the many other bill's that do not help this country as a whole. We must stop and think: "Who are we sending to Washington to govern this country?"

Instead of giving all these big companies and corporations all this bail out money, that we all know will not work, congress should be giving a 50 percent tax cut on our income and we would see the economy grow by leaps and bounds. The American people would bail their own self out. But as we know that will never happen. That would be too easy and a lot of congressman would not get their PORK. What the American people are getting is the wrong end of Obama's broom and sad to say we will have years and years to get over the pain.

Bill Patchett

February 15, 2009

.

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Just Words!

As I look back on the campaign promises of our president I find some flaws in some of those promises that he made. Barack Obama promised during his campaign to clean up both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue; with the most comprehensive and all-inclusive ethics reform in history of our government. He stated that his Government would have the toughest and most complete ethics laws of any government in history. Mr. Obama don't make promises to the American people that you cannot and will not keep. A short time ago many people were chosen by Obama for top positions in his administration. Six of them were involved in tax dodging or other deals that do not look very moral from an ethical point of view. Who were these people?

There was ex- senator Tom Daschle who was nominated by Obama to head the Department of Health and Human Services. Bill Richardson is next on the list. He was nominated by Obama for the position of Commerce Secretary. The next on the list is David Ogden who Obama wanted to be the number two man in the justice department. While he was a private attorney Ogden took cases on behalf of Pent House, Play Boy, the ALCU, and one of the largest distributors for pornographic movies. This is the man our President wanted for the number two position in the justice department. There was Nancy Killefer who was Obama's pick for The Chief Performance officer. Whatever that job entails I do not know. Obama wanted William Lynn for second in command of the Defense Department. Then there was the appointment of Tim Geither as Treasury Secretary and last but not least Obama nominated Hilda Solis for Labor Secretary. All I can say is this: "Which end of the broom was Obama using to make the clean sweep with?"

We must be living in a total different America than we use to live in or else I am getting senile. There use to be a moral standard that people, who run for government office and people that worked for the government had better have if they wanted the job.. They were not associated with films, magazines, writings, photographs, or other materials that were sexually explicit in anyway nor were they somebody who did not pay their taxes. They were somebody that we looked up to because they held their standards high. They did not associate with any body that was even the least shady or had anything to do with the production or sale of sexually explicit films, magazines, or other materials. But as I think about this, it is just about right. Look who Obama associated with before he was elected. How can somebody make promises for a clean government when they are not associating with moral and ethical people to start with? If this is what he calls making a clean sweep then he sure is sweeping in the wrong direction! I wonder what end of the broom he is using? In closing I want to insert one of our presidents most used sayings as he ran for office and it will be my punch line. That saying he used a lot is this: "JUST WORDS, THEY ARE JUST WORDS!" Remember him saying that over and over again? Mr. President someone needs to tell you all the campaign promises made by you for a clean government are JUST WORDS.


 



 

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

The Communication Problem

What We Have Here Is a Failure to communicate:
Remember that quote from the movie Cool Hand Luke years ago? Failure to communicate can be a bad thing, especially in the running of our government and that is on any level. There is most certainly a communication problem that exists between the American people and their elected officials. Why is this? The answer to that question is very simple. These elected officials have their own agenda and they could care less what the majority of American people say. That is a plain and very easy to understand statement. If you have a problem with that last statement of mine then let me give you some facts to back the statement up.

Fifty four percent of all Americans in a recent poll said that the congress is doing a bad job; sixty seven percent of the American people say they could do a better job than congress. Congress and Obama want to nationalize the banks, seventy five percent of the American people oppose that idea. Will Obama and congress listen? Sixty two percent of the American people want the stimulus package that congress is working on to contain tax cuts. Will Obama and congress listen? The answer to the repeated question is; no they will not listen! They have their own agenda and can care less what the majority of the American people want. So what am I saying?

I'm saying this: if we as do not communicate with these people and tell them what we want, in four years our country, as we know it, could be in ruins. The way things are going now our liberties will be gone. The governments will control the banks, the stock market, the health care system, the corporations, and every part of our life. Then it will be easy for Mr. Obama to spread the wealth around. As this writer sees it we are on a road that will lead to the taking away of, almost, all our liberties. A little here and a little there and they will all be gone. Obama and the congress have four years to take them away and it looks like they already have a good start.

Please forgive me if I'm sounding like one of those people who cling to their guns and Bibles, because I am one of those people who cherishes our freedom. I am one of those people that cling to guns. It is my right as an American citizen to bear arms: To protect my family, myself, and if need be to protect this great country of ours. I am one of those people who cling to and read the Bible and if Mr. Obama and the congress would cling to their Bibles maybe they would see how to govern this nation of ours. It is all there in black and white, stained in red by the blood of the one who died to set us free. It was good enough for our founding fathers and it is good enough for me.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Which is it, President Obama?


 

Yes We Can or is it Doom and Gloom: During the presidential campaign Obama ran his campaign with a message of hope and change. He said a lot at that time, but really said nothing that had any substance at all. The voters bought into this rhetoric, this great speech making of his, and now a lot of them are ashamed of their self for falling into his false message of hope. I wonder, as a lot of Americans do, why has his presidency not matched the words of his campaign. He has said one thing but is he living up to his promises?

He said that in his administration there would be no lobbyist. He exact words were: "Lobbyist will not find a job in His White House." One of the very first things that he did when he came into office was sign an order stopping all lobbyists from working in his administration. That was good. Then the very next day he signed a waiver to allow William Lynn, who is a lobbyist for Raytheon, to serve as the Deputy Secretary of Defense and since then more than a dozen lobbyists has joined the Obama administration. The bottom line is he lied to the American People. Strong words, but they are the truth! There will still be barrels of pork rolling out of Washington at the struggling tax payers' expense.

During his campaign Obama stated, in an issue of USA Today Magazine, that he was the only candidate that was not taking any money from Washington lobbyist. Really Mr. Obama, are you telling the truth. One again NO he
is not! During his campaign his bunch of fundraisers has at least thirty members of law firms that were compensated over one hundred thirty million dollars to try to influence the federal government. Ten of these people were previous federal lobbyist and raised millions of dollars for Obama's Campaign.

Obama who had a catchphrase of "YES WE CAN" now has gone to words such as "continuing disaster", "we will sink to a point that we may never recover". No reverse ever? What happened to the yes we can? What a turnaround! Not more than three weeks ago Obama was saying that this country was up to any challenge. Now he is telling us that we as a country could be in economic ruin forever. I have a question to ask the reader: "WHERE IS THE AUDACITY Of HOPE THAT HE PREACHED? WHERE DID THAT HOPE GO? They were "Just words". Remember that phrase?

I remember when the democrats in congress, including Obama, were saying that President Bush was spreading fear to accomplish his goal in Iraq. Is not Obama doing the same now with his rhetoric and his new speech making about the economy? I think he is, except there is one difference. Bush was not spreading fear. He was telling it like it was. The trouble with Obama is this: "He is spreading fear to get his goals accomplished. He has gone from being upbeat and optimistic to gloom and doom. To you voters who are sad that you voted for him you should have looked at his record through the years and you would have not made the mistake of listening to campaign promises and rhetoric that said everything but yet said nothing. In closing I want to leave you with this thought: BELIEVE IT OR NOT, HE IS NOT THE MESSIAH!

What this writer sees for the next four years is false hope, false promises, and some very tough times ahead for this country.


 


 

Thursday, February 5, 2009

It is The soldier


It is the soldier,
Not the President, Who gives us democracy.
It is the soldier,
Not the Congress, Who takes care of us.
It is the soldier,
Not the Reporter,Who has given us Freedom of Press.
It is the soldier,
Not the Poet, Who has given us Freedom of Speech.
It is the soldier,
Not the campus Organizer, who has given us the
Freedom to Demonstrate.
It is the soldier,
Who salutes the flag;
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
 That allows the protester to burn the flag.
Rev. Dennis O'Brien,

US Marine Corp. Chaplain

 


Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Respect or Compromise

 


Respect or Giving In: How proper and fitting that Barack Obama had as one of his main guest Aretha Franklin in his

a celebration at the White House since one of her songs is "Respect." Plainly speaking in words that everybody can understand is since January 20th the new president has been giving out his "respect" to the Muslim World. Regrettably, the way he practices it seems to be spelled SURRENDER or just giving in. In other words put up the white flag. What a disgrace to the American people and to those who was murdered in cold blood on 911. Has he forgotten that terrible day?

  Obama said that his" job to the Muslim people is to tell them that the American People are not their enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect." What does he mean by that? Where has this country made a mistake in defending its self's from people who would and will kill you because of their so called religion of peace. He is the one making the mistake, not the American people. The only mistake that this country has made with the Muslims is not fighting hard enough to protect its self.

A few writers and bloggers have noted in recent days that Mr. Obama's reaching out to

The Muslim's is not only distrustful, it is remorseful. It clearly embraces a description of the American People that is not accurately correct; it is flawed, and insulting to many Americans. What Obama is saying and doing is belittling his own country. He needs to speak the truth and say it like it is, THESE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO KILL US AND WE ARE DEFENDING OURSELFS! That is a fact. We have men and women who have bled and died to protect us against theses terrorist!

To show more of his so called respect for the Muslims, Obama deliberately said that America was a country of Muslims, Christians, Jews and others. This moved them (the Muslims) from the second place spot he gave them in his State of the Union address just days before to first place. What is that all about? There are far fewer Muslims than Christians in the United States and, according to self-supporting estimates, only half as many - or even less than Jews.) So why did he do this? It was done to pacify and appease the Muslims.

My closing thoughts on this article is this; why should any American President or people give respect to a religion that degrades women, wants other nations sub servant to them, demands that you convert to Islam, who has murdered 1000s of American Citizens who were at peace and defenseless, a brotherhood of people who have sworn to destroy America from within, a religion that calls this great country of ours, "The Great Satan." The Islam religion
is firm in their determination to destroy freedom and the people who love it. Americans will never respect or have a very high opinion of a religion like that. The kind of respect that Obama is showing the Muslims is not one that will help only hinder a peace. Why would a country like America that was founded and based on freedom show respect for any country or religion that does not respect their right or any other country's right to freedom?