Obama's first judge nomination

Can we now start actually questioning the merit of him actually "attending church" and "being a Christian"? Because that was not allowed during the campaigne. Christians who verbally wondered about the kind of "Christian" church he went to were stared down at the audacity to ask such a question. I had wondered if this man was actually a Christian- now, I believe I can safely assume he is not. Because he is not, we can no longer be suprised when he pushes through anti-Christian legislation (like the killing of babies born alive in an abortion attempt).

A BIBLICAL Christian- would not do this:

From the Liberty Counsel newsletter:

"President Barack Obama's first judicial nominee, David Hamilton,
is a former ACLU attorney, who as a federal trial judge issued
a court ruling that said "No" to Jesus and "Yes" to Allah.

In 2005, this former ACLU activist ordered the Speaker of
the Indiana House to immediately stop "sectarian prayers"
at the opening of the legislative session. Specifically,
Hamilton ruled that prayers "using Christ's name or title"
were sectarian and therefore unconstitutional.

To make matters worse, in a post-judgment motion for this same
case, Hamilton ruled that prayers said to "Allah" were acceptable!
So, according to Obama's first judicial nominee, prayers to Jesus
are unconstitutional but prayers to Allah are just fine!

Liberty Counsel filed an amicus brief opposing Hamilton's
ruling in that case and fortunately it was reversed by the
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the same court to which
he has now been nominated for life time tenure. But this
case and others have exposed the far-left, anti-faith and
anti-life positions of President Obama's first judicial
nominee. Go here for more details on Hamilton's record.

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee begins its hearings
on the Hamilton nomination. I am asking you to take a stand
with me in opposing this nomination."

Click here to take action through the Liberty Counsel.

Anniversary of Terri Schiavo

From the Christian Law Association newsletter:

"Terri was the first American ever court ordered to die without being criminally convicted of a crime.

When our nation’s journalists and politicians discuss this issue, as they still do, they continue to get it wrong. This was not the government meddling in a private family decision. Terri’s husband voluntarily took this matter to court to obtain a judicial order mandating his disabled wife’s death. Terri was neither sick nor terminal, but a probate court judge ordered her death despite the heroic efforts of Terri’s family, her attorneys, and many elected leaders including the President of the United States to urge a higher court to overturn this outrageous decision. "

(Click Here to Order or to Download a FREE Copy of the DVD Fighting for Dear Life)

I think of this story, and it makes me think of the recent story of the North carolina Homeschooling mom who had her right to homeschool overturned in "divorce court" by a judge that clearly had an agenda of getting her kids into public school, despite their high grades and academic testing. (blog)

We cannot put our heads in the sand while the government and local courts are consistently doing things to take away our freedoms. They cannot be allowed to do that, they must be held accountable. We must stay aware of what is going on around us, and be willing to stand against the wrongdoings of our government, before it is considered trreason to say anything against the government. If we do nothing, we are allowing it to happen.

Have you plugged in to your local 9-12 project? If not, I encourage you to- today! My local chapter is meeting at the end of this month and I am going to be there. I am also going to be going to our 4-15 local tea party downtown. Think that's a fly by night operation? Think again, these things are popping up all over the nation, don't take my word for it, look for yourself! Go to the website to find the one nearest you and make it a family event.

Don't stick your head in the sand- open your eyes and pay attention to what is happening to our nation- and do something to stop it! When my kids are grown, and they are sitting with their grandkids talking about how things were when they were little, and they talk about a certain president called Obama and how through his UNgodly, flawed vision almost RUINED the most wonderful country in the world ... they are going to be able to say their grandma made sure she done everything she could to stop it, and through her and thousand other God fearing parents and Christians- it WAS stopped.

Never take freedom for granted!

PC Police at it again

I can't believe the story I just read. I'm glad it is in England, and I love the lady's response and of that of her neighborhood, but still? A neighborhood association telling someone their Christmas lights, which are on their private property, are offensive and to take them down? PULEASE! Yeh man, "Bugger Off!!".

Throughout the Election season people were rolling their eyes at Republicans and their assertion that Obama would lead us towards socialism. I, for one, did not appreciate that but hey, I guess I'm a fear-monger for agreeing to such things, right? Maybe not.

Apparently, socialistic values have been creeping in for a while and are being shown in multiple examples now by the local (umm .. democratic) governments!
Case(s) in point (from monicamemo.com):

Faced with a $12.5 billion deficit next year, New York Governor
David Paterson .. is teeing up the following:
Higher gasoline taxes
New taxes on clothing
New taxes on health insurance
Requiring new
license plates ...
... "anti-obesity" tax on non-diet soda.
If you want a
Diet Coke, no problem. If you want a Classic Coke, you're screwed. Wait,
correction: According to New York State, you're fat AND you're screwed.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has put into effect all
kinds of intrusions, including banning transfats ... and putting a 6 cent
surcharge on all plastic bags.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has banned plastic water
bottles. Most cities and states have passed widespread smoking bans, instead of
allowing individual establishments to determine whether or not to allow smoking.
And who can forget The Bama's campaign statement: "We can't drive our SUV's,
you know, eat as much as we want, and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at
all times."

This is incremental fascism. It starts with plastic water bottles, moves on
to non-diet soda, and ends with you in Orwellian chains of an oppressive
nation-state. It's time we demanded some of our freedoms back, and a reversal
of those we've already lost. *

For the record, as someone misunderstood something in one of my signatures on iVillage, "Obamaphobia" is a word some uses to describe a "fear of socialism". Not wanting your capitolistic country to take a turn towards socialism does NOT mean that one does not like people who are socialists or live in socialist countries. There is a VAST difference!! Some may not agree that Obama would do that, but I and others believe he would, and I expect frankly nothing less than respect from others for me to have my opinion, as I respect their right to their own opinions that might differ from my own.
Afterall, in America, that's what it's supposed to be :o)

Lets talk "Auto Bailout"

There has been something about the whole auto bailout issue that has not set right with me, and I have not been able to put my finger on it til just now. Something about it just didn't seem right, howbeit the noble, concerned reasoning that has been stated in support of it. I guess it's one of those things I can see both sides of, but my better judgement has leaned against it instead of for it.

But why? I've been decluttering our very cluttered bedroom today while listening to Fox News (fair and balanced), and Shepherd Smith was on. I just love that guy, he's so funny, LOL and he's very good at reading comments from emails from "both sides", but one email he read struck home for me, so much I've paused the TV so I could come here and type it out for anyone out there who reads here ;o)

It was from John in Alabama:

"... it is unconstitutional to use Federal tax dollars to bail out
industries and union labor states with Federal tax dollars taken from industries and non union states. It is not fair to unfairly advantage Michigan over Alabama citizens. And to use Alabama tax dollars to bail out Michigan is unconstitutional."

He hit it on the head right there. There are southern states where Foreign car companies have plants, and they are functioning and doing fine. Why is it my responsibility to bail out families whose primary provider makes $70/hr, when there are families in NC whose primary provider only makes $18/hr? Is it Dish Network's fault their business is functioning properly and the auto industry isn't? Is it our fault, as tax payers?

Since when did it come to be our responsibility as hard working, frugal lower middle class citizens to ensure companies do not go under?

Did Mr. Ford himself not file bankruptcy some seven times before Ford Motor Company got off the ground?

Christmas Wins In North Carolina School

I could not believe this story when I heard it this morning. Surprised, but not shocked though. Someone down the road apparently didn't make it known that Santa is NOT a Christian theme! There are many, MANY Christians that do not include Santa in their Christmas celebration. It can potentially be a hot topic in some Christian circles, really.

See the FoxNews report (video) here.

Read the OneNewsNow article here.

Day Without a Gay

from http://www.onenewsnow.com/:

SAN FRANCISCO - Some homosexual marriage supporters are urging people to "call in gay" Wednesday to show how much the country relies on homosexuals, but others question whether it's wise to encourage skipping work given the nation's economic distress.

Organizers of "Day Without a Gay" -- scheduled to coincide with International Human Rights Day and modeled after similar work stoppages by Latino immigrants -- also are encouraging people to perform volunteer work and refrain from spending money.

"We are all for a boycott if that is what brings about a sense of community for people," said Hetherington, 30, ... "You can take away from the economy and give back in other ways."

Scott Craig, a fifth-grade teacher at Independence Charter School in Philadelphia, had no problem requesting and being granted the day off. So many of the school's 60 teachers were eager to show support for homosexual rights they had to make sure enough stayed behind to staff classrooms. About 25 teachers plan to take Wednesday off and to have their work covered by substitutes while they discuss ways to introduce homosexual issues to their students and volunteer at the local branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, Craig said. A letter telling parents why so many teachers would be out went home Monday.

Join The Impact, ... has urged people to withdraw $80 from their bank accounts Wednesday to demonstrate gays' spending power, and to devote the time they might otherwise spend watching TV or surfing the Internet to volunteer work.

Witeck-Combs Communications, a public relations firm in Washington that specializes in the the homosexual market, published a study this year that estimated that those consumers spend $700 billion annually.
____________________________________________

So, what would the economy look like if all of the Christian community stayed home from work, and withdrew their consumer contributions? Which group is really larger?

Are gay people going to really quit buying things? What is the point of pointing out how much they spend annually?

What happened to tolerance?

Is there a group in Philadelphia gathering to protect their children from the classroom indoctrinations that are being planned to happen in that charter school? If that was our school- my kids would be out that day and they would NOT be counted absent. What happened to being neutral? (I'm SO glad our school is! contrary to some strong opinion, not all public schools are created equally @@ )

Sarah Palin, her faith

I mentioned in this post that when asked, Sarah Palin professed to be a Christian, attending a non denominational church. There has been a lot of buzz around the Christian community about her vice presidential nomination. Some of it I have been quite surprised with. The biggest one is assuming we know what the will of God is for someone else. I'm reminded that as humans how well we are at deciding what is best for someone else's family, when we do not know what all of the details are. How we can become the example of godliness when we see another family have something happen that we have not encountered- how we have that instant knowledge of how it would not happen in our own families because we wouldn't have done the things the other family did- such as the mother work outside of the home. I'm reminded that we are SUCH sinful, prideful people! YES! I'm talking about Christians!

I expect such reactions from the lost, for example the parts of the Democratic party that has now found a sudden case of "family values". The idea that Bristol being pregnant at 17 is a reason that Sarah should not be the VP nominee is ridiculous. There's NOTHING Sarah can do now at home that is going to make her any less pregnant! The presumption that Bristol becoming pregnant reflects on Sarah's absence in the home due to being Governor is ... you know, my mind is stirring so much over that I cannot even come up with a word for it right now. Can someone help me? HOW DARE YOU assume you know what was behind Bristol's pregnancy!!

I will never forget my high school math teacher explaining to us what "assume" really means- it makes an 'a.s.s. [out of] u. [and] m.e.' . Yes, that's strong and might not had been appropriate for a 14 year old to hear in school but boy did it stick with me. That's why I try my BEST not to assume I know what's behind a situation unless I am really there. I believe the reactions by Christian women asserting that had Sarah been home and not working as Governor of Alaska, Bristol would not had been pregnant, are not presenting a godly, gracious, merciful reflection of what Christ is really like. It's more so reflecting that attitude of the Pharisees in Jesus' time IMO!! "If you do this, and this, because this is to be this way ... you will be OK". YOU MIGHT NOT BE OK!!

Life is a journey, and Christian life is a battle in that journey to heaven. We are NEVER guaranteed that things will work out EVEN IF we do the best we can. All we ARE guaranteed is that God will give us the grace to get through the trials we are faced with. Bristol's pregnancy did NOT surprise God at all. You know who I bet it did surprise? Sarah and Todd. Better yet- Bristol! I'm seeing a lot of Christians ASSUME that Sarah was not doing an effective job in teaching abstinence to her children, because of this. The fact is, we can do everything "just right", and we still might not get the results we were striving for. Fact is, we can teach and teach and lead and lead our children, but when they become teenagers, their faith has to be their faith, and our convictions are no longer their convictions, it has to be their own.

If your teen does not get pregnant before she gets married, PTL for you. That did not surprise God. If your teen does get pregnant before they get married, bless you. I will not think any less of you as a mother and a Christian (like people are against Sarah), because due to your profession as a God loving, fearing Christan mother, I know you done the best you could and understand that once our children become teens, they are responsible for their own actions, and have to answer to God for their own sin; and you know what? THAT DID NOT SURPRISE GOD. Furthermore, no one knows whether the conception was a "one shot wonder" or not, so to assume that Sarah's kids are out running around without morals because their mother is "out of the home pursuing a career", is silly- borderline gossippy in my mind. So lets not act like we have those facts and give grace where grace is due. God gives US grace, why are Christians not showing her the same amount that is shown to them?

It is clear that Sarah has taught her child to accept the responsibility for her own sin, because she is making things right. She is having the baby, and she is getting married. Okay and for those who question whether or not Bristol and Levi's marriage will "make it" because they are so young- THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE DOING!! How self righteous can we be?! There have been a number of young couples in my own church that have gotten married as teens, the girls being the younger teen (17 even!!) and the boys being a year or so older. These have to be the godliest examples of marriage I have ever seen- to the point I wish MY marriage had the start theirs did. Bristol is going to live the rest of her life with the knowledge she sinned, that one decision impacted everything she has probably been dreaming of in regards to falling in love, getting married, then having kids ... she does not need a nation of sinners condemning her mother for her own sins by way of not supporting her mom with their vote when she is obviously the best choice available.

Our duty, as citizens in this upcoming election, is to elect the best person for the positions they are running for. To look at who is most qualified, and to look at who shares the values we share. It is so utterly clear that Sarah Palin holds our values, yet we are ready to not vote for her ticket because we are going to judge her personal life? Let me share with you a story.

Young mother, assistant manager of a convenience store. She's qualified for a promotion. She's a hard worker, dedicated, independent, responsible, very good at what she does. There's no other person more qualified than her for the current promotion to store manager available. Yet the district manager discounts her, because the store available is five miles further to drive than the store she is currently working at. Not because she's not qualified, or that there was a person more qualified than her for the job, but because of where she lives, the district manager doesn't think driving an additional five miles would be acceptable considering current gas prices. HA!! We're talking about a company that makes money from gas sales!!

Is that a professional, acceptable decision? OF COURSE NOT!! It's shotty! and I fail to see where there's a difference between that and Christian women not supporting Sarah on the ticket.

I say, let Sarah determine whether it is God's will for her life for her to run as VP and possibly become our first female president (Lord willing IMO!). We CANNOT know what God's will is for her. We DO know that God's will for our country is to become more righteous, and NOT supporting the McCain - Palin ticket is definitely a step in the OPPOSITE direction. I voted for Mike Huckabee by principle, but we need to realize this presidential race is between Obama and McCain. There might be other people running, but now is the time to realize that if we have any hope for godliness to be restored to our nation, McCain is the hope we have. It might not be the same hope we would have if Mike Huckabee was running, but it's more hope than what we as bible believing Christians would have in Obama. I could write Mike Huckabee in this November, but even he has the wisdom to tell his supporters to vote for McCain this November and have our votes actually going towards a cause.

No one is perfect, not one of us. We have all sinned, and if we are born again, we are all forgiven. I believe it's high time for a lot of Christians in our country to practice what is preached, and show grace when grace is due. Quit being grace hoggers because you get it every day. I implore you to research the issues and make an educated decision on what God would have you vote for in this election for our country, instead of trying to decide what is best for Sarah Palin and her family. I'm going to leave their family decisions up to the head of that family, Todd Palin.

As a matter of fact, it might serve well to make note from this article:

"Then there’s the motherhood question. How could a full-time mother of five,
including a disabled infant, possibly serve as Vice President? Won’t she be forced to neglect her children? This shouldn’t be much of a problem for Palin. She’s received rave reviews for her performance in a far more difficult job, running the government of Alaska, while also being a hands-on mom. Besides, no elected office in the land is better suited for a full-time mother than the vice presidency. Unlike governors, vice presidents spend most of the day looking for something to do."

So if you can't get past the idea of her working, think of voting for her for VP as putting their family in a better situation than what they've been in for the past year and a half. ;o)

SO.

In speaking about Sarah Palin's faith, I want to ask my sisters (and brothers) this:

If you believed with your whole heart God was leading you to a job position- would you want a nation of sinners second guessing that?

I've made a big decision recently in which I believed 100% it is God's will for my family, and I cannot tell you how HURTFUL and potentially discouraging it is to see people second guess my decision. Do we really want to elevate ourselves to that level of spirituality to assume we know what God is telling someone else? Or do we want to vote in November what would be best for our nation, and vote for someone who would strive to leave this nation in a BETTER condition for our children when they grow up?

For anyone interested, this is a video of Governor Palin speaking at the Wasilla Assembly of God Church in Wasilla, Alaska. Yes, I am IFB and no I do not agree with a lot of AoG doctrine, but that does not mean I question her salvation- especially when her character in my opinion is a strong result of her salvation. She practices what the bible preaches, unlike the opposition. In my opinion if you do not vote for the McCain - Palin ticket, you are welcoming the Obama - Biden ticket into the White House.

Whose values mean more to you?

Rudy Giulani at RNC: great speech!

Rudy was great, I haven't gotten to see Mike Huckabee's yet. This was the keynote address:

The Sarah Palin RNC speech

For those who missed it. My comments to come, yours are welcome ;-)
There's 4 parts:

CA Supreme Court, Obama, The Dark Knight

The same California Supreme Court that created a "right" to homosexual
"marriage" earlier this year has now ruled that the state may force healthcare
professionals to provide services that support an immoral and physically
dangerous lifestyle.

California's highest court was unanimous in its decision on Monday that
Christian doctors may not refuse to perform artificial insemination for
homosexual patients. (See "California court says no religious exemption for
doctors") Attorney Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI),
reacts to the ruling.

** read
more **

I believe this is a disgrace. An absolute disgrace. You know what else this attacks besides people's personal freedoms? It's an attack on Capitalism, yet the very people perpetuating this doesn't even realize it. So people who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle are hate motivated. What about the people who so spitefully choose to push legislation to FORCE people to do something against their will or else lose their job, essentially taking away their basic free will, in a free, democratic society?

Let me go on record as saying THEY are the ones that are hate motivated!! Yes, those who disagree with the lifestyle might refuse service to them- who cares? It's not like they're the only ones available to perform said service! How about a service contract, "I will provide this service only if you agree to (fill in the blank)"- how would that fly over?

Oy, I sure hope to see this ruling overturned. I think it's a matter of time before the California Supreme Court loses all credibility.

"Yesterday the New York Sun reported that the
Obama campaign has admitted that Obama lied about a 2003 bill he axed which
would have required medical attention for infants born alive during an attempted
abortion.

... Obama told interviewer David Brody in the CBN interview that it was
"ridiculous" to suggest that he had ever supported witholding lifesaving
treatment for an infant born alive. "It defies common sense and it defies
imagination, and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive," he
said. Now, 24 hours later, his campaign concedes he "misstated"
this point. David Freddoso's column for National Review is on this
same topic.

The truth is that Obama supports abortion at any time, including
the time after the baby has been born alive, which puts him to the left of even
Senators Boxer and Kennedy. The only question is, when is a baby not fair
game for murder in Obama's eyes?"

*** read
more ***

It's worth repeating:

"The only question is, when is a baby not fair game for murder in Obama's eyes?"

I also wonder, when is this man going to be able to say something and stick to it? Hes very indecisive and unable to communicate effectively at all. I wish there was a blog post somewhere that had a timeline of all his initial statements and subsequent "clarifications", don't you?

There's a thought-provoking article on LifeSite News about the movie The Dark Knight. This movie has grossed $400 million in its first
two weeks, and seems to be on its way to overtaking Titanic as the
all-time box office champ.

John-Henry Westen, the author of the article linked to above, actually went
to see the movie along with millions of others, and says the movie was
"visually and viscerally stunning but deeply disturbing, even diabolic."

** read
more **

We saw the movie, I agree with this assertion. Have you seen it? If so, do you agree?

Michael Savage and Austism comments

I am going to read some more on this subject tomorrow, but it just kills me from what I have read so far how incredibly crazy people can be in America. I was reading on the iVillage Beehive an entry about the current buzz this week about Michael Savage's recent comments about Austism. It reminds me of the recent Imus comments that were taken out of context a few weeks ago, people back again accusing him of being racist.

But this time, Michael Savage is being accused of saying that children who are diagnosed as autisic, is not really autistic, they are just "brats". Contrary, what I have gathered is that he is saying the disorder is overdiagnosed, and there are kids out there with the dx that is not truly autistic. I am going to do some more reading on this, but you can do some footwork yourself and listen to the snippets from his show here.

As for what I thought about the iVillage article, I posted my comments but iVillage blogs has a habit of not showing mine, maybe they're anti conservative commenters? ;o) I mean they did source the Huffington Post for this entry- I'd think they could find a more balanced source than the Huffington Post people!!

So for my comments:

I believe celebrities are elevated to levels by the public they should not be. Just because someone is famous, doesn't mean they are required to know everything about everything. Though, I do have a problem with the article that is referenced in this entry. Their only sentence in the whole article that gives room for context is "...Savage offered no apology in a message posted Monday on his Web site. He said greedy doctors and drug companies were creating a "national panic" by overdiagnosing autism,..."

Why should he apologize for saying he believes autism is overdiagnosed? In this article they crucify him completely through, but we have to ake a mopment and realize this is a liberal blog, talking about an appaently conservative person, so there is not going to be a *fair balance* of reporting and wording of the article.

iVillage, I challenge you you to find better balanced sources for your articles.
From this page -http://michaelsavage.wnd.com/?pageId=1156
It says:

"Dr. Savage has clarified that his July 16th statements concerning autism
were not directed at those who are in fact challenged by this horrible
affliction, but were instead addressing efforts to broaden the concept of autism
beyond those who truly are autistic to a broader "autistic spectrum" of
behavioral symptoms which are also manifested by persons who do not suffer from
autism, and his concern that many children are being misdiagnosed as autistic
due to the subjective nature of autism diagnosis (due to the lack of known
biomedical indicators, such as blood tests, to definitively confirm or deny the
actual existence of autism).

Dr. Savage has also explained his belief that there have been efforts by
certain professionals and professional organizations to expand diagnoses of
autism more broadly, for various reasons, and his concern that this victimizes
and stigmatizes children who are misdiagnosed as autistic.

On multiple other occasions Dr. Savage has expressed his concerns that
other conditions, such as ADD and ADHD, are overdiagnosed and result in improper
medication of young children, which Dr. Savage regards as abusive.

In the context of his broader concerns, it is clear that Dr. Savage's
comments were intended to suggest his opinion that, in the vast majority of
cases, most children throwing tantrums, or refusing to communicate, are not
autistic. Unfortunately, by condensing his multifaceted concerns into 84 seconds
of commentary, the necessary context for his remarks was not apparent, and the
few words he used to express his concerns were, in this instance, inartfully
phrased."

Straight from the results of the investigation by the network its self.

Now, I find it *crazy* that people think that one should be fired for exercising their right to freedom of speech! (Imus was not fired, btw) The people in San Franscisco who are going to protest outside of the station would do them selves well in showing grace to others as it is shown to them.

I had a child that fit every single "check" of the ADHD "list" beginning at three years old, and he got worse at four, then five, into his sixth birthday. A friend of mine with an autistic son even went through their diagnostic scales with me, and my son scored HIGHER on the autistic scale than her dx'd son did, yet my son was NOT.

I was told by EVERYONE including parents of children with ADHD I needed to find a doctor that WOULD dx him so we could get him medicated to "calm down". My ped REFUSED to dx him, because in her 30+ years of experience, she did not believe he was.

He does NOT have ADHD and shortly after his sixth birthday he changed dramatically. BY seven, those behaviors that everyone felt needed to be medicated and therapies for, were gone.
I DO believe there are children who are diagnosed with disorders they do not really have. I also have a family member who has aggressively persued a dx of ADHD for her child, (like she was telling me to do with my own), and after having her child with me for a period of time I can TELL you he doesn't have it, he needs consistency in his life, which his mother does NOT provide!

So I'm erring on the side of giving Mr Savage some grace and believing his follow up statements, and believing that he was saying publically what I already believed- there are parents out there that are not parenting as responsibly as they have the courage or strength to do, refuse to get support and *would rather blame their child* for their child's inapprorpiate behavior, and seek a medical label, than accept responsibility for their own parenting shortcomings.

Lets quit acting like this does not happen in own country!!

Do you have any thoughts on this?