Archive for November 14th, 2008

“Hank Paulson, Naked Emperor” by Michelle Malkin

Friday, November 14th, 2008

Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson finally confirmed what lonely bailout opponents tried to tell the American public all along: The man doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing.

Paulson held a bazooka to taxpayers’ heads. He groveled on his knees in front of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. He lured leaders from both political parties into linking arms in a panicked Chicken Little line dance for the beleaguered mortgage industry. Paulson demanded an unprecedented $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program for the good of the country. For the health of the housing market. For the survival of the economy. No time for deliberation. No time to review the failures of such interventionist approaches around the world. Now, now, now!

And now? The pulled-out-of-the-posterior “$700 billion” price tag has ballooned into the trillions. The “mortgage industry rescue” has expanded to banks, insurance companies, automakers, credit card companies and possibly the entire national volume of consumer lending. Oh, and that vaunted “TARP” component, Paulson admitted this week, is nothing but a four-letter word that rhymes with TRAP.

In September, Paulson offered his lofty pledge: “The ultimate taxpayer protection will be the stability this troubled asset relief program provides to our financial system, even as it will involve a significant investment of taxpayer dollars. I am convinced that this bold approach will cost American families far less than the alternative — a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets unable to fund economic expansion.”

Two months later, Paulson’s conviction melted faster than microwaved butter. “Our assessment at this time is that this is not the most effective way to use TARP funds,” he sheepishly told the nation Wednesday.

Hey, who died and put Emily “Never Mind” Litella in charge of the economy?

Paulson explained at his non-mea culpa press conference that he knew when the bailout was signed that it wasn’t going to work as sold: “It was clear to me by the time the bill was signed on October 3 that we needed to act quickly and forcefully, and that purchasing troubled assets — our initial focus — would take time to implement and would not be sufficient given the severity of the problem.”

Now he tells us? Would have been nice if he had made this clear — quickly, forcefully and publicly — to the Beltway stooges who were pulling the TARP over our eyes. So much for Paulson’s earnest transparency commitments on the Hill.

Members of Congress who let themselves be bullied into switching their votes on the bailout should be experiencing the biggest case of buyers’ remorse in U.S. history. They fell for what Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek called “the fatal conceit” — the disastrous idea that a federal bureaucrat has the knowledge to do a better job than the private market in organizing and directing an economy. They gave unchecked power to a single government official without a clue.

Read the rest of the article here.

“Obama Wins, Muslims Divided” by Daniel Pipes

Friday, November 14th, 2008

Ali ibn Abi-Talib, the seventh-century figure central to Shiite Islam, is said to have predicted when the world will end, columnist Amir Taheri points out. A “tall black man” commanding “the strongest army on earth” will take power “in the west.” He will carry “a clear sign” from the third imam, Hussein. Ali says of the tall black man: “Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us.”

Barack Hussein in Arabic means “the blessing of Hussein.” In Persian, Obama translates as “He [is] with us.” Thus does the name of the presumptive American president-elect, when combined with his physical attributes and geography, suggest that the End of Times is nigh – precisely what Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been predicting.

Back down on earth, the Muslim reaction to Obama’s victory is more mixed than one might expect.

American Islamists are delighted; an umbrella group, the American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Election, opined that, with Obama’s election, “Our nation has … risen to new majestic heights.” Siraj Wahhaj, Al-Hajj Talib Abdur Rashid, the Council on American Islamic Relations, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Society of North America, the Islamic Circle of North America, and the Muslim Alliance in North America responded with similar exuberance.

Hamas, and Islamist movements in Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, India, Indonesia and the Philippines delighted in Obama’s election. Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch generalizes that jihadists and Islamic supremacists worldwide showed “unalloyed joy.” The New York Times finds public reaction in the Middle East mostly “euphoric.” John Esposito of Georgetown University emphasizes the Muslim world’s welcome to Obama as an “internationalist president.”

But plenty of other Muslims have other views. Writing in Canada’s Edmonton Sun, Salim Mansur found John McCain the “more worthy candidate.” Yusif al-Qaradawi, the Al-Jazeera sheikh, endorsed McCain for opposite reasons: “This is because I prefer the obvious enemy who does not hypocritically [conceal] his hostility toward you… to the enemy who wears a mask [of friendliness].” Al-Qaradawi also argued that twice as many Iraqis died during Bill Clinton’s two administrations than during George W. Bush’s.

Iran’s hardliners also favored a McCain victory (according to Iran’s former Vice President Mohammad Ali Abtahi) “because they benefit more from enmity with the U.S., which allows them to rally the Islamic world behind their policies and at the same time suppress dissent at home.” The Taliban took note of Obama’s election promise to increase U.S. troops in Afghanistan, warning that, should he fulfill this plan, “jihad and resistance will be continued.”

Iraqis are intensively divided about Obama’s plan quickly to withdraw U.S. troops from their country. That plan, plus promises to end U.S. dependence on Middle East oil and to negotiate with Iranian leaders, rattled the leaders of Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf governments.

Some commentators argue that Obama cannot make a real difference; an Iranian newspaper declares him unable to alter a system “established by capitalists, Zionists, and racists.” Predictably, the appointment of Rahm Emanuel as Obama’s chief of staff confirmed Palestinian perceptions of an omnipotent Israel lobby. A commentator in the United Arab Emirates went further, predicting Obama’s replication of Jimmy Carter’s trajectory of flamboyant emergence, failure in the Middle East, and electoral defeat.

In all, these mixed reactions from Muslims suggest puzzlement at the prospect of a U.S. president of Islamic origins who promises “change,” yet whose foreign policy may buckle under the constraints of his office. In other words, Muslims confront the same question mark hanging over Obama as everyone else:

Never before have Americans voted into the White House a person so unknown and enigmatic. Emerging from a hard-left background, he ran, especially in the general election, mostly as a center-left candidate. Which of these positions will he adopt as president? More precisely, where along the spectrum from hard- to center-left will he land?

Looking at the Arab-Israeli conflict, for example, will Obama’s policies reflect Rashid Khalidi, the ex-PLO flak he befriended in the 1990s, or Dennis Ross, his recent campaign advisor and member of my board of editors? No one can yet say.

Still, one can predict. Should Obama return to his hard left roots, Muslim euphoria will largely continue. Should he seek to make his presidency a success by moving to the center-left, many – but hardly all – Muslims will experience severe disillusionment.

Original Link.

“So Much for Tolerance: The Aftermath of Prop 8” by Chuck Colson

Friday, November 14th, 2008

The ad ran all over California on Election Day—and surely sets a record for anti-religious bigotry. Two clean-cut young men knock at the door of a lesbian couple. The men identify themselves as Mormon missionaries. “We’re here to take away your rights,” they announce.

They snatch the women’s wedding rings off their fingers and ransack their home. When they find the couple’s marriage license, they rip it in half. “Say no to a church taking over your government,” the voiceover says. “Vote ‘no’ on Proposition 8.”

Despite such vicious attacks, California’s Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman, passed. But the assaults on churches have just begun.

Two days after the election, 2,000 homosexual protesters surrounded a Mormon temple in Los Angeles chanting “Mormon scum.” Protesters picketed Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church, holding signs reading “Purpose-Driven Hate.” Calvary Chapel in Chino Hills was spray painted. Church members’ cars have been vandalized, and at least two Christians were assaulted. Protesters even hurled racial epithets at African-Americans because African-Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of traditional marriage.

This is an outrage. What hypocrisy from those who spend all of their time preaching tolerance to the rest of us! How dare they threaten and attack political opponents? We live a democratic country, not a banana republic ruled by thugs.

Clearly, Christians need to redouble their efforts to help people understand what marriage is all about. In Los Angeles, when protesters gathered at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, they chanted, “What Would Jesus say?”

That’s a good question, and the Church should not hesitate to answer it. What would Jesus say about same-sex “marriage?”

To get to the answer, let’s first understand the meaning and purpose of marriage. In his book The Clash of Orthodoxies, Princeton philosopher Robert George writes that matrimonial law reflects a moral judgment—that marriage is inherently heterosexual, monogamous, and permanent—a union of one man and one woman.

This view reflects the biblical and natural law understanding that marriage is a two-in-one-flesh communion of persons. This communion is consummated by sexual acts that are reproductive in nature. They unite the spouses as a single procreative unit—an organic unity achieved even by infertile couples. Only a mated pair can be a complete organism capable of human procreation.

Since homosexual acts have no relationship to procreation and cannot unite persons organically, these acts cannot be marital—which means relationships integrated around them cannot be marriages.

We’ve got a winsome case, but we’ve got to get better equipped to explain it to our neighbors. You could start by reading The Clash of Orthodoxies and other material available on our website. And then, start discussing these issues in your small groups, Sunday school classes, and youth groups.

By protecting traditional marriage, we aren’t taking away anybody’s rights. We are simply upholding the framework of society’s most basic institution, the loss of which would irreparably damage our families and our society.

———-

Chuck Colson’s daily BreakPoint commentary airs each weekday on more than one thousand outlets with an estimated listening audience of one million people. BreakPoint provides a Christian perspective on today’s news and trends via radio, interactive media, and print.

Original Link.

Radical Homofacist Plan Day of Violent ‘Intolerance’ to Protest Traditional Marriage

Friday, November 14th, 2008

The homosexual movement for special rights has become louder, and in some cases violent, in the aftermath of losses at the ballot box in Florida, Arizona, and California. Florida Family Association notes the increased intensity in rhetoric from the self-proclaimed “champions of tolerance” and diversity. The National Day of Protest’s logo is a clenched fighting fist and features phrases such as “Fight the H8” (Fight the Hate) and “Ready to Rumble.”

Florida Family Association notes the irony in that the homosexual movement that formerly preached diversity and tolerance has now become increasingly disorderly and aggressive, even intolerant, of supporters of traditional marriage by vandalizing property and staging protests at and inside churches. Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel says the demonstrations ought to be taken seriously, especially this Saturday.

According to an alert issued by the Florida Family Association, the “radical gay leaders” have two goals in mind through the upcoming protest: one being to normalize homosexuality in all areas of American society, and the second being to “silence everyone who disagrees with them.” The notice adds that the homosexual activists are refusing to accept the final vote as an expression of the will of America’s people.

Original Link.

“Obama’s Civilian National Security Force” by Michael G. Mickey

Friday, November 14th, 2008

WorldNetDaily has been carrying the ball strongly on the questionable plans of the incoming Obama administration to require, yes require, all young people between the ages of 18 and 25 to be part of a proposed national civilian security force Obama and his comrades plan to create for a yet unclear purpose.

In July of this year, Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND, wrote a commentary on Obama’s proposed ‘civilian national security force’ wherein he wrote the following, in part:

The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn’t count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. Defense budget was $439 billion.

Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that?

If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?

So far, despite our attempts to find out, the Obama campaign is not talking.

At this point all I can do is enlist your help – and the help of every other journalist who still thinks the American people have a right to know the specifics about a presidential candidate’s biggest and boldest initiatives before the election. I also want to ask radio talk-show hosts across America to start asking this same question. I have a feeling if others join our quest, we might yet get clarification on this proposal from Obama.

Who will Obama appoint to administer this new “civilian national security force”? Where will the money come from? Where in the Constitution does he see justification for the federal government creating such a domestic army?

The questions are endless.

Now, leading the way on raising public awareness on this issue once again, WorldNetDaily has placed an article on its site that features both of the videos posted below with more written on the topic as well.

In the second video below, recorded in 2006, incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel makes some chilling comments, a couple of which I want to put in text so you’ll listen for them in the video. Among other things, referring to the camps that will be set up to train our children, he says:

  • “If you’re worried about are you going to have to do 50 jumping jacks the answer is yes.”
  • “Rather than figure out if whether you take a train ride or a barrack.… Think of it this way, it will be a common experience.”

Is it just me or is the Barack Obama White House, much as so many of us sternly warned was a possibility given the many radicals he has associated himself with throughout his life, looking more and more like the second coming of Hitler’s Nazi Germany by the minute?

Video #1: Obama refers to a civilian national security force

Video #2: Incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is recorded talking of mandatory training camps for our youth – and train rides to camps.

Clarification Needed

We have until January 20th, 2009 to raise a warning cry to all the nation’s patriots and our GOP leaders in Washington voicing our concerns as to what is being proposed here.

From where I’m sitting, especially with Emanuel smugly making reference to our children being placed on trains as the Jewish people were under Hitler, the comments made by our incoming president and White House Chief of Staff are enough for me to be extremely concerned we’re on the path to the “land of the free” being a thing of the past!

Americans, we need some clarification from the ambiguous incoming administration of Barack Hussein Obama concerning what he has planned for this nation that is going to require of him a ‘civilian national security force’ at his disposal – a domestic army of young people mandatorily indoctrinated into whatever is going to be being taught to them at these proposed camps.

If, in any manner, what president-elect Obama and his administration is planning for our nation is an overthrow of our democratic republic, we will soon find out if America is yet the home of the brave! I, for one, love my country with all my heart. Anything that is done to protect its freedoms and its shores I am all for but I want to know what path it is we’re about to head down so I’ll know if I am going to be able or willing to travel down it.

Anyone out there of Christian faith yet wondering why we need to vote God’s way to the best of our ability during election processes? Anyone out there yet wondering why we need to seriously and carefully examine the background and character of men who seek power in our lands no matter what the liberal mainstream media tells us?

ASK QUESTIONS

Write your representatives in Congress, readers. We need some answers – and pronto!

A former German member of the Hitler Youth, because our nation has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith, believes we are moving closer to a Nazi-style totalitarianism. Is this what Obama, Emanuel and others are planning for us? I have no idea but this is some downright scary stuff, which is probably not the best words to describe what is potentially coming but words that apply nonetheless.

If this is what an Obama presidency is going to look like, many of those who have delighted in George W. Bush’s days in Washington coming to an end may reflect favorably on Dubya’s presidency after four years of “The One” holding power.

Original Link.

“The Fall of America. The Fall of the West” by Jan Willem van der Hoeven

Friday, November 14th, 2008

Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for so did their fathers to the false prophets. (Luke 6:26)

Despite the overwhelming and unbelievable euphoria accompanying the election of America’s new president, the sad truth is that the very opposite of what the enthralled millions of Obama supporters – both in the United States and elsewhere – have hoped would happen as a result will actually become the reality.

This truth is too bitter for most of us. Even among many of those Christians who may have voted for the – to them – more friendly team of McCain and Palin, after all their hopes to the contrary, still do not really understand the utter seriousness of what has just taken place.

America has fallen, never to rise again to its former glory and strength. It is as what happened to the glory and splendor of Rome. I have wept about this, and reading now some of the Christian commentators trying to put the typical ‘let’s not lose hope’ seal upon what has happened, I believe this will only speed up this degradation of America’s society.

As a European, I years ago saw this same process happen to most of the Continent – today a pagan, self-centered, de-Christianized and heavily Muslimized continent that has hardly any moral or military strength left. As was the case when Hitler’s Nazi hordes overran Europe in 1939, so now it lies nearly totally defenseless against the aggressive designs of both Putin’s revived “Soviet” Russia or the deep and dangerous Jihadic infiltration of ISLAM.

Obama, as President of the United States, will not this time send his “Eisenhower-”led U.S. marines to save Georgia, Ukraine or any other Putin-threatened European country, EVEN THOUGH most of these Europeans, utterly blind to what is coming their way, voted in their hearts for Obama to be the next president – “their president” – of the free world.

Israel, in spite of some prominent Jewish and even Israel-linked Obama advisors, will practically, (for all practical purposes) find itself alone in its fight for mere survival as a nation against the horrendous threats of a soon-to-be nuclear-armed Iran and the increasingly armed and fanatized Muslim world that surrounds Israel on all sides.

All that the new, fully Democrat-controlled U.S. administration with its inbuilt anti-war bias will do to alleviate Israel’s fears is talk and talk and talk, just as the Europeans have fruitlessly done these last years. Israel will literally be left alone and stark naked vis-à-vis their ever more ferociously armed enemies. If the Israelis want to do anything they will be on their own. Even requesting the approval of the new Obama-led administration will be a mistake. He will opt for more talk, more sanctions, until the time will have passed for Israel to act preventively.

It is all very sad indeed. Very sad because there will not be a reverse in all this.

For truly-concerned believers to think things will be able to change again by, for instance, Sarah Palin running for president after four or eight years is fantasy. By then America will have, after four or eight years of Democratic rule, newly-placed and far more liberal judges on the Supreme Court; the country will have been so secularized and paganized that never again will there be enough of a conservative Christian bloc left among America’s voters to even want a ‘Christian president’ back in the White House.

Thus America has fallen, never again to rise to its former height; and with her fall the whole free world will suffer. And only few understand and are weeping about this because most DON’T WANT TO SEE, or quickly search for a stereotyped word: Let’s not lose hope. Hereby they precisely cause Christians not to hear the holy and fearful voice of God’s Alarm, that it is all over now for the moment.

Jesus Himself spoke such words over His nation and city. No stone would be left upon the other. The prophets of old spoke the very same words about their own nation, words which few preachers today in the U.S. or the West would dare to preach!

Thus says the Lord God: ‘A disaster, a singular disaster; behold, it has come! An end has come, the end has come; it has dawned for you; behold, it has come! Doom has come to you, you who dwell in the land; the time has come, a day of trouble is near, and not of rejoicing in the mountains.’ (Ezekiel 7:5-7)

O my soul, my soul! I am pained in my very heart! My heart makes a noise in me; I cannot hold my peace, because you have heard, O my soul, the sound of the trumpet, the alarm of war. Destruction upon destruction is cried, for the whole land is plundered. Suddenly my tents are plundered, and my curtains in a moment. How long will I see the standard, and hear the sound of the trumpet? (Jeremiah 4:19-21)

It is because we have grown up in an often sugar-coated Christianity of ‘God is love’ that we nearly feel obliged to be positive in the end.

Yes, positive we can be in spite of all that will soon happen to us and our nations on earth because we all have, if we endure through it all, a heavenly future. As Jesus said: When all these (terrifying) things begin to happen lift up your eyes to heaven from where I soon will be coming on the clouds with great glory and majesty. But, here on earth, He also said: ‘You will be hated, hated by all nations for my Name sake!’

That’s the time we are entering now. Where not that long ago, 60 percent of America’s youth was still God-fearing, today that number stands at less than 10 percent! There are, in the upcoming next generations, not enough believers left to bring the change in America that “positive minded” Christians still want to pray for. It is finished, just as it was for Israel in days past and few, very few are willing even to face up to this sad and painful truth.

Already you can feel it in the air: the hatred, anger and intolerance of many who have reveled in the election of their messiah-like Obama, the man who promises them – the young and the old – change that is not based on personal change by repenting from sin and evil, but a deceitful promise of change, while every one can live it up according to his and her own desires without necessitating a change in their own, personal behavior.

Under Obama, nearly everything will go. The killing of the unborn, the perversion of sexuality, the very abominations that brought down the worlds of Sodom and Gomorrah, of Rome and the Greek civilization, will bring down America and, with it, the West.

Is there then no respite at all any more?

God’s Word again and again holds forth that the nation that shall refuse to serve His purpose with Israel shall perish. He states it baldly in Isaiah 60:12:

For the nation and kingdom which will not serve you shall perish, and those nations shall be utterly ruined.

And says through Jeremiah 30:10-11:

‘Therefore do not fear, O My servant Jacob,’ says the Lord, ‘nor be dismayed, O Israel; for behold, I will save you from afar, and your seed from the land of their captivity. Jacob shall return, have rest and be quiet, and no one shall make him afraid. For I am with you,’ says the Lord, ‘to save you; though I make a full end of all nations where I have scattered you, yet I will not make a complete end of you. But I will correct you in justice, and will not let you go altogether unpunished.’

The same word comes through many other passages, like His pronounced judgment on the nations that will have the audacity – as purposed by America and Europe, among others – to parcel out the land God has called His Own, by dividing it in two. This, tragically, has been the immensely-destructive cornerstone of the Middle East policy of President George W. Bush and his Condoleezza Rice. The prophet Joel does not mince words about the serious consequences that such an anti-God and anti-His Land policy will reap from Him.

Would President Bush, at this desperately-late hour, still wake up and reverse this policy which he initiated by fully endorsing God’s eternal covenant with His people, whereby He exclusively promised the entirety of this, His land, “as an everlasting possession?” If that were to happen, by the immense and unrelenting pressure of America’s millions of Christian believers in the two months that remains of his presidency, even I would see a glimmer of hope! But will it happen? And will the dear Christians of America do more than hope and pray for the best without sounding forth the ALARM – that Lord would maybe so still leave some blessing behind Him, as Joel prophesies:

“Now, therefore,” says the Lord, “turn to Me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning.” So rend your heart, and not your garments; return to the Lord your God, for He is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness; and He relents from doing harm. Who knows if He will turn and relent, and leave a blessing behind Him– a grain offering and a drink offering for the Lord your God?” (Joel 2:12-14)

Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director
International Christian Zionist Center

Read the rest of this article here.

Ban Defamation of Religions: UN General Assembly President

Friday, November 14th, 2008

On the surface, this appears to be a really sensible statement. But if one digs a bit deeper and discovers it’s root, one can see how this concept can be totally misused and abused.

Of course, for all too many Muslims “defamation of religions” equals “honest discussion of the ideology that motivates Islamic jihadists.” That is just one of many things wrong with this. War On Free Speech Update: “Defamation of religions should be banned: UN,” from Dawn, November 12 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 12: United Nations General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann said on Tuesday that the world body should ban defamation of all religions and disagreed that such a move would impinge upon freedom of speech.“Yes, I believe that defamation of religion should be banned,” he said in response to a question at a press conference to highlight the interfaith conference at the UN headquarters. No one should try to defame Islam or any other religion, he said, adding: “We should respect all religions.”…

Don’t see the problem with this? Take Pakistan’s blasphemy law. Under it, a Christian who is confronted by a Muslim and asked whether or not he thinks Muhammad was a prophet can be charged with blasphemy, i.e. disrespect of Islam, simply for answering No. That is, simply for affirming that he is not indeed a Muslim.

Laws that restrict free speech are tools in the hands of the powerful — tools by which they silence dissent.

Original Link.