Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Election Day Endorsement
Here we go, the moment you've all been waiting for (yeah, right). Who will I actually endorse?
Okay, let's start with Obama. No way. No F'in way. Most socialistic guy to ever get near the white house? No way, no how.
The man who thinks we are at war with al qaeda and not with something bigger? The man who thinks the war is in Afghanistan and not in Iraq, not in the Philippines, not in Africa, not in Europe, not in Kazakhstan, Not in the rest of the world? Obama is a non starter.
The man who will let the democratic congress give us the fairness doctrine? No way.
The man who would certainly appoint legislators from the bench supreme court justices? No way.
Now, McCain. Better than Obama at all levels, but still a big government republican, still a man who will destroy the economy for some bad environmental science.
He is marginally better than Obama on the economy, but only marginally. he, like Obama, are good on immigration. They want more legal immigration, and we need that.
On the war, McCain is right on, and if that were the only issue, I'd vote for him. But there's more, much more.
He's still no better than Obama on civil liberties, although he would probably veto a fairness doctrine. He certainly won't repeal the Patriot Act, which has been a nightmare.
Nader? Nope. See Obama. Although better on civil liberties, a nightmare on economics.
McKinney. See Nader and Obama.
Ron Paul. Right on everything but the war and immigration. My second choice.
Bob Barr: a clear winner. I don't agree with him on the war, but he seems more reasonable than Ron Paul. same thing with immigration. Like Ron, 100% on the economy and civil liberties. I've been voting Libertarian most of my life, because I agree with them on the basic issues.
This year, my hawkish disposition isn't gonna change me. If I lived in a battleground state, I'd probably be voting for Mccain, and if YOU do, I hope you vote for McCain, because I'd rather have him in the White House than Obama. But if you live in Obamaland like me, time to send a message again that you really want CHANGE, and not more of the same. I want FREEDOM.
Bob Barr for President 2008.
And now let me close with the best campaign video I have ever seen:
Okay, let's start with Obama. No way. No F'in way. Most socialistic guy to ever get near the white house? No way, no how.
The man who thinks we are at war with al qaeda and not with something bigger? The man who thinks the war is in Afghanistan and not in Iraq, not in the Philippines, not in Africa, not in Europe, not in Kazakhstan, Not in the rest of the world? Obama is a non starter.
The man who will let the democratic congress give us the fairness doctrine? No way.
The man who would certainly appoint legislators from the bench supreme court justices? No way.
Now, McCain. Better than Obama at all levels, but still a big government republican, still a man who will destroy the economy for some bad environmental science.
He is marginally better than Obama on the economy, but only marginally. he, like Obama, are good on immigration. They want more legal immigration, and we need that.
On the war, McCain is right on, and if that were the only issue, I'd vote for him. But there's more, much more.
He's still no better than Obama on civil liberties, although he would probably veto a fairness doctrine. He certainly won't repeal the Patriot Act, which has been a nightmare.
Nader? Nope. See Obama. Although better on civil liberties, a nightmare on economics.
McKinney. See Nader and Obama.
Ron Paul. Right on everything but the war and immigration. My second choice.
Bob Barr: a clear winner. I don't agree with him on the war, but he seems more reasonable than Ron Paul. same thing with immigration. Like Ron, 100% on the economy and civil liberties. I've been voting Libertarian most of my life, because I agree with them on the basic issues.
This year, my hawkish disposition isn't gonna change me. If I lived in a battleground state, I'd probably be voting for Mccain, and if YOU do, I hope you vote for McCain, because I'd rather have him in the White House than Obama. But if you live in Obamaland like me, time to send a message again that you really want CHANGE, and not more of the same. I want FREEDOM.
Bob Barr for President 2008.
And now let me close with the best campaign video I have ever seen:
Monday, November 3, 2008
Prediction: Obama By a Nose; Republicans Cry Foul
Now, first off I have no idea how this thing is gonna go, but I may as well make a prediction so I can see how wrong I was after the fact. My GUESS is, Obama will win, but it won't be by a very wide margin.
I believe many states will be very close, and McCain's campaign will contest it at every level. I see a repeat of Bush/Gore from the other side, and four years of hate and Republicans, like Democrats before them, crying about a "stolen election."
Barr gets 1%, Nader about the same, maybe a little less -- pretty high for third parties.
Democrats keep both houses -- probably get that filibuster proof Senate they dream of. As some other pundit dude said, it probably won't matter since there are always about five RINOs who side with Democrats anyway.
If any of these predictions turns out to be right, remember who you heard it from. If wrong, I blame society ;)
Update: I'm sad I was right about Obama winning, but very glad I was wrong about the margin. A decisive victory will remove any excuses Republicans might have to undermine his presidency. Hopefully we can all put "country first" and face our challenges together, including winning the war against the Jihad and rebuild our economy.
I believe many states will be very close, and McCain's campaign will contest it at every level. I see a repeat of Bush/Gore from the other side, and four years of hate and Republicans, like Democrats before them, crying about a "stolen election."
Barr gets 1%, Nader about the same, maybe a little less -- pretty high for third parties.
Democrats keep both houses -- probably get that filibuster proof Senate they dream of. As some other pundit dude said, it probably won't matter since there are always about five RINOs who side with Democrats anyway.
If any of these predictions turns out to be right, remember who you heard it from. If wrong, I blame society ;)
Update: I'm sad I was right about Obama winning, but very glad I was wrong about the margin. A decisive victory will remove any excuses Republicans might have to undermine his presidency. Hopefully we can all put "country first" and face our challenges together, including winning the war against the Jihad and rebuild our economy.
Dalai Lhama Says China Handing His People a Death Sentence
In the midst of the election season, we may be tempted to forget that their is a world of tyranny out there, and China is a big part of that:
Evidently, the 73-year-old spiritual master is going into semi-retirement due to the stalled talks with his communist adversaries in Beijing. He claims to have all but given up hope for a meaningful solution, according to an article at Breitbart.com.
Free Tibet, however, has released a statement from the Dalai Lhama's Office that seems to say something else:
In other words, he has lost faith in CHINA, and their sincerity (no surprise there) -- and is taking stock on what to do next. Let us all hope and pray for real change in this troubled area of the world.
Chinese rule is handing down a "death sentence" to Tibetans, the Dalai Lama said Sunday, ahead of a meeting to decide Tibet's future approach to Beijing.
The region's exiled leader is on a week-long visit to Japan for talks on spirituality, just as a new round of talks between his envoys and Chinese officials was set to begin, and days after he said he had lost hope of any productive dialogue with Beijing.
"Tibetans are being handed down a death sentence. This ancient nation, with an ancient cultural heritage is dying," he told a group of reporters.
"Today, the situation is almost like a military occupation in the entire Tibetan area.
"It is like we're under martial law. Fear, terror and lots of political education are causing a lot of grievance," he added.
Evidently, the 73-year-old spiritual master is going into semi-retirement due to the stalled talks with his communist adversaries in Beijing. He claims to have all but given up hope for a meaningful solution, according to an article at Breitbart.com.
Free Tibet, however, has released a statement from the Dalai Lhama's Office that seems to say something else:
Clarifications on His Holiness' Tibet Remarks in Dharamsala on 25 October 2008
During celebrations of the 48th founding anniversary of the Tibetan Children’s Village on 25 October here in Dharamsala, His Holiness the Dalai Lama made some remarks on the issue of Tibet that are now being quoted out of context in some media reports. Consequently, to clarify the situation we are issuing the gist of His Holiness’ remarks below as well as a separate translation of a transcript of what he really said.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama said that Tibetans have long been pursuing a path to find a solution to the issue of Tibet that would be mutually acceptable to Tibetans and Chinese. This has received widespread appreciation from the international community, several governments included. More importantly, it has gained the support of many Chinese intellectuals.
His Holiness went on to say that, unfortunately, the Chinese leadership has so far not responded positively to our overtures and does not seem interested in addressing the issue in a realistic way. Beginning in March this year, a series of protests and demonstrations erupted in Lhasa and in many other traditional Tibetan areas. These were clearly a spontaneous expression of the Tibetan people’s deep-seated resentment and dissatisfaction over more than five decades of repressive Chinese communist rule.
Since the Chinese Government has accused His Holiness of orchestrating these protests in Tibet, he called for a thorough investigation to examine these allegations, even offering access to Central Tibetan Administration files and records here in India. So far, this offer has not been taken up, but the situation in Tibet becomes graver by the day. Therefore, His Holiness said that it is difficult for him to continue to shoulder such a heavy responsibility when the present Chinese leadership does not seem to appreciate simple truth, reason and common sense. In the absence of any positive reciprocal response from the Chinese leadership, His Holiness feels that if he cannot help find a solution, he would rather not hinder it in any way. His Holiness feels that he cannot afford to pretend that his persistent efforts to find a mutually satisfactory solution to the Tibetan problem are bearing fruit.
Therefore, on 11 September His Holiness called a special meeting of Tibetans from all parts of our community in exile to engage in wide-ranging discussions with the aim of identifying realistic and non-violent options for the future course of our struggle. His Holiness concluded that when all is said and done it is for the Tibetan people themselves to decide about their collective future.
Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama
Dharamsala
28 October 2008
In other words, he has lost faith in CHINA, and their sincerity (no surprise there) -- and is taking stock on what to do next. Let us all hope and pray for real change in this troubled area of the world.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
The Parable of the Lost Sheep
Matthew 18: 12-14
A shepherd in charge of 100 sheep notices that one of his sheep has gone astray. What do you think he should do? Should the shepherd leave the flock on the hills unguarded to search for the lost sheep? God's shepherd goes to look for that one lost sheep, and when he finds her, he is happier about her return than he is about the 99 who stayed put. Your Father in heaven does not want a single one of the tripped, waylaid, stumbling little ones to be lost. (The Voice)
12"What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? 13And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. 14In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost. (NIV)
12 “What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine and go to the mountains to seek the one that is straying? 13 And if he should find it, assuredly, I say to you, he rejoices more over that sheep than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish. (NKJV)
Okay, here we can clearly see that the Shepherd, who is God, is crazy. He appears to be willing to sacrifice all of His sheep to save ONE LOST ONE, and that he is happier about the one He finds than all his "loyal" sheep.
God is either a crappy, insane shepherd or an amazing, loving, very thorough God.
Luke 15: 3-7
Wouldn't every one of you, if you have 100 sheep and lose one, leave the 99 in their grazing lands and go out searching for the lost sheep until you find it? When you find the lost sheep, wouldn't you hoist it up on your shoulders, feeling wonderful? And when you go home, wouldn't you call together your friends and neighbors? Wouldn't you say, come over and celebrate with me, because I've found my lost sheep. This is how it is in heaven. They're happier over one sinner who changes his way of life than they are over 99 good and just people who don't need to change their ways of life. (the Voice)
3Then Jesus told them this parable: 4"Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? 5And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders 6and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.' 7I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent. (NIV)
3And he spake this parable unto them, saying,
4What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?
5And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing.
6And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost.
7I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance. (KJV)
Okay, now, many people who do not hold to the eventual salvation of all, will try and claim that people need to repent and stop sinning to get into heaven, and that's a wonderful, fun debate for another time. What I am more interested in is focusing on the Shepherd here.
Notice how it is not the SHEEP who turns back to God, but God who grabs the sheep and puts it on His shoulders and takes the little one home. Free will? Looks like election, only ALL are elected. We have the sheep who are good, and the sheep who is bad, and God goes out, grabs that bad sheep and takes it HOME. The lost sheep has NO choice.
And there was much rejoicing.
We have every right to reject God, but as Gulley and Mulholland say in If Grace is True: Why God Will Save Every Person, God has an even higher right to reject our rejection.
When the infinite refuses the rejection of the finite, who wins? My money's on the Lord.
Third Party Debate
Longest video I have ever posted, but well worth watching!
Another Hat Tip to Muirin over at MMORPG.com. Thanks!
Another Hat Tip to Muirin over at MMORPG.com. Thanks!
Saturday, November 1, 2008
BTW I'm Voting for McCain/Palin
Not me, this guy...
Nice, smart, entertaining discussion of the issues.
Nice, smart, entertaining discussion of the issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)