Summer of reflection - updated: July 10, 2009

[Commentary links updated July 10, 2009 - R.A.S.]

Who will remember?

• Flag Day - June 14? [no Flags seen flying]

• Independence Day - July 4?
REVOLUTION!   TEA PARTY! ...plus the Official Tea Party web site   +   WND list of July 4th Tea Party sites, times, contacts - AFA list of July 4th Tea Party sites, times, contacts   +   Tea partiers counterattack 'bad guys on bad mission' - July 5, 2009 - by r.a.s.

• Constitution Day - September 17?

Gurgle forgot D-Day. A lot of people forget a lot about America. That's too bad. They forget God, too. That's hellish. America has forgotten itself. That's why we are headed to oblivion. That's why I say, "America is toast."

It's time for a vacation. I may return by Constitution Day. But, we may not have a Constitution by then, if the globalist, new world order (Satan's plan), unAmerican crowd have their way. Spell that s-o-t-o-m-a-y-o-r. Spell that "gubbermint motors." Spell that: everything God never intended for this once-upon-a-time shining-light-upon-a-hill.

Please pray about these things. Read II Chronicles 7:14. Let's all pray for forgiveness. God will not be mocked. Judgment awaits. Correction: Don’t Pray For America [Read this only if you can handle the Truth.]

Yours in Christ for America,
Ronald Goldwater

P.S.: "But as for me, I watch in hope for the Lord" - Micah 7:7

---

WARNING:

Earth's Final Days - by Ron Graham - July 10, 2009

Government-Run Health Care? You First! - by Bobby Eberle - July 9, 2009

Pure Terror: A NWO with Real Teeth?


DEPRESSION - are we in one? - video - July 8, 2009

Great Total Solar Eclipse of 2009 - July 22 - By J.R. Church - July 7, 2009

ISRAEL RUMBLES - By Bill Salus - July 7, 2009

What Must I Do to be Saved? - By J. R. Church

Will Israel Strike Iran? - By Hal Lindsey - July 6, 2009

PASS ACT - REAL ID - DANGER TO LIBERTY - JULY 6, 2009

Alex Jones' latest publicity stunt - by Matt Jarvie - July 6, 2009

The End of Independence Day? - by Mary Grabar - July 4, 2009

A Christian Citizen’s Responsibilities - by Dr. Charles Stanley - July 4, 2009

Does the Flag Still Wave? - By Hal Lindsey - July 3, 2009

Silence and Treason Against God and Country - By Bill Wilson - July 3, 2009

JULY 8:   Energy Independence Day Rallies and Video Contest -
T. Boone Pickens' PickensPlan.com - 6-30-09

Freedom Ain't Free - by Chuck Missler - July 2, 2009

Why a Bill of Rights? - By Walter E. Williams - July 2, 2009

NEA to consider full support of homosexual 'marriage' - July 2, 2009 - Your children are in great danger. - ed.

God, America, and the Economy - By Richard Booker - July 1, 2009

S.909 - POLICE STATE TYRANNY - UK, then Amerika - July 1, 2009

The two party system has failed America - by Shawn Connors - June 30, 2009

Mr. Sunshine? Ron Paul Wins Support to Audit Fed Reserve - FOX - June 30, 2009

REVOLUTION COMING IN AMERICA - LEOs: OATH KEEPERS - background on unrest in America - June 30, 2009

N.A.I.S., FRIEND AND FOE - by Lynn Stuter - June 30, 2009

RFID implants = 666? - June 29, 2009

HOMELAND SECURITY AND US ARMY PLAN INVASION OF STATES - by Jim Kouri - June 26, 2009

HELL IN AMERICA:  Obama Says We Shouldn't Treat Old Folks to Save Money And the Media Goes Deaf - by Warner Todd Huston - June 26, 2009 [Revolt, people. - ed.]

4 Key Reasons an Economic Collapse is Likely Imminent - June 25, 2009

Conservatism Won't Save America - By Jan Markell - June 24, 2009

Bankster “Holiday” Planned for September? - by Kurt Nimmo - June 22, 2009

Bank Holiday Coming? Prepare? - from Harry Schultz - June 21, 2009

Calling all kooks - by Patrice Lewis - June 20, 2009

Put BIG BROTHER in prison! - By Bob Livingston - June 19, 2009

Healthcare: Obama's Waterloo? - By Dick Morris - June 18, 2009

Constitution Party Opposes Sotomayor Confirmation - June 17, 2009

Plan For Socialist World Government - By Cliff Kincaid - June 17, 2009

Obamunists Working Fast To Implement Dangerous Policies - TVC - June 17, 2009

New White House Proposals Aimed at Restricting Economic and Religious Freedom - By Bill Wilson - June 17, 2009

Stop the Dictatorship Now! - By Janet Porter - June 16, 2009

Why Perilous Times Are Now in Overdrive - By Jan Markell - June 16, 2009

The Real Crisis Is Obamacare - By Alan Caruba - June 16, 2009

Robert Prechter predicts Depression II - June 16, 2009

Record Lows Coming for Stock Market - Glenn Neely - June 16, 2008

NSA has ability to collect, read domestic e-mails of Americans on widespread basis - NYT - June 16, 2009

Prophecy Clock Ticks Forward with Reaction to Netanyahu's Speech - By Bill Wilson - June 16, 2009  &  Jerusalem: Trigger to Armageddon - By Terry James - June 15, 2009

Dr. Ron Paul On Reforming Health Care - video - June 15, 2009

The American Empire is Bankrupt - June 15, 2009

War Is the Likely Outcome of the Iranian Elections - By Joel C. Rosenberg - June 15, 2009

END TIMES MADE SIMPLE - By Jack Kelley - June 14, 2009

Greater Depression Coming: Doug Casey - June 14, 2009

Global downturn worse than expected - Martin Wolf commentary, 23-min audio on BBC - June 14, 2009

Christians, here come the lion - by Pat Boone - June 13, 2009

How to get ready for the End until HE comes - By Greg Evensen - June 13, 2009

What in the world has happened to us? - by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - June 12, 2009

The Late Great United States - By Mark Hitchcock - June 11, 2009

Obama's "Gangster" Government

in Congress, June 10, 2009

The Man of Sin and the New World Order  &  A Spirit Of Antichrist And The Era Of Obama - By Thomas Horn - June, 2009

When God Abandons a Nation - audio with John MacArthur - June, 2009

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA - May 31, 2009

Barko Bummer is a phony - by Bert Prelutsky - March 4, 2009

Occupy Till I Come - BILLY GRAHAM VIDEO

Billy Graham speaking in Melbourne, March 1959

5 W's of the Second Coming - BILLY GRAHAM VIDEO

Billy Graham speaking in San Jose, October 1981

...and the people remain asleep. Woe comes upon the people.

Sotomayor is not an Option

Tough Questioning of Judge Sotomayor: An Obligation, Not An Option

The last time I read the U. S. Constitution (which was quite recently), the document still began with the words, "We, the People of the United States . . . ." If this declaration means anything, it means that the American people have a right to know — a necessity of knowing — the basic philosophical and constitutional positions of their leaders — before those leaders are chosen.

This is true even — or especially — with appointed federal judges. Reconstructionists (i.e., "activist/liberal") judges are leading the assault on America's Judeo-Christian foundations in our nation's Culture War. Indeed, these Reconstructionist federal judges (particularly U. S. Supreme Court Justices) have changed the nature of the courts, the Constitution, and the culture in this War.

This truth about the Court has been generally disputed in past judicial nomination hearings. "Judges...are not political actors," declared Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her dissenting opinion in the Court's 2002 decision, Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, (536 U.S. 765, 2002). (Ginsburg is arguably the most "political" of all of today's Justices.)

There is little reason to expect in the upcoming Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court nomination hearings a change in the rhetoric of either the nominee or her supporters. But the Senate nomination hearings — especially the Judiciary Committee hearings — offer our best, and most appropriate, opportunity to learn the necessary information about prospective judges, including Sotomayor, and the roles they will actually play in today's real world.

Therefore, tough questioning of would-be judges is not only our option as Americans, it is our obligation. ("Tough questions" are questions about the nominee's general philosophy as it pertains to law, plus his/her legal and constitutional philosophies.) Indeed, lurking in the shadows of the "judges can't be asked the tough questions" rhetoric is one of the most basic questions of all: what happens to the right of the electorate in a republican form of government to know in advance the views of those who would lead them (especially the Supreme Court, which is now clearly a lawmaker, though clinging to the fiction that it is only a law-interpreter)? America needs, and deserves, to know if its would-be judges understand the current unconstitutional nature of the courts and are committed to the constitutionalist philosophy of returning the judiciary to the role prescribed for it by the Constitution.

The battle over judicial nominees is a white-hot front in America's Culture War — a war between the polemic Judeo-Christian and humanistic worldviews. The nominations battle is not really over people, but over principles; it is not just a fight for the Court, but for the country. Therefore, the "fictions-proclaimed-as-facts" by the "no tough questions" campaigners raise issues extending far beyond any one nomination. It is vital that we Constitutionalists understand the fictitious platitudes parroted by Reconstructionists and the facts with which to refute these fictions. Some of the main Reconstructionist arguments are dissected below.

Fiction #1: "Asking nominees tough questions 'threatens to radically politicize the judicial confirmation process and turn judges into politicians.'" Fact: Politicizing the judiciary and morphing judges into politicians is a moot issue. The federal judiciary has been politicized from its earliest days — witness the Jeffersonian impeachment effort against Federalist Justice Samuel Chase in 1804-1805. Today's Court is even more radically politicized. This truth was clearly articulated by former Cornell Law School Dean William R. Forrester. Writing in the American Bar Association Journal in 1977, Forrester declared," [the Court] can no longer be described with any accuracy as a court, in the customary sense. . . . its primary function is not judicial but legislative. . . . It has become the major societal agency for reform." Such a body is, by definition, a "political body," Justice Ginsburg's protestations notwithstanding.

The irony of the Ginsburg argument is that it is made by the Reconstructionists, who are primarily responsible for the politicization of the current judiciary and its judges. Constitutionalists are devoted to selecting judges who will reverse this judicial politicization as much as is possible.

To repeat the Fact: America's national courts are already very politicized, and one of the nation's greatest challenges is to reverse this trend. Asking judicial nominees tough questions relevant to this challenge is a major step toward de-politicizing the judiciary. The supremacy of judges must be replaced by the supremacy of the Constitution.

Fiction #2: "Asking nominees tough questions threatens the independence and impartiality of the federal courts." Fact: At least three truths render this assertion a fiction.

• It is impossible to attempt to find a judge who has no views whatsoever on the fundamental constitutional and cultural issue of our nation's law. The White majority made this clear in asserting that, " . . . it is virtually impossible to find a judge who does not have preconceptions about the law."

  Indeed, the very definitions of "impartiality" and "independence" are derived from one's philosophical and constitutional positions. (Does anyone really believe that Justice Ginsburg is, or was in 1993, "impartial" or "independent"?)

  There are overwhelming reasons for Americans to be concerned about the independence and impartiality of those who judge them. But the danger is from today's Reconstructionist judges who have violated their oath to "support this Constitution" and have used the "impartiality /independence" argument to cloak their own fierce efforts to morph the Constitution and culture into Humanistic entities, radically different from the America which grew to greatness under a Judeo-Christian worldview.

• It is undesirable to attempt to find a judge who has no views whatever on the fundamental constitutional and cultural issues of our nation's law. As the White Court majority explained, ". . . even if it were possible to select judges who do not have preconceived views on legal issues, it would hardly be desirable to do so. [This lack of views] would be evidence of lack of qualification, not lack of bias (emphasis added)."

  American "law" today contains numerous definite statements of America's worldview positions, and any normally functioning adult must have developed ideas about these positions. It is therefore unthinkable that federal judges would have no such ideas.

• It has not been America's practice to require judicial nominees to have no worldview (an impossibility) and/or to shield nominees from tough questioning during the conformation process. "A judge's lack of predisposition regarding the relevant legal issues in a case has never been thought a necessary component of equal justice. . . .," declared the White Court.

  This Court explained further that the "traditional sense" in which the term "impartiality" is used is "the lack of bias for or against either party to the proceeding [over which a judge is presiding]." "Impartiality" in this sense is certainly a quality which America should require of its judges.

To repeat the Fact: Asking nominees tough questions does not imperil judicial impartiality or independence. To the contrary, exposing a judge's worldview to all Americans before the nominee is approved is a necessary ingredient in guaranteeing that judges will be as impartial and independent as possible.

Fiction #3: "Nominees should not be asked to 'prejudge' future cases and issues as a condition of confirmation, especially when such prejudgment involves a nominee's religious persuasion" (allegedly a violation of the Constitution's prohibition on religious tests for national government office). Fact: a judicial nominee's publicly articulating and defending his/her basic philosophical and constitutional positions (critical ingredients of his/her worldview) is not "prejudging any case or issue." Nominees can, and must, be questioned, and questioned carefully, about the law-relevant portions of their worldviews.

If it were otherwise, nomination hearings would be short indeed. As the Court itself declared in White, "[there] is almost no legal or political issue that is unlikely to come before a judge of any American Court, state or federal, of general jurisdiction." And a nominee's stating "a philosophical generalit[y]" (e.g., "I am a strict constructionist") "has little meaningful content for the electorate" and may not even be verifiable without "application to real-life issues" that the Court is likely to face.

This fact is illustrated by the issues of abortion and homosexual rights, where worldview clashes are especially visible. Cases in both these issue areas inevitably involve fundamental, non-legal questions such as the meaning of "personhood," the nature of man, the nature of marriage, and morality. Court decisions on these issues are inherently philosophical statements by the courts.

But these Court decisions are now also constitutional statements. The Court has dragged these issues into the constitutional arena with its convoluted expansion of the Constitution's Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses (as well as other provisions) to cover abortion, homosexual rights, and other fundamental cultural issues. The Court itself is thus the one responsible for legitimizing a wide range of questions of judicial nominees which would not have even been thought of in earlier American history. Indeed, it is these very issues that have ignited many of the flames in the Culture War now engulfing America. Scrubbing from nomination hearings and public debates over judges any discussion of a judge's views about these fundamental philosophical and constitutional questions of our society is an impossibility and a vicious slap at the principle of republican government.

It is therefore also a fiction to argue that questions about such issues as abortion or homosexual rights violate the Constitution's prohibition upon religious tests for national office. These issues are not "religious" per se. They are philosophical and constitutional.

They do indeed have roots in religious values. But "to have roots in" something is not the same thing as "to be" something.

The constitutional and cultural conundrum created by fictitious arguments in judicial nomination battles must be addressed by us — "We, the people." We must insist that our Senators (who are accountable to us — yes, to us and not their party or Senate peers) ask of all judicial nominees a full and honest explanation of their basic philosophical and constitutional positions. Law-savvy Americans can provide questions to Senators (especially some apparently question-allergic GOP Senators) who do not fulfill their responsibility. We must hold the Senate, the White House, and the nominee accountable in providing us with a substantial, objective, verifiable body of data revealing a nominee's basic philosophical and constitutional positions. We must then lobby our Senators to support only clearly Constitutionalist nominees. And we must continue to hold these officials accountable for the judicial conduct of any nominee who is confirmed. It is in this context of openness, not secrecy, that the greatest degree of judicial non-politicization, independence, and impartiality can be achieved.

What ARE some of the tough questions we need to ask Judge Sotomayor and other judicial nominees? Here are a few. Affirmative reactions to the following assertions, all actually made by a court or "legal expert," reflect Reconstructionist positions. The original sources of these quotations are cited in parentheses.

[NOTE: These questions are covered in our "Constitution Blitz" and other works by Dr. Armstrong — see www.BlackstoneInstitute.org.]

1. QUESTIONS ON GENERAL PHILOSOPHY: "Nominee _____, do you agree:
   • that "the word 'person' as used in the 14th Amendment does not include the unborn"? (Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 [1973])

   • that "the government creates civil marriage . . . [and civil marriage] is a wholly secular institution"? (Goodridge v. Department of Public health, 798 N.E.2d 941 [2003])

   • that "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, . . . and of the universe"? (Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 [1992])

2. QUESTIONS ON LEGAL PHILOSOPHY: "Nominee _____, do you agree:
   • that "it is from the [American] people, and not God, that the state draws its powers"? (Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F.Supp. 2d 1290 [2002])

   • that basing our law on Western civilization and Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards does not, but should, take account of foreign and international authorities? (Lawrence v. Texas, 156 L.Ed.2d 508 [2003], summary of majority point)

     
     

   • that "The institution of rights against the government is not a gift of God, . . . [but] a complex and troublesome practice that makes the Government's job of securing the general benefit more difficult and more expensive . . . ."? (Ronald Dworkin, TAKING RIGHTS SERIOUSLY [1977])

3. QUESTIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL PHILOSOPHY: "Nominee ____, do you agree
   • that the Constitution is to promote "the living development of constitutional justice" and be interpreted to elaborate an idea of what is "human" and "being" and to forge "a new moral order"? (Lawrence Tribe, AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW [2d ed. 1988]); Michael Perry, THE COURTS, THE CONSTITUTION, AND HUMAN RIGHTS [1982])

   • that "[The Constitution] is made for a people of fundamentally differing views . . . ?" (Roe, supra)

   • that The Constitution "reflects a set of conflicting ideals and notions . . . ." and "is an intentionally incomplete, often deliberately indeterminate structure for the participatory evolution of political ideals and governmental practices"? (Tribe, supra)

We American Constitutionalists who hold a high view of our Constitution, believing that it is, and must be, the Supreme Law of the Land must act. We are encouraged in this vital endeavor by one of America's most brilliant and articulate defenders of a limited judiciary — Justice Felix Frankfurter. Frankfurter wrote in 1941 that "Judges as persons, or courts as institutions . . . are entitled to no greater immunity from criticism [or questioning] than other persons or institutions . . . . Judges must be kept mindful of their limitations and their ultimate public responsibility by a vigorous stream of criticism [or questioning] expressed with candor however blunt. (italics added)" (Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252, 289-290).

[NOTE:This material was originally presented orally to the national Eagle Forum's annual leaders roundtable in St. Louis, Jan. 27-28, 2007. Eagle Founder and President Phyllis Schlafly urges all concerned Americans to utilize this questionnaire and distribute it as widely as possible.]

NEWS UPDATE: Eagle Forum's Court Watch is receiving a major boost in its worldwide outreach. The Library of Congress has asked for permission to archive material from the Court Watch Web site. The LOC will monitor the CW Web site in the future so that CW will have an ongoing contribution to "researchers on site at Library facilities" as well as "researchers across the world through the LOC's Web site" (quotes from LOC message). Court Watch materials will be housed in the U. S. Supreme Court collection at the Library. "Court Watch is most grateful for this extraordinary opportunity to provide top-quality education and scholarship on a broader scope than before and are excited about this opportunity," declared Dr. Virginia Armstrong, National Court Watch Chairman.

[by permission]

---

Sotomayor Disqualified Herself for the Supreme Court

Washington, D.C. — JULY 9, 2009 - Today, Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC) is sending a letter to U.S. Senators asking them to oppose the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court.

CWALAC President Wendy Wright said, “Sonia Sotomayor has lived the American dream. Rising from a poor childhood to being nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court, Judge Sotomayor is a testimony to the opportunities and blessings of America. But as we investigate her record, we are struck by her unwillingness to allow others to have the same opportunities as she has had. Her record reveals she lacks the primary characteristic required of a judge: impartiality. She has used her position as a judge to deny equal opportunity to people based on their ethnicity. She worked with organizations that aggressively fought against basic human rights for preborn children and ethical rights to ensure women and girls are not coerced into abortion. After giving her the benefit of the doubt, her record of giving preferences to certain classes of people and denying equal justice to others obliges Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee to oppose her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. We urge senators to vote against her nomination.

“Sonia Sotomayor has disqualified herself from the U.S. Supreme Court. Her proud insistence on denying equal justice to all is antithetical to our American system. Her unwillingness to provide Constitutional reasoning for her decisions exposes her arrogance and her disrespect for our judicial system and the people whose lives are dramatically impacted by her decisions. She fails even President Obama’s controversial ‘empathy’ test of considering how her decisions ‘affect the daily realities of people’s lives, whether they can make a living, and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes. …’ Through her work as a judge and in organizations, she has denied people equal opportunity to make a living because of the color of their skin, preborn babies their right to live, women the right not to be exploited by abortionists, and property owners the right of their own property.

“Senators need to set aside party loyalty and do their Constitutional duty to uphold equal justice for all by opposing Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination.”

Read the letter from CWALAC to United States Senators here. [.pdf]

For Information Contact:
Demi Bardsley
(202) 488-7000, ext. 134
media.cwfa.org

[by permission]

BORN AGAIN AMERICAN - video

courtesy: BornAgainAmerican.org

It's Time to Join the Resistance

Faced with a government that is not heeding their demands, many Americans are simply giving up. But as John Whitehead reminds us in this week's vodcast, we are far from helpless, and this is not the time to surrender our rights. ...


RutherfordInstitute - March 20, 2009

Hitler's Germany = Obama's Amerika

I am a student of history. Professionally. I have written 15 books in six languages, and have studied it all my life. I think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is just a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten - fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learn just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has “loaned” two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the 700B we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of “we the people,” who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is medicare and our entire government, our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about)–the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x ten. And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.

And now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin’s pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more imporant.)

Mr. Obama’s winning platform can be boiled down to one word: change.

Why?

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning.

And I thought I would never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930s. In those times, the savior was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they did know was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his “brown shirts” would bully them into submission. And then, he was duly elected to office, a full-throttled economic crisis at hand [the Great Depression]. Slowly but surely he seized the controls of government power, department by department, person by person, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught what to think. How did he get the people on his side? He did it promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe, and across the world.

He did it with a compliant media–did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and . . . change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

(Look it up if you think I am exaggerating.)

Read your history books. Many people objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made fun of. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though.

Don’t forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And in less than six years–a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency–it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me.

Some people scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. Perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe–and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am.

---

Reprint pemission: Sources: Pamela Geller's Atlas Shrugs blog, 11-13-2008, referenced from Pat Dollard's Young Americans Documentary with audio featuring "TPS," author of this essay: Part One 11/16/2008, [2 hours, with very rough language - gratuitous sewer language] Part Two 11/17/2008 [2 hours more, with more pointless, offensive gutter language. Why do these people have to talk with fecal matter and other exorcised pea soup matter regurgitating from their mouths? - ed.] - origination credit goes to dear friend, J.S., who told me about this TPS essay via email. - R.A.S.

Cap and Trade: 44 to Switch? - Ron Paul Video

Ron Paul on Cap and Trade, 44 Nays In Line to Switch Votes to Pass


video - 5:13 / courtesy: AwakenAmerica - June 29, 2009

If 8 Repubs Hadn't Voted for Cap n Trade, More Dems Would Have. 15 or 20 who voted yea really didn't want it to pass. Up to 44 Dems were in line to switch their votes if they had to in order to pass Cap & Trade.

BUT there's still hope. It will probably come back to the House in a compromise bill. Some of the initial yea votes came from people who really believe it's for the environment. If they only knew...

Rise of Sea Levels Is The Greatest Lie Ever Told: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/co...

Many glaciers are growing across the earth: http://www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Glac...

SO KEEP TELLING THEM. Even some of the puppet ducks lined up in a row wouldn't vote for it if they knew what was really behind it. Even if we lose the battle, as long as we keep informing congress and the public, we may win the war.

Join Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty, the most promising group pushing for legislation that will lead to sound money and restore liberty. Create a free user account and they will email you editable action alerts they foward to your congressmen. https://www.campaignforliberty.com/si...

And please sign the petition to audit the Federal Reserve on their home page.

---

Gerald Celente speaks on Cap and Trade and other handicaps to the US economy

INDEPENDENCE NOW AND FOREVER

By Dr. Chuck Baldwin - July 1, 2009

As we approach Independence Day, it behooves us to recall the principles of America's founding, especially in light of the ongoing attempt by today's political and commercial leaders to merge the United States into a hemispheric government. In fact, the clarion call for independence is just as fundamental, just as revolutionary as it was 233 years ago.

Regarding the signing of the Declaration of Independence, John Adams said, "[Independence Day] will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the Day of Deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forevermore."

Adams went on to say, "You will think me transported with enthusiasm, but I am not. I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure that it will cost us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the gloom I can see the rays of ravishing light and glory; I can see that the end is more than worth all the means, that posterity will triumph in that day's transaction, even though we should rue it, which I trust in God we shall not."

Indeed, the signers of America's Declaration of Independence endured the sacrifice of both toil and blood. Pertaining to the lives of the signers, David Limbaugh writes, "Of those 56 who signed the Declaration of Independence, nine died of wounds or hardships during the war. Five were captured and imprisoned, in each case with brutal treatment. Several lost wives, sons or entire families. One lost his thirteen children. Two wives were brutally treated. All were at one time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes. Twelve signers had their homes completely burned. Seventeen lost everything they owned."

Yes, America's Declaration of Independence, which is our nation's birth certificate, was purchased at a very high price. Rightly did its primary author, Thomas Jefferson, invoke God's name no less than four times in the Declaration. Without God, our struggle for independence and freedom would surely have failed.

Jefferson, along with the vast majority of America's founders, knew that freedom was, first, the gift of God, not the accomplishment of men. He further understood that man's law must be subordinate to the natural laws of God.

Therefore, with an appeal to Heaven for the "rectitude of [their] intentions," America's Founding Fathers courageously forged a document that would put their own lives at risk, but would also change the course of history.

The question now is, "How long can we maintain our nation's independence?" The forces of global government seem to dominate both major parties in Washington, D.C., most corporate boardrooms, and most newsrooms.

In fact, hemispheric or regional government never had more powerful and committed allies than former Presidents George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and now President Barack Obama. Mark my words: if and when America loses its independence, it will have been these Presidents that led the way in making it happen.

If the United States is going to maintain its independence and freedom much beyond the year 2010, it will only be because millions of freedom-loving Americans (and the governments of the States in which they reside) are willing to fight for it.

Both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson died on July 4, 1826. Daniel Webster gave the eulogy for both men on August 2 of that year. Included in his remarks on that notable day were these words: "It [the Declaration of Independence] is my living sentiment, and by the blessing of God, it shall be my dying sentiment. Independence now, and independence forever."

To Webster's words, I say a hearty AMEN! I promise no loyalty to the North American Union, the United Nations, or any other brand of global government. When the day comes that I am required to submit to any form of global authority, I will be an outlaw. There is no freedom without independence, and there is no independence without eternal vigilance. To my dying breath I will say with Daniel Webster, "Independence now, and independence forever!"

© 2009 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

---

[by permission]

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's other columns here.

July 4th - Independence Day

Happy Independence Day

As the nation prepares to celebrate its birth, John W. Whitehead pays homage to the revolutionary spirit behind the Declaration of Independence. ...


The fourth of July is more than hotdogs and fireworks. It is a day every person who chooses to live in this great country of ours should cherish and be thankful. There are unspoken heroes who risk their lives and well-being to ensure we maintain our freedom. As you enjoy yourselves and fireworks realize that the comfort and security we enjoy is and has been secured by our men and women in uniform. Don’t forget it was courageous individuals who became soldiers who fought and died for the birth of this great nation.

Take this day and acknowledge the sacrifices made for the birth of our nation, the American spirit, and most of all our men and women of the Armed forces. So for those who protest our foreign policies and current global standing, realize it is the ability of our nation to take the fight to those who oppose freedom, and dismiss democracy that secures our nations well-being. When you start to complain or hear complaints towards our nation stop and appreciate those who have given you the freedom to do so. Take the time on this Independence Day and acknowledge that our rights and our way of life are protected by the sweat and sacrifice of our soldiers.

There are those who protest and rebuke our nation as it offers them the blanket of security necessary for them to be able to freely voice their negative opinions. Today remind these people why they are able to have these freedoms and not worry about waking upin jail, having their tongues removed, or worse. Regardless of your political views, religious beliefs, or personal opinions, take the time to thank a soldier and their families.

There is great honor in being liberators and the defenders of freedom. To all my fellow military veterans, and all those who wear the uniform that protects this great nation, you are greatly appreciated and the sacrifices you have endured are not in vain.

Thank You.

courtesy: John Robinson

---

Declaration of Independence

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty,
to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.— Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms:

Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock

Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of
Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple

Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott

New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

Know Your Rights or You Will Lose Them

By John W. Whitehead - The Rutherford Institute - June 22, 2009

"It astonishes me to find... [that so many] of our countrymen... should be contented to live under a system which leaves to their governors the power of taking from them the trial by jury in civil cases, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce, the habeas corpus laws, and of yoking them with a standing army. This is a degeneracy in the principles of liberty... which I [would not have expected for at least] four centuries." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1788

"Most citizens," writes columnist Nat Hentoff, "are largely uneducated about their own constitutional rights and liberties."

The following true incident is a case in point for Hentoff's claim. A young attorney, preparing to address a small gathering about the need to protect freedom, especially in the schools, wrote the text of the First Amendment on a blackboard. After carefully reading the text, a woman in the audience approached the attorney, pointed to the First Amendment on the board and remarked, "My, the law is really changing. Is this new?" The woman was a retired schoolteacher.

For more than 200 years, Americans have enjoyed the freedoms of speech, assembly, and religion, among others, without ever really studying the source of those liberties, found in the Bill of Rights--the first ten amendments to our U. S. Constitution.

Yet never has there been a time when knowing our rights has been more critical and safeguarding them more necessary. Particularly telling is the fact that even under the Obama presidency, most of the Bush administration policies and laws that curtailed our freedoms have remained intact--all of which have drastically altered the landscape of our liberties.

Thus, it is vital that we gain a better understanding of what Thomas Jefferson described as "fetters against doing evil." If not, I fear that with each passing day, what Jefferson called the "degeneracy" of "the principles of liberty" will grow worse until, half asleep, Americans will lose what our forefathers fought and died for.

A short summary of the first ten amendments shows how vital these freedoms are.

The First Amendment protects the freedom to speak your mind and protest in peace without being bridled by the government. It also protects the freedom of the media, as well as the right to worship and pray without interference. In other words, Americans cannot be silenced by the government.

The Second Amendment guarantees "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." This is one of the most controversial provisions of the Bill of Rights. Indeed, there are those who claim that gun ownership in America should be restricted solely to the police and other government officials. In many countries, owning a firearm is a mere privilege, reserved for the rich and powerful. Self-protection, however, is not a privilege in America. It is an individual citizen right which the U.S. Supreme Court has now recognized.

America was born during a time of martial law. British troops stationed themselves in homes and entered property without regard to the rights of the owners. That is why the Third Amendment prohibits the military from entering any citizen's home without "the consent of the owner." Even though today's military does not threaten private property, this amendment reinforces the principle that civilian-elected officials are superior to the military. But increasingly, even under the Obama presidency, the threat of martial law being imposed is a clear and present danger.

There's a knock at the door. The police charge in and begin searching your home. They invade your privacy, rummaging through your belongings. You may think you're powerless to stop them, but you're not. The Fourth Amendment prohibits the government from searching your home without a warrant approved by a judge. But what about other kinds of invasions? Your telephone, mail, computer and medical records are now subject to governmental search. Even though they're all personal and private, they are increasingly at risk for unwarranted intrusion by government agents. The ominous rise of the surveillance state threatens the protections given us by this amendment.

You cannot be tried again after having been found innocent. The government cannot try you repeatedly for the same crime, hoping to get the result they want. It's one of the legal protections of the Fifth Amendment. Moreover, you cannot be forced to testify against yourself. You can "plead the Fifth." This means that if you are accused of committing a crime, it is up to the state to prove its case against you. You are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without following strict legal codes of conduct.

The Sixth Amendment spells out the right to a "speedy and public trial." An accused person can confront the witnesses against him and demand to know the nature of the charge. The government cannot legally keep someone in jail for unspecified offenses.
Moreover, unlike many other countries, Americans also have the right to be tried by a jury of ordinary citizens and to be represented by an attorney. Our fates in criminal proceedings are not decided by panels of judges or unaccountable politicians.

Property ownership is a fundamental right of free people. In a legal dispute over property, the Seventh Amendment guarantees citizens the right to a jury trial.

Like any other American citizen, those accused of being criminals have rights under the Constitution as well. In some countries, the government abuses what they see as disloyal or troublesome citizens by keeping them in jail indefinitely on trumped-up charges. If they cannot pay their bail, then they're not released. The Eighth Amendment is, thus, similar to the Sixth--it protects the rights of the accused. These are often the people most susceptible to abuse and who have the least resources to defend themselves. This amendment also forbids the use of cruel and unusual punishment.

The framers of our Constitution were so concerned about civil liberties that they wished to do everything conceivable to protect our future freedom. Some of the framers opposed a bill of rights because it might appear that these were the only rights the people possessed. The Ninth Amendment remedied that by providing that other rights not listed were nonetheless retained by the people. Our rights are inherently ours, and our government was created to protect them. The government does not, nor did it ever, have the power to grant us our rights. Popular sovereignty--the belief that the power to govern flows upward from the people rather than downward from the rulers--is clearly evident in this amendment and is a landmark of American freedom.

Ours is a federal system of government. This means that power is divided among local, state and national entities. The Tenth Amendment reminds the national government that the people and the states retain every authority that is not otherwise mentioned in the Constitution. Congress and the President have increasingly assumed more power than the Constitution grants them. However, it's up to the people and the state governments to make sure that they obey the law of the land.

Having stood the test of time, there is little doubt that the Bill of Rights is the greatest statement for freedom ever drafted and put into effect. In the end, however, it is the vigilance of "we the people" that will keep the freedoms we hold so dear alive. Therefore, know your rights, exercise them freely or you're going to lose them.

---

[by permission]

Read John Whitehead's other columns here.

Ron Paul on Healthcare - video

Having practiced medicine for over 30 years, Congressman Paul gives his perspective on the past and future of medicine in this country, and the effects of government and special interests on quality, costs and access. ...

video - 7:40 / courtesy: campaignforliberty - June 18, 2009

[It's time to run the socialists out of Washington. - ed.]

AUDIT THE FED, THEN ABOLISH IT - video

Congressman Ron Paul gives the latest [6-12-2009] exciting news on his legislation to audit the Federal Reserve and explains the possible next steps for the bill. ...

video - 5:33 / courtesy: CongressmanRonPaul - June 12, 2009

---

Tue., May 5, 2009:

With each passing day, Ron Paul is winning people over to the cause of Federal Reserve transparency and sound money.

More and more Congressmen have been signing onto Dr. Paul’s Audit the Fed bill, HR 1207, and it is now up to a whopping 124 cosponsors.

That cosponsor list now includes over half of the House Republican Caucus. Dr. Paul is truly leading the GOP back to its roots of sound money and fiscal conservatism.

In fact, The Washington Independent’s David Weigel just wrote an important article about how Ron Paul’s message is resonating with Republican lawmakers. All I can say is, "It's about time!"

Click here to read the article -- "Ron Paul's Economic Theories Winning GOP Converts".

And today, Dr. Paul proved the case for Federal Reserve transparency to people across America by grilling Ben Bernanke on national television.



Chairman Ben is running scared now that HR 1207 is gaining steam. He even tried to appease Dr. Paul by offering transparency on everything except monetary policy -- the Fed's sole function!

It is clear we are winning this fight, and I believe that ultimately we will see it through to victory. But this is no time to rest on our laurels.

Keep writing and calling your congressman if he has not already cosponsored HR 1207 (click here to find out). Circulate more petitions and Audit the Fed literature to your friends and neighbors to recruit them to this winning effort.

Thank you for all you have done and all you will do. With your continued support, Ron Paul and Campaign for Liberty will return the GOP to its conservative roots, and America back to its founding principles.

In Liberty,
John Tate
President, Campaign for Liberty

---

Ron Paul says audit the Fed. [After the audit, abolish the Fed. Put all the globalist, new world order criminals - politicians, banksters, CFR types, media mugwamps, in prison for life. They betray you and the Constitution. - ed.]


video - 3:16 (sounds like a Bible verse)
courtesy: campaignforliberty - April 2, 2009

See also: ABOLISH THE FED: HR 1207 - Momentum growing - elsewhere on this blog - March 17, 2009

Dangerous signs for the world

Obama's Speech In Egypt - by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - June 09, 2009

Obama: It's in Palestine's Best Interest - By Michael G. Mickey - Just today someone wrote me to ask one of the most frequently asked questions ever posed to me, that question being whether I truly believe Christ's return is drawing near. My answer, of course, was yes! After all, on this very day, a powerful leader told the world, in a speech televised live around the globe, that what is in the world's best interest is for the world to enter into the prophesied Tribulation Period, assuming, of course, that the seven-year covenant of peace the Antichrist will confirm is going to be the one that leads to peace between Israel and its enemies, among whom are the Palestinians Barack Obama feels so sorry for --- the same Palestinians who danced in the streets and passed out candy on September 11, 2001.

The end times drama continues...

Bible Prophecy Today blog - June 04, 2009

Time is short for the world

The New Tolerance: Prophetic Implications - By Dr. David R. Reagan - The religious impact of the "New Tolerance" has profound prophetic implications. I see it as paving the way for the one world religion of the Antichrist. ... In fact, steps have been taken to establish a one world religion based on the "New Tolerance." Over 200 delegates from religious groups all over the world gathered at Stanford University to begin drafting a charter for an international interfaith institution to be called The Organization of United Religions. ... Jesus is coming soon! He is coming to rule with "a rod of iron" (Psalm 2:9 and Revelation 2:27). There will be no tolerance of evil, and the result will be that the world will be flooded with peace, righteousness, and justice as the waters cover the seas. ...

Bible Prophecy Today blog - June 03, 2009

Is this God's Final Warning to America?

By Jan Markell - Olive Tree Ministries

America is at a crossroads. Many are asking if she can be saved, or has God abandoned America? What a pitiful conclusion, if so, for a nation that has been a beacon of hope for the oppressed of the world. How often has America banded to fight off aggression or traveled to the ends of the earth to aid the less fortunate? How many missionaries has she provided to the world saving an untold number of lost souls?
 
Some say America must be punished for her sins, but are they really that much more grave than other wealthy nation? Luke 12:48 reminds us that from those given a great deal will be required much more.  Have we used our God-given assets properly?

My radio guest on May 16 was John McTernan, author of God's Final Warning to America  and As America Has Done to Israel. (As America Has Done to Israel will be on my Web site in the next few days.)  Since 1987, John has tracked judgment on America when we abuse the unborn, look the other way at the radical gay agenda, and cause any kind of harm to God's covenant land of Israel. Some have "issues" with this. I am not sure why since there is a biblical illustration for each category. Ever heard of Sodom and Gomorrah? 

Right now America is torn in two, and the more Obama pushes the division of Israel, the more division there will be in our country. It has far surpassed the clever little red state-blue state illustration of a few years ago. Now it is hard-core secular humanist liberalism vs. traditional values and biblical values' people butting heads. Just this rampant division in our country is judgment. We cannot all get along! The chasm of division grows more each day!

America is trillions of dollars in debt. More than 60% of the country is experiencing a drought. Two million houses are in foreclosure. Read Deuteronomy 28 to see how God dealt with a rebellious Israel. Why would He do less to a rebellious America?

Recently Homeland Security declared millions of good people "right-wing extremists." Janet Napolitano has now pulled that position paper due to the outcry. Nonetheless, very good people were called evil with overtones of Isaiah 5:20 at play. Let's be honest and say this kind of labeling was going on long before the Obama administration came to power but now it is on fast-forward.

Dr. James Dobson stated that "America is awash in evil." He also stated in World Net Daily on May 14, 2009, "There is utter evil coming out of the U.S. Congress." Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-TX) has been reporting on the "pedophile protection act" being promoted by Congress. He states, "If we don't have another awakening, I'm not sure what's left (of America)."  Dobson concurs and says that the threat to religious rights "keeps me awake at night."

Under certain circumstances, names for Jesus or symbols of Jesus must be covered up as ordered by the Obama administration. If any prayer is to be used in any service or ceremony, it must be approved and likely will be stricken out. There is almost unbelievable news that our Pentagon is burning Bibles. Do we even have a right to expect God's favor on America?

Thankfully some Christian leaders and pastors are speaking up and risking all, but for the most part, the church is asleep. A nation is only as strong as her churches are strong.  A passage was given to Israel that can be applied to our day, which reads, "If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, then turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and will heal their land" (II Chronicles 7:14). The verse is not directed at the devil's crowd! The responsibility for turning around the direction of a country falls heavily on people of faith.

Unfortunately many churches today don't want to preach about judgment. They are spiritually anesthetized. They have not been taught to fear the Lord but rather, that God is all about love because that makes people come to church. Many pastors and ministry leaders would never put a big part of the blame on America's demise onto the church! They're into church growth and don't make waves or people won't return next week. Praise needs to be extended to pastors and church leaders who are holding to truth, who are telling the truth, and who are warning of serious judgment occurring now and in the future.

This past spring, "America's pastor," Rick Warren, reversed himself on California's "Proposition 8." He ultimately apologized to the gay community for his endorsement of it. And we expect God's blessing when "America's pastor" does this? I realize many reading this do not consider Rick their pastor, but let's be honest, many do. America's "other pastor" is Joel Osteen who said on Larry King that he's just glad Obama "loves the Lord." Why the sugar-coating? Why not tell the inconvenient truth?

We have reached a point where we can only pray that God would have mercy in His judgment on America, and that He would send an outpouring of His Spirit to help beat back the rampant evil of our times. Perhaps right now our only focus should be on evangelism before the Ark door shuts once again. Maybe it is too late for petitions and pleading with Congress to do things right.  Maybe our focus should be eternal, not earthly.  But once an individual or a nation gives up, the slide can be at rapid pace and no one wants to see that. The Bible doesn't tell Christians to be "salt and light" just up to a certain point in history and then quit!

Thus I would exhort you to press on and speak up for righteousness, for "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people" (Proverbs 14:34).

For articles that complement these thoughts, visit the Web categories of "Spiritual Deception" and "Prophecy Watch."

You can hear my hour on air with John McTernan here aired on May 16. It is one of the most important in several years. Visit "Radio Archives."  For podcasting info, go here. Hear May 23 programming with Chuck Missler and Jerry Robinson on the economy, also posted to "Radio Archives."

[by permission]

MEMORIAL DAY - 2008, 2009 - video

"We are a Constitutional Republic." - Aaron Russo

Democracy was created by Terrorists... The word democracy should be eliminated from the American dialogue. Democracy is for slaves to make them believe they are free and if you are a slave, keep using it!

video - 4:29 / courtesy: RP4409 - May 25, 2009

-------30-------
Here we are, a year after Dr. Chuck Baldwin spoke about U.S. military issues during the 2008 presidential campaign, having voted into office the least qualified man to be president since the last president. The American voter is really an uninformed, stupid, unqualified-to-be-an-American schmuck. Shame on you if you voted for either of our two criminal, treasonous parties. Our once great Nation is headed for the dirt pile of demonic destruction for the horrible choices we have made. Abortion. Sodomy. Drug addiction. Laziness. Godlessness. We will be judged accordingly, if we are not already being so judged.

On to Memorial Day, 2009. My son once considered joining the Army. I said, "I will not stop you, nor try to dissuade you. But if you join the military, you will be giving your life to those who mock both God and the Constitution." He didn't sign up. Millions of others in our past did. They gave their lives so we could be free. Instead, we have chosen to lead our country straight into the depths of Hell. I am angry. I will stay angry. I despise those who would infringe upon my freedom. If you are one of those, you are my enemy. May God have mercy on your soul, because I won't. That is no physical threat; it is a political and spiritual promise.

Fly your flag, Monday, May 25, 2009. Remember our Fallen Ones. Pray for our Living Ones.

Thus says the LORD: Cursed is the man who trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm, and whose heart departs from the LORD. – Jeremiah 17:5

Or at another moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it; if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it. - Jeremiah 18:9,10

---

Dr. Chuck Baldwin on Military Issues - May, 2008 [He sounds like Dr. Ron Paul. - ed.]


YouTube video (7:33)

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's columns here. Dr. Baldwin was the 2008 Constitution Party candidate for President of the United States.

-------30-------
Is this God's Final Warning to America? - By Jan Markell - America is at a crossroads. Many are asking if she can be saved, or has God abandoned America? What a pitiful conclusion, if so, for a nation that has been a beacon of hope for the oppressed of the world. How often has America banded to fight off aggression or traveled to the ends of the earth to aid the less fortunate? How many missionaries has she provided to the world saving an untold number of lost souls? ...

-------30-------
Stand up and Fight – the Time is Now - By Janet Porter - Every day we lose more of our lives, our liberties and our property. At what point do we stand up and fight? ... Every week there is another hostile takeover of a bank and a business. CEOs fired, auto-company budgets cut while Obama adds trillions in debt to the budget for the rest of us. A "cap and tax" limit on what we can do while arbitrarily taxing us at the same time. They are even mandating what kind of cars we can drive. Obama's power grab is devouring everything in his path. ... Are we going to sit back until Newsweek's cover reads "We are all Communists Now"? ...

-------30-------
Vision America President Says Sotomayor Nomination Should be a 'Teaching Moment' for Americans

WASHINGTON, May 26, 2009 /Christian Newswire/ -- Vision America President Dr. Rick Scarborough said President Obama's nomination of 2nd. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court "should be a teaching moment for the American people on the dangers of a runaway judiciary."

Scarborough: "Judge Sotomayor is exactly what Obama promised us in a Supreme Court nominee -- someone whose rulings will be based not on the Constitution but on misguided liberal 'empathy' (Obama's very word). From her record and stated views, we can expect Sotomayor not to 'interpret the Constitution,' but to inject her personal agenda into the Constitution."

At a 2005 forum at the Duke University Law School, Sotomayor said the courts -- not Congress -- should make "policy" -- meaning judges should become legislators, every time they sit.

Scarborough warned: "At age 54, Sotomayor could be a member of the United States Supreme Court for the next 20 years -- or longer. As a dedicated liberal, we know her views on abortion, gay marriage and reverse-discrimination -- whether or not she's ruled directly on these issues."

"That much power simply can't be bestowed by a compliant Senate," Scarborough observed. "This nomination must be stopped dead in its tracks. Sonia Sotomayor isn't a 'centrist,' she's a disaster at every level."

For more information on Vision America, go to www.visionamerica.us. To schedule an interview with Dr. Rick Scarborough, contact Catherine Rouse at 936-560-3900 or Catherine@visionamerica.us.