Have you ever heard that a dog “knows” when an earthquake is about to hit?
Have you ever heard that a dog can “sense” when a tornado is stirring up, even 20 miles away?
Do you remember hearing that before the December tsunami struck Southeast Asia, dogs started running frantically away from the seashore, at breakneck speed?
Do you know that dogs can detect cancer and other serious illnesses and danger of fire?
Somehow they always know when they can ‘go for a ride’ before you even ask and how do those dogs and cats get home from hundreds of miles away?
I’m a firm believer that animals - and especially dogs - have keen insights into the Truth.
And you can’t tell me that dogs can’t sense a potentially terrible disaster well in advance.
Simply said, a dog just KNOWS when something isn’t right .. . when impending doom is upon us . . they’ll always try to warn us…. !
Obama backs funding for religious charities Democrat making bid for conservative votes BY JENNIFER LOVEN The Associated Press
ZANESVILLE, Ohio — Taking a page from President Bush, Democrat Barack Obama said Tuesday he wants to expand White House efforts to steer social service dollars to religious groups, risking protests in his own party with his latest aggressive reach for voters who usually vote Republican. Obama contended he is merely stating long-held positions — surprising to some, he said, after a primary campaign in which he was “tagged as being on the left.” In recent days, with the Democratic nomination in hand and the general election battle with Republican John McCain ahead, Obama has been sounding centrist themes with comments on guns, government surveillance and capital punishment. He’s even quoted Ronald Reagan. On Tuesday, touring Presbyterian Church-based social services facility, the Democratic senator said he would get religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty efforts if elected. “We need an all-hands-on-deck approach,” he said at Eastside Community Ministry. The event was part of a series leading into Friday’s Fourth of July holiday aimed at reassuring skeptical voters and shifting away from being stamped as part of the Democratic Party’s most liberal wing. He said the connection of religion and public service was nothing new in his personal life. Obama showed he was comfortable using the kind of language that is familiar in evangelical churches and Bible studies by calling his faith “a personal commitment to Christ.” He said that his time as a community organizer in decimated Chicago neighborhoods, supported in part by a Catholic group, brought him to a deeper faith and also convinced him that faith is useless without works. “While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I went out and did the Lord’s work,” he declared. His talk on faith in the battleground state of Ohio came a day after a speech on patriotism in Missouri, another November election battleground. Wednesday, he travels to Colorado Springs, Colo., a hub of conservative Christian organizations, for a speech focused on service. With 80 percent of Americans saying they identify themselves with some religion, Obama’s campaign has struggled with the topic. Comments critical of America by Obama’s longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, caused a firestorm during the primaries and brought Obama’s brand of faith under scrutiny because of Wright’s adherence to black liberation theology. Obama also has battled false but persistent rumors that he is a Muslim; they have been kept alive on the Internet despite his repeated talk about his longtime devotion to Christianity. Conservative Christians make up about a quarter of the electorate, and they helped put Bush in office twice. Many still are likely to oppose the Democratic nominee because of his support for abortion rights, gay rights and other issues. An AP-Yahoo News poll in June found that people who attend church at least once a week support Republican McCain over Obama, 49 percent to 37 percent. Those who attend church less often tend to favor Obama. White evangelical Christians who attend church weekly favor McCain by huge margins. Still, the Obama camp notes that some evangelicals feel passionately about aggressive environmental stewardship, an issue more commonly associated with Democrats. Others find appeal in Obama’s message about ending messy political divisions. Obama recently won the endorsement of the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, leader of a Methodist megachurch in Houston who is very close to Bush. McCain is a mostly reliable conservative vote, but he isn’t as passionate or vocal about religious conservatives as some would like. He also famously upbraided some Christian evangelical leaders as “agents of intolerance” in his first presidential campaign. He has sought to make amends since then and is continuing his outreach efforts. He met with world-renowned evangelist Billy Graham last weekend. Obama’s high-profile embrace of a key theme of Bush’s time in offi ce — the “faith-based initiative” — is just the latest example of him trying to show his centrist side. Last week, he quoted Reagan, saying “we have to trust but verify” after Bush lifted trade sanctions against North Korea and moved to remove the country from the U.S. terrorism list. JAE C. HONG/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Sen. Barack Obama poses for a photo with a group of children in a youth program while touring the Eastside Community Ministry in Zanesville, Ohio, on Tuesday.
The Wars of Religion Return by Patrick J. Buchanan (more by this author) Posted 07/01/2008 ET
Last week's clash between Dr. James Dobson and Barack Obama is but the latest skirmish in a war that dates back to the time of Christ. At issue: What is Christian truth? Does the true Christian put social peace ahead of his duty to make God's Law man's law?
In a speech in June 2006, Obama, citing the Book of Leviticus, which declares homosexuality an abomination, noted that Leviticus also says the eating of shellfish is an abomination and condones slavery.
Moreover, Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is "a passage so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application."
"Folks haven't been reading their Bibles," said Obama.
"Even ... if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States ... whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's or with Al Sharpton's?"
Barack was saying that, since Christians disagree deeply over what is biblical truth, why fight? Let us "try to translate some of our concerns in a universal language so that we can have an open and vigorous debate rather than have religion divide us."
In Catholicism, this is the heresy of indifferentism, which holds that one religion is just as good as another and all religions can be a path to salvation. The Pew poll out last week reveals that 82 percent of Protestants believe there are multiple paths to salvation, as do 79 percent of Catholics and 57 percent of evangelicals.
A striking development. For did not Christ say, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"?
Dr. Dobson is having none of it. Tuesday, he accused Obama of "deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology."
"(H)e is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter," said Dobson. "Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the life of tiny babies?"
"What he (Obama) is saying here is that unless everyone agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe."
Dobson has no small point. For in his litany of moral heroes, Barack himself selected no "can't-we-all-just-get-along?" Christians.
Indeed, Obama celebrates the Underground Railroad and the abolitionists who, to end slavery, took us over the brink into Civil War. He invokes the defiant marchers of Selma Bridge and Dr. King, who chose confrontation and tore the nation asunder rather than see segregation endure.
Obama, however, is now preaching a kumbaya Christianity where leaders who believe abortion is the killing of the innocent unborn are to set their convictions and cause aside in the name of ecumenical amity.
It is Dobson who, in his intolerance of perceived evil, seems in the tradition of the abolitionists, and Barack who appears more like the milquetoast believers of whom Christ said he would spit them out of his mouth because they were neither hot nor cold and whom Dante consigned to the deepest reaches of hell.
Does social peace require the toleration of manifest evil?
In the Roman Empire before Constantine, Christians accepted martyrdom rather than burn incense to Caesar. Thomas More went to his death rather than assent to the divorce of the Henry VIII, declaring, "I am the King's good servant, but God's first."
A disciple of Gandhi, Dr. King is celebrated as a champion of civil disobedience against the injustice of segregation. What would Obama say to massive civil disobedience by those who believe the killing of 50 million unborn children since Roe v. Wade is a greater evil than segregating folks by race in public accommodations?
Would an Obama, who hails the abolitionists and Dr. King, condemn them as divisive? Was not that the charge thrown up at Dr. King?
The divide between Dobson and Barack is mirrored among many who profess the Christian faith. It split the Baptists. It is splitting the Episcopalians. A traditionalist minority has severed communion over female bishops and homosexual marriages.
Barack has a "fruitcake interpretation" of the Constitution if he thinks it requires us to give up fighting for justice because it may be divisive, says Dobson. Here, too, he has a point.
The unbridgeable divide between the two portends a troubled future. Can Americans ever come together if we are divided in our deepest beliefs about morality and truth, where one side believes gay marriage is moral progress, the other holds it a moral outrage; where one side views abortion to be a mighty advance for women's freedom, the other sees it as legalization of mass slaughter of unborn babies?
There can be no peaceful coexistence in a cultural war because it is at root a religious war. Far into the future, Americans seem fated to face each other again and again "at some disputed barricade."
Barack was saying that, since Christians disagree deeply over what is biblical truth, why fight? Let us "try to translate some of our concerns in a universal language so that we can have an open and vigorous debate rather than have religion divide us."
Here it is folks..... 'ONE WORLD RELIGION'. That is how they (whoever) will sell the concept. Like I said before, 'go along to get along'.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Presidential nominee Barack Obama joins the list of several other high-profile Democratic Party members who received highly favorable home loans.
Obama, D-Ill., reportedly purchased a $1.65 million mansion in Chicago through a “super, super jumbo” loan he received from Northern Trust Bank in Illinois, the Washington Post reports.
The portion of the money financed through the lender ($1.32 million) was offered to the Obamas at an unusually low discount interest rate locked in at 5.625 percent over the life of the 30-year fixed-rate loan, which was below the average of what a typical Chicagoan pursuing a similar low loan rate received at the time.
For his part, Obama and his camp are defending the lower rate as lender competition for business. A spokesman for the camp says, “The Obamas have since had as much as $3 million invested through Northern Trust."
Obama joins Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., on the list of high-profile public figures who received “VIP” loans that some now are scrutinizing as alleged trade-offs for political favors.
According to a report released last month by Condé Nast, Dodd received highly favorable loans under the designation, "Friend of Angelo," a reference to embattled Countrywide Financial Corp. head Angelo Mozilo.
Dodd, who chairs the Senate Banking Committee, received loans from Countrywide that reportedly saved him tens of thousands of dollars.
Conrad also has been named as a recipient of special-consideration loans from the beleaguered lender.
Countrywide is the same bank involved in the loan scandal that caused Obama's vice presidential Vetting Team Chief James Johnson to resign amid criticism over his personal loan deals with the lender.
Other Democratic Party participants involved in questionable "VIP” home loans include former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson, former Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala, and former U.N. ambassador and assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke, Condé Nast reports.
Obama's rival for the White House, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has also fallen under home loan scrutiny for an embarrassing report Newsweek recently published revealing that the McCains failed to pay taxes on their beach-front condo in La Jolla, Calif., the last four years and, for a time, were in default.
The McCains, Newsweek reports, paid the last of the taxes owed on the property on June 27, shortly after the story broke.
Let's go back to buying the pottery barn chairs in numbers and with cash......if one can do that there is a giant discount....if one can only afford one or two chairs at a time and/or uses credit----too bad.....so who can actually afford them????----I guess only our legislators/leaders.......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Subject: Obama, By Bill Brown on Billy Graham team
A bit scary…
For everyone's information, regardless of your party Obama, By Bill Brown on Billy Graham Team
Bill Brown is a highly respected retired member of the Billy Graham team. So, I take his assessment of Obama very seriously and for that reason accept his challenge to pass this on. I share his concern about the 'rock star' image Obama has, and I watch with growing concern at the celebrity status the media has foisted upon him. I hope this email informs you in a wise way. ________________________________ The Obama Tidal Wave
We are witnessing a political phenomenon with Barack Obama of rare magnitude. His speeches have inspired millions and yet most of his followers have no idea of what he stands - for except platitudes of 'Change' or that he says he will be a 'Uniter'.
The power of speech from a charismatic person truly can be a powerful thing. Certainly Billy Graham had charisma and both his manner of speech and particularly the content changed millions. On the extreme other hand, the charisma of Adolph Hitler inspired millions and the results were catastrophic.
Barack Obama certainly is no Hitler or a Billy Graham, but for the many Americans out there feeling just like a surfer, ecstatic and euphoric while riding a tidal wave, the real story is what happens when the wave hits shore.
Just Some of What Defines Barack Obama:
Supports affirmative action in Colleges and Government. In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.. Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as minimum wage affair. Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in college. He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung Il, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would be to have a conference with all Muslim nations. Opposed the Patriot Act. First bill he signed that was passed was campaign finance reform. Voted No on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. Supports universal health-care. Voted yes on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees. Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants. Voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform. Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. Wants to make the minimum wage a 'living wage'. Voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes. Is a big believer in the separation of church and state. Opposed to any efforts to privatize Social Security, and instead supports increasing the amount of tax paid. He voted No on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax. He voted No on repealing the 'Death' Tax. He wants to raise the Capital Gains Tax. Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded. He is ranked as the most liberal Senator in the Senate today - and that takes some doing.
If your political choices are consistent with Barack Obama's and you think that his positions will bring America together or make it a better place, then you will probably enjoy the ride and will not forward this Email.
If you are like most Americans who, after examining what he stands for, are truly not in line with his record, it would be prudent to get off the wave or better yet, never get on, before it comes on shore and undermines the very foundations of this great Country.
We have limited time to save America or the Supreme Court as we know it.
Inaction is action. If you agree this is important, pass it on. The mainstream media will not do it for you!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
"Barack Obama is the Platonic philosopher king we’ve been looking for for the past 2,400 years" Barack Obama is the Platonic philosopher king we’ve been looking for for the past 2,400 years.
Plato argued that without a philosopher king there could be neither happiness (V, 473e, VI, 500d-3) nor personal perfection (VI, 499a-b). Therefore, none of us will attain the four excellences required for true unity — each of our souls will remain internally divided, broken (IV, 441c-d, 443c-e) — until the philosopher king arrives.
Thus, Plato wrote:
[W]e have to fix our souls – our souls are broken in this [city-state]. . . . . . . [The philosopher king is] the only person in this race who has a chance at healing this [city-state].
Or was that Michelle Obama?
Oh. It was Mrs. Obama. Either way, it works. Mr. Obama will fulfill the Platonic prophecies.
But he’ll do even more. He won’t just heal our city-states and souls. He won’t just bring the Heavenly Kingdom — dreamt of in both Platonism and Christianity — to earth. He will heal the earth itself.
And that, my friends, is taking the philosopher king to the next level. Only a Christian Platonism could predict what Obama will do.
We might say, then, that Obama is not only post-partisan and post-racial, but post-Platonist. The context in which he lives, moves, and has his being may have been first designed in the 300’s B.C.; but it was radically re-designed in the First Century, A.D.
Micah Tillman, July 10, 2008. Tillman is a lecturer in philosophy at The Catholic University of America.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Charles Krauthammer Maliki’s blessing good for Obama, bad for U.S. Charles Krauthammer is a nationally syndicated columnist.
In a stunning upset, Barack Obama this week won the Iraq primary. When Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki not once but several times expressed support for a U.S. troop withdrawal on a timetable that accorded roughly with Obama’s 16-month proposal, he not only legitimized the plan. He relieved Obama of a major political liability by blunting the charge that, in order to appease the MoveOn left, Obama was willing to jeopardize the astonishing success of the surge and risk losing a war that is finally being won. Maliki’s endorsement left the McCain campaign and the Bush administration deeply discomfited. They underestimated Maliki’s sophistication and cunning. What is Maliki thinking? Clearly, he believes that the Iraq War is won. Al-Qaida is defeated, the Sunni insurgency is in abeyance, the Shiite extremists are scattered and marginalized. There will, of course, be some continued level of violence, recurring challenges to the authority of the central government and perhaps even mini-Tet offensives by both Shiite and Sunni terrorists trying to demoralize U.S. and Iraqi public opinion in the run-up to their respective elections. But in Maliki’s view, the strategic threats to the unity of the state and to the viability of the new democratic government are over. So Maliki is looking ahead, beyond the withdrawal of major U.S. combat forces, and toward the next stage: the long-term relationship between America and Iraq. With whom does he prefer to negotiate the status-of-forces agreement that will not be concluded during the Bush administration? Obama or McCain? Obama, reflecting the mainstream Democratic view, simply wants to get out of Iraq as soon as possible. Two years ago, it was because the war was lost. Now, we are told, it is to save Afghanistan. The reasons change, but the conclusion is always the same. Out of Iraq. Banish the very memory. Leave as small and insignificant a residual force as possible. And no long-term bases. McCain, like George Bush, envisions the U.S. seizing the fruits of victory of a bloody and costly war by establishing an extensive strategic relationship that would not only make the new Iraq a strong ally in the war on terror but would also provide the U.S. with the infrastructure and freedom of action to project American power regionally, as do U.S. forces in Germany, Japan and South Korea. For example, we might want to retain an air base to deter Iran, protect regional allies and relieve our naval forces, which today carry much of the burden of protecting the Gulf, thus allowing redeployment elsewhere. Any Iraqi leader would prefer a more pliant American negotiator because all countries — we’ve seen this in Germany, Japan and South Korea — want to maximize their own sovereign freedom of action while still retaining American protection. It is no mystery who would be the more pliant U.S. negotiator. The Democrats have long been protesting the Bush administration’s hard bargaining for strategic assets in postwar Iraq. Maliki knows the Democrats are so sick of this war, so politically and psychologically committed to its liquidation, so intent on doing nothing to vindicate “Bush’s war,” that they simply want out with the least continued American involvement. Which is why Maliki gave Obama that royal reception, complete with the embrace of his heretofore problematic withdrawal timetable. Obama was likely to be president anyway. He is likelier now still. Moreover, he not only agrees with Maliki on minimizing the U.S. role in postwar Iraq. He now owes him. That’s why Maliki voted for Obama, casting the earliest and most ostentatious absentee ballot of this presidential election.
Logged
