The laughable farce-of-an-award-committee that brought us the debacle of Al Gore, alarmist hypocrite extraordinaire, as a Nobel Prize winner… has set a bold, new standard of incompetence and political pandering. They awarded Barack Obama the Nobel Peace prize!? But for what?! He’s a young, first-term leader who has only served nine months and has spent those nine months losing support in the wake of his controversial, debt-laden government bailouts and his otherwise inaction and lack of change (or change for the worse, if you will).

The piece de resistance for me is the fact that the nomination cutoff for the Nobel was just 12 days after Obama took office!?! Are you frakkin’ kidding me?

From the Times Online UK:

The award of this year’s Nobel peace prize to President Obama will be met with widespread incredulity, consternation in many capitals and probably deep embarrassment by the President himself.

Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.

Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.

[full article]

From Yahoo: He won, but for what?

From Reuters: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize to mixed reviews

Another one from Reuters: Obama Peace Prize win has some Americans asking why?

You’ve heard me decry this idiocy before… and you’ll hear it again and again. I can’t stand the lack of rational thought that permeates nearly every half-arsed notion coming from the religious left (who are the perverted people-of-faith of the political left… same smell, different clothes). Taking money from citizens in order to turn around and “solve” societal problems in the name of “social justice” (read secular humanism) is about as far from Christ-following as prime rib is from motor oil.

I know Christians… even pastors… who have written off politics as a vehicle for positive, Scriptural change. They criticize previous generations of Christians who put their trust in certain leaders… and they have retreated into their own circles of influence at their community level (or even into their own small exclusive church circles – although they won’t admit that). How cute that the same emerging voices critical of previous churches who didn’t “engage the culture” are actually doing the same thing themselves. And how cute that they would actually CALL others to do the same with politics… although what they are really doing is trying to dissuade traditionally GOP-supporting Christians from supporting conservative candidates while supporting left-leaning pols out the other side of their mouth.

So… about politics… guess what boys and girls — politics is part of our culture. So guess what? We are called to be engaged in politics.

I’m not saying don’t be involved in your tighter circles of influence (I oculd say community but it’s been such a tortured, tired word lately devoid of real meaning). I’m not saying put your faith in political leaders rather than Jesus. What I’m saying is obey your calling to be engaged… and participate in the political process because that it obedient and ultimately effects us, our children, our culture and our ministries we support. This is common sense that most children know so I shouldn’t have to say it again. Even if it means that all you’re doing is being educated on the major political issues, reading your Bible (both red AND BLACK letters) to see where God stands on the issues, and then voting appropriately based on Scripture (which means you didn’t vote for Obama) then do that. At the VERY LEAST do that… because as a Christian it is your duty. It could be as simple as 1st Peter’s call to respect government, but there’s plenty of Scriptural support for intelligent political involvement as part of a Christ-followers holistic engagement in culture.

Apologetics.com is a great, great site that if I had my way I would force people to listen to (like an Obama speech to schoolchildren). They just had a wonderful podcast on this topic: Apologetics.com – Christianity, the Church, and Government

Why is it that many Christians who decry Christian political involvement (read Tony Campolo types) because power and politics are tools of Satan, then go on to argue for government solutions to global warming and health care? Do they really want Satan and his tools cooling our planet and running our health care? Perhaps a more balanced approach is needed.

Should Christians be involved in government? Isn’t Christ our hope not politics? Is any influence of Christian thought on the state a violation of the separation of church and state? In this episode of Apologetics.com radio, Dean Donald McConnell of Trinity Law School, Doug Eaton, and Lane Chaplin discuss several questions that pertain to the Christian’s role in government and the governments role in Christianity.

A young Barack Obama

They’ll Let Anybody Vote

I remember being at a party a few months before the election. I was in a side conversation when politics was brought up (not by me, I swear!). An early-twenty-something schoolteacher voiced his enthusiastic support for Obama. To this point the only topic this fellow seemed knowledgeable in was hard liquor (seriously — and indeed this party of mostly church-goers talked more about hard liquor than any other topic… astounding… but I digress).

So, intrigued, I prodded him for a few details of why he supported Obama. His faced turned uncomfortable, but he managed to mumble something about “feeling” Obama was a good choice and would “bring change”. Unsatisfied, I asked for which of Obama’s proposed changes he favored the most. Astoundingly (or not so), this schoolteacher — this young “learned” instructor of my community’s children — could not name even ONE THING Obama professed to change.

His ignorance is not without healthy company…

Electric Justice

A man kept having his McCain signs stolen… so he set up a camera and electrified the sign. [article link] Turns out a local neighborhood liberal had coerced his young son into crime… replacing local McCain signs with Obama signs. But this time he got “caught”.

This is a wonderful, feel-good story. It’s beautiful… really. This man, an electrical engineer, used his skill to electrify his property and brought joy to the world. Joy in the form of pure, justice-honey. Mmmm. Poetry… a balancing of the universe… like the dawn’s light pouring over green hills.

She Said What?!

So What Does Change Really Mean?

Change Means Socialism

Mugshots for Change

Let me leave you with a collection of Obama supporter mugshots? Indeed, this is the kind of thing you’d probably never be able get from a conservative candidate. Behold the faces of change!

Some Obama supporters

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4 – Republican, Constitution, Libertarian, American, Populist, Conservative (NY), Right-to-Life (NY), and Independence (NY) Parties

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5 – Democratic, Green, Liberal (NY), Working Families, Socialist Workers, Labor, and Communist Parties

Every vote should count, so please follow the above guide very closely, and best of luck to your candidates.

NOTE: No educated voter was disenfranchised by this public service announcement, and no animals were harmed in the writing of this post except for polar bears and kittens.

The AP had a great article taking a critical look at this steaming pile of Obama-vanity [full article]. An excerpt:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was less than upfront in his half-hour commercial Wednesday night about the costs of his programs and the crushing budget pressures he would face in office.

Obama’s assertion that “I’ve offered spending cuts above and beyond” the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by “eliminating programs that don’t work” masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are—beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

Marxism aside… Obama, a devout Muslim Black-Liberation-Christian, apparently made quite an impression with al-Qaeda who issued a public prayer of support hoping for a big GOP defeat:

O God, humiliate Bush and his party, O Lord of the Worlds, degrade and defy him.

~al-Qaeda web Internet video posting – reported by Reuters

Unfortunately for al-Qaeda, the prayer (as with all their prayers) went directly to Satan who, already supporting Obama, merely returned to his TiVo to finish watching his favorite daily show “Today’s 115,000 Abortions – Uncensored!”

Anyways… if you made the mistake like I did and found yourself catching even a small glimpse of Obama’s socialist vision last night, you can purge the darkness from your mind with a little light (in lieu of chemical inebriation). Here’s a few short video gems to clear things up faster than mental prunes.

Score a theological slam-dunk to the Catholics… who show that they know “what’s more important” better than some of their Protestant brethren:

And another video. Ahhh… straight talk from a soldier who was on the ground (rather than from artsy, hippie, student-freaks who think they all-of-a-sudden know so much about war). This was YouTube’s number one political video of this election (by viewings, I guess):

Growing up in a small town myself I relate to this letter. I empathize with the author’s feelings and frustrations. I, too, sorta’ shake my head and crinkle my nose at some of the screwy things I hear politicians say about “normal folk”.

Dear Barack Obama:

I grew to like you over the last year.

I’ve always thought of you as dangerously naive at best. Eloquent, gifted, genuine, yes. But dangerously naive at best.

I couldn’t vote for you — but not because of your funny name or your lunatic pastor. I couldn’t vote for you because you say we should raise taxes (even on the rich, who I’m convinced already pay too much), and because you say we should abandon Iraq (which I’m convinced would be surrendering a war we must win), and because you don’t respect the Second Amendment (which I’m convinced should disqualify any politician from any office).

Still, I’ve liked your message of unity and your ability to inspire. And, since your rise I’ve hunted, quite frantically, for young conservative leaders with your talent. (To my relief, I found Bobby Jindal.)

And I’ve long said if you beat Hillary Clinton, you will have done your country a tremendous service. But anymore I’m having a harder and harder time rooting for you.

First came your wife’s comment about being proud of America for the first time — conveniently, right after you started winning primaries. Then came your own words about your grandmother, who is just a “typical white person” — a racist, or at least someone with racist tendencies. (I’m a “typical white person,” I suppose, and I’m no racist. In fact, little makes me angrier than when it’s insinuated I am.)

Sometimes people say things they don’t really mean. But this is a pattern.

Last week, we heard your comments about small-town America. Someone at a San Francisco fundraiser asked you why it’s so hard for Democrats to win in rural areas. You said:

“You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them … So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them …”

Is that a minority? HEY CLETUS, GET THE GUN! (If only we had a job to go to, some time in the last 25 years …)

Here’s a thought: Maybe gun rights voters know gun control laws kill people and steal freedom.

Here’s a thought: Maybe some of us have moral objections to an immigration system that forces rule-followers to wait decades for legal status, and rewards border-violators with amnesty.

Here’s a thought: Maybe some Americans cling to their church because their pastor is a nice person, because they find love there, because there they have something they can believe in.

Here’s a thought: Maybe, just maybe, us simpletons in small towns find it harder to be bigoted than all o’ y’all cityfolk. Maybe, in small towns, where everybody knows your name — and how hard you work, if you pay your taxes, how well you treat your neighbors, how often you volunteer in the community, and whether or not you’re a good parent — people see the content of your character, so they don’t give a hoot about the color of your skin. (But I grew up in a small town where about a third of the population is of a different race than me. What do I know?)

And here’s my favorite thought of all: Maybe small-town folks are — really — capable of thinking. All on our own.

You’re wrong about why small-town Americans don’t vote for Democrats.

We don’t vote for Democrats because we’re self-reliant so we don’t like the government trying to “solve” everything for us. And because you tell your rich friends in San Francisco that we’re dumb. And because, each election, whichever one of you is running for president traipses all over the country telling us you have all the answers, that you’re the one on our side, that you understand and respect our way of life.

But each time, a little bit here and there slips out — and by the end of the campaign, we can tell what you think about us. And we manage to learn who you really are.

And we see you’re just a horse’s ass.

Will Manly was a reporter for The Hays Daily News and The Stir.

So the Dutch politician Geert Wilders demonstrates some sac – and a little thing called free speech – by releasing a short-film titled Fitna, which means “division among peoples”. The film is a montage. It includes verses from the Qur’an (Koran, Currahn, Cor-anne, Quho’ron, Koh-ron’n???) that could be taken out of context to incite violence against non-Muslims. Interspersed with these verses are scenes from the media that you’d have to be a cave troll to have missed… cowardly acts of Islamist terrorism (September 11 attacks, Madrid train bombings, etc.)… Muslim children calling Jews “pigs”… Muslim clerics calling for death to Jews and Westerners… you get the idea – just the usual. [please don't confuse the clerics with Barack Obama's pastor... although they're close]

So I watched the film. The premise – that the Qur’an is being used (to some extent) in fueling hatred and violence in the name of Islam – seemed to be well demonstrated (proven?). Indeed, the point seems grossly obvious to anyone with a television. Sadly the point is in dispute. Violently in dispute. Violently in dispute?! Isn’t that a double-negative or a oxy-contradiction? Fortunately I didn’t need the film to see that Islam isn’t always very… umm… “peaceful”? And where would I get that idea?

Remember the cartoons? Remember the Pope’s remarks? This recent brouhaha over Fitna has firmly established a grave pattern… that the very right to free speech can be removed – under threat from an extremist mob – when you have pansies in leadership.

From a Reuters article:

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Friday condemned as “offensively anti-Islamic” a Dutch lawmaker’s film that accuses the Koran of inciting violence.

Ban acknowledged efforts by the government of the Netherlands to stop the broadcast of the film, which was launched by Islam critic Geert Wilders over the Internet, and appealed for calm to those “understandably offended by it.”

“There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is not at stake here.”

Did you read that? The UN Figurehead says that “The right of free expression is not at stake here”!? That there is no justification for this? How about no justification for answering an insult with violence? How about no justification for responding to a cartoon with killings? You see… the UN Figurehead knows that there are a small number of Muslims who are wild extremist animals – unfortunately a small percentage of a billion people is still A LOT OF PEOPLE! So instead of acknowledging the problem he jumps down the throat of the guy revealing the problem. Isn’t that just like today’s world leadership?

From a Breitbart article:

An Internet site said Saturday it had removed anti-Islam film “Fitna” by far-right Dutch MP Geert Wilders after receiving threats to its staff amid protests by Muslim nations and the UN chief.

The Britain-based Liveleak.com said it pulled down the video, which can still be seen on other websites, including youtube.com. The film was posted to the Internet on Thursday.

“Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature, and some ill informed reports from certain corners of the British media that could directly lead to the harm of some of our staff, Liveleak.com has been left with no other choice but to remove ‘Fitna’ from our servers,” the site said in a statement.

“This is a sad day for freedom of speech on the net but we have to place the safety and well being of our staff above all else,” the online statement said.

Wilders said it was “terrible that these threats deal a serious blow to freedom of expression,” but he told Dutch news agency ANP that he understood the decision to withdraw the short film.

So here’s the ploy… threaten the providers of the medium, and scare them into silence. Fortunately, in this case, LiveLeak.com ended up putting the video back up – I give them points for that. And really, this is what it takes. It takes standing up to the threats and the violence. It takes standing strong and saying that being offended is okay… you’ll survive.

I would be remiss here not to mention that although there are a small percentage of Muslims who are Satan incarnate, there are also a small percentage who are disgusted by the sickening and irrational animal displays of the former group. These are the Free Muslims, and you should read more about them.

And actually, another Muslim group that watches extremists – Islam Watch – recently uncovered some extremism that was just covered here in this FoxNews article:

A report posted on Islam Watch, a site run by Muslims who oppose intolerant teachings and hatred for unbelievers, exposes a prominent Islamic cleric and lawyer who support extreme punishment for non-Muslims — including killing and rape.

A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.

“Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet,” the Imam says, according to the report. “If you don’t believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain.”

The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam’s position, saying that all Muslims are innocent.

Click here to watch the interview with Islamic lawyer Anjem Choudary.

“You are innocent if you are a Muslim,” Choudary tells the BBC. “Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God.”

Choudary said he would not condemn a Muslim for any action.

Anyways… without further prattle… here’s the Fitna short-film (courtesy of LiveLink courtesy of Google Video):

OLD VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

MODERN VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, “It’s Not Easy Being Green.”

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, “We shall overcome.” Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper’s sake.

Barack Obama exclaims in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and he calls for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary Clinton gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.

The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around him because he doesn’t maintain it. The ant has disappeared in the snow. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be very, very careful how you vote!