Well, yesterday Obama — facing no pressure or need to change anything at all — quite recklessly turned over the strategic initiative (operational, too, for that matter) to the other guys.
Little countries can now act, with chemical or biological agents, sure in the knowledge that however we respond, we will respond with less. The other guy now gets to determine how much punishment he is willing to take. Before yesterday, we determined how much punishment we were willing to dish out (plenty).
President Johnson (and to a lesser extent, Nixon) made the same mistake in dealing with North Vietnam. “Escalation,” tit-for-tat, let Hanoi dictate the pace of the war, while simultaneously learning how to deal with, and obviate, our military might. Result: We lost the initiative and eventually the war. Sucky, that.
The Breitbart video very effectively makes the case that Waters is guilty of hypocrisy. Her behavior at the rally is at least as unattractive as her description of the tea partiers’s; conduct. On the other hand, so what? When has a politician ever complained about the other side's incivility without being guilty of hypocrisy?
But a look further back into Waters’s history reveals her hypocrisy to be far worse than is typical. The last time America experienced political mob violence–the Los Angeles riots of 1992–Waters was there offering excuses and justifications.
The L.A. riots began on April 29, 1992, after a jury returned a not-guilty verdict in the trial of four Los Angeles policemen charged in connection with the videotaped beating of Rodney King. By the time the riots wound down, six days later, 53 people had been killed and thousands injured.
Maxine Waters was a freshman representative from California’s 29th Congressional District (now the 35th), which covers areas of southern Los Angeles where the rioting was centered. Her own district office was burned to the ground. She quickly emerged as an advocate on behalf of the rioters.
“I accept the responsibility of asking people not to endanger their lives,” the Associated Press quoted her as saying on April 30. “I’m not asking people not to be angry. . . . I have a right to be angry.”
Looks like Maxine Water‘s past is coming back to haunt her. I guess that will teach her to open her mouth, when in all honesty, she should keep it shut.
But then again, does not that describe liberals in general? I mean, are they not all like that? Want others to conform to a high standard; all the while not living up to it themselves?
They’ve been doing it for years. This proves that.
Jeeez… I would have gotten the guy some hosting for a blog, if all he wanted to do is vent. 🙄
A 63-year-old Yakima County man has been charged with threatening to kill U.S. Sen. Patty Murray over her support of the health-care overhaul.
The FBI and local police arrested Charles Alan Wilson at his Selah home early Tuesday. He later made an initial appearance in federal court in Yakima on one count of threatening a federal official. He was appointed a public defender and ordered to be kept in custody pending a detention hearing Friday.
According to the charges, staffers in Murray’s office in the Jackson Federal Building in downtown Seattle had become concerned over phone calls by an unknown man in recent months. The calls came from a blocked number and often were made at night or on weekends.
Usually, according to a staffer, the calls were merely vulgar and harassing.
But on March 22, “the caller began to make overt threats to kill and/or injure Senator Murray,” according to the complaint signed by FBI Agent Carolyn Woodbury.
In that call, a man the FBI says it has identified as Wilson stated, “I hope you realize there’s a target on your back now … Kill the [expletive] senator! I’ll donate the lead.”
Again, the old man was most likely upset. But, he did break the law. As I have written on here before, it is one thing to get on a blog like mine, write about politics; it is another to start phoning in death threats. That is, I am afraid, just plain stupid. Hopefully this old man learns his lesson. He might have also been a little disturbed as well. Maybe he needed a little help. Either way, he will get that help or learn his lesson, one way or another.
Again, what the guy did was stupid, 50 years ago, you would have gotten away with something like that. But in this day and age of Caller ID and high tech phones. There’s no getting away with this sort of thing anymore. Besides all that; this woman is just one person. It is not like she was solely responsibility for the passage of the bill.
Again, while I feel for the old guy; what he did was wrong.
April 6, 2010 (Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org) –
The following is excerpted from the book THE PENTECOSTAL CHARISMATIC MOVEMENTS by David Cloud. This book begins with the author’s own experience with the Pentecostal movement. The next section deals with the history of the Pentecostal movement, beginning with a survey of miraculous signs from the second to the 18th centuries. We then examine the movements in the 19th century that led up to the creation of Pentecostalism and the outbreak of “tongues-speaking” at Charles Parham’s Bible school in Topeka, Kansas, in 1901, and at William Seymour’s Azusa Street Mission in Los Angeles in 1906. We examine some of the major Pentecostal denominations, the Latter Rain Covenant, the major Pentecostal healing evangelists, the Sharon Schools and the New Order of the Latter Rain, the Manifest Sons of God, the Word-Faith movement and its key leaders, the Charismatic Movement, the Roman Catholic Charismatic Renewal, the Pentecostal Prophets, the Third Wave, the Laughing Revival, and the recent Pentecostal scandals. In the last section of the book we deal with the theological errors of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movements (exalting experience over Scripture, emphasis on the miraculous, Messianic and apostolic miracles can be reproduced today, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the baptism of fire, exalting the Holy Spirit, tongues speaking, sinless perfectionism, healing in the atonement, spirit slaying, spirit drunkenness, visions of Jesus, trips to heaven, women preachers, and Charismatic ecumenism). The final section of the book answers the question: “Why are people deluded by Pentecostal-Charismatic error?” 317 pages. $14.95 – Go here to buy it.
________________________
A foundational truth about biblical tongues is that it was chiefly a sign to Israel that God was extending the gospel to all nations. Paul made this clear in his instructions to the church at Corinth:
“Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe” (1 Cor. 14:20-22).
The Corinthians were abusing the spiritual gifts and were particularly enamored with tongues. As spiritual infants (1 Cor. 3:1), they were “showing off” to one another. Paul tells them to stop being children and to be men, by understanding the true purpose of tongues. It was a fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah 28:11-12 that was directed to the Jews.
I just wanted to post something here to all my readers. I noticed that not too many Bloggers on my side of the political fence have said anything about this.
Well, once again, I will be the one to do it.
Politics is one thing, real life is another.
Losing someone to a tragedy such as this, is unimaginable. Unlike some on the left, I will NOT bring my personal politics into this. But I will say that I personally feel for this people. Mining is in my family too; sort of. My Father is from Middlesboro, Kentucky. Back when he was a young man, he drove a tri-axle dump truck down in his home town. He worked out of a strip mines down in that town. Oh, the stories he would tell, about Hazards of driving those trucks. Some of the stories were side splitting tales, some were quite scary.
Anyhow, my heart goes out to these people during their time of loss. This is where I will also deviate from my normal hard line Conservative stance, and say the following; which most likely will not do anything for my Conservative creds. Not that I quite honestly give a damn about that anyhow.
It would be a crime, if I did not mention the fact that this mine was, in fact, a non-union mine. Because of that, the safety record of this mine, was, in fact, terrible. Unions; for all their short-comings and horrible politics, are the best defense against companies who want to cut corners and allow their employees to work in unsafe conditions. I honestly believe that if the union that my Father was represented by at G.M. had not been there, my Father would have been dead ages ago. For those who are just passing through, my Father is a retired G.M. Worker and is represented by the U.A.W. The Union forces the big business owners to a very high standard of safety and if the companies do not adhere to them, they simply will not allow their employees on the job. Which I feel is a very good thing. Equipment can be replaced —- Human Lives cannot.
There are some possibly of the right, that might say my bringing this up is morbid or something silly like that. Well, too bad. As they say, all politics is local; and this my friends is a local, personal issue for me. One of the nicest things I read, was the fact that even though this mine was non-union, the President of the Union miners was sending a team of people up to the site, to offer their assistance. Because it is the human and responsible thing to do. That is what normal, sane, rational Americans do, when their fellow man is hurting. They put partisan differences aside and come together. I bet some in the world of Political Blogging could learn something from that; on both sides of the aisle.
Again, my and my family’s prayers go out to the people of MONTCOAL, W.Va. tonight.
President Obama said Monday that he was revamping American nuclear strategy to substantially narrow the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons.
But the president said in an interview that he was carving out an exception for “outliers like Iran and North Korea” that have violated or renounced the main treaty to halt nuclear proliferation.
Discussing his approach to nuclear security the day before formally releasing his new strategy, Mr. Obama described his policy as part of a broader effort to edge the world toward making nuclear weapons obsolete, and to create incentives for countries to give up any nuclear ambitions. To set an example, the new strategy renounces the development of any new nuclear weapons, overruling the initial position of his own defense secretary.
Mr. Obama’s strategy is a sharp shift from those of his predecessors and seeks to revamp the nation’s nuclear posture for a new age in which rogue states and terrorist organizations are greater threats than traditional powers like Russia and China.
It eliminates much of the ambiguity that has deliberately existed in American nuclear policy since the opening days of the cold war. For the first time, the United States is explicitly committing not to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons or launched a crippling cyberattack.
Those threats, Mr. Obama argued, could be deterred with “a series of graded options,” a combination of old and new conventional weapons. “I’m going to preserve all the tools that are necessary in order to make sure that the American people are safe and secure,” he said in the interview in the Oval Office.
As I said above, I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, the idea of America being stoked to the hilt with Nukes on a hair trigger is not my idea of a good time. On the other hand, the idea of the United States not being able to defend itself is not a very comforting thought. Because I am not a partisan blogger, I will simply say this; I believe Obama is trying to strike a balance and trying to keep all parties happy. Which is not easy, when the people you are trying to make happy are not your biggest fans. Either way, it has to be a tough order.
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests
10 minutes
__utmb
Used to distinguish new sessions and visits. This cookie is set when the GA.js javascript library is loaded and there is no existing __utmb cookie. The cookie is updated every time data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
30 minutes after last activity
__utmc
Used only with old Urchin versions of Google Analytics and not with GA.js. Was used to distinguish between new sessions and visits at the end of a session.
End of session (browser)
__utmz
Contains information about the traffic source or campaign that directed user to the website. The cookie is set when the GA.js javascript is loaded and updated when data is sent to the Google Anaytics server
6 months after last activity
__utmv
Contains custom information set by the web developer via the _setCustomVar method in Google Analytics. This cookie is updated every time new data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
2 years after last activity
__utmx
Used to determine whether a user is included in an A / B or Multivariate test.
18 months
_ga
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gali
Used by Google Analytics to determine which links on a page are being clicked
30 seconds
_ga_
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gid
ID used to identify users for 24 hours after last activity
24 hours
_gat
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests when using Google Tag Manager
1 minute
_gac_
Contains information related to marketing campaigns of the user. These are shared with Google AdWords / Google Ads when the Google Ads and Google Analytics accounts are linked together.
