Sunday, September 30, 2007

Saudi divorces wife for watching male TV host: report


OK, folks, here's our crazy news story of the day. Kind of speaks for itself, I think.

A Saudi man divorced his wife for watching alone a television programme presented by a male, an act he deemed immoral, the Al Shams newspaper reported on Saturday.

The man, whom the paper did not identify, ended his marriage on the grounds his wife was effectively alone with an unrelated man, which is forbidden under the strict Islamic law enforced in the ultra-conservative kingdom, the paper said.

Men in Saudi Arabia have the authority to divorce their wives without resort to the courts.



Saturday, September 29, 2007

Hillary Clinton meeting wanting a 'new world order' 1984

I hope someone brings this up during the 2008 election season. Hillary Clinton is a blatant proponent of world government. It's been documented in several books, and here on video, that she was a vocal supporter of the World Federalist Association, now known as Citizens For Global Solutions , an organization that strongly proposes world government.

Does American want someone like this to be president? I want to see if one reporter anywhere will ask her about this meeting, and this video.

Interestingly, the group's website has taken on a softer tone than it has in the past. But I, for one, am not fooled!! I've been to their website many times over the years. They're trying to tone down the more radical-sounding rhetoric to make them more acceptable to the mainstream. But the fact is, they are wolves in sheeps' clothing, as are so many others in the World Government movement.

CNN/DOBBS: W FULFILLS HIS DAD'S DREAM OFA NEW WORLD ORDER

Another reason why the Republicans cant be trusted any more than Democrats. At the end of the day, the elites are in charge, and their goal is a New World Order. Bush's dad wanted it , and GW Bush today is helping to bring it into being also. Too bad the American sheeple arent paying attention.

Rep. Pelosi criticizes border fence




Somehow this didn't surprise me at all.

From the article:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-09-28-pelosi-fence_N.htm

"EDINBURG, Texas (AP) — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called a plan to build fencing along parts of the Mexico border a "terrible idea" that overlooks local communities.

Pelosi made the comments during her trip to the Rio Grande Valley for the annual Hispanic Engineering, Science & Technology Week conference at the University of Texas-Pan American.

"I have been against the fence, I thought it's a bad idea even when it was just a matter of discussion," said Pelosi, D-Calif. "These are communities where you have a border going through them, they are not communities where you have a fence splitting them."

Last year, President Bush signed the Secure Fence Act requiring the construction of fencing along the 2,000-mile border. The plans call for about 370 miles of fence and 200 miles of vehicle barriers, including concrete barriers, by the end of 2008."


My thinking is: if the border is 2000 miles long, why did they pass a law that only requires 370 miles of fencing to be built?? That doesn't make any sense at all . But then again, it does. In the end, the powers that be dont really want to build a fence across our border with mexico, because the long term plan is to eventually unite with Mexico and Canada into the North American Union.

And deep down, I have a feeling that even this 370 mile fence will never get built, much less a 2000 mile fence.



Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Why is the GOP scared of black voters?



Roland Martin, who I've disagreed with on so many issues, really nailed it in a CNN.com article entitled: Why is the GOP scared of black voters?. Its in part a response to the fact that the 2008 Republicans for president brushed off a debate hosted by Tavis Smiley and airing on PBS, which was geared toward the black community. (They also brushed off one aimed at the Latino community recently; only John McCain showed up for that one) I wish each of the 2008 Republicans and their staffs would read the article, although they almost certainly wont.

Smiley himself has says about the snub: "no elected official, no one running for president, black, white or brown, male or female, Republican or Democrat, ought to be elected president in 2008, if they can avoid people of color, black folk and brown folk ... as these folks are doing along the way." Well said.

As a black conservative, I find this interesting. I think many Republicans have lost sight of a few things: Blacks may well more anti-abortion than any other racial/ethnic group in America. Blacks are least in favor of gay marriage than any other ethnic group in America. We have one of the highest rates of attendance to weekly religious services, tend to be strongly anti- illegal immigration, and to be very much in favor of reforming our failed educational system. On many social issues, many many blacks have a lot more in common with Republicans than the Democrats, and would seem to be a natural ally of the Republican party on many issues.

So why do blacks still vote 90% or more for Democrats? Its the race thing, plain and simple. For several decades, the Republicans used the racist "Southern Strategy" designed to appeal to the worst racist impulses in southern whites, not caring if it alienated blacks. (And now they're surprised that so many blacks see them as racist?!). But it seems that every time they have a chance to repair the breach, they shoot themselves in the foot. 2- examples: 1) George Bush came along and claimed to be different, a so-called "compassionate conservative" . But when blacks were offended that he was going to appear at Bob Jones University , which had a racist policy against interracial dating, he decided to go anyway, even though he knew that blacks (and many whites) found this offensive. It just furthered the perception that noting had changed, and it was just more racially insensitive politics as usual. 2).. Now these 2008 Republican candidates knew about the Tavis Smiley debate for many months, but chose to schedule other things for that date so they could claim to have a "scheduling conflict" . (Utter nonsense, of course, and totally disingenuous) . They had a chance to put forward a positive face for themselves and their party, to make a statement that they are willing to be the president of ALL the people, even of communities that might be skeptical of them... but once again they blew it.

I'm embarrassed by the remarks I see and hear being made by so many white conservatives, from message boards, to talk radio, and it makes me really understand why so many blacks have total hatred for the GOP. This garbage about not bothering to appeal to a blacks because they vote 90% Democrat anyway... well, how do you think that 90% happened in the first place?...largely by the unwillingness of the GOP to distance themselves from racist elements withing the party, and the constant pandering to such elements among conservatives (such as talk radio hosts constantly carping about blacks always looking for a "handout").

It is for this reason that, although I'm a conservative, I will never become a Republican. The stench of racism still lingers in the Republican party to this day, and the comments made on this board just typify the type of thinking that alienates so many forward thinking blacks, who might be disenchanted with the Democrats, but still feel (rightfully, perhaps) like the Dems treat them with more respect.

Maybe one day, a forward thinking Republican will make efforts to rebuild the bridges, and to find common ground with the black community. Bush seemed like he could have been that guy, but he totally shot himself in the foot with the Bob Jones University debacle, and the Katrina response. It could take a generation or more, for the rift to be healed. Its obvious that this crop of Republicans isn't that interested, or don't have the guts or the vision to try.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Censorship, Wikipedia and the North American Union




Hmmm... as of today, the Wikipedia article on the North American Union, which was deleted and locked, still remains so. Why is that? Why would the folks at Wikipedia not want this issue discussed? What are they afraid of; that we'll find out the truth too soon?

Mexican curriculum in Oregon schools stirs debate

he slow motion unification of North America marches forward... This is so crazy its beyond words. Now in Oregon, they're aligning their educational program for Spanish-speaking immigrants with the Mexican government?? Are you kidding me?

By the way... as of today, the Wikipedia article on the North American Union, which was deleted and locked, still remains so. Why is that? Why do some out there do not want this issue discussed?

From the article:

Some Oregon high schools are adopting Mexico's public school curriculum to help educate Spanish-speaking students with textbooks, an online Web site, DVDs and CDs provided free by Mexico to teach math, science and even U.S. history.

The Oregon Department of Education and Mexico's Secretariat of Public Education are discussing aligning their curricula so courses will be valid in both countries.

(more here) http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_091907_education_mexican_curriculum_.ede64566.html

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Marvin Sapp: You Are God Alone (Live)

One of my favorites ever. Sung live by Pastor Marvin Sapp, from the Diary of a Psalmist CD.

Another One of My Favorites: Redeemer; Nicole Mullen

Another one of my all-time favorites: Redeemer, by Nicole Mullen . Enjoy.

Wow... Just Had To Share This One.

It's not very often that I hear a song for the first time and am just really, really moved by it.
I heard this song tonight on RadioSchnell (http://radio.schnell.ca/, an online Praise and Worship Station) and just had to look up the lyrics and find out more about the song. I thought I'd share it here (Take All of Me, by Hillsong United):

Saturday, September 15, 2007

Is World Poverty Getting Worse, or Better?

You decide. (And for those wondering, the data does use real, inflation-adjusted, dollars.)

Universal Health Care? Hmm...Not So Fast

I've recently been becoming a pretty strong proponent of some form of nationalized health care coming into being here in America. It seemed like maybe it' s just an idea whose time has come. All the Democrat candidates for president are pledging to bring in national health care if they get into power, which seems likely right now. Hillary Clinton, in particular, has long been a major proponent of government-run health care. This is going to be a key issue of discussion during the 2008 campaign, so I'm sure we'll be hearing much more on this issue.

But now I'm not so sure. John Stossel of "20/20" had a powerful 1 hr special on ABC last night called "Whose Body is It Anyway?"that really made me think. The promo is available on Youtube. Stossel interviews Michael Moore, and picks apart key assertions from Moore's documentary "Sicko". Moore has been known for distorting the truth in his documentaries, so its no surprise that pretty soon we see that he's don the same thing in "Sicko" too. I'm convinced that those who advocate socialized medicine have not been telling us the whole story; and make no mistake, there is another side to the story that needs to be told. .

The ABC special is something I wish every American could see before deciding on nationalized health care. Our system now is far from perfect, but it still might be better than what the proponents of socialized health care want to change it to. We as Americans had better make the right choice, because if we change it to a government run plan, theres no turning back. And that might not be a good thing.

The promo video is below.

And by the way, those who keep telling us how wonderful Cuba is, with their "free health care", might want to check out this site: TheRealCuba.com

Robert Bazell of NBC has another persepective on the issue here: "Deciding Who Lives And Who Dies"

Saturday, September 08, 2007

Another Reason Not To Go To Church? Hardly.


So much of the media has been abuzz over the Juanita Bynum/Thomas Weeks story. It's actually been one of the most blogged story since the story became national news a little over tow weeks ago . Bishop Weeks, who received his ministerial credentials in the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World denomination. Bynum, referred to by some as a prophetess, came out of the independent New Greater Bethel Ministries church in Jamaica, New York, and became quite a sought-after speaker on the Charismatic preaching circuit since her breakthrough hit sermon "No More Sheets" . Mr. Weeks allegedly gave his wife a bit of a beatdown in a parking lot of an Atlanta area hotel on August 24th. He's facing charges, and she recently authorized her lawyers to file divorce papers although none seem to have been filed yet as of today.

No doubt, this is a black eye on the church. I've seen a lot of comments made on message boards and blogs all over the place, stating a wide range of opinions on this matter. What got my attention though, is how many people who look at this incident, and others like it, say "see, that's why I don't to to church".

Well, newsflash for anyone who thinks that way: that wont be a good enough excuse for you if you don't do your duty before God and live according to his will. Nobody's perfect, not even bishops and prophetesses. The imperfection of the messenger doesn't negate the truthfulness of the message. If we all waited for the clergy members of any particular religion to be perfect, then none of us would have any religion at all, since you won't find a perfect clergy member in any religion on earth.

The bottom line is though, people want to find excuses to justify them not submitting their lives to God's will. So any preacher that falls give them an excuse to to say "see, the church is full of hypocrites anyway". Well , my guess is, if it wasn't that excuse, they would find some other excuse for not doing what they should do - and simply because they just don't want to do it.

The fact is , there are literally tense of thousands of preachers all across America. None of them is perfect. Some of them will fail badly, and some very publicly. Anyone who thinks the failures of any particular preacher or preachers is justification for him not going to church, and not repenting of his sins like we're all supposed to , is kidding himself.