Apr 14, 2013

The Psalmist Identifies The True Man Of God By His Love Of Truth

Common Sense Commentary:  The true man of God is not identified by his oratory, his appearance, his beauty, his intelligence, his personality, his position, his powers of persuasion or size of his church.  He is identified by his walk of faith, his works of righteousness and his words of God's truth.... from his heart. "He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart." Psm.15:2.


The Psalmist Identifys the true man of God:

By His Words:
"I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart; I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation: I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation." Psm.40:10.



By His Walk:
"All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies." Psm.25:10.
"Lead me in thy truth, and teach me: for thou art the God of my salvation....". Psm.25:5.



By  His Works:
"For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth." Psm.33:4.



 By His Heart's Desire:
"Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts...." Psm.51:6.

 

By his Music: 

"I will also praise thee with the psaltery, even thy truth, O my God: unto thee will I sing with the harp, O thou Holy One of Israel." Psm.71:22.

 

By his Science:

"Truth shall spring out of the earth; and righteousness shall look down from heaven." Psm.85:11. 


By his Glorying:
"Not unto us, O LORD, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy mercy, and for thy truth's sake." Psm.115:1.


By his Choices:
"I have chosen the way of truth: thy judgments have I laid before me." Psm.119:30.


By his Worship:
"I will worship  .... and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." Psm.138:2. 


By his prayer life:
"The LORD is nigh unto all them that call upon him, to all that call upon him in truth." Psm.145:18. 



By the object of his seeking:
"The preacher sought to find out acceptable words: and that which was written was upright, even words of truth." Ecc.12:10.

 If there is one glaring, Scriptural error in a preacher or politician, it is a flashing red light warning of serious trouble ahead of that man and his followers. The sign says, "STOP ... TURN AROUND ... SAVE YOUR LIFE AND TESTIMONY". RB



Here Is Something For You Logical, Perceptive Thinkers

Common Sense Commentary:  Here we have an enormous, classic contrast between 
"The Reporter", Chris Matthews, a flaming, Left Wing, Liberal Socialist, Catholic, and "The Catholic Cardinal" Bergolio of Argentina, a country mathematics teacher, priest who understands the logic, history and the Scriptural rightness of morality, freedom, and free enterprise. Catholicism leaves a lot to be desired but this is a reasonable, likable man.  One of the most revealing things I have read recently. RB
 
 

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A CATHOLIC TO APPRECIATE THIS INTERVIEW WITH THE NEW POPE.

The following is a transcript of an interview between Chris Mathews of MSNBC, American journalist and then Cardinal Bergolio. It is clear why the interview was never broadcast. This Pope is a breath of fresh air; a very enlightening, clear understanding of social justice. It is clear that Matthews never understood or learned a thing.


CAMERA ON / BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

REPORTER: Welcome Cardinal.

BERGOGLIO: Thank you. Happy to speak with you.

REPORTER: Well, let me get into it directly. Last conclave, you were almost elected Pope. Can this happen again?

BERGOGLIO: What? That I will almost be the Pope, again?

REPORTER: No. Will you be the next Pope?

BERGOGLIO: Friend, I’m only jesting with you. I understand the question. I will not be the next Pope

REPORTER: Why not?

BERGOGLIO: I chose not to. God has someone else in mind I’m certain.

REPORTER: But you would take the job if it were offered.

BERGOGLIO: I think not.

REPORTER: Why not.

BERGOGLIO: I believe I’m too embroiled in the secular fiasco. It is a spiritual job, and I’m a soldier. Look at the nature of power. In Europe first and now in America, elected men have taken it upon themselves to indebt their people to create an atmosphere of dependency. And why? For their own selfish need to increase their own personal power. I’ve been a keen observer of the effect this has on the people, especially the poor. They are very good at creating poverty where there is no reason to explain it. My job is try to alleviate poverty and if that means to oppose the cause then I will not be Pope.

REPORTER: But you are worried you would be a spend thrift pope?

BERGOGLIO: Friend. Where did you go to school?

REPORTER: La Salle College High School in Pennsylvania and.

BERGOGLIO: And after that?

REPORTER: College of the Holy Cross.

BERGOGLIO: They told me you were Catholic. Once elected, the Pope is by virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error. God would change any spend thrift politician into a responsible Pope. I’m just saying I’m not that man.

REPORTER: So what is your job?

BERGOGLIO: My job is to ask you? Why are men creating poverty?

REPORTER: What do you mean?

BERGOGLIO: I mean that poverty is part of the natural condition and that is bad enough. But my task is to prevent the aggravation of this condition. The ideology that adds to the poverty must be denounced. I have and this is the reason I will not be Pope. I have a saying for myself, no more poverty than God originally intended in the fall from Grace?

REPORTER: Oh.

BERGOGLIO: It is a spiritual choice, and I’m a political person. I’m sorry. I know you will make more money from this interview if I’m Pope. Or want to be Pope. But I’m sorry. I can’t help you. God has already chosen someone anyway. Right? You learned this in school?

REPORTER: Yes. Well? Where are you on the issues that matter most, issues about contraception, women priests?

BERGOGLIO: This might be a surprise to you, but I am Catholic. We are Catholic. It isn't an issue and for you to pretend that it is being debated goes against God.

REPORTER: If you were Pope, then you would not change anything.

BERGOGLIO: Certainly God would direct the new Pope to have more compassion for these newly created poor. And if there is any social justice in the Church, the new Pope would have a stern word for the creators of the new situation.

REPORTER: But you are staunchly orthodox on the issues of abortion, contraception, and same-sex marriage.

BERGOGLIO: I am Catholic.

REPORTER: You were punished for opposed same-sex marriage in Argentina. You opposed free contraception and the government exiled you. What do you have to say about that?

BERGOGLIO: I am Catholic.

REPORTER: In the secular world, as you say, you follow the conservative line. You oppose, uh, same-sex marriages, very popular with young people. You are conservative on birth control. Won’t that be the doom of the Church, alienating young people who support reality based faith?

BERGOGLIO: Since God created the world, he also created reality. You seem to be arguing that a man can’t be Catholic in reality. Son, you are a Catholic?

REPORTER: Yes, of course. I meant no disrespect

BERGOGLIO: You don’t have to worry about offending me.

REPORTER: Okay, good. Can a, uh, Pope even be elected if he is pro-choice or pro-love? I mean isn’t the election sort of fixed in favor of anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage?

BERGOGLIO: Yes, the election is fixed by God.

REPORTER: Very witty.

BERGOGLIO: Well, you did ask.

REPORTER: It is being reported in America that you are against marriage equality. Is that why you feel that you can’t be Pope?

BERGOGLIO: God chooses the Pope, and God also made men and women different.

REPORTER: But you are... a conservative and oppose abortion!

BERGOGLIO: Friend the expression on your face gives you away.

REPORTER: I’m sorry, I’m just trying to do my job.

BERGOGLIO: And what job is that?

REPORTER: I’ve been sent to interview eight men in line for the papacy.

BERGOGLIO: And I guarantee you that they all oppose abortion. So?

REPORTER: But?

BERGOGLIO: So, you feel like you need to alienate the eight from the flock?

REPORTER: That isn’t it. How can the church attract young people when it is opposed to abortion and contraception?

BERGOGLIO: Young people are just as attracted to the truth as they are convenience and expediency. So we will call it a draw.

REPORTER: Doesn't the church need to modernize?

BERGOGLIO: Finally, I’ve met someone who will advocate publicly painting over the Sistine Chapel with one of the contemporary street artists. Are you sure you support this and in public?

REPORTER: What?

BERGOGLIO: Forgive me, I was rude.

REPORTER: Won’t the new pope, don't these cardinals realize what they've gotta do if they want to attract young people to the church?

BERGOGLIO: I am a cardinal.

REPORTER: Won’t the new pope, don't you and the other cardinals realize what they must do if they want to attract young people to the church?

BERGOGLIO: I’ve explained the mysteries of the atom to rural young people and also I’ve explained the Grace of God. And you know what? They can understand both perfectly well. Frankly, I have more trouble with adults understanding both.

REPORTER: But they have done focus groups; if you want to spread your message you can't have this position that's anti-gay marriage and anti-contraception.

BERGOGLIO: And you treat the church as a political institution.

REPORTER: So we were not gonna see any kind of change when it comes to things that matter like abortion or gay marriage?

BERGOGLIO: All eight of the men you will be talking to are Catholic.

REPORTER: Okay, I understand. Let’s talk about your controversial stand on poverty.

BERGOGLIO: You want it to be controversial?

REPORTER: But don’t you blame various governments around the world for poverty?

BERGOGLIO: Some. Yes.

REPORTER: But you refuse to blame corporations for their role.

BERGOGLIO: Okay, they also told me you have a degree in economics. No buyer, or seller either, enters into any exchange against his will. It is the nature of the economy. Man is frail, and he makes mistakes and sometimes is greedy and they enter into exchanges that don’t help them. Sometimes they become poor, but they made choices. There is nothing the Church can do except try to educate people to become good consumers. Chiefly, for me, it is an education solution on that side. And the Church has more schools around the globe than any other faith. I say teach the people to save their souls, and also teach them how not to become poor. And now not to allow the government to trick them into poverty.

REPORTER: And you blame government.

BERGOGLIO: No, I blame the self-serving politicians.

REPORTER: So your solution to poverty is to change the nature of politics?

BERGOGLIO: Please feel free to broadcast this; I don’t want to be pope. Friend, you are a socialist and your friends are socialists. And you are the reason for 70 years of misery in Russia and Europe now is seizing in pain from your policies. You believe in the redistribution of wealth and it makes entire populations poor. You want to nationalize everything and bring every human endeavor under your control. You destroy a man's incentive to take care of his very own family, a crime against nature and nature’s God. You want social control over populations and incrementally you are making everything against the law. Together this ideology creates more poverty today than all the corporations you vilify have in the history of man.

REPORTER: I’ve never heard such from a Cardinal. I’m not sure if you are here to help yourself or disqualify yourself.

BERGOGLIO: Please air this interview. People being dominated by socialists need to know we don’t all have to be poor. Some poverty is part of our being cast out of the Garden of Eden. But look at the empire of dependency created by Hugo Chavez. Promising them, tricking them into worship of government and his very own person. Giving them fish but not allowing them to fish. If a fisherman does develop a talent today in Latin America; he is castigated and his catch stolen by the socialists. He stops?

REPORTER: You would be the first pope from the Americas.

BERGOGLIO: He stops fishing. I will not be pope, but yes I am from Argentina.

REPORTER: And you didn't want to be pope?

BERGOGLIO: God didn’t want me to be pope.

REPORTER: Perhaps he changed his mind.

BERGOGLIO: Ludicrous.

REPORTER: Okay, I’m sorry. I feel like we are getting off on the wrong path. I’m sorry.

BERGOGLIO: Yes, let’s be productive.

REPORTER: You are a classic conservative Catholic theologian?

BERGOGLIO: Of course there's politics clearly in the Curia throughout the Vatican, but in terms of church teaching, it's not a political institution. It's religious.

REPORTER: I heard people, in fact, media people, "Is this cardinal, is he a liberal? Is he a conservative?"

BERGOGLIO: Tell them please, He's a Catholic. It's no more complicated than that. Catholicism is what it is. You don't have to believe it; you may not. You don't have to follow it; you may not go to Mass. But it's not up to you to modernize us.

REPORTER: You see no room for reform?

BERGOGLIO: It's not up to any religion, although some do this, 'cause they want the money. They want the membership. But the Catholic Church doesn't do it. It's not up to them to bend and shape and mold itself to accommodate the shrinking depravity of a worldwide culture. It's to provide the exact opposite. It's to provide a beacon out of depravity, socialism and sin, among other things.

REPORTER: If pope you would be bad news for the left.

BERGOGLIO: I won’t be pope. But I am opposed to abortion. I’m opposed to euthanasia. The pro-choice movement is a culture of death. I oppose the demonic same-sex marriage. I oppose gay adoption on the grounds that it is discriminatory to the child. I was exiled by the Cristina Kirchner government, but I hold no grudge. How is this bad news?

REPORTER: John Paul II rescued you?

BERGOGLIO: He made me the archbishop of Buenos Aires. Yes.

REPORTER: And so you feel like you owe the Right some sort of repayment?

BERGOGLIO: There are many values and many types of people. Perhaps it is my interest in mathematics, but I’m the type of human who is interested most in the truth. God gave me a healthy love for the truth. Loyalty is only a virtue if in support of the truth or another important value.

REPORTER: Cristina Kirchner said you held a grudge.

BERGOGLIO: Funny I’ve never spoken her name. Not once. And it is a battle of ideas not a battle of two or more people. I’m only concerned with ideas.

REPORTER: She said you refused to speak up for civil rights violations.

BERGOGLIO: As a spiritual leader, I opposed cultural modernization, and so I became a political enemy. I understand politics as well as I do mathematics.

REPORTER: And the Jesuits, they were eager to cast you out, which they did.

BERGOGLIO: So you are implying that I’m a vengeful priest?

REPORTER: Do you feel that you need to erase the progress recently made in Latin America?

BERGOGLIO: I say poverty. You say progress.

REPORTER: Let’s talk about poverty.

BERGOGLIO: Sure, there is voluntary poverty that is virtuous. Many understood the nobility of making themselves independent of the fleeting things of earth. They are distractions from our pursuit of the truth. I have no problem with this. I only oppose involuntary poverty.

REPORTER: That is what I thought you would say.

BERGOGLIO: Why?

REPORTER: Because you are a capitalist right?

BERGOGLIO: Yes, I think capital is needed to build a factory, a parochial school, or a church or hospital, all. Do you oppose factories or churches or hospitals?

REPORTER: Of course not, but don’t you think the capital is sucked out of peoples hands by greedy business types to pay for these factories?

BERGOGLIO: No, I think people agree, through their economic choices, that some of their money goes to build these. Capital building should be voluntary. Only when the politician confiscates their wealth to build government factories, government schools, government hospitals; only then do the people not agree. Money given voluntarily is legitimate to build with. Money coerced from the people is not legitimate to build with, because it isn’t given voluntarily.

REPORTER: You are opposed to all government?

BERGOGLIO: No of course not. But it isn’t the seat of wisdom in any society I’ve seen in my life. The best government was created by the Americans, in which they admitted that people are endowed by their creator and most of the administration of society was left to the relationship between God and man. However, slowly that has been eroded by the atheists on the left who would replace man's relationship with God with a new relationship with an opportunist like Hugo Chavez.

REPORTER: I just found it fascinating that you were willing to stand up to an entire government in Argentina. You where cast aside. Didn’t you care about your career?

BERGOGLIO: Yes, there are people who cave to worldly authority. Even priests.

REPORTER: But you didn’t?

BERGOGLIO: No, I changed nothing. How did I have the power to change anything in church teaching? My opinion? The democrats, seeking votes, only wanted me to change my opinion and legitimize their decadence. I did not, as evidenced by the fact that I was teaching high school math in small isolated town.

REPORTER: I’m sorry that happened to you.

BERGOGLIO: Why don’t you feel for others oppressed for their interest in freedom.

REPORTER: Freedom isn’t punished anywhere, is it?

BERGOGLIO: Certainly it is.

REPORTER: In Latin America?

BERGOGLIO: I’m afraid Latin America is lost. The people of the entire area are controlled by a bloc of militant socialist regimes in the region, most prominently Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua. They have a gun pointed at their head. So their heart is now captured. Who will save them at this point?

REPORTER: So the game is over. Checkmate?

BERGOGLIO: Friend, I’ve been studying America this month before the Pope chose to resign. You must not have fear at speaking the truth. It is for the salvation of souls and the recovery of Thomas Jefferson’s people. America must not fall to the new painted communism. Even the low information voters don’t want America to be sold into slavery. I pray they cast out the money changers in their government! What manner of government is there that condones sin? Abomination upon abomination--giving monies for the murder of children, giving monies for the murder of the elderly! You are an American. Your government, My child, has been infiltrated by men of sin.

REPORTER: These are pretty radical ideas.

BERGOGLIO: No. Perhaps reactionary. Radical means something different. But a very long time ago, Khrushchev warned that we cannot expect Americans to fly from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small injections of socialism until they suddenly awake to find out they have Communism. This is what is happening now in an ancient bastion of freedom. How can America save Latin America when they are slaves to the government themselves?

REPORTER: I’m having a hard time digesting most of this.

BERGOGLIO: The truth can be painful. You look angry; do you want to stop or ask a question? But you have created a new type of state, the so-called welfare state. This has happened in order to respond to the needs of the politically created poor. However, intervening directly is depriving the original society of its responsibility. Families escape responsibility in the welfare state. And churches even escape responsibility. People stop giving to charity and see every poor person as the government’s problem. I am a Catholic priest and there are no poor for me to take care of, they are made permanently poor and the property of the politicians.

REPORTER: I’m not sure this interview is going to work.

BERGOGLIO: You asked and now you will listen, my son. The social assistance state leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic thinking than by real concern for helping people. Needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them who act as neighbors and parish members to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need. This is not to mention the welfare states excesses and abuses.

REPORTER: I think we are done.

BERGOGLIO: Wait. If I speak on the ordination of women, on celibacy, on divorce, will you air this interview and my message?

REPORTER: No, we are done.

BERGOGLIO: Partially what irritates me to the core is the media’s inability to look at anything without looking into the cause of the various problems. People are made poor so they will vote for the very candidates that made them poor.

REPORTER: Have a nice day and thanks for your time.

CAMERA OFF / END TRANSCRIPT

Apr 13, 2013

Tax Loophole As Big As Mexico

Common Sense Commentary:  

It seems our national insanity has no limits.

The video site below reports on just one state.

However, in California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico,

Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Colorado and Utah,

Local TV stations have reported similar stories,over

the last 3 years.The tax fraud information is

distributed to illegals by local, Liberal churches

and emigration support groups.

Apr 11, 2013

How Can You Know If Religious Charlatans Are True Or False?

Common Sense Commentary:  "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Heb.4:12.  The "word" in this verse is not capitalized and therefore not a proper name of a person, place or thing and is therefore not a reference to the person of Jesus Christ who is the Living Word of God, as is the "Word" in John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word...."  No, the "word" in Heb.4:12 is in reference to God's written word, the Bible ... Holy Scripture.
The volume of the Holy Scriptures cover every major truth and the important issues of life. Whatever religious claims are made by someone, the Scriptures speak to those claims, and are there, visible, chapter and verse, to refute or confirm the claim.

THE CLAIM CERTAIN:  One can claim a verse of Scripture, read it, quote it and point it out to all. Everybody can see the words in black and white. The primary difference between the certainty quotient of the Holy Scriptures, manifested, versus the Holy Spirit's actions manifested, only to the individual touched by Him, is this: The Holy Scriptures are visible, recorded in a billion Bibles, read by hundreds of millions of people, memorized and quoted exactly by millions of Christians and is publicly available for all to see.   One can easily compare Scripture with Scripture or Scripture with what someone says it says, and see clearly the harmony or discord in whatever is claimed.  It is what it is.  Nobody can change, misquote or mistranslate it without being discovered and identified as a liar or a careless handler of God's written word.

THE CLAIM UNCERTAIN: Spiritual 0r religious claims, personal testimony, by whomever,
 are not visible to the hearer or absolutely confirmable or "CLAIM CERTAIN" to anyone but the claimant and God. Only he and God know whether his spiritual claim truly happened  ... even if the experience does not contradict any Scripture verse, it still may not have happened, though it be claimed. Many an apparently religious person has claimed, "The Holy Spirit told me, spoke to me, showed me or gave me...." But whether true or false, not one such claim can be proven with absolute certainty as can Holy Scripture.  Spiritual "claims" are surely as often false as true. God knows. But even true claims, unless it is a visible miracle, cannot be proven with certainty no matter how many people believe the person making the claim.  Unless it is visible, one must take the person's word for what happened ... which is an open door to endless, false religious claims. Satan, "a liar and the father of it", pours a polluted river of "religious" heresy and lies through claims, which cannot be proved or disproved, except by the clear, visible, "quick and powerful", written word of God.

God, in His wisdom, gave us the written word so we flesh and bone, physical beings could SEE and HEAR with our human eyes and ears what He wants us to know, and not have to depend on the multitudinous, invisible, or faked claims of charlatans, heretics, apostates, false Apostles, false Prophets and other religious fakes. If we had no definite, visible standard (The Holy Bible) to measure them with, we could not know if they were real or false.  Yes, the Holy Spirit can "guide you", personally, internally in understanding truth and error but He does that primarily through His written word, and never in conflict with it. Besides, your friends and family or neighbors cannot SEE your heart to know if you are real or not, telling the truth or not, just because YOU said it. Almost all religious claims, not confirmed in the Bible, cannot, must not be relied upon when eternal souls are at stake. "Say so" is always subject to question. God's word is not. The Bible is the only absolute and visible confirmation or refutation of Spiritual or religious claims. Personal testimony is not enough, and if it does not conform to God's written word, it is a lie.


One Cult, who "claims" that the Bible is not the "word" of God because Jesus is the "Word" of God, has the written word of God and the Living Word of God entangled. Why did God capitalize the one and not the other? Because they are intrinsically different.  One is a person; The other is a thing. Christ is the person; the Bible is the thing, reflecting, like a mirror, the person. The Living Word spoke words which were written down. The written word, whether spoken by Jesus or written by an Apostle or other chosen disciple,  directs us to the Living Word. The cults leave us dependent on their "claims" which carry no more authority than any one of a billion library books or newspapers, as to what is true or false...with God. They are more reliant on their "dreams", which they claim are visions, than they are of the Bible. Their fuzzy gurus have produced an avalanche of claims, including name changes for themselves such as "Justice", "Beautiful", and "Honorable".  God help those who would follow a man who names himself "Justice" or a woman who names herself "Beautiful".  If it were anywhere near the realm of possibility, that they were right in what they "claim", then all the Apostles were  wrong,  Charles Spurgeon, D.L. Moody, Jonathan Edwards, Torrey, Tozier, Billy Graham and all the Christian pastors, fathers, mothers and grandparents of the past were liars or dupes and going to hell because they believed that "All scripture was given by inspiration of God".  Before the arrival of these cults, in recent years, they must believe that all Bible believing Christians for 2000 years went to hell. A little late isn't it?  It's almost time for the Living Word to return, as predicted by the written word. RB

"For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes..... And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many." Matt. 24:7&11.  That day has arrived. RB


Apr 10, 2013

Sequester Deluge Backs Up White House Septic System

UnCommon NonSense Commentary:    


What on earth is the world coming to? Here we are at the most dangerous, world-wide, economic and immoral sequester disaster in human history and what does our Commander In Chief and Sequester Court Jester do?  He gives away our multi-trillion dollar Sequester Tester to the Portuguese ... as if money grows on trees. Only now, when the devious deed is done, do we discover an illegal, underground, Sequester Infester in the plumbing of the White House. This catastrophic, Sequester Pester can only be flushed with a yet uninvented Sequester Arrester.  Yes, it is true. I saw it on T.V. and checked it with Snopes. All the sequester gurus, Chester, Lester and Esther Sequester,  have prophesied that a young, agile, illegal, expert sequesterer will come forth and spew out new, meaningless and "Quantitative" words until he rules all the septic systems of  United Nations Sequestrations. 

Here is my proof on video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gXOV_XWJck&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Apr 9, 2013

Is Irrationality Insanity ?

Common Sense Commentary: Everybody on earth is a little bit crazy.

I often read articles that prove the exact opposite of the author's own point or position.
Also, many printed and embedded instructions on a new purchase ... increase my confusion. Words sometimes seem to flow from the writer's brain, filtered through a badly used dish-rag or a clogged up nervous system between his thoughts and his fingers. I recently read a long list of instructions which left my understanding short circuited, hair sparking, wide eyed and paralyzed like the computer I was trying to fix. The next day, I talked to an expert technician, geek, who knew exactly how to fix it, I am sure, but knew zero about communicating it to me ... or to Bill Gates or Steve Jobs either.  When I got off the phone, I had mixed motions with my emotions about schizophrenia. I don't know if I was "in it", but I was definitely "out of it". I think I recognize schitzo when I see it but I can't spell it without the couch and consultation of Dr. Noah Webster.  Anybody who can spell it without consulting a dictionary is getting billed for it every month by their shrink. All crazy people deny they are insane while sane people wonder if they are.   I therefore dare not deny insanity, so I'll just confess senility.  But, remember  John 7:20, when demon possessed people accused Jesus of being demon possessed.  If you are now wondering if I am off my medication  .... remember those who accused Jesus.

Just a wild tangent of hot steam escaping the pressure valve. RB

Apr 8, 2013

The Bill Of Rights Is "The Rights Of The People" As Opposed To The Powers Of Government


Common Sense Commentary: Our Country's Founders were among the brightest, bravest, most honest, patriots who ever lived, and were mostly Christian. Do not let them be, now, overruled and betrayed by a bunch of greedy, dishonest, treasonists to our Constitution, Bill Of Rights and their own sworn commitment to uphold it.

Amendment #1  PROTECTS "The right of the people" as opposed to Congressional legislative power.  It states in no uncertain terms that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


Amendment #2 PROTECTS "The right of the people" as opposed to statist's infringement of those rights. It, also, states in no uncertain terms that, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people  to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"  by their Government.  A civilian Militia is not the same as full time government soldiers.  It is understood that all government soldiers "keep and bear arms".  This Amendment is not "The right of Government Soldiers" to keep and bear arms, it is "the right of the people  (civilians), to keep and bear arms" that they might be a prepared civilian Militia to preserve their freedoms and free state against the infringements of their own Government or outside powers.


Amendment #3 PROTECTS "The right of individual home owners"  as opposed to government decree to take over their homes to house government "soldiers". It, clearly states that, "No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."   This Third Amendment, in the fewest possible words, 32 to be exact, distinguishes citizen rights of privacy, property and protection for all who own homes, from being invaded by government "soldiers", even as the first Amendment gives "the Right of the people" as opposed to the powers of their government, and the Second Amendment distinguishes "The Right of the people to keep and bear arms", including as a civilian "Militia", and as opposed to government "soldiers", in the Third Amendment.




Senator Rand Paul says his jaw hit the floor when he read Dianne Feinstein's bill.
"After reading Senator Dianne Feinstein’s new so-called "Assault Weapons" Ban, I can only describe this radical scheme as the effective END of the Second Amendment in America.

The gun-grabbers are going for broke, doing everything they can to "cash in" on the recent tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut.

They’re targeting EVERYTHING -- rifles, shotguns and even handguns -- and every gun owner and gun purchase is to be catalogued and tracked by the federal government."


http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=F584p5kJL-U&feature=youtu.be>
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=F584p5kJL-U&feature=youtu.be






Apr 7, 2013

America Is Out To A Free Lunch, And We Are Not Coming Back!

Common Sense Commentary: I was not a great fan of Romney. Nor am I a Republican except in the U.S. Constitutional mandate sense.  I do believe in a democratic republic, which the Constitution demands, but  .... which neither the Democrat nor Republican parties have faithfully defended.  Democrats are the worst offenders. In recent years I have been forced, by the deterioration of both major parties into a Liberal Socialist quagmire, to become an Independent.  I am by nature, experience and conviction an Independent type person.  Our Constitution defends the rights of the individual ... not the masses or even the majority, but each and every individual, American citizen.  The Bible also defends the rights of the individual, and every born again person became a Christian one at a time. Our Shepherd left the ninety and nine to seek the one lost sheep.  Most of our Lord's miracles were performed for individuals ... the woman at the well, the demoniac, the woman taken in adultery, Zacchaeus, the blind, sick and lost person.  Most of His problems were from the mob... the masses and the monolithic government.
The majority of Americans are no longer freedom loving, self-reliant and responsible people.  The new majority are addicted to hand outs not individual responsibility.
America is out to a free lunch, and we are not coming back. RB


"We Are Not Coming Back!"

This logic from a Jewish Rabbi:

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky is the spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo - for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted.

But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.

Romney lost because he didn't get enough votes to win.

That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues - the traditional American virtues of
liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness - no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.

The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff.

Every businessman knows this; that is why the "loss leader" or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama's America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who - courtesy of Obama - receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their
windfall) surely know for whom to vote. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.

The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which "47% of the people" start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money - "free stuff" - from the government.


Almost half of the population has no skin in the game - they don't care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children
and from the Chinese.


They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else's expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.

It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.

That engenders the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that the electorate is ignorant and uninformed. Indeed, it does not pay to be an informed voter, because most other voters - the clear majority are unintelligent and easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. That is the indelicate way of saying that too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich.

During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: "Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!" Stevenson called back: "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"
Truer words were never spoken.

Obama could get away with saying that "Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules" - without ever defining what those different rules
were; with saying that the "rich should pay their fair share" - without ever defining what a "fair share" is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to "fend for themselves" - without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending.

Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions - in which politicians ply the unions with public
money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the oliticians provide more money and the unions
provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone.

Obama also knows that the electorate has changed - that whites will soon be a minority in America (they're already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America . Obama is part of that different America , knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.

Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his "negative ads" were simple facts, never personal abuse - facts about high unemployment,
lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not
embrace the devil's bargain of making unsustainable promises.

It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan - people of substance, depth and ideas - to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy of class warfare - never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. If an Obama could not be defeated - with his record and his vision of America , in which free stuff seduces voters - it is hard to envision any change in the future.


The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy - those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe - is paved.

For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a
president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel . They voted to secure Obama's future at America 's expense and at
Israel 's expense - in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin.


A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the US will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more
likely thwart any Israeli initiative. The US will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon - and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality.

But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent empire, nor is there an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline.
Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations.. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come.


The "Occupy" riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead - years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution.

If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back."

-- The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.