Southern Baptist Leader Right About No Religion Test for President

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/romney-mormonism-christianity-santorum/2012/02/29/id/431034?s=al&promo_code=E4CC-1

I found this article distressing and I disagree with the analysis that Mormon Christianity is not Christianity at all. And I disagree with the idea that the book of Mormon is the same as the Quran. However, I do agree that there is not a “religion” test for the Presidency of the USA. In fact a Hindu, Confucian, Shinto, Moslem, or “no religion at all” person could become President under the Constitution. The key word in the above sentence is “Constitution”. The USA is a constitutional Republic and not a Christian State. Essentially, the USA is a secular government under the prescription that it must respect the freedom of religion opinions of its citizens. There is also the proscription that the government cannot impose itself upon, regulate, or attempt to destroy the practice of religions by its citizens.

That being affirmed, the opinions of the leader of the Southern Baptist Convention are really the affairs of that denomination of Christianity. His viewpoint is allowed in USA. He is even allowed to make it public and to defend his position. That is our right under the first amendment regarding freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Unlike, the grossly stated falsehood that the Constitution protects the government from the influences of religiously informed opinions, the Bill of rights, which is the first ten amendments to the Constitution, protects people of religion from the power of the government and the prejudices of people opposed to religion. That is to say, that you are not required to agree with my religion nor my opinions as informed by my religion but the law guarantees me the liberty to hold and express such opinions. And while IRS regulations threaten to revoke a congregations 501.3C status if the leaders use the pulpit to preach for or against any political candidate, that is merely an IRS regulation and does not forbid preachers of any type from preaching politically motivated sermons. Admittedly, sermons such as those of Jeremiah Wright, Senator Obama’s Christian Pastor, in which he damned America and not blessed America, are repugnant to and repudiated by the 99.9 % of Christians, nonetheless, he is allowed to preach that. (Please, note that no one needs to listen to his rants, and that a Senator of the USA should belong to Rev. Wright’s congregation for ten or more years, is disturbing but not illegal.)

Finally, to the doctrinal theology that informs the SBC speaker. It is a judgement made because Mormonism supplements the 66 books of the historic Christian Bible with the book of Mormon. Some Christians regard this as an addition to the Holy Scriptures and therefore as antithetical to Christian teaching that the only authoritative scripture is the 66 book Bible. In this regard, some Christians would claim that Roman Catholic Christianity is also not true Christianity because they include the Apocryphal books to their publication of the Bible. And even though Roman Catholic Christians are informed that the Apocryphal books are not regarded as Holy Scripture, nonetheless, their detractors say that publishing them inside of the covers of a Bible is itself condemnatory.

Friends, these are matters of internal Christian denominational belief and although we can go on, this writer will again state, as he has repeatedly, that Mormonism is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and that its doctrines regarding the essentials of the Christian faith make it another, albeit disputed, Christian denomination.

Letter to Tea Party Establsihment about Senator Santorum

I am actually surprised. The Tea Party movement has an organization and a structure very much like a political party. And the very next day after the Michigan and Arizona Primaries endorsed Romney, I get this paid political message from Rich Santorum. I did not ask to hear from him. I did not give you permission to share my email with him. I do not intend to vote for him. As far as a true Conservative I think Governor Romney is better credentialed than Senator Santorum. Both he and this tea party advertisement are undermining the Republican primary process and disclaimers to the contrary, this letter very much shows your political endorsement of Senator Santorum. Maybe if my friends at the “establishment” level of the tea party movement would get it straight, they would be more effective. Friends, the Tea party is a movement as you claim but do not honor. It is not a political party as you say but you act differently. It is not a conservative movement against so-called “establishment Republicans” but a rally of citizens against certain key ideas of governing and for other key ideas of governing. Sadly, I am beginning to think that the “establishment” level of the tea party movement is betraying the movement in favor of its own exclusive administrative and fund rasing club. Since I have a radio show and a blog and often am called upon to speak to clubs etc. I am considering analysis of the “establishment” level of the tea party movement in order to explore and reveal the fundamental betrayal that letters like this communicate to those who have attended Washington, as I did and who are now disillusioned with the Tea Party Movement administrative “establishment”. : Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:20 PM Subject: Rick Santorum: Fight of his life Below please find a special message from one of our sponsors, Rick Santorum. He has important information to share with you. Thank you. Please note that the following message reflects the opinions and representations of our sponsor alone, and not necessarily the opinion of TheTeaParty.net. I have not included the actual political fund raising letter from Senator Santorum because I will not give free publicity..I do not agree.

Republicans May be Best At Snatching Defeat from Jaws of Victory

This writer has Republican roots and generally is Republican. However, I am distressed at the persistence of the Republican electorate to seek defeat from the jaws of victory.

The continued debate within the Republican party over who should be the candidate to face President Obama may be healthy in a classroom environment but may be fatal in the election process.

This is my take:

Gingrich is a very powerful intellectual and his ideas and the uniqueness of his visions are often refreshing. However, he also displays fatal flaws. They are the following: that he does not have a broad-based, energetic, organized, election campaign organization. I appreciate Speaker Gingrich, and I hope that he will continue to wholeheartedly contribute to the process of political debate in the USA. However, the nation needs not only ideas, it needs a person who can energetically and enthusiastically makes the ideas into reality. And although when Mr. Gingrich was Speaker of the House of Representatives, and although he was able to make remarkable progress by working closely with President Clinton, he is not displaying the same gregarious ability in reaching out to fellow Republicans. Rather, he has conducted a partisan political rebellion within the Republican party which seeks to divide the party. Therefore, this writer believes Speaker Gingrich should be encouraged to end his campaign and instead throw his considerable intellectual and political acumen behind the main candidate.

Mr Santorum is the spoiler. Senator Santorum enters this race having been a Washington political insider, both as a Congressman and Senator. While I laud many of his strongly held Roman Catholic beliefs and I appreciate his working class roots, I find Senator Santorum’s claim that it is Romney who is the so-called “establishment” while Mr Santorum is the “working class alternative to ??” Personally, I have named Senator Santorum the “spoiler” because I am distressed at what I regard as his assertion that his position representatives the true “conservative” position within the Republican party. Frankly, I spotted Senator Santorum’s presidential aspirations several years ago when he was a frequent guest on the Greta Van Sustern, Fox News program. Yet, Mr. Santorum has a very small political organization and his organizational skills at establishing a viable political alternative to “?” are revealed as weak. For both Senator Santorum and Speaker Gingrich, I ask the simple question, “Why didn’t you expend the tremendous efforts, energy and enthusiasm shown By Governor Romney in building up and funding a viable political alternative?”

Why is the above question of tremendous importance? It is because both Speaker Gingrich and Senator Santorum both have displayed a lack of political entrepreneurship which is essential to a successful campaign and a successful Presidency. Rather, they have depended upon spontaneity and the mercurial nature of the news media. They are not positive candidates with viable individual political platforms. They are the “anti Romney” candidates. This is a weak and disingenuous position which seeks to spoil the other person’s success by playing the role of antagonist to Romneys Protagonist. And while I know that I am torturing the words, I prefer the Pro position to the negative Anti position.

Now, to the true alternative. Congressman Ron Paul. I believe that this Representative is truly what he intends to be , namely, a voice for the alternative position. And what this writer especially likes about this tried and true perennial Presidential candidate is that he conducts himself as a true believer in the power of the American political process and as a true proponent of the American political philosophy. Congressman Paul is someone who has a realistic and humble evaluation of himself and his cause. Yet, he pursues that cause with the vigor and the enthusiasm of an ardent believer in the rightness of his position. And he does all of this with a refreshing self-deprecation and winsome sense of grace that is indeed winning. Congressman Paul’s ideas may seem bizarre to some but he represents a core philosophy that acknowledges American exceptionalism while insisting that it be applied with great sensitivity to the rights and freedoms of other nations. He agrees that we are a great and mighty nation while insisting that our might and greatness necessitates humility not apology. Congressman Paul’s ideas deserve robust and vigorous discussion and sincere debate because they are well-considered and he himself deserves the respect. Why? Because he is a man of such obvious sincerity and integrity who has tirelessly served his nation and his ideas are viable while amendable.

Lastly, we come to my endorsement of Governor Romney. At this point I see a candidate who worked tireless over many years to do the following:

To compete in the harsh and combative arena of national politics as a candidate for President

To accept defeat not aa a cliff from which he must turn away but as a chasm over which he must build a bridge.

To foster, develop and organize a true national political organization that is a model of entrepreneurship and organizational skill worthy of a serious political candidate for the Presidency.

To research, a viable national program to reduce our debt, increase our national wealth and return America to the economic leadership of the world by creating jobs, increasing citizen business initiatives and cutting out the fat and flab of a government bureaucracy that stifles the achievement of success for America’s working class.

Romney can do all of this because as a citizen, a Governor and a very successful business leader, he created companies, improved failing industries, inspired creative leadership in job creation and held everyone accountable for careful spending.

Is Romney successful? Yes. We want a successful President.

Is Romney wealthy? Yes, he has proven his prodigious business skills by doing what every American wants to do. His experience with personal wealth creation means that he will not casually spend our money by higher taxes and carefree spending.

Is Romney part of the so-called “Republican Establishment.”? Yes. Let’s all be honest on this one. Not one of the candidates can place themselves outside of the respected, recognized and legal Republican party. After all, they are working very hard to get that so-called “establishment” to allow them to be its candidate this November! And that is what we need. A President Romney who loves America. Not another Barrack Hussein Obama who is a maverick malcontent who doesn’t like America, its guns, bibles or religion.

Many of the political experts feel that this prolonged primary battle is harmful to the Republican party. Maybe it is. However, these candidates, good people all of them, are good spirited, patriotic Americans who put themselves forward at great cost to themselves in time, talent and treasure in order to allow the American people to examine them and judge if they should be the candidate. I call that gutsy and I admire and respect all of them for their willingness to get out there in the public arena and fight for the right to lead.

This writer wants to thank them and tell them that they didn’t hurt the Republican party and they definitely helped America.

USA Intervention prolongs Tyrany and Prevents Democracy

It is this authors opinion that the progress of democracy is inevitable. I also believe that it is the best form of government for all people’s worldwide. Additionally, I wholeheartedly support efforts to educate, advocate and promote peaceful democracy worldwide. However, war is a terrible thing and as we learned in our own Revolution and Civil War a great many people die prematurely for something which is so inevitable that we do not need bloodshed for its achievement. And for those conservative pundits who argue with me on this, well! Have you been in the US military? Is your child in the US military? Have you been confronted with the agony of mobilization and deployment? Yes, I have and so have my children. So, before we go wrapping everything in the flag, let’s talk. Okay.

Democracy has many forms, including limited democracy such as a real monarchy, and on to parliamentary democracy and a Republic like the USA. However, there is not one form that fits all societies. A tribal system such as Libya and Iraq may not be historically, culturally or ethnically suited for USA style democracy. Rather, ethnic, cultural, religious and societal uniqueness may require that democracy be tailored to the local situation.

And I completely agree that many societies in the Middle East of our world are seeking a greater form of democratic society. However, in distinction from my colleagues, I suggest that democracy was and is inevitable in these societies and that the modern interconnected Internet world, would and will, sooner than later, achieve that democracy, worldwide. However, in many countries and societal situations the so-called “powerful” need to learn the new methods of power and government. It is my belief that they would have, and they will learn the modern way without violence, bloodshed and death. It is inevitable.

But, many object, that in the societies of the Middle East, it is taking too long. First, I ask you, if you are a citizen of the country you criticise? If not, shut up. It is none of your business and don’t spout the crap about “you are your brothers keeper”. When you leave your USA armchair and travel to the streets of the struggle and face the bullets, then maybe, and only maybe, then you will have a little right to speak. Hey, brother, please don’t tell me what I must die for. You die in my place, okay? And then, I will religiously lay a wreath at your grave. Deal?

It is this author’s opinion that much of the violence and the death happening worldwide and especially in the Mid East is caused by geopolitical aims and seeks to falsely use democracy as the excuse for the extension of a western economic imperial model that has nothing to do with the “quality of life” of the protagonists and a lot to do with the wealth and continued economic imperialism of western governments and corporations.

Rather, let’s not arm the rebels. Let’s educate them on civil organization and political reality. But, you say, that we tried that and it failed. Did it? In my opinion, it did not fail. It simply did not meet our expectations. We will need to extend our timelines and get real about what is possible now and what can only be achieved later.

Friends, I will not dictate that for which you must die. Rather, I will do everything I can to promote your freedom within the context, society and culture in which you live. In the end, the result will be the same because freedom and I believe, democracy, are inevitable.

Graham and Mc Cain War Oriented

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/02/20/senators-want-to-arm-syrian-rebels.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_morning&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_morning&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet

It continues to disturb this writer that Senator Mc Cain is a very hostile person who wants war, armaments and interventionist policies to prevail. We intervened in Egypt with our President Obama saying that our long time friend Mubarak “Must go”. The result is chaos in Egypt and a military government trying to prevail against radical terrorist Muslims, and Islamic radical mobs burning Christian Churches, terrorising Christian business people and threatening to make Christianity illegal in Egypt. Then we supported the rag-tag rebellion against the sovereign government of Libya, which government was a UN member, forsworn against terrorism and nuclear armament in return for USA consideration. But our government changed from George W. Bush and Condie Rice to Barrack Hussein Obama and Hilary Rodman Clinton, both of whom reneged on USA promises, backed the UN resolution 1973 against Gaddafi, and supported the 2300 bombing raids, the 225 cruise missile attacks, and the use of the terrifying A 10 anti personnel aircraft against the legal, uniformed and legitimate military forces of the sovereign UN recognized Libyan government. The result is chaos, a weak central government and the fear that the approximately 10 to 20 thousand shoulder launched missiles of the Gaddafi government are now being funneled to A Qaeda. Hey, folks, the so-called terrorist Gaddafi and his military forces did not use those anti-aircraft, anti tank, anti naval missiles! Why not? Because they believed assurances that the UN resolution 1973 protected them against the murderous rebels. Instead, Gaddafi was brutalized and obscenely murdered, his son killed, and his supporters rounded up and quietly exterminated by the new “freedom loving??” Libyan government. The Syrian Government is also an independent sovereign State, member of United Nations and engaged in a brutal civil war. And yes, the legally constituted government and the legitimate uniformed military forces and police of that government have been brutal in suppression of the civil war. However, in the USA, it is illegal for anybody to advocate the violent overthrow of the USA Federal or State government. In fact, if such an armed conflict broke out in the USA, the penalty is death by firing squad or hanging. Such death by bullet or rope, could under a military emergency and martial law, be administered by the USA military forces in summary field executions. So, friends, before we fool-heartedly get involved in yet another illegal military adventure, let’s be honest with ourselves and tell the world, especially the Russians, that we intend to continue to foment revolution in their backyard and they had better get used to the idea. And then, when the Russians visit Mexico and try to overthrow that government, we too, had better get used to the idea. And by the way, why shouldn’t the Iranians stop selling oil to France and UK. It’s their oil from their land and if they don’t want to sell it to their enemies, France and UK, well, that’s their business. We don’t sell to the Iranians because we say that they are our enemies. So who is the hypocrite here?

China to Take Trillions from America

http://pro.stansberryresearch.com/1202CHINAGLD/EOILN206/?o=621625&s=625964&u=50056120&l=388320&r=Milo

This article was sent to me via e-mail and I share it with you because I have read Porter Stanberry and he is very often right on target. He is not a prophet nor the son of a prophet but he does considerable research on the financial markets and his world view is large enough to allow him to see major trends before they are obvious to the general public. Of late Porter has been very worried about the welfare of the US citizen and the financial future of our nation. He is a red-blooded America and he loves his country. However, his projections are dire warnings that we need to be more business like in our government. Read what he has to say.

Sarkozy a Phony, Libya a Crime and the World Liars

http://news.yahoo.com/sarkozy-advises-against-military-strike-iran-215253967.html This writer is made sick by this article. Now Sarkozy says that the solution to problems is Diplomacy, etc. ( see article). Before with Libya, he was all missiles, bombs, strafing, war and destruction of an entire sovereign nation called Libya. I have written extensively on this blog about the illegal criminal war against Libya and the Leader of the Revolution Gaddafi. Here I simply call attention to the travesty of international political phoniness by Sarkozy, Cameron, and Obama abetted by a superfluous but dangerous UN and its crony Security Council. The base line is this: The UN resolution 1973 was dead wrong and allowed to be gravely misused by Sarkozy, Obama and Cameron as they dropped at least 2000 bombs on the army, navy and air force of a UN member country called Libya. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is not an arm of the UN. It is a war making organization parading as a defense organization. It is a throwback to the Cold War and should be disbanded for its criminal activities in Libya. Why? Because the legal government under Gaddafi was internationally recognized as the legal government and even the new puppet regime in Tripoli agrees that all contracts signed by the Gaddafi government are legal and binding!!

The Libyan government under Gaddafi was criminally attacked by NATO forces under the excuse of protecting civilians. How were the civilians being attacked. They were not. This is plain fact. However, rebellious para military forces backed by France (Sarkozy) Britain (Cameron) USA ( Obama) and aided by Belgium (?), fought against the legal government seeking its overthrown. These para military forces were without regular military organization. They were not recognizable by a regular military uniform. Their tactics of attacking the legal government forces, facilities and jurisdictions are recognized by other governments as the actions of terrorists!! [If this was the case today in USA, the law allows the Obama administration to utterly crush the military rebellion and then to hang all its leaders as traitors. (Yes, it is illegal to attempt the forced overthrow of the USA government and the penalty for such action is death.)] Yes, the US Obama administration backed the UN resolution 1973 authorizing military force against a UN member nation. The President later did not commit USA military ground troops to the overthrow of the legal sovereign government of Libya opting instead, to providing cruise missiles, Air Force plans, Navy ships, and A-10 attack planes in order to carry out the blatantly criminal aggression against the country of Libya. In a just world, (yes, this is not a just world), the criminal aggressor nations would be indicted by the UN (really!) as aggressors. They would also be indicted by the International Court at the Hague for aggression against a sovereign nation of the international community of nations and against a legal member of the United Nations and a nation recognized as legal by 101 nations. In a just world, this writer believes that all three leaders, Sarkozy, Cameron and (Nobel Peace Prize winner) Obama would be found guilty of criminal aggression and could even face charges of genocide against the Libyan people. Hey, facts are facts and the 200 plus cruise missiles, the 2000 plus air force sorties against the legal army of Libya were all carried out without a legal Declaration of War which according to international law and the USA Manual of Land Warfare and the USA Military Code of Justice constitutes lawless and wanton criminal behavior. By the way, Gaddafi did not have Weapons of Mass destruction. He did not have and was not developing any form of nuclear weapon. He was not a military or terrorist threat to the nations of the International community. Yes, he was at one time. But that had been adjudicated by international agreement, an agreement which shamefully, was completely disregarded by the Obama administration and as far as this writer knows, was not defended by former Sec. State Condi Rice nor former President George Bush!!) The legal Gaddafi government was not killing hundreds of its people daily. It was not bombing its own cities. Its jails were not overflowing with prisoners ( look at the US jails. We cannot build them fast enough!!) Yet, the UN and the NATO aggressors were allowed to brutally attack and destroy the legal government of Libya and allowed to murder the head of the Revolution, Gaddafi. This amounts not only to brutal wanton aggression but to illegal Regicide which is an odious form of assassination. All of the foregoing is very disheartening to this writer. Why? Because the Game of Nations seem to be above the law and therefore, the drones that are aimed against our supposed enemies by the USA, can be reproduced and aimed against us. But you say that our assassination drones only murder those who are guilty. Well, that is our definition of things. But when they send their drones against us, we will be defined by them as those who deserve to die without benefit of accuser, indictment, defense and trial. But you say “they” did that to “us” on 9/11. Yes, they did, the bastards! But does that mean that we too become terrorist bastards? I hope not, but the evidence of this administration and of France and Britain point to the adage that “Might makes right.” If that is the case, than we can all despair because justice does not exist and the law of the jungle reigns supreme. PS. The Menvedev regime of Russia and the Communist regime of China could have vetoed UN resultion 1973. They did not and one thinks they felt betrayed because they objected during the brutal NATO criminal aggression but did not act. Now, it is hopeful that the Russian Confederation under Putin and the Communist Chinese government will continue to successfully veto Western aggression and NATO brutality and Genocide.

Can US Survive The Government’s Credit Card Mentality?

What follows are facts. Nothing in this essay will be conjecture or opinion. I will make no forecast – at least not in this essay. So please, stop the political name-calling… and grow up. The problems we face are ours. All of ours. It doesn’t matter how we got here. It only matters that we begin to deal with these issues – soon. If we don’t begin to solve these core financial problems, they will certainly destroy our country.
Today, our national federal debt far exceeds $15 trillion. This alone is not a serious problem. The interest we pay on these debts is small – thanks to the trust of our creditors, who, for the moment, continue to believe America is a safe bet.
So… what’s the problem? The main problem is the amount of debt we owe continues to increase at a faster and faster pace. This is exceptionally dangerous for two simple reasons. First, there’s simple math. When numbers compound, the result is geometric expansion. And that’s happening right now with our national debt because we continue to borrow money to pay the interest. And we have done so for about 40 years. Think about it this way: How big would your debts be today if you’d been using credit cards to pay your mortgage for the last several decades?
Even worse, our debts are compounding at an accelerating pace because we lack the political ability to limit the federal government’s spending. Please understand… I’m not pointing the finger at any politician or either political party. I’m simply pointing out a fact: This year’s $3.6 trillion federal budget is 20% larger than the entire 2008 budget. And while our government has grown at a record pace, our economy hasn’t. It has hardly grown at all. Thus, this will be the fourth year in a row we set a record for deficit spending. Never before in peacetime has our government borrowed this much money. And now, it’s borrowing record amounts every year.

Is it OK for a Black Man to be a Racist?

http://news.yahoo.com/radio-host-loses-female-gop-candidate-stupid-m-164432955.html?ugccmtnav=v1%2Fcomments%2Fcontext%2Fad439fd0-da0e-3cbd-8def-d68938598f5f%2Fcomments%3Fcount%3D20%26sortBy%3DhighestRated%26isNext%3Dtrue%26offset%3D20%26pageNumber%3D1#

This racist event is bad enough. But I am also amazed at the silence of the women’s movement. Where is the outrage? I guess it is okay for a black man to verbally abuse a black woman? There was more outcry over the Komem organization denying 500 thousand dollars to Planned Parenthood, then over this outrage. I suppose we could just bury this story and forget the talk show host. However, wrong is wrong and this is wrong. Another amazing thing is reading the comments made by viewers of this article. They seemed to me to laugh this off, to excuse the behavior as idiotic or stupid but not racist. Is it because it is not politically or socially safe to name this guy what he is, namely, a racist? Of course he could have done all of this for effect in order to catapult himself into headlines and take his tiny radio program stellar. Nonetheless, this kind of hate speech and verbal abuse is shown for what it is, violence parading as outrage. It must not be rewarded.

Will US Admin and US Congress Condemn Sudan

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/Sudan-Graham-Heiban-Bible/2012/02/02/id/428361

The question is: Will the US Government and the US Congress condemn the government of Sudan for bombing a Christian Bible College? The US Obama government backed uprisings against Mubarak in Eqypt even though it was suspected the results would be persecution of innocent Christians. Subsequent events in Egypt proved that not only innocent Christians are persecuted but also moderate Muslims and social activities. In Libya, the US Obama administration backed the wonton and wholesale bombing of the Sovereign government of Gaddaffi even though it was suspected that the NTC rebels were a front for European colonalist and imperialist powers. The results have proven the colonialist and imperialist takeover is now threatened by an Islamic fundamentalist extremism that persecutes Sufi Muslims and Ethnic Christians. In Tunisia, the US Obama administration hailed and supposrted the “Arab Spring” which is now instituting strict Islamic religious (Sharia) law upon a moderate Moslem population. Now we have the government of Sudan using its air force to bomb and destroy a Christian Bible College. The Obama Administration and the US Congress must not only condemn this action but also raise the issue at the United Nations of Islamic genocide against Christians.