The demands of real life have, for weeks now, put the blogging world on the back burner. On a really low burn, even. If you're a Facebook friend with me, you probably know the narrative.
But I'll be picking the posting pace back up soon, Lord willing. Stay strong, effendi.
--Mike
I will explore this in depth in my next article, but here's the crux of the matter: Trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his fellow terrorists in a U.S. court of law, rather than dealing with them through military channels as enemy combatants, is giving aid and comfort to enemies of the United States of America.
In case that phrase, "aid and comfort," didn't ring a bell, that's a definition of treason. Since the Obama Administration has directed this travesty, the blame lies not only with Attorney General Eric Holder, but primarily with President Barack Obama. And Obama's treason is more than sufficient reason to impeach him.
Let's see if it happens. We can only hope--and pray.
More soon.
--Mike
After perusing the passage in question, and agreeing with your child about the aforementioned grossness, what would you do? Scratch your head, say it's required reading, and then return to whipping up some dinner? Or do you tell your child that just because you get an assignment, it doesn't mean you have to do it against your will and your beliefs?
Such was the puzzlement facing Rafael and Mindy Mercado. Their daughter, Mari, brought home the Haruki Murakami novel The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle. This isn't a book for teenagers, or for anyone with high literary standards; it has a disjointed plot, characters with whom one cannot connect, and episodes of lubricious exhibitionism. However, it's won some awards, so there are plenty of people who will automatically assume it's wonderful reading, even for younger readers. For them, it's inappropriate, mind you.
My observations are not focused upon the Pasco County, Florida school system, which correctly decided to give young Miss Mercado something else to read, but on those who feel it's their civic duty to respond (without standing behind their responses, mind you) by attacking the Mercado family's very moral request.
This brings me to why I've been saying "mind you" so annoyingly much in this little missive. Much of the attacks (as is typical of much Internet-comment bile, if not most) were unsigned, toss-it-from-the-bushes nonsense. They attacked the student and her parents, rather than taking the time to focus on the issues raised. According to them, this student and her family are: Pathetic, sad, uninformed, spoiled, immature, closed-minded, and hypocritical (because they read the Bible, which is supposed to be "[f]ull of child abuse, kidnapping, murder, psychological and physical torture and incest"). And those are just some of the highlights. These were comments made without the use of developed minds; comments made with only the input of quivering, gelatinous emotions. Use your minds, people, particularly when you insist yours are so very well-developed.
But I digress.
As you might know, such brickbat-hurling is endlessly fascinating to me. So, I had to respond--and if the pattern holds, some of those brickbats will come flying in this direction. Which is, also, endlessly fascinating. My response to them, quoted thusly and like so:
Interesting to see so many hate-mongers coming out (or, generally, hiding behind first-name-only signatures and pseudonyms) to attack a young lady whose life has a solid moral foundation.
The "tolerant class" preaches capital-t Tolerance morning, noon, and night--as long as they're not required to be tolerant of those who disagree with them. Of course, nowadays "tolerance" is popularly defined by such people as "live your own life, but don't even make me think I'm not making a perfect choice with my life." You might have noticed that Miss Mercado and her father didn't try to inflict their beliefs upon the entire program, but rather asked for (and received) an alternate assignment. Unfortunately, the request suggested that students who read the book in question shouldn't have done so. And we can't have that, can we?
Freedom, boys and girls, carries with it responsibility. Miss Mercado, rather than mindlessly following the status quo, acted responsibly; some, mindlessly, attacked her for it.
Because of her moral foundation, this episode won't be the last time she'll weather such knee-jerk opposition--and that is probably the best lesson she'll learn this semester.
(Linda Stelter/Birmingham News)
Yesterday, American dictator Barack Obama had a conference call with a group of roughly 1000 Jewish religious leaders, during which he made an astounding statement--one that was astounding, in its narcissism, even for the new dictator Obama.
In addressing the rabbis on health care, Obama the Usurper was quoted by Rabbi Jack Moline as saying this (I quote thusly, and like so): "We are God's partners in matters of life and death."
Let that sink in for a moment. "We are God's partners in matters of life and death."
Keep in mind that ol' Barry thinks it's a fine idea to kill developing children--even via the barbarism of partial-birth abortion. Remember that Barry believes the "bitter" cling to "guns and religion," can't find a church with which to affiliate, spent decades listening to the rants of a cult preacher of ethnocentric liberation theology, and couldn't be bothered with the National Day of Prayer.
Oh, and be certain to remember that Barry is a faux Christian. He uses the faith as a prop, opining that there are "many paths" to a right relationship with God, discounting Jesus' own pronouncement that "no man comes to the Father but by Me." And now, Barry is trying to use others' beliefs as a prop, attempting to convince Jewish rabbis (all of whom should read Obama the riot act for his anti-Israel, pro-terrorism attitude toward the Middle East) that they should get on board with Obama's desire to nationalize health care.
This same Obama--the Lightworker, the Usurper, the first American dictator--believes himself to be "God's partner" in "matters of life and death." "But he said 'we,' Mike!" Now, last I checked, the word "we" means "you and me." Do you believe yourself to be God's equal? No? Then that "we" is actually "I," correct? Indeed, you might have heard of the Royal We, as in "We are not amused." That's what Barry was saying: We are not amused that you haven't rolled over and accepted rampaging socialism, so we must remind you that we are God's partners in matters of life and death, and we must be accorded the accompanying deference.
Those of us who are Christians are described in many ways. We are children of God, joint-heirs with Christ, servants, and such. We are not characterized as God's "partners," ever. God has no partners; He has followers, but He does not share the limelight, the responsibility, or the throne with anyone else.
One thing to consider, though--these words were spoken, not printed initially. Perhaps Obama was referring to another being? Should we take his words as being "we are god's partners in matters of life and death"?
Or (and this would make more sense, knowing Obama's narcissism and the advancement of the Obama cult of personality) "we are gods, partners in matters of life and death"?
Ah, if we had some audio. But however you parse it, Barry's perspective is a new low.
--Mike
