---------- Forwarded message ----------
Subject: 240 years old, this is really something
Friday, September 27, 2013
Why Michelle came home and Sharia law ... thx Paul C!
WHY MICHELLE CAME HOME -
Interesting!Sheppard Smith, Fox News."If you check
President Obama's last trip over-seas, his wife left just after
their visit to France . She has yet to accompany him to any Arab
country. Think about it. Why is Michelle returning to the states
when 'official' trips to foreign countries generally include the
First Lady."Here's one thought on the matter.While in a
Blockbuster renting videos I came across a video called "Obama".
There were two men standing next to me and we talked about
President Obama. These guys were Arabs, so I asked them why they
thought Michelle Obama headed home following the President's
recent visit to France instead of traveling on to Saudi Arabia
and Turkey with her husband. They told me she could not go to
Saudi Arabia , Turkey or Iraq.I said "Why not,(?) Laura Bush
went to Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Dubai ." They said that Obama
is a Muslim and therefore he is not allowed to bring his wife
into countries that adhere to Sharia Law.Two points of
interest here:1) I thought it interesting that two American
Arabs at Blockbuster believe that our President is a Muslim, who
follows a strict Islamic creed.2) They also said that's the
reason he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia . It was a signal to
the Muslim world, acknowledging his religion.For further
consideration, here is a response from Dr. Jim Murk, a Middle
Eastern Scholar and expert on Islam.This is his
explanation of what the Arab American's were saying."An orthodox
Muslim man would never take his wife on a politically oriented
trip to any nation which practices Sharia law, particularly
Saudi Arabia where the Wahhabi sect is dominant. This is true
and it is why Obama left Michelle in Europe . She will stay home
when he visits Arab countries. He knows Muslim protocol; this
includes, bowing to the Saudi King. Obama is regarded as a
Muslim in the Arab world, because he was born to a Muslim
father; he acknowledged his Muslim faith with George
Stephanopoulus. Note that he downplays his involvement with
Christianity (after touting it in the election campaign , by not
publicly joining a Christian church in DC. And occasionally
attending the chapel for services at Camp David.He also
played down the fact that America is a Christian country and said,
unbelievably, that it was one of the largest Muslim nations in
the world, which is nonsense. He has publicly taken the side of
the Palestinians in the conflict with Israel and he ignored the
National Day of Prayer, something no other President has ever
done. He conceals his true faith to the detriment of the
American people."--- Jim Murk, Doctor of Philosophy in
Middle Eastern Culture & Religion.ACTIONS speak louder than
words.Another interesting item regarding Sharia Law. Why has
Barack Hussein Obama insisted that the U.S. Attorney General
hold the trials of the 911 Muslim Terrorists in Civilian Courts
as Common Criminals instead of as Terrorists who attacked the
United States of America ? If the Muslim Terrorists are tried in
Military Tribunals, convicted and sentenced to death, by LAW,
Barack Hussein Obama, as President of the United States , would
be required to sign their death warrants. He would not be
required to sign the death warrants if they are sentenced to
death by a Civilian Court. Muslim Jihadist, Army Major Hassan
slaughtered non-Muslim soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas rather than
go to Afghanistan and be a part of anything that could lead to
the deaths of fellow Muslims. He stated that Muslims 'could not and
should not kill fellow Muslims.' Is the motive for Barack
Hussein Obama's insistence on civilian trials, to make sure he
doesn't have to sign the death warrants for the Muslim
Terrorists? Why would he, as President of the United States, not
sign the death warrants for Muslim Terrorists who attacked the
United States and murdered over 3,000 U. S. Citizens on 9/11?
Could it be that he is FORBIDDEN by his RELIGION to authorize
the execution of Muslims?Think about that! Open your eyes,
ears and mind to who the President is, how he behaves and what
he is doing!Actions speak louder than teleprompter-written
words.Please pass on to family & friends around the country
and ask they do the
same!!
| ||
|
|
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Bill O'Reilly: OK gor Cruz to pull GOP Further Right ... Thx Newsmax!
Cruz wants to be the leader of the Republican Party, and he doesn't like the way it's being run, O'Reilly said Monday on "The O'Reilly Factor."
"He thinks it's far too liberal, and it's not in-your-face enough, not confrontational," O'Reilly said. "So he's breaking away from the consensus middle to stake out his own area that he's going to be the leader."
Editor's Note: Should ObamaCare Be Defunded? Vote in Urgent National Poll
Cruz wants to be president and re-energize the tea party movement, O'Reilly said. "He wants people to coalesce around his view of the country. There's nothing wrong with that."
O'Reilly asked guest Karl Rove why mainstream Republicans don't debate Cruz rather than attack him. "Win the debate, that's what it's all about."
The Republican strategist Rove, who is one of Cruz's critics, said the problem is that Cruz doesn't debate. Cruz's fellow senators complain to Rove that they have no idea what his plans are until he makes public statements.
"His fellow senators don't know where he's coming from," Rove said.
O'Reilly continued with what he called his defense of Cruz. He said the tea party won big in 2010, but failed miserably in 2012.
"You gotta win if you want to dismantle Obamacare," O'Reilly said. "Cruz may be the guy to take the tea party up again."
"Well, we'll see," Rove answered.
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
SamKat- things I believe
Things I believe:
I will continue voting Republican although I am a Tea Party person and a conservative Christian. Only votes from the two major parties matter in American elections every other year. I believe a solid majority of American citizens share my beliefs in the political arena, but all too few have been voting that way recently.
I believe most of the four hundred thirty-five Representatives, one hundred Senators and the Supreme Court and our supposed potus people who have acted in a non-representative way of the USA citizens,would be better out of their positions. Ours is a representative government which has become out of control due to a lack of participation by the majority of our citizens.
I love the idea of "kinder and gentler"; however the islamic terrorists have avowed their desires to kill all Americans and particularly Christians of all nations, and they aclaim the Kuran instructs them so.
I am a sinner as Pope Francis also proclaims. I love his humility, even in light of his exalted position with the Catholic Church.
I believe Republicans love to maintain their positions of power, but they are more reasonable than the secular progressive democrtats who walked out of Senator Isse's hearings when Benghazi family members of the four USA citizens killed in the senseless attacks 9/11/2012, were testifying. Democrats, more than Republicans, put their party desires above our country and the expected Potus reactions. obama acted cowardly then and does so repeatedlly. He is not qualified to be our Commander in Chief, and he continues to go against the majority people's wishes. Conservative Christians are the majjority, but are not voting with the correct frame of what is happening to our country and to our world.
My preference over Romney, who is a very good man, was Gingrich and I believe the best speaker for conservatives is Sarah Palin. The Republicans did nothing to protect these stronger candidates and they are again putting down Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. That is why I am Tea Party mamber above being a Republican. I do not want to lose to another secular progressive in the upcoming 2014 and 2016 elections. Nevertheless, I still know that our God, Christ's Father is in control of this world.
SamKat
I will continue voting Republican although I am a Tea Party person and a conservative Christian. Only votes from the two major parties matter in American elections every other year. I believe a solid majority of American citizens share my beliefs in the political arena, but all too few have been voting that way recently.
I believe most of the four hundred thirty-five Representatives, one hundred Senators and the Supreme Court and our supposed potus people who have acted in a non-representative way of the USA citizens,would be better out of their positions. Ours is a representative government which has become out of control due to a lack of participation by the majority of our citizens.
I love the idea of "kinder and gentler"; however the islamic terrorists have avowed their desires to kill all Americans and particularly Christians of all nations, and they aclaim the Kuran instructs them so.
I am a sinner as Pope Francis also proclaims. I love his humility, even in light of his exalted position with the Catholic Church.
I believe Republicans love to maintain their positions of power, but they are more reasonable than the secular progressive democrtats who walked out of Senator Isse's hearings when Benghazi family members of the four USA citizens killed in the senseless attacks 9/11/2012, were testifying. Democrats, more than Republicans, put their party desires above our country and the expected Potus reactions. obama acted cowardly then and does so repeatedlly. He is not qualified to be our Commander in Chief, and he continues to go against the majority people's wishes. Conservative Christians are the majjority, but are not voting with the correct frame of what is happening to our country and to our world.
My preference over Romney, who is a very good man, was Gingrich and I believe the best speaker for conservatives is Sarah Palin. The Republicans did nothing to protect these stronger candidates and they are again putting down Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. That is why I am Tea Party mamber above being a Republican. I do not want to lose to another secular progressive in the upcoming 2014 and 2016 elections. Nevertheless, I still know that our God, Christ's Father is in control of this world.
SamKat
Frank Bruni- NYT ColumnistThe pope's radical whisper ... Col's Dispatch 9/24/2013 pA16
Opinion
The pope's radical whisper
Reuters
Pope Francis talks during his general audience in St. Peter’s Square at the Vatican earlier this year.
It's about time. The leader of the Roman Catholic Church has surveyed the haughty scolds in its ranks, noted their fixation on matters of sexual morality above all others and said enough is enough. I'm not being cheeky with this one-word response. Hallelujah.
But it wasn't the particulars of Pope Francis' groundbreaking message in an interview published last week that stopped me in my tracks, gave fresh hope to many embittered Catholics and caused hardened commentators to perk up.
It was the sweetness in his timbre, the meekness of his posture. It was the revelation that a man can wear the loftiest of miters without having his head swell to fit it and can hold an office to which the term "infallible" is often attached without forgetting his failings. In the interview, Francis called himself naive, worried that he'd been rash in the past and made clear that the flock harbored as much wisdom as the shepherds.
Instead of commanding people to follow him, he invited them to join him. And did so gently, in what felt like a whisper.
What a surprising portrait of modesty in a church that had lost touch with it. And what a refreshing example of humility in a world with too little of it.
That's what stayed with me, not the olive branch he extended to gay people or the way he brushed aside the contraception wars but his personification of a virtue whose deficit in American life hit me full force when I spotted it here, in his disarming words. Reading and then rereading the interview, I felt like a bird-watcher who had just stumbled upon a dodo.
I'm hardly the first to flag this pope's apparent humility or the fact that it extends beyond his preference for simple dress over regal costumes, for a Ford Focus over a papal chariot, for modest quarters over a monarch's suite. Less than two months ago, when he answered a question about gay priests with a question of his own — "Who am I to judge?" — the self-effacement in that phrase was widely and rightly celebrated. Was a pope really acting and talking like this?
But Francis' tone so far is interesting not just as a departure for the church but as a counterpoint to the prevailing sensibility in our country, where humility is endangered if not quite extinct. It's out of sync with all the relentless self-promotion, which has been deemed the very oxygen of success. It sits oddly with the cult of self-esteem.
Humility has little place in the realm of social media, which is governed by a look-at-me ethos, by listen-to-me come-ons, by me, me, me. And humility is quaintly irrelevant to the defining entertainment genre of our time, reality television, which insists that every life is mesmerizing, if only in the manner of a train wreck, and that anyone is a latent star: the housewife, the hoarder, the teen mom, the tuna fisher. Just preen enough to catch an audience's eye. Just beckon the cameras close.
Politics is most depressing of all. It rewards braggarts and bullies, who muscle their way onto center stage with the crazy certainty that they and only they are right, while we in the electorate and the news media lack the fortitude to shut them up or shoo them away. They disgust but divert us, or at a minimum wear us down. Maybe we get the showboats we deserve.
For a textbook case of humility gone missing, consider right-wing Republicans' efforts to derail Obamacare by whatever crude and disruptive means necessary. The health care law has its flaws, some of them profound, but it was legitimately passed, in accordance with the rules, and to stray outside them in order to make it go away is to believe that they don't apply to you, that your viewpoint trumps the process itself. It's the summit of arrogance.
Humility doesn't work in the cross-fire of our political combat. Certainty and single-mindedness are better fuels.
How exactly does President Barack Obama fit in? While his Syria reversals may well have diminished him, they had a sort of humility to them, reflected a willingness to yield to the strong feelings of others and deserve some acknowledgment along those lines. Leadership, more art than science, should be a mix of rallying people to your cause and recognizing when you stand too far away from them.
But in Obama there's a recurrent deflection of criticism and a refusal to abide certain political customs and efficiencies — the stroking, the rewarding, the mantra-style repetition of a simplified argument for a distracted populace — that work against his success and smack of excessive pride. He could take a page from this pope.
I never expected to write that. For too many years, I watched the chieftains of the church wrap themselves in lavish pageantry and prioritize the protection of fellow clergy members over the welfare of parishioners. They allowed priests who sexually abused children to evade accountability and, in many cases, to abuse again. That cover-up was the very antithesis of humility, driven by the belief that shielding the church from public scandal mattered more than anything else.
For too many years, I also watched and listened to imperious men around the pope hurl thunderbolts of judgment from the Olympus of Vatican City. But in his recent interview, Francis made a plea for quieter, calmer weather, suggesting that church leaders in Rome spend less energy on denunciations and censorship.
He cast himself as a struggling pastor determined to work in a collaborative fashion. He characterized himself as a sinner. "It is not a figure of speech, a literary genre," he clarified. "I am a sinner."
He didn't right past wrongs. Let's be clear about that. Didn't call for substantive change to church teachings and traditions that indeed demand re-examination, including the belief that homosexual acts themselves are sinful. Didn't challenge the all-male, celibate priesthood. Didn't speak as progressively — and fairly — about women's roles in the church as he should.
But he also didn't present himself as someone with all the answers. No, he stepped forward — shuffled forward, really — as someone willing to guide fellow questioners. In doing so, he recognized that authority can come from a mix of sincerity and humility as much as from any blazing, blinding conviction and that stature is a respect you earn, not a pedestal you grab. That's a useful lesson in this grabby age of ours.
Frank Bruni is a columnist for The New York Times.
Kramer's speech- Why are whites the only racists? ... thx clay V!
Kramer's speech- Why are whites the only racists?
BE
PROUD TO BE
WHITE!
Thought you might think this was an interesting talk! I
liked it.
|
I have
been wondering
about why
Whites are
racists,
and no
other race
is...
Proud
to be White
Michael
Richards makes
his point...
Michael Richards better known as Kramer
from
TVs' Seinfeld
does make a
good point.
This was
his defense
speech in
court
after
making racial
comments in
his comedy
act.
In it he raised a few interesting points... Someone finally said it.
But how
many are
actually
paying
attention to
this?
There are African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans,
Arab
Americans,
etc.
And then there are just Americans...
You pass
me on the
street and
sneer in my
direction.
You call me 'White boy', 'Cracker', 'Honkey', 'Whitey', 'Caveman'...
And
that's OK...
But when I call you Nigger, Kike,
Towel
head,
Sand-nigger,
Camel Jockey,
Beaner, Gook,
or Chink...
You call
me a racist.
You say that whites commit a lot of violence against you... So why are the ghettos the most dangerous places to live in? You have the United Negro College Fund.
You have
Martin Luther
King Day.
You have Black History Month. You have Cesar Chavez Day. You have Yom Hashoah. You have Ma'uled Al-Nabi. You have the NAACP. You have BET... Imagine if we had WET
(White
Entertainment
Television)...
we'd be
racists.
If we had a White Pride Day,
you
would call us
racists.
If we had White History Month,
we'd be
racists.
If we had any organization for whites only to 'advance' OUR lives,
we'd be
racists.
We have a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, a Black Chamber of Commerce,
and then
we just have
the plain
Chamber of
Commerce.
Wonder who pays for that??? A white woman could not be in the
Miss
Black American
pageant,
but any
color can be
in the Miss
America
pageant.
If we had a college fund that only gave white students scholarships...
You know
we'd be
racists.
There are over 60 openly proclaimed
Black
Colleges in
the US ...
Yet if there were 'White colleges',
that
would be a
racist
college.
In the Million Men March,
you
believed that
you were
marching for
your race and
rights.
If we marched for our race and rights,
you
would call us
racists.
You are proud to be black, brown, yellow and orange,
and
you're not
afraid to
announce it.
But when we announce our white pride,
you call
us racists.
You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us. But,
when a
white police
officer shoots
a black gang
member or
beats up a
black drug
dealer running
from the law
and posing a
threat to
society, you
call him a
racist.
I am proud...
But you
call me a
racist.
Why is it that only whites can be racists??? There is nothing improper
about
this
e-mail...
But let's see which of you are proud enough to send it on. I sadly don't think many will. That's why
we have
LOST most of
OUR RIGHTS
in this
country.
We won't stand up for ourselves! BE PROUD
TO
BE WHITE!
It's not a crime YET...
But getting
very close!
It is estimated that ONLY 5%
of those
reaching this
point in this
e-mail,
will pass it
on.
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)