Tuesday, January 29, 2008
McCain Wins Florida
Senator John McCain has won the Republican Florida primary and the endorsement of Rudy Giuliani who left the presidential race after coming in a distant third in the Sunshine state. I hope McCain's victory will bring unity and focus to Republicans who have been splintered this entire election cycle. As he emerges as the front runner those GOP voters who're sceptical of some of McCain's views should rally around him nonetheless for the good of the party and the country. Otherwise the Democrats will when the White House and impose their severly left-wing agenda on our society. Allowing that to happen in the name of ideological purity would be unforgivable. If McCain continues to lead the pack after Super Tuesday he should become the candidate for all Republicans. He needs us all to ensure a Republican presidency, which will be the best thing for America.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Why Just This Cause?
First, I want to say that I'm pro-life. I'm not critcizing the activists who marched for life in cities across America yesterday, the 35th anniversary of the tragic Roe v. Wade decision. But the protests on that historic date got me thinking about a question that's been in the back of my mind for a while. Why don't conservatives protest like that for our other beliefs?
Conservatives do care about a whole range of issues. We want a strong defense. We support school prayer. We oppose gay marriage. We're the backbone of the fight against illegal immigration. And, of course, we're pro-life. As individuals we can be passionate about all of these causes. But the only one that consistently gets conservatives into the streets en masse is the cause for life. Why?
Liberals take to the streets in support of all of their varied causes; we don't. In 2006, for instance, illegal aliens and their liberal enablers massed in the streets demanding "their" rights. Counterdemonstrations by conservatives were always embarrassingly small, when they occurred at all. Polls showed that most Americans opposed amnesty for illegals and wanted tough border security, but the streets were filled only with those who supported illegal immigration. I was dismayed, to say the least. And it's the same story with other hot button issues such as gay marriage, the Iraq War, and global warming. Liberals are in the streets; we are at home.
I have no clue why we conservatives are such stay-at-home "true believers" on every cause except saving babies from abortion. I do know that this has to change. While mass demonstrations don't always accomplish the changes they seek, they DO powerfully communicate resolute committment to those changes on the part of the demonstrators. And that's not something the powers that be are quick to forget. We conservatives, then, had better get over our shyness about demonstrating in support of all our causes, or else get used to our creeping irrelevance.
Conservatives do care about a whole range of issues. We want a strong defense. We support school prayer. We oppose gay marriage. We're the backbone of the fight against illegal immigration. And, of course, we're pro-life. As individuals we can be passionate about all of these causes. But the only one that consistently gets conservatives into the streets en masse is the cause for life. Why?
Liberals take to the streets in support of all of their varied causes; we don't. In 2006, for instance, illegal aliens and their liberal enablers massed in the streets demanding "their" rights. Counterdemonstrations by conservatives were always embarrassingly small, when they occurred at all. Polls showed that most Americans opposed amnesty for illegals and wanted tough border security, but the streets were filled only with those who supported illegal immigration. I was dismayed, to say the least. And it's the same story with other hot button issues such as gay marriage, the Iraq War, and global warming. Liberals are in the streets; we are at home.
I have no clue why we conservatives are such stay-at-home "true believers" on every cause except saving babies from abortion. I do know that this has to change. While mass demonstrations don't always accomplish the changes they seek, they DO powerfully communicate resolute committment to those changes on the part of the demonstrators. And that's not something the powers that be are quick to forget. We conservatives, then, had better get over our shyness about demonstrating in support of all our causes, or else get used to our creeping irrelevance.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Monday, January 14, 2008
Let The God Of Wisdom Speak!
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." Ecclesiastes 10:2. I knew God was a conservative. Hehe!
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Introducing: Seane-Anna!
Hey blogging friends! Perhaps because it's a new year I've been feeling the change bug. I've already changed the template for my blog Hammer Folk Woman--and may change it again!--and want to change things on all the others, too. Until I do I have decided to change my display name, the name I "sign" my posts with. From now on, instead of PoorGrrl at the end of my posts you'll see Seane-Anna. Don't worry, it's still me. I just wanted something different.
Why Seane-Anna? Well, Seane (pronounced Shawn) is what my family calls me. It's my nickname, derived from my middle name. Of course, I don't actually spell my nickname Seane. I got the idea for that spelling from remembering that in French adding a silent "e" to the end of some male names feminizes them. Thus, Michel because Michele, Jean becomes Jeane, as in Jeane d'Arc, aka Joan of Arc. See, I was paying attention in French class! So I took the Irish male Sean and made the feminine Seane, sort of a Gaelic/Gaulic hybrid. Hehe!
And Anna? That's a corruption of my first name which has been mispronounced and misspelled all my life. Anna, with both A's pronounced like the "a" in father, was the prettiest such corruption, courtesy of some Bosnian refugees I used to work with. They couldn't say my name right but at least they gave it a melodic Slavic twist. And I now pay tribute to them.
So that's how I came up with Seane-Anna. From now on PoorGrrl will just be part of my blog's title. If you want to address me call me Seane-Anna. After all, that's who I really am.
Why Seane-Anna? Well, Seane (pronounced Shawn) is what my family calls me. It's my nickname, derived from my middle name. Of course, I don't actually spell my nickname Seane. I got the idea for that spelling from remembering that in French adding a silent "e" to the end of some male names feminizes them. Thus, Michel because Michele, Jean becomes Jeane, as in Jeane d'Arc, aka Joan of Arc. See, I was paying attention in French class! So I took the Irish male Sean and made the feminine Seane, sort of a Gaelic/Gaulic hybrid. Hehe!
And Anna? That's a corruption of my first name which has been mispronounced and misspelled all my life. Anna, with both A's pronounced like the "a" in father, was the prettiest such corruption, courtesy of some Bosnian refugees I used to work with. They couldn't say my name right but at least they gave it a melodic Slavic twist. And I now pay tribute to them.
So that's how I came up with Seane-Anna. From now on PoorGrrl will just be part of my blog's title. If you want to address me call me Seane-Anna. After all, that's who I really am.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
The Church Of Black Racism?
With Barack Obama's win in the Iowa caucus and his decent second place finish in New Hampshire he is poised to finally get the kind of scrutiny that's dogged the other presidential candidates from day one. One of the things that I hope more people will pay attention to is the teachings of Obama's church, Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC).
I myself knew nothing of Obama's church until a few days ago while conversing with my friend Robert who blogs at Tired Of All The Liberal Rhetoric Out There. Robert has a link in one of his posts to TUCC's website where the church's philosophy is laid out. I was struck by how race conscious and liberal that philosophy is.
Straight away we're told that the TUCC congregation "is Unashamedly Black...an African people [who] remain 'true to our native land'". Further, we're informed in the church's 10 Point Vision that TUCC has "a non-negotiable committment to Africa" and to "the Historical Education of African People in Diaspora". TUCC also is committed to "Liberation" and to "working towards Economic Parity." Black liberation theology is the order of the day at TUCC, but not to worry. We're assured in the church's Talking Points that "African-centered thought, unlike Eurocentrism, does not assume superiority and look at everyone else as inferior." Oh. So racism is a problem of White people only. So much for Paul's teaching that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
This is Barack Obama's church, people. Imagine if a White, conservative, Republican candidate for dog catcher, let alone president, belonged to a church that boasted it was unashamedly White, with a non-negotiable committment to Europe and to educating European people. A church that pushed a White Value System calling for, among other things, support for White businesses and the White family. The outcry would be deafening. As it stands, the silence of White and Black liberals on TUCC's questionable teachings is what's deafening.
Barack Obama has often proclaimed his Christianity in order to enhance his appeal to certain constituencies. He has said he's proud of his Christian faith. It's time we took a closer look at the kind of Christianity he practices. If it's the kind that says it's ok for Blacks, but not Whites, to be racialist; that rejects patriotism; that embraces socialism, then we don't need to elect Obama to the most powerful political office not only in America but in the world.
Ask yourself: do you really want a president whose first allegiance--after God, that is--is to Africa, not America? A president who revels in his membership in a racialist church? A president who believes in different standards for Whites and Blacks? A president who supports wealth distribution, i.e. socialism? How would these beliefs play out on the world scene?
How, for instance, would a president who believes that socialism is mandated by the Bible react to a UN proposal to tax rich nations? Can a president whose cultural, racial, and religious allegiance is NOT to this country be trusted to protect America's sovereignty? What about the war against radical Islam? Can it be fought vigorously by a president religiously predisposed to give non-Whites the benefit of the doubt? These are questions we must ask so long as Obama remains a member of Trinity United Church of Christ.
In America we rightfully don't have a religious test for those seeking public office, but that doesn't mean citizens can't question where a candidate's religious beliefs may take this nation. And if those beliefs run counter to the obligations of the office the candidate should NOT be put in that office. Based on its own website some of the key teachings of Barack Obama's church are at odds with the obligations of the office of president. Consequently we must be EXTREMELY wary of making Obama our chief executive. A Black racist is no better than a White racist, especially in the Oval Office.
I myself knew nothing of Obama's church until a few days ago while conversing with my friend Robert who blogs at Tired Of All The Liberal Rhetoric Out There. Robert has a link in one of his posts to TUCC's website where the church's philosophy is laid out. I was struck by how race conscious and liberal that philosophy is.
Straight away we're told that the TUCC congregation "is Unashamedly Black...an African people [who] remain 'true to our native land'". Further, we're informed in the church's 10 Point Vision that TUCC has "a non-negotiable committment to Africa" and to "the Historical Education of African People in Diaspora". TUCC also is committed to "Liberation" and to "working towards Economic Parity." Black liberation theology is the order of the day at TUCC, but not to worry. We're assured in the church's Talking Points that "African-centered thought, unlike Eurocentrism, does not assume superiority and look at everyone else as inferior." Oh. So racism is a problem of White people only. So much for Paul's teaching that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
This is Barack Obama's church, people. Imagine if a White, conservative, Republican candidate for dog catcher, let alone president, belonged to a church that boasted it was unashamedly White, with a non-negotiable committment to Europe and to educating European people. A church that pushed a White Value System calling for, among other things, support for White businesses and the White family. The outcry would be deafening. As it stands, the silence of White and Black liberals on TUCC's questionable teachings is what's deafening.
Barack Obama has often proclaimed his Christianity in order to enhance his appeal to certain constituencies. He has said he's proud of his Christian faith. It's time we took a closer look at the kind of Christianity he practices. If it's the kind that says it's ok for Blacks, but not Whites, to be racialist; that rejects patriotism; that embraces socialism, then we don't need to elect Obama to the most powerful political office not only in America but in the world.
Ask yourself: do you really want a president whose first allegiance--after God, that is--is to Africa, not America? A president who revels in his membership in a racialist church? A president who believes in different standards for Whites and Blacks? A president who supports wealth distribution, i.e. socialism? How would these beliefs play out on the world scene?
How, for instance, would a president who believes that socialism is mandated by the Bible react to a UN proposal to tax rich nations? Can a president whose cultural, racial, and religious allegiance is NOT to this country be trusted to protect America's sovereignty? What about the war against radical Islam? Can it be fought vigorously by a president religiously predisposed to give non-Whites the benefit of the doubt? These are questions we must ask so long as Obama remains a member of Trinity United Church of Christ.
In America we rightfully don't have a religious test for those seeking public office, but that doesn't mean citizens can't question where a candidate's religious beliefs may take this nation. And if those beliefs run counter to the obligations of the office the candidate should NOT be put in that office. Based on its own website some of the key teachings of Barack Obama's church are at odds with the obligations of the office of president. Consequently we must be EXTREMELY wary of making Obama our chief executive. A Black racist is no better than a White racist, especially in the Oval Office.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)