“My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see a time in which we put a stop to discrimination against gays and lesbians — whether in the office or on the battlefield. You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman. You will see a nation that’s valuing and cherishing these families as we build a more perfect union — a union in which gay Americans are an important part. I am committed to these goals. And my administration will continue fighting to achieve them.”

“Gay Americans” who wish to be married have the same rights as the rest of us Americans. What they want, something I’ll always speak out against, is the right to render absurd the very idea of marriage, which is the God-ordained union of one man and one woman. They want to shift the very foundation of the nation in general and families in particular, and some have the shameless gall to equate sex between two men with blacks’ rights to equal treatment.

In a stunning display of irony, Obama signs off with this: “God bless you. God bless America.”

Got it, professing Christians who voted for this man? Obama asked God to bless that which God calls an abomination. To echo Dr. James White, Reformed Christian pastor, apologist, debater, author, webcaster, and blogger, Obama wants us to honor that which sent Christ to the cross. Christians cannot honor it.

I can’t post the video. To watch this “Christian” assuring those in rebellion against God that he hopes their rebellion will be glorified is stomach-churning. Watch at your own risk.

Dr. White offers a wonderfully edifying assessment of Obama’s speech. Download the 60-minute MP3. Follow him on Twitter at DrOakley1689.

They want the government to manage every part of their lives, from the time they realize they have to work for a living until they’re ready for the grave. Such people are afraid of “cold” capitalism and the “rugged individualism” upon which the country was built–two of many reasons why the U.S. still is the greatest country on the planet.

As I’ve listened to and read about liberals’ (including elected officials) disdainful reactions to Americans exercising their constitutional rights by protesting government action, I was sort of sad. People who voted for Obama casually and carelessly accuse dissenters of racism for having the audacity to express discontent over government intrusion, control, and wastefulness.

Even lovers of socialism dreaming of a world in which the government pays their bills and manages their lives (and erodes their freedom in the process, a natural consequence) should see the irony of calling opponents of the “health care reform” bill racists and Nazis. Nazis were national socialists. Obama’s so-called reform bill is national socialism. Then again, it’s fashionable to call people racists and Nazis, especially if the protesters are white.

By the way, I don’t think it’s useful or effective for conservatives to call the other side Nazis, either. Let’s strive to be more original and cleverer than that.

Here’s a mini-lesson so simple, my six-year-old nephew could understand it. Fundamentally, “we the people” are the government, but in a constitutional republic such as ours, elected leaders represent us. Elected leaders of all stripes are prone to forget we have a Constitution and conveniently remember it when it comes to something they want. That’s human nature. I’ve got it. You’ve got it. We all have it. The character-building struggle is to rise above it.

A digression: I wanted to make sure you read Eboo Patel’s blog post. A blogger for the Washington Post, Patel had the straight face to call a Marxist an American patriot and lament the “vicious smear campaign” that led to his resignation from the Obama administration. That Van Jones, who fell on his own sword, was hired to work for the President of the United States is appalling enough. Similarly distressing is Patel himself, blogging regularly for a mainstream newspaper, works for the administration. (Well, he works for us, but you know what I mean.) Obama appointed him to the Advisory Council of the White House Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Initiatives.

Here we have a current political appointee spreading unmitigated propaganda in support of an anti-America Marxist (redundant, I know). Not an occasional op-ed. A daily blog. (Our hourly or minute-by-minute, his choice.)

Having said that, this is what makes America great. Everyone is free to spout his opinions, from harshly castigating the government and our elected officials to effusively proclaiming our love for them. It doesn’t sit well for me that an Obama appointee has a regular “free press” platform from which to push his man’s policies and sing his praises, and I don’t know how the Washington Post gets away with it. Someone who voted for the president? Okay. But someone appointed by the president? Come on.

(I don’t recall hearing or reading about the Post allowing a Bush appointee to blog. If you have examples, please send them my way, and pardon my ignorance.)

At least the paper allows comments, so real patriots can castigate Patel’s stunningly uninformed and incredible ideas.

You know, some free people tend to forget that freedom costs. They think it rained down from heaven. They think America is the rule instead of the exception. Reasonable and informed people know that American is a successful experiment, one that men and women fought and died to protect. They gave their lives so that I can express my disgust for misguided socialist policies. They sacrificed themselves so that we’d keep our rights to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress and criticize the government without fear of arrest, and all the rest you learned in school.

The majority of Americans elected a man who, despite having taught constitutional law, doesn’t seem to get the Constitution’s elegant simplicity and clarity and what it takes to protect our rights (unless it concerns racial grievances, also known as pseudo-rights) and the absolute necessity of ensuring the freedom of the individual.

Keep protesting and criticizing and calling the administration out. And let’s hope Obama will gain the title of “first biracial president to serve one term.” There’s no guarantee that a Republican will protect the freedom of the American people and the integrity of our system of government…

…but I’ll take my chances.

Rally ’round the reform bill at your own risk.

Whose health?

Abortion obviously isn’t healthy for the fetus, as it leads to a violent death, so it must be the woman’s. Carrying a baby, after volunteering to perform the act that creates babies, apparently is unhealthy for the woman who doesn’t want the baby. Instead of concerning herself with the health (read: life) or her unborn child, she proceeds to snuff out that life, and abortion proponents want taxpayers to foot the bill for the snuffing.

Twisted world, indeed.

The Christian Defense Coalition and Operation Rescue created a campaign called “Abortion is Not Health Care” to bring attention to the $1.5 trillion health care bill, over 1,000 pages worth, scheduled for a vote at the end of July. Our Christ-professing president will include taxpayer-funded child killing in his socialized medicine plan. The Coalition will begin its campaign on Sunday, July 26, in Washington, DC.

Coalition director Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney said, “President Obama talks about being a progressive leader who embraces human rights and equality for all. It is tragic that he would turn health care, which is supposed to heal and bring comfort to those in need, into something that destroys innocent life.”

Later…My non-political sister just pointed out that Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad’s attack on the military recruiters was an attack against the entire U.S. military. STILL no response from AG (as of 11:39 a.m. PT).

*************************************************************************

Update (6/4): The U.S. Attorney General issued a statement on private citizen Tiller’s murder the day it happened:

“The murder of Doctor George Tiller is an abhorrent act of violence, and his family is in our thoughts and prayers at this tragic moment. Federal law enforcement is coordinating with local law enforcement officials in Kansas on the investigation of this crime, and I have directed the United States Marshals Service to offer protection to other appropriate people and facilities around the nation. The Department of Justice will work to bring the perpetrator of this crime to justice. As a precautionary measure, we will also take appropriate steps to help prevent any related acts of violence from occurring.”

So far, there’s no statement posted about the murder of Pvt. Long (as of 10:34 a.m. PT), a member of the U.S. armed forces, three days after it happened.

*************************************************************************

Well, what do you know? Two days after military recruiter Private William Long’s murder (as opposed to hours after abortionist George Tiller’s murder on a Sunday, no less) by a Muslim convert, President Barack Obama finally released a statement, though it’s not posted on the White House web site yet (as of 9:26 a.m. PT):

“I am deeply saddened by this senseless act of violence against two brave young soldiers who were doing their part to strengthen our armed forces and keep our country safe. I would like to wish Quinton Ezeagwula a speedy recovery, and to offer my condolences and prayers to William Long’s family as they mourn the loss of their son.” (Source)

Obama’s statement about Tiller:

“I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence.”

This is how Obama’s statement about Long should read:

“I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Pvt. William Long as he performed his duty. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as sending our men and women overseas to preserve our freedom, protect others from tyranny, and contain global Islamic terrorism, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence.”

Our military men and women serve and protect. One of the commander-in-chief’s own men was killed by a follower of Allah while on duty. Relevant in the age of Islamic terrorism, don’t you think? That’s the murder that should have been responded to within hours. But why quibble? I suspect the only reason Obama released a statement at all was because conservative bloggers kept daring him to.

(Photo credit: KATV)

The thing is done. Barack Hussein Obama is America’s 44rd president and first biracial president. I almost – almost – envy black people excited about Obama. They really do have a pep in their step.

Yesterday truly was an historic moment for the United States. For better or for worse, Obama’s got four years to do his thing. In my world, values trump skin color, and I can’t get excited about the reign of someone whose system of belief is so different from my own, even if he’s half-black.

During the campaign, Obama said one of the first things he’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act into law. Since he thinks women have a right to commit infanticide, I believe him. Then again, he’ll be so busy dealing with friends and foes trying to cash in favors, he might forget.

Readers have asked for my opinion on the following portion of Rev. Joseph Lowery’s prayer:

Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest,
and in the joy of a new beginning,
we ask you to help us work for that day
when black will not be asked to get in back,
when brown can stick around,
when yellow will be mellow,
when the red man can get ahead, man;
and when white will embrace what is right.
That all those who do justice and love mercy
say Amen

I know white people are so weary of being made to feel responsible for everything wrong in the “black community,” from out-of-wedlock pregnancies, to the inability of people with bad credit to get home loans or, depending on which way the wind blows, their ability to get sub-prime loans, to the academic achievement gap, and on and on. Personally speaking, that is, I, myself, would rather be left alone. I don’t blame anyone else for my lot in life. It falls squarely on me. At least, that’s the way I choose to see it and how I conduct my life.

I understand how frustrating it can be that even in prayer, someone’s implying that you’re embracing what is wrong, that your efforts have been insufficient, that you must do more for people who are blessed to live in the greatest country in the world. Opportunities abound, but some people don’t want to do what it takes to seize them. Complaining and blaming are so much easier.

Somewhere along the way, equality of opportunity morphed into a desire for equality of outcome. But thanks to the true diversity of individuals – not just the skin deep-only kind – that won’t happen. Individuals will always have varying levels of talent, motivation, curiosity, drive…equality of outcome can only be produced by rigging the game and subsidizing the players.

Obama will be like any other president: going back on his promises, disappointing the base, etc. People who see him as some kind of great biracial hope who’ll bring together all the colors of the rainbow are deluded. He’s just a man. He has no magic powers. He doesn’t have the power to make rogue nations that hate us suddenly fall in love with us, for example. What he probably will end up doing is appeasing these nations. They will always hate the United States and live to see its destruction; an ally in the White House will make their efforts to destroy us easier.

Whoa! Pardon the digression. Back to Lowery. Keep in mind that he’s an 87-year-old black man who lived through Jim Crow. As co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Lowery was on the front lines of the civil rights movement. If anyone knows how this country once treated blacks, it’s Lowery. Make allowances for a man who witnessed something yesterday he didn’t believe he’d ever live to see.

Despite my difference of opinion with people like Lowery, I am grateful to him and to others for making the road easier and less steep for me.

(Photo credit: REUTERS/Larry Downing)

Update: Fabulous Carlotta Morrow writes, via Facebook:

“I agree with you about Lowrey. He offended many whites, but I just believe it came out the wrong way. Many of us oldies remember the phrases “black get back, white is right, and so on…” I took it to mean that those phrases have been wiped out but for those like you and me, we believe those phrases were wiped out long ago. Many were offended because it sounds like he’s still living in the past…as if Obama’s election meant nothing! The offense is understandable and Lowery needs to clarify if nothing else.”

But I’m pleased Barack Obama chose the socially conservative Rick Warren to do his inaugural invocation, regardless of his motives.

Whatever you think of Warren, make no mistake: he’s a social conservative, my favorite kind. Among other things, he is pro-life and opposes homosexual “marriage.” (I’ve learned in recent years that being socially conservative doesn’t necessarily mean one holds these values.) And that’s good enough for me.

Homosexuals are a tad upset that their brother-in-arms chose someone who calls homosexual behavior by its proper name and shares my opinion about the slippery slope of allowing two men to call themselves married in the traditional sense of the word. People may be offended that I think such a mockery eventually would lead to atrocities like allowing adults to marry children. But look at it this way: I can’t believe in my lifetime, Americans are discussing allowing people of the same sex to marry. Whoever thought that would happen? You honestly don’t think it will lead to other perverted things? You’re either naive, imbecilic, or straight-up lying.

Be offended, curse, laugh, say evil things about me behind my back — whatever you need to do, but I will always oppose homosexual “marriage” and will continue to speak out boldly and publicly against it.

Why did Obama (who said he opposes homosexual “marriage,” by the way) choose a Prop 8-supporting man like Warren, knowing it would anger and confound his leftist base? To “reach out” to social conservatives who voted for John McCain, to skim off a few Republican-voting Christians who dig Warren – I don’t know, and I don’t think it matters that much.

I’m enjoying the fact that Barack Obama is not doing what his supporters expected. For example, blacks, hispanics, and radical leftists aren’t satisfied with his cabinet picks, and some say he’s being too careful, too timid. Careful or timid, he’s still an infanticide-supporting liberal. And that’s bad enough for me.

Happy invocating, Rick!

(Let’s pray that he smuggles in the Gospel.)

I remember when President George Bush pledged $15 billion to help reduce AIDS in Africa. I wasn’t too pleased. I’m hardly ever pleased about the government sending billions of dollars.

Close to 25 percent of that money goes to groups that promote abstinence outside marriage and fidelity within marriage. The policy prohibited aid to organizations that counseled for and performed abortions, with the usual “rape, incest, or woman’s health” exception. (I don’t hold to such exceptions.)

Focusing on abstinence has paid off in countries like Uganda, where the AIDS rate has decreased from 15 percent to five percent. In Kenya, HIV infection rates among unmarried young adults have dropped by two-thirds. Why? Because they curbed an activity we Bible thumpers call fornication. Well, that’s what God calls it.

Apparently some have complained that Bush’s policies impede efforts to push condoms and “family planning” — a euphemism for child killing – despite positive results of the policies. With an infanticide-supporting man like Barack Obama in charge of things, pro-child killing “family planners” will get their wish. (Source – Also see LifeNews.com)

Susan F. Wood, co-chairman of Obama’s advisory committee for women’s health, said abstinence, fidelity, and pro-life requirements “have set back sexually transmitted disease prevention and family planning globally…We [we???] have been going in the wrong direction and we need to turn it around and be promoting prevention and family-planning services and strengthening public health.”

By the way, I learned something new today. Abstinence before marriage, fidelity within marriage, and protecting the unborn are “narrow, political ideology.”

President-Elect Barack Obama’s gift to the motherland: Obligation-free sex for the men, and dead babies for the women!

Yes we can!

Related posts:

• Obama On His Support For Infanticide: “I WILL NOT YIELD”
• Barack’s Infanticide Obamobfuscations
• Californians, Obama Says You’re “Divisive and Discriminatory”

Author Shelby Steele, with whom I shared a discussion panel several years ago, writes about Barack Obama’s delusional “post-racial promise.”

After Obama’s speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, people at my former day job were aglow. (See Barack Obama Goes to Boston) My boss in particular went on and on about this “young man” and his eloquent speech. I told him I hadn’t watched the convention but couldn’t wait to find out what everyone was gushing about. I read the speech and found nothing remarkable about it.

Young, black, and possessed of so-called charisma, Obama was fresh and new. His rhetoric was tired and devoid of substance, but he symbolized a racial idealism, as Steele notes. My co-workers, black and white, were excited about the “articulate” Obama’s potential. It was the idea of him rather than what he said that got people excited. My boss, who was white, could barely contain himself.

It’s safe to say my sixtysomething former boss proudly voted for Barack Obama on Tuesday. No doubt he bought into the “post-racial promise,” the idea that Americans have moved beyond race, and a vote for Obama proves it. For white liberal types, failing to support Obama implies a failure to embrace this ideal.

I read quite a few music and book author blogs, and some are run by Obama-supporting liberals. I can almost see them patting themselves on the back as they try to convince themselves race means nothing, and Obama’s presidency signals the beginning a new era of diversity, tolerance, blah, blah, blah. But they’ve got it twisted. Voting for Obama because he represents some post-racial ideal is to inject race into the equation.

“When whites — especially today’s younger generation — proudly support Obama for his post-racialism, they unwittingly embrace race as their primary motivation,” Steele writes. “They think and act racially, not post-racially. The point is that a post-racial society is a bargainer’s ploy: It seduces whites with a vision of their racial innocence precisely to coerce them into acting out of a racial motivation. A real post-racialist could not be bargained with and would not care about displaying or documenting his racial innocence. Such a person would evaluate Obama politically rather than culturally.”

It the end, it doesn’t matter why white people voted for Obama. He’s the leader of the free world now (shudder). Who I am to interfere with their “I voted for a black man because I don’t care about race” back-patting?

Steele asks what Obama’s election means to blacks. Well, I doubt it will do anything to decrease illegitimacy among blacks (70 percent; as high as 80 percent in some urban areas), or decrease child killing, or strengthen families and communities, or much of anything. It’s a proud moment for many blacks, to be sure, but having a black man in the White House will not motivate black Americans to wait until marriage to have babies, to stop killing their babies (and at three times the rate of white women), or to stop uttering the word racism whenever they don’t get their way.

Of course, Obama never promised that his presidency would have any effect on these things.

As long as families (the foundation of society) are in shambles, conditions won’t improve much. But with Obama in office, white liberals can feel good about themselves and blacks can feel proud, fatherless children and dead babies be damned.

Update: Welcome to post-racial America! Now we don’t have to talk about race anymore!

(Hat tip: MM)

For those who do care, let me ease your mind. As confusing as it may be, you shouldn’t be surprised. That is, if you know anything about Colin Powell.

Did you know Colin Powell is pro-choice? He believes women have a right to choose to have their unborn babies slaughtered in the womb.

Did you know Colin Powell believes colleges and universities should admit and reject applicants based on the color of their skin? Race should play a role in admissions, he thinks, an idea totally contrary to the very spirit of the civil rights movement.

(Incidentally, black Republican Condoleezza Rice is also pro-choice and pro-race preferences.)

I would not be surprised if I learned Colin Powell opposes California’s Proposition 8, a measure that would amend the constitution to define marriage as between only one man and one woman.

Colin Powell, endorser of BHO, is a Republican, but he’s not socially conservative. That should clear up any confusion or answer most questions you have about why he did such a thing.

Update: Speaking of race preferences, check out the American Civil Rights Institute’s (ACRI) new blog. If you’re interested in reading about ACRI’s efforts to end race- and sex-based preferences in government hiring, contracting, and admissions, bookmark it or subscribe via RSS or e-mail.

Thanks to Ward Connerly’s efforts, voters in Colorado and Nebraska will decide on November 4 whether their state and local governments may continue discriminating against and granting preferences to people based on race and sex.

I invite you to “live-comment” tonight’s presidential debate. Discuss the candidate’s answers, appearance, and anything else of relevance. Topics of interest to me: immigration (McCain voted for amnesty, so I don’t know what else I’m expecting from him – very disappointing selection), the war in Iraq and how to deal with global terrorism, and the developing Cold War, Part II.

TV-less? Watch it live at CNN.com beginning at 9 p.m. ET. Live-blogging at MM, and trackbackers probably will do the same. Live-blogging and chatting at Hot Air.

As always, thanks for reading and participating on my blog.

Rest easy, everybody.

By now you’ve heard about a new AP-Yahoo News online poll that shows blacks and whites hold different views on race. Newsflash, right?

Generally speaking, blacks and whites don’t agree on how much racial prejudice exists and who’s to blame for such perceptions, and it didn’t take a poll to determine that. Fifty-seven percent of blacks said “a lot” of racial discrimination exists, and only 10 percent of whites said the same. A third of whites said “most” racial tension is caused by blacks, and only three percent of blacks said the same.

It would be helpful to know how individuals define prejudice and discrimination. The two aren’t wrong per se. We prejudge and discriminate all the time, as well we should. People my age and under have a twisted view of racism. Jim Crow was racism; jailing black men, who commit a disproportionate number of crimes, at higher rates is not.

The only newsworthy part of the poll is the contention that Barack Obama’s skin color will cost him six percent of the vote. If it weren’t for racial prejudice, Obama would get about six percent more support, according to the survey. That is, there are whites who won’t vote for him because of his race. In the same regard, some people will vote for him because he’s black. Both can be said and calculated about John McCain. But harping on Obama’s skin color gets more attention and generates more discussion.

Now this is rich: a white Democrat named Kelly Edmondson, who apparently participated in the survey, works with black students. She said hardworking and intelligent describe most blacks “very well,” and lazy and irresponsible describe most blacks “somewhat well.” Confusing. How many degrees different are “very well” and “somewhat well”? How can most blacks be hardworking and lazy?

What do you think of the lazy-and-irresponsible stereotype (a conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image)? Are you willing to honestly express your views about it on this blog? Share your views about the poll, too.

By the way, stereotyping isn’t wrong per se, either. People of all races do it from time to time.

On the morning of November 5, 2008, some of us will be disappointed and others pleased. I voted for the first time at age 25. I pulled the lever for Bill Clinton in 1992 and again in 1996. I escaped leftism and voted for George Bush in 2000 and again in 2004.

When it comes to presidential elections, I’ve always been on the winning side. I’ve never had the dreaded feeling of waking up the day after an election and being bitterly disappointed. I hope the streak continues.

(Click on the thumbnail to see larger map.)

I know I’ve said and written that it doesn’t matter to me who’s in the White House. Hey, frustration makes say such things. Of course it matters. America won’t fall apart if Barack Obama is elected president.

But it will become less like the place I know and love.

Pigs, Lipstick, and Illiterates

Despite the fact that election news is everywhere, you’ll notice I haven’t done a daily play-by-play of who said what to and about whom. I keep up with all of it, but I don’t blog about it. I don’t want to read one more retread news story that takes things out of context and quotes every little gaffe or dumb comment, so I certainly don’t want to blog about it.

I think the “lipstick on a pig” headlines and Barack Obama’s inane ad about John McCain being computer illiterate are ridiculous beyond reason. Serious discourse isn’t highly valued, at least not among mainstream media. Then again, the stakes are high, and both camps have hit below the belt. Sensationalism is what people want, but I’m not getting caught up.

If you check this blog every day or every week to find out what I have to say about this latest gaffe or that new ad, you’re probably disappointed. Don’t waste time dissecting every ad and news story and quote. Focus on the bigger picture: which presidential candidate is the best man to lead our country? I believe that for anyone calling himself a Christian and claims to uphold a biblical worldview, the choice is obvious.

A person’s morals and values should trump skin color and sex. I’m not impressed that a black man was nominated for president. I have never supported anyone for anything just because the person’s black or a woman. If this country never elects a black or female president in my lifetime, I won’t lose sleep over it. All I care about is what that person stands for.

As a Christian, I cannot ignore or discount a person’s views on issues I deeply care about. My faith in Christ lives within every thought and informs every decision. A candidate doesn’t have to be a Christian to get my vote, but he must strive to uphold traditional values.

Child Killing and Homosexual “Marriage”

I’m pretty much a two-trick pony. To get my vote, you must be pro-life and you must advocate protecting traditional marriage. Protecting unborn life and the institution upon which civilization depends is crucial.

People complain that politicians try to divide voters with “wedge” issues. It’s what they should do. Conservatives should magnify and reinforce so-called conservative values and expose liberalism for what it is. Opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage are huge components of conservatism. Use these issues to divide and conquer.

These days, McCain is calling himself pro-life. In fact, he’s spoken out quite strongly against infanticide, known euphemistically as partial birth abortion. McCain chastised Republicans in 2004 for voting for a federal amendment to ban homosexual “marriage” because he believes the issue should be left up to the states. In that regard, he supports California Proposition 8 (will appear on the November 4 ballot), which would define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Everything else for me is either a secondary issue or issues I know most Republican candidates support: smaller/limited government, strong national defense, stopping illegal “immigration,” dismantling government preferences based on race, etc.

Barack Obama is not pro-life and has no desire to protect traditional marriage. Sadly, too many Christians will end up voting for him because they hate Republicans, or want to see a black man in the White House, or believe women have a right to kill their babies, or don’t really care that homosexual activity is an abomination to God and “marriages” therein a mockery.

Supreme Court Justices

I wish there were someone other than McCain running on the Republican ticket, but he’s what we have. There’s a possibility in the next four years at least one Supreme Court justice will retire. Because justices have so much power, which they’ve improperly wielded at times (Roe v. Wade), it’s crucial that we elect a president who will appoint someone committed to exercising judicial restraint and applying original intent.

You know the kind of person/people Obama would appoint.

I’ve criticized McCain in the past. He’s not a strong conservative. But I believe getting him into the White House is extremely important if conservatives want to maintain even a slight majority on the court. Let me be up front: I hope I live to see the day when Roe v. Wade is overturned and states begin to severely restrict child killing or ban it outright.

Christians for Obama

Don’t allow a man’s skin color or your hatred for the other side to trump what you know to be right and true. John McCain is no saint (men who cheat on their wives enrage me), and I even question his faith. But his political stances are a better match for Bible-believing Christians. Barack Obama is to be admired for presumably being faithful to his wife, but what he stands for politically is the antithesis of a biblical worldview.

If you are a Christian and plan on voting for Barack Obama, perhaps you ought to take some time to re-evaluate what you believe and whether those beliefs are biblical. If you’re saved, you’re saved. Voting for Obama won’t condemn you to hell. But I urge you to pray about your choice and spend time re-reading the Bible as Election Day approaches.

When I realized we’d been attacked by Islamic terrorists, I wanted the U.S. to do something strong and quick like leveling all countries that were helping Osama bin Laden elude capture and hunting down and locking up people with even the remotest connection to Al-Qaeda until they started talking. I wanted to see heads rolling, literally.

My anger has abated after seven years, naturally, but I still think we should have responded much more aggressively.

I urge you to think about the consequences of and real meaning behind September 11, 2001. It was not a random event perpetrated by lone-nut type fanatics who hate America. It was and is a defining moment in Muslims’ desire to destroy our way of life. It was an affront to Western civilization, and we’ve got to fight it with everything we’ve got. Forget weak “surges” and sending our men and women to fight a rag-tag bunch of thugs. Bomb them out, smoke them out, hold public executions — whatever it takes.

(I received an advance copy of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization. I haven’t started reading it yet, but with section headers like, “Beauty is not merely in the eye of the beholder,” “Knowing God yields science,” “How Christians elevated culture,” and “Islam v. Civilization,” I can’t wait to dive in. On the cover: “Warning: Contains Moses, Plato, Jesus, and Shakespeare. Contents May Be Offensive.” Too cool.)

Forget jets crashing into buildings. That’s not the worst. Remember global Islamic terrorism. Think about living under sharia. I don’t know about you, but I’d rather be dead. That’s how strongly I feel about my freedom.

Victory over Islamic terrorism won’t take place in a desert battle zone but in our hearts and minds. We need a strong will and zero tolerance for weakness and apathy.

I have issues with George Walker Bush, but man, was I glad to have someone like him at the helm. Imagine a similar or worse terrorist attack under President Barack Hussein Obama. How do you think he’d handle it? The words appeasement and understanding and root causes come to mind. I shudder to think…

Update: I’ve got a pile of books ahead of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization, but I started reading it after I published this post. I can’t put it down! An excerpt:

“Christianity. Judaism…Dead white males. Old-fashioned morality…The traditional family. Tradition itself.

“These are the betes noires of the elites. They are the pillars of political correctness. Together, they constitute that thing called Western civilization.

“Political correctness, at its heart, is the effort to dissolve the foundation on which American and European culture has been built. It has been a demolition project: undermine Western civilization in whatever way possible, and build a brave new world from the rubble.

“Multiculturalism has nothing to do with genuine love for natives of the Australian outback or the monks of Tibet. It is an effort to crowd out our own cultural traditions.”

Add it to your collection.