SNL Takes A Swipe At Obama Over China Trip

Go see the full transcript at SNL Takes A Swipe At Obama Over China Trip [Video]. Very funny and pointed.  I didn’t think they still had it in them.

INTERPRETER: Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to add that I completely understand why you feel entitled to come here and lecture China on our shortcomings. After all, my country does owe the United States a great deal of money. Oh, wait. Hold on a moment. I believe I had that backwards. In fact, now that I think about it, it is your country that owes us a large sum of money. Is this correct?

OBAMA: Uh… yes.

. . .

INTERPRETER: Are we? Are we going to get our money? Because from what I read your country is in the middle of a serious recession.

OBAMA: Uh, while this is true, there are signs that our bailout has steadied the financial markets and our stimulus package has been effective in fixing the job crisis.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I’m curious. How many jobs has it created?

OBAMA: Uh, so far, none.

. . .

OBAMA: But our health care reform plan, we’re confident, is going to lead to enormous savings.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: How exactly is extending health care coverage to 30 million people going to save you money?

OBAMA: I… don’t know.

Naivete can be so costly

You might think that Obama fans would have learned not to trust his promises.  He promised cooperation but is more radically Left than any President has been or hopefully will be.  Afghanistan was the “good war,” but he is doing everything he can to lose it (by doing nothing).  And on and on.

So why do people believe the health care fictions?

Even without the lies behind sneaking taxpayer-funded abortion to the health care ill it is still an awful idea.  People argue by anecdote with problems in the current system.  Conservatives agree and offer solutions that are ignored, such as tort reform and increased competition.  But people still want to turn control of this over to the Federal government knowing that it will be almost impossible to ever get it back.

I’m just pointing out what should be obvious: Eliminating insurance and giving all the power to the government is a bad idea and it is not a logical conclusion from the premise that insurance companies have flaws.  Using that logic, they should concede that since Medicare is already experiencing $60 BILLION in fraud that giving even more to the government is just begging for more fraud.

Or they should concede that stories of bad care with socialized medicine would make us stay with private carriers.

Perhaps the solution is a little more complicated than just turning over control to the Federal government and hoping for the best.

Some argue that health care is too important to leave to the private sector.  But what about food?  That is even more important.  By that logic the government would take over food production and more.

Questions for those wanting government to completely control health care:

  • Do you find government agencies to be more customer oriented than other businesses? 
  • Do you find their employees to be more qualified than those in the private sector? 
  • Do you get better service from monopolies or from businesses who must compete?
  • Do you get better service from contractors if you pre-pay or if they get paid when the work is done?

Roundup

The latest ACORN video.  But Fox definitely shouldn’t mention this in the news, right?

Breitbart to Eric Holder: Investigate ACORN, or else — As if the videos to date aren’t enough, there are more shoes to drop.  I’m with the author:

Principle over party, Attorney General.  Or your party gets hammered.  Your call.  Speaking as a Republican, I hope that you try to keep stonewalling; speaking as an American (which takes precedence), I suggest that you don’t.

Surprise!  Global warming proponents play the same as evolutionists do: “Your views aren’t science because they aren’t in peer reviewed journals and they can’t be in peer reviewed journals because they aren’t science.”  And if they if they do make it into a peer reviewed journal, then just insist that the peer reviewed journal is no longer valid.  Either that, or destroy whoever let the view in.  Voila!  How very scientific and ethical.  Heh.

More problems for Al Gore & Co., if only the media would report them and ensure that everyone who saw An Inconvenient Truth were aware of them: Global warming hysterics burned by predictions.

People are rightly outraged at fraud, but are wildly naive to think it only happens in business.  There is already a ton of fraud with the TARP funds and other government programs.  Who’d have thought that would happen?  I mean, just because a massive amount of money is thrown around with little controls, why would that attract bad guys?

Liberal media rep Norah O’Donnell tries to play “gotcha” with 17 year old — She interviewed her once, then gathered some data, then turned the cameras on.  But no media bias here, folks!  Now maybe Norah could question Obama & Co. over all their health care lies and broken promises of bi-artisanship.

Jesse Jackson: “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man” — I’d say you shouldn’t be pro-legalized abortion and call yourself a black man.

Take that, Jews. White House guts annual Hannakhah party; meanwhile, Obama wishes there were more Muslim holidays to celebrate — great commentary from my favorite gay Chicago bloggers

Who is a Christian? Who is a Muslim?

church.jpgFor many people the word “Christian” has lost or changed meaning.  It used to mean someone who was an authentic follower of Jesus.  Now it is often used as a synonym for nice, as in, “She’s a really Christian person,” or to describe someone who goes to church sometimes while rejecting the essentials of the faith.

Theological liberals tend to get very wounded if you imply that they don’t hold Christian views.  They’ve been in false-teaching churches so long and have such a low view of scripture that they think that is the way church is supposed to be.

It is ultimately God’s job to assess who truly trusts in Jesus and who does not.  I’m not qualified and wouldn’t want the job even if I was. 

Jesus did say that you will know them by their fruit and that we should make right judgments, so it is fair to examine people’s lives to see if they have evidence for their faith.  But mistakes can be made during fruit inspection.  We would have probably thought that Judas was the real deal and that the criminal on the cross was not. 

But it does seem fair to point out when self-described Christians don’t hold views that have historically applied to Christians, as shown in the Bible, countless creeds and denominational statements of faith.  The views of theological Liberals mock the cross and the blood of the martyrs who died — and who still suffer and die today — rather than recant their faith.

First, consider this conversation:

Me: I’m a Muslim.

Real Muslim: No, you’re not. 

Me: Really, I am, and I’m offended that you say I’m not.

RM: Do you believe the Koran is the word of God?

Me: No, of course not.  A man wrote it, and it has obvious errors like saying that a body double died on the cross instead of Jesus.  It was written hundreds of years after Christ, and even sources outside the Bible claim that Jesus himself died.  And don’t get me started about all the violence it encourages!  Why trust the Koran?

RM: Do you believe in Allah as the one true God?

Me: No.

RM: Do you like Jewish people?

Me: Yes.

RM: Do you eat pork?

Me: Mmmmmmm . . . bacon.

RM: You aren’t a Muslim.

Me: Yes I am! 

Sounds ridiculous, right?  Now consider this:

Me: Are you a Christian?

Liberal theologian: Yes.

Me: Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God?

LT: No, not a bit of it.  Even though it claims to speak for God roughly 3,000 times, I think those are all made up by people. 

Me: Do you think Jesus is God?

LT: No.

Me: Do you believe any of the miracles recorded in the Bible are true?

LT: Of course not.  I’m too smart for that.  Miracles can’t happen.  Writers made those up.

Me: Do you think Jesus is the only way to salvation?

LT: No.

Me: Do you believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead?

LT: No.

Me: Do you believe that we are created in God’s image and that we should protect innocent human life?

LT: Abortions for any and all reasons at any time are fine with God.  Jesus is pro-legalized abortion.  We get to decide who the real “persons” are.

Me: Do you look for opportunities to share the Gospel as outlined in the Bible?

LT: Of course not.  All religions (or no religions) are valid paths to God.  God loves us unconditionally.  We don’t need a Savior.

Me: Do you realize how radically different your basic views are from those of Christians throughout the last 2,000 years, especially to the countless Christians who died rather than recant their faith?

LT: Sort of . . . but we’re so much smarter than they were.

Me: Indeed.  But how can you claim to be a Christian?

LT: How dare you question my faith?!

Is the first conversation different from the second? 

I haven’t had that precise conversation with any liberal Christians, but it is a highly accurate composite.  Try it yourself.  You may find that their views are even more bizarre.  I’m almost certain that any of the “Jesus Seminar” members would answer the questions that way.  For example, I read a book co-authored by Marcus Borg (a member of the Jesus Seminar) and he held all the heretical views noted above and more.

These people may be decent citizens and friendly neighbors, but calling themselves Christians wildly distorts the meaning of the word.  I wish the frauds would be honest for once and officially switch to professing atheism or Hinduism, which are much more in line with their views.

Roundup

One type of finch evolves into a slightly different type of finch — Just a few more cycles and it will evolve into Angelina Jolie, or something along those lines.  Golly, I guess that proves macro-evolution once and for all.  My bad.  I’ve been wrong all along.

12 Rules To Govern And Live By For Destroying An Economy And A Nation — Great list by Dan.  If I didn’t know better I’d think a certain nation was dutifully following them all.

Great analysis of Bart Ehrman’s ironic and contradictory thinking

In the end, Jesus Interrupted can be best summarized as a book filled with ironies. Ironic that it purports to be about unbiased history but rarely presents an opposing viewpoint; ironic that it claims to follow the scholarly consensus but breaks from it so often; ironic that it insists on the historical-critical method but then reads the gospels with a modernist, overly-literal hermeneutic; ironic that it claims no one view of early Christianity could be “right” (Walter Bauer) but then proceeds to tell us which view of early Christianity is “right;” ironic that it dismisses Papias with a wave of the hand but presents the Gospel of the Ebionites as if it were equal to the canonical four; and ironic that it declares everyone can “pick and choose” what is right for them, but then offers its own litany of moral absolutes. Such intellectual schizophrenia suggests there is more going on in Jesus Interrupted than meets the eye. Though veiled in the garb of scholarship, this book is religious at the core. Ehrman does not so much offer history as he does theology, not so much academics as he does his own ideology. The reader does not get a post-religious Ehrman as expected, but simply gets a new-religious Ehrman–an author who has traded in one religious system (Christianity) for another (postmodern agnosticism). Thus, Ehrman is not out to squash religion as so many might suppose. He is simply out to promote his own. He is preacher turned scholar turned preacher. And of all the ironies, perhaps that is the greatest.

Hat tip: Alpha & Omega Ministries

Hungry Americans: Debunking The Hype — How many hungry are there?  What are the real problems?  Also see where Dinesh D’Souza has interesting reflections on this:

This book, some of his articles, and many of his speeches make the following point: “Indeed, newcomers to the United States are struck by the amenities enjoyed by poor people. This fact was dramatized in the 1980s when CBS television broadcast a documentary, People Like Us, intended to show the miseries of the poor during an ongoing recession. The Soviet Union also broadcast the documentary, with a view to embarrassing the Reagan administration. But by the testimony of former Soviet leaders, it had the opposite effect. Ordinary people across the Soviet Union saw that the poorest Americans have TV sets, microwave ovens and cars. They arrived at the same perception that I witnessed in an acquaintance of mine from Bombay who has been unsuccessfully trying to move to the United States. I asked him, Why are you so eager to come to America? He replied, I really want to live in a country where the poor people are fat. Dinesh D’Souza

It’s a great time to brush up on your pro-life reasoning

With all the debate over the health care bill, abortion is back in the news.  Many people know it is wrong but don’t know how to present the case for life.  Please spend a little time getting educated and be ready to share the truth in love.  Lives are at stake.

Even if you are firmly pro-choice I urge you to review these resources.  The worst that could happen is that you learn more about your ideological enemy’s arguments.

If you only have time for one web site, go to Abort73.com.  They have a thorough, concise and easy to read site that takes you through all the major issues. 

Or go through the slides I use for training volunteers at CareNet.  And learn about what organizations like CareNet do for women in crisis pregnancies.  Or scan my posts in the Pro-life Reasoning category to the left.

Then see this fact based, winsome and reasoned defense of life by Kathy Ireland.  She went from pro-choice to pro-life after examining the scientific evidence.  Don’t just listen to the facts, note her compelling manner.

Then watch the O’Reilly interview with Abby Johnson, the Planned Parenthood Director who quit after participating in an ultrasound and seeing a human being lose its fight for life. 

Or search Stand to Reason for their many outstanding pro-life resources and articles.

Please take the time to get a little better informed.  You don’t have to know everything, but you can learn enough to easily defend the basics of the pro-life view.  Or you’ll at least have some resources to point people to.  And you can at least point out that while abortions may be legal it is a radical change to make pro-lifers fund them with taxes, and that the Democrats have consistently lied on this point.

P.S. Planned Parenthood hides statutory rape.  Why will the health care bill give them even more business?  Why haven’t they been de-funded already?  I’d rather fund ACORN than them.