Obamaville updates

The Occupy Wall Street movement continues to amaze me.

First, from the “you can’t make this up” category, see Occupy Wall Street Kitchen Staff Tired of ‘Freeloaders’?

Apparently some of the folks slaving away to cook politically correct meals for the participants of Occupy Wall Street are sick and tired of working themselves to the bone for homeless people, criminals, and other freeloaders who are eating their food. This is called being mugged by reality.

It is also pretty darn funny.

The New York Post reported that volunteer kitchen staff at Occupy Wall Street are angry about working 18-hour days to feed the protesters but are being taken advantage of by the local homeless people and criminals. And they are going on a work slow down to protest at their protest.

. . .

“We need to limit the amount of food we’re putting out” to curb the influx of derelicts, the Post reports from one Rafael Moreno, a kitchen volunteer.

So, these Occupiers are tired of cooking for freeloaders, eh? And they want to ration the food?

It’s all rather amusing. One wonders if these people see the irony or catch even a whiff of a “lesson,” here?

“Free” invites abuse. Abuse causes rationing.

Can I ask them why they think Obamacare will be any different? Can I ask why they think offering everything else by government for free will result in anything less than obscene abuse and ultimate rationing and ineffectiveness?

Are these Occupy people so unable to think critically that this lesson is lost upon them?

I really hope that some of them see the error of their thinking and convert to conservatism.

Next up, an adult at the OWS movement literally pimped out a 16 yr. old girl.  To recap:

So, the 14-year-old girl sexually assaulted at Occupy Dallas, the 11-year-old boy who got drunk at Occupy Missoula, now the 16-year-old pimped out at Occupy New Hampshire. Anybody see a pattern here? I mean, if it was Catholic priests doing this stuff, somebody would have noticed the pattern.

The “worsening income inequality” meme would not justify the OWS demands (whatever those are), but the facts don’t even back it up:

Let’s compare the change in share of the tax burden since 1980:

Top 1%

Top 5%

Top 10%

Top 25%

Top 50%

Bottom 50%

1980

19%

36.80%

49.30%

73%

93%

7%

2009

36.70%

58.60%

70.50%

87.30%

97.75%

2.25%

See The Evangelical Left’s Nostalgia Trip Down Wall Street for a great analysis of how false teachers like Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis and race-baiting Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie are drawn to these explicitly non-Christian protests and encouraging the covetousness of those involved.
Finally, this explains a lot.

Did Hermain Cain lie about Planned Parenthood?

Consider Cain’s words here:

Schieffer also pushed Cain on his history of comments attacking Planned Parenthood as an organization that favors “genocide” in the black community — comments Cain said he still believes.

“I still stand by that,” Cain said. “If people go back and look at the history and look at Margaret Sanger’s own words, that’s exactly where that came from … What I’m saying is, Planned Parenthood isn’t sincere about wanting to try to counsel them not to have abortions.”

Those words are 100.00% accurate.  No lies there.  It is a fact that abortion rates in the black community are three times that of whites, and pro-legalized abortion voters and Planned Parenthood deeply desire taxpayer-funded abortions that are certain to increase that rate.  Therefore, the policies most dear to them result in the black population shrinking as a percent of the total.  Just imagine the outcry if Republicans supported policies that killed more blacks in a week than KKK has done since their inception.

But false teacher Chuck Currie says that  Herman Cain lied about Planned Parenthood Lie (and Chuck would know lying, I suppose).  But what of Cain’s claims?  PolitiFact quotes Cain here:

“When Margaret Sanger – check my history – started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world,” Cain said during a talk in Washington, D.C., at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative group.

“It’s planned genocide,” Cain added. He wants the U.S. Congress to yank funding for Planned Parenthood, which receives about $75 million a year to provide non-abortion health services.

Technically Cain may have been wrong on the precisely worded original goals of Planned Parenthood (although it it easy to see how proud Sanger would be of how many blacks PP aborts).  But even PolitiFact notes this, though they water down Sanger’s evils:

The supposed evidence that Sanger supported black genocide is a loose collection of her most objectionable statements, her ties to the disgraced eugenics movement, and her work on what was called the Negro Project. That effort, started in 1939, brought birth control services (but not abortion) to black communities in the South.

That’s not “supposed evidence,” that’s evidence.

And speaking of lies, why don’t Chuck & Co. criticize Planned Parenthood for their serial lies in hiding statutory rape?  Or their lies about offering mammograms?  Is lying bad, or not?

Truths: The greatest killer of black human beings in the U.S. is abortion.  The abortion rates in the U.S. mean the black population is a smaller part of the whole than it would be otherwise.  Democrats support this 100%.  Margaret Sanger, PP’s founder, aggressively worked to decrease the black population.

I’m going to side with Herman Cain over a false teacher and Planned Parenthood on this one.

—–

More things to consider

Here’s one time when Planned Parenthood didn’t lie and when I agreed with them: “An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.” Sadly, that was their view in this 1964 advertisement but they changed it when they realized how profitable abortions would be and how they could fulfill Margaret Sanger’s vision.

Regarding genocide: A pro-abort on Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis‘ blog tried to insist that as a conservative and pro-lifer I was just trying to keep my majority.  I enjoyed pointing out that if I wanted to do that I would be just like her and fake Christians like Chuck: I would support Planned Parenthood, I would oppose crisis pregnancy centers and I would vote for Democrats.

Also see Group of 99% whites raises money to destroy group of 76% blacks. Anyone else find that creepy?

Yes, Herman Cain is “a black man who knows his place” — the White House!

You just can’t make this stuff up.  The racist Left just doesn’t learn and keeps accusing Republicans who support Cain of being racists who are trying to hide their racism by supporting a black man.  Their true racism shines through, as they can’t see why we vote for ideas and character and not skin color.  See Video: MSNBC Analyst: GOP See Herman Cain as ‘Black Man Who Knows His Place’.

Who has seen Courageous?

I rarely go to any movies so I must confess I haven’t seen this one.  If you saw it, do you recommend it?  What did you think of it?

“We’ve minimized the role of fathers, so we’ve created a generation of barbarians—children who become men without growing up. They stay in boyhood through their 20s and 30s, sometimes their whole lives. They think of themselves first, indulge in pornography, do what they feel like, and leave their wives and culture and churches to raise their children.” —Nathan, character in Courageous novel (www.epm.org/courageous)

Why Republicans should not vote for Romney

1. He’s a RINO (Republican In Name Only).  Example: As much as he has tried to pretend he is pro-life, it is all just weasel-words in the predictable “I’m personally against crushing and dismembering innocent human beings but if elected I won’t do a thing about it” political spin.

2. Even if he wasn’t a RINO he can’t beat Obama.  He can’t run against Obamacare, because it is mirrored on Romneycare.  And the Democrats and the mainstream media (redundancy alert, I know) are well aware of that.  That’s why they and the Republican elite keep pushing Romney as the front-runner. Their worst-case scenario, which has a slim chance of occurring, would be a President that is almost as Left as Obama.

See Federal Government Provides Life Support for RomneyCare.

State treasurer of MA absolutely shreds RomneyCare, which “has nearly bankrupted the state” and is surviving solely because of federal aid…

“If President Obama and the Democrats repeat the mistake of the health insurance reform here in Massachusetts on a national level, they will threaten to wipe out the American economy within four years,” Cahill said in a press conference in his office.

…[T]he state’s health insurance law…Cahill said, “has nearly bankrupted the state.”

Cahill said the law is being sustained only with the help of federal aid, which he suggested that the Obama administration is funneling to Massachusetts to help the president make the case for a similar plan in Congress…
Voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina should take note. After all, they are paying for RomneyCare along with all of the rest of us.
3. The media will do the same thing with Romney that they did with McCain: Be his cheerleader until the primaries are over, then bring out the knives.  Only then will you hear them bring up the oddities of Mormonism and other attacks.
Conclusion: Don’t be suckers and let the Democrats tell you how to vote!

Getting Galileo wrong. Twice.

Galileo and Viviani

Image via Wikipedia

Darwinists reflexively use the story of Galileo to advance the religious vs. science false dichotomy.  That fails on two levels.

1. The Galileo story that people usually refer to has many mythical elements.  And how many people can cite an example besides Galileo?

And as far as religious (or non-religious) beliefs getting in the way of science, who knows if Einstein’s presupposition of a static universe caused his error with the cosmological constant?  After all, an expanding universe certainly gives more support to a theist model than a static one.  That hypothesis cuts both ways.  This happens often in science, such as the myth of “junk DNA” that went on for years because Darwinists assumed it without evidence.

2. Which is the more pertinent element of the Galileo story?

A. Some religious people were wrong while other religious people were right.

B. Those in power were wrong and abused their authority and those not in power were right.

People who use the Galileo example typically assume A, but I think it is B.

The August 2011 issue of Salvo (great magazine and web site, btw) had an article about a professor forced to write an apology to a student he had harassed in class over her unwillingness to believe in Darwinian evolution.  He wrote a non-pology instead, “apologizing” for “appearing to denigrate” her beliefs and insisting that he hadn’t meant to offend her.

Worse yet, he had the gall to refer to Galileo.  The girl’s lawyer replied to him noting the irony of the Galileo example.  After all, who was the authority figure in this case and who was the victim?  The professor was authority figure (the “Pope” of this situation) and he used his power to deliberately humiliate the woman taking risks in opposing the majority view.  The professor cast himself as the hero, but the woman was the one challenging the orthodox position and standing up for free thinking.

P.S. The religion vs. science canard always reminds me of this gag from The Simpsons,  where Lisa Simpson finds a phony fossil of what appears to be an angel.  The judge presiding over a trial about the fossil said this:

As for science versus religion, I’m issuing a restraining order: Religion must stay 500 yards from science at all times.

Repent and believe. Seriously. God commanded it.

Eternity is a mighty long time.  Here’s the Good News: By God’s grace alone, He adopts, completely forgives and eternally blesses everyone who repents and trusts in Jesus.

Brandon had a great list of passages to consider in Do you have to repent to be saved? « Touch ya Neighbor Ministries:

God said repent: (Ezekiel 18:30-32; Acts 17:30), the Prophets said repent: (1 Kings 8:47-49; Ezra 10:11; Isaiah 55:6-7; Isaiah 1:16-17), John the Baptist said repent: (Matthew 3:1-12; Mark 1:4; Luke 2:3; Luke 2:8),Jesus said repent: (Mark 1:14-15; Luke 5:32; Luke 13:5; Luke 15:7; Matthew 4:17; acts 5:31), the disciples said repent: (Mark 6:12), Paul said repent: (Romans 2:4-5; 2 Corinthians 7-10; Acts 17:30), Peter said repent: (Acts 2:38; Acts 3:19-20; Acts 11:18), John said repent: (Revelations 2:5; Revelations 2:16; Revelations 3:3; Revelations 3:19), James said repent: (James 4:9-10).

My favorite (I love Acts 17!):

The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead. Acts 17:30-31

Point people to the Word (Jesus – John 1) and the word (the Bible).