"Why Have No Heads Rolled?



You have been made aware of our computer problems,
and since we operate on a totally free basis, we simply
have not had the funds to replace worn-out, out-dated
equipment. But a few friends who appreciate the mission
of ANC, and don't want it to end, have made it possible
for us to acquire this week both new and replacement
equipment, and these extremely difficult days will soon
be over, and we will be able to do a better job of bringing
reports on the day's news from a Christian Conservative
viewpoint. Thank you for your patience!

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

"Why have no heads rolled?"

And this is our editorial for this week. But first, we freely
admit -- that headline isn't ours. It was the lead editorial
in one of America's major metropolitan daily newspapers
just a few days ago. It is a question that many -- probably
most -- Americans are asking. And we will get back to it.
But now for our editorial . . .

In our continuing efforts to comment on current events,
including political, from a Christian viewpoint, we are
often perceived as being solely "anti-Obama." But that
is too simplistic a perception. History proves that the
United States of America was created by our Founding
Fathers on basic Judeo-Christian principles, and with
their firm intent that this should be a Christian nation.
And for the more than 230 years of America's existence,
it has been as a Christian nation that we earned the
respect, admiration and, yes, envy of the civilized nations
of the world. And they have learned to depend on us to
come to their aid in times of oppression and disaster.

Through all those years, it is granted that not every
president has met the precise standard of being "Born
again, Christian, Evangelical and Conservative." But it is
also true that no president has ever before declared that
America is not a Christian nation, or has shown open
disdain for Christianity, affirming instead, in varying
degrees, his admiration for a contrary religion: Islam.

So we arrive at the conclusion that this man who has
had unlimited power for all of his first year in office,
instead of achieving his own assessment of "B-plus,"
has really flunked in his planned accomplishments.
Setting aside his multiplying the national debt, federal
support and involvement in business, banking and
manufacturing, granting of American citizens' rights to
Muslim terrorists, and the non-achievement of his major
proposal for completely restructuring the nation's
health program, as Christians we have to be alarmed over
his efforts to alter the traditional Christian life of our nation.
He is open in his support of homosexuality, contrary to
Bible teaching; he favors freedom of choice to increase
the practice of abortion, contrary to the Declaration of
Independence affirmation that all men are entitled to life;
he enacted the "Hate Crime" law which can have a
dramatic effect on freedom of speech from American
pulpits; he has pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage
Act to do away with God's instruction that married
couples should be fruitful and multiply . . . and that is
only a brief summary of his anti-Christian convictions
and intentions. We have not even touched on the views
of authoritative opinions of international historians who
are warning us of the dangers of the socialistic trend
in American governmental proposals, and that socialism
is a major step toward atheistic communism.

And from an international viewpoint, last week following
the State of the Union speech, Lech Walesa, former
President of Poland, made this sobering assessment:

"The US does not lead morally or politically anymore. The
world has no leadership. The United States was always
the last resort and hope for all other nations. That was
the hope, that whenever something was going wrong,
one could count on the United States. Today we lost
that hope"

Thus our position is more significantly "pro-Christian
America" than it is simply "anti-Obama." Of course, the
two positions virtually go hand in hand, and the corollary
is obvious: to be "pro-Obama" is essentially to be "anti-
Christian America."

And now back to the opening question -- part of the
answer has to include: "Whose heads?" One aspect of
the serious problems facing America is that of our
national security, which is really the president's first and
major responsibility. We are increasingly subject to
Muslim terrorist attacks, and our security is clearly
lacking. Some have pointed to Janet Napolitano,
Secretary of Homeland Security, as having earned
immediate dismissal.

Others point to another aspect of national security which
has been weakened -- the granting of civilian rights and
trials to terrorists, and feel that Attorney General Eric
Holder should be dismissed. And many feel that the past
and most recent actions of Treasury Secretary Timothy
Geithner are more than sufficient grounds for dismissal.

And whoever is in charge of our national response to
disasters -- no single name can be ascertained -- but
whichever Czar it is, they have made the response to the
Haiti disaster make the foul-ups of the Katrina response
look like a model of efficiency. Fortunately the nation's
Christian agency responses, and those of some other
nations, have filled that gap.

And then there is Ben Bernanke, finally approved by the
Senate to head up the Federal Reserve by a 70-30 vote,
the largest negative vote in the 32 years of this procedure.
(The largest previous negative vote was in Paul Volker's
confirmation, 84-16.) Perhaps Bernanke, too, should go.

In short, there are many heads which deserve to roll, but
it is doubtful that this president and his Congress will
take the seemingly necessary actions.

A few comments on the "State of the Union" speech;
in all candor, it doesn't merit more than just a few. To
begin, it could much better have been titled "State of My
Mind" rather than "State of the Union, because it really
represented Obama's "smoke and mirrors" attempts to
gloss over and ignore his errors, and to revert to his
campaign promises (or threats) to "transform" America.
But it is a regularly scheduled event of some importance
. . . has been much in the news . . . and deserves at least
some mention herein.

Ercille Christmas (author of "Thoughts of a Proud
American") wrote quite pointedly, "Hello There, Mr.
President. I did not watch your State of the Union
speech. I already know the state of the Union. It is at
the point where the 'lipstick on this pig' analogy is
looking more and more apropos." An interesting
comment: some residents of San Diego, CA, have
emailed us to say that there is new evidence that San
Diego is truly "America's finest city" -- at exactly 6:00
PM on Jan. 27, much of the city experienced a power
outage, lasting for several hours, thus preventing TV
coverage of the speech.

Matt Staver, of Liberty Counsel, gave a more exacting
summary, "He upbraided the Republican minority;
he chastised his own party's legislators; he publically
excoriated the United States Supreme Court; he blasted
former administrations; and he told the Joint Chiefs of
Staff exactly how it was going to be on the explosive
issue of homosexuals openly serving in the military. In
fact, the only government official who remained above
blame for any of the nation's problems was... himself."

Investors Business Daily (IBD) referred to it as "State
of Denial," and asked this question, "When have senators
and congressmen ever before been unable to keep from
laughing at — not with — a president?" Of course,
a few of the elite media liked the speech. Chris Matthews
(on MSNBC) who once was much listened to, and who
confessed he got thrills up his legs when Obama spoke,
said of the speech, “Obama is post-racial by all
appearances. You know, I forgot he was black tonight
for an hour.” (Could that be a racist remark? From a
true-blue Obama sycophant? Maybe the Harry Reid
viewpoint is contagious. It does make you wonder.)

One great summary, from a Christian viewpoint, was
from Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist
Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, who wondered
"if he's been in a Rip Van Winkle slumber somewhere
and has missed the votes in Virginia, New Jersey and
Massachusetts. The votes in those three states,
particularly Massachusetts, can only be taken by a fair-
minded observer as a rejection of the direction President
Obama is seeking to lead the country. When you're
seeking to lead and no one's following, you're just out
for a walk."

The president vowed once again that he would not rest
until U.S. businesses were hiring again, and then with his
poll numbers continuing to sink, and his presidential plans
floundering, he tried another town-hall type meeting in
Florida, offering $8 billion in seed money for high speed
rail systems, obviously years away -- while at the same
time his Senate was voting (60-39) to increase the federal
debt limit by $1.9 trillion to $13.3 trillion. (Don't even try
to imagine how much that is!) And on Monday he revealed
his new budget, which projected $5.08 trillion in deficit
spending over the next five years -- a 35 % increase over
what his administration had projected just a year ago.

During the State of the Union address the president said
that his administration has cut taxes for 95% of Americans.
It is significant that polls show that only 21% of voters
believe that. Most (53%) say it has not happened. He also
stated that “after two years of recession, the economy is
growing again,” but only 35% of voters believe that
statement is true, while 50% say it is false. And he made
the further claim that his administration is responsible for
putting to work two million people “who would otherwise
be unemployed.” Only 27% of voters say that statement
is true while 51% say it is false. There is obviously a major
disconnect between the president and the American people.

The President "still believes the problem is that people
fail to understand his goals," suggests Heritage fellow
and former Congressman Ernest Istook; "Instead, his
problem is that we understand them all too well."

Finally, in what was the second longest State of the
Union speech ever (only Bill Clinton made a longer one),
Obama referred to himself repeatedly (by one count, he
used "I" 115 times), and claimed he was the anointed
spokesman for "we," the American people, more than
100 times. By contrast, he referred only twice to the US

Shakespeare said it well in his comedy title: "Much ado
about nothing." Or Benjamin Franklin: "Here comes the
orator! With his flood of words, and his drop of reason."

A repeat of an often used heading: "What can we, as
Christians, do now?" Our friend and long time Christian
Conservative commentator, Gary Bauer, expressed in
his words the message we have also been conveying,
week after week: "The American people heard two vastly
different visions for America. Only one of them can
prevail. That’s why it is so important for men and
women of faith to be informed and fully engaged in
the public policy process. The most important way you
can make your voice heard is by voting, but you must
first be registered to vote. If you or anyone you know is
not yet registered to vote, please do so today." He did
not mention, as we always do, the date of Tuesday,
Nov. 2, 2010, now just 272 days away. Don't forget that
date. Begin to plan how to vote on that day.

And here are a few elections where we can make a
change for the better . . . our friends in these states
should take notice: Delaware: Vice President Joe
Biden's son, Beau Biden, has decided not to campaign
to take over the seat in the Senate his father vacated. A
strong Conservative Representative, and former Governor,
Mike Castle, may become a candidate. Nevada: Senate
Majority leader, and Obama devotee, Harry Reid, is
already running way behind in the polls. Nevada voters
can send a strong message by replacing him. And in
Illinois, Roland Burris, appointed by the state's corrupt
Governor to fill Obama's Senate seat, has made (for him)
a highly moral and ethical decision: he will not seek
re-election. A great opportunity for a Republican upset
there, rivaling the Brown victory in Massachusetts! Some
other suggestions will be coming next week.

Some words of advice from Founding Fathers which we
should always keep in mind at election time: "The public
cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public
men." -- Samuel Adams, 1775

"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide.
Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the
candidate - look to his character." --Noah Webster, 1789

"Good moral character is the first essential in a man ...
It is therefore highly important ... not only to be learned
but virtuous." --George Washington, 1790

You have indicated you like them, so we keep bringing
new "one liners" to your attention.

"Plan ahead: It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."

-- Richard Cushing

"There is as much chance Obama will reboot himself as
JFK as there was that JFK would ever have redefined
himself as an Obama." -- A.J. DiCintio

"The problem is not the 'crises' Obama inherited. It's the
ones he's creating." -- columnist David Limbaugh

“The President made it clear last night that he is not
interested in the will of the people." -- Brent Bozell

"I'd rather be a really good one-term president than a
mediocre two-term president." -- Barack Obama (Weekly
Standard editor, Fred Barnes, suggested that Mr. Obama
could combine the two concepts and be a one-term,
mediocre president.)

Others are saying -- a few comments from the news:

"Just as we do not tolerate private racial beliefs that
adversely affect African-Americans in the commercial
arena, even if such beliefs are based on religious views,
we should similarly not tolerate private beliefs about
sexual orientation and gender identity that adversely
affect LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender]
people." (This example of leftist tolerance is from Chai
Feldblum, openly lesbian Law Professor at Georgetown
University and Obama's nominee to serve on the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission)

"The President could wait months before deciding to
give a general the troops he asked for to fight the war
in Afghanistan but there was never to be enough time
for the health care bill to be exposed in the light of day
to the usual Congressional hearings and debate."
(Thomas Sowell)

"The state of the union is obstreperous. Dyspepsia is
the new equilibrium. All the passion in American politics
is oppositional. The American people know what they
don't like, which is: everything." (Joel Achenbach, staff
writer, Washington Post)

"If those in power choose to ignore what the Constitution
says, who can stop them? ... Remember, if the old lion
of socialism hadn't passed away, the most anti-liberty
piece of legislation in history — posing as a 'healthcare
bill' -- would have been passed into law ... The
progressives have already decided what is 'best for the
most,' even if most don't want it! Which is why
'universal healthcare' will reappear, again and again."
(Robert Ringer)

Some random afterthoughts . . .

Some, not all, of the puzzlements Islam offers: Many
supporters or adherents of Islam (including our president)
keep trying to convince us "Infidels" (Christians) that the
religion of Muslims, Islam, is a peaceful religion. And it
can probably be accepted as true that all Muslims are not
terrorists -- but it is also a fact that all of the terrorists who
have attacked America and Americans are Muslims. That
is puzzling. And then there is the puzzling confusion over
the name for the Supreme Being of the two religions. The
Islamists refer to their God by the name Allah, yet that
letter to the world's Christians from the 138 Islamic
scholars, titled "A Common Word Between Us and You,"
(a hot topic a couple of years ago), clearly identified the
Allah of the Quran with the God of the Bible. But when
churches in Malaysia recently began using the name Allah
to refer to God, the Muslims burned and destroyed the
Christian churches. However, when Osama bin Laden in
his latest message to the West used the name God in
place of Allah, there was no outcry, no burning of churches
or mosques. These are just a few of the puzzling aspects of
Islam. In future issues we will touch on others.

Don't you love some of the elite media? Nine days
before the January 19 Senate election in Massachusetts,
veteran Globe Magazine writer Charles Pierce ridiculed
the idea that Republican Scott Brown could win, in a
piece written as a letter to Brown: "Well, we’re almost
here, aren’t we? The end of a long, arduous, four-month
campaign for a Senate seat that you have approximately
the same chance of filling as you did the pilot’s chair of
the Starship Enterprise." Remember the old phrase about
"eating crow?" One wonders how Mr. Pierce enjoyed his

They love to ridicule W's communication skills, but
the elite media virtually ignored Obama's use of his much
depended on teleprompter to speak to an elementary
school class of 6th graders in Falls Church, VA on
January 19. Someone apparently leaked news photos of
the use of the device. It can probably go down as another
of Obama's "firsts."

Our Founding Fathers seem to have foreseen the type
of leadership we are experiencing . . .

"There are more instances of the abridgment of the
freedom of the people by gradual and silent
encroachments of those in power than by violent and
sudden usurpations." --James Madison, 1788
- - - - - - - - - - -

Comments: Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]