“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” – Mahatma Gandhi

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

What? Not even lip service Mr. Obama?

Our new President has decided to shun the annual National Day of Prayer service and the Catholic breakfast held the following day. He says he's reverting back to the days prior to President Bush.

Ummm.... this is the sixth annual National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. He doesn't have to go back that far to boycott the Catholics, just six years. Of course, he doesn't seem to be going out of his way to embrace Catholics anyway, so any excuse to avoid them will do I suppose.

I can't say with any certainty which Presidents have attended a service on the National Day of Prayer (NDP), if any. In reading historical accounts the bill enacting the current NDP wasn't signed into law until 1952. President Truman did the honors. Seems to me that some of the presidents since then might have attended a prayer service. However, there were various national days of prayer prior to that and it appears that President Lincoln and other Presidents participated in whatever they called it during their time in office. I'll let you know if I ferret out any more info on who has or has not attended since 1952.

Whether previous Presidents chose to attend a service or not doesn't matter today. If I were in President Obama's shoes, you better believe I'd have my butt sitting in a pew of a church on the day designated for prayer for our country.
The National Day of Prayer Task Force's mission is to communicate with every individual the need for personal repentance and prayer, mobilizing the Christian community to intercede for America and its leadership in the seven centers of power: Government, Military, Media, Business, Education, Church and Family.

Kind of a no-brainer to me. Whether I'm Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Latter Day Saint, Jehovah Witness or any other brand of Christian, I'm praying that day. If I'm President, I'm going to let the people of the nation know that I'm praying. Can we say "moral booster", Mr. Obama?

I have a LOT to say about this one...

It's not as if Obama isn't having problems with the Catholics already. He covered up Jesus and Christian symbols when he spoke at Georgetown University causing a bit of a stink. He's pushing through every pro-abortion action conceivable. Then there's the stem-cell issue, something that offends many of faith.

Now he's snubbing the Catholic prayer breakfast?

It's not as if there aren't a ton of people in this country wondering if he is Muslim or Christian. The idea that he may lean Muslim has been fostered by the bow to the Saudi King, his willingness to speak to terrorist nations without precondition and other actions (or lack of actions). He hasn't chosen a church (unless I missed something these past few weeks). He says he prays, but doesn't say if it's to a Christian God or just in general.

Now he's boycotting a Christian prayer service? Once which was enacted BY a President and has been ongoing since 1952?

Our country is in turmoil and we're battling to keep our heads above the financial waters. Our economy has tanked, capitalism is under assault, our military is trying to follow orders in Afghanistan as they receive mixed messages, the CIA is wondering what the repercussions will be for legal actions they make today... the list of things causing us angst is way too long for one blog.

Now Obama is avoiding a prayer breakfast that if nothing else gives a symbolic sense of concern and caring?

He shows a distinct lack of concern for those who believe. He shows disdain for the Catholic Church by rebuffing the Prayer Breakfast.

There are some things that people in leadership do just because they should. Whether he believes or not, it's a small thing to go to a prayer breakfast. By choosing not to go he just added another log, as opposed to straw, to the camels breaking back. Now more of us are going to question his motivations, his actions, his beliefs and his faith. If he'd opted to go? It would have been a short bit of time from his schedule. He would have shown that he respected the Christian faith and the Church. Questions wouldn't have been raised.

People of no faith are in the minority in this country according to statistics, whether we regularly go to church or not. He would have offended less by going than by not.

Instead he seemingly scorns this annual event where Christian leaders pray for our country, our leaders and the world. He scorns those of us who believe in the importance of prayer by not paying lip-service at a minimum.

Obama to be prayer day no-show
President Obama is distancing himself from the National Day of Prayer by nixing a formal early morning service and not attending a large Catholic prayer breakfast the next morning.
All Mr. Obama will do for the National Day of Prayer, which is Thursday, is sign a proclamation honoring the day, which originated in 1952 when Congress set aside the first Thursday in May for the observance.

On the National Day of Prayer:

On April 17, 1952, President Harry S. Truman signed a bill proclaiming a National Day of Prayer must be declared by each following president at an appropriate date of his choice. In 1982 a National Prayer Committee formed to coordinate and implement a fixed commemorated day of prayer. In 1988, President Ronald Reagan amended the law decreeing that the National Day of Prayer should be held on the first Thursday of May. A claimed intention of the National Day of Prayer was that it would be a day when members of all faiths could pray together in their own way

Obama Demands Georgetown University Cover Christ Symbols Before Speech
Obama Demands Georgetown University Cover Christ Symbols Before Speech. Filed under: ... stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the ...

CNSNews.com - Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply ...
... Obama spoke Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all ... President Obama is greeted by Georgetown University President John J. ...www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46667

Monday, May 4, 2009

Global gun control?

Saturday our local probate judge attended our regular Republican monthly breakfast. I was chatting with her when someone came up and said told her wanted to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon. The judge said, with a chuckle, to get in line, they were being overwhelmed with requests. She figured that pretty much everyone in our county must have a permit or be in line to get one.

Our county has one of the lowest crime rates in the state. We have tough law enforcement. We have tough judges. No hand-holding here... crooks and druggies know they're going away if caught here. In fact, surrounding counties work with law enforcement to lure drug dealers into our county for busts because they know they'll get their butts kicked.

Crime is increasing in the county though. I suppose it's because we have a higher per capita income and that's attractive to crooks. They all figure they're going to be able to get away with whatever crime they want to commit, don't they?

Even with the rising crime rate, we're still seeing less than the rest of the state. I rather like living here, although I could live without that ticket I received recently .

One of the reasons people are lining up for gun permits, not just concealed weapon permits, is they see bad times coming on a number of fronts. The current crew would take away every law abiding citizen's guns if they could. They'd then wonder why the crime rate sky-rocketed. Although, maybe they're looking for excuses for marshal law. Who knows.

Many are reasoning that they'd better get their guns now while they can, just in case Obama and friends are successful in banning guns. I would bet the number of reported stolen guns will probably be on the rise in the near future, too, as people figure out that there's a record of gun ownership and their guns can be confiscated.

Another reason people are wanting to get their guns now is they know crime is increasing. Whether it's from the downturn in the economy or the wimpy judges we're seeing or the new give everyone a break mentality that's permeating our society, many see that things aren't going to get better in the crime arena. Best to have your own protection.

You can't love a criminal or a sociopath into not shooting when they're standing in front of you with their hand on the trigger of a gun. You sure can stop them if you are fast enough with your own gun or have one at the ready when they break down your door.

If you think an America without guns for law-abiding citizens would be bad, how about a world without legal guns? One thing that I never hear anyone explain is how they're going to take guns away from criminals. Even if we stopped manufacturing guns around the world legally, criminals are going to find a way to stockpile those already in existence, and then have factories to make their own.

Legal Advisor Nominee Advocates Global Gun Control

Last week, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on the nomination of Harold Koh, a former Dean of the Yale Law School, to be Legal Advisor to the State Department. One of the many concerns with Koh is his belief that international organizations should be empowered to regulate the Second Amendment right to own a firearm.

On April 2, 2002, Koh gave a speech to the Fordham University School of Law titled “A World Drowning in Guns” where he mapped out his vision of global gun control. Koh advocated an international “marking and tracing regime.” He complained that “the United States is now the major supplier of small arms in the world, yet the United States and its allies do not trace their newly manufactured weapons in any consistent way.” Koh advocated a U.N.-governed regime to force the U.S. “to submit information about their small arms production.”