CURRENT EVENTS

DREAMING Part 1. I ha(d) a dream; Part 2. A dream comes true.


Part 1: I ha(d) a dream (nightmare)

Two senators (formerly air force reserve helicopter pilots) were flying an empty helicopter transport over the desert on the return leg home after delivering foreign aid to some needy Saudis. They spotted a man below lying in the open in the 140 degree sun.

They landed the helicopter and one of the senators went to investigate the man. He returned and reported to the pilot.

“An American citizen. He is suffering from sever sun exposure, he’s dehydrated and suffering from malnutrition.”

“That sun exposure could cause cancer.” responded the other senator. “Give him this jar of sunscreen.”

The senators then started to resume their flight home. “I’ll circle overhead to determine if the man is applying the sunscreen. In that manner we will be providing over-sight as required when administering government aid.”



Part 2: A dream comes true.

Washington DC, Us Senate, Feb 6, 2009. Senators, Kent Conrad (D, N Dakota) and Lindsey Graham (R, S Carolina) introduced and argued for a bi-partisan amendment to the Stimulus bill (900B), diverting 22 Billion of some of the wasteful spending on Non-Stimulus projects currently in the stimulus plan to a program of the FDIC to stop over 1,5 million projected home foreclosures projected in the US within the next year. The senators argued that to fix the current economic crisis it is necessary to attack the three major problems simultaneously. The problem are the employment, housing and banking. Unless all three problems are addressed, any fix will not be effective.

In order to resolve the banking problems, foreclosures must be stopped because
they are one part of the banking problem. Foreclosure result in short sales by banks, causing surrounding homes to devalue causing further foreclosures, causing vicious downward spiraling of bank assets and homeless people. If you do not stop foreclosures, you do not solve the banking problem. The affected population is now not only out of work but also out of a home.

Senators Chris Dodd (D, Conn) and Chuck Schumer (D, New York) applauded the sentiments of the amendment but argued against it because the current Stimulus Bill is just that—a stimulus bill (to stimulate employment) and it is illogical to introduce amendments concerning banking and foreclosures to a stimulus bill. Additionally, they explained, that there is another program (The TARP, 750 B) which has already been allocated for that purpose.

Both Graham and Conrad argued that the TARP is already overspent (43 B to the auto industry) and cannot handle the foreclosure program. That did not seem to dissuade Schumer and Dodd who apparently will offer the American Public a new book on the spread of venereal disease (part of the new “stimulus plan”) which they can read camped out in their new fuel efficient automobiles. (perhaps they will also be given a bottle of sunscreen)

Won’t somebody please introduce an amendment to rename the stimulus plan the recovery plan. Since the spread of venereal disease is part of a “cause” not a “recovery” it could not be a part of the newly named bill.

REACTION TO NOVEL DEATH DEFINED

FROM THE AUTHOR,

This section of the blog is reserved for reader responses to the Political Novel “Death Defined” (www.deathdefined.com). Responders may post comments either on the book’s website or here on the blog. Responder comments will be removed when judged to be outside the bounds of “good taste” on the basis of offensive language but not on the basis that they are not also held by the author. The author and others participants may respond to posts.

It is recognized that the book has an agenda which may arouse opposition. One of the objectives of the book was to stimulate a forum where both sides of one of the many issues surrounding the basic concepts of “the right to Life” and the “freedom of choice” may be debated.

With that said, I invite your responses.

The author, Harper

CALIFORNIA PROP4, YOUNG GIRLS, PARENTS LOSE

PROP 4, YOUNG GIRLS, PARENTS LOSE.

Proposition 4 on the 2008 California election called for 48 hour parent notification that a pregnant minors’ parents be notified prior to the performing of an abortion. Arguing against the proposition, and winning, were childless entities such as Family Planning and Womens Rights Activist Organizations. Losing: Parents and their children.

Advancing the main argument against Pop4, these organizations said that

notification to parents may (could be, might happen, in some cases, etc) result in abuse by the parent or guardian of the defenseless young girls.

Absent from the discussion was the covered over fact that in every case of underage pregnancy, a crime has been committed. Statutory Rape. As it stands, these girls are being sent right back into the same environment where the crime was committed. The law-breakers are undetected, unpunished and unleashed to repeat their offense against the girls.

This is the third such defeat for a similar law. Parents rights were lost in 2004, 2006 as well. It’s time to re-group and start over. At the national level. We need grass roots leadership because this won’t be easy with the current liberal government. Just remember, we are still a government for the people, by the people. You can cast your first vote here. NOW.

When does life begin?

If you watched the Pastor Rick Warren television interviews with the presidential candidates, Senator Obama and Senator McCain, you might remember Dr. Warrens question to both candidates: "When does life begin?" Senator McCain’s response was quick and decisive: “at Conception”. Senator Obama’s reply was neither quick nor decisive. He said: “I’m going to have to leave that up to someone in a higher pay grade”. Now, you can take that in a lot of ways:

1. I don’t have to decide that until I am president. or

2. A higher pay grade than senator or president is God Himself. or

3. A host of other arguments typical of most politicians such as “that

depends upon what the definition of what is. . .is!”

Based upon his answer, Senator Obama is going to have to admit that: Life begins anywhere between conception and birth! There are no other reasonable conclusions. That means: Termination of the normal development of an unborn fetus is MURDER! We must give the life of an unborn fetus “the benefit of doubt”. We must define an abortion as a death of one of Gods children.

When does God condone killing?

Despite the OT Commandments "thou shalt not kill", God seems to have condoned killing, as in the battle of David versus Goliath, where David is presumed to have Gods Blessing. In the NT, while Jesus does not directly speak out on one person killing another, He does caution "Live by the sword, Die by the sword" and "turn the other cheek".

Under what conditions do you think God would consider one person taking the life of another exempt from the commandment "Thou shalt not kill"? Consider the following situations: A soldier in battle; A policeman on duty; A father defending his family from intruders; A woman defending herself in an attempted rape.