Google

Sunday, April 08, 2007

He is Risen!

The Resurrection

Luke24:1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.' " 8Then they remembered his words.

9When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. 12Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.

Friday, April 06, 2007

Nancy goes Gucci on Mideast Tour

Smiling and ever poised Mrs. Pelosi wowed the hoi poloi and foreign dignitaries while traveling with an entourage of Democrat and Republican members of Congress this week. During her travels Mrs. Pelosi met with various mideast leaders including Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad. Following her trip to Israel, the new speaker of the House also tried her hand at a bit of mideast shuttle diplomacy by informing the President of Israel's shadowy enemy Syria, of Israel's willingness to begin peace talks with that nation. Following this announcement which seemed like a diplomatic breakthrough the office of Israel's Prime Minister issued a quick and unprecedented "clarification" of the Israeli government's wishes. The office of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wrote, "although Israel is interested in peace with Syria, that country continues to be part of the Axis of Evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East."

In diplomaticspeak, this was a polite smack-down of the Speaker's brief carreer as impromptu diplomat. In fact, Mr. Assad has been given the silent treatment from the Bush administration for his funding and material support of terrorists operating against Israel and in Iraq. It is widely believed that Mr. Assad also played a pivitol role in the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri in West Beirut. The intense International and Lebanese pressure that followed that outrageous act was the catalyst for Syria's removal of its troops from Lebanon after occupying that region for nearly thirty years. Mr. Assad is a bad actor who has a long history in meddling in the affairs of his neighbors and has provided a safe haven for terrorists operating in the region.

The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and surprisingly USA Today have been highly critical of Mrs. Pelosi's trip to the middle east. Today's Wall Street Journal even brought up the fact that the Speaker of the House has committed a felony by violating Federal Law with respect to the Logan Act.

While all of the criticism and scathing editorials regarding her travelogue in Syria are well-deserved no one can fault the House Speaker for her tony sense of style! I harly think anyone is seriously considering prosecuting the Speaker of the US House of Representatives for violation of the Logan Act. I would'nt be so crass as to advocate prosecuting Nancy in violation of the Logan Act. Maybe they should instead go after Congressman Tom Lantos of San Mateo. The Congressman and head of the House Foreign Relations Committee told reporters while on his trip to the middle east, "We have an alternative Democratic foreign policy, I view my job as beginning with restoring overseas credibility and respect for the United States." Well we must thank our lucky stars for Tom Lantos! How can we ever repay him for his making us palitable to all the world's dictator's and kleptocrats?

The Logan Act states: Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Out of his own mouth Tom Lantos has implicated himself as violating an act that prevents U.S. citizens from interfering with negotiations between the United States and foreign governments. Lantos is in effect saying that there are two foreign policies and two State Departments in the United States. Perhaps he yearns for the bygone days of the Confederacy, when Democrat Senators voted to split from the Union and create their own form of government known as the Confederate States of America?

I vote for an all-expenses trip for Tom Lantos to Leavenworth, Kansas. Maybe Nancy can visit him when time permits and bring him one of those goodie bags the Iranians gave the British hostages upon their release.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

House Committee Banishes the Global War on Terror

The use of the use of the term, "Global War on Terror" is a “catch phrase” to be avoided the House Armed Services Committee has decided. In future, the committee has decided that the use of more specific terminology with respect to operations against terrorists is to be used, according to an unidentified Democrat aide to the committee. The Drudge Report links to a report posted yesterday on MilitaryTimes to recount the story.

According to the report, aides to the committee who wished to remain anonymous stated that one of the reasons for the decision was that it "has a political element involving a disagreement over whether the war in Iraq is part of the effort to combat terrorism or is actually a distraction from fighting terrorists."

This would help the Democrats in their effort to denounce the war in Iraq and claim that we are not fighting terrorists but are merely seeing the effects of a civil war in that country. The Democrats can help prop up one of their talking points about Iraq by claiming that we ignited a civil war by invading Iraq in the first place.

Never mind that Saddam DID have WMD's and had terrorists sheltered in Iraq under his murderous regime. The Democrat position on this war is that there are no terrorists in Iraq and there is no need for us to be there at all.

The talking points of the Democrats have been carefully crafted by people who are totally committed to our defeat in Iraq and in the Global War on Terror with the aim that they can capture the White House in 2008. They are so maniacally obsessed with that goal that they will without hesitation sacrifice the safety of the nation, its citizens and its armed forces to achieve that aim. The Democrats will stop at nothing to gain the White House in '08. A resounding defeat or retreat for the United States in a time of war is what they want. If the United States wins against terrorists they stand little chance of winning a Presidential election in 2008 and posing as the great Saviors of the nation. Their insatiable thirst for power has corrupted them mind body and soul.