Monday, January 19, 2009

How to Pray

How to Pray

"Yet everything depends on this ability to stand still and to be present with full inner awareness."

"The basic meaning of the word 'collected' is to be gathered together, united.
A glance at our life will show how much we lack this aptitude. We should have a fixed centre which, like the hub of a wheel, governs our movements and from which all our actions go out and to which they return; a standard, also, or a code by which we distinguish the important from the unimportant, the end from the means and which puts actions and experiences into their proper order; something stable, unaffected by change and yet capable of development, which makes it clear to us who we are and how matters stand with us. We lack this; we, the men of today, lack it more than did those who lived in earlier ages.

"This becomes evident in our attempts to pray. Spiritual teachers speak of 'distraction' as that state in which man lacks poise and unity, that state in which thoughts flit from object to object, in which feelings are vague and unfocused and the will ineffective. Man in this state is not really a person who speaks or who can be spoken to, but merely an unco-ordinated bundle of thoughts, feelings and sensations.

"Collectedness means that he who prays gathers himself together, directs his attention on to what he is doing, draws in all thought—a painstaking task—so as to dedicate himself to prayer as a unified whole. This is the state in which he may, when the call comes to him, answer in the words of Moses, 'Here am I (Exod. 3:4).[page 19]

"In it awakens not only the religious consciousness but a new and higher consciousness, which we might call the spiritual heart of the child of God.

"On this holy ground the reality of God becomes manifest. It may happen that man experiences it suddenly and is overcome by its grandeur and flooded by its proximity. If this happens, he knows that he is receiving the great and intimate mystery of prayer. He must receive it with reverence and guard it well. But such an event is rare indeed and more often than not nothing happens. The God of whom the worshipper had said, 'He is here,' remains silent and hidden. Then the prayer, supported by faith alone, must go out into this silent darkness and maintain itself there.

"In collectedness the worshipper says, 'God is here and here also am I.'" [Page 23]

[Romano Guardini, Prayer in Practice, Page 18, 23]

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

Stay in Peace in God's Presence

Stay in Peace in God's Presence
It is now the hour to stay in peace in God's presence.

We must pray and do penance (big or little). The Father, Son and Holy Spirit is in control.

I'll most likely be closing all my blogs except the Catholic Monitor. God is our refuge and we all must be and get closer to Him in this hour.

Fred

Sunday, November 02, 2008

O'Brien: Obama "[U]shering in the Time of Great Trial for the Church"

-I also believe that he is a carrier of a deadly moral virus, indeed a kind of anti-apostle spreading concepts and agendas that are not only anti-Christ but anti-human as well. In this sense he is of the spirit of Antichrist (perhaps without knowing it), and probably is one of several key figures in the world who (knowingly or unknowingly) will be instrumental in ushering in the time of great trial for the Church under its last and worst persecution, amidst the numerous other tribulations prophesied in the books of Daniel and Revelation, and letters of St Paul, St. John, and St. Peter.

StudiObrien newsletter, The U.S. ElectionSaturday, November 1, 2008 1:20 PM
From: "studiObrien" Add sender to Contacts To: undisclosed-recipients

All Saints Day, 1 November 2008

Dear Friends,

From just north of the border, we Canadians, like other people throughout the world, are observing and praying for the coming federal election in the United States of America. I would prefer to keep private my counsel about political choices, because it is not my country. However, I am receiving letters from American subscribers and visitors to my studio website asking me some rather surprising questions about Barack Obama, related to one of my novels.

During the past year I have read a number of his pronouncements, and saw the smoke and mirrors beneath the rhetoric, but couldn't understand why everyone south of the border (the other south of the border, the 49th parallel) was getting so excited about him, both pro and con. Then a few weeks ago a German friend called me immediately after Obama's speech in Berlin, to say that the presidential candidate had mesmerized the crowds, and that a commentator on German television had said: "We have just heard the next President of the United States...and the future President of the World." My friend felt that Obama bore an uncanny resemblance to the fictional character of the President in my novel Father Elijah. I have received several other letters saying the same thing and asking what I thought about it.

From my own reading of Obama's declarations and stated positions, I knew he was an ultra-liberal, a social revolutionary with visionary pretensions. But the Antichrist? No, not possible, I thought. I felt that he was too shallow a man to be the Son of Perdition, the Man of Sin, the Beast of the Book of Revelation. And I still think so. Obama is a crowd-pleaser with just the right ethos of idealistic crusader. That the crusade and the banners under which it marches are evil does not automatically prove that he is the Antichrist.

But now that I have seen the video of the Berlin speech I think there is more here than meets the eye. He is indeed a powerful manipulator of crowds, even as he appears ever so humble and wholesomely charming. I doubt that he is the long-prophesied ruler of the world, but I also believe that he is a carrier of a deadly moral virus, indeed a kind of anti-apostle spreading concepts and agendas that are not only anti-Christ but anti-human as well. In this sense he is of the spirit of Antichrist (perhaps without knowing it), and probably is one of several key figures in the world who (knowingly or unknowingly) will be instrumental in ushering in the time of great trial for the Church under its last and worst persecution, amidst the numerous other tribulations prophesied in the books of Daniel and Revelation, and letters of St Paul, St. John, and St. Peter.

Of course the mystique that has grown up around him is endlessly reinforced by the liberal media, which presents him to us as a high-minded humanist, a kind of secular messiah (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 675). Yet when all the rhetoric is boiled down to its substance, the man is advocating unlimited state-sanctioned murder, and compounds it by indulging in habitual falsehood. He is well accustomed to playing loose with the truth whenever it is expedient for him to do so; or else he is the victim of the largest memory lapses in recorded history; or perhaps he is just not careful about how he expresses things—a blurring or selectivity regarding facts for the purpose of aggrandizing his public image. There is a controversy currently raging in the (admittedly unreliable) forum of the internet, prompted by an African-American talk show host in Los Angeles who listed 39 significant details that Barack Obama claimed were facts about himself, but on fu! rther investigation were proved to be simply untrue. There has been some wild-fire debunking of the debunking, and then more counter-debunking, but it remains obvious that forthrightness and clarity are not major concerns in the Obama camp.

What are we to make of a man who has appeared out of semi-obscurity and become, nearly overnight, so very much an idol of the popular imagination? That he intends to become the most effective advocate of murder of the unborn ever seen in America should give us pause. Murder and lies are as old as the lands east of Eden, of course, but when they are charmingly packaged, proposed as reasonable and just policies (with a smile, a resonant voice, and an appealing flash of the eyes), one begins to wonder just what is afoot in the modern age. It brings to mind a passage from the first Act of Shakespeare's Hamlet:

“That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain...”

The line is from a scene where prince Hamlet has just encountered the ghost of his father, who informs his son that he was poisoned by his own brother Claudius (the "smiling, damned villain"), who after murdering him, seized the king's crown and his queen.

Barack Obama is an image-maker, creating his own myth as he goes along. This would be a sad defect in any human being, but it takes on ominous proportions in a person who may become, after November 4th, one of the most powerful figures in the world. How is it possible that such a tragic turn of events may come about, if indeed a majority of Americans choose to believe the smile and the myth? Why is it that so many people have come to believe that a mirage is reality, even destiny? Do pro-Obama voters hanker for a world figure who would heal old divisions between races and religions, thus heralding a new age for mankind? During this time of near intolerable tensions, does he appear to be the one who can reconcile Islam and Christianity, Africa and America, occident and orient, black and white, rich and poor? Do they see his racial origins as a symbolic victory over the history of racial oppression? Do they see in him the good-hearted "under-dog", the gutsy street fi! ghter who agitates for the rights of the "little guy," whose meteoric rise to a position of maximum influence represents themselves enthroned at last in the high seat of power? Is this why they ignore his every grave fault and hungrily consume his vague idealist platitudes as if these were a kind of new gospel for the third millennium? Our hero. Our visionary. Our Great Friend and spokesman in the forum of the world?

Clearly, contemporary man needs heroes. But why not choose a genuine one, why not look a little deeper and work a little harder to find a man of courage and principle, and if it helps in the historical healing process, why not a very different kind of black man, say a person like Alan Keyes, a scholar, former ambassador, experienced in different levels of government, and (it might be added) an African-American married to a woman from India. Moreover, he is a devout Catholic who believes in moral absolutes and has amply proved that he will stand firm to defend them regardless of the cost to his own career. He knows that kings and presidents cannot usurp the natural law, the moral order of the universe, without bringing down judgment upon their nations. But it need not be Keyes. It might be any number of other men and women of clear thought and clear principle. Surely there are "Ten Just Men" still out there somewhere in America. So why Obama? And why does he ! rise and rise as his mouth smiles and smiles, exuding sincerity as he speaks lies and death?

And why, most horribly, most shamefully, are so many Christians of malformed or unformed conscience supporting him? Is it because they have never been clearly instructed in the truth, never understood the foundation upon which the moral cosmos is built? Is morality for them merely another system of abstract "values" in a crowded playing field of such systems, from which one may pick and choose? In the case of Catholics, for example, have they been blinded by a diet of theological nuances and deadly little loopholes offered to them by the committees of national episcopal conferences — committees that have absolutely no authority over Catholics, yet which are widely revered as a kind of alternative Magisterium? Have they been deadened by a habitual dismissing or dissembling of the solid teaching given to them by the universal Church under Peter? Have they grown accustomed to listening to opinion shapers who tell them that certain excellent apostolic Bishops in ! America who teach the truth without compromise are merely hidebound reactionaries, moralistic extremists, contemporary manifestations of those old boogymen who still haunt the American psyche — the Chillingworths and Dimmesdales and the judges in The Scarlet Letter? And so it goes, this over-reaction to Puritanism played out over centuries, an over-reaction that breeds tragedies a thousand times worse than Salem’s. Lies compounding on lies, and it all floats on an ocean of spilled innocent blood. And who can gaze at that ocean (or be splashed by it) without coming to a radical choice: One either turns away into a deeper state of denial, or one turns heart and mind toward the splendor of Truth, and changes one's life accordingly.

Is this why many of our Catholic people have become impulse-driven impressionists? Of course, the blindness is not due to the failure of pastors alone. The Ministry of Disinformation (by which I mean most modern media) has played a major role. There is also the erosion of truth in the education systems, combined with the gradual confusion and weakening of conscience through our addiction to the "soma" drugs supplied by the entertainment industry. Other factors may be the war in Iraq, or Republican economics, or the Bush administration, or the structure of Capitalism itself, or any number of prudential questions in the sociopolitical order, all of which are presently tangled nests of moral dilemma. But why do they not see that these questions are secondary to the fundamental issue of life itself? Why would they replace one reigning oligarchy with another kind of oligarchy — moreover, one that would kill vast numbers of its own citizens?

"I call on heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life or death, blessing or curse. Choose life, then, so that you and your descendants may live...." (Deuteronomy 30:19)

May God bless and guide you,
in Jesus our Saviour,

with prayers and fasting,

Michael O'Brien

PS: For those interested in a concise examination of the moral parameters of voting in the forthcoming election, I urge you to read an excellent article by Dr. Mark Miravalle, professor of Theology at Franciscan University, Steubenville, available at the following link:

http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1531

Saturday, November 01, 2008

How McCain Can Pull a Truman Win with Sarah's Help

Palin Press Conference Exposing Obama’s Corruption

The media is filtering McCain's Obama message. The only media event they will allow to get through the filter is a Palin press conference.

They think she is dumb and they can destroy her.

She showed in the Biden debate that she is more than a match for them if McCain lets her be herself.

McCain's redistrubutionist Obama taxing taxpayers theme is starting to get through, but he needs a jump start to get it through with only four days left.

Sarah Palin’s huge viewer numbers at the convention, debate and the mock press conference on Saturday Night Live proves a live press conference is a chance to turn the election around with an unfiltered message.

Sarah exposes Obama’s corruption especially on taxes. (Below are a few short examples under Dick Morris' How McCain Can Pull a Truman)

Fred

http://www.newsmax.com/morris/mccain_truman_morris/2008/10/26/144298.html

How McCain Can Pull a Truman

Sunday, October 26, 2008 8:11 PM

By: Dick Morris Article Font Size

The most reliable surveys put McCain five to seven points behind Obama as we enter the last week of this interminable campaign. But in a race that will be famous for years afterwards for its volatility, it is not too late for the Republican to pull out a victory.

For Harry Truman in 1948, the presidential race shifted dramatically in the final week, and it's happened three more times in the past 30 years. In 1980, Reagan came from eight points behind to a solid victory by winning his sole debate with Carter in the last week of October. In 1992, Clinton, who had fallen behind in the polls because of the pounding he was taking over his liberalism and propensity to raise taxes, surged ahead of Bush when Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh announced that he was indicting Defense Secretary Casper (Cap) Weinberger, an indication of Bush's possible complicity in the Iran-Contra scandal. And in 2000, Bush's three-to-four point lead in the polls was erased over the final weekend when reports surfaced that he had been cited for DWI 20 years before and had not revealed the fact to the public. Bush still won the election, of course, but Gore won the popular vote by half a point.

What does McCain have to do to pull off a similar shift this time?

1. Use the stock market crash to highlight the tax issue. With the Dow Jones dropping each day by hundreds of points, this election is being held against a backdrop of economic fear unlike any since the Depression. Almost every reputable economist agrees that it would be catastrophic to add to the economy's woes by raising the capital gains tax. But Obama is on record as favoring an increase from 15% to 20% and suggested during the primaries that he would consider hitting 28%.

McCain should jump on the issue and challenge Obama to agree to a two-year moratorium on increases in the capital gains tax. If Obama agrees, McCain will score points for leadership. If Obama refuses, or ignores the challenge, McCain can attribute much of the drop in the market to the fear of increased capital gains taxation once Obama takes over. After all, its pretty obvious that if you keep 85% of your capital profits right now but stand only to keep 80% or 72% once Obama takes over, it's prudent to unload now. This pressure to sell is exactly what the markets do not need, and McCain can hammer the point home.

McCain can say that Obama's refusal to join in supporting a moratorium on capital gains taxation increases shows his commitment to class warfare - and that big government exceeds any concern he might have for stock market stability or the value of 401Ks or retirement pension funds.

McCain has already scored mightily with his invocation of Joe the Plumber and, polls show, he won the third debate by using the issue of taxes and small businesses. By early this coming week, his advertising will have achieved sufficient levels of frequency to have an impact on the polling.

2. Bring back Rev. Jeremiah Wright. For reasons that are beyond me, John McCain has vowed not to make an issue out of Rev. Wright's extreme anti-American statements. But that should not stop independent expenditure and 527 groups from raising the issue.

A good advertisement would alternate footage of Wright saying "God damn America" and 9/11 was just the "chickens coming home to roost" with an announcer explaining the relationship between the two men. The narrator might remind voters that it was Rev. Wright who married Barack and Michelle Obama and that Obama himself sat in the pews at Wright's church for 20 years as sermons like these were being given. It should point out that Obama only distanced himself from Wright a month after his remarks scandalized all Americans and cost him his momentum in the polls.

McCain is likely fearful that the establishment media would condemn him for running the ads. Their very effectiveness would ensure that the liberal media would fall all over themselves to denounce the tactic. But independent groups who want to prevent a leftist takeover of the government should not let liberal organs dictate their campaign tactics or their message.

3. Warn voters of impending socialism in America. The recent bailout legislation puts the United States government inside the ownership, management and direction of many of our major companies and financial institutions. The bureaucrats have entered as firefighters, trying to extinguish the blazes that threaten to consume these companies. But once the flames are put out, will the firefighters go home or will they set up shop and give the United States a socialist economy akin to that of Western European nations? Will the bureaucrats relinquish the power they are being given in a time of crisis?

McCain needs to point out that bureaucrats never let go of power unless they have to. He should say that with an Obama Administration and a highly Democratic Congress, we could face a long and perhaps permanent period during which entrepreneurial, private-sector capitalism disappears and loan applicants must win government approval for their financing.

Many people have become concerned with the growing power of foreign sovereign wealth funds in major American businesses. Will these funds use their influence and power to alter the financial policies and lending practices of America's leading banks and investment houses? But now the danger comes not just from abroad but from government intervention at home. The sovereign wealth fund that might be most influential in distorting our private capitalist system is the United States Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board.

Under conservative, pro-capitalist Republican management, we can, presumably, trust these institutions to exercise their power benignly and to turn control over to the private sector as soon as possible. We can count on their taking a hands-off policy toward the investment of the banks and financial firms in which they acquire an equity position. Except to control abuses like subprime mortgages and making marginal loans, we can expect that these federal institutions will act in our interest.

But if Obama's appointments take over the Treasury and the Fed, can we be as sure? McCain needs to point out that it was political meddling by liberals that led Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to encourage subprime mortgage loans in the first place. Were it not for the pressure in the Clinton Administration to expand home ownership to poor people and minorities, Freddie and Fannie would not have relaxed their down payment policies and would not have been willing to guarantee mortgages without proof that the borrowers had sufficient income to repay the debts.

McCain needs to point out that it is precisely this sort of liberal pressure which led to the disaster and to warn that the power the bailout legislation gives the next president is so potent that it could destroy our concept of a private economy.

If the Dow continues to terrify investors and distract voters from the election, it will continue to bolster Obama's candidacy and his lead. But if there is some stability in the final week before the election, there is every chance that voters will take another look at Obama and decide that he is too risky. By stressing the tax issue and the potential of an Obama regime to subvert our free enterprise system, McCain can harness the crisis and warn voters of the impact of a decision to elect the most radical candidate for president in our nation's history.



© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.


Obama’s Corruption from ACORN to Taxes

Obama's Lie on Taxes

During the first Debate:
JOHN MCCAIN: "But again, Senator Obama has shifted on a number of occasions. He has voted in the United States Senate to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year."

BARACK OBAMA: "That's not true, John. That's not true."

Record

Barack Obama Voted Twice In Favor Of The Democrats' FY 2009 Budget Resolution That Would Raise Taxes On Those Making Just $42,000 A Year. (S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 51-44: R 2-43; D 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #142: Adopted 48- 45: R 2- 44; D 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama Voted Yea)

· In March 2008, Obama Hailed His Vote For The Budget As Making "Significant Progress In Getting Our Nation's Priorities Back On Track." Obama: "The budget passed by the Senate tonight makes significant progress in getting our nation's priorities back on track. ... We need change in this country, and this budget is an important step in helping bring it about." (Sen. Barack Obama, "Obama Statement On The Senate's Passage Of The FY 2009 Budget," Press Release, obama.senate.gov, 3/14/08)

FactCheck.org: Barack Obama Did Vote For Higher Taxes On People Making $42,000 Despite Saying The Opposite. "Obama denied voting for a bill that called for increased taxes on 'people' making as little as $42,000 a year, as McCain accused him of doing. McCain was right, though only for single taxpayers." ("FactChecking Debate No. 1," FactCheck.org, http://www.factcheck.org, 9/27/08)

· "Yes, As We’ve Said Before, Obama Did In Fact Vote For A Budget Resolution That Called For Higher Federal Income Tax Rates On A Single, Non-Homeowner Who Earned As Little As $42,000 Per Year." ("FactChecking Debate No. 1," FactCheck.org, http://www.factcheck.org, 9/27/08)

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:r2GD__EUSckJ:ncgop.blogspot.com/2008/09/obama-fact-check-on-tax-increases.html+obama+voting+record+on+taxes+%2442,000+per+year.&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&ie=UTF-8

Obama's Lie on ACORN

In third Debate Obama said:“The only involvement I’ve had with ACORN was I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department.”

Obama's Website: Fact: ACORN never hired Obama as a trainer, organizer, or any type of employee. Fact: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive[http://fightthesmears.com/articles/20/acornrumor] Barack ran in 1992.

Record

Toni Foulkes, a Chicago Acorn leader wrote:

Obama then went on to run a voter registration project with Project VOTE in 1992...Project VOTE delivered 50,000 newly registered voters in that campaign (ACORN delivered about 5000 of them)...

Since then, we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office. Thus, it was natural for many of us to be active volunteers in his first campaign for State Senate and then his failed bid for U.S. Congress in 1996. [Actually, the congressional race was in 2000, SK] By the time he ran for U.S. Senate, we were old friends.



http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTNiN2YwMmQ4Njc2MzE4ZDUxYWVlYTA1NzZlMmY3YmM=

Obama's Lie on Same-Sex Marriage

Obama said:

-Obama had previously said he opposes same-sex marriage but that each state should make its own decision.
[http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:jsCGxB36hzEJ:www.sacbee.com/111/story/1051404.html+obama+prop+8&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us&ie=UTF-8]

Record

Obama record:

-Perhaps, it’s because in his first Illinois senate race, Obama is listed by a Chicago gay-lesbian publication as “supports same sex marriage”. Obama’s stand on same sex marriage was one reason he got the endorsement of Outlines, a Chicago-based gay paper that merged with the Windy City Times in 2000.
[http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:_cYvgDcUsqYJ:deathby1000papercuts.com/2008/10/obama-same-sex-marriage-obama-supported-same-sex-marriage-as-ill-state-senator/+obama+I+will+tell+you+that+I+don%27t+believe+in+gay+marriage,+but+I+do+think+that+people&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&ie=UTF-8]

-"And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts [Proposition 8] to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states," Obama wrote.
[http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:jsCGxB36hzEJ:www.sacbee.com/111/story/1051404.html+obama+prop+8&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us&ie=UTF-8]

Obama's Lie on Abortion

In the third debate Obama said:

-Yes, let me respond to this. If it sounds incredible that I would vote to withhold lifesaving treatment from an infant, that's because it's not true.[http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08101601.html]

Record

Obama in the Illinois Senate said:

-"I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions," said Obama, "because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute."

-Obama said near the beginning of the discussion, "the testimony during the committee indicated that one of the key concerns was -- is that there was a method of abortion, an induced abortion, where the -- the fetus or child, as -- as some might describe it, is still temporarily alive outside the womb."

-For Obama, whether or not a temporarily-alive-outside-the-womb little girl is a "person" entitled to constitutional rights is not determined by her humanity, her age or even her place in space relative to her mother's uterus. It is determined by a whether a doctor has been trying to kill her.

http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/10/the_obama_debat.html

Obama's biggest Lie on hailing himself as the champion of the the middle class

Record

Obama's Church Tenet: "Disavowal of the Pursuit of 'Middleclassness'”
-8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”


- But the tenets of that church during Obama's attendance are well documented. They were on the church website earlier this year and served as the church's tenets for the entirety of the time Obama worshiped there. As they are part of the "Black Value System", they were as follows:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”


http://thebigfeed.blogspot.com/2008/10/what-obama-really-thinks-of-middle.html

WHAT OBAMA REALLY THINKS OF THE MIDDLE CLASS: WHAT EVERY AMERICAN NEEDS TO KNOW
This is a repost.

Barack Obama is spending much of time hailing himself as the champion of the the middle class. He has made his promise of help for the middle class the center of his campaign. But how does he really feel about the middle class?

Truth be told, Barack Obama has spent much of his adult life worshiping in a church that had as one of its basic tenets the "disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness". What does that mean? Well, If I have to tell you what "middle class" means, please, spend your time at CNN.com. As for the term "disavowal"...It means (and this is solely for your benefit because I have a big brain and already know what it means) "to disclaim knowledge of, responsibility for, or association with". It should be clear to you now what Obama's church meant by "disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness".

Here is the point that I would normally direct you to Obama's church's website and let you view its basic tenets for yourself. Just so you can see that I'm not BSing you. Alas, that web page listing those tenets has been removed (The work of Obama's "truth squad"?). But the tenets of that church during Obama's attendance are well documented. They were on the church website earlier this year and served as the church's tenets for the entirety of the time Obama worshiped there. As they are part of the "Black Value System", they were as follows:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

Number 8, the one at issue, is no longer one of the stated tenets of the church. It has been removed. But it did exist. Again, it served as one of the points of the church for the entire time Obama worshiped under Jerimiah Right, his spiritual mentor. Here's proof. And here's even better proof.


Now, if you take Obama's worship at a church that has as one of its basic points the "disavowal of the pursuit of 'middleclassness'", and you throw it in a pot with the thoughts of his communist mentor Frank Davis and his and his socialist associate Saul Alinsky, and then you add a dash of resentment and condescension for bitter, bible clinging, gun toting types, you really start to get a better picture of exactly what Obama thinks about the middle class. Which is, that he doesn't believe it should exist.

America! Here is a man who is running around the country telling anyone who will listen that HE is the one who is fighting for the middle class. Which, given the above, comes as quite a surprise. After all, he had 20 years to get point 8 removed from his own church's tenets. He did nothing. He had 20 years to tell his congregation that killing the middle class is not such a good idea. Instead, he showed up to church on Sundays and said nothing. And we're now supposed to believe he is our greatest defender? Wolf...sheep's clothing. Y'all know the story. Don't get eaten.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Obama's Taxes Taxpayers for more Welfare Checks to Nontaxpayers

-In real numbers, 60.7 million people who have no tax burden at all will receive refunds from Obama, while only 33.8 million people, who pay approximately 40 percent of income taxes, will get any kind of refund. Twenty percent[20%] of taxpayers, who pay 87.5 percent of total income taxes, will actually see after-tax income decline under Obama by nearly two percent[2%], according to the Center.

http://www.macpac08.com/2008/10/obamas-tax-lies.html

Oct 16, 2008
Obama's Tax Lies
Interesting article at the Wall Street Journal, outlining how Obama's tax policy is more about wealth redistribution than it is lowering taxes for, as he says "95% of all families."


"For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase "tax credit." Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals:

A $500 tax credit ($1,000 a couple) to "make work pay" that phases out at income of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 per couple.
A $4,000 tax credit for college tuition.
A 10% mortgage interest tax credit (on top of the existing mortgage interest deduction and other housing subsidies).
A "savings" tax credit of 50% up to $1,000.
An expansion of the earned-income tax credit that would allow single workers to receive as much as $555 a year, up from $175 now, and give these workers up to $1,110 if they are paying child support.
A child care credit of 50% up to $6,000 of expenses a year.
A "clean car" tax credit of up to $7,000 on the purchase of certain vehicles.
Here's the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer -- a federal check -- from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this "welfare," or in George McGovern's 1972 campaign a "Demogrant." Mr. Obama's genius is to call it a tax cut."

These refunds are claimed on tax returns and are paid to all taxpayers who qualify for them, regardless of whether they owe taxes or not. These refunds have the ability of reducing a taxpayer’s liability below zero, meaning they can get a refund without actually paying taxes.

In real numbers, 60.7 million people who have no tax burden at all will receive refunds from Obama, while only 33.8 million people, who pay approximately 40 percent of income taxes, will get any kind of refund. Twenty percent of taxpayers, who pay 87.5 percent of total income taxes, will actually see after-tax income decline under Obama by nearly two percent, according to the Center.

Thanks To AFBlue at 7:24 AM

Monday, October 27, 2008

“A Third of all the Obama Voters Live with a McCain Voter"

-Morris suggests a simple plan that could put McCain over the top in votes: “A third of all the Obama voters live with a McCain voter. It’s the McCain voters’ job to read . . . stock up on ammunition, and win the breakfast table conversation!”

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Morris_close_prez_race/2008/10/27/144599.html

Dick Morris Says Presidential Race In 'Tremendous Flux,' with McCain Gaining

Monday, October 27, 2008 3:56 PM

By: Kenneth D. Williams Article Font Size


Dick Morris says the presidential race is now in a state of “tremendous flux,” with McCain gaining anywhere from 3 to 7 percentage points in just the past few hours.


Fox News host Neil Cavuto, interviewing Morris for his “Your World” program today, told Morris that, to him, Obama’s economic plan wasn’t adding up. “And no one knows it’s not adding up!” Cavuto said.


Morris agreed, saying, “It’s ridiculous to think that you can pay for an elaborate spending plan like Obama’s by taxing 10 people who happen to be rich in the United States. It’s ludicrous.”


Cavuto pointed out that Obama said he would raise capital gains taxes by 5 percent, and wondered why anyone wouldn’t sell now and save 5 percent on taxes.


Morris reminded Cavuto that Obama probably would raise capital gains taxes by 13 percent, from the current 15 to a high of 28 percent. “During the primary they asked Obama, ‘How high would you raise capital gains taxes?’ And he said, ‘I wouldn’t go higher than it was under Clinton,’ which was 28 percent. So if you’re going to sell your stock now, you get to keep 85 percent of your [gains]. If you sell it later, you only get to keep 80, and probably 72 percent. ”


For McCain’s part, Morris said he could use a “tax-induced market sell-off” scenario against Obama.


“I think that what McCain needs to do is to challenge Obama to two years of moratorium on capital gains tax increases,” Morris told Cavuto, “and say, ‘With the market plunging a couple of hundred points every single day, from here until Election Day, if the voters believe you’re going to raise capital gains taxes, and they feel you’re going to win, it’s going to send the market into a tizzy. Why don’t we both agree not to raise capital gains taxes?’ And Obama can’t follow him on that, and that puts the declining market over the next six or seven days on the Obama campaign’s doorstep.”


Morris then detailed how close the presidential race had become in a matter of hours.


“I want to report that this election right now is in a state of enormous flux,” he said. “Forty-eight hours ago, there was no sign of any McCain movement. Then Zogby first reported it narrowing from a 12-point Obama lead to 9, and then yesterday to 5. Today Rasmussen, who had [Obama’s lead] at 8 reported it at 5, and Gallup, that had it at 6, now reports it at 5. So you have the three most reliable tracking polls, Rasmussen, Zogby and Gallup, all saying 5.”


Morris suggests a simple plan that could put McCain over the top in votes: “A third of all the Obama voters live with a McCain voter. It’s the McCain voters’ job to read . . . stock up on ammunition, and win the breakfast table conversation!”

Obama Caught on Tape Calling for Redistributing Wealth

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_spread_wealth/2008/10/27/144493.html

Obama Caught on Tape Calling for Redistributing Wealth

Monday, October 27, 2008 12:22 PM

By: David A. Patten Article Font Size




One of the tragedies of the Civil Rights movement is that it failed to lead to income redistribution in the United States, Barack Obama appears to state in an audio excerpt of a Chicago public radio program recorded in 2001.

Obama, who then was an Illinois state senator, also stated that people continue to “suffer” because there is no government program to take money from the rich and redistribute it to Americans who are less well off.

The excerpt, posted on YouTube.com, has set the blogosphere abuzz.

It also caught the attention of GOP presidential nominee John McCain, who is using it to help drive home the Joe the plumber theme. McCain states that Obama’s plan to “spread the wealth around” amounts to income redistribution.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Obama: Jekyll-Hyde

-Jekyll-Hyde case. I imagined the leftist Dr. Barack, having won the nomination, drinking a potion and turning into the centrist Mr. Obama for the final campaign. I had to discard this model because Obama manages to hold conflicting positions simultaneously, like one of those images under ridged plastic that changes back and forth as you tilt it.

-There is something like that in C. S. Lewis' The Great Divorce, wherein one of the damned spirits, an ugly silent dwarf, leads around a large impressive puppet that speaks for him like a ventriloquist's dummy.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2096438/posts

The Enigma of Obama
American Thinker ^ | October 03, 2008 | Paul Shlichta

Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:55:03 PM by neverdem

A school of thought is emerging that Barack Obama has an advanced form of narcissistic personality disorder. I heartily agree with Robert Bowie Johnson and Dr. Sam Vaknin in their shared conclusion, but I reached it from a somewhat different route. I had been trying to write an article comparing our political candidates to circus freaks such as chameleons, phoobs, and contortionists. But I was stumped when I came to Obama, who seems to partake of all of these metaphors.



How can one categorize a man who combines:


-a revivalist's grandiose and extravagant oratory,
-a charismatic talent for swaying crowds for no logical reason that they can explain,
bewilderingly contradictory changes in positions on issues,
-a squidlike ability to befog and blur statements into ambiguous or ominous vagaries,
-an inflated image (and self-image) covering a naïve and meager mental ability,
-a penchant for gaffes and misstatements combined with a dismissal of any corrections as irrelevant or malignant,
-a humorless rigidity, elitist aloofness, and perpetual air of condescension, and
-a thin-skinned aggrievement at being misinterpreted or of having his privacy violated.

It's like trying to cram a three-ring circus into a pup tent. Unlike a chameleon, he maintains a constant personal image; it is only his positions that change. He shares the ignorance and self confidence of megaegos, but they doggedly stick to one set of dogmas while he changes them with the ease of a shapeshifter. Moreover, he maintains conflicting positions with more grace than a contortionist and more rigidity than an india-rubber man.


I tried thinking of him as a Jekyll-Hyde case. I imagined the leftist Dr. Barack, having won the nomination, drinking a potion and turning into the centrist Mr. Obama for the final campaign. I had to discard this model because Obama manages to hold conflicting positions simultaneously, like one of those images under ridged plastic that changes back and forth as you tilt it.


I next thought of Obama as an amoeba [no anagram intended], incessantly changing its detailed shape. to engulf its prey while maintaining a constant overall appearance. This suggested the image of an amoeba splitting in two (one to reassure the liberals while the other woos the centrists) or of Siamese twins or a two-headed man-a perfect freak for my political sideshow.


And then I saw the ads for "The Dark Knight". Of course, Barack Obama is Harvey Dent! Imagine Two Face in the White House, with his subservient aides saying: "Mister President, Iran has just detonated an atomic bomb. Should we attack them or negotiate?" Without a word, the coin flips up and spins in mid-air....


But all this imagery iconizes only one facet of Obama. His penchant for pyrotechnic oratory calls to mind a sideshow barker or snake oil salesman. His charisma suggests a hypnotist, or perhaps the daring young man on the flying trapeze. His pompous humorlessness suggests Victorian icons that I have described elsewhere. But his most prominent trait is the incongruous combination of meager mental resources, as evidenced by his frequent gaffes and childishly naïve pronouncements, with a greatly inflated self-image of his expertise and capabilities.


I then thought of one of those huge balloons in the Macy's Thanksgiving parade.

There is something like that in C. S. Lewis' The Great Divorce, wherein one of the damned spirits, an ugly silent dwarf, leads around a large impressive puppet that speaks for him like a ventriloquist's dummy.

Or like the old man in "Men in Black", who turns out to be a robot operated by a tiny alien sitting at the control panel inside its head.


But these extravagant fantasies are needless excesses. As she occasionally does, Maureen Dowd managed to pinpoint Obama precisely:


He seems more like a child prodigy. Those enraptured with his gifts urge him on, like anxious parents, trying to pull that sustained, dazzling performance out of him that they believe he's capable of; they are willing to put up with the prodigy's occasional listlessness and crabbiness, his flights of self-regard and self-righteousness.


But Dowd did not carry her analysis far enough. As Johnson and Vaknin and others have already pointed out, the traits she hints at would alert a psychologist to the likelihood of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), whose symptoms include


An exaggerated sense of self-importance; exaggerates achievements and talents; expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements
Need for excessive admiration
A sense of entitlement
Selfishness; taking advantage of others to achieve own ends
Lack of empathy
Arrogant, haughty, patronizing, or contemptuous behavior or attitudes.
It is important to realize that NPD is much more dangerous than simple vanity. Even closer to Dowd's precocious-child model is Joanna Ashmun's description of NPD:


"Narcissists have normal, even superior, intellectual development while remaining emotionally and morally immature. Dealing with them can give you the sense of trying to have a reasonable discussion with a very clever six-year-old -- this is an age when normal children are grandiose and exhibitionistic, when they are very resistant to taking the blame for their own misbehavior, when they understand what the rules are (e.g., that lying, cheating, and stealing are prohibited) but are still trying to wriggle out of accepting those rules for themselves."


The Dowd-Ashmum model, which seems to account for all of the Obamic traits listed above, moves us to pity and then horror. A child with NPD is bad enough -- but what if that child had the immense power of the President of the United States? As if to answer that question, Ashmun's website refers to Jerome Bixby's famous short story "It's a Good Life", in which a small boy is omnipotent, to the servile terror of everyone else in his village. A plot summary can be found in Wikipedia. The whole story can be found here.

But I warn you that, if you read it, you will be very anxious until the election is over -- and perhaps even more so in the years to come.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: npd; obama


1 posted on Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:55:03 PM by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: neverdem
He seems like the perfect prez for our modern world of narcissistic nitwits and pudgy-bodied multiculti emotion-based doofuses who think it’s cruel fate that they have to work for a living.



2 posted on Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:58:59 PM by Darkwolf377 (I've got a bracelet, too. From Sergeant..... uuuuuuuhhhhhhh...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: neverdem
Rasputin



3 posted on Friday, October 03, 2008 12:03:47 AM by bruinbirdman ("Those who control language control minds." - Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: neverdem
Thank you for posting this. After reading it carefully, I realized that others had put perfectly in words what I contained within myself in feelings towards this very dangerous man.

It explains so many of his bizarre actions and reactions to me.



4 posted on Friday, October 03, 2008 12:04:48 AM by border bud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: neverdem
Hitler had the same sort of ‘personality’.

Catholic Bishop's Radio Ad could Sink Obama

-To hear and download bishop Gracida’s radio ad at no charge, go to www.randallterry.com. To organize a press conference in your area on Thursday, October 30, go to www.humbleplea.com for instructions.

-Simply contact your local radio station(s), buy 10 or 20 radio ads yourself, and they can download the audio file to play on their radio station. It is truly that simple. Call your radio station(s), tell them you want to buy ads, and tell them to download the mp3 file from our web site: www.randallterry.com. (For those with questions, call us at 904-687-9804.)

-Catholics to Demonstrate against Obama’s Pro-abortion Agenda
Theme: “No Catholic Can in Good Conscience Vote for Obama.”

At 12 Noon, Thursday, October 30, Catholics will hold a one hour demonstration, accompanied by a press conference, echoing Bishop Gracida’s words: No Catholic can in good conscience vote for Obama, because of his radical support of child-killing.

WOW! Bishop Gracida even names names. He stated and says on the radio, for all to hear, that Barack Hussein Obama is a pro-abortion candidate" and a Catholic CANNOT vote for him.

At last a real shepherd who is not afraid to name names. As far as I know, no other bishop has used Obama's name. If only all the bishops had the same "guts," the killing of unborn children would soon be history.

Get involved -- release the radio ad in your area.

Bishop Rene H. Gracida for Pope.

Frank Joseph M.D.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breaking News: Bishop Rene H. Gracida releases a radio ad that could sink Obama’s campaign. This “political light saber” is in our hands. What will we do with it?

Bishop Rene H. Gracida releases radio ad against voting for Barack Obama; Catholics Plan anti-Obama Demonstrations and Press Conferences Coast to Coast on Thursday, October 30.

By Randall A. Terry

Like millions of the faithful, I have been thrilled by the sudden and forceful rise of various Bishops’ voices against the errors decimating the hearts of the Faithful in this election cycle. I am speaking of the errors stated by Doug Kmiec (and echoed by others) that go like this: “It is time to set the record straight that it violates no aspect of Catholic teaching for a Catholic Voter to endorse, support, or vote for Barack Obama…” (Doug Kmiec, Catholic Attorney and Author, Can a Catholic Support Him?, pg 36, emphasis added.)

Anyone with “an ear to hear” clearly knows that no Catholic can vote for Obama with a clear conscience – no matter what Doug Kmiec, Roman Catholics for Obama, or any other misguided Catholic may declare. As Bishop Martino declared: “This is madness, people.”

But now – perhaps in an eleventh hour answer to prayer – Bishop Rene H. Gracida has released a stunningly clear radio ad concerning Catholics voting for Barack Obama.

He boldly states:

"This is Bishop Rene H. Gracida, reminding all Catholics that they must vote in this election with an informed conscience. A Catholic cannot be said to have voted in this election with a good conscience if they have voted for a pro-abortion candidate. Barack Hussein Obama is a pro-abortion candidate."

Bishop Gracida recorded the radio spot in English and Spanish; it can be heard at www.randallterry.com.

But there is more good news – where you can be a part of defeating this madness – Bishop Gracida has offered this radio spot without charge for all who want to use it. You - an American citizen committed to protecting innocent unborn life in this election – can download the mp3 file, and pay to place this ad on your local radio station(s).

Simply contact your local radio station(s), buy 10 or 20 radio ads yourself, and they can download the audio file to play on their radio station. It is truly that simple. Call your radio station(s), tell them you want to buy ads, and tell them to download the mp3 file from our web site: www.randallterry.com. (For those with questions, call us at 904-687-9804.)

If this ad receives the airplay it deserves – and the unborn so desperately need – it could jolt Catholic voters back to their senses and moorings; Catholic voters who have been seduced into ethical quicksand by partisan supporters of Obama who betray the lives of innocent unborn children.

Catholics to Demonstrate against Obama’s Pro-abortion Agenda
Theme: “No Catholic Can in Good Conscience Vote for Obama.”

At 12 Noon, Thursday, October 30, Catholics will hold a one hour demonstration, accompanied by a press conference, echoing Bishop Gracida’s words: No Catholic can in good conscience vote for Obama, because of his radical support of child-killing.

Right now, cities include:

Cincinnati, Ohio
Columbus, Ohio
Indianapolis, Indiana
Denver, Colorado
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Jacksonville, FL
St. Augustine, FL
Miami, FL
Charlotte, NC
Arlington, VA
Richmond, VA
St. Louis, MO
Kansas City, MO
Joplin, MO

Our message to the press will be simple: “As Catholic voters – who put innocent life ahead or partisan politics – we reject the Obama/Biden ticket, and urge our fellow Catholics to abandon their plans to betray their faith.”

Our beloved late Holy Father, John Paul II, clearly stated: “In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it.” 73, Gospel of Life”

With our federal system of government, we do not vote for laws; we vote for lawmakers who make laws in our stead. Given the history and intention of Obama to continue the legalized killing of the unborn, to vote for him is to knowingly to participate in his evil acts and intentions, and in a real way to vote for abortion itself.

We will hold these peaceful vigils, and hopefully have some good “face time” with the media. If we do our job right, we could have millions of Catholics hear the truth through the vehicle of the secular media.

We beg the prayers of our compatriots, and invite others to join us.

We have about 15 cities ready to go; we would love to have 50!

If anyone is interested in leading an event in their city, they can go to www.humbleplea.com and look at the plans we have laid out. We will help anyone with a heart to help the babies in this election cycle.

I know that many are discouraged, many are fearful, and many do not know what to do.

Let us invoke our Blessed Mother for a miracle, and then lift up our voices with all our hearts.

Perhaps – just perhaps – the message of bishop Gracida and the growing chorus of bishops correcting the errors of Kmiec & Co. will reach the hearts of the faithful.

And maybe – if the laity ignites an unquenchable fire of truth through demonstrations, press conferences, and letters to the editor; emails, blogs, and a fervent plea to our pastors – maybe we will see a “Hail Mary” victory for the children in this election. Maybe Our Lady – for the sake of the Innocent – will honor the cries and sighs that have touched her Immaculate Heart.

(To hear and download bishop Gracida’s radio ad at no charge, go to www.randallterry.com. To organize a press conference in your area on Thursday, October 30, go to www.humbleplea.com for instructions.)

_______________________________________________


To respond to this email, subscribe, or unsubscribe, please contact Dr. Frank:

drfrank@abortiontruths.net

Thank you.