But before I get into why I think the “country” was stolen before Obama showed up for work, I should clarify my position on him, since I have not yet done that in this space.

Yes, I believe he is a socialist (or at least a socialist in training). Any rational person who objectively reviews the case against him MUST draw that conclusion. Why? Because to ignore his speeches/ideologies/patterns, and fail to juxtapose them to those of prominent socialists like Chairman Mao or Marx, is both NEGLIGENT and DISHONEST.

That said, the difference between my opinion of Obama and those held by the likes of Glenn Beck, the Tea Party (and other forms of conservatives with which I do not  align), is that I don’t think Obama has acted maliciously. In plain speak I don’t think he arrived at the White House with a  blueprint labeled “How I’m going to Murder America”  in his briefcase. If ever there was one, Obama is what I will call an  Accidental Socialist. To be sure, he never set out to hurt anyone. It was an accident.

The NFL star drank a bottle of rum and went for a drive. He ran over a pedestrian. The humanity. But wait.  He didn’t set out to kill anyone. We examine his character and we find he hasn’t a history of malice, etc. Hence we conclude that  if–by some miracle–the car had stopped within inches of the pedestrian and offered the driver a choice, he would have chosen not to run the pedestrian down. Therefore we must further conclude, the driver is not guilty of malice, but of some lesser degree of culpability, such as manslaughter. Like it or not, that is how the wheels of  justice turn in our country.

I view Obama’s presidency much the same way.  I equate his crimes against country more to something along the lines of  “involuntary countryslaughter.”  When one evaluates his short and unremarkable history objectively, void of passion or pretense, one finds very little about his character that screams malice or premeditation. This leaves the malice burden on his detractors, and they have, in my mind at least, failed to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

On to culpability.  Those few who solve problems by identifying ROOT CAUSES  (as opposed to focusing on their EFFECTS, as most people do), will find it extremely difficult to place blame squarely on Obama.  Let’s return to my drunk driver analogy.  In said accident, those observing the case, from inside or outside the court room, would no doubt inquire as to where the driver had been before the accident, and how he was able to drive his car, particularly had he been in the presence of other adults. Observers would no doubt ask: “Why did his friends allow him to drive!? Why didn’t someone take his keys?!”

These are the right questions to ask when seeking root causes. Hence we should present the same ones to the American public who, by majority count, no longer approve of their presidential choice:  Who gave Obama the keys? Why was he allowed to drive?! And I answer: YOU. The majority of YOU were seduced by his rhetoric, feigned sincerity, and  “hope” propaganda. Seduced you with his logo depicting a red, white and blue sunrise. A new day for America. Caught you off guard. Caught me off guard, too. I admit it.

But unlike the scores of Obama detractors that readily accuse of him of manipulating the American public, I’m not suggesting he is a manipulator. I’m going to suggest something far more radical. I’m going to suggest Obama is merely just another one of the manipulated.  I’m going to suggest that he has been bamboozled, hoodwinked, and led astray by all of those whom tricked his young mind into believing equality should be more than just a STATUS that grants one  every protection the constitution affords, but a fiscal ENTITLEMENT ratified by Jesus Christ himself.

This is why I say it’s more likely that Obama is ignorant rather than malevolent. My money (which admittedly aint much) says he believed in his heart of hearts that he was fighting for a just cause when he decided to run for president. I bet you he never–in a million years–knew his personal ideals were in almost perfect alignment with that of Karl Marx.. until the wrath of righteous, conservative patriots descended on him the moment it became clear he had what I will call “socio-economic biases.”

Still, even if–in the absence of malice–Obama can be spared the “enemy of the state” label,  a litany of questions persist about his motivation. For instance: What is his motivation for championing the plight of the poor and “disadvantaged”? Did he embark on this philanthropic crusade in the name of love? Vanity? Something else? My answers to those questions are beyond the scope of this piece (I’ll save them for another), so for now I’ll just leave it at this: as there is no trace of malice in his past, neither is there a trace of philanthropy.

So who are the victors to whom all the Obama spoils should go? I submit they are NOT–as Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin would have us believe– “liberals” or “democrats,” or any other American patriot who likes to be labeled.  The beneficiaries are the legions of those whom share the president’s brainwashed fiscal entitlement complex. Not just in the USA, but anywhere in the world where the downtrodden curse the gods of capitalism for what they perceive to be the great injustice.

Withstanding all those things, though Obama came like a thief in the night, I object to the notion that he has “stolen” the country from us. How could he steal it when, upon his arrival at the White House, he discovered it already gone?  So, who took the country if not Obama? The 60’s took it. The 70’s took it. FREE THOUGHT took it.

FREE THOUGHT of the 60’s and 70’s brought us:

- “diversity” (in every form) arrived on the scene

- people started to question how the personal and the social interact to form the individual

- people began to critique and question anything or anyone that sets themselves up as “right”, or as “the truth” (including the Bible–ESPECIALLY the Bible)

- political truth and moral truth became “subjective”

- people began to question the extent to which rhetoric forms our concepts of “reality.”

Seems to me we are now living in the aftermath of that social revolution. The shadow of it even.

I submit we were raped of our innocence long before 9/11 or Obama. I also submit we will never get it back. It is gone. Everyone is out for themselves now. Case closed.

All the great songs, written. All the great movies, done. All the greatest leaders, dead. We’re just living in their shadow. Left behind.  Passing our time with technological “advancements” that are arguably not advancing us at all. In vain. We are a generation living in vain.

In other words, Beck is calling Obama a socialist with a deep-seated hatred for Capitalism.

To be sure,  ”Liberal Theology” is a Christian doctrine. It was developed by a Catholic priest in Latin America. It’s believed by anyone who holds poverty is not misfortune or fate, but instead INJUSTICE on the part of capitalist oppressors. It is by all measures a socialist view of the world. It has been REJECTED by the Vatican on the grounds that it is Marxist-leaning.

I have a word for Beck: Disingenuous. Not only is he disingenuous, he is blaspheming God every time he opens his mouth and vilifies a fellow Christian to further his own political agenda.

Beck wants people to think he is some great Christian. But he does not represent the views of most Christians, nor does he know the first thing about HONOR.

If you truly believe the “natural selection” LIE (a lie  perpetrated by the “free” thinkers whose pride prevents them from SEEING this life is strictly about redemption and reconciliation) then I urge you to go try this experiment:

Buy a fish tank.  Place in it all the material that was known to be on earth at the time of the big bang. All that sludge. Now walk away from it. Never touch it again. Re-check it in 80 years from now. Re-check it in a MILLION years m now for all I care! Let us know when, from your sludge, a “naturally-selected” human being emerges.

I will not hold my breath.

The “science community” (you know, that contingent of academic types whose vision generally doesn’t extend beyond the lens of a microscope)  is all “abuzz” over the discovery of a new species of hominid, the evolutionary branch of primates that includes humans, that will purportedly be  revealed when a two-million-year-old skeleton of a child is unveiled this week. One noted scientist says, “A find like this could really increase our understanding of our early ancestors at a time when they first started to become recognisable as human.” Another said, ” the new find could help scientists gain a better understanding of our evolutionary tree.”

I say: and just how the $#@% is this going to help me pay my mortgage?  Decrease unemployment? Stop the globalization that is robbing the U.S. of MILLIONS of service-related jobs? Make people less greedy? Stop corporate behemoths from putting mom and pop stores out of business? Restore family values?? Help people lose weight? Decrease the violent crime rate? End the wars going on across the planet? End child slavery and trafficking?  Get the state of California (and many other states)  out of the horrendous financial hole it is in that threatens to lock middle and lower class Americans out of state colleges? The list goes on and on.

What good is this science to anyone?  For that matter, what good is the kabillion dollar space program we have?? Really, who besides the “science community” and those anti God zealots peppering the global map CARES about these discoveries?

And for the record, these discoveries don’t disprove God, they only prove His plan is much more complex than he revealed to the first conscience-endowed humans. I am certain that if God wanted us to know how we evolved, he would have told us. Why didn’t he? Because he doesn’t want us to focus on the graveyard friends, he wants us to focus on paradise.

Happy Easter, believers. Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ.. will.. come… AGAIN.

Source: http://popurls.com/viewbar/l3a4b4ed526782a8bae3a8911c7f52188

Are you SERIOUS?? The church is a disgrace! Priests and Cardinal Ratzinger have brought GREAT SHAME on Jesus Christ and parishioners and we are SICK AND TIRED of the cover-up and stonewalling.

IT IS TIME TO RID THE CHURCH OF EVERY SINGLE PEDOPHILE AND ENABLER.

In fact the time is LONG overdue.  The priests may have stopped abusing the children, but now the Vatican is abusing Catholics worldwide by continuing the perverted DENIAL! Clean up the church NOW and stop the lies!

Never thought I would say this, but if the latest allegations are true, Pope Benedict should resign. Period.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/pope-benedict-fired-growing-sex-abuse-cover-ups/story?id=10200682&page=2

Glenn Beck recently said people should boycott churches that preach economic and social justice. Preachers of such churches are now calling for a boycott of Beck.  Even though Beck is a spaz, and–at least in this observer’s opinion–no more interesting than the office water cooler big mouth, he has a point. Jesus said “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.” He never preached social or economic justice. Socialism is not good for a society. It stifles achievement and creativity, it squashes the very blessings that make humanity so beautiful. Socialism is evil. But then, so is Capitalism.

Image and Source: http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/03/12/beck.boycott/index.html?hpt=C1

From MSNBC: In 1970 a magnitude-7.9 earthquake struck just off the west coast of Peru. It reduced the coastal towns of Casma and Chimbote to rubble and killed at least 3,000 people. Even greater disaster struck the towns of Yungay and Ranranhirca. The shaking sent an avalanche of mud, rock and ice down the slopes of the Cordillera Blanca and buried the cities under tens of feet of debris. An estimated 70,000 lives were lost. Here, a statue of Christ is all that remains in Yungay.

Here in life, Christ is all the remains. He is all that is true. He is all that is light. He is all that is love.

Prayers to those in Haiti and Chile. God bless you all.

If the age of the wall is correct, the finding would be an indication that Jerusalem was home to a strong central government that had the resources and manpower needed to build massive fortifications in the 10th century B.C.

That’s a key point of dispute among scholars, because it would match the Bible’s account that the Hebrew kings David and Solomon ruled from Jerusalem around that time.Get the whole story here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/22/world/main6231848.shtml?tag=stack