DHS Napolitano orders Sheriff Arpaio to stop looking for illegal aliens
Posted using ShareThis
Friday, October 9, 2009
Thursday, September 24, 2009
A Course in Miracles Lesson 37
I thought I would share today's lesson from A Course in Miracles.
"My holiness blesses the world"
This idea contains the first glimmerings of your true function in the world, or why you are here. Your purpose is to see the world through your own holiness. Thus are you and the world blessed together. No one loses; nothing is taken away from anyone; everyone gains through your holy vision. It signifies the end of sacrifice because it offers everyone his full due.
There is no other way in which the idea of sacrifice can be removed from the world's thinking. Any other way of seeing will inevitably demand payment of someone or something. As a result, the perceiver will lose. Nor will he have any idea why he is losing. Yet is his wholeness restored to his awareness through your vision. Your holiness blesses him by asking nothing of him. Those who see themselves as whole make no demands.
Your holiness is the salvation of the world. It lets you teach the world that it is one with you, not by preaching to it, not by telling it anything, but merely by your quiet recognition that in your holiness are all things blessed along with you.
Click the title for a link to the website for more information.
"My holiness blesses the world"
This idea contains the first glimmerings of your true function in the world, or why you are here. Your purpose is to see the world through your own holiness. Thus are you and the world blessed together. No one loses; nothing is taken away from anyone; everyone gains through your holy vision. It signifies the end of sacrifice because it offers everyone his full due.
There is no other way in which the idea of sacrifice can be removed from the world's thinking. Any other way of seeing will inevitably demand payment of someone or something. As a result, the perceiver will lose. Nor will he have any idea why he is losing. Yet is his wholeness restored to his awareness through your vision. Your holiness blesses him by asking nothing of him. Those who see themselves as whole make no demands.
Your holiness is the salvation of the world. It lets you teach the world that it is one with you, not by preaching to it, not by telling it anything, but merely by your quiet recognition that in your holiness are all things blessed along with you.
Click the title for a link to the website for more information.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Response to State of the Union
Tonight we heard an eloquent speech presented by a master orator. He was polished, witty, and it seemed he was very sincere in his desire to help the American people. Once again the American people basked in the gentle glow of their televisions to hear the President of the United States slide around his oath to the Constitution.
click here to continue
Having said that; here is a man that less than 5 weeks ago swore an oath to “protect and defend the Constitution;” who spoke for 50 minutes on the many and costly programs that were totally outside the scope of the federal government.
This is not about saving money, or banks, or car companies, this is about saving the very principles this great nation was founded upon.
What we heard tonight was nothing more than a plea to race headlong toward socialism, to spread the wealth around, as he has said before. He wants to create federal lending funds and housing rescue plans to help individual home owners (wealth redistribution). He wants to swoop down from on high with the “full force of the Federal Government” whenever any bank may be having problems and bring them to task. And may we remind the reading audience; it was that very same federal government that mandated that these banks make those loans or lose their favored bank rating. They caused the problem by their very own regulations and offer to fix it by increasing regulation and control. What this really means is more power for the central government and less power to the states.
Then he tells us how he inherited this “Great Debt” and within 30 days...click here to continue
Monday, February 23, 2009
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Obama's Plan for Mandatory National Service
Hi there,
Below is an article outling some info about Obama's vision for our country. If this doesn't scare you into action, I don't know what will.
:)
"National Service" and Conscription: A Question of Ownership
By William Norman Grigg
Government-mandated "community service" is integral to Barack Obama's vision of "change." Obama has described such service as a key element of creating "a new era of responsibility -- a recognition on the part of every American that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world; duties that we do not grudgingly accept, but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character than giving our all to a difficult task."
Actually, there is nothing novel about Obama's emphasis on government-imposed citizen "service." National service, in some form, has been endorsed by every U.S. president since George Bush the Elder. But none has promoted it as insistently as Barack Obama.
Of course, most Americans are hardly strangers to responsibility. They hold jobs, provide for families, and perform volunteer work for schools and churches. Thousands of acts of service occur literally every second of every day in America, both in the form of mutually beneficial business transactions and charitable deeds performed out of conviction.
The problem with such service, apparently, is that it is neither mandated nor brokered by the government. So from the perspective of those who believe that life should be organized by the state, such spontaneous service simply doesn't count.
Before it created a small but significant scandal, the Obama campaign's position paper on national service promised that as president he would "inspire" Americans to render "universal voluntary service."
It was not explained how service could be both "universal" and truly "voluntary": Was the assumption that differences over opinion regarding the proper type of "service" would simply vanish? Or would the reluctance of many Americans to surrender valuable time to carry out government-approved activities be overcome by the sheer power of Obama's charisma?
Obama's vision of "Universal Voluntary Service," as originally outlined in his campaign literature, displayed far greater ambition and more than a touch of authoritarianism: "Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year." The blueprint likewise called for the expansion of AmeriCorps from 75,000 to 250,000 and the creation of five separate "Corps" of government-funded "volunteers" to deal with education, health, energy, veterans affairs, and homeland security.
One element of the Obama plan, the "Classroom Corps," employed frankly militaristic language, stating that the administration would "enlist" retired teachers, "recruit" civic leaders, and "draft" parents, grandparents, and others to serve as mentors.
The campaign for "universal voluntary service" is bipartisan and enjoys enthusiastic support from the mainstream media. Richard Stengel, Time magazine's managing editor, is co-chair of Service Nation, a non-profit established to promote Obama's service campaign. Former GOP presidential candidate John McCain has joined with Obama in promoting government-imposed service.
Tony Blankley, who served as chief of staff for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, has called in his new book American Grit for the re-introduction of a universal military draft.
Blankley's proposed system is similar to legislation being promoted by House Democrat Charles Rangel; it would require all Americans who turn 18 to spend two years either in military service or in a government-selected "Homeland Security" role. He proposes a "compulsory program for all Americans aged eighteen or nineteen, men and women, after most have graduated from high school. The military, reviewing these graduates' transcripts, extracurricular activities, and medical reports, would select however many they needed to fulfill their draft allotments for a two-year period of military service. Those not chosen by the military would undertake a two-year service obligation."
Setting a tone likely to be emulated by other Republicans, Blankley condemns Obama's national service proposal not because it represents a presumptuous imposition on the lives of Americans, but because it wouldn't provide soldiers for ongoing and envisioned military conflicts.
"We will soon be faced with the choice of severely scaling back our role in the world or expanding the army through conscription," observes Blankley, blithely assuming that the former option is simply inadmissible. Since "there is a limit to the number of people willing to volunteer to be a soldier," the government must return to a system its critics consider nothing less than military slavery.
All "national service" proposals, whether civilian or military, are rooted in the assumption that individuals owe service to the State -- indeed, that the State has the first claim on the individual's time, labor, and wealth.
Although the legally protected practice of chattel slavery ended roughly a century and a half ago, politicians routinely insist that the government is entitled to claim uncompensated labor from the citizenry in the name of "community" or "national" service.
continue article here
Below is an article outling some info about Obama's vision for our country. If this doesn't scare you into action, I don't know what will.
:)
"National Service" and Conscription: A Question of Ownership
By William Norman Grigg
Government-mandated "community service" is integral to Barack Obama's vision of "change." Obama has described such service as a key element of creating "a new era of responsibility -- a recognition on the part of every American that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world; duties that we do not grudgingly accept, but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character than giving our all to a difficult task."
Actually, there is nothing novel about Obama's emphasis on government-imposed citizen "service." National service, in some form, has been endorsed by every U.S. president since George Bush the Elder. But none has promoted it as insistently as Barack Obama.
Of course, most Americans are hardly strangers to responsibility. They hold jobs, provide for families, and perform volunteer work for schools and churches. Thousands of acts of service occur literally every second of every day in America, both in the form of mutually beneficial business transactions and charitable deeds performed out of conviction.
The problem with such service, apparently, is that it is neither mandated nor brokered by the government. So from the perspective of those who believe that life should be organized by the state, such spontaneous service simply doesn't count.
Before it created a small but significant scandal, the Obama campaign's position paper on national service promised that as president he would "inspire" Americans to render "universal voluntary service."
It was not explained how service could be both "universal" and truly "voluntary": Was the assumption that differences over opinion regarding the proper type of "service" would simply vanish? Or would the reluctance of many Americans to surrender valuable time to carry out government-approved activities be overcome by the sheer power of Obama's charisma?
Obama's vision of "Universal Voluntary Service," as originally outlined in his campaign literature, displayed far greater ambition and more than a touch of authoritarianism: "Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year." The blueprint likewise called for the expansion of AmeriCorps from 75,000 to 250,000 and the creation of five separate "Corps" of government-funded "volunteers" to deal with education, health, energy, veterans affairs, and homeland security.
One element of the Obama plan, the "Classroom Corps," employed frankly militaristic language, stating that the administration would "enlist" retired teachers, "recruit" civic leaders, and "draft" parents, grandparents, and others to serve as mentors.
The campaign for "universal voluntary service" is bipartisan and enjoys enthusiastic support from the mainstream media. Richard Stengel, Time magazine's managing editor, is co-chair of Service Nation, a non-profit established to promote Obama's service campaign. Former GOP presidential candidate John McCain has joined with Obama in promoting government-imposed service.
Tony Blankley, who served as chief of staff for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, has called in his new book American Grit for the re-introduction of a universal military draft.
Blankley's proposed system is similar to legislation being promoted by House Democrat Charles Rangel; it would require all Americans who turn 18 to spend two years either in military service or in a government-selected "Homeland Security" role. He proposes a "compulsory program for all Americans aged eighteen or nineteen, men and women, after most have graduated from high school. The military, reviewing these graduates' transcripts, extracurricular activities, and medical reports, would select however many they needed to fulfill their draft allotments for a two-year period of military service. Those not chosen by the military would undertake a two-year service obligation."
Setting a tone likely to be emulated by other Republicans, Blankley condemns Obama's national service proposal not because it represents a presumptuous imposition on the lives of Americans, but because it wouldn't provide soldiers for ongoing and envisioned military conflicts.
"We will soon be faced with the choice of severely scaling back our role in the world or expanding the army through conscription," observes Blankley, blithely assuming that the former option is simply inadmissible. Since "there is a limit to the number of people willing to volunteer to be a soldier," the government must return to a system its critics consider nothing less than military slavery.
All "national service" proposals, whether civilian or military, are rooted in the assumption that individuals owe service to the State -- indeed, that the State has the first claim on the individual's time, labor, and wealth.
Although the legally protected practice of chattel slavery ended roughly a century and a half ago, politicians routinely insist that the government is entitled to claim uncompensated labor from the citizenry in the name of "community" or "national" service.
continue article here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
