Rush Limbaugh speaks in Joplin, MO - 7/4/11

Click Here for before and after pictures of Joplin's tornado devistation

The Obama Legacy

Terror threat -- U.S. churches in danger

by Becky Yeh

With the recent airing of an al-Qaeda video that encourages Muslims to attack religious institutions, Christian churches are being warned.

In a video released by al-Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn, the American-born Muslim asks jihadists to quickly obtain guns and carry out terrorist attacks against the West. He states that Muslims are placed in the region to "do major damage to the enemies of Islam, waging war on their religion, sacred places, and things and brethren."

"That's very troubling," admits Steve Amundson of the Florida Security Council. "Adam Gadhan lived here in Southern California for a number of years. He studied under Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi at the Islamic Center of Orange County, which is in Garden Grove."

church steepleGadahn's statements to U.S. Muslims follow the death of Osama bin Laden. In response, the Christian Emergency Network has issued a warning for churches in the United States, and Amundson advises Christians to stay alert.

Read More...

Economic Freedom & Quality of Life

ACLU Attacks God and Children, Again

by Mark Baisley

Last Tuesday, June 21, 2011, the ACLU filed its latest lawsuit against an American school district for violating their “separation between church and state” mantra. The specific offense is allowing parents to spend vouchers for their children at schools that have a religious foundation.

The famous words, “wall of separation between church and state” came from a letter of assurance from President Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Church. That same letter from Jefferson also includes the sentiments, “I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man.”

And yet, there is no insistence by the courts nor the ACLU that public schools recognize the Father and Creator of man.

Thomas Jefferson was not a fan of having a Bill of Rights in the Constitution.

Yet his unofficial words that were never debated, voted on, nor ratified have become the phrase used to hammer school districts who would dare allow voluntary attendance to schools that acknowledge an intelligent design behind the science that they teach.

Read More...

Geithner: We Must Tax Small Businesses to Protect Big Gov

Lee Greenwood - God Bless the USA (Live in 1985)

Zombie Americans have forgotten why 4th of July is a holiday!!!

Defending the Faith Part 4: Columbo Step One

Defending the Faith Part 4: Columbo Step One:

“What do you mean by that?”

by Greg Koukl

The first question of the Columbo tactic is to gain information. Sometimes you just need more information to know how to proceed further.

This is the simplest way to use the Columbo tactic. It is virtually effortless, putting no pressure on you at all. When used this way, the questions can buy you valuable time, help you know how to proceed in the conversation, give you information for this and future encounters, and be a casual conversation-starter.

Key question: “What do you mean by that?” (or some variation)

This clarification question tells you what a person thinks so you don’t misunderstand her or, worse, misrepresent her. It should be delivered in a mild, genuinely inquisitive fashion. This question also forces the person to be precise in her meaning, as many people object to Christianity for reasons they don’t completely understand themselves.

This first Columbo question accomplishes five important objectives.

1. It immediately engages the non-believer in an interactive way.
2. It flatters the non-believer because it shows genuine interest in his or her view.
3. It forces the non-believer to think more carefully and more precisely maybe for the first time
about his intended meaning.
4. It gives you valuable information about the non-believer’s exact position.
5. It positions the non-believer in the defensive position while placing you in control of the conversation.

Be sure to pay attention to the response. If it’s unclear, follow up with more questions. Say, “Let me see if I understand you on this…,” then feed back the view to make sure you got it right.

By the way, don’t let them merely repeat what they just said. For example:

“You’re intolerant.”
“What do you mean by the word ‘intolerant’?”
“I mean you are intolerant!”

Sometimes this first Columbo question is directed at a specific statement or topic of conversation. Other times, the question can be more open-ended. As the discussion continues, gently guide the dialogue into a more spiritually productive direction with additional questions.

Learning how to ask this first question is your key to productive conversations, as people often don’t know what they mean by the things they say. Often, they are merely repeating slogans. Frequently, their statements, questions, opinions, or points of view are so muddled it’s impossible to proceed in conversation without clarification. Asking the question “What do you mean by that?” is the simplest way to clear up the confusion, while also giving you time to size up the situation and gather your thoughts.

Do not underestimate the power of this question. Use it often.

You can ask this question all day long and there is absolutely no pressure on you.

In the next email, I'll introduce you to the second Columbo question.

Next week: Columbo - Question Two

For more extensive tactics training go to www.str.org and look for Tactics in Defending the Faith Mentoring Series or STRi DVD interactive training in our online store or call Stand to Reason at 1-800-2-REASON.

California to Require Gay Agenda in School Textbooks

California to require homosexual/transgender

Americans added to school textbooks

Would You Drive A Car With Only Three Wheels?

Jason McElway, Autistic Basketball Hero

Crazy Parents Allows Teen to Marry 51-Year-Old Actor

by Janelle Harris

What would you say if your 16-year-old daughter announced she was in love? Maybe you’d humor her. Maybe you’d want to know all the juicy details. Maybe you’d want to lay eyes on the fella to see if he’s worth the attention and affection he’s getting.

This much I can say with certainty, though — if I found out that my child’s beau was a 51-year-old man?! I’d probably do one of three things: 1) Call the cops, 2) grab a set of brass knuckles and my GPS, or 3) Call the cops and tell them I’m grabbing my set of brass knuckles and my GPS so that they can have an ambulance in tow when we both get to his house.

But that’s not what country singer slash child bride Courtney Stodden’s father said when she married her boo, 51-year-old actor Doug Hutchison, last month. I repeat: He is 51. She is 16. And her #%@ father is OK with that? Who’s the biggest loser? The freaky groom or the idiot parent?

I mean, what are the chances of two ridiculously gross and irresponsible men crossing paths to create such a nasty situation? It’s not every day that you stumble on a father willing to let his barely-old-enough-to-drive teen get married. To an actor. Who is smack dab in the midst of what I can only guess is a mid-life crisis. The couple calls it “ageless love.” Yeah OK. I call it a reason to grab a stomach-soothing peppermint to keep me from throwing up a little in my mouth.

I cannot even begin to imagine how or why a grown man would pimp his child off to a guy who is 35 years her senior. That means the groom and the father are peers — in fact, Courtney’s dad is 47, four years younger than the dud(e) he allowed his daughter to exchange vows with. I’ve never had a dad myself, but I thought fathers were supposed to be like, extremely overprotective with shotgun in hand to threaten anybody wanting to lay hands on their daughters. Except this guy, I guess.

We can’t even give them a pass because this was some shotgun wedding. Can’t even use that as an excuse because Daddy Dearest made a statement in a show of support: “Courtney is one of the most level-headed girls out there and I’m not just saying that because she’s my daughter. Doug is the nicest man I’ve ever met in my life.”

Ah, nothing like the sacred romance between a level-headed teen and a super nice pedophile. Oh, and don’t hold out hope for the mama having any common sense, because she’s on board too.

Read More...

Handy Dandy Reference on Obama Lies

by Glenn Beck

Below is a list of Obama’s documented lies so far with the most recent lies first. If you see we are missing a documented lie Submit the lie here.

Lies During Third Year

USA producing more oil than ever before
Petroleum Insights
Fence between US and Mexico is “Practically Complete”
Department of Homeland Security says 5%

Lies During Second Year

If you like the health care plan you have you can keep it
TownHall
“Under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.”
U.S. Capitol, Washington, D.C., September 9, 2009.
ObamaCare Fee is not a new tax
Obama denies healthcare is a new tax on all Americans
We have run out of places in the US to drill for oil.
Obama’s oval office speech in June 2010
Now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you can be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen.
Arizona Immigration Law

Lies During First Year

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Obama Inaugaration. 20 Jan 2009
Cut Deficit in Half by end of first term
Associated Press Video
Health Care deals will be covered on C-span
Obama Lies

2008 Campaign Lies

Obama campaign would accept public funding
ABC
Didn’t know Jeremiah Wright was Radical
Dreams of My Father – A radical Socialist.
Would have the most transparent administration in History
Cato Institute
I have visited all 57 states.
Snopes
I’ll get rid of earmarks
Source: Any bill passed during presidency
When a bill lands on my Desk, The American people will have 5 days to review it before I sign it.
Campaign Speech
My father served in World War II.
The Videos and the Facts

Read More...

The History of India’s Islamic problem

Tsunami video in Minami-Sanriku

Walter E. Williams: America's New Racists

by Walter E. Williams

Born in 1936, I've lived through some of our openly racist history, which has included racist insults, beatings and lynchings. Tuskegee Institute records show that between the years 1880 and 1951, 3,437 blacks and 1,293 whites were lynched. I recall my cousin's and my being chased out of Fishtown and Grays Ferry, two predominantly Irish Philadelphia neighborhoods, in the 1940s, not stopping until we reached a predominantly black North or South Philly neighborhood.

Today all that has changed. Most racist assaults are committed by blacks. What's worse is there're blacks, still alive, who lived through the times of lynching, Jim Crow laws and open racism who remain silent in the face of it.

Last year, four black Skidmore College students yelled racial slurs while they beat up a white man because he was dining with a black man. Skidmore College's first response was to offer counseling to one of the black students charged with the crime. In 2009, a black Columbia University professor assaulted a white woman during a heated argument about race relations. According to interviews and court records obtained and reported by Denver's ABC affiliate (12/4/2009), black gangs roamed downtown Denver verbally venting their hatred for white victims before assaulting and robbing them during a two-month crime wave. Earlier this year, four black girls beat a white girl at a McDonald's, and the victim suffered a seizure. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel ordered an emergency shutdown of the beaches in Chicago because mobs of blacks were terrorizing families. According to the NBC affiliate there (6/8/2011), a gang of black teens stormed a city bus, attacked white victims and ran off with their belongings.

Black silence in the face of black racism has to be one of the biggest betrayals of the civil rights struggle that included black and white Americans.

Read More...

Egyptian Cleric: We will be the martyrs to liberate Jerusalem!

CRS Report: US Has Largest Energy Resources on Earth

by Peter C Glover

In case anyone missed it, let me repeat something that is of a magnitude of 10 on the scale of news-quakes for Joe Public USA: America’s combined energy resources are, according to a new report from the Congressional Research Service (CSR), the largest on earth. They eclipse Saudi Arabia (3rd), China (4th) and Canada (6th) combined – and that’s without including America’s shale oil deposits and, in the future, the potentially astronomic impact of methane hydrates.

“The Obama administration has made a conscious policy choice to raise energy prices, accomplished in good measure by restricting access to domestic energy supplies.” So says Senator James Inhofe, a Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. He adds forthrightly, “We could help bring affordable energy to consumers, create new jobs, and grow the economy if the Obama administration would simply get out of the way so America can realize its true energy potential.”

While the US is often depicted as having only a tiny minority of the world’s oil reserves at around 28 billion barrels (based on the somewhat misleading figure of ‘proven reserves’) according to the CRS in reality it has around 163 billion barrels. As Inhofe’s EPW press release comments, “That’s enough oil to maintain America’s current rates of production and replace imports from the Persian Gulf for more than 50 years”. Next up, there’s coal. The CRS report reveals America’s reserves of coal are unsurpassed, accounting for over 28 percent of the world’s coal. Much of it is high quality too. The CRS estimates US recoverable coal reserves at around 262 billion tons (not including further massive, difficult to access, Alaskan reserves). Given the US consumes around 1.2 billion tons a year, that’s a couple of centuries of coal use, at least.

Read More...

Greenhouse Gas Cuts Proving Illusory

by H. Sterling Burnett

Recent greenhouse gas emissions cuts reported by developed nations are illusory, a new peer-reviewed study has found, as many of the cuts have occurred simply as a result of industries relocating to developing nations such as China and India.

Migrating Emissions
As analysts and some politicians recognized when debating the Kyoto protocol, rapid economic growth in developing nations has offset the emissions cuts in industrialized economies. Much of that growth has occurred in China and India as a result of lower wages for workers and less stringent pollution controls and environmental standards.

Ironically, industries that have recently moved overseas merely export the same goods back to developed nations, such that global greenhouse gas emissions are unaffected or actually increase.

A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences examines the extent of “outsourced” carbon emissions. Conducted by the Centre for International Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo, Norway, the study finds emissions from increased production of internationally traded products have more than offset the emissions reductions achieved under the Kyoto Protocol.

Read More...

City Hall Hoists Rainbow Flag Above Old Glory

Ronald Reagan tells joke about Democrats

Defending the Faith Part 3: Using Columbo to Lead the Way

by Greg Koukl

The third use of Columbo takes us on the offensive, yet in an inoffensive way. We will ask a different kind of question, sometimes called a “leading question.”

As the name suggests, leading questions take the other person in the direction we want them to go. Think of yourself like an archer shooting at a target. Questions are your arrows. Your target will be different in different situations. Sometimes your goal will be to defeat what you think is a bad argument or a flawed point of view. Your questions will be “aimed” at that purpose. Or you may want to use questions to indirectly explain or advance your own ideas. Sometimes you will set up the terms of the conversation using questions to put you in a more beneficial position for your next move.

In each of these cases, questions accomplish two things mere statements cannot. Every time you ask a question and get a favorable response, the person is telling you he understands the point you’re making and he agrees with it, at least provisionally. He takes another step forward with you in the thinking process.

Here’s why this is so important. Ultimately, we want to win someone over to our point of view. But we do not want to “force” our opinions on him. Instead, we want to persuade him. When the steps to a conclusion are both clear and reasonable, it is much easier to convince someone because he can see the route clearly. He can even retrace it on his own if he wants to. With each question, we lead him closer toward our destination. In this way, we bring him along on the journey.

Generally, your leading questions will be used to inform, persuade, set up, or refute. Let me show you how this tactic plays out in a specific example.

As you step out as an ambassador for Christ, inevitably you will be asked what I call “the question.” It’s one of the most important questions anyone can ask, but it’s also one of the most difficult because the correct answer—a simple “yes”—would be wildly misleading.

“You’re saying that just because someone doesn’t believe in Jesus they are going to Hell?"

Someone once said if you word the question right, you can win any debate. This question is a classic case in point. A simple “yes” would be the correct answer, but it actually would distort the truth.

Remember that the first responsibility of an ambassador is knowledge—an accurately informed mind. Knowing that people need to trust in Jesus or face judgment, though, is not enough. Since this truth does not give an accurate sense of why Jesus matters, God seems petty, pitching people into Hell because of some inconsequential detail of Christian theology.

I addressed the issue of why Jesus is the only way when the question came up during a book promotion at a local Barnes & Noble. I met an attorney there who didn’t understand why he, a Jew, needed Jesus. He believed in God, and he was doing his best to live a moral life. Those were the important things, it seemed to him—how he lived, not what he believed. Here is how I used Columbo questions to lead him to a proper understanding of the cross.

“Let me ask you a question,” I began. “Do you think people who commit moral crimes ought to be punished?”

“Well, since I’m a prosecuting attorney,” he chuckled, “I guess I do.”

“Good. So do I. Now, a second question: Have you ever committed any moral crimes?”

He paused for a moment. This was getting personal. “Yes,” he nodded, “I guess I have.”

“So have I,” I offered candidly, agreeing with him again. “But that puts us both in a tight spot, doesn’t it? We both believe people who do bad things should be punished, and we both believe we’re guilty on that score.” I waited a moment for the significance to sink in. “Do you know what I call that?” I asked. “I call that bad news.”

In less than 60 seconds I had accomplished a remarkable thing with my two questions. I didn’t have to convince this man he was a sinner. He was telling me. I didn’t have to convince him he deserved to be punished. He was telling me.

I was tapping into a deep intuition every person shares: knowledge of his own guilt and a realization that his guilt should be punished. And I didn’t do it arrogantly or in an obnoxious, condescending way. I freely admitted I was in the same trouble he was.

Now that we agreed on the problem, it was time to give the solution. (This is where the “knowledge” part of the ambassador equation is so vital.)

“This is where Jesus comes in,” I explained. “We both know we’re guilty. That’s the problem. So God offers a solution: a pardon, free of charge. But clemency is on His terms, not ours. Jesus is God’s means of pardon. He personally paid the penalty in our place. He took the rap for our crimes. No one else did that. Only Jesus. Now we have a choice to make. Either we take the pardon and go free, or turn it down and pay for our crimes ourselves.”

In this conversation I handled an awkward question by combining two things: my knowledge of what Jesus accomplished on the cross with asking leading questions. My questions led the attorney, step by step, to an answer to his question.

You can employ the Columbo tactic to take the conversation in an entirely new direction. Instead of using questions to gather information, questions can be very effective to lead someone in the direction we want the conversation to go engaging the other person’s thoughts the whole way. Such “leading questions” often work better than statements to explain our view, to set up the discussion in a way that makes it easier for us to make our point, to soften our challenge to another’s view, or to indirectly exploit a flaw we detect in his thinking.

Unlike the first two uses of Columbo, this one requires knowledge of some kind. When we know what we want to accomplish (e.g., to inform, to persuade, to set-up, or to refute), we can use leading questions to achieve our purpose. This is a skill that develops over time, so if you stall out at first, don’t be discouraged. Instead of trying to force a conversation you don’t have the resources to pursue, you can simply move on knowing you have done the best that we could for the moment.

If someone’s thinking is flawed, the key to finding the error is to listen carefully to the reasons for his views, then ask if his conclusions follow from his evidence. Point out errors with questions rather than statements. You might soften your challenge by phrasing your concern as a request for clarification or by suggesting an alternative with the words “Have you considered…” before offering your own ideas.

Next week: Columbo - The First Question

For more extensive tactics training go to http://www.str.org/ and look for Tactics in Defending the Faith Mentoring Series or STRi DVD interactive training in our online store or call Stand to Reason at 1-800-2-REASON.

Study Finds Glaring Bloopers in Texas Science Curricula

by Discovery Institute

Austin, TX—According to a study released today by the non-profit Discovery Institute, bogus embryo drawings, long-debunked claims about tonsils, and outdated information from a 1950s lab experiment highlight the glaring bloopers found in proposed science curricula currently being considered by the Texas State Board of Education.

“Retro-science must be in, because the proposed curricula are filled with outdated scientific claims,” said Casey Luskin, a policy and education analyst with Discovery Institute. “It’s truly amazing how much discredited information keeps getting recycled year after year.”

In order to satisfy state educational standards set in 2009 (TEKS), the Board of Education asked publishers to submit supplementary curricula that would enable students to “analyze and evaluate” core aspects of evolutionary theory, and to “examin[e] all sides of scientific evidence of those scientific explanations, so as to encourage critical thinking.” But according to Discovery Institute‘s 70-page study, only one curriculum out of the 10 evaluated managed to comply with the TEKS as well as avoid glaring scientific errors.

Read More...

Solution to the Global Food Crisis - TURD BURGERS!

I Think I'd Rather Eat Soylent Green...