I write this letter as a patriot, a taxpayer, a lifelong resident and as concerned citizen of what I consider to be the greatest nation ever known to man, the United States of America.
I am Caucasian, so let's get the racial aspect out of the way to start with. This letter has nothing to do with your race. I lived through the cruelty of Jim Crow and segregation and learned early on in my life that the color of my skin does not make me better or worse than any other man.
We all remember Martin Luther King, Jr.'s statement about judging people, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character, and I believe that with all my heart.
I believe that America is an exceptional country. We have been liberator, benefactor and leader of the free world for centuries. America is an example of what can be achieved by free people living under the free enterprise system.
We have led the world in technology, industry, science and medicine for a long time.
Our capitalist system guarantees that those who explore new worlds and bring us new products and better techniques are amply rewarded for their efforts, and this is as it should be.
A person who is the first one to get there and the last one to leave, who burns the midnight oil and never gives up until they realize their goals, are a boon to humankind. They're the ones who discover new cures, start new industries and create jobs.
These people deserve to be rewarded for their hard work and for the products and services they bring to make life better for all mankind.
Mr. President, it is my personal opinion that you want to take the well-earned rewards of these people and give it to those who have done nothing to deserve them.
It's really redistribution of wealth, and it's nothing new. It's been tried many places before and it has miserably failed in every one of them.
It's called socialism.
Am I calling you a socialist? Yes, I am. I firmly believe that you are a socialist and a globalist, and that you think America should have a comeuppance and have our playing field leveled to match those of other countries not as industrious or as innovative as we are.
Mr. President, how can you support the building of a mosque in the very same area where Islamic radicals murdered so many Americans?
Just who's side are you on?
Am I accusing you of being a Muslim? No I'm not, but the jury is still out a little bit on that subject in my mind, because many times your sympathies seem to lean in that direction. You need to watch who you bow to Mr. President.
You have betrayed a whole generation of African-Americans who voted for you because they really believed all that junk about "hope and change," they really thought you were going to do something great and the only thing you've done is to make their jobs disappear and their health insurance go up.
You and your party have corrupted duly elected officials in an effort to get your legislative agenda passed. Remember the "Louisiana Purchase" and the "Cornhusker Kickback," and that's just a couple we know about, but you bought off a bunch of congressmen and senators, knowing that you were going against the will of the majority of Americans, because you think that you and your arrogant friends know more about what's good for America than the citizens your disastrous actions effect.
Am I accusing you of being an elitist? You bet.
I don't believe you take the Islamic threat to America nearly as seriously as you should. You use semantics like "Overseas Contingency Operation" and "Man Caused Disasters" to soften your rhetoric toward people who would like nothing better than decapitate the entire population of America.
And Mr. President, if you'd really like to know the kind of warriors who are fighting the "Overseas Contingency Operation," and you would like to really know about what kind of enemies they're fighting, you should read a book called Lone Survivor by a brave, young Navy Seal named Marcus Lutrell who went to hell and back for his country, and is still a dedicated patriot. I think you'd find it enlightening, Mr. President and after you finish it would you pass it on to Janet Napolitano? And by the way, tell her that my invitation to take her to Iraq and show her some "Man Caused Disasters" is still open.
Am I calling you naïve? Absolutely.
You seem to think that America has an endless supply of tax dollars for you to waste and give away, and the debt you've piled up could well bankrupt the greatest nation on earth.
Am I calling you a failure, Mr. President? With all due respect that's exactly what I'm doing.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/charlie-daniels/2010/09/24/open-letter-president-obama#ixzz10YTYxNUN
(click image to see a huge version of this picture)
Every chance I get, I like to take my kids (my wife doesn't care for it) to a huge outdoor flea market near Putnamville, Indiana (South of Greencastle) called Croy Creek (visit their website here).
We have been able to get a lot of things for our house, vehicles, work, etc, but our best purchase yet has been Wheezie. She's a full blooded Black Pug. No papers, no manners, and she smells, but she's the best dog we've ever had.
If you pay attention to the news, you may be under the impression that most people who lean to the Right, such as myself, are "Homo-phobic," "Islamo-phobic," or "Racist." I want to talk about the first two.
Let's first define what a phobia is. According to Dictionary.com:
I would add that the key word here is fear. This is where I have a problem with such labels, and here is where things need to be straightened out. I, personally, am not afraid of Homosexuals or Muslims (those who follow Islam as their faith). I am opposed to homosexuality - not afraid of those who choose to live the lifestyle. I will admit, I do have a 'compelling desire to avoid it,' but I am not afraid of it. The reason for my opposition is that God's Word tells us it is sin. Like everything else, anyone speaking truth has to add a disclaimer, so I will say that I am not against the person, but the lifestyle. And it is the lifestyle that will keep me from being in the continuing company of a homosexual. Drunkenness is sin too, and I will help an alcoholic as much as I can - but they will never practice their alcoholism in my home or around my wife and kids. Same goes for the homosexual. I won't be inviting them to our house for movies on Saturday night. And yet this is not fear - it is acting with wisdom. Enough said about that.
Now for "Islamo-phobia." Not afraid. I know two Muslims who I believe to be of good integrity - they wouldn't blow my house up for wearing tzi-tzit or a kippa. I doubt they are going to a training camp in Yemen this summer to learn the finer arts of bomb making. However, when a person of Islamic beliefs says openly that America "got what it had coming" on Sept.11, then I am in direct opposition. When they want to build a symbol of victory at Ground Zero, I am against it. Call it what you will, but it is not a 'fear' of Islam; it is opposition to an evil ideology that claims the right to kill innocent people in the name of their god. It is opposition to a Left-leaning media that tells us the Religion of Peace had nothing to do with the last 4,000 terrorist attacks, and an opposition to anyone who calls for the death of those who do not convert to their beliefs. That is not a "phobia," but again, wisdom.
Remember when we were kids and our elders told us to treat people like we wanted to be treated? Why is that only being applied to those who are opposed to an ideology that spits in the faces of our Founding Fathers? Call me a fundamentalist, a fanatic, a Right-Winger, a Bible Thumper, or what ever it is you need to call me, but don't label me as afraid of Islam and gays. After all, don't they both cry for their rights? Their right to be heard, their right to be counted, and their right to be what they are? How can any group of people expect to stand for the rights of their group while trampling the same rights of those they are standing up to?
...And racist? Please. My Savior - my Master, Yeshua (Jesus) is a Jew. I will serve Him until the day I die. We are all made in God's image! I could never swear allegiance to Jesus and hate His creation for the way He made them. That is nonsense. However, never are we expected to agree with the ideas of a person based on his or her skin color. If I disagree with you, it is because of your position, not your skin color. That whole argument is a juvenile, pathetic way out of having to prove your point with any intellectual comprehension; and just the accusation of racism whenever a disagreement comes up simply proves your lack of solid ground for whatever Liberal piece of excrement you are trying to sell to the American public.
I can remember being called paranoid when I told people that the government could track us with GPS... well, here it is guys. This time it is coming from Time Magazine. And we know they're not paranoid.
The Government Can Use GPS to Track Your Moves
Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn't violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn't tracking your movements.
That is the bizarre — and scary — rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants — with no need for a search warrant. (See a TIME photoessay on Cannabis Culture.)
It is a dangerous decision — one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell. It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich.
This case began in 2007, when Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents decided to monitor Juan Pineda-Moreno, an Oregon resident who they suspected was growing marijuana. They snuck onto his property in the middle of the night and found his Jeep in his driveway, a few feet from his trailer home. Then they attached a GPS tracking device to the vehicle's underside.
After Pineda-Moreno challenged the DEA's actions, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit ruled in January that it was all perfectly legal. More disturbingly, a larger group of judges on the circuit, who were subsequently asked to reconsider the ruling, decided this month to let it stand. (Pineda-Moreno has pleaded guilty conditionally to conspiracy to manufacture marijuana and manufacturing marijuana while appealing the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained with the help of GPS.)
In fact, the government violated Pineda-Moreno's privacy rights in two different ways. For starters, the invasion of his driveway was wrong. The courts have long held that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their homes and in the "curtilage," a fancy legal term for the area around the home. The government's intrusion on property just a few feet away was clearly in this zone of privacy.
We need to take a break form the insane world that we live in and listen to some music. Bluegrass music.
This is "Man Looks On The Outside" performed by Kenny and Amanda Smith. This song was written by a good friend of mine, Jim Denman...
If Chris Christie doesn't run for president in 2012 and Herman does, Herman will get my vote.
Please take notice that the only reason I would choose Chris over Herman at this point, is Chris has a superb track record so far as a politician (see previous post).
Not because I am a racist.
While I'm at it, the fact that I am against big government has nothing to do with race, nor does my opposition to Marxism, Communism, Stalin-ism, Fascism, Socialism, and Obamaism. I am against taxing the crap out of citizens who work hard for their money, and I am against the stripping away of the personal freedoms of individuals... but not because I am a racist.
I am against such things because I am a Constitutionalist. And if that makes me a racist, then we are in big trouble.
Back to Herman
Listen to what he has to say about the Eight Million Word Mess we call a Tax Code:
Conservatism, ladies and gentlemen - that's the answer.
It's been a while since I've posted, and with good reason. It seems like the news is an on-going bad movie about how to destroy this great country. I have been going about my day to day business with a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach - how are we going to fix this? Can it be stopped? Is it too late?
Well, three bleeding ulcers later, I am here to tell you that I have seen the answer to my questions.
I knew all along that the answer would lie in Conservatism, but who would have the kahunas to stand up and start making the change (not to be confused with the other 'change') happen?
I have two words for you:
This guy is amazing. He says what he means, and means what he says. We need more people running for office that are just like him.
I will leave you with some of his better moments
(don't leave without seeing the 'journalist smack-down').
This century's most corrupt band of liars, cheats and thugs have made the biggest step yet toward making America a Communist Nation.
The words "transparent" and "open" mean nothing to them.
Democracy and Capitolism are swear words to them.
Truth and Justice are a nuisance to them.
Thanks to everybody who refused to believe Obama when he told us he was going to "fundamentally change America."
Thanks for not reading his voting record while he was still in Illinois.
Thanks a lot for voting for "hope and change."
Because of your pathetic lack of responsibility and foresight, you have effectively ruined any chance for future generations to know the liberties that we have seen.
If you voted for "O" you should be ashamed of yourselves.
Imagine if George W. Bush were to have conducted himself in the manner in which our illustrious president has. Would the press let him off for such a string of lies? For allowing and encouraging open bribery?
Would they have kissed his feet, and treated him like deity while hounded representatives, gave them rides on Air Force One, and gave their family members life-long positions in the judicial system?
No. They would have raked him over the coals.
They would have... well, they would have treated him like George W. Bush.
Welcome to the New Deal, only it isn't a new deal at all - it is an outright Marxist take over.
I have let my readers down. I apologize. Please allow me to give a few excusesreasons for the blatant neglect of Mangdiddles.
OK, I have very little time these days to blog. I hate to be blunt, but dang! We are dealing with some stuff here!
What sort of stuff, you might ask? Allow me to elaborate...
The first on the list is that we are expecting a new baby. Yes, a new baby... and yes, it was on purpose. I'm not getting any younger, and to tell you the truth, I am a sucker for little one's. I love having little kids in the house - they are so sporatic and off-the-wall, that they make me laugh & appreciate being alive. Besides that, we are commanded to "be fruitful and multiply." How can I argue with that?
...well, actually, I can interpret that a few ways - three kids is fruitful. Four kids is fruitful. Truth is, I don't know how many "fruitful" is, but the thought of having a whole bunch tickles me.
I'll fill you in on a little secret (my wife doesn't read Mangdiddles - go figure): I worry for my kids' future in America. We are letting our boarders down, steeping debt on the unborn ...that we decide not to kill, and destroying the foundational principles that America was founded on. ...But that's another story.
I am being pulled in all directions concerning business. Sometimes I wonder if I am in the right line of work, and if it is even safe to consider getting out of it. I love my job... my job doesn't always love me though. These are not the best times to change careers. Enough said on that.
My kids are growing up, which adds a whole new dynamic to the equation - working on their vehicles, explaining chemistry & algebra (we home-school). The fact that my oldest is as tall as me, and eats twice as much as I do just... honestly, it makes me sad. I hate it. I would give anything to go back in time, and prioritize my life. I have failed in 'time management.'
I have been doing portraits and such on the side - I love doing it, but it takes a bunch of time.
Time. There's never enough when I am at home, and it never goes fast enough while I'm at work.
I am teaching the book of 1 John at church, which takes a lot of time too.
I promise to try to keep up-to-date on here. Pray for me, as I want to be a person, who in the end people can say, "man, he did it right."
So, it's been about a 10 years since I've posted here, and after a lot of false starts, I've decided to get back in the saddle. Time is of the essence in my world at the moment. I am teaching 1 John at church, which has been a total blessing (see links below to listen), and my business is starting to branch a little, which is good and bad. Good for obvious reasons - any work is good work; bad because of the amount of paperwork and time on the computer (which means time away from my family).
At any rate, I am here for the moment, so let me talk about John's 1st epistle.
As you may know, I believe that the Torah is not only valid for believers today, but I believe that it is to be obeyed. This of course is not the popular opinion within the body of Christ today.
...Let me tell you why I am at odds with the opinion of the church as we know it, and what I believe John, and the rest of the Apostolic writers, were talking about.
That's as good of a kick off to a commentary as I can think of, so here goes:
In the first chapter of 1 John (read it here), we see John telling his readers,
"5 This is the message which we have heard from Him and declare to you, that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
There is a paradox in these verses. John tells us (by way of inspiration f the Holy Spirit), that God is "light," and in Him is no darkness at all. This reminds me of James' words, "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning." He is light, so there is no variation or shadow of turning. Notice that He is also the "Father of lights." God created light in the first place. By default, He is the literal Father of light; but not only that sort of light. Jesus is the Son of God, and He is also called the Light.
Stay with me.
Let's back up for a moment, and look at what King David had to say about God's Word (Torah).
Psalm 119:105; "Your word is a lamp to my feet
And a light to my path." We all agree that God's Word is light unto our path, right? Lamp unto our feet? Of course. We also agree that Jesus is the Light, which makes since, considering He is the Word made flesh. Jesus is the Light, the Father is Light, and His Word is Light.
By default, darkness would imply a lack of either God the Father, Jesus the Son, or the Word, Given by the Father, right? Right. We are given the alternative here though; "if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin."
Here's where the paradox comes in. It all begins with the word "sin." John tells us that if we are in the light with Him, we not only have fellowship with each other, but with Him as well; and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
Be in the light. Have fellowship with won another, have fellowship with Him, and Jesus' blood cleanses us from all sin.
...so what is sin?
Before you answer that question, I encourage you to read a couple chapters ahead in 1 John. John doesn't use the wishy-washy definitions that we are used to hearing. He never once mentions "falling short" or "anything against God's will." The definition that John gives is very simple:
the emphasis on "and sin is lawlessness" is mine. That's the biblical definition of sin; lawlessness.
Stay with me.
John wrote this letter in Greek. He was living in Ephesus at the time, probably between 90 and 100AD. John uses a very specific word when describing "lawlessness" here. He uses the same word that the writers of the Septuagint used for... you guessed it, Torah. Not just any Torah - the same Torah that is found in synagogues all over the world. We call it "Old Testament Law." This becomes very important early on in John's book, because he will mention sin several times. Each time, we can rest assured that he holds the same meaning for the word, because he defined it.
I know what you're thinking, "what is the Septuagint, and why does it matter what it says?"
Good question. The Septuagint is nothing more than the Hebrew scriptures translated into Greek. Seventy men (hence the name Septuagint) did the translating, all Jews, who held the Torah in high regard.
This is really important, so please bear with me...
These seventy men were meticulous in the choosing of Greek words to translate the scriptures. The need for accuracy was paramount - they were translating God's Word, and they were very aware of the importance of the task.
Now, fast forward to John, writing to the churches surrounding Ephesus. While penning the letter, he feels the need to define "sin." John and his contemporaries are used to one translation of the Scriptures - the Septuagint. Paul, James, John, all of them quote it. That was the "version" of the Word that they had.
Back to John. While defining the word sin, he chooses to use the word "anomia" which means transgression of the law. Which Law? Torah. Nomia=Torah, or Law, while the "a" before it indicates a lacking of, or absent. You could say that sin is "no Torah" or "Torah-less-ness."
John could have chosen from a handful of words to use in it's place, but he chose not to. He was simply telling the readers that sin equates to breaking Torah.
I know this is a little choppy, but it is after midnight, and i have to get up at 5:00am. I'll write more noon.