I wonder what happened to the healthcare debate? Implementation is rapidly underway right now with not one voice raised in opposition or exposure of its noxious consequences. I wonder what happened to the card-check legislation? I wonder what has happened to the attempt by the police and firefighters union to take over all such unions at a Federal level?
Aren't there more important things going on in the background than the oil spill? What, indeed, can be done by the news media endlessly repeating what they don't know, or worse yet, parading an array of lawyers and other neer-do-wells across the screen in an endless cacophony of blame and counter-blame, all before any facts are on the table?
FoxNews coverage has been especially disappointing in this regard. I expect the lame-stream-media (LSM) to constantly harp on anti-capitalist and leftwing environmentalist themes, but I had hoped that Fox was more insightful than that. They are part of the media feeding frenzy centered on BP, even though real facts are not on the table. Beck might be on to this issue in its true ramifications and of course Rush, but the main FoxNews coverage has been fawningly similar to the LSM. I turned it off today.
I, for one, am intensely interested in what forensic evidence can be gleaned from the now sunken wreck of the drilling platform. Despite the incessant innuendo concerning BP's "poor safety record" I have not seen or heard any facts concerning the drill ship that would convince me that the event was even an accident. How could such an explosion occur, with oil jetting up onto the rig and burning? There had to be a breach of the pipeline below the blowout preventer. We know that because the X-rays of the preventer, taken while it is still lying on the bottom, show that it is closed. Strange, is it not? If it closed, then why an explosion? If the battery backup that everyone has been speaking of was defective, then how did the preventer get closed in the first place? Did it close using the fail-safe circuits that were still operational before or during the explosion? Then whence the pipeline breach? If the preventor did not close as part of the emergency - and it is a fact that it is now closed - then how did it get closed? Perhaps the explosion was "man caused" as the current political PC-speak would have it. I want to know, and see the real guilty parties brought to justice. And I am not referring to BP or their contractors.
Maybe we need a "Pelican Brief" to expose what really happened.
Obama is not helping resolve this oil situation either. With his claim of the oil spill being an "assault on our shores," he seems to be deliberately dragging military terminology - perhaps ghosts of Normandy - before our minds, but he almost certainly does not intend any allusion to the Islamic assault on our shores that is definitely underway, or an assault on our borders from the south - especially through Arizona. That brave state is fighting for its life against both the illegals and the Washington see-no-evil crowd of globalists. He seems to deliberately major on the minors when he calls the oil spill an "assault."
I think that the oil spill, as I said in an earlier blog article, is a god-send for Obama - suspiciously timed and way too convenient, as it has acted to knock almost everything else off the table of national political discourse in favor of the oil and its "dreadful consequences."
Some might point to the "hits" he is taking because of the failure to stop the leak, but that is not a valid criticism, and almost everybody recognizes that he cannot do anything about it. But it helps that he stirs things up with comments like "stop that damn leak" implying that he cares. I think that if he can keep it on the front burner, even if some in his own party vilify him, he gains because he is keeping other things - substantive things - out of the attention of the public.
And concerning the extent of this "disaster:, recently I caught just a fragment of a report that "30 acres of marshland has been impacted by the spill." Well that certainly sounds like a disaster to me! After all, there must be hundreds of thousands of acres of precious marshland along the coastline and we are hyperventilating about thirty acres? Disaster? What disaster?
This oil spill, whether accidental or not (and I am deeply suspicious that it is not an accident but a contrived event to do precisely what it is doing) is keeping important political revelations out of the news in the pre-election season. It has silenced Sarah Palin for all intents and purposes, and it is dampening the fires of political discourse in the conservative movement, which for the most part is pro-drilling and pro-exploration. People have been set back on their heels by this much-trumpeted "disaster."
It is as if the wind has been taken out of our sails. It is just a bit too convenient in its import and its timing - and results. I call it a political red herring. It is an ongoing drama drawn across the path of our thinking with the intent to deflect us off the trail of the socialist makeover that is underway.The implications of this being a deliberate event are as serious as Obama being a natural citizen of Kenya or Indonesia, and not the United States. It needs a full forsensic investigation and open results. For that reason the Federal Govenement must be kept out of it as much as possible and impartial investigaors used. The fox must not be allowed to guard the henhouse.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Friday, May 28, 2010
What Obama can really do about the Oil Spill
James Carville's recent rant against his hero Obama points up one thing that is pretty certain to the people of the Gulf States. Someone needs to do something about it.
Obama can't since he is completely out of his depth. In fact, the worse the disaster is, ironically, the better it is for his ultimate agenda of taking over the Energy sector and wrecking the American economy. I don't know if the origin of the oil spill was a genuine accident or sabotage, but it must be seen as a god-send to the Lefty environmentalists. There is virtually nothing imaginable that could have played into their hands more perfectly than this event.
Certainly some like Carville are trying to get Obama down there to use his vaunted "leadership and intellectual powers" in the cause of a cleanup, but their hopes are wasted on Obama and even the Federal Government. No goverment is any good at this kind of thing, despite years of Liberal dogma and propaganda to the contrary. Obama, to his credit, has paid lip service to this idea, but has wisely stayed away. Even though the Liberal media are pummeling him, there is really nothing he can do about it.
Stupidly, the Conservative media like Fox, have also jumped on the bandwagon, mocking him for his ineffective response, and contrasting his record unfavorably with that of Bush who was even more strongly criticised for not acting more aggressively after hurricane Katrina. But again, there was not much he could do either. While thousands of hapless citizens sat in the sports arena crying out for some one to take care of them, they did nothing for themselvs. This was a sad testimony to years spent training a citizenry to look to the government for everything - ie: the fruit of the welfare state.
The recent flooding in Knoxville, Tn produced a response that was a marked contrast to New Orleans. The news people did not even cover it (almost didn't), but the fact is, the citizens just picked up and got about the business of putting things back together, receiving such aid as the state and neighboring communities gave. It was a "no whine" zone.
I would have thought the conservative media would smell a rat in all the cries for the FedGov to "do something" about the oil spill. Since when is it even the responsibility of the Federal government to fix every bad thing that happens to any area or group in the country? We are Americans and traditionally self-reliant. There is nothing that we cannot do as citizens when we pick ourselves up and begin organizing on the ground, unlike ineffectual top-down FEMA efforts.
There is one thing that FedGov can do, and it is almost certain that they won't do it: that is, they can suspend all environmental restrictions on local and state actions to deal with the oil. Governor Jindel of Louisiana has been virtually begging the EPA and Army corp of engineers (and probably hundreds of other regulatory agencies that form a Gulliver's web of restrictions) to stop prohibiting any effective action to deal with the spill. Like Reagan's famous quote about government from his first inaugural: "Government isn't the solution to our problems; government IS the problem." It is not that government isn't doing enough; it has already created the recipe for a much larger disaster because of its interference with those who already would have been taking effective action to minimize the damage from oil coming on shore.
Instead of looking to big government to take care of this problem, why don't we recognize that the efforts of big government are really best viewed in a support role: let them get out of the way, provide what resources in manpower and equipment that are readily at hand; be prepared to provide funds if necessary for short term relief, and as to the rest, just get out of the way of the people on the ground.
While the Lefty environmental wack-jobs would go ballistic again, one of the most universally-applauded announcements that this Federal government could make would be to announce a moratorium on all environmental restrictions on action for some extended period of time along the Gulf Coast. Such a sensible announcement would galvanize whole armies of citizens who are now sitting back and witing for "someone else" to do it, when the obvious thing is for the local and state people to take charge. After all, they are there, and they are the ones being most directly impacted. They have the most incentive to be effective, and they definitely can be.
I note sadly, that this sensible announcement is most unlikely to be made, for it would also highlight the insidious nature of those same regulations which are ostemsibly "for our good." For the most part, I am of the opinion that they are much more of an obstruction to caring for the practical living environment of our country than we realize. Relieving us of them might just prove too big an embarassment to the Lefties. So don't hold your breath.
Local people rising to the occasion is the quintessentially American way of dealing with disasters of every kind, from the Johnstown flood to the Knoxville flood. It is a sign of the times that we have so forgotten our roots that even the Conservatives are whining that Obama is not fixing the problem quickly enough. That is sad.
Obama can't since he is completely out of his depth. In fact, the worse the disaster is, ironically, the better it is for his ultimate agenda of taking over the Energy sector and wrecking the American economy. I don't know if the origin of the oil spill was a genuine accident or sabotage, but it must be seen as a god-send to the Lefty environmentalists. There is virtually nothing imaginable that could have played into their hands more perfectly than this event.
Certainly some like Carville are trying to get Obama down there to use his vaunted "leadership and intellectual powers" in the cause of a cleanup, but their hopes are wasted on Obama and even the Federal Government. No goverment is any good at this kind of thing, despite years of Liberal dogma and propaganda to the contrary. Obama, to his credit, has paid lip service to this idea, but has wisely stayed away. Even though the Liberal media are pummeling him, there is really nothing he can do about it.
Stupidly, the Conservative media like Fox, have also jumped on the bandwagon, mocking him for his ineffective response, and contrasting his record unfavorably with that of Bush who was even more strongly criticised for not acting more aggressively after hurricane Katrina. But again, there was not much he could do either. While thousands of hapless citizens sat in the sports arena crying out for some one to take care of them, they did nothing for themselvs. This was a sad testimony to years spent training a citizenry to look to the government for everything - ie: the fruit of the welfare state.
The recent flooding in Knoxville, Tn produced a response that was a marked contrast to New Orleans. The news people did not even cover it (almost didn't), but the fact is, the citizens just picked up and got about the business of putting things back together, receiving such aid as the state and neighboring communities gave. It was a "no whine" zone.
I would have thought the conservative media would smell a rat in all the cries for the FedGov to "do something" about the oil spill. Since when is it even the responsibility of the Federal government to fix every bad thing that happens to any area or group in the country? We are Americans and traditionally self-reliant. There is nothing that we cannot do as citizens when we pick ourselves up and begin organizing on the ground, unlike ineffectual top-down FEMA efforts.
There is one thing that FedGov can do, and it is almost certain that they won't do it: that is, they can suspend all environmental restrictions on local and state actions to deal with the oil. Governor Jindel of Louisiana has been virtually begging the EPA and Army corp of engineers (and probably hundreds of other regulatory agencies that form a Gulliver's web of restrictions) to stop prohibiting any effective action to deal with the spill. Like Reagan's famous quote about government from his first inaugural: "Government isn't the solution to our problems; government IS the problem." It is not that government isn't doing enough; it has already created the recipe for a much larger disaster because of its interference with those who already would have been taking effective action to minimize the damage from oil coming on shore.
Instead of looking to big government to take care of this problem, why don't we recognize that the efforts of big government are really best viewed in a support role: let them get out of the way, provide what resources in manpower and equipment that are readily at hand; be prepared to provide funds if necessary for short term relief, and as to the rest, just get out of the way of the people on the ground.
While the Lefty environmental wack-jobs would go ballistic again, one of the most universally-applauded announcements that this Federal government could make would be to announce a moratorium on all environmental restrictions on action for some extended period of time along the Gulf Coast. Such a sensible announcement would galvanize whole armies of citizens who are now sitting back and witing for "someone else" to do it, when the obvious thing is for the local and state people to take charge. After all, they are there, and they are the ones being most directly impacted. They have the most incentive to be effective, and they definitely can be.
I note sadly, that this sensible announcement is most unlikely to be made, for it would also highlight the insidious nature of those same regulations which are ostemsibly "for our good." For the most part, I am of the opinion that they are much more of an obstruction to caring for the practical living environment of our country than we realize. Relieving us of them might just prove too big an embarassment to the Lefties. So don't hold your breath.
Local people rising to the occasion is the quintessentially American way of dealing with disasters of every kind, from the Johnstown flood to the Knoxville flood. It is a sign of the times that we have so forgotten our roots that even the Conservatives are whining that Obama is not fixing the problem quickly enough. That is sad.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
The Oil Spill a Disaster? Maybe only in some people's minds.
I found this article fascinating for what it only suggested - a very politically incorrect conclusion that the oil spill is likely to be much ado about nothing. That certainly won't play well in Washington, where some are preparing the death knell of the American Oil Industry.
One thing about oil that needs to be recognized: it is a hydrocarbon - that is, it is a biological food for a ton of organisms. While it is true that sea birds, turtles and even air-breathing mammals like dolphins and porpoises may perish if they are engrossed in the slick, it is not a given that this is a disaster at all.
Remember that most of the hype is driven in the so-called main stream media by political, Leftwing animus against a nexus of issues like oil drilling itself, big corporations like Halliburton (associated with that big bugaboo Dick Cheney whom the Liberals hate) and BP, and environmentalism. They hate anything that spills into the environment because they come pretty close to worshipping the planet as some kind of god. Thus, their "god" is being polluted. Their evangelical fervor is religious in nature.
This oil spill is very convenient for those who want to stop oil exploration, drilling, production, and ultimately to stop the entire US economy if they can pull it off. Many are alleging that the oil spill is much larger than has been reported. There is only one problem with that, the pesky oil slick just doesn’t seem to be coming onshore, and it seems so elusive that many are beginning to worry that it won't show up in any significant way.
The author of the subject article reserved some of the best facts for the last: "This was a problem we ran into with Ixtoc, we never found the oil." Ixtoc was a Mexican oil rig in the western Gulf that spilled up to 420,000 barrels of oil a day for nine months in 1979 before being capped. That kind of makes this oil spill seem a bit puny in comparison. And we never heard about it.
Now that is an interesting prospect: they can't find the oil.
I suggest that there is much more to this subject than has been officially reported. After all, Obama cannot push the oil industry around if the environment - alleged to be so fragile that it will be destroyed if a single drop of oil spills - can easily handle anything like this. That is not likely to warrant the draconian measures this uber-Marxist has in store. He is just warming up with his charges of a "cozy relationship" between the regulators and the Oil industry which he proposes to strangle with a strait-jacket of new controls. The end of this will be the takeover and control of the industry. A much greater harm will come to our country as a result of Obama-ization of the oil industry than will ever come from some alleged environmental disaster.
My instinct tells me that there a lot of little bugs out there who are just waiting to sink their teeth into this rich feast of food floating somewhere in or on the ocean. In fact, they seem to be dealing with it pretty effectively to date. The article points out that a substantial portion of the oil will just evaporate harmlessly.
I don't buy the notion that this was an accident - see my other article on that subject - and I don't buy into the doom and gloom of the environmental wack-jobs. Just like humans are not the cause of any climate change that might be occurring, I also don't think we are capable of creating a natural disaster on the scale that the main stream Liberal media are alleging. Perhaps I will have to eat my words, but I don't think so.
The Daily Business Review reported last week that some South Florida law firms are gearing up for a whole raft of environmental lawsuits over this oil spill and its effects. You could see the cheesy grin on the face of one of the attorneys - just slavering over the prospect of milking millions - or billions - out of BP and Halliburton, spurred on by the Federal Government: a virtual feeding frenzy in prospect. Nothing would make me happier than to see all of that evaporate into nothingness, just like the oil. The only losers would be those ambulance-chasers hoping to cash in on their supposed bonanza.
I am sure that some oil globs will wash up on the shore, but a "natural disaster"? I suspect this will be a fizzle and an embarassment to the MSM and the Obama administration. Aside from being glad at not seeing a disaster of Biblical proportions, I would also be glad to see Obama and his socialists take a stick in the eye.
One thing about oil that needs to be recognized: it is a hydrocarbon - that is, it is a biological food for a ton of organisms. While it is true that sea birds, turtles and even air-breathing mammals like dolphins and porpoises may perish if they are engrossed in the slick, it is not a given that this is a disaster at all.
Remember that most of the hype is driven in the so-called main stream media by political, Leftwing animus against a nexus of issues like oil drilling itself, big corporations like Halliburton (associated with that big bugaboo Dick Cheney whom the Liberals hate) and BP, and environmentalism. They hate anything that spills into the environment because they come pretty close to worshipping the planet as some kind of god. Thus, their "god" is being polluted. Their evangelical fervor is religious in nature.
This oil spill is very convenient for those who want to stop oil exploration, drilling, production, and ultimately to stop the entire US economy if they can pull it off. Many are alleging that the oil spill is much larger than has been reported. There is only one problem with that, the pesky oil slick just doesn’t seem to be coming onshore, and it seems so elusive that many are beginning to worry that it won't show up in any significant way.
The author of the subject article reserved some of the best facts for the last: "This was a problem we ran into with Ixtoc, we never found the oil." Ixtoc was a Mexican oil rig in the western Gulf that spilled up to 420,000 barrels of oil a day for nine months in 1979 before being capped. That kind of makes this oil spill seem a bit puny in comparison. And we never heard about it.
Now that is an interesting prospect: they can't find the oil.
I suggest that there is much more to this subject than has been officially reported. After all, Obama cannot push the oil industry around if the environment - alleged to be so fragile that it will be destroyed if a single drop of oil spills - can easily handle anything like this. That is not likely to warrant the draconian measures this uber-Marxist has in store. He is just warming up with his charges of a "cozy relationship" between the regulators and the Oil industry which he proposes to strangle with a strait-jacket of new controls. The end of this will be the takeover and control of the industry. A much greater harm will come to our country as a result of Obama-ization of the oil industry than will ever come from some alleged environmental disaster.
My instinct tells me that there a lot of little bugs out there who are just waiting to sink their teeth into this rich feast of food floating somewhere in or on the ocean. In fact, they seem to be dealing with it pretty effectively to date. The article points out that a substantial portion of the oil will just evaporate harmlessly.
I don't buy the notion that this was an accident - see my other article on that subject - and I don't buy into the doom and gloom of the environmental wack-jobs. Just like humans are not the cause of any climate change that might be occurring, I also don't think we are capable of creating a natural disaster on the scale that the main stream Liberal media are alleging. Perhaps I will have to eat my words, but I don't think so.
The Daily Business Review reported last week that some South Florida law firms are gearing up for a whole raft of environmental lawsuits over this oil spill and its effects. You could see the cheesy grin on the face of one of the attorneys - just slavering over the prospect of milking millions - or billions - out of BP and Halliburton, spurred on by the Federal Government: a virtual feeding frenzy in prospect. Nothing would make me happier than to see all of that evaporate into nothingness, just like the oil. The only losers would be those ambulance-chasers hoping to cash in on their supposed bonanza.
I am sure that some oil globs will wash up on the shore, but a "natural disaster"? I suspect this will be a fizzle and an embarassment to the MSM and the Obama administration. Aside from being glad at not seeing a disaster of Biblical proportions, I would also be glad to see Obama and his socialists take a stick in the eye.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
The false lure of "let us all have one purse"
The temptation of the welfare/socialist state: "Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse." Pro 1:14. But the spoils are those of robbery and murder and to take the innocent in a snare. God counsels us to not to consent to such enticement. Where is such wisdom today?
Some have objected that this is not a valid application of this scripture, since the enticement was to engage in “street violence.” The principles of the scripture are timeless, and applicable to all ages and societies. If we are forced to view them as being strictly captive to their time and culture, then they have nothing to say to us today. Certainly that is not true. This portion of Proverbs 1 is the warning of a father to a son to not be fooled into thinking there is profit in heeding the enticement of criminals to join them in stealing their living from other people and to all share a common purse funded from their plunder.
A working example of this is found in the New Testament in the story of the Good Samaritan. In that parable, the man on his way down to Jericho is set upon by thieves and beaten and robbed and left “half dead.” The Samaritan encounters him on the road; shows compassion, and helps him.
The warnings against the enticement to rob others for a living are only a part of this father’s advice. He also warns about having one bag in common. The lure is partially that the participant will always have something monetary to count on since they will all be contributing to the bag. He owns a part of what is in the bag. In other words, he sees it as a means to security in an insecure world. There is also the practical perspective that if they don't share and share alike, it will pit them against one another. That would be no incentive to be part of such a gang, so the one purse is the only solution.
But there are other problems: the security of having one bag is ephemeral, for the bag itself is not secure. His confidence in the bag is predicated on the good character of the one who holds it. The problem with this thought is that one cannot expect to find good character in a band of thieves. Say what you will about "honor among thieves" I would think that it has strict limits. Thus, he won’t be able to depend on a fair and equal sharing out because the bag is in the hands of a thief and murderer to begin with. Who is to say that the spoils in the bag are not systematically plundered by the bag-keeper and maybe a few of his closest cronies? It is highly likely. A newcomer might bring something to the bag, but it is very unlikely he will draw much from it. And complaining or questioning the bag-keeper might prove fatal.
There is a further trap in the plan. Throwing in your lot with murderers and thieves might sound exciting, but one’s own life is now in danger because he is not able to leave the group. He would not be allowed to leave because he knows who they are, their victims, their hideouts, their lurking places and their crimes. Any attempt to leave would likely cost him his own life. He has forfeited his freedom in joining them.
The warning not to try to profit by thievery is seen to be very good advice to a young man indeed.
Some pointed out that Jesus’ group had “one bag” also (John 12). There is no doubt they did, but I also have no doubt that the invitation to join his group was not predicated on an enticement to profit by ill-gotten gains, or that they would all live out of one bag. Jesus’ “bag” was funded by voluntary contributions and not, God forbid, on rapine and murder.
It is noteworthy as an aside that the one bag was also in the hands of Judas Iscariot who stole from it. The experiment of trusting someone even in Jesus’ inner circle proved to be a failure because of the bed character of Judas. This might even be an implied warning that even in the presence of the Son of God, checks and balances are required to secure wealth that is placed in the hands of a fallible man. I will not speculate as to why Jesus allowed this. He certainly knew what was going on with the bag. But it is a fact nonetheless.
It is also doubtful that the one bag was shared out evenly – it was shared out in accord with what Jesus would have dictated (whatever was left from Judas’ depredations.) Jesus’ one bag has many points of contrast to the Proverb’s bag. The Proverb warnings are not applicable because the two examples are so far apart..
This portion in Proverbs 1 is important because it is a father’s advice to a young son just starting out his life. I commented on it mainly because of the enticement that the ringleaders dangled in front of his eyes: “join us and we’ll all share the spoils”. IE: “you’ll profit by joining us because our source is others’ wealth – and best of all, you will get a portion of it (without having to work for it.)”
What is most important in my application is the heart of the enticement – the prospect of getting something for nothing (which by the way, is a violation of the Eighth Commandment not to steal.) He is being enticed to ignore the unrighteous source of his wealth.)
That is exactly the enticement of the Socialist welfare state. It entices some to profit off of what has been taken from others by force. “Never mind where the money comes from, just be glad you can swill at the common trough.” Margaret Thatcher said it very well: “Socialism works fine until you run out of other people’s money.“ She had a keen appreciation of the lure of Socialism, and the real source of its apparent (but temporary) “success.” It eventually wrecks a country or society. Think Greece.
That is why we should scrupulously avoid all Socialist schemes that depend on coercion to fund their “bag.” Sharing risk voluntarily is our privilege as individuals, but sharing risk against our will, and by crooked means, as it is in the heart of Socialism, is dead wrong. We all ought to carefully heed Solomon’s counsel.
Some have objected that this is not a valid application of this scripture, since the enticement was to engage in “street violence.” The principles of the scripture are timeless, and applicable to all ages and societies. If we are forced to view them as being strictly captive to their time and culture, then they have nothing to say to us today. Certainly that is not true. This portion of Proverbs 1 is the warning of a father to a son to not be fooled into thinking there is profit in heeding the enticement of criminals to join them in stealing their living from other people and to all share a common purse funded from their plunder.
A working example of this is found in the New Testament in the story of the Good Samaritan. In that parable, the man on his way down to Jericho is set upon by thieves and beaten and robbed and left “half dead.” The Samaritan encounters him on the road; shows compassion, and helps him.
The warnings against the enticement to rob others for a living are only a part of this father’s advice. He also warns about having one bag in common. The lure is partially that the participant will always have something monetary to count on since they will all be contributing to the bag. He owns a part of what is in the bag. In other words, he sees it as a means to security in an insecure world. There is also the practical perspective that if they don't share and share alike, it will pit them against one another. That would be no incentive to be part of such a gang, so the one purse is the only solution.
But there are other problems: the security of having one bag is ephemeral, for the bag itself is not secure. His confidence in the bag is predicated on the good character of the one who holds it. The problem with this thought is that one cannot expect to find good character in a band of thieves. Say what you will about "honor among thieves" I would think that it has strict limits. Thus, he won’t be able to depend on a fair and equal sharing out because the bag is in the hands of a thief and murderer to begin with. Who is to say that the spoils in the bag are not systematically plundered by the bag-keeper and maybe a few of his closest cronies? It is highly likely. A newcomer might bring something to the bag, but it is very unlikely he will draw much from it. And complaining or questioning the bag-keeper might prove fatal.
There is a further trap in the plan. Throwing in your lot with murderers and thieves might sound exciting, but one’s own life is now in danger because he is not able to leave the group. He would not be allowed to leave because he knows who they are, their victims, their hideouts, their lurking places and their crimes. Any attempt to leave would likely cost him his own life. He has forfeited his freedom in joining them.
The warning not to try to profit by thievery is seen to be very good advice to a young man indeed.
Some pointed out that Jesus’ group had “one bag” also (John 12). There is no doubt they did, but I also have no doubt that the invitation to join his group was not predicated on an enticement to profit by ill-gotten gains, or that they would all live out of one bag. Jesus’ “bag” was funded by voluntary contributions and not, God forbid, on rapine and murder.
It is noteworthy as an aside that the one bag was also in the hands of Judas Iscariot who stole from it. The experiment of trusting someone even in Jesus’ inner circle proved to be a failure because of the bed character of Judas. This might even be an implied warning that even in the presence of the Son of God, checks and balances are required to secure wealth that is placed in the hands of a fallible man. I will not speculate as to why Jesus allowed this. He certainly knew what was going on with the bag. But it is a fact nonetheless.
It is also doubtful that the one bag was shared out evenly – it was shared out in accord with what Jesus would have dictated (whatever was left from Judas’ depredations.) Jesus’ one bag has many points of contrast to the Proverb’s bag. The Proverb warnings are not applicable because the two examples are so far apart..
This portion in Proverbs 1 is important because it is a father’s advice to a young son just starting out his life. I commented on it mainly because of the enticement that the ringleaders dangled in front of his eyes: “join us and we’ll all share the spoils”. IE: “you’ll profit by joining us because our source is others’ wealth – and best of all, you will get a portion of it (without having to work for it.)”
What is most important in my application is the heart of the enticement – the prospect of getting something for nothing (which by the way, is a violation of the Eighth Commandment not to steal.) He is being enticed to ignore the unrighteous source of his wealth.)
That is exactly the enticement of the Socialist welfare state. It entices some to profit off of what has been taken from others by force. “Never mind where the money comes from, just be glad you can swill at the common trough.” Margaret Thatcher said it very well: “Socialism works fine until you run out of other people’s money.“ She had a keen appreciation of the lure of Socialism, and the real source of its apparent (but temporary) “success.” It eventually wrecks a country or society. Think Greece.
That is why we should scrupulously avoid all Socialist schemes that depend on coercion to fund their “bag.” Sharing risk voluntarily is our privilege as individuals, but sharing risk against our will, and by crooked means, as it is in the heart of Socialism, is dead wrong. We all ought to carefully heed Solomon’s counsel.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
The Gulf Oil Spill - A Crude Coincidence?
The linked article - please read it - makes an excellent point: the timing of the explosion on the oil rig is just too convenient for Obama and his environmentalist wackos. I would place my bets on sabotage, but I am not very hopeful that this can be proven, what with the loss of life and the destruction of the evidence. Perhaps someone will come forth who was on the rig and has some real knowledge of what happened.
This I know: the oil industry has a long and successful history of managing risk. Like the coal mining industry, of which I have been a part, a hostile and dangerous environment is made livable by human ingenuity. Without solid irrefutable proof, I am not willing to believe that there has been any engineering failure. The circumstances surrounding the ongoing behavior of the Obama regime lead me to strongly suspect that this was a "man-caused" disaster - eco terrorism on the highest level - and encouraged, if not carried out, by the agents of this regime under deep cover. If the explosion was caused by an act of man, then there will be a way of gathering up some pre-explosion evidence. Were there any new employees on the rig the day of the explosion? Are there satellite iimages - or logs - of any submarine vessel activity in the rig's vicinity just prior to the "accident"? Are there persons who know what happened who can put forth some facts? Why hasn't the rescued crew been deposed? What did they have to say about the explosion and its cause? Why is no one asking these questions?
The recent explosion in the West Virginia Coal mine is another suspicious occurrence. Perhaps another incident of sabotage? Who can tell? Will enyone investigate?
I predict that there will be another major energy sector disaster in the near future - nuclear pehaps - that will establish the predicate for a call for a government regulatory takeover of all energy producing portions of the economy.
If you watch what this regime is doing, not what they are saying, the pattern is disturbingly clear. They create a disater or crisis, then they exploit it to increase goernment control. Once this regime took power, they financed themselves with the TARP and other stimulus expenditures. The accounting of that money will never be done because I suspect it went down a lot of Liberal rat holes to buy elections or reward supporters of Obama.
Then came the "healthcare" debacle, which is nothing short of a takeover of the entire health system, including mandatory power to enlist non-conforming doctors into the military, stripping them of their civil rights, and forcing them to work for the system upon pain of imprisonment or worse.
Now we have Financial sector "reform" under debate - another 1000 to 1500 pages of regulations that no one in Congress has any interest in reading, and which is being shepherded through by Pelosi and Reid according to the Obamacare pattern, without substantive debate. This bill is not about helping prevent disasters - the market will do an excellent job of regulating that - no, this is an insider's protection bill, along with a takeover of the financial sectors, including monitoring and controlling every American's financial accounts. This is Big Brother on Steroids.
On the energy front, we have this oil spill, which is being spotlighted as a natural disaster, which it most certainly is, with little attention paid to how it happened. It is as if no one cares. How could a successful engineering system design with billions of experience-hours behind it fail so disastrously with no warning? Yes, it could be simply that, a failure, with no one to blame. But somehow, with this Communist agenda-driven Obama regime pulling strings at all levels, I am unconvinced there is not much more to this whole matter.
(Editors' note: It is May 14 now, and no plausible explanation has yet been offered as to how an explosion occurred on an oil rig specifically designed to make such ignitions extremely unlikely, if not impossible. As far as I have been able to determine, the explosion occurred on the rig, not underwater, as some have said.
I have more confidence in the safety of the oil rigs - and offshore drilling in general - than I have in our homeland security under the hand of Obama and his thugs. Hugo Chavez has wrecked the Venezuelan energy industry with his communist government. The cronies he put in charge don't know what they are doing, and their incompetence has brought the once-lucrrative sector of that country's economy to the point of shambles. We can expect the same if our Socialist-in-chief manage to get a strangle-hold on our Energy Sector.)
Most certainly this was a god-send to Obama, who offered the olive branch to the energy industry and a majority of the population who endorsed development of our natural resources. Two weeks ago, (was it that short a time?) Obama indicated that he would support "exploration" of the offshore oil in previously banned areas. Sounded like he was going to go for it, but his Green supporters went beserk even over that announcement.
Now enter this disaster, allowing him the moral high ground to do practically anything he wants with energy policy because drilling has proven to be so "dangerous to the environment". That is just too convenient.
I don't know how this is going to play out, but one thing is sure. Just like we did not shelve the Space Shuttle after the disaster with the Challenger (caused by the effects of junk science), but went on to complete the series of missions, just so we need to stand up and say the unsayable - drilling must go on. A thorough investigation must be done and the technical flaws, if any, corrected. Government must be locked out of the investigation. With this Regime, there is no trusting the results of any investigation since Obama has so much to gain by not reporting any embarassing facts. Our government has become the enemy of truth and the search for truth.
The author of the article to which I linked titled his piece a "Crude Coincidence." Perhaps it was not crude at all, but a very sophisticated plot to manipulate public opinion so as to achieve the aim of taking over the Energy sector, further crippling the US economy. That would fit the Marxist agenda of this Regime to a "Tee".
This I know: the oil industry has a long and successful history of managing risk. Like the coal mining industry, of which I have been a part, a hostile and dangerous environment is made livable by human ingenuity. Without solid irrefutable proof, I am not willing to believe that there has been any engineering failure. The circumstances surrounding the ongoing behavior of the Obama regime lead me to strongly suspect that this was a "man-caused" disaster - eco terrorism on the highest level - and encouraged, if not carried out, by the agents of this regime under deep cover. If the explosion was caused by an act of man, then there will be a way of gathering up some pre-explosion evidence. Were there any new employees on the rig the day of the explosion? Are there satellite iimages - or logs - of any submarine vessel activity in the rig's vicinity just prior to the "accident"? Are there persons who know what happened who can put forth some facts? Why hasn't the rescued crew been deposed? What did they have to say about the explosion and its cause? Why is no one asking these questions?
The recent explosion in the West Virginia Coal mine is another suspicious occurrence. Perhaps another incident of sabotage? Who can tell? Will enyone investigate?
I predict that there will be another major energy sector disaster in the near future - nuclear pehaps - that will establish the predicate for a call for a government regulatory takeover of all energy producing portions of the economy.
If you watch what this regime is doing, not what they are saying, the pattern is disturbingly clear. They create a disater or crisis, then they exploit it to increase goernment control. Once this regime took power, they financed themselves with the TARP and other stimulus expenditures. The accounting of that money will never be done because I suspect it went down a lot of Liberal rat holes to buy elections or reward supporters of Obama.
Then came the "healthcare" debacle, which is nothing short of a takeover of the entire health system, including mandatory power to enlist non-conforming doctors into the military, stripping them of their civil rights, and forcing them to work for the system upon pain of imprisonment or worse.
Now we have Financial sector "reform" under debate - another 1000 to 1500 pages of regulations that no one in Congress has any interest in reading, and which is being shepherded through by Pelosi and Reid according to the Obamacare pattern, without substantive debate. This bill is not about helping prevent disasters - the market will do an excellent job of regulating that - no, this is an insider's protection bill, along with a takeover of the financial sectors, including monitoring and controlling every American's financial accounts. This is Big Brother on Steroids.
On the energy front, we have this oil spill, which is being spotlighted as a natural disaster, which it most certainly is, with little attention paid to how it happened. It is as if no one cares. How could a successful engineering system design with billions of experience-hours behind it fail so disastrously with no warning? Yes, it could be simply that, a failure, with no one to blame. But somehow, with this Communist agenda-driven Obama regime pulling strings at all levels, I am unconvinced there is not much more to this whole matter.
(Editors' note: It is May 14 now, and no plausible explanation has yet been offered as to how an explosion occurred on an oil rig specifically designed to make such ignitions extremely unlikely, if not impossible. As far as I have been able to determine, the explosion occurred on the rig, not underwater, as some have said.
I have more confidence in the safety of the oil rigs - and offshore drilling in general - than I have in our homeland security under the hand of Obama and his thugs. Hugo Chavez has wrecked the Venezuelan energy industry with his communist government. The cronies he put in charge don't know what they are doing, and their incompetence has brought the once-lucrrative sector of that country's economy to the point of shambles. We can expect the same if our Socialist-in-chief manage to get a strangle-hold on our Energy Sector.)
Most certainly this was a god-send to Obama, who offered the olive branch to the energy industry and a majority of the population who endorsed development of our natural resources. Two weeks ago, (was it that short a time?) Obama indicated that he would support "exploration" of the offshore oil in previously banned areas. Sounded like he was going to go for it, but his Green supporters went beserk even over that announcement.
Now enter this disaster, allowing him the moral high ground to do practically anything he wants with energy policy because drilling has proven to be so "dangerous to the environment". That is just too convenient.
I don't know how this is going to play out, but one thing is sure. Just like we did not shelve the Space Shuttle after the disaster with the Challenger (caused by the effects of junk science), but went on to complete the series of missions, just so we need to stand up and say the unsayable - drilling must go on. A thorough investigation must be done and the technical flaws, if any, corrected. Government must be locked out of the investigation. With this Regime, there is no trusting the results of any investigation since Obama has so much to gain by not reporting any embarassing facts. Our government has become the enemy of truth and the search for truth.
The author of the article to which I linked titled his piece a "Crude Coincidence." Perhaps it was not crude at all, but a very sophisticated plot to manipulate public opinion so as to achieve the aim of taking over the Energy sector, further crippling the US economy. That would fit the Marxist agenda of this Regime to a "Tee".
Sunday, May 2, 2010
17 illegals captured in search for deputy shooters (OneNewsNow.com)
17 illegals captured in search for deputy shooters (OneNewsNow.com)
Obviously, all the hoopla about civil rights of illegals is intended to obscure the fact that it is American's civil rights that are being systematically violated by the US Congress and exccutive branch. We have a constitutional right to be "secure in our persons and property".
That phrase is intended to refer to security from our own government. But it extends not only to acts - or failures to act - by that same government to secure our borders. That right is worthless if our citizens are besieged by illegals running our streets and neighborhoods, kidnapping our citizens for ransom, killing police officers trying to do their duty, tjhreatening or bribing government officials as have they done in Mexico, and extending the tentacles of their operations further and further into heartland USA.
I am far less concerned with the civil rights of a bunch of illegals than I am about the security of our country.
And all this talk of "amnesty" for those already present in the country - bull! Let them all go home, or be forcibly rounded up and deported after being permanently ID'd. If they want to become citizens, let them enter by the front door and adhere to our laws for naturalization - not crash the gate and expect to be rewarded for it.
It was a mistake to "legalize" the illegals before, and it is doubly a mistake now. Any congressman or senator who supports this kind on non-fix to the problem is announcing their intellectual and moral bankruptcy.
Obviously, all the hoopla about civil rights of illegals is intended to obscure the fact that it is American's civil rights that are being systematically violated by the US Congress and exccutive branch. We have a constitutional right to be "secure in our persons and property".
That phrase is intended to refer to security from our own government. But it extends not only to acts - or failures to act - by that same government to secure our borders. That right is worthless if our citizens are besieged by illegals running our streets and neighborhoods, kidnapping our citizens for ransom, killing police officers trying to do their duty, tjhreatening or bribing government officials as have they done in Mexico, and extending the tentacles of their operations further and further into heartland USA.
I am far less concerned with the civil rights of a bunch of illegals than I am about the security of our country.
And all this talk of "amnesty" for those already present in the country - bull! Let them all go home, or be forcibly rounded up and deported after being permanently ID'd. If they want to become citizens, let them enter by the front door and adhere to our laws for naturalization - not crash the gate and expect to be rewarded for it.
It was a mistake to "legalize" the illegals before, and it is doubly a mistake now. Any congressman or senator who supports this kind on non-fix to the problem is announcing their intellectual and moral bankruptcy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)