On Being "Self Evident"

Another word for "self evident" is "Obviously", for you people in Rio Linda. I think we could say the lack of veracity of Berock Obama as a candidate has been "self evident" as of late. For one thing we all know that when a President is sinking in the polls the first thing they think of doing is to get out of town and preferably out of the country for a while to distract the votors. But it's where Obama intends to go that tells the tale. He's going to Iraq, more because Mc Cain has been bugging him that he has to go there more than any reason of his own. But the question is what does he expect to find? Can we expect him to come back from Iraq and say "I was all wrong about Iraq and now I know we have to keep our troops there"? He's already hinted at this. There is another line of his I'd like to take apart and that's the one about "being as careful getting out as we were careless about going in". Suppose you resolved in your mind that you were going to one way or another go into the girl's locker room while they were undressing. You would rehearse every excuse in the book as to why you were there like "I guess I lost my sense of direction" or "I was taking a short cut" or whatever. Much as George Bush did in his mind before the war ever began and before 9 - 11. Once in the locker room and told to get out are you going to be "deliberate" about it, or are you getting out immediately? But the thing is we voted for Obama because he "had the judgement" back in 2002 to condemn the war. So his going to Iraq now is kind of a second guess of himself. The necessety of doing certain things- such as leaving Iraq, is obvious. And now we learn from Sixty Minutes that Christians worshipping in Iraq for over a thousand years, are now for the first time being driven out or exterminated, by the waring Islamic factions and that the US Army has a non intervention policy whenit comes to churches. I have heard time and again about the "good old days" when Saddam Hussein ruled the land. And for the first time I am actually coming out and saying that my initial support of the Iraq War was wrong and misguided. We were all truely lied to because our presence there has only made the cause of democracy, for said reason Bush went in, more imperiled than it ever war in Iraq. We further hear about Obama's defending of John Mc Cain. Now I'd like to say this about that. If it were me jumping up and defending John Mc Cain for the attacks against him on Face the Nation- - this would be understandable. I have my own emotional reasons for defending John Mc Cain's veracity and "qualification" to be President. But I don't think this is Obama's motive. Me thinks his motives were simply to rack up points with the right of center Republican voting block. I would further say that "Acting like a Christian" isn't BEING a Christian. I don't respect a candidate who engages in "Mee, too" itus. Harry Truman once said that given a choice between a Republican who "acts" like a Democrat, and an actual Democrat, the people will vote for the real Democrat every time. You may know that the church where I grew up had a congragation split into liberal and conservative factions. Guess which "faction" that the "Asshole of El Paso" emerged from? Not the conservative faction but the liberal one. It's because there were so many "posers" among this liberal group that despite the mass exidus from the church in general- - this ultimate "poser", Bill Halliday, was voted in as pastor. But now Obama is talking about "Faith based initiatives" playing the Bush "me, too" card once again.

Some have said that the rights from God we have are "self evident". But despite or perhaps because of what Rush Limbaugh thinks, there are no "guarendeed rights from God" in the Christian faith. A lot of things are self evident to smart people, such as these geometric proofs. It always baffled me why we had to prove things that were "self evident". This economy could be likened to a Tour de France trial run bike ride of 180 miles that should take six hours and to qualify for the big race you have to average over thirty mph over that 180 miles. Now, suppose the US economy is "in the race" and averages only fifteen miles per hour for the first half or ninety miles of the race. What are this candidate's chances for qualifying. Some would say "Well all they have to do is go 45 mph or tripple the speed for the rest of the race. For those of you who say this you're thinking like that mentally retarded guy Clinton had exicuted on the eve of his inoguration. Remember he asked for pizza as a last meal and he was eating the pizza and someone said "time to go" and the man said, "That's OK. I'll eat the other half of the pizza when I get back. That's like people who had some debate with an evangelist and as a final retort said, "Well, if what you say proves untrue, I'm coming back and give you a piece of my mind!". No you won't; you'll be dead and he knows that. Dead men tell no tales. As to the US economy the future of our economy is "already baked into the cake". In case you are wondering about that biker averaging 15 mph the first half of the race. Well, it's impossible for him to make up that time because the race is over and he's only half way there. So it is with the economy. The damage is done and it's only a matter of time to watch the chickens come home to roost. You can't do anything for this economy now because everyone is way too much in debt.

You know, Justin Martyr might be called the George Washington of Christianity. And hee too spoke of the resurrection of Christ and his atoning death being "Self Evident" meaning it was so obvious that to even argue the point with anybody was an insult to God. Of course you read the treaties anyhow and true to form not one material fact is ever brought in to justify the existance of the doctrine of the resurrection. The arguments made by sone objectors is that "Since the flesh is mortal and corruptable and depraved, to resurrect it would only condemn one to eternal sin". This argument is never refuted. But it's brought up that Justin believed that the human Soul was by its nature mortal, and not immortal. The word Resurrection referrs to things that are dead, after all. So absent the cross of Jesus, we all just die a natural death. And thoughts of going to Hell and spending eternity there can be put away, because we don't have an eternal soul. I bring up the fact Justin regards his argument as "stating the obvious", because no where in Justin's writings, is the notion of Jesus being the 2nd. person of the Holy Trinity ever raised. And today this (along with immortality of the soul) are considered cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith. But the thing wrong is the trinity would not be invented for at least another century and a half. Of course when Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount said that all poor people were going to heaven this should have been a hint. In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the only reason why Lazarus went to Paradise was because he was poor, and not because he did some act of religious hocus pocus that "got him into the Kingdom". You know that if you live around here that poor people are the most generous when it comes to giving a percentage of their resources to other people worse off than they are. You should also know that the Church is guilty of Idolitry and I can prove it. What if I told you there is something Churchmen value above their Cadalics and Mercedes Benz. After all if they lose one of these they can always buy another, if you're Fred Price. There is something they value to almost idolotry perportions. Their time. Try to get these people to share their Time, the most precious of God's gifts, and you will clearly see what it is they value most, while they expect you to place no value on yours.

Everyone is talking about this new cell phone law. But it's the mere act of talking on the phone while driving that is distracting and disruptive, occupying your mind. This law was merely passed by Blue tooth and other manufactures of wireless. It's a real racket they've got going. This law is kind of an insult to a lot of peoples' intelligence. Except for the absolute ban on teenagers using cell phones. I think that's a great idea, and I hope they really rack up the arrests there. We know how teenagers are and how distracted they get. They want to ban styrofoam containers and plastic bags now. I think this is kind of silly and over legeslating. You know styrofoam is a great way to keep food warm. Think about it.

One way in which I fundamentally think like a conservative is that I believe the words "We are endowed with life, liberty and the persuit of happiness" and "all men are created equal" to be sweeping declarations about all men. A liberal would say that this doesn't apply to all of the slaves out there. Again KFI"s Jesus would say that God is in a constant state of evolution and change. Just because human sacrifice used to be OK in Abraham's day doesn't mean it's OK in ours. A man was stoned for gathering sticks on the sabbath. Would today neighbors report a man who was clearing brush around his house in the keeping of fire laws as "breaking the sabbath" even though he was doing good? Jesus of KFI would say "The fact that he was doing good is immiterial to the argument. The man was sinning". In like manner it was OK for a man to sell his daughter into slavery. This was a "training period phase" with God according to Jesus of KFI. This is why I'm not a liberal. Because conservatives believe that values are constants. But liberals have this "dispensationalist" outlook on life, and on God. A liberal looks at Justin Martyr and may see a "George Washington" figure, but of course George Washington had slaves. A liberal may honor Jefferson but an objectivist, would say between Jefferson and Alexander Hammilton, Hammilton was more of a "working class" than was Jefferson, who was of the "landed gentrie". And yet Hammilton gets the rap for being a "right winger". It's the liberal who is constantly re-defining things and values, rather than the conservative. (Selah)