Newsletter for May 5, 2010
- TheAmerican News Commentary
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Formerly "EPOCH Commentary" -- Evangelical Perspective On Current Happenings- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Vol. 14, No. 18 May 5, 2010 © 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NEWSLETTERS AND COMMENTARIES LIKE ANC ARE IMPORTANT.
That's not just our opinion . . . it was expressed very clearly this week by two Internet
writers and commentators. It isn't that we didn't already know this and believe it to be
true -- but it's nice to know that someone else supports our views . . . this encourages
us in what we are trying to do. First, there is this comment from Caroline Glick, of the
Jerusalem Post: "At a time when the US media – the traditional watchdogs of
American democracy -- have transformed themselves into President Barack
Obama’s lapdogs, the new media, on the Internet plays a crucial role in bringing
accurate news to the public’s attention." And then Pamela Geller, author of "Atlas
Shrugs," offered this evaluation, "A New Jersey court has ruled that bloggers are not
journalists ... and so do not enjoy the same protections that journalists do from
being forced to reveal their sources. Actually, this tool of a judge is right. For
the most part, journalists today act as shills for the Democrat party. They cover
up for the party’s crimes and excesses, obfuscate the effects of its disastrous
policies, and propagandize for Obama’s agenda. In that sense, bloggers are not
journalists. The best bloggers aren’t shilling for Obama and Pelosi the way
journalists are. Instead, bloggers are doing the heavy lifting." We here at ANC
are pleased not to be numbered with current day, main line journalists. We will continue
to report and comment on current happenings from a Conservative Evangelical Christian
perspective just as we always have. You can depend on that -- it is our pledge to you.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *because you don't find comments like these in the main-line media, either press or TV:
LAST WEEK WE FEATURED TWO MAJOR NEWS STORIES -- THE US
MILITARY'S REJECTION OF CHRISTIAN PRAYER AND THE
ARIZONA ATTEMPT TO DEAL WITH ILLEGAL ALIENS;
THIS WEEK BOTH SITUATIONS ARE STILL WITH US
Despite all the handicaps and opposition, the National Day of Prayer as required by
federal law, will be observed tomorrow, and all across America Christians will be united
in prayer to thank God for His many blessings, and ask Him to guide our nation and its
leadership into the paths our Founding Fathers laid out for us. As expected, President
Obama has issued a Day of Prayer proclamation -- it is not his choice -- he is
required by law to do so. The ruling by the Wisconsin federal district judge that the
National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional will be appealed, and it is expected that the
decision will be overturned. Whether there will be any relaxing of the military's anti-
Christian position, and whether the "disinvited" club will continue to grow, is still an
open question. At the moment, the three charter members are Tony Perkins, Michael
Youssef and Franklin Graham -- all strong Christian Evangelicals who were invited
and then disinvited to offer prayer at a military event.
And the "Military Religious Freedom Foundation" isn't through yet. The MRFF,
based in Albuquerque, NM, and headed by a Mikey Weinstein, is the group that last
week persuaded the Army to rescind its invitation for Franklin Graham to participate in
a National Day of Prayer observance in the Pentagon. Now the MRFF has asked the
Army to change the emblem and motto of the Evans Army Community Hospital in Fort
Carson, CO. The motto -- adopted in 1969 -- reads "Pro Deo et Humanitate" ("For
God and Humanity"), and the design includes a cross. Weinstein claims the emblem and
motto violate the unwritten constitutional requirement for separation of church and state.
[At least he's right on one point; it definitely is unwritten in the Constitution.] The Army
spokesman said the usual, that the complaint would be reviewed. As the old radio
newscasters used to say: "Stay tuned." And then there is this item in the news: Rep. Jack
Kingston (R, GA) has asked the House Armed Services committee to hold hearings on
what he calls,"a growing movement in the military to censor some Biblical teachings."
And Rep. Trent Franks, (R, AZ), is asking others in Congress to join him in asking
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to explain what standards were used to deny to
Christians the right to speak at military events. Franks called the action in disinviting
Franklin Graham, "an outrageous affront to the ideals of freedom of religion and
expression that are the essence of America" and adds that there is an effort to
"stifle religious freedom in the name of tolerance." Rather than bothering Secretary
Gates, wouldn't it be simpler to ask the Commander in Chief of our military?
If you have been a regular reader of ANC, you have noticed that we regularly offer
quotes from our Founding Fathers, the men who wrote the Declaration of Independence
and the Constitution, and who established this nation as a bastion of liberty and freedom,
unique in all the world of nations. That was over 200 years ago, and those documents
still stand, but the principles set forth in them are being eroded by present day liberalism,
and the new anti-moral virus: "Political Correctness."
But we still hold forth the wisdom of those Founding Fathers, and begin with a statement
from the first United States President, George Washington, in 1783, but still remarkably
applicable to the illegal alien problem in Arizona: "The bosom of America is open to
receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and
persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation
of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear
to merit the enjoyment." A few years later, in 1801, Thomas Jefferson expressed the
same conviction: "Born in other countries, yet believing you could be happy in this,
our laws acknowledge, as they should, your right to join us in society, conforming,
as I doubt not you will do, to our established rules." Those highlighted phrases,
"decency and propriety of conduct," and "conforming to our established rules,"
are the elements which are missing in the unregulated influx of illegal aliens into Arizona
and the other states bordering on Mexico. Murders, kidnappings, drug and human
smuggling are among the problems the controversial Arizona law is attempting to address.
The need for establishing such standards goes back more than 200 years to the time when
Washington and Jefferson founded this nation. After two centuries we can still learn much
from those Founding Fathers.
And this one additional note, as the debate over the Arizona law continues: Gary Bauer
reminded us this past week: "Many on the Left are charging that the law will create
a Nazi-like atmosphere with Arizona cops knocking down doors and demanding to
'see your papers.' ... Current federal law already requires that legal immigrants
carry proof of their immigration status 'at all times.' Here's what the law says:
'Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and
have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien
registration receipt card issued to him ... Any alien who fails to comply with the
provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor ...'" It seems logical
that instead of Mr. Obama trying to find ways to have the Arizona law deemed to be
unconstitutional, he must first have to cause the existing federal law (which he has chosen
not to enforce) also deemed to be unconstitutional.
Nationally syndicated columnists and authors, Floyd and Mary Beth Brown summarized it
well: "Obama, the media, liberal elites -- and even some Republicans -- have rushed
to decry Arizona's immigration enforcement law with shocking hyperbole. This bill
is constitutional and it addresses a pressing issue at the state level because the
federal government has shirked responsibility for years ... If the critics had read the
law, they would know that it primarily focuses on enforcing existing federal law at
the state level."
An aspect of Mexico we don't often hear about, by New York Post columnist, Ralph
Peters: "South of the border, down Mexico way, a new and savage revolution rages
just beyond our inspection lanes. After less than five years of fighting, estimates of
the dead have reached 22,000. The rate of killing accelerates each month. And
Washington covers its eyes like a kid at a scary movie. Well, the Mexican narco-
insurgency, in which well-armed guerrilla forces confront the authority and presence
of the state is our No. 1 security challenge."
Maybe we asked too much of Barack Obama -- After all, the only prior experience he
had was as a "community organizer" under the Chicago Democrat party machine, and part
of a term as US Senator. Then suddenly the awesome responsibilities of the US presidency
were thrust upon him.During his first 16 months in office he has tried to change (that was his big word: "change")
American policy, and he has had some success in remaking America into his concept. He
forced through the now proven failed "stimulus" package in 2009, and the much-disputed
"Obamacare" health care reform bill earlier this year. (Already 21 states have filed lawsuits
challenging the law's constitutionality, and legislation has been, or soon will be introduced
in at least 41 states banning certain key elements of the new law.) In neither case did he
seem to pay any attention to the actual content of the bills. Free and open discussion and
debate -- the "transparency" he and Nancy Pelosi had promised -- never occurred. Now
he seems to be planning to jam through other legislation (while he still has a Democrat
majority in the Congress) not for reasons of national policy, but purely for political reasons.
And he knows the language for such political procedure. He accuses Senate Minority Leader
Mitch McConnell as being in bed with Wall Street "movers and shakers," and of fronting
"cynical and deceptive" actions in their behalf. House Minority Leader John Boehner he
describes as a health care Chicken Little. Sarah Palin is to be ignored on armament issues
because she is "not an expert on nuclear issues." (The implication is that he is.) Glenn
Beck and Rush Limbaugh he rates as a "troublesome" twosome spouting "vitriol." And
the unprecedented digs and insults directed at George W. Bush by virtually everyone in
the Obama administration and the Democrat Congress have reached a new low never
even closely attained by other US presidents. But incredibly, this past weekend while
speaking at the University of Michigan graduation ceremony he said that partisan rants
and name calling pose a serious danger to America's democracy. Recently Wall Street
Journal editorial writer William McGurn labeled him "The Post-Gracious President."
Maybe we did expect too much of him.
Al Gore becomes news again, still promulgating his "Global Warming" hoax.
Almost lost in all the newspaper headlines and TV news programs focused on the
Pentagon disinviting Christians for religious events, and the Arizona law to cope with
illegal (unlawful) aliens, plus the environmental disaster in the Gulf, was Mr. Gore's
appearance recently at the annual meeting of the Council of Foundations in Denver.
He told the nation's leaders in philanthropic giving,"Time's running out [on climate
change]. We have to get our act together." The nation's foundations do play an
important role in the climate change scam. It has been pointed out that the Joyce
Foundation (with Barack Obama as a Board member) provided the funds to start the
Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX). CCX describes itself as "North America's only
cap-and-trade system for all six greenhouse gases with global affiliates and projects
worldwide." In other words, CCX provides the mechanism for trading the pollution
permits and carbon offsets which the administration's cap-and-trade act -- if enacted
-- would impose. Richard Sandor, the founder of CCX, estimates that such climate
trading could be, in his words, "a $10 trillion dollar market."
Former California TV meteorologist Brian Sussman did not miss this background, and
in his new book, "Climategate," says Al Gore's "go green" mission has nothing to do
with Global Warming, but has everything to do with another kind of green -- money.
Sussman says of Gore that "he stands to make billions ... or maybe a trillion dollars
is what these guys can make together off of this." It is Sussman's opinion that Gore
and others in the Global Warming movement are trying to pull off one of the greatest
scams of all time.
And you may have missed this gem: on a recent "Good Morning America" TV show,
ABC journalist Sam Donaldson touted Mr. Gore for the upcoming Supreme Court
appointment, saying, "He's 62, but he's still a few years. I think he's confirmable,
although there would be a fight to some extent. I think he might make a very
An interesting story concerning "Love" that we noted this week: This is the
news story that we read: The Dietrich von Hildebrand Legacy Project is proud to
collaborate with the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in hosting a major
international conference in Rome dedicated to the question, 'What is love?'"
The conference will bring together philosophers, theologians, psychologists, artists,
physicians and scientists to discuss and attempt to understand von Hildebrand's book
titled "The Nature of Love." It is an impressive, almost overwhelming assemblage of
scholars in so many branches of thought -- but they could have saved a lot of time,
work and money by simply turning to the Bible. John -- who through the years has
been referred to as the "Beloved Disciple" -- expressed these views which are totally
relevant to the goal of the conference: "God is love. In this was manifest the love
of God toward us, because that God sent His only begotten Son into the world,
that we might live through Him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but
that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved,
if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another." (I John 4: 8-11) What
more do they need to know?
Sorry! Just these two "One Liners" this week . . .
"All change is not growth, as all movement is not forward." -- -- Ellen Glasgow
"If government could create jobs and raise children, socialism would have worked."
-- Gerald Gilder
We receive many favorable comments on "What others are saying" doubtless
Jack Cafferty (CNN): "President Obama called the Arizona immigration law
misguided. What's misguided, Mr. President, is the federal government's ongoing
refusal to enforce the laws that are already on the books. Read the Arizona law.
Parts of it are word-for-word the same as the federal statutes which continue to
be all but ignored."Barry Rubin (Director, Global Research in International Affairs): "The real
Matt Barber (writing in Townhall.com): "With a potential bloodbath looming
in November, liberals are understandably desperate. They see it all slipping away,
and it shows. The grassroots groundswell of opposition to Obama's neo-Marxist,
secular, humanist agenda intensifies daily despite the left's best efforts to silence
dissent. According to the latest Pew poll, America's trust in today's godless
Obama-Pelosi-Reid federal government is at an all time low of 22%, little more
than a year after Obama took office."
Cal Thomas: "America is the only developed nation that has a 2,000 mile border
with a developing nation, and the government's refusal to control that border is
why there are an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona."
Binyamin Jolkovsky (Editor in Chief, Jewish World Review): "If safeguarding
international security is the chief aim of US President Barack Obama's foreign
policy, then at some point he can be expected to change course in the Middle East.
For today, Obama faces the wreckage of every aspect of his Middle East policies.
And largely as a consequence of his policies, the region moves ever closer to war."
Larry Elder: "ODSD is Pandemic ... Obama Double Standard Disease: an affliction
that causes the media to ignore, rationalize or trivialize in order to defend, support
and advance the tax-the-rich, spread-the-wealth, expand-the government agenda of
President Barack Obama and his party."
Andrew McCarthy (National Review): "Barack Obama is a revolutionary on a
mission to cut America down to size. One size fits all, to be precise. His post-sovereign
America is a country no different from any other: economically bankrupt, morally
rudderless, with nothing exceptional about it besides the heights from which it
tumbles and the remorselessness of its choice -- his choice -- to decline."
problem is the refusal of policymakers to recognize just how bad things are and
how negative has been the impact of their policy. It is not too late to change course.
But how can opinion makers explain this to the administration when most of them
don't see how much has gone wrong. Waking up is the first step."
Oh, and did you notice, amidst all the liberal criticism -- Last week Arizona Governor
Brewer signed that immigration law which launched national debate about it, all the way to
the White House where Mr. Obama issued his description of the law as "misguided" and
"irresponsible." That may be his opinion, but in Arizona it has helped the Governor . . .
a new Rasmussen Poll report of likely voters in the state shows 56% now approve of the
way Brewer is performing as Governor -- that's a 16 point jump over a similar survey just
two weeks ago when only 40% voiced their approval. (That is a higher job-approval rating
than the American people give to Mr. Obama.) And the figure that shows 70% of the people
of Arizona favor the new law remains constant.
A Few Random Afterthoughts . . .
This is no time to stop issuing a reminder about the next national election day
on Nov. 2 -- now just 181 days away. This is the date when we can vote to reclaim
America to the founding principles upon which this nation was established. But in order
to vote, you must be registered. For a simple registration procedure, click on this link:
Register to vote.
Janet Napolitano is still suffering from "foot in mouth" ailment: last week in testimony
before a Senate panel she said that she knew the US-Mexico border "as well as anyone"
and added this gem: "I will tell you that it is as secure now as it has ever been." (That is
almost worthy of being a Joe Biden comment!) Apparently she hasn't been to Arizona since
being elevated to the head of Homeland Security. (Just that thought is scary.) She was
obviously not aware of these facts just released by the National Drug Intelligence Center, a
division of the Obama Justice Department, that on average every day three Border Patrol
Agents are assaulted at or near that border. Or that every 35 hours there is a kidnapping in
Phoenix, usually by agents of alien smuggling organizations. And that 1-in-5 American
teenagers use some type of illegal drugs smuggled across the unsecured US-Mexico border.
And that illegal aliens (or whatever she chooses to call them) still enter America from Mexico
by the thousands every year. Yes, Janet, it's as secure as it has ever been, whatever that means.
A word about the still not-forgotten Jimmy Carter. Lebanon-born, terrorism expert, Dr.
Walid Phares, reminds us that Jimmy Carter is still on the loose in international affairs: "Former
US President Jimmy Carter is often lauded by the Arab world for championing the
Palestinian cause. However, after stumbling into the world of Sudanese politics, Carter
has lost all credibility. Inexplicably, Carter gave his blessing (with perfunctory caveats)
to a rigged election that has handed victory to a genocidal war criminal who granted
safe haven to Osama bin Laden in 1990." (To say nothing of President al-Bashir's ethnic
cleansing of Christians living in the Sudan.)
In continuing our references to statements from our Founding Fathers, we often focus
on their views of the importance and meaning of the Constitution they had created for a new
"In the formation of our constitution the wisdom of all ages is collected -- the legislators
of antiquity are consulted, as well as the opinions and interests of the millions who are
concerned. In short, it is an empire of reason." -- Noah Webster, 1787
"The Constitution on which our Union rests, shall be administered by me [as President]
according to the safe and honest meaning contemplated by the plain understanding of the
people of the United States at the time of its adoption -- a meaning to be found in the
explanations of those who advocated, not those who opposed it, and who opposed it
merely lest the construction should be applied which they denounced as possible."
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1801
- - - - - - - - -SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION
To Subscribe (no subscription charge), click on:
To Unsubscribe, click on: