OBAMACARE, 9/11, CHENEY TORTURE, AND MORE
Barack Obama is having a time getting through his public-option healthcare even though it has been shown that the statement about abortion funding is a lie, death panels is a wild stretch, lack of choice of doctor and hospital is a lie, and stories about other countries problems with public healthcare are mostly lies and selective exaggerations, etc.
Are the Democrats going to go the appropriations route so they don't need to get 60 votes to override a Republican filibuster against the public option? The French have public healthcare. They have better outcomes, a longer lifespan, greater user satisfaction, spend much less on national healthcare, and are rated number one in the world. Why is the U.S. bringing up the bottom of the developed world in so many telling categories? Greed, stupidity, ignorance, and lies are among the reasons.
He's not having an easy time of it concerning a consumer-protection agency concerning financial deals with banks and others either.
He's confronting opposition to derivatives regulation even though the recent history shows what a disaster deregulation and non-regulation have been.
9/11 Still a Smoldering Issue
Obama is making a huge error in Pakistan and Afghanistan. He sounds just like George W. Bush about al Qaeda when people in the know realize that 9/11 was never fully investigated. It must be the largest least investigated event in American history. The list of unanswered questions is only growing too.
Dick Cheney Fears Torture
Dick Cheney's guts are in a knot. He's being tortured by the thought that he could be put in the dock, found guilty, and have to spend the rest of his life behind bars for his role in torturing others, many of whom were completely innocent, such as Canadian, German, and British Muslims kidnapped, rendered, imprisoned, and tortured for nothing other than because under Bush/Cheney the U.S. just could.
Cheney says that the CIA shouldn't have to consider what some future administration might think of their actions today. Nonsense, they should always be considering whether or not what they are doing violates the law. What an absurd notion is Cheney's.
Dick Cheney also repeatedly said that memos disclosed would prove that torture worked. They have not, and it wouldn't matter regardless. Experts have testified to the public that valuable information was obtained before torture and that what came after was junk because people say anything to stop the torture.
More importantly, we don't torture not because it doesn't work. We don't torture because 1) innocent people can be caught up in investigations and have been tortured and 2) it's barbaric, and we claim not to be barbarians but rather civilized human beings who do not do to others what we don't want done to us (hence Dick Cheney hating the torture he's undergoing now for having been such a monster).
Dick Cheney blew it. He did one of the worst things people can do to others and also got caught doing it. Many torture victims died: scores of them died at the hands of U.S. interrogators under orders from Bush and Cheney who are both just as guilty, even more guilty, then if they had shot those people dead point blank themselves.
By the way, much as been made about the lack of training they had even though Cheney said they were highly professional and highly trained. I never said they were that, but I will tell you that they were all supervised by those who had studied the techniques used down through the centuries (yes centuries). All this talk about that all the techniques were new or learned only recently from the Koreans (early 1950's) and such is bull. Some of the techniques were newish, but the British learned a great deal during their Empire days and recently with their dealings over the Northern Ireland debacle. Also, the Israelis certainly shared with their new big bully friend all the techniques that the Likudniks learned against the Palestinians and others. Of course, the U.S. had plenty of its own experience going back through all of its wars where men did things that they never told the wife and kids when they got back from the front. Things got out of hand though when the TV cameras showed My Lai and Central American death squads. That's why George W. Bush's team clamped down so hard on journalism in the war zones. They didn't want the truth to get out again causing another wave of Vietnam Syndrome (war hating; evil hating).
Meanwhile, FOX News talks rubbish. They talk about disrespecting the CIA and the CIA Director, etc., as if disrespecting evil is bad.
- Technorati Tags: 60 votes, 9/11, abortion funding, Afghanistan, al Qaeda, American history, appropriations, banks, Barack Obama, barbarians, barbaric, better outcomes, big bully, British, Bush/Cheney, Canadian, Central American, Cheney, choice, CIA, CIA Director, civilized, consumer-protection agency, death panels, death squads, Democrats, deregulation, derivatives regulation, developed world, Dick Cheney, doctor, Empire, evil, evil hating, exaggerations, FOX News, French, George W. Bush, German, greed, guilty, healthcare, highly professional, highly trained, hospital, ignorance, imprisoned, innocent, interrogators, investigation, Israelis, journalism, kidnapped, Koreans, lie, lies, Likudniks, longer lifespan, Muslims, My Lai, national healthcare, Northern Ireland, number one, Obama, Obamacare, Pakistan, Palestinians, public healthcare, public option, rendered, Republican, Republican filibuster, stupidity, torture, torture works, tortured, torturing, U.S., user satisfaction, Vietnam Syndrome, war hating, war zones
Tom Usher
Standing Comment, all posts and pages:
To all homosexuals and their supporters, condoners, promoters, accepters, confirmers, and the like:
Unless you have something completely new that hasn't already been refuted, don't bother. It won't show up.
Rehashing what has already been refuted is a waste of everyone's time.
I'm not interested in casting pearls before swine, giving the children's bread to the dogs, or rebuking a forever scorner.
Learn or go away: There is zero wisdom in homosexuality. Homosexuality is wrong. Nothing any homosexual or anyone else can say or do will alter it. No one needs the Bible to know it either. It's prima facie. There's no such thing as an unrepentant-homosexual Christian. There never has been and never will be. That's the way of it. If you don't like it, change.
Do site searches on the various topics concerning homosexuality to determine if your "point" has already been handled. Currently, I provide three different search methods. The "WordPress" search is still the most thorough.
The same can be done regarding militarism, capitalism, coercion, and many other main issues and themes.
TREATMENT, RUDENESS, POLITENESS, OFFENSE, TRUTH
Many times over the course of this website's existence, I've had commentators complain about how I've treated them and/or others. Much less frequently has anyone taken exception to those commentator's comments. I assume that's because for one, I appear to be holding my own.
Often, I have raised the fact that Jesus called certain people "serpents." I've often also mentioned how he cleaned the temple with whip in hand, not that he used it on anyone. It certainly doesn't say that he did, and neither was he charged with it in the kangaroo court of the serpents who ended up murdering him by proxy just for, among other wonderful things, speaking out and speaking truth.
If I say that those who are engaged in serpentine behavior are the New Testament "serpents," then why take offense at my saying it rather than standing with Jesus and me about it?
If others don't like it that I treat others or them the way I have in this regard, why don't they take it up with the serpents and/or their own consciences and God?
If I wanted to catch flies, I'd use honey. I don't want flies on this level. Human beings aren't to be on the level of flies. If the truth is bitter as vinegar, then ask yourself why and learn to taste it as sweet but not sickeningly so. Why attack the message and messenger, as the serpents did, and become a serpent by so doing?
The issue is not "name calling" on some bratty, childish level. When Jesus said "serpents," he was not being as a brat. His level was completely adult to adults and children. He dared say that the children understood the clear and plain truth before the adults who, afterall, had been abused and socialized by the serpents. He still calls adults back. Those who hear him and know his voice (truth) turn around and do the other required things together as well.
What is it for a human being to be more serpentine or reptilian than what God initially gave? What was and remains Jesus's point? What is the reptilian brain versus the vastly higher human brain with its cerebral cortex and frontal and temporal lobes and specific areas of altruistic sentiments and abilities? What are those higher areas before they are damaged, before the communication pathways to them and between them are diminished by evil that is always some form of abuse? How are those pathways reestablished or created where they never were in this fleshly life?
The snake lays its eggs. The eggs hatch. The snake parent doesn't nurture or raise the offspring. It's every snake for itself. Human parents and family are not designed to be that way. Humans hand down the learning of nurturing. Many people get better training than do others, and many people have a greater aptitude for learning and predisposition for the higher and highest virtues. Many are less abused. People can change for the better and best though, no matter where the starting point. They only can't if they don't — if they reject it.
Snakes, of course, also come in venomous varieties and in strangling varieties, etc., such that they have been attackers and even devourers of humans for eons, guilty and innocent alike.
Now, Jesus knew that most people could relate to what were, and still are, largely considered "good" parenting skills and "good" "family" relations. He regularly used those concepts to get people to consider the wider implications for the whole of humanity. He did know that many would refuse. He let them go. He didn't demand secular or false-religion legislation to rein them in with threats of violence and imprisonment. He was not and is not coercive. Even his Church is a voluntary place to be.
What he still teaches (through the written words in the New Testament and as those connect with the Old and also teaches through the Holy Spirit he definitely sent as he said he would) is, among many other things, that "good" is vastly better than has been commonly accepted and that real "family" is everyone left after all the rest have rejected the higher and highest good. He raised the standards far above the Old Testament and far above the "modern" standard.
The American Empire and the American people in general aren't even touching the hem of his garment, let alone even attempting to stand upright and side-by-side with him.
I point out that Jesus was, and is, a Real Liberal Christian. He is the one who brought back this censored truth that is the light. After he had spoken it and lived it and was murdered for doing so, the censors set about to re-censor it and did. They couldn't put it out though — couldn't completely extinguish the truth. I wouldn't be saying it now again with all credit to God, just as Jesus, if they had been able to completely block it.
I point out that each of those terms ("real," "liberal," and "Christian," along with "Church") are actually redundant terms — synonyms that are so close that they become one. The term "liberal" here is not the common usage, which common usage is a deliberate corruption of the term. There is no harm in real liberalism. There is no vileness in it. There is only beneficence. "Real" may be understood as the opposite of false-hearted, dark side, and dead of the Holy Spirit. Christian is both real and liberal in those senses. To arrive at living, doing, being those full senses requires what Jesus lives, does, and is in the highest. Finally, the Church is the whole.
Who are they who want to drag it down, censor it, work against it, lessen it, ignore it, etc.? Well, who sides with Jesus and who sides against him? Did the serpents side with him then? Do they now?
We call war-mongers "hawks." We call "peacemakers" blessed and "doves." Why do the hawks not take offense at "hawks" but do take offense at "serpents"? "Hawks" is not yet as telling to the general public, but I must tell you that all hawks are serpents. Why do some say, "Greed is good" but take offense at "serpents"? I tell you there is no difference between the selfish and the serpents. Why do people take offense at serpents when they do not take offense at homosexuality? I tell you the homosexual spirit also comes out from the dark side. It is a choice. It is harmful. Many are abused with it. Many never overcome it. Their very brain matter is transformed by it. Then they claim it is good when it remains confusion and definitely wrong and harmful.
Many arguments were put forth in support of tolerance. I understood that Jesus "tolerated," as in he did not execute wrath but rather told the truth and let the blind follow the blind (blind to the truth) into the ditch of their own making. I have watched while the movement has been corrupted into condoning what was once only to be tolerated. I have watched further while it has moved from condoning to promoting even to the youngest children to get to them before the truth does. I have seen evil at work, and I sound the alarm. I face censorship and other negative reactions for it.
As the American Empire claims to be a light to the world, it murders innocent babies by Hellfire missiles fired from predator drones controlled by armchair, video-gaming serpents in uniform. It tortures those who are not even suspects. It spies on its own without even probable cause or reasonable suspicion. It lies its way into wars for spoils and control. It neglects its poor, whom it treads down for the sakes of the superrich — for the sake of the massive flow of mammon from the bottom up (no trickledown — trickledown is a farce and always has been). All is claimed to be okay in America though — that America is headed in the right direction — because soon, even "don't tell, don't ask" will be a thing of the quaint past and homosexuals may be able to sleep together and have sex in the barracks with the "blessing" of the Empire while they practice murdering the innocent for the sake of homosexual, greedy plutocrats who own them and who, in turn, are owned by the dark-side spirit named by God and Jesus as Satan.
Whose side are you on? I speak truth to warn. I don't tell the secular government what to do other than occasionally to say what at least would be less hypocritical within their fallen, unenlightened system. I do so for spiritual reasons. What I want is the Christian Commons.
Now, if you submit a comment:
What you write here against the Real Liberal Christian Church founded by Jesus Christ will mark you in the Biblical sense unless you show that you have turned and are repenting in time to escape the damnation of your own choosing. That's the way of it. Don't be tempted by the devil to stand opposed to the call of righteousness. Overcome such evil temptation. Help others to help yet others to come to righteous behavior through-and-through.
Check out how even after reading this, people will still take it out of context and twist it to an evil end.