Saturday, December 31, 2011

Which of These GOP Candidates do You Think is the Most Qualified to Become the Next President?

Undecided Voters Make For 'Wide Open' Iowa Race Fox News

Mitt Romney  Newt Gingrich

Ron Paul
 Rick Santorum Michelle Bachmann  Jon Huntsman
 Rick Perry

In just three days, the first presidential race will be underway with the Iowa caucus.  As of right now, polls show former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Texas Congressman neck-in-neck with one another.  Many polls show Romney with a slight lead over Paul.  A few days later New Hampshire will host its first primary with Mitt Romney leading in that race.  Who will be the candidate that will emerge as the GOP frontrunner?  On different occasions various candidates have seen a surge in their poll numbers.  At one time Texas Governor Rick Perry was one of the top candidates.  Later it was former GOP candidate Herman Cain.  Then Newt Gingrich took the lead as far as the GOP candidates were concerned.  As of right now, many pollsters are projecting that Mitt Romney will receive the Republican nomination next year to face Barack Obama as president of the United States. 

This past year, the GOP candidates have participated in numerous debates.  I have many of the GOP debates posted on this blog.  Consequently, I don't see a GOP candidate that appears to be presidential material.  They don't want to solve the real issues concerning trade amongst nations such as China and they don't want to install a border fence from Texas to California which replicates the border fence that was built from San Diego California, to Tijuana, Mexico.  It's a tragedy that we have the low-quality candidates that we do running against Barack Obama.  Some of them say the right things but they aren't electable.  Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann says that when she wins the presidency, she will repeal Obamacare?  However, she hasn't shown leadership in compiling a group of Republicans in the House of Representatives to defund Obamacare.  If she won't utilize the means at her disposal to defund Obamacare, how am I suppose to expect her to repeal Obamacare as president?  I don't.  She doesn't show leadership to stop Obama's radical socialist agenda.  Former Pennsylvania Senator is right on the moral issues in regards to abortion, but he was a bushpot when George W. Bush was president.  He was very supportive of the Iraq War and didn't call out Bush on how the Iraqi War was prosecuted.  The candidate which I agree with the most overall is Ron Paul, even though I didn't agree with his statement concerning sanctions against Iran.  Paul says that sanctions against Iran are an act of war, which he's wrong about.  I do agree with him about Congress declaring war because the U.S. goes to another country to wage war.  I also agree with him the U.S. needs to mind its own business in regards to the Middle East and other countries in general.  I don't agree with him about Iran.  I do think we need to have tight sanctions against Iran.  There could be a time when the U.S. might need to declare war on Iran.  If the U.S. declares war against Iran, it needs to be a quick and decisive war and troops need to exit Iran as soon as possible.  We don't need another land invasion with troops staying for 10 years.  As far as Paul's statements concerning Congress auditing the Federal Reserve, the appropriate action to take would be for the U.S. to unhook itself from the U.N. and follow the Constitution in regards to the printing of our currency.  Who would audit the FED? Would the "audit" against the FED be accurate and unbiased? 

One of the top issues in America today is the massive deficit and the growth and size of government.  If there's anybody that knows how to operate a business, it's Mitt Romney.  Mitt Romney has had several successful business ventures with Bain Capital for example and he played a major role in the turnaround of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah.  Romney knows all the intricate details revolving around business.  However, the question that needs to be asked in regards to Romney is this: Will Mitt Romney govern using business sense or will he cast all his business knowledge aside and be Mr. Politician?  Will Romney be his own man if elected president or will he be a tool of the puppetmasters or the forces of Nimrod?  I've witnessed politicians casting aside common sense when they enter office to jump on the bandwagon of political correctness.  One of the major problems I have with Romney is the fact he's flip-flopped on positions such as abortion for example.  In the 1994 Senate race against Ted Kennedy, he was supportive of abortion but since he's been governor of Massachusetts he says he's pro-life.  Which side of the abortion debate does he stand?  He appears to be the candidate who's all about pointing his finger in the wind to determine which way the wind blows in regards to the positions he takes.  Another issue that I have with Romney is the fact he passed Romneycare in 2006, which is a state version of government-run healthcare which has proven to be costly to the citizens of Massachusetts.  If you didn't know anything about Mitt Romney's background, would you have believed he knew how to run a business? 

What's startling is that political party affiliation or your personal credentials don't seem to matter anymore.  Regardless of their political affiliation, they all still are supportive of bloated government.  They will go against the grain of common sense and seek to be politically correct.  We don't need another president who will be controlled and manipulated by the forces of Nimrod.  We need a candidate who will stand for the values our Founders held dear.  I haven't yet found the candidate we need to guide this nation for the next four years.

Friday, December 30, 2011

Iran Warns Of Closing Strategic Hormuz Oil Route

Iran Warns Of Closing Strategic Hormuz Oil Route Fox News

Iran's Navy chief on Wednesday warned that his country can close the strategic Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf where a sixth of the world's oil supply travels to.  Within the last few days, it was the second such warning.  Iranian Vice President Mohamed Reza Rahimi threatened to close the strait, cutting off oil exports, if the West imposes sanctions on Iran's oil shipments.  With the concern of a drop in Iranian oil supplies, a senior Saudi official stated Gulf Arab nations are ready to offset any loss of Iranian crude.  That reassurance led to a drop in world oil prices.  Adm. Habibollah Sayyari told state-run Press TV "Closing the Strait of Hormuz is very easy for Iranian naval forces." "Iran has comprehensive control over the strategic waterway." 

The U.S. Congress has passed a bill banning dealings with the Iran Central Bank and President Obama stated he would sign it despite its misgivings.  Critics warned it could impose hardships on U.S. allies and drive up oil prices.  The bill could impose penalties on foreign firms that conduct business with Iran's Central Bank.  European and Asians import Iranian oil and use its central bank for the transactions.  Iran is the world's fourth largest oil producer, with an output of about four million barrels of oil a day.  It relies on public exports for 80% of its public revenues.

Within the last six years, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been threatening to obtain uranium to build nuclear weapons.  Ahamdinejad stated that he desired to see Israel wiped off the face of the map.    With Iraq being unstable since the last vestiges of U.S. troops having just left recently, the Shiites in Iraq could merge with the Shiites in Iran which could produce a stronger Iran that could become an even more dangerous presence in the Middle East and around the world.  Texas Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul stated that sanctions against Iran are "acts" of war.  That's not true.  Sanctions are actions taken against a country by another country or groups of countries to influence a particular policy over another country.  Sanctions should be imposed on Iran to keep them in check.  Sanctions should be used as a means to inform rogue countries that if they get out of line, sanctions will be imposed to put them back in their place.  If we don't keep a check on Iran, they could be a major nuclear threat.

Let me tell you what the U.S. needs to do in response to Iran threatening to close the strategic Hormuz Oil route.  First of all, we need to be determined as a country that we won't be dependent on oil from the Middle East.  The United States has an abundance of resources.  There's no excuse for us to be dependent upon the Middle East for our oil supplies.  The United States needs to marginalize the Middle East so they can be irrelevant to our energy needs.  We don't want to be dependent upon the Middle East for anything given how unstable that region of the world is.  The Middle East is a hotbed for terrorism.  There's always violence that takes place.  Islam is the religion of the Middle East.  Islam believes in killing the infidel.  Many of our politicians in the U.S. make mention they would like to see democracy take root in the Middle East.  Democracy won't take root in a country where it's religion is Islam.  None of the Middle Eastern countries dominated by Islam are democratic.  Also democracy leads to mob rule, which in turn will lead to a dictator being elected to take control of that particular country.  So what's the benefit of democracy in the Middle East when the people know nothing about the concept of freedom?

Another point I need to make mention is we need to stay out of the affairs of the Middle East as much as possible.  Even Iran as much as possible.  I know that type of thinking wouldn't fit well with Republican candidates Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, for example.  However, the United States shouldn't involve themselves in the Middle East unless it's absolutely in the national interests of our country and the Western hemisphere.  I do believe there's a possibility the U.S. might have to involve itself in a military conflict with Iran in the near future.  If we do strike Iran, we need to strike down their nuclear capacity and depose their dictator Ahmadinejad.  We don't need to involve ourselves in a bloody battle like we did with Iraq and Afghanistan.  We don't need to involve ourselves in nation building in the hopes of bringing democracy to Iran.  That will never happen.  If we go to war there it's for the purpose for removing a threat that could be perilous to the security interests of our world.  We don't go to war with Iran so we can occupy that country for ten years.  I know Santorum and Gingrich would call me isolationist, but you don't go to war with other countries unless it's absolutely necessary and if Congress declares war then there needs to be an agenda carried out by our military.  Once that agenda is completed, the United States needs to exit Iran as quick as possible.  We don't need to maintain a long-term presence in Iran.

And the Spending Continues . . .

Obama to ask for debt limit hike: Treasury official Reuters

U.S. President Barack Obama talks to the press after signing into law a two-month payroll tax cut extension at the White House in Washington December 23, 2011. REUTERS/Larry Downing

In spite of all the rhetoric we hear from our elected officials about government reining in Congressional spending, the spending continues.  There's no stopping place when it comes to spending money we don't have.  Of course, I don't have a difficult time understanding President Obama and the Democratic Congress spending money like crazy.  You expect that from a Democrat party that's socialistic in their thinking.  That's no surprise. What's surprising (which shouldn't be surprising) are the Republican leadership in the House who are supposed to rein in government spending.  Even the Tea Party Republicans haven't made a dent in this area.  The Republican leadership and those Tea Party Republicans have been worthless since they gained control of Congress this past year.  House Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor have done nothing but cave into President Obama making compromises.  They caved in when it came to raising the debt ceiling this past August and they caved in concerning the latest payroll tax budget last week.  There hasn't been any type of cuts which have been significant.  If any cuts have been made, they're only cuts to the rate of the growth of spending.  But there haven't been any significant cuts.  There's no excuse for this.  The House has jursidiction when it comes to spending bills.  The House has the authority to cut off funding for unconstitutional spending such as Obamacare, for example.  Yet, there hasn't been any effort to do so.  Congress held a symbolic vote in January to repeal Obamacare.  However, the Republicans knew that there wasn't a Republican majority in the Senate to repeal Obamacare.  Why doesn't the House defund Obamacare and any type of spending that's unconstitutional?  I believe it's because it's not part of the agenda.  The Republicans love to claim to be the party of fiscal control.  They love the issue when it comes to campaigning for the next election.  Consequently, they're aren't about solving problems.  They just go along with the flow.  The Republican party, including the Tea Party freshmen for the most part, are content with the growth of government.  That's tragic but true.

According to Reuters, the White House plans to ask Congress by the end of this week for an increase in the government's debt ceiling to allow the United States to pay its bills on time.  The approval is expected to go through without a challenge, given the fact that Congress is in recess until January.  The debt is projected to fall within $100 billion of the current tap by December 30, when the United States has $82 billion in interest on its debt and payments on its Social Security coming due.  President Obama is expected to ask for authority to increase the borrowing limit by $1.2 trillion, part of the spending authority that was negotiated between Congress and the White House this summer.

This is a joke.  The Republicans should say "no" without any reservation.  They won't because they don't care about greatly reducing spending.  I can say that with confidence because the Republicans in the House won't use the power they have to defund wasteful spending.  I know that Obamacare can't be repealed in the 112th Congress, but it could've already been defunded.  Why hasn't it been defunded?  All I can say it's not part of the agenda.  The Republicans are phony.  They're part of the problem.  That's why I say there's no difference between the two parties on a national level.  The Republicans aren't going to make the tough decision to slash spending, even when the House has the power to control the spending bills.  Instead of another debt ceiling increase, the House automatically should defund any spending that's unconstitional and not needful.  There's so much spending that can be eliminated it's not even funny.  Why don't talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity call out the Republicans in the House for not defunding Obamacare and other spending that's unconstitutional?  Probably because the Republican politicians won't came back on their programs if they're asked questions of accountability.  Hannity and Limbaugh are Republican hacks.  I'm not interested in electing Republicans that refuse to tackle the nations' problems.  If they're content with the growth of big government, they need to be voted out.  We need to vote out a whole array of Republicans in the 2012 elections.  John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, and a host of House Republicans need to be voted out next year.  They're worthless and they're perpetuating the problem.  Any Republican in the Senate who's up for re-election next year needs to be voted out in the Republican primary.  I have no patience for Republicans that refuse to do what is necessary to halt and eliminate the size of government. 

Click on the above link from Reuters to read the full story. 

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Jesus Was Born Into This World to Die For the Sins of Mankind (Part 4)

Whenever you read about the life of Christ in the Gospels, you will read a number of accounts where Jesus speaks to his disciples concerning his purpose for coming to this earth: that is to one day die upon an old rugged cross to die for the sins of mankind.  The Jews wanted to crown Him king.  They were looking for a man to come to deliver the Jews from the oppressive Roman Empire.  However, that wasn't what Jesus' purpose was in his first coming.  There will come a day when Jesus returns to this world and when he does he will be crowned king.  When he is crowned king, he will rule the nations with a rod of iron (Revelation 19:15).  There will be justice upon this earth during the Millennial Reign of Christ.  There will be no sin, nor sorrow.  All will be tranquility. 

Jesus came to this earth as a lowly man.  He humbled himself before man.  Phillippians 2:8 said he was obedient unto death.  He lived a perfect, sinless life.  He knew no sin.  He was the spotless lamb that was needed to pay the debt for our sin.  No other person could pay that debt.  Jesus was foreordained before the foundation of the world was laid to be that spotless lamb for mankind.  (I Peter 1:20)  Jesus had a very distinct purpose.  He wasn't deterred from that purpose.  Even though he was tempted by Satan in the wilderness (Matthew 4), he still didn't sin.  He fulfilled his purpose.  Even when he was praying in agony in the Garden of Gethsemane and sweat drops of great blood (Luke 22:44), he still partook of that bitter cup on Calvary's cross.

In closing, the reason why we celebrate Christmas is because of the fact that Christ died upon Calvary's cross so man might be redeemed from the plagues of sin.  That's why we can rejoice in His birth.  If Christ was born into this world and never went to an old rugged cross, then his birth wouldn't be very significant for mankind.  However, the story of Christ doesn't end at the manger scene.  He paid the price for our sins in full on Calvary and on the third day He arose again.  Thank God, for Christ's birth, which led to His death, burial, and resurrection.  I wish everybody a blessed holiday!

Ben Nelson, Nebraska Senator, Will Not Seek Re-election

Ben Nelson, Nebraska Senator, Will Not Seek Re-election -

Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE)

Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) the embattled two term Senator, has decided not to seek re-election in 2012.  Nelson's refusal to seek a third term in the U.S. gives Republicans a chance to capture his seat in 2012 and it could help the GOP regain control of the Senate next year.  "Simply put," said Mr. Nelson, "It's time to move on."  Senator Nelson was considered a Midwestern political moderate.  The 70 year old former insurance executive also spent two terms as Nebraska governor.  He spent the better part of the fall pondering the decision whether or not to run for re-election or simply retire.  Democrats had already spent considerable money in his defense and to encourage him to run for Senator again.  Senator Ben Nelson won his first Senate seat in 2000, replacing retiring Senator Bob Kerrey, a former Vietnam veteran. 

Senator Nelson is the seventh member of the Democratic caucus to announce his decision to retire next year.  Other Senators tht have announced they were stepping down next year are Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, and Jim Webb of Virginia, to name a few.  Senator Nelson, the only Democrat to hold a statewide office in Nebraska, enjoyed immense popularity there until he was one of the last Democratic senators to cast his vote for President Obama's health care overhaul.  Since then, he's endured intense criticism for backing Obamacare. 

Click on the above link from the New York Times to read the full story of Senator Ben Nelson's decision to not run for re-election in 2012.

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Christ was Foreordained to be the Perfect Sacrifice For Mankind

(I Peter 1:19-20) "But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you."

This past month I've been writing a series of posts entitled, "Jesus Was Born Into This World to Die For the Sins of Mankind."  As I was writing these posts I was thinking about the scripture from I Peter 1:19, 20.  I presented a historical background from the second and third chapters from the book of Genesis.  I was giving the example of Adam and Eve who partook of the forbidden fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.  In order to understand why Jesus came into this world to die for the sins of mankind, you must go to the very beginning in the book of Genesis.  It was the sin of Adam that plunged the whole human race into sin.  As a result, there was the need for a Savior to come into this world to be the perfect, spotless sacrifice to die upon Calvary's cross in order that man might be redeemed.

When I was reading this verse of scripture several days ago, I was thinking about the love of God that was manifested to man.  One thing you will never be able to explain is the love of God towards mankind.  Why would God, in his foreknowledge, choose for Christ to be the perfect, spotless sacrifice to die upon Calvary's cross for the sins of mankind prior to the creation of man?  Why would God do that?  That's a mystery that the most keen intellect will never be able to comprehend.  One could understand God creating Adam and then Adam, unbeknowst to God, sin and God making the decision to send the Lamb of God from Heaven to atone for the sins of mankind.  You could see God making the decision after the fact to one day send Jesus to this world to redeem makind.  However, one cannot fathom with his own mortal mind God, in his infinite wisdom, deciding before the foundation of the earth was laid to send Christ to be the perfect sacrifice for man.  That doesn't make sense.  Who in their right mind would ever create something if they knew ahead of time that creation would be more costly than it ever would be profitable?  In the business realm what entrepreneur would create a product to place on the market if they knew it would generate no sales?  Nobody would.  Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple who died recently was known for creating such technological devices as the Apple Mac, the i-pad, the i-pod, etc.  They've all been successful on the market.  Would Steve Jobs have created those products if he knew prior to inventing them that they would never sell?  Would Steve Jobs have created those products if he knew he would spend far more money and time into creating those products than what the dividends would generate?  No, he wouldn't.  No entrepreneur in their right mind would invest money into something if they knew it would fail.  Would Thomas Edison have created the light bulb if he knew he wouldn't make a profit from it?  I highly doubt it.  In the business world, you invest money into things that you believe will make you profitable.  In the business world, you have to think in terms of what will make money.  The purpose of a business is to make money.  Any type of endeavor that doesn't generate a profit is money lost.

When we ponder the fact that God had foreordained Christ to one day come to this earth to die on Calvary's cross, that should cause us to rejoice.  I'm very thankful that God didn't have the mindset of a businessman when he made the decision in his infinite wisdom to choose Christ to be that perfect sacrifice.  God knew that Adam would sin and plunge the whole human race into sin.  God knew the heartache that man would cause him.  God knew the price Jesus would pay for the sins of mankind on Calvary.  God was not looking into the numbers game when he created man.  The creation of man wasn't profitable to God.  What was profitable about the creation of man when God knew that man would one day reject God and live according to his own will.  The Bible says that God's angry with the wicked every day.  Why would God create man that would one day choose the path of sin and mock his creator?  That doesn't make sense to the human mind.  God doesn't need man.  God doesn't need us.  He has both Jesus and the Holy Spirit to fellowship with.  God also has the angels he can fellowship with.  To top it all off God could've annihilated man and created another race to worship and serve him.  What's so special about man to God, other than the fact he created man in his likeness?  When you consider the depths of the love of God toward man, you can't explain it.  There was nothing profitable about the creation of mankind to God.  It caused Jesus everything upon Calvary's cross to redeem man.  Just for depraved man.  God even knew that only a few would ever accept the free gift given by God.  Matthew 7:13, 14 speaks of the strait and narrow gate and only a few would ever find eternal life.  Most people on this earth will choose the broad path instead of the strait path that leads to eternal life.  In the midst of that God still foreordained Christ before the foundation of the earth was laid to be the perfect sacrifice for mankind.  That's a mystery man will never understand.  It doesn't make sense to man that Jesus would've died if only one person got saved.  It doesn't make sense to mortal man because we think of things in terms of numbers.  God was thinking in terms of numbers when he sent Christ to this earth.  We have so much to thank him for and rejoice in. 

When you consider the fact that God doesn't need man, it should cause us to desire to worship and serve him.  He went out of his way for us so that one day we could inherit eternal life.  Of all people he chose for Christ to die for sinful man.  That's love one can't begin to comprehend.  I'm thankful that God doesn't value man in the way mankind values people.  God didn't think in terms of utilitarianism, or that which is profitable when creating man.  The creation of mankind wasn't profitable to God.  Not only those that choose to reject Christ, but even those that are his children.  Those of us that are saved have been a disappointment to God.  Read about the men in the Bible who loved God but yet disappointed him at times such as Samson, Lot, or King David, who was a man after God's own heart.  King David disappointed God when he had ordered Uriah the Hittite to be killed and committed adultery with Bathsheba.  David also sinned when he numbered the people of Israel.  God's people at time go astray and that brings heartache to God.  When you considered how disappointing God's people are to him at times, it's amazing he would've sent Jesus to Calvary.  According to man's thinking, it would've been natural for God to decide to not create man at all because of man's rejection toward God throughout the ages as well as the fact even God's children have disappointed God.  In spite of the fact that God knew before the creation of man that man would choose the path of sin and that even those that are redeemed would disappoint him at times, he made the choice to send Christ to this earth to redeem man before the foundation of this earth was laid.  We can't even begin to comprehend the love of God towards man.  I'm glad he loves us in spite of us or he would've destroyed man a long time ago.  The love of God should compel us to desire to serve him.  God's good.  You'll never be able to explain or comprehend the love of God in a thousand lifetimes. 

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Perry Shifts Views On Abortion, Opposes Exceptions

Perry Shifts Views On Abortion, Opposes Exceptions Fox News

Rick Perry clutching fistTexas Governor and 2012 presidential candidate speaking during a campaign stop at the Glenn Miller Museum in Clarinda, Iowa

As the Iowa Caucus is only seven days away, Texas Governor and presidential candidate Rick Perry has shifted his position on abortion.  Not only is he "opposed" to abortion, he's opposed to abortion--no exceptions!.  At least that's what he now says since he's trying to drum up support in Iowa during the closing days of the Iowa campaign.  Perry says he's now opposed to abortion even in cases of rape, incest, and even if a woman's life is in danger.  Perry says his change of heart is the result of a meeting he had with a woman whose mother was raped and whose story was part of an abortion documentary screened by former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.  Perry claims the encounter caused him to think about abortion and now he opposes abortion in all forms--at least to the voters in Iowa anyway.  Once the Iowa caucus is over with, Perry may alter his position on abortion when he tries to sway voters in New Hampshire, the nation's first presidential primary each election cycle.  Social conservatives play a vital role in this state so Perry's trying to win the hearts of voters.  In 2008, Mike Huckabee scored a surprising win in the Iowa caucus. 

It's difficult for me to take these GOP candidates seriously.  They'll say whatever it takes to win an election.  They want the issue for campaign purposes, but they don't have any intention to solve the problem.  As of right now, Texas Congressman Ron Paul has the lead in Iowa as of right now.  The Iowa caucus is a week from today. 

Monday, December 26, 2011

House GOP Passes 2-Month Extension of Payroll Tax Cut

House GOP Eats Humble Pie, Passes 2-Month Extension of Payroll Tax Cut

oehnerHouse Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) surrounded by reporters after exiting a House vote on the payroll tax cut on Friday December 23, 2011.

After weeks of so-called partisan bickering, the GOP House along with the Democratic-controlled Senate, extended the payroll tax cut extension to 160 million workers along with unemployment benefits to those who are laid off.  After the extension was passed, President Obama and his family finally traveled to Hawaii for his Christmas vacation.  This extension will keep in place a 2 percentage point cut in the payroll tax.  It's a salary boost of about $20 a week for an average worker making $50,000 a year along with preventing laid off workers from losing their jobless benefits averaging $300 a week.  What a deal!  Why just settle for a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut.  How about abolishing the current tax code and drastically revamping it.  This is a joke.  There's no excuse in the amount of tax dollars that's paid to Washington every year when you recognize all the waste and fraud that takes place with our tax dollars.  The reason for these stupid "debates" over the tax-cut extension is because they're all about controlling the American people when it comes to their money.  Congress can't take away enough of our money.  All these partisan squabblings are phony. 

Voters who live in the 8th district in the state of Ohio need to vote out House Speaker John Boehner in next year's election.  Republicans need to find a strong candidate to challenge Boehner next year in the primary.  Boehner is a RINO who does nothing but roll over for Obama.  His loyalties aren't to the American people.  Last year he was putting on a facade when he was crying before Leslie Stahl in a 60 Minutes interview last year stating that he wants young people to have a chance to live the American dream and be successful in their walk of life.  I'm not trying to sound harsh or judgmental toward Boehner but he hasn't stood for the American people in Congress.  He hasn't pushed Congress to defund Obamacare or all the socialist programs from the Obama administration.  He's just a go-along-to-get-along politician.  Boehner's not doing anything in Congress which will help the next few generations of Americans in years to come.  He's part of the problem in Washington.  Next year we need to vote out these Washington politicians in droves in next year's election.

Click on the article CNS to read the full story.

Sunday, December 25, 2011

Jesus--The Greatest Gift


(John 3:16) "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."  I want to extend this time to wish all the bloggers and blog readers a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.  I hope your Christmas is a very joyous time today as we remember the birth of our saviour and Lord Jesus Christ.  Even though Christmas is on a Sunday this year, it's still very important to be in attendance at the House of God.  What a better way to celebrate Christmas than to celebrate it in the House of God today.  Even though many people will be gathering at their families' houses today, it's still important to be faithful to church. 

During the Christmas season many people go shopping to and fro to retail stores to purchase Christmas gifts for their loved ones.  One of the busiest times of years in the retail market is during the Christmas season starting with Black Friday the day after Thanksgiving all the way to December 26, the day after Christmas.  Christmas is a very commercialized time of year.  There's so much emphasis upon gifts and what we desire for Christmas that we don't take time to ponder the most important gift ever given to us in this world.  That gift is none other than Jesus coming down to this earth in a robe of flesh to be born of a Virgin named Mary.  There's no greater gift.  Jesus came to this earth as God incarnate--both God and man without sin.  That's a mystery because there's no way that man can be born naturally without sin.  That's why Jesus' birth wasn't natural.  Mary wasn't impregnated through the means of mortal man.  Mary was impregnated through the Holy Ghost, which isn't naturally possible.  However, with God all things are possible.  Jesus couldn't have been born as a spotless lamb had he been born through natural means.  That's why he was born through the Holy Ghost.  This process of conception is known as the Immaculate Conception.  Jesus would've been a sinner had he been born through Joseph or any other mortal man.  Ever since the fall of the human race, the seed of sin is passed down through man every time a woman conceives.  The Psalmist David says that in sin did my mother conceive me (Psalms 51:5).  Every child is born in sin through conception.  However, Christ's conception was supernatural and as a result he was no natural man.  He was robed in flesh and understood the temptation that man had undergone but yet he was without sin.  That made him the perfect candidate to walk up Calvary's hill and die upon a cross so man could be redeemed from sin. 

I've heard preachers preach for a number of years that Jesus is the gift that keeps on giving.  That is very true.  He is the gift that keeps on giving.  Out of all the gifts that mankind has received throughout the ages, there's no greater gift than God sending his Son Jesus to this world so that one day mankind would be redeemed from sin.  There's not a greater gift given than Jesus laying down his life for mankind.  He willingly gave his life for us so that we might one day know the free pardon from sin.  As a result of the fall of Adam, mankind was plunged into sin and for four thousand years the high priest had to offer animal sacrifices in the Holy of Holies as a means to cover the sins of mankind.  However, animal sacrifices weren't meant to be a permanent solution to atone for the sins of mankind.  Animal sacrifices only covered the sins of man.  They were sacrificed once a year.  This process had to be offered continually.  However, when Jesus died, he paid the price for our sins only once (I Peter 3:18).  Jesus doesn't have to continually go upon Calvary's cross to die on a yearly basis for the sins of mankind.  Once was enough for Christ.  His sacrifice is sufficient for time and eternity.  Jesus will never again have to come down to this earth as a mortal man to die for the sins of mankind.  That's what Christ did at his first appearing.  When Jesus comes the second time, he will be crowned the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  He will be king the second time he comes.  Those that are saved will live with Christ forever and ever.  What a blessing!

There's no greater gift than you can receive than Jesus.  All the material goods of this world will one day fade away.  However, the gift of Jesus still stands.  It's still just as good today as it was when he died on Calvary.  Jesus still today saves sinners and any man that will come to him, he will in no wise cast out (John 6:37).  The gift never grows old.  Most of the gifts we receive today in a materialistic form will one day be worthless.  The gifts in this world pale in comparison to the gift that God gave to this world over two thousand years ago.  The gift of God is still good today.  Jesus is still as relevant today as he was yesterday.  Jesus will never grow old and He will still be just as sufficient a thousand years from now as He is today.  There's no greater gift that has ever been given to mankind than Jesus.  Nothing compares to Jesus.  The gift of God will endure for eternity. 

The Real Story of Christmas

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5