Gingrich, Huntsman Play Nice in NH Debate
The GOP debate in New Hampshire was held on December 12, 2011. It was held at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire. I overlooked this particular debate so I'm posting this debate now.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
This particular debate featured former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman. This was a Lincoln-Douglas style debate.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Monday, December 19, 2011
Iraqis celebrate impending US withdrawal - Middle East - Al Jazeera English
Iraqis celebrate impending US withdrawal - Middle East - Al Jazeera English
Iraqi protesters burning the U.S. and Israeli flags in Fallujah
As the remaining vestiges of U.S. troops are scheduled to leave Iraq at the end of this year, thousands of protesters in the Iraqi city of Fallujah have taken to the streets to celebrate the impending U.S. withdrawal from Iraq at the end of this year, after more than 8.5 years since the Operate Iraqi Freedom began. Demonstrators rallied across the streets Wednesday, shouting slogans in support of the resistance, a reference to the campaign by Iraqi fighters in Fallujah which was a bastion of opposition against the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003. That shows you the kind of "thanks" we are receiving from the Iraqis after having liberated them from the throes of Saddam Hussein almost nine years ago. It doesn't make sense that the U.S. would spend as much time as they have in Iraq. What has the U.S. accomplished remaining in Iraq for that long? Nothing. I guarantee you the situation will grow worse once the complete removal of U.S. troops takes place. All our efforts to impose democracy in Iraq has failed. They may have free elections in Iraq, but what does it amount to? The people don't know how to rule their own country. Ever since Saddam's departure, Iraq has experienced all kinds of civil unrest between the Sunnis, Shia's, and the Kurds. There's too much ethnic division in Iraq. You can't bring democracy to a Muslim-dominated country. Democracy is another term for mob rule. It's the elite mobs that rule. The Iraqis will never experience true freedom in their country. They don't consider the U.S. as their allies. Over the last several years we've spend untolds billions in treausre and lost numerous U.S. soldiers in the name of freedom for the Iraqis. They're no more secure and safe today than they were five years ago as far as I'm concerned. The Iraqis don't even approve the sacrifice the U.S. soldiers have made on their behalf. The U.S. should've withdrawn from Iraq years ago. There was no reason for us to be in Iraq. It had nothing to do with 9/11. We've made billions of dollars for the U.S. defense contractors while fighting in Iraq. It was no benefit for the U.S. We can't fight and police the whole world.
Click on the above link to read about the Iraqis in Fallujah celebrating the impending U.S. withdrawal.
Iraqi protesters burning the U.S. and Israeli flags in FallujahAs the remaining vestiges of U.S. troops are scheduled to leave Iraq at the end of this year, thousands of protesters in the Iraqi city of Fallujah have taken to the streets to celebrate the impending U.S. withdrawal from Iraq at the end of this year, after more than 8.5 years since the Operate Iraqi Freedom began. Demonstrators rallied across the streets Wednesday, shouting slogans in support of the resistance, a reference to the campaign by Iraqi fighters in Fallujah which was a bastion of opposition against the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003. That shows you the kind of "thanks" we are receiving from the Iraqis after having liberated them from the throes of Saddam Hussein almost nine years ago. It doesn't make sense that the U.S. would spend as much time as they have in Iraq. What has the U.S. accomplished remaining in Iraq for that long? Nothing. I guarantee you the situation will grow worse once the complete removal of U.S. troops takes place. All our efforts to impose democracy in Iraq has failed. They may have free elections in Iraq, but what does it amount to? The people don't know how to rule their own country. Ever since Saddam's departure, Iraq has experienced all kinds of civil unrest between the Sunnis, Shia's, and the Kurds. There's too much ethnic division in Iraq. You can't bring democracy to a Muslim-dominated country. Democracy is another term for mob rule. It's the elite mobs that rule. The Iraqis will never experience true freedom in their country. They don't consider the U.S. as their allies. Over the last several years we've spend untolds billions in treausre and lost numerous U.S. soldiers in the name of freedom for the Iraqis. They're no more secure and safe today than they were five years ago as far as I'm concerned. The Iraqis don't even approve the sacrifice the U.S. soldiers have made on their behalf. The U.S. should've withdrawn from Iraq years ago. There was no reason for us to be in Iraq. It had nothing to do with 9/11. We've made billions of dollars for the U.S. defense contractors while fighting in Iraq. It was no benefit for the U.S. We can't fight and police the whole world.
Click on the above link to read about the Iraqis in Fallujah celebrating the impending U.S. withdrawal.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Jesus Was Born Into This World to Die For the Sins of Mankind (Part 2)
In the last post we were giving an introduction to this series of posts about Jesus being born into this world to die for the sins of mankind. During the Christmas season, we set aside this time to remember Christ being born into this world in a manger scene. We read about the Wise Men searching for Jesus to bring gifts to him. I'm very thankful for the blessed day when Jesus came into this world for the very first time. Even though there is some dispute among some in the religious world concerning the celebration of Christmas on December 25, Christ was still born into this world and that's worth commemorating regardless when we celebrate it. If Jesus was never born, then Jesus would've never went to Calvary's cross to die for the sins of mankind. As I've stated repeatedly over the years, there had to be a birth in order for there to be a death, burial, and resurrection. It's proper and fitting to celebrate the birth of Christ. Christ's birth fulfills the various prophecies in the Old Testament which states there would be a Messiah to come into this world to deliver mankind from the threshold of sin.
I want to now focus our attention in Genesis chapters 2 and 3 concerning the fall of mankind. In Genesis 2:7 we read where God formed Adam from the dust of the ground. He took Adam to put him into the Garden of Eden to dress it and keep it. The reason why Jesus had to come into this world to die for the sins of mankind is because of Adam's sin when he and Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit, which God told Adam in Genesis 2 he wasn't to touch. God told Adam that before God took a rib from Adam's side to form Eve. God had told Adam in Genesis 2:17 about the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and he told Adam not to partake of it. The day he did so, he would surely die. In Genesis 2:21-25 we read the account where God caused Adam to be put into a deep sleep and he took a rib out of Adam to form Eve. Adam had called her a woman because she was taken out of man. Adam said this is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh (Genesis 2:23). Anybody in liberal religious circles that want to dispute the subject of "gay marriage" need to read the last few verses in Genesis. God instituted the family unit in these verses and his intention was for man and woman to be joined together. It's Adam and Eve--not Adam and Steve.
In Genesis 3:1-3:7, we read, "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree in the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, let ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day that ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons." It's amazing how tricky the Devil is. He twisted the statement God told Adam and that was the day ye eat of the tree ye shall surely die. The Devil told them that it wasn't so and that the day they ate of the fruit their eyes would be opened and they shall be as gods. The Devil is sly in the sense he uses half-truths to twist statements around. It was true when he said their eyes would be opened if they partook of the fruit. What wasn't true was when the Devil told them they should be as gods. They weren't as gods. Their eyes were opened in the sense they no longer were in the state of innocence. They learned what sin was when they partook of the forbidden fruit.
When Adam and Eve disobeyed God and partook of the forbidden fruit, they plunged the whole human race into sin. They were to learn what the curse of sin was. When they first partook of the fruit, they were embarrassed of their nakedness and as a result they sewed themselves fig leaves together to make aprons. Also, they were afraid of God when he called on them. Adam also tried to hide himself from the presence of the Lord. Why would he do that? He did that because sin had separated him from God. Adam no longer was able to have sweet communion with God because of disobedience. The fellowship he had with God was no longer the same. Another thing that took place as a result of their sin was God told them that he would curse the ground and thorns and thistles would grow (Genesis 3:17-19). The beasts of the field also would be cursed. Adam would also return to the dust of the ground as a result of his sin before God. The sting of sin is death, not only spiritually but physically. If Adam hadn't partaken of the fruit, he would've lived forever. God didn't create man to die. It was the curse of sin that brought death to man. Another result from the curse of sin was that there would be great pain in childbearing whenever Eve would conceive (Genesis 3:16). God also said that Eve's desire would be to her husband and he would rule over her. Finally, God drove both Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden. God placed Cherubims there, with a flaming sword turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
In the midst of their sin, God made a promise to Eve in Genesis 3:15 where God would put enmity between the serpent and the woman. There would come a day when a Saviour would come into this world to die upon Calvary's cross to reclaim man and save him from sin. One of these days Satan would be defeated as a result of Christ's dying upon Calvary's cross. God would redeem man so that one day man could have fellowship with God once again and that man would go to Heaven for eternity when he dies. What a promise!
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Senate Passes Short-Term Payroll Tax Cut Extension
Senate Passes Short-Term Payroll Tax Cut Extension Fox News
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, accompanied by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) They speak to reports about extending the payroll tax cut in Washington, D.C.
The Senate approved this morning by a vote of 89-10 a short-term payroll tax cut extension, which means the American people will still enjoy a two percentage point cut from their Social Security tax. The Democrats wanted to add a millionaire surtax to finance the measure but abandoned that provision because of the possibility of deepening gridlock on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers had decided on a two-month extension after they were unable to agree on how to finance the tax cut through the next election. The $40 billion two-month package uses fee hikes on new mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Also, the jobless benefits payments average $300 to millions of Americans out of work six months or more will still be continued.
One of the key provisions that the Republicans were able to secure was a provision to force President Obama to make a decision within the next 60 days on the fate of the Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline. The administration had earlier delayed the project because of "supposed" concerns over environmental issues and safety, although the unions support it and it could create thousands of jobs. Truthfully speaking, the issue has nothing to do with the environment as much as it does with the government controlling America's choices of energy to run the country. The Obama administration is trying to control the American people through energy and in turn force the prices of oil to climb even higher. They don't want the American people to be energy-independent. They want America to be dependent upon oil from overseas.
As far as the payroll tax cut issue is concerned, theoretically there shouldn't be a payroll tax. Social Security is nothing but a Ponzi scheme as Texas Governor Rick Perry rightfully pointed out in a previous presidential debate. I'm not opposed to a Social Security trust fund for Americans, but the federal government shouldn't be in charge of it. The American people shouldn't be paying that much in payroll taxes. The problem's not there isn't enough money to finance Social Security. The problem is our elected elite has stolen that money and used it for other projects over the last several decades. Social Security's a fraud the way the government has administered it. No sane American would invest more money into an IRA than what they draw from it. However, we as Americans pay far more into the system than what we're reaping from it. It's a fraud and we need to take Social Security away from the federal government. WE can't trust them with our dollars.
We need the Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline in order to not only create new jobs for workers, but also so Americans can use their own energy resources to finance our lifestyle. There's no excuse for America to be purchasing our oil from the Middle East when we can produce our own oil. It's nothing but a means for the government to dictate to the American public what they can and can't use for their energy resources. It's nothing but fascism.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, accompanied by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) They speak to reports about extending the payroll tax cut in Washington, D.C.The Senate approved this morning by a vote of 89-10 a short-term payroll tax cut extension, which means the American people will still enjoy a two percentage point cut from their Social Security tax. The Democrats wanted to add a millionaire surtax to finance the measure but abandoned that provision because of the possibility of deepening gridlock on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers had decided on a two-month extension after they were unable to agree on how to finance the tax cut through the next election. The $40 billion two-month package uses fee hikes on new mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Also, the jobless benefits payments average $300 to millions of Americans out of work six months or more will still be continued.
One of the key provisions that the Republicans were able to secure was a provision to force President Obama to make a decision within the next 60 days on the fate of the Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline. The administration had earlier delayed the project because of "supposed" concerns over environmental issues and safety, although the unions support it and it could create thousands of jobs. Truthfully speaking, the issue has nothing to do with the environment as much as it does with the government controlling America's choices of energy to run the country. The Obama administration is trying to control the American people through energy and in turn force the prices of oil to climb even higher. They don't want the American people to be energy-independent. They want America to be dependent upon oil from overseas.
As far as the payroll tax cut issue is concerned, theoretically there shouldn't be a payroll tax. Social Security is nothing but a Ponzi scheme as Texas Governor Rick Perry rightfully pointed out in a previous presidential debate. I'm not opposed to a Social Security trust fund for Americans, but the federal government shouldn't be in charge of it. The American people shouldn't be paying that much in payroll taxes. The problem's not there isn't enough money to finance Social Security. The problem is our elected elite has stolen that money and used it for other projects over the last several decades. Social Security's a fraud the way the government has administered it. No sane American would invest more money into an IRA than what they draw from it. However, we as Americans pay far more into the system than what we're reaping from it. It's a fraud and we need to take Social Security away from the federal government. WE can't trust them with our dollars.
We need the Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline in order to not only create new jobs for workers, but also so Americans can use their own energy resources to finance our lifestyle. There's no excuse for America to be purchasing our oil from the Middle East when we can produce our own oil. It's nothing but a means for the government to dictate to the American public what they can and can't use for their energy resources. It's nothing but fascism.
Michael Savage Offers Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich $1 Million to Drop Out of Race
Michael Savage offers Gingrich $1 million to drop out of race
GOP Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich in a debate on December 12, 2011
I read an interesting article from World Net Daily just a few minutes ago that I think is worth sharing. You can click on the link above to read the details of the story. Earlier this past week radio talk show host Michael Savage offered former House Speaker and 2012 presidential candidate Newt Gingrich $1 million dollars to drop out of the presidential race within 72 hours. That was from the time Savage made this comment which was earlier in the week. Savage rightly noted that Americans can't stand another four years of Barack Obama and that Newt Gingrich needs to step aside from the 2012 presidential race. Savage stated that if Gingrich loves this country then he needs to set his ego aside and accept Savage's offer. He also stated while former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney isn't a strong conservative himself, Gingrich doesn't stand a chance to beat President Obama. Savage said, "His (Gingrich) continued candidacy spells nothing but ruin for conservatives, Republicans, and all true American patriots," he continued. "One million dollars in exchange for preserving the nation, Newt. I say take the money... and don't run." Savage noted that the most pressing issue for next year's presidential race is to defeat President Obama, and that's something Newt Gingrich cannot do."
I say "amen" to Savage's assessment of Newt Gingrich's candidacy. Newt doesn't stand a chance of beating Obama. On top of that Gingrich is a RINO himself. You can't trust him. He's content with big-government himself. Early this morning I was listening to a repeat radio program of Glenn Beck's from earlier this week. He was interviewing Newt Gingrich. Newt Gingrich told Glenn that his philosophy paralleled that of former president Theodore Roosevelt, who was a Progressive Republican early in the 20th century. Beck properly noted that Progressives are in both parties: both Democrat and Republican. The Progressive movement back in the early 20th century believed in the philosophy of big government and massive government intervention. Newt Gingrich is content with the growth of big government. He won't decrease the size of government. It will continue growing under him as president as it did under former president George W. Bush. Gingrich has been very wishy-washy on certain issues. He speaks against Obamacare, but favors the mandate that Americans should be required to purchase healthcare. Newt also appeared in a global warming ad with former house speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2008. Gingrich suppors amnesty for illegal aliens and he called the Republican plan, crafted by Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) as "right-wing social engineering." What a reliable candidate for president of the United States!
I've already predicted that Barack Obama will be re-elected as president of the United States next November. I will guarantee you that will be a given if Gingrich is the GOP nominee next year. Gingrich is an imposter. He took hundreds of thousands of dollars from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are two of the most corrupt financial institutions in America. I guarantee you if he's the nominee, the Democrats will feature all sorts of attack ads exposing some of Gingrich's dirty dealings. Gingrich is a Washington insider who's part of the problem. We don't need another RINO for president. I hope he doesn't get chosen to face Obama next November. As much as I don't care for Mitt Romney, I'll vote for Romney before I vote for Gingrich. On the other hand, there's no question that Newt Gingrich is an intellectually brilliant man. He's written numerous books. He's taught college courses on history. He's done a great job heading up the organization "American Solutions for Winning the Future." He can better serve American by involving himself with that organization than running for president. Newt Gingrich and politics don't mix. He would be a disaster. I will echo Savage's comment: Gingrich needs to step aside for the sake of the country. He will not beat President Obama next November.
GOP Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich in a debate on December 12, 2011I read an interesting article from World Net Daily just a few minutes ago that I think is worth sharing. You can click on the link above to read the details of the story. Earlier this past week radio talk show host Michael Savage offered former House Speaker and 2012 presidential candidate Newt Gingrich $1 million dollars to drop out of the presidential race within 72 hours. That was from the time Savage made this comment which was earlier in the week. Savage rightly noted that Americans can't stand another four years of Barack Obama and that Newt Gingrich needs to step aside from the 2012 presidential race. Savage stated that if Gingrich loves this country then he needs to set his ego aside and accept Savage's offer. He also stated while former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney isn't a strong conservative himself, Gingrich doesn't stand a chance to beat President Obama. Savage said, "His (Gingrich) continued candidacy spells nothing but ruin for conservatives, Republicans, and all true American patriots," he continued. "One million dollars in exchange for preserving the nation, Newt. I say take the money... and don't run." Savage noted that the most pressing issue for next year's presidential race is to defeat President Obama, and that's something Newt Gingrich cannot do."
I say "amen" to Savage's assessment of Newt Gingrich's candidacy. Newt doesn't stand a chance of beating Obama. On top of that Gingrich is a RINO himself. You can't trust him. He's content with big-government himself. Early this morning I was listening to a repeat radio program of Glenn Beck's from earlier this week. He was interviewing Newt Gingrich. Newt Gingrich told Glenn that his philosophy paralleled that of former president Theodore Roosevelt, who was a Progressive Republican early in the 20th century. Beck properly noted that Progressives are in both parties: both Democrat and Republican. The Progressive movement back in the early 20th century believed in the philosophy of big government and massive government intervention. Newt Gingrich is content with the growth of big government. He won't decrease the size of government. It will continue growing under him as president as it did under former president George W. Bush. Gingrich has been very wishy-washy on certain issues. He speaks against Obamacare, but favors the mandate that Americans should be required to purchase healthcare. Newt also appeared in a global warming ad with former house speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2008. Gingrich suppors amnesty for illegal aliens and he called the Republican plan, crafted by Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) as "right-wing social engineering." What a reliable candidate for president of the United States!
I've already predicted that Barack Obama will be re-elected as president of the United States next November. I will guarantee you that will be a given if Gingrich is the GOP nominee next year. Gingrich is an imposter. He took hundreds of thousands of dollars from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are two of the most corrupt financial institutions in America. I guarantee you if he's the nominee, the Democrats will feature all sorts of attack ads exposing some of Gingrich's dirty dealings. Gingrich is a Washington insider who's part of the problem. We don't need another RINO for president. I hope he doesn't get chosen to face Obama next November. As much as I don't care for Mitt Romney, I'll vote for Romney before I vote for Gingrich. On the other hand, there's no question that Newt Gingrich is an intellectually brilliant man. He's written numerous books. He's taught college courses on history. He's done a great job heading up the organization "American Solutions for Winning the Future." He can better serve American by involving himself with that organization than running for president. Newt Gingrich and politics don't mix. He would be a disaster. I will echo Savage's comment: Gingrich needs to step aside for the sake of the country. He will not beat President Obama next November.
The Fox News Presidential Debate
Newt Leads GOP Out Of Debate Wilderness Fox News
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
This particular Fox News GOP debate was held in Sioux City, Iowa on December 15, 2011
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
This particular Fox News GOP debate was held in Sioux City, Iowa on December 15, 2011
Friday, December 16, 2011
Donald Trump Pulls Out of Moderating Iowa Debate
Donald Trump pulls out of moderating Iowa debate, leaves door open to run as independent candidate - NYPOST.com
Real Estate Mogul Donald Trump
Real estate mogul Donald Trump has decided to pull out of a Republican debate he had agreed to moderate in Iowa later this month after most of the candidates turned down his invitation to participate, according to sources from Fox News Channel Tuesday. The only Republican candidates that agreed to participate in the Iowa debate are former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The other Republican candidates declined to participate. In a statement to Fox News, Trump attributed the low attendance to the possibility that he might launch his own independent run for the White House. Trump declared since he wasn't willing to give up his right to run as independent candidate, he decided to pull out of moderating the debate so there wouldn't be "a conflict of interest within the Republican party." He also stated that the American people are embarrassed by the gridlock that's taking place within Washington and that he must leave all his options open because above all else we must make America a great nation again.
Donald Trump was supposed to be the moderate of a Newsmax debate held on Tuesday December 27, 2011. As of right now, Newsmax, a conservative publication, has determined to postpone the debate originally scheduled December 27th until an undetermined date. I personally believe the reason why most of the Republican presidential candidates declined to participate in the Newsmax debate is because they don't want to have to answer questions that Trump would bring to the debate. Trump asks the questions that need to be asked such as the birth certificate issue he mentioned earlier this past Spring. I've questioned whether or not Trump is an Obama operative designed to spoil next year's presidential election, but regardless whether he does or doesn't, he'll ask the questions that need to be asked such as the subject of "free trade" and the loss of numerous manufacturing jobs to other countries. He'll also ask questions about illegal immigration that the Republican candidates probably don't desire to be asked. There have been questions that the mainstream media (including Fox News) refuse to ask. I'm not surprised that most of the GOP candidates have declined to participate in the debate on December 27, 2011. They don't want any questions of accountability and these candidates aren't about winning next year's election. They're are running as a filler candidate for the Republican opposition next year. These debates are nothing but a joke.
Real Estate Mogul Donald TrumpReal estate mogul Donald Trump has decided to pull out of a Republican debate he had agreed to moderate in Iowa later this month after most of the candidates turned down his invitation to participate, according to sources from Fox News Channel Tuesday. The only Republican candidates that agreed to participate in the Iowa debate are former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The other Republican candidates declined to participate. In a statement to Fox News, Trump attributed the low attendance to the possibility that he might launch his own independent run for the White House. Trump declared since he wasn't willing to give up his right to run as independent candidate, he decided to pull out of moderating the debate so there wouldn't be "a conflict of interest within the Republican party." He also stated that the American people are embarrassed by the gridlock that's taking place within Washington and that he must leave all his options open because above all else we must make America a great nation again.
Donald Trump was supposed to be the moderate of a Newsmax debate held on Tuesday December 27, 2011. As of right now, Newsmax, a conservative publication, has determined to postpone the debate originally scheduled December 27th until an undetermined date. I personally believe the reason why most of the Republican presidential candidates declined to participate in the Newsmax debate is because they don't want to have to answer questions that Trump would bring to the debate. Trump asks the questions that need to be asked such as the birth certificate issue he mentioned earlier this past Spring. I've questioned whether or not Trump is an Obama operative designed to spoil next year's presidential election, but regardless whether he does or doesn't, he'll ask the questions that need to be asked such as the subject of "free trade" and the loss of numerous manufacturing jobs to other countries. He'll also ask questions about illegal immigration that the Republican candidates probably don't desire to be asked. There have been questions that the mainstream media (including Fox News) refuse to ask. I'm not surprised that most of the GOP candidates have declined to participate in the debate on December 27, 2011. They don't want any questions of accountability and these candidates aren't about winning next year's election. They're are running as a filler candidate for the Republican opposition next year. These debates are nothing but a joke.
A Charlie Brown Christmas
A Charlie Brown Christmas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Meaning of Christmas
I know I've already shown this Charlie Brown Christmas twice, but I strongly feel it bears repeating. What is so special about this particular Christmas production? The story is centered around Charlie Brown trying to learn what the true meaning of Christmas is all about. Charlie Brown was trying to discover the true meaning of Christmas despite all the commercialization involved with the Christmas season. In this segment, Linus explains what the true meaning of Christmas is all about by reciting the Christmas story in Luke 2. What's fascinating about the story of this particular show is that network executives didn't want the recitation of Jesus birth aired on the Charlie Brown Christmas special. However, Charles Schultz, the creator of the Peanuts gang, felt it was crucial that the true meaning of Christmas to be presented so that viewers can know that Christmas centers around the birth of Jesus. I've always enjoyed this Christmas special every since I was a young boy
The Meaning of Christmas
I know I've already shown this Charlie Brown Christmas twice, but I strongly feel it bears repeating. What is so special about this particular Christmas production? The story is centered around Charlie Brown trying to learn what the true meaning of Christmas is all about. Charlie Brown was trying to discover the true meaning of Christmas despite all the commercialization involved with the Christmas season. In this segment, Linus explains what the true meaning of Christmas is all about by reciting the Christmas story in Luke 2. What's fascinating about the story of this particular show is that network executives didn't want the recitation of Jesus birth aired on the Charlie Brown Christmas special. However, Charles Schultz, the creator of the Peanuts gang, felt it was crucial that the true meaning of Christmas to be presented so that viewers can know that Christmas centers around the birth of Jesus. I've always enjoyed this Christmas special every since I was a young boy
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Christmas Songs by Kate Smith
Kate Smith, who popularized the song, "God Bless America" will be featured in this post singing some of your favorite Christmas songs.
O Holy Night
Silver Bells
White Christmas
Kate Smith the Christmas Song 1960
O Holy Night
Silver Bells
White Christmas
Kate Smith the Christmas Song 1960
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Christmas Songs by Burl Ives
White Christmas
A Holly Jolly Christmas
Happy Birthday Jesus- Christmas Prayer
Christmas is a Birthday
Christmas Can't be Far Away
A Holly Jolly Christmas
Happy Birthday Jesus- Christmas Prayer
Christmas is a Birthday
Christmas Can't be Far Away
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)