People who are still convinced that McCain's chances of winning are dim should take note to just four years ago. At this time four years ago, Bush was getting beat by more than 150 electoral votes, and trailed by 5-10% in most polls. I know things are different now, but I would watch how polls will change once the vice-president nominees are in place.
By the way, what is up with Obama skipping his trip with wounded troops? He has no problem standing in front of thousands of screaming German citizens, with anti-American foriegn leaders, and 'ahem' plenty of photo oppurtunities, but wounded troops seem to be a problem. Makes me wonder who he really cares about. I have a least had admiration for his promises of hope and change, but I'm starting to see the ray of light that keeps telling me that this is only 'Barack Obama Publicity' tour. This is the same guy that is still in denial about the progress due to the surge mind you. Maybe more sad is that Liberals will actually belive him and defend that the surge has failed to the end of their lives. Go ahead, try to say that the surge didn't work. If John Murtha has said he saw progress from the surge, then Obama has serious issues. Hopefully America will see what this guy is saying soon.
Linkbar
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Election Junkie Pages:
Projection Pages:
Favorite Links:
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(78)
-
▼
July
(10)
- McCain Not in Bad Shape Yet, Obama Did What?
- Pelosi, Bush Battle
- Obama Extends Lead, New Insider Truths Feature
- John McCain Rising
- Projection Moved to Friday, New Insider Truths Arg...
- When asked about Obama's accomplishments...
- Next Projections, Insider Truths Update
- Happy Birthday America!
- New: Insider Truths
- New Projections are Here...
-
▼
July
(10)
26 comments:
Obama in denial the 'surge of troops' worked? Let's analyze it.
Obama is down (ontheissues.org) as voting that troops be withdrawn in March 2008. HAD that withdrawl actually come to be (of course we say thank God it did not) but had our great troops left in March...
I guarantee we would not have seen Obama visiting Iraq in July 2008.
Can the evidence be clearer?
THE SURGE worked. (with all thanks to our troops and GOD who led them in wisdom)
How much plainer can it be? The Surge worked. Sunni's are back at Iraq's legislative table, 15 of 18 benchmarks are pretty much met, children are playing openly in the streets. Al Queida is pretty much
gone from the scene and the Iran militants are not coming over the border. Is it 'perfect' yet? No.
but when mothers let thier children play ball in the street, and U.S. soldiers talk to those children...I'd say 'the surge worked.'
p.s. - as to Sen. Obama's call for
'change' ... remember this: what Sen. Obama calls 'change' ... the American worker can call tax DOLLARS. Sen. Obama is trying to 'buy himself in' to the White House by giving giving giving.
Let's quote a democrat from the past: "ask not what your country can do for you...ask what YOU can do for your country." -- JFK.
ie: America does not 'give' people a livlihood (income) or health insurance, or any other THING...
AMERICA gives one FREEDOM (in the manner of GOD'S WAY who gave man a free will...what you do with that free will - is up to every individual. But this is truth: NO ONE ... NO ONE ...gets rich quick, and NO ONE gets rich by simply 'taking' ... if you want it, it takes WORK...
To give up freedom just to TAKE
something 'easily' is rather foolish. Hope more people wake up
to TRUTH.
Er. Why don't you go read the factcheck.org article on why Obama didn't visit the Landstuhl Medical Center.
Newsweek link
that didn't change a thing. It says he didn't because he was afraid it would be labeled political.
...which is saying he SNUBBED wounded troops because he didn't want to look bad.
So that it gets through your liberal skull...he put his own self in frpmt of the wounded troops.
Why try to argue?
to anonymous who showed the Newsweek link: in that article it
reads: "Obama visited wounded troops in Baghdad earlier in his overseas trip, but he did so without reporters and "without a lot of fanfare, just to say Thanks"
1. Sen. Obama had no authority to
be traveling in the Middle East talking to the leaders of Iraq and Iran...as though he has some sort of power already. Why did he go? Sen. McCain suggestion? AHHH...good to see Sen. Obama LISTENS to LEADERSHIP. That is as it transpired is it not? Sen. Obama went on the 'gentle persuasion of Sen. McCain?'
It's a sign of leadership when you can persuade another to do something. It's truth isn't it? Sen. Obama did not think about going til Sen. McCain persuaded him to. McCain...A LEADER.
As to Obama's going to Iraq, what else could he do but see the troops. (the article leaves the reader hanging a bit. He visited the wounded troops in Baghdad...well, I would think he would...they were RIGHT THERE)
But...exactly why did Obama go to Germany? If he said he went SPECIFICALLY to visit our troops,
well and good...but it appears he
simply wanted to make some speech.
...all those miles, political looking or not...if you CARE you
make the effort...and you just don't care how anyone else 'reads'
it.
Obama is making some serious political mistakes as you point out. This is exactly the reason why Hillary Clinton would have been a much better candidate. She never would have gone to Europe. She would have seen the injured soldiers. It astonishes me that he wouldn't tell the news crews to wait while he visited the injured soldiers. I mean why in the world would he do that? Obama will probably end up being a good President but as far as a candidate, he stinks. Political scientists across the nation are in awe of him because he has relatively little political skill, isn't a great public speaker, isn't a great debater. Yet somehow he has gone from state represenative to nominee for president of the United States in less than ten years. It's groundbreaking really. Still, the Republican Party lucked out by having him as an opponent rather than Hillary.
I just love this ... when the red state "rednecks" are pushed against the wall is when you see their TRUE colors. To the person who posted the factcheck link ... the "rednecks" don't CARE about the TRUTH. When they are about the be crushed ( a 60 vote Senate majority is NOW very possible) they will LIE, CHEAT, SMEAR ... they will do ANYTHING to try to cling on to power ... and for all their efforts, what will they accomplish? Well, since their LIES are being challenged by the press, all they are doing is pushing away the INDEPENDENTS ... if they keep it up, THIS will make their defeat COMPLETE!!
LOL
anonymous,
if you are so intent on the truth, then why can't you accept the fact that Obama didn't visit wounded troops for political reasons.
and why can't he just admit that the surge was a success and even the AP is now admitting we are winning, and are on the brink of complete victory in Iraq.
and yet Obama clings to the idea that his trip to the middle east, where progress was proven to him, ONLY reaffirms his belief that troops have to come home now.
pathetic
Nice going Jammin' ... why can't anonymous say a simple truth: "Iraq is going well" There is a peace (firm yet, no...all the more reason our troops need to stay put)
The SURGE worked. Terrorists do not have Iraq to kick around anymore. Evil was defeated OBJECTIVELY...
That's right; objectively...
How do you fight a global war on terror? Difficult thing. Where does one start? Well...how about starting where 'the good' were terrorized by a man named Saddam.
Where all three groups of Arabs live. If all three groups of a Middle East can live together, WHAT AN EXAMPLE for all the middle east. If all three groups say NO TO TERRORIST minds...guess what;
we've licked EVIL objectively.
Makes more sense than trying to subjectively go to this nation and
simply fight then that nation and then that and that and that...
ALL THREE GROUPS of Islamic Muslims
living together...Kurds, Shiite,
and Sunni's...it's absolutely
MIRACULOUS...
jammin' and dom: after at least 85,000 civilian casualties in iraq (and possibly much much more, according to Lancet and NEJM articles - there are credible estimates of more than half a million excess deaths), who knows how many wounded, more than 1.5 million refugees, and a couple million Iraqis displaced from their homes, out of a population of 27 million... you have the audacity to claim "complete victory" and "miraculous" results???
Plus more than 4000 US casualties and at least 30,000 US wounded. And a massive loss of US credibility and therefore ability to be helpful in other places.
Also, on the visiting wounded soldiers argument: Obama _has_ visited wounded soldiers. In Iraq and at Walter Reed. Both as low key, private visits. More important, one can ask how he votes on things important to wounded soldiers, and the answer is that he voted for a GI bill that expanded veteran's benefits. Which is more important to soldiers - a third visit in several weeks from a Senator/candidate, or real tangible bills from the Senate?
ps. Dom: Obama went to Iraq with several other Senators. Going to countries where we have significant military involvement is well within the purview of our elected representatives.
pps. Anonymous: calling people "rednecks" is not a good way to get them to listen to you, and betrays a rather narrow view of the world. You aren't helping your cause with your attitude.
to "anonymous" who says: "you have the audacity to claim "complete victory" and "miraculous" results???"
Nope...no where in my words did I say victory was yet COMPLETE. (go back and read again) I said:
"why can't anonymous say a simple truth: "Iraq is going well" There is a peace (firm yet, no...all the more reason our troops need to stay put)"
First paragraph...Iraq is going well,but there's not yet COMPLETE victory...all the more reason for our wonderful troops to stay put.
and yes, I do call this MIRACULOUS. When in a nation that once 'feared' each other if of a different group (Sunni, Shiite, Kurd) they now are all voting in one election and voting in REPS to
pass 'common good' laws; that such could happen...WHY YES...it is most definitely MIRACULOUS. (ie: GOD had to be part of this transformation)
and anonymous there are some veterans who believe in more than 'just' veteran's benefits:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/05/vets-group-plans-ads-touting-success-in-iraq/
4000 US casualties and 30,000 wounded is a lot of casualties anonymous...but tell me: HOW MANY casualties would there be had we NOT TAKEN Saddam out of commission?
In a war that went 5 years - that there is 'only' the numbers you mention says a lot was done right.
World War II - that 4 year war run by a democrat commander in chief
the number of casualties was...
CONSIDERABLY HIGHER. 60 MILLION I believe.
Would you rather have Saddam back in his position? How many lost lives would there be?
Really anonymous think it out
World War II - that 4 year war run by a democrat commander in chief
the number of casualties was...
CONSIDERABLY HIGHER. 60 MILLION I believe.
VIETNAM: the war that we could have won but the democrats of Congress 'got' their way back then.
We 'cut and run' from our commitment and THE SOUTH Vietnamese were taken by THE NORTH
(communism) NOW THAT makes us lose
"credibility" / THAT makes the loss
of the MANY LIVES fighting in Vietnam A LOSS...when 'the enemy'
in effect 'won' and we merely
'saved ourselves' Anonymous, that
ain't what this earthly journey is about.
>>Any figure above zero is a tragedy when we fight wars. But America -- on both sides of the Civil War -- lost more than
600,000 soldiers, or 2 percent of the country's population of 31 million. Of our country's 132 million, we lost more than 400,000 in World War II, or .3 percent of our population. In the Korean War, we lost 37,000, and the Vietnam War saw 58,000 dead.
So anonymous, put those war 'stats'
you mumble about Iraq with all wars; and THEN - LOOK DEEPER into
'why' sometimes 'ya just go to go and defend THE GOOD against EVIL'
'subjective peace' IS NOT PEACE.
If evil is allowed to be, it does
'hit home' eventually...reference
Sept. 11, 2001. (Evil doesn't listen to 'aw come on guys; lighten up...let's be friends we'll
let you be ... you let us be'
anonymous; allow evil...and
'you' will come to be hurt by it
'someday.'
and I found an interesting article
on-line that says the same:
"The effort is difficult and the outcome uncertain, but I think the effort must be made. Either we bring them freedom, or they destroy us."
Here's another letter written to
Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes
http://860wgul.townhall.com/columnists/LarryElder/2006/10/26/regarding_iraq_open_letter_to_andy_rooney&Comments=true?page=1
and biblically the words go:
"do not be conquered by evil, but conquer evil WITH GOOD"
easy? NO. ...but nothing worthwhile ever is EASY.
You're kidding right? Obama doesn't care about the troops because he didn't visit wounded troops in Germany? But he's visited them in Walter Reed? And he's visited them overseas before? So exactly what is the rationale that he wouldn't visit them this time, other than it would appear as a campaign event and the McCain camp would run with it???
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/obama-gaffes-on.html
Just another example of Sen. Obama's 'nice talk' without the experiential understanding.
EXPERIENCE matters.
Robbie says:
So exactly what is the rationale that he wouldn't visit [troops]this time, [Germany] other than it would appear as a campaign event and the McCain camp would run with it???
Sounds like Robbie is for Obama's
'missing the troops' in Germany.
...the entire point is: Sen. Obama was in Germany. He know there was an American base their with troops, he could have poked his head in and said 'hi'...how are you? He did not. If he hesitated because he wasn't sure 'how it would look' ... mmmm could be he's
too concerned with 'how HE looks'
It's done. No problem. Whether Obama visited troops or not visited or McCain visited or did not...
MAIN POINT; which candidate SUPPORTS THE TROOPS by his voting record? Which one is pro-military?
p.s. recent article on msnbc.com:
Obama willing to 'shift' on allowing off shore oil drilling...
this because McCain called him on it. So...Sen. Obama listens to
THE LEADER..."yes yes...we could probably drill for oil offshore."
McCAIN - PROVEN LEADERSHIP.
OBAMA - no ideas; takes others ideas as his own.
Obama's comment on war April 2007:
opposed this war from the start. In part because I believed that if we gave open-ended authority to invade Iraq in 2002, we would have an open-ended occupation of the sort that we have right now. And I have stated clearly and UNEQUIVOCALLY that open-ended occupation has to end. The idea that the situation in Iraq is improving is simply not credible, and it's not reflective of the facts on the ground. The hard truth is, there's no military solution to this war. Our troops have done all that they have been asked and more, but NO AMOUNT OF AMERICAN SOLDIERS are gonna solve the political differences that lie in the heart of the sectarian conflict. Extending the surge is just going to put more men and women in the crossfire of a civil war.
Source: Virtual Town Hall on Iraq, sponsored by MoveOn.org Apr 10, 2007
July 2008: OBAMA goes to Iraq. Children are playing in the street, Sunni's have come back to the legislative table, 'peace' [fragile yet, but peace] is happening. HINT: the SURGE WORKED.
Sen. Obama couldn't understand. Sen. Obama won't say "I was wrong"
You will never hear a democrat say
"I was wrong, Mr. President" THE SURGE did work, and our troops work there is bringing a unity to that country. THE SURGE WORKED.
THE SURGE WORKED. THE SURGE WORKED.
we do not give artificial timelines of withdrawl (otherwise known as SURRENDER) to an enemy that will 'hold back' UNTIL...we leave.
Any democrat who can't understand this, is INEXPERIENCED in human nature.
Good luck with Oldboy. Maybe he will solve US problems.
John6538 says Good luck with Oldboy. Maybe he will solve US problems.
not MAYBE...he will WORK to resolve (not solve) problems in this nation. Objective problems that is.
definition of resolve: resolve (v.) To reach a decision or make a determination: resolve on a course of action.
definition of solve: solve (v.) To work out a correct solution to (a problem)
Get the difference? solving problems for others means the one 'solving' is the ruler over others and SOLVES many different problems carte blance regardless of individual circumstances. ie:
poverty is a problem. For some candidates the way to solve people's lack of funds is just
GIVE THEM MORE MONEY. (ahhh if it could be so simple) The mature know 'more dollars' isn't the answer to stopping poverty. It's simplistic. To give one side more money; this type of candidate TAKES AWAY FROM the other side.
So...how did that alleviate ALL
poverty? Take from the have's and
give to the have not's? That's solving ALL OF THE PROBLEM? No...
don't think so.
Now 'resolving' a nation's problems is to have made the determination overall what causes
THE OBJECTIVE (encompassing) problem. With that understanding; the real leader puts forth out there, certain conditions that
'grow' a person's pocketbook.
ie: extra tax incentives if people save thier own dollars for school tuition, IRA accounts, whatever.
The leader 'puts forth' certain
things that MAKE PEOPLE come to
'the right decision' for themselves...thus, by thier right decision they grow MORE wealthy.
Ending poverty is not as simple as
I have or can get money for you, Mr. Poor Guy...therefore you are now not poor. (nope. Mr. Poor Guy
is still poor; because he's dependent on another to provide for him)
McCain will set forth the right motions so a nation can SOLVE it's own idividual problems and THE WHOLE OF THE NATION will benefit.
and we remain A FREE NATION. Not a dependent nation - dependent on
a politician's 'handout'
bears repeating:
resolve (v.) To reach a decision or make a determination: resolve on a course of action.
Yes, as wonderful as America as a nation, on the WHOLE nation is; yes, there are 'problems.' Some
problems are for the government to
step into and some ARE NOT.
Some problems have to do with SPIRIT of citizens in a nation. Some problems are fixed by 'setting thier reasoning straight again' NOT ACTING 'for the self' (and I won't go into details)
No details but here's some problems 'we the people' government reps can think about:
DRUGS (how many lives and families were destroyed by illegal drugs and 'from where the poppies grow'
we know why a terror empire grew.
ABORTION another 'life' killer.
Baby Boomers will soon be retiring.
FEW will be left to pay into social security for them. That's only one aspect of why abortion isn't doing anyone any good, but the other reason is: IT KILLS THE MOST INNOCENT.
"FREE LOVE" aka no commitment to
what Love is. Love is GOD. Marriage of man and woman love is
a special union that honors that special intimacy that brings life to society. When a certain party advocates marriage to be 'any 'ol
thing' you can bet what they are trying for is to get GOD out of society...no God, no morality, no morality, no rules of order.
No rules...the one IN CHARGE OF YOU (paying perhaps your health insurance) gets to CONTROL the whole show...it's his call as to
what is right/wrong on any given day. CONTROL CONTROL CONTROL
no freedom.
Freedom isn't doing anything you want...freedom is doing that which is RIGHT...and for doing right, one receives BLESSING.
Sigh...Dear God, help them to 'get it'
more 'good news'
>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26110004
excerpt:
AP NEWS: updated 1 hour, 25 minutes ago
ROME - Police broke up a suspected terror cell Saturday and arrested five North Africans, including the alleged leader, who Italian officials said recruited Islamic extremists for attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26110003/
updated 1 hour, 1 minute ago
KABUL, Afghanistan - About 20 Taliban fighters were killed in a battle with Afghan and U.S.-led forces near a key military supply route in western Afghanistan, a provincial official said Saturday.
last paragraph: More than 3,000 people — MOSTLY MILITANTS — have died in insurgency-related violence this year, according to an Associated Press tally of figures from Western and Afghan officials.
_______________________________
What's going on? this is a fight
of GOOD vs EVIL. EVIL...hard core;
EVIL exists 'in the world' ... let's not bury our heads in the sand and pretend it does not. IT HAS TO END. It wasn't going to end by 'nice talk'...hard core evil
is beyond talking to...there comes
a time the 'good' must 'fight'
GOOD ALWAYS WINS...'evil' or any degree of 'bad' - never does. It's
not rhetoric: one reaps what they
sow. Do good; you are graced (favored) Do bad; you will always be fightin'...never have peace within or outside of self. You will always be defending your
'power position' /
GOD (authentic good) is in
control. He takes care of His own.
He isn't 'possessive' ... he doesn't laud it over His own with
His all knowing ... in fact, to those who are with Him...HE BLESSES WITH SHARING HIS KNOWLEDGE
and WISDOM.
GOD is the 'power' 'control'
Any human who says: "I will give you..." back away slowly... all
one needs in order to 'have' is
GOD'S LIFE within. We humbly admit
our 'dependency' on God...but by the same token REMAIN 'free' (of any human dominating us) THE TRUTH sets one free.
the TRUTH sets one free.
live right...live free. Live maturely and you are free.
It's so simple.
so...according to this article in the Washington Post democrats have let their 'platform' be known:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/07/by_jonathan_weisman_barack_oba_1.html
excerpt:
> Democrats commit themselves to a comprehensive overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, including a commitment to bring illegal immigrants "out of the shadows" [sounds to me like: 'the heck' with whether illegal immigrants did wrong; we will make your wrong right because it 'suits us' to do so. We need your labor, since we do approve of aborting the innocent that would 'grow into legal American citizens]
> "strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of the ability to pay." That piece of the platform appears to favor doing away with restrictions on the USE OF TAXPAYER FUNDS to help finance abortions. [In other words: no matter what 'you think' 'we your rulers' will take YOUR money to
abort THE INNOCENT. WE speak for
all, they 'think']
and here's a 'goodie' "Working together" [my note: 'together' is
relative to: YOU PEOPLE do as I SAY]
the platform states, "we can cut poverty in half within ten years."
Why of course they can...they just
take ALL THE MONEY and dole it out as they wish...then...there is no
'poor' ... ahem...of course there's no 'rich' either - in thier confused minds: ALL are 'equal' [so long as one OBEYS their commands...after all, they are 'your new god and provider who CONTROL your life - because you
didn't know how to 'control your own passions]
more good news on war:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26111030/
To those of a praying mind, keep praying 'cause we are winning the war on terror. Americans don't
'cut and run'...Iraq will be a success as will Afghanistan as will the middle east.
definition of communism: A system of government in which THE STATE plans and controls the economy and a single, often AUTHORITARIAN party holds power, CLAIMING to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
Socialism comes first...then Communism.
Definition of Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a FREE market.
In other words; if one works, one has. And that 'work' doesn't necessarily mean 'big job' 'high income job' ... it means USING what wealth one has with THOUGHT.
If you make $15,000 a year don't SPEND $25,000 a year. (it doesn't work out - mathematically) If you are 20 something making $15,000 annually (thereby not really paying income tax) share the expenses with a family member who
lives alone if possible (maybe owns a house) Maybe an elderly relative who could use assistance
(cooking, cleaning, laundry, doing the house repairs) They need assistance, you need home; and
BOTH of you help each other)
Some dependence is independence.
FAMILY is stronger than 'government handout' by a cold government agency who will
run your life when handing you dollars.
In time, the low income 'goes up'
as one proves thier responsibility.
take a course here there and everywhere...to LEARN while working and while sharing a home with a relative. LIVE RIGHT. Don't
frequent the bar-room and gripe about 'how tough life is' while paying 3 bucks for a beer and 5 bucks (+) for cigarettes. Do without the cell phone if you have to (they do have phones where you pay only for minutes used - which is sort of the 21st Century equivalent of a 'pay phone') God gave everyone a 'head' ... use it.
PRAY. Much enlightenment comes when one 'slows down' and 'prays'
It means your mind isn't racing in a million directions and yes answers to problems come...FAITH understands THAT SPIRIT that 'got through' got through because YOU WEREN'T TRAPPED in the FEAR THING.
GOD can't 'unblock channels' in those who are afraid...
"be not afraid" HE PROCLAIMS...
THERE IS A GOD...HE does 'speak'
if we BE STILL and LISTEN for HIM.
"slow and steady wins the race"
"slow" isn't the way of 'the world'
but it is the way of THE SPIRIT OF GOD...God moves ever so slowly in enacting his plans...never deterred by those who oppose His Way...He is always of THE GOOD WAY
and HIS WAYS always triumph...
What's the rush folks? Ok, so you can't go to college. 'this year'
Are you healthy? Can you walk, talk, speak, see, hear? Can you assist another in some capacity?
retail clerk, stock clerk, clerk typist, file clerk, can you paint?
Can you THINK? GO...SEEK...YOU WILL FIND 'work' ... and inch by inch CAREFULLY ...you will have...
the wealth may take a lifetime...
but A LIFETIME is what we all have.
hint: wealth is supposed to take a lifetime to accumulate; but just
another thought: YOU DON'T get to leave this earth with toys and dollars. So...earn it, spend it
wisely, remember you work FOR another really, that you leave behind (niece, nephew, children, or siblings or parents or aunt and uncle) ... that's the gist of the
GOD CENTERED 'other centered' life.
One generation improves 'the lot'
of the next...and so it goes.
But, YOU are FREE.
In Communism; 'government' wishes to take the place of what family is. [don't believe it] 'government' is 'government'
and LOVE (God, since GOD IS LOVE]
is left out of the picture. 'They'
become 'their own god' (small g)
with thier own 'human love' which
is conditional on how they view you.
Don't work to impress anyone, just keep on working...saving...living right in actions and you will have and you will be BLESSED. And you will mature and remain FREE...
the gist to what I wrote in last email is: STOP WORRYING that you don't have what 'neighbor' has.
By same token 'neighbor' might wish he had what you had. So...forget what neighbor has or doesn't have and follow the biblical; LOVE GOD first and LOVE
neighbor as on loves oneself.
ie: to love neighbor as one LOVES SELF is NOT 'self love' as the words sound.
Reason it out: God is love and can be nothing but LOVE...therefore if I'm to LOVE GOD with WHOLE heart, mind and strength..."I" must bring GOD LOVE to others. (to show care, do good, be patient, even if 'other' doesn't respond in like mind) Human Love expects back for love given...some humans even
'need to love' for thier 'own' sake of feeling good. They love for the wrong reason...that's 'self love' ...
But authentic 'self love' is
love that knows GOD LOVES 'me'
and is within me...therefore if
GOD is in me, how can I not love self? for my 'true self' is GOD
(SEE?) So; how could I not love
self...as long as I keep in mind,
it is God always.
If God lives in me, and God is love, "I" begins to decrease and He increases...I can't help but
DO GOOD, control temper, show patience with others, and 'be not afraid' for HE is with me always.
Don't believe mere mortals who
say: 'you'll never do' or 'you
can't have' or 'you need me'...
Anyone who wants to 'hand you a good life' has some 'self' notions
in mind.
Life is what YOU make it. Think right, live right, do good ...
for HE WHO LIVES in you.
Politicians who see no wrong in
aborting 'the littlest guy' 'the innocent guy'...does not, in my opinion, care for 'the little guy'
America is not only about to elect its first black president, but also the first "gay" president, and that's Barack Obama.
the first "gay" president, and that's Barack Obama.
pu-leeeeese...does Mrs. Obama know?
pu-leeeeeeeese.
Post a Comment