Sunday, February 5, 2012

No Religious Liberty for You!

This is why I put the word "Liberal" in quotes.  The root word of "Liberal" is - obviously - liberty.  That implies that a person who calls him or herself a "Liberal" should love and invariably stand on the side of liberty.  But the people in modern American politics who call themselves "Liberals" invariably stand against liberty - whether it's individuals' 5th-Amendment-guaranteed right to property, 9th-Amendment-guaranteed right to economic liberty, or 1st-Amendment-guaranteed right to religious liberty.

Case in point, Pres Obama's sustained attempts deny Christians' religious liberty.  First, Pres Obama attempted to usurp the power to tell churches who they can and cannot hire.  Now, Pres Obama insists he has the power to force religious organizations to provide health coverage that includes contraception and abortifacients, even if that goes completely against their religious beliefs.

White House Press Secretary
Jay Carney
White House press secretary Jay Carney said at Thursday’s afternoon briefing that there was “not a debate” over reversing the decision. “The decision has been made, and it was made after careful consideration,” he said. 
The new rule, released nearly two weeks ago, will make nearly all health plans cover women’s preventive services, including FDA-approved forms of contraception, without co-pays or deductibles. Catholic hospitals, schools and charities had hoped to get an exemption on the grounds that the Catholic Church opposes the use of most forms of birth control.
 See, "the decision has been made".  This is "not a debate".  Is this how representative democracy is supposed to work?  A presidential administration makes a decision independently of anyone else, and the rest of us just shut up and do their bidding?  Oh, but wait, they gave their decision much "careful consideration", so that makes it all better.

See what I mean about "Liberals"?

This is why all Christians should oppose excessive government and support limited government; because bloated government seeks to replace the Church, and ultimately, God.  Unfortunately, there are too many who do the opposite.

On the lighter side, Michael Ramirez captures The One's attitude perfectly.

Lego Movie Sets

Check out these amazing Lego movie sets.
























That's the court house from Back to the Future II.  Somebody has a lot of talent... and way too much time on their hands.

Chicken Kabobs


Aimee and I made these totally awesome chicken-and-veggie kabobs Friday night.  Well, she made the marinade (using this recipe) and cut, prepped and skewered the chicken and veggies.  I grilled them.  Which means she did all the hard work.


It's no surprise to me that Aimee's an amazing cook, but I was still surprised at how flavorful they were.  We unintentionally marinated the meat and veggies for two days in the fridge.  We meant to marinade them for one day only, but we had more left-overs than expected from another meal.  Once on the grill they took about eight minutes to cook, and they burst with flavor when I bit into them.  Most importantly, they contain all the nutrition necessary for one meal in one tasty, convenient package.

UPDATE: Aimee informs me that she added a lot more lemon juice than the recipe prescribed.

Brother's Keeper

President Obama said at the National Prayer Breakfast that...
"Living by the principle that we are our brother's keeper. Caring for the poor and those in need," Obama said before an audience of about 3,000 at the Washington Hilton. These values, he said, "They're the ones that have defined my own faith journey."
This isn't the first time Pres Obama used the phrase "brother's keeper" to justify his politics.



But Pres Obama doesn't just have some theoretical brother somewhere in the ether.  He has a literal brother, literally living in Kenya.  How well has he "kept" that brother?
George Hussein Onyango Obama
The Italian edition of Vanity Fair said that it had found George Hussein Onyango Obama living in a hut in a ramshackle town of Huruma on the outskirts of Nairobi.
Mr Obama, 26, the youngest of the presidential candidate's half-brothers, spoke for the first time about his life, which could not be more different than that of the Democratic contender.
"No-one knows who I am," he told the magazine, before claiming: "I live here on less than a dollar a month." 
 As you can tell from the mention of "the presidential candidate", the article quoted above is from 2008.  "I live here on less than a dollar a month".  That means all Pres Obama needed to do to double his literal brother's income, and therefore "keep" him in conditions twice better than they were at the time, was to mail his literal brother $12/year.  So, why hasn't he improved his literal brother's situation?

Part of the reason is shoddy theology, which leads to erroneous beliefs.  Back in 2010, Pres Obama stated that...
“I came to my Christian faith later in life, and it was because the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead — being my brothers’ and sisters’ keeper, treating others as they would treat me,” 
In case you're not too familiar with the Bible, Jesus never said anything about being ones brother's keeper.  That phrase only appears in Genesis.
8 Now Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let’s go out to the field.”[a] While they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him.
9 Then the LORD said to Cain, “Where is your brother Abel?”
“I don’t know,” he replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”    Genesis 4:8-10
Please explain, "liberal" Christians; where in that passage do you read a mandate for bloated, morbidly obese government? 


There are so many examples of Pres Obama's shoddy theology that I can't possibly cover them all, so I'll focus on this latest one from the National Prayer Breakfast.
The rich should pay more not only because “I actually think that is going to make economic sense, but for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,’”  
Let's look at the scripture where the phrase, "for unto whom much is given, much shall be required" originates. 
47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Luke 12:47-48
In other words, those who've received the Word of God, but refuse to follow it will receive a much worse punishment than those who haven't received it and therefore didn't know any better.  Also, the text clearly states that it is God, and not anyone else, who does the demanding.

Please explain, "liberal" Christians; by what twisted logic does Luke 12:47-48 give government the right to confiscate greater proportions of wealth from rich people?


Therein lies the problem with "liberal" Christianity.  "Liberal" Christians like Pres Obama twist the scriptures to justify their love of socialism, and absolve themselves of the individual responsibility to care for the poor.


That's why Pres Obama, and other "Liberal" Christians, create a false dichotomy in which one either supports bloated government, or cares nothing for the poor.  It never seems to occur to them that private charity can take care of the poor, and in fact does it far more efficiently and effectively than bloated government bureaucracy.  


Worse, as Mark Steyn states, 
“This version of shared responsibility means the state should be your ‘brother’s keeper,’” he said. “And this is the point for the Catholic Church. Separation of church and state is one thing, but big government means the state as church, the sole legitimate source of moral authority whether it’s on contraception or gay marriage or abortion or any of the rest. And that’s what you see in Europe. Big government drives out other sources of moral authority.”
Thus, "Liberal" Christianity renders onto government the responsibilities of the Church - charity and mercy - making the Church irrelevant and making "Liberal" Christianity suicidal.  To be clear, justice is the role of government, charity, grace and mercy are the roles of the Church, and neither does each other's role remotely well.

Finally, Tina Korbe's comments on Steyn's...
Steyn’s comments are thought-provoking, as they usually are. His last statement, though, could easily be reversed: The decline of other sources of moral authority enables big government. It’s a chicken-egg dilemma: Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill? Or did the government gradually usurp the authority of church and family, leading church and family to abdicate responsibility?
 It's a death spiral.  Shoddy "Liberal" theology leads to big government, which makes the Church superfluous, which leads to more shoddy "Liberal" theology, etc.

The solution?
14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14
 In the modern context, "my people" refers to the Church, not the United States of America.  The Church needs to teach Biblical theology, not the "Liberal" garbage - and definitely not the "health wealth and prosperity" "gospel" - that passes for Christianity nowadays. 

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Making Things Worse

Back in December 2011, I used data from the Minneapolis Federal Reserve to demonstrate how Pres Obama's policies have made this economic recovery much weaker and slower than past ones.
Since World War II, the economy rebounded at a rate generally proportional to the recession that preceded the recovery.  But not this time.  This time, the downturn was steep, but the "recovery" has been shallow and slow.
Dan Mitchell of the Cato institute did something similar a year ago, and revisited the issue more recently.  The difference is that he compared Pres Obama's weak recovery only to Pres Reagan's much, much stronger recovery.
Those two charts showed that the current recovery was very weak compared to the boom of the early 1980s.
But perhaps that was an unfair comparison. Maybe the Reagan recovery started strong and then hit a wall. Or maybe the Obama recovery was the economic equivalent of a late bloomer So let’s look at the same charts, but add an extra year of data. Does it make a difference?  Meh…not so much. 


As you can see, the Reagan recovery didn't just rebound in proportion to the recession, it actually exceeded the trajectory of the recession.  In fact, it was literally off the charts.  Mitchell points to a Wall Street Journal article that expounds on the difference between the two recoveries.
If in this “recovery” our economy had grown and generated jobs at the average rate achieved following the 10 previous postwar recessions, GDP per person would be $4,528 higher and 13.7 million more Americans would be working today. …President Ronald Reagan’s policies ignited a recovery so powerful that if it were being repeated today, real per capita GDP would be $5,694 higher than it is now—an extra $22,776 for a family of four. Some 16.9 million more Americans would have jobs.
Mitchell then points out that Pres Obama didn't cause the recession, but he's continued - and even worsened - the bad policies that did cause it.
  • Bush increased government spending. Obama has been increasing government spending.
  • Bush adopted Keynesian “stimulus” policies. Obama adopted Keynesian “stimulus” policies.
  • Bush bailed out politically connected companies. Obama has been bailing out politically connected companies.
  • Bush supported the Fed’s easy-money policy. Obama has been supporting the Fed’s easy-money policy.
  • Bush created a new healthcare entitlement. Obama created a new healthcare entitlement.
  • Bush imposed costly new regulations on the financial sector. Obama imposed costly new regulations on the financial sector.
Is this the Hope'n'Change(TM) you voted for, Obamaphiles?  Face it.  Empirical evidence proves that Pres Obama made things worse by doubling down on the bad policies that caused the recession in the first place.

Finally, Mitchell ends with this very good point.
This is why I always tell people not to pay attention to party labels. Bigger government doesn’t work, regardless of whether a politician is a Republican or Democrat. The problem isn’t Obamanomics, it’s Bushobamanomics. But since that’s a bit awkward, let’s just call it statism.
True, and that's what scares me.  All Democrats are statists, but the vast majority of Republicans are too.

Audi R18 TDI Hybrid

Revisiting the post on fast hybrids, now Audi confirms that their R18 TDI endurance racer will feature a hybrid electric drive system for 2012.

The diesel era at Le Mans may not be over yet, but already we're seeing the emergence of a new propulsion trend: hybrids. Toyota recently announced the TS030 Hybrid LMP1, Peugeot was working on a hybrid version of its 908 prototype before it killed the race program, and now Audi has confirmed a hybrid version of the R18 TDI.

Few details were released, but what we can tell you is that Audi will field four cars at Le Mans this year: two with hybrid assist and two without. One will be headlined by Allan McNish, one by Oliver Jarvis, one by Timo Bernhard and one by André Lotterer, with supplemental drivers to be announced sometime before the 80th running of the 24 Hours of Le Mans kicks off in June.
I wonder why Audi went with two hybrids and two pure Diesels.  Maybe they're not convinced that hybrids are the way to go and want to test their viability against their well-tested, dominant counterparts.  I also wonder which drivers will be driving which cars.  After all, the skill and talent of the driver is still the most important variable in racing, and McNish is Audi's most experienced driver.  The car they give him to drive may indicate which they suspect is the best.

Here's Allan McNish explaining the 24 Hours of Le Mans in the coolest Audi commercial ever.
 

And here's the horrific crash that took him out of contention in 2011.

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

The Vote Pump

Bill Whittle explains how politicians buy votes using tax payers' money.


When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. Sell not liberty to purchase power. - Benjamin Franklin
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition. - Thomas Jefferson