Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Oral Exam

December 16, 2009

Today we learned of the passing of Oral Roberts. He was 93 years old. In his lifetime, he started a hospital, many churches and Oral Roberts University. The man was associated with the so-called “health and wealth gospel” that purports to express the teaching of Jesus as a “name it and claim it” formula by which believers give to get. Needless to say that is inconsistent with the Bible, historical Christianity and reality. Oral Roberts “gospel” had more in common with Oprah’s “spirituality” and pop books like “The Secret” than the Good News in Matthew, Mark , Luke and John.

However one may feel about Oral Roberts theology, one thing is certain; he provides a fascinating insight into the base hypocrisy of the liberal Left in this country. How so? History  tells us that Oral Roberts University received the most media attention it ever had during the attempt to smear Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. At that time, Judge Thomas’ qualifications and intelligence were beyond dispute. The man had risen from unimaginable poverty to the highest accolades in the legal profession. During judge Thomas’ confirmation hearing, extremists like Ted Kennedy were at a loss to prevent his appointment to the highest court in the land. The man had impeccable credentials and was the first African American to be nominated since the extremely liberal Thurgood Marshall in the 1960’s.

Only a few years before, Kennedy had dashed the appointment of Robert Bork in a hysterical hate campaign that sought to destroy Judge Bork’s reputation and thus disqualify him from the bench. Remember, these were the days of total control of the media by the Dan Rathers and the Peter Jennings of the world, who sniffily sneered at America’s heartland values. There was no Matt Drudge, no Breitbart, no Bill O’Reilly or Glenn Beck to shout “wait a minute you liberals are liars!” After a slanderous season of lies and innuendo insinuating that Bork was a crypto fascist, Kennedy and his comrades managed to torpedo the nomination and the term “Borking” entered the national political landscape. The Left simply destroyed nominees on the right since the days of the Nixon Administration’s Haynsworth/Carswell debacle and Reagan’s buckling on Mel Bradford. The liberals did it before, and they would do it again — business as usual in Washington.

But Ted Kennedy had a major problem: Clarence Thomas was black. How could multimillionaire Ted Kennedy, a man who had never worked a single day in his entire life, attack the great-grandson of slaves without appearing to be a racist? The race card was not as worn out in those days and was used with deadly results by men such as Kennedy as a sort of nuclear option to silence the opponents. Even with the managed, corporate media in his pocket, the liberals understood that an inquisition by a bunch of rich white, liberal senators would look like what Clarence Thomas so memorably described it as “a high- tech lynching.” Kennedy would be seen as the Grand Dragon at a Klan rally. What to do?

In an act of unmitigated gall, the liberals trotted out a woman whose major qualification was that she was a teacher at Oral Roberts University. The mind reels imagining the acrimony and snide remarks that would be made had a victim of Bill Clinton been employed at Oral Roberts University. The references to snake handling and itinerate pastors and televangelists would have been in every lead paragraph. Th subtext of flyover-state ignorance would have dripped off of the media’s fangs- much like it dripped from the flabby jowls of Perez Hilton when Carrie Prejean dared state that she shared the majority of Americans’ view regarding homosexual “marriage.’

One looks in vain for any such references to this Oral Roberts University teacher, you see , her name was Anita Hill, but she is a piece of cultural detritus now. Her name was memorialized on thousands of bumper stickers found on the backs of cars in faculty parking lots, the Castro District of San Francisco and Planned Parenthoods everywhere. “I Believe You Anita” bumper stickers
were hurriedly scraped off when, in the wake of Bill Clinton’s serial adultery and rape accusations, the Left reverted to the “move on” mantra (the inspiration for George-Soros-funded is this era) and accusations that the conservatives were engaged in “sexual McCarthyism.” But back in the early 1990’s Clinton was an unknown Arkansas Governor and Clarence Thomas had to be destroyed. Anita Hill claimed that a full decade earlier Judge Thomas made unseemly references to someone called “long dong silver” in a humorous fashion after viewing a film starring said person in an obscenity case. Miss Hill claimed there was an incident in 1981 when he allegedly made a reference to hair on a Coke can and had the poor taste to ask Miss Hill on a date. This was supposed to be “sexual harassment,” remember? Never mind that the same feminists and liberals screamed to high heaven in defense of Bill Clinton’s office shenanigans with West Los Angeles’ 20-year-old Monica Lewinsky.

Yes, the name Oral Roberts serves as a fantastic litmus test. If you have a memory, you can piece together the hypocritical double standards employed by the Left. Oral Roberts University was a name intoned with the reverence of an Oxford or Cambridge when it was Anita Hill’s place of business. I wonder how the New York Times and CBS will treat Oral Roberts’ passing? I wonder if there will be a single mention of Anita Hill’s famous association with Oral Roberts. If ELVISNIXON is correct, the answer will be a decided silence on the matter. Down the memory hole with all their other lies .


Climate Changes In Favor of Truth! Obama’s Global Warming Mythology

December 15, 2009

Recent developments have caused a meltdown of the glaciers of political correctness in favor of truth and actual science. This is great news for all who are committed to truth. It is fantastic news for humanity, for science, and for our sagging economy. This is terrible news for Al Gore, George Soros, the Obamas and other multimillionaires who seek to profit from man-made hysteria about “man-made” global warming (also known as climate change). *Interesting how the Left reverts to “man” and not “person” when it is a negative .

This tidal wave of truth providentially has arrived just in time for the Copenhagen Summit (Test: if a person pronounces it “cope-En HAWG-in,” he is a liberal. it is pronounced “Copen-Hay- Gun,” always has been, at least in America). One-worlders who seek to micromanage your life have all flown to Denmark (proving once and for all that they are hypocrite since it all could be done by computer teleconference, thus saving the world Obama and his comrades’ enormous carbon footprint). These gray lice are meeting in anticipation of a proclamation that Obama will decimate the US economy for no good reason except to enhance his profile amongst extremists and the blame-America-first crowd. The problem is that facts are getting in the way. No wonder Obama sought to crush Fox News

Science & Environmental Policy Project president S. Fred Singer, a physicist who has participated in several of the UN climate conferences, said in World Magazine that the recent publication of emails from leading climatologists suggesting that global temperature data has been manipulated to improve the case for the types of global controls contemplated at Copenhagen is having little effect on public debate amongst “true believers” there. Singer expects delegates to accomplish little except “jabber away” until President Obama arrives on December 18th: “They’re all waiting for Obama to come down from a cloud. . . . He will descend and say a few magic words, and they’ll all say, ‘OK, we’ve all agreed the climate must not change.’ And then they’ll go home.”

Singer was part of last Tuesday and Wednesday’s “Climate Sense” conference, which opposed the UN negotiations and was hosted in Copenhagen by the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. He co-authored Climate Change Reconsidered, an 868-page, peer-reviewed report released in June (and available at It rebuts the UN position on global warming and argues that global warming and cooling are natural, rather than man-made, events. It even concludes that more CO2 in the atmosphere could actually be beneficial to humans and the planet, such as by increasing the growth yields of crops. “The idea of burying it in the ground is preposterous, besides it being impractical and expensive,” said Singer.

In addition to Singer, no less a luminary than Frederick Seitz, the great scientist and partner of Linus Pauling, has established the which seeks to refute the lie of Al Gore and Obama that man-made global warming is beyond argument. The Petition Project is something that every single adult American needs to consider in the blizzard of managed media propaganda surrounding the Obama Copenhagen circus. This is not merely the politics of personal destruction. It is the politics of world economic destruction. The intolerant Gore went so far as to accuse any who dared question his money- making scam as the moral equivalent of “Holocaust deniers.” His outrageous remarks were greeted with a collective shrug by the corporate media. It is a fascinating coincidence that General Electric stands to make billions in windfall profits if perpetually-bowing Obama and his Red Chinese Comrades are able to impose their governmental power grab in the name of “saving the planet.”

The Christian ban on cursing one’s enemies was once obviated by the prayer to “let our enemies go too far.” It seems the enemies of science and reason have gone far too far. The recent expose of so-called “peer reviewed” science journals manipulating data and engaging in a hateful campaign of distorting the facts has exposed Leftist loathing of open debate.

Christopher Booker has pointed out a very fascinating and unmentioned fact about this rigged game. As President Obama burbles on at Copenhagen about his commitment to Cap and Tax in the USA, we should keep in mind that the whole thing appears to be a fraud perpetrated from the top. Climate change is the worst scientific scandal of our generation, the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. Their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated. What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the world-wide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Philip Jones, the CRU’s director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports. Through its link to the Hadley Centre, part of the UK Met Office, which selects most of the IPCC’s key scientific contributors, his global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely, not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it. Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph which 10 years ago turned climate history on its head by showing that, after 1,000 years of decline, global temperatures have recently shot up to their highest level in recorded history. Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Medieval Warm Period when temperatures were higher [than] they are today, the graph became the central icon of the entire man-made global warming movement. (Christopher Booker, “Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation,” The [London] Daily Telegraph Online, 28 Nov 2009)

Bacon spoke of the “crucible of open debate.” John Stuart Mill outlined in On Liberty the purpose of unlimited free speech and free thought. The Left fights in favor of NAMBLA and child pornography but is deeply into censorship about climate change.Sustainabullies countenance no heresy on their dogmas.

Even the oft decried as “dogmatic” Roman Catholic Church employed a “devil’s advocate” when vetting potential saints (a process far more rigorous than that employed by the Obama White House that vetted NAMBLA-praising, Van Jones, Kevin Jennings ad nauseum) in a methodology far less politicized and more transparent than anything imaginable by the “open minded” Leftists managing discourse on the global warming debacle.

The Left has never had a commitment to truth. Truth, like ethics, is malleable in the service “equality.” The equality of the Left is exemplified by Napoleon the Pig’s decree in George Orwell’s Animal Farm that some animals are “more equal than others.” Obama can take his “social justice” loving wife on a “date night” at taxpayers expense with a full retinue of secret service and armed guards but you cannot protect your family or forget to pay that .50-cents-a-mile “allowance” for gasoline allowed on the 1040 or face the wrath of the federal government leviathan state.

Global Warming is hardly a fact. The reality is that temperatures have dropped over the last decade. Even more vital is the simple fact that there is no conclusive evidence as to the cause of such putative warming. Is it man made? Is it caused by cows? Trees? Bovine flatulence?

If so, how should we appropriately respond? Starve a peasant and feed your Prius? As Mark Steyn pointed out over a year ago:
“Western governments listened to the ecowarriors and introduced some of the “wartime measures” they’ve been urging. The EU decreed that 5.75 percent of petrol and diesel must come from “biofuels” by 2010, rising to 10 percent by 2020. The United States added to its 51 cent-per-gallon ethanol subsidy by mandating a fivefold increase in “biofuels” production by 2022.
The result is that big government accomplished at a stroke what the free market could never have done: They turned the food supply into a subsidiary of the energy industry. When you divert 28 percent of U.S. grain into fuel production, and when you artificially make its value as fuel higher than its value as food, why be surprised that you’ve suddenly got less to eat? Or, to be more precise, it’s not “you” who’s got less to eat but those starving peasants in distant lands you claim to care so much about.

Heigh-ho. In the greater scheme of things, a few dead natives keeled over with distended bellies is a small price to pay for saving the planet, right? Except that turning food into fuel does nothing for the planet in the first place…Researchers at Princeton calculate that, to date, the “carbon debt” created by the biofuels arboricide will take 167 years to reverse.

The biofuels debacle is global warm-mongering in a nutshell: The first victims of poseur environmentalism will always be developing countries. In order for you to put biofuel in your Prius and feel good about yourself for no reason, real actual people in faraway places have to starve to death. On April 15, the Independent, the impeccably progressive British newspaper, editorialized: “The production of biofuel is devastating huge swaths of the world’s environment. So why on Earth is the government forcing us to use more of it?”

In other words, the same people who pushed ethanol and biofuels can never, ever admit that they were wrong. How can they, and Obama, expect us to be so stupid as to let them create even more rules? As ELVISNIXON pointed out with Obama’s refusal to stop illegal immigrants from spreading swine flu, follow the money! These people do not really care about human life or the environment. They care about money and power. This is all hypocrisy. With the exposure of climategate and the worthy goals of thepetitionproject and others we, the American people, can thwart the criminal fraud that is the Copenhagen conference, Obama administration declarations of C02 as a “pollutant” and Cap and Tax legislation. Fans of know that Jimmy is exposing the hidden agenda behind much of this man-made global warming conference. The fact is that we must speak out before it is too late. Look at the incredible damage that NAFTA has caused because we trusted people like Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton. Even an existentialist like Albert Camus knew that Christians have an affirmative duty to speak out against the injustices being promoted in the name of “science” at conferences like Copenhagen:

” … What the world expects of Christians is that Christians should speak out, loud and clear, and that they should voice their condemnation in such a way that never a doubt, never the slightest doubt, could rise in the heart of the simplest man. That they should get away from abstraction and confront the blood-stained face history has taken on today..”

Liberal Lies and Confusion.ELVISNIXON.COM

October 21, 2009

Leftist Lies, Obfuscation and Paygrades

Their is a deep confusion in American politics.

This confusion is caused by the Left. Conservatives are regularly called “fascists” by those on the Left.  Leftists change their name from “liberal” to “progressive.”  They also hide under the umbrella of “environmentalist” or crusaders for something called “social justice.”

Voltaire famously said that he refused to debate until his opponent “defined his terms.”  The terms for Leftists listed above all share a common definition, common character traits.  Generally, people on the Left like to tell other people what they ought to do.  If they have enough power, they extend their suggestion of what someone ought to do to what they MUST do.  They seem to love to compel someone else to act in accordance with their own priorities.
They deny the concept of truth, morality and universal standards.  They then seek to impose their own opinions (they can be nothing more than mere opinion after all) on others.
Who else does this?
Fascists, communists, socialists, Leftists, progressives and Democrats all NEED government POWER, so they consistently champion the EXPANSION of government.  I call it a family resemblance; those in the same family have shared characteristics. 
Conservatives? Conservatives want less, not more, government and more personal responsibility.  Conservatives believe government is necessary to protect “Life , Liberty and Property.”  They seek to protect these sacred things from everyone, particularly the leviathan state
Jonah Goldberg in his 2007 book Liberal Fascism points out the historical fact that Joseph Stalin, the brutal communist dictator and murderer, used the term “fascist” to condemn his fellow Left-wing Marxist Leon Trotsky.  Yes, Trotsky the communist was called a “fascist.”  But so was anyone else who disagreed with any Soviet policy, including those who opposed the massive expansion of government power.
Today, conservatives who seek less government are called “fascists” (someone who believes in maximum government) by Leftists who have the same goals as fascists (more government, less freedom).
Confusing?  Yes.  The Left lies and distorts through a misleading use of “Left vs Right.”  Like Stalin, they use labels to silence and frighten.  They call Focus on the Family “rabidly anti-gay,” but no homosexual is ever called anti-heterosexual or anti-family.  Obama is invariably called moderate, and any who dare question him are called extremists.

In order to get elected in the USA, Leftists must run as “moderates” and espouse conservative values, until they are elected and then the Leftist “wolf” takes off his sheepskin.

Remember Obama at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church? Candidate Obama said he opposed “gay” marriage.  Last weekend he came out in favor of homosexual “marriage’ and said that same-sex relations are morally laudable.

Candidate Obama said that the question of when life began was “above [his] pay grade.”  If that issue is beyond his understanding, then surely he should not seek to increase abortion funding to Planned Parenthood and mandate that all medical personnel be compelled to perform abortions even when their personal religious faith forbids it.

Perhaps, this should not surprise those who are paying attention.  Nobody every accused the Left of believing in “thou shalt not bear false witness.”