Original Bard portrait unveiled



The portrait is believed to have been painted in 1610


A portrait of William Shakespeare thought to be the only picture made of the playwright during his lifetime has been unveiled in London.

It is believed the artwork dates back to 1610, six years before Shakespeare’s death at the age of 52.

The newly-authenticated picture was inherited by art restorer Alec Cobbe.

The portrait will go on show at The Shakespeare Birthplace Trust in Stratford-upon-Avon from 23 April, the author’s birthday.

The painting has been in the Cobbe family for centuries, through its maritial link to Shakespeare’s only literary patron, Henry Wriothesley, the 3rd Earl of Southampton.

‘Very fine painting’

Mr Cobbe realised the significance of the painting after visiting an exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery where he saw a portrait that had until 70 years ago been accepted as a life portrait of Shakespeare.

He immediately realised that it was a copy of the painting in his family collection.

70 Responses to “Original Bard portrait unveiled”

  1. rosettasister Says:

    if you’re having trouble posting comments, so am I

    trying again

    if this works, hopefully things back to normal later today


  2. JAC Says:


    Go here and give Bo a grade


  3. JAC Says:

    dang 🙂

  4. calli Says:

    Hi Rosetta,
    I thought I would drop in to say hi!! It’s a beautiful day here in VA!!! Have a wonderful week!!!! Keep up the good work!!

  5. rosettasister Says:

    Check out this blog:


    which includes this post:

    Obama’s Rosy Scenario (or don’t believe a word that comes out of Peter Orszag’s big mouth!)


    Here Is Barack Obama’s budget guru Peter Orszag on CNN today:

    I don’t think we should be chasing our tail, constantly revising assumptions,” Orszag said. “Let’s see what happens, let it work. We’ll have a mid-session review later in the year. We’ll have an opportunity to revise the assumptions at that point.

    James Pethokoukis:

    Ah, yes, the assumptions.

    Team Obama has forecasted the economy will grow 1.2 percent this year.

    If you assume the economy falls 5.5 percent this quarter, as JPMorgan does,

    then ‘the growth rate in each of the remaining three quarters of the year would need to be a positive 3.5% (don’t bet on it!)

    in order to get to OMB’s -1.2% year on year forecast.

    Beyond 2009, the OMB growth forecast remains significantly higher than most forecasters anticipate.

  6. LadyTexan Says:

    Newsweek is waking up.


    Presidential Double-Talk

    Uncertainty (too much) and confidence (too little) define this crisis. Investors have surely noted the gap between Obama’s rhetoric and his actions.

    Read the rest here:http://www.newsweek.com/id/188261

  7. rosettasister Says:

    gotta run

    have a wonderful day, all!


  8. LadyTexan Says:

    I don’t know who wrote this, but it’s great!

    PSALM 2009 – 2012


  9. CJ Says:

    Here’s more info on the article I posted last week ala Gun Control for Seniors. It was a satire piece as stated by one of the other posters here. Interesting report however:

    From: http://www.nraila.org/Legislation?Read.aspex?ID=4404

    “Rumor Control–Debunking the Latest Legends

    Friday, February 06, 2009

    Lately, the rumor mills have been running at full capacity. Among other things, we’ve heard phony tales circulating about such things as guns being banned for the elderly, ammunition with expiration dates, and a prohibition on gun and ammunition imports. This sort of scuttlebutt is nothing new, but let’s try to shed some light on these dark assertions.

    “Guns to be Banned for Elderly” was the cry. The “report” assured readers that Deputy Attorney General Designate David Ogden has circulated a draft of an executive order in which “firearms possession would be severely limited to people over 60.”

    This report is bogus and, in fact, it was labeled as “satire” on the website where it first appeared. There was an isolated case last year in which an 81-year-old Delaware woman was initially delayed in receiving approval to purchase a firearm based on her age and gender. The delay on the approval was eventually lifted–10 days after the initial application and after significant pressure was brought to bear by NRA.

    Then, not long ago, the rumor regarding ammunition primers “expiring” resurfaced. The rumor was that the government would require all primers in ammunition to contain something that would cause them to permanently fail after two years. In other words, no primer = no spark = no burning gunpowder = no moving bullet = useless ammunition.

    We received hundreds of calls and letters about this during the early-Clinton panic buying period in 1993, and that was before most people had the Internet and the spread of misinformation was more limited. There was no such proposal then, and we have not heard of any such proposal now.

    The 1993 rumor may have been a result of the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s (D-NY) proposal to put a colossal tax on certain handgun ammunition. (Senator Moynihan had the bizarre idea that ammunition was only good for a couple of years, and that his tax would quickly dry up the supply.) In fact, properly stored ammunition remains usable for decades.

    Since the first rumors about such proposals in the early 1990s, two inventors have actually received a patent for a chemical process that would supposedly allow manufacture of primers that would go dead after a specific period of time. But an invention doesn’t actually have to work, let alone be a good idea, to get a patent–patents have been issued for such odd ideas as crank-operated pneumatic shoelaces, a “banana protective device,” and the use of explosives to tenderize meat. And it’s hard to imagine anyone making or buying ammunition that’s doomed to fail, without a government mandate–a mandate that no one, so far, has actually proposed.

    Additional rumors have recently been circulating about stopping gun and/or ammunition imports. And once again, NRA and representatives of firearm importers know of no real measures proposing this, yet.

    It is important to note that the President does have broad power with respect to imports; we’ve obviously seen that power expressed in the 1989 and 1998 import bans on various semi-auto rifles, and the 1993 “assault pistol” import ban. But President Obama has yet to propose any new import ban (though that would certainly not be out of the question).

    Finally, a lot of these rumors involve supposedly secret “executive orders.” Even a real executive order–a formal document reviewed by the Justice Department before the President signs it–does not have the force of law; it just serves as guidance for Cabinet officers. The same goes for other kinds of documents, like the presidential memoranda that previous presidents used to impose import bans on various kinds of firearms.

    And it’s worth mentioning that these orders and memoranda aren’t secret. President Obama’s executive orders and presidential memoranda are available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing_room/executive_orders/.

    In fact, all of the anti-gun memoranda by past presidents were very well publicized, because the presidents who issued them wanted to get media attention for their actions.

    Now don’t take all this to mean that we underestimate our anti-gun opponents, or that we don’t believe they would happily and readily seize the opportunity to adopt and enforce any of these measures. We know full well that they would. Rather, our message is this: Rumors abound, so don’t believe everything you read. If it’s a legitimate concern, rest assured your NRA-ILA will promptly address it and will give you the straight story. “

  10. JAC Says:

    I just left a pro obama forum..(I need a shower). They think our whole argument over the NBC is race motivated…. They couldn’t be more wrong…and that argument gets very old.

    If there is any teeth to there being a motive…… it is his Social/Maxis agenda…. but they don’t even want to consider the posibilty there IS an corrupt agenda…

  11. NEConservative Says:

    I hope Chicago folks fire this guy, but hey, this is the kind of politician who keep getting re-elected….

  12. ddlew2 Says:


    Chuck Norris calls for Revolution!

  13. Katie Says:

    Mark your calendars and do whatever you can to participate in your area. Talk to the business owners now and request a long lunch break for ALL employees who are not in vital positions. The People are waking up, and rather than the 25,000 that showed up on the first spontaneous Tea Party, let there be millions across this beautiful country called America.


  14. susiezen Says:

    ……got class….

  15. susiezen Says:

    Glenn Beck is on to something. Surely our country could use a taste of humble pie. I just hope that we are not all giving the same portion of that pie. I have become fully aware of a certain people who need a super sized portion of that pie, conservative or not.
    What does it mean to be humble.
    What does it mean to have little to no EGO. its not important to be a republican, to be a good, honest God loving person is all it takes then the right things will just fall into place.
    I learn more and more each day how little everything matters except genuine goodness in each soul I meet.
    It amazes me how blinded people are by there egos. they think they are a good person because they promote a cause that is good.
    It takes more than that…..
    Heres to all that work for the good of our country!!
    Heres to all who are good that work for goodness for all.

  16. rosettasister Says:

    Well, if Van Morrison says so …

    Listening Party

    by Ben Greenman March 9, 2009


    Morrison mentioned Wynonie Harris, the ribald singer of the late forties and early fifties known as Mr. Blues: “I heard one of his on the radio, on a daytime show. Someone probably played it by accident.” He held forth on Leadbelly: “He did everything from children’s songs to cowboy songs to show tunes.” He talked about the blind harpist Sonny Terry (the first record he ever bought was one of Terry’s), the powerhouse vocalist Bobby Bland, and the skiffle pioneer Lonnie Donegan. When someone grouped Donegan with other practitioners of “pre-Beatles rock and roll,” Morrison pulled up short.

    “That’s a cliché,” he said, adjusting his sunglasses. “I don’t think ‘pre-Beatles’ means anything, because there was stuff before them.

    Over here, you have a different slant. You measure things in terms of the Beatles. We don’t think music started there. Rolling Stone magazine does, because it’s their mythology. The Beatles were peripheral. If you had more knowledge about music, it didn’t really mean anything. To me, it was meaningless.”


    Actually, I’ve been trying to tell my son the same thing for some time now.

    But he’s not having any of it.

    For me, the Moody Blues were full of meaning.

    Van Morrison cover:

    “I’ll Be Your Lover Too – Robert Pattinson”

    To hell with a “Day in the Life”; this album is an immaculate reflex of a simple day, and the emotions which render any regular day formidable.

    “Milestone Albums:Days of Future Passed”

  17. Tenacity Says:

    I will be honest and tell you that I’m not sure what you just said. Would you care to be more specific? There seemed to be some truth mixed in with overstatement and mush (rhetorical sentimentality). I am sincere in just wanting to see/understand your point. For example, God uses our weaknesses to teach us. He does not promise that anything will “just fall into place” until His Son comes again. There are great trials to be faced before That day. Plus, humble does not translate as passive. So please help me understand what you are really trying to say. Thank you.

  18. rosettasister Says:

    Hugh Hewitt on now:


    I’m confused as the rest of country just sprang ahead, and AZ did not.

    So I think this is 2nd hour.

  19. Tenacity Says:

    Waiting for God to go before you is humbling. Caring more for others than yourself is humbling. Fighting for what is right, risking your life for truth and refusing to bend your knee to anyone or anything other than God is righteous (see Daniel) and courageous. Being courageous does not mean one is not humble.

    If we do away with debt in our lives and live within our means, it will require a serious lifestyle change and seem like a great sacrifice. Is that what you mean by humble pie? If so, it is a requirement to exit this predicament our government has willfully inflicted upon us. We have asked for it through our greed and complacency. Our pride as Americans is in some ways more good than bad. We have pride for what America has represented…freedom and liberty. I am willing to die so that my descendants can exercise their God given unalienable rights. I will pray and listen for God’s guidance, but do not expect for things to just fall into place without a battle. I trust in God to work all for good, but what that will look like will likely be different than I envision.

  20. rosettasister Says:

    March 07, 2009, 7:00 a.m.

    The Great Destabilization

    Can America, the engine of the global economy, pull the rest of the world out of the quicksand?

    By Mark Steyn



    What Mr. Brown and the rest of the world want is for America, the engine of the global economy, to pull the rest of them out of the quicksand — which isn’t unreasonable. Even though a big chunk of the subprime/securitization/credit-bubble axis originated in the United States and got exported round the planet, the reality is that almost every one of America’s trading partners will wind up getting far harder hit.

    And that was before Obama made clear that for him the economy takes a very distant back seat to the massive expansion of government for which it provides cover. That’s why he’s indifferent to the plummeting Dow. The president has made a strategic calculation that, to advance his plans for socialized health care, “green energy,” and a big-government state, it’s to his advantage for things to get worse. And, if things go from bad to worse in America, overseas they’ll go from worse to total societal collapse. We’ve already seen changes of government in Iceland and Latvia, rioting in Greece and Bulgaria. The great destabilization is starting on the fringes of Europe and working its way to the Continent’s center.

    We’re seeing not just the first contraction in the global economy since 1945, but also the first crisis of globalization. This was the system America and the other leading economies encouraged everybody else to grab a piece of. But whatever piece you grabbed — exports in Taiwan, services in Ireland, construction in Spain, oligarchic industrial-scale kleptomania in Russia — it’s all crumbling. Ireland and Italy are nation-state versions of Bank of America and General Motors. In Eastern Europe, the countries way out on the end of the globalization chain can’t take a lot of heat without widespread unrest. And the fellows who’ll be picking up the tab are the Western European banks who loaned them all the money. Gordon Brown was hoping for a little more than: “I feel your pain. And have you ever seen The Wizard of Oz? It’s about this sweet little nobody who gets to pay a brief visit to the glittering Emerald City before being swept back to the reassuring familiarity of the poor thing’s broken-down windswept economically devastated monochrome dustbowl. You’ll love it!”

    “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn”? Oh, perish the thought. The prime minister flew 8,000 miles for dinner and a movie. But the president says he’ll call. Next week. Next month. Whatever.

  21. rosettasister Says:

    Wishful, and dangerous, thinking (or Just What Planet IS Obama Living On?!)


    First, Mr Obama’s budget forecasts that the economy will shrink 1.2% this year then grow by an average of 4% over the following four years.

    It might if the economy were to follow a conventional path back to full employment. But this is not a conventional recession.

    (i.e., ain’t gonna happen!)

    The unprecedented damage to household balance sheets could well result in anaemic economic growth for years, significantly undermining the president’s revenue projections.

    The economic outlook continues to darken and the stockmarket has already tumbled to 12-year lows.


    Mr Obama may either have to renege on his promise to slash the deficit to 3% of GDP in 2013 from more than 12% now, rein in his spending promises or raise taxes more.

    (12% — probably more like 13.5%)


    Second, Mr Obama’s scattershot tax increases are a poor substitute for the wholesale reform America’s Byzantine tax code needs.

    Limiting high earners’ deductions for mortgage interest, local-government taxes and other things is certainly more efficient than raising their marginal tax rates even more.

    But it would be better to replace such deductions for everyone with targeted credits, abolish the alternative minimum tax (an absurd parallel tax system that ensnares a sizeable chunk of the upper middle class), and implement a broad sales tax.

    Rather than simply eliminating the sheltering of corporate income from abroad, Mr Obama could have broadened the corporate tax base and lowered the rate.

    In sum, Mr Obama could simultaneously raise more revenue and make the tax code simpler and more conducive to growth.

    But he hasn’t.

  22. susiezen Says:

    Tenacity, my idea of humbleness does not include being passive in any way.
    If my statement of everything falling into place was to generalized than I shall refine it.
    If I overstated anything with rhetorical sentimentality than you must not realize my associations of the ego, humbleness, goodness, and everything falling into place.

    If in fact our country is heading into a depression, that alone would probably be for the good of some who have taken God and everything we have for granted.
    If we are taken over by socialism and communism, that is another story all together, and I was not referring to that. I my friend would take arms, and saccrifice my life if that were to happen..
    Most Americans are not so far away from God that a financial downfall would probably be sufficient to bring out the goodness in people. It will also bring out the bad in the people so far away from God as to be beyond help.
    Thats what I mean about humble pie…..financial suffering.
    I feel like it will let shine whats capable of shining and weed the rest away. As terrible as that sounds its due.
    Look tenacity, If I went into depth here on this post I could be deemed politically incorrect, or whatever some might find offensive..
    I just think some people need a stronger lesson than others and when there are bad times it is a test from God.
    When I talk about ego, it does not mean proud. I am so proud of my country and to be an American.
    To me the real definition of ego is false pride, or to love yourself in a way that is narcissistic. exactly like obama!
    there are so many people out the with what I consider to be an evil ego.
    peruse a bit of Wayne Dyer and his definition of ego and you’ll understand my point.
    I have really been disappointed with our society today. The way our children are raised, what there taught in school, the changing of hisory in school books to suit the liberals that have taken over our school systems. look what it has done to todays kids. So many so disrespectful.
    And another take on being humble is just the simple act of being respectful and kind to others.
    I se so much petty jealousy, and nastiness from people out there. thats waht I call bad ego.

    Call it rhetorical sentimentality, but our society is failing when it comes to the basics of the bible. the elementary meaning of love thy neighbor. We Americans can treat each other like shit. if someone gives you a compliment, recognize it. common courtesy.
    OK, now, I think If we Americans are good to each other, the little things will fall into place, thats just how the universe works….you get what you put out there for the most part.
    There is a plague in America today that is just as scary as socialism, and it looks a lot like the family that resides in the white house. selfish, hypocrytical,lying, greedy, power hungry, narcissistic people. Its ugly and it rears it ugly head everyday. those bithches can use some huge humble pie!

    If indeed our lives are faced with much more than a financial depression, we do not put a knee down to anyone.

  23. LadyTexan Says:

    Obama musters campaign army for economic fight

    US President Barack Obama mustered his powerful campaign army on Monday, calling on his millions of supporters to lobby on behalf of his budget and economic plan.
    The appeal to back the president was made in an email and video sent out by “Organizing for America,” the organization which morphed out of Obama’s campaign machinery to push his agenda when he entered the White House.

    In the video, Mitch Stewart, the director of Organizing for America, urged the president’s supporters to take part in the “Organizing for America Pledge Project.”

    Read the rest at: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.1da91b565bedacc6461ea17550408182.661&show_article=1

  24. susiezen Says:

    does anyone know where slider is?

  25. sliderblaze Says:

    here, been busy lately

  26. Tenacity Says:

    Amen Sister Zen! Please forgive me if I misinterpreted your earlier comment. Now I get the point very clearly and agree whole heartedly.

  27. Tenacity Says:

    Say Slider,
    I was afraid they might have hauled you off to the poky. I could see Foxy calling her buddy Axelrod and trumping up something on you.

  28. Tenacity Says:

    El Rushbo’s question for the day; Who is the head of the Democrat Party now? Is it Axelrod or Pelosi? Pelosi’s office wrote the Bailout bill. But S/Ob doesn’t breath without checking in with the Axe first. What say ye?

  29. susiezen Says:

    ten!, I can really grow to like you…..
    Rush poses a much more relevant question than obama put forth.
    does not really matter right now who runs the right party, its the one making All the decisions affecting us!!!!{president pelosi} aahhhhh

    Slider glad to hear your still among the blabbering…

  30. NEConservative Says:

    Hmmm, Rosie, more open season on the Catholic Church:


    Sunday, March 8, 2009
    Judiciary Committee Run Into a Ditch?
    The Judiciary Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly, chaired by Senator Andrew McDonald and Representative Michael Lawlor, seems to have run off into a ditch this session.

    First we have an over-reaching attempt to codify the Connecticut Supreme Court’s Kerrigan decision legalizing gay marriage – Senate Bill 899 – and now we have a bizarre attack of First Amendment rights against the Roman Catholic Church in Connecticut – Senate Bill 1098.

    I’m going to focus on Senate Bill 1098 — “An Act Modifying Corporate Laws Relating to Certain Religious Institutions.” The stated purpose of this bill is “to revise the corporate governance provisions applicable to the Roman Catholic Church and provide for the investigation of the misappropriation of funds by religious corporations.” The real purpose of this bill is payback to the bishops and pastors of the Roman Catholic Church in Connecticut for opposing gay marriage.

    Unfortunately, I think some well-intentioned, unhappy Catholics from Darien are being used as pawns by Senator McDonald and Representative Lawlor in a thinly-veiled attack on the Church.

    This legislation seeks to eliminate bishops and pastors from all financial decisions of the Church. Currently, local parish corporations are governed by the bishop, diocesan administrator, pastor and two lay trustees as required in Canon Law. Senate Bill 1098 will change this to an elected board of directors of seven to thirteen lay members and will exclude the bishop and pastor. The pastor of the parish corporation will report to the board of directors.

    This proposal turns the Catholic Church of Connecticut into a congregational church structure. The proponents claim this is necessary because of financial impropriety of two pastors from Darien and Greenwich in the past several years. McDonald and Lawlor claim the parishioners approached them for assistance making changes to the Catholic Church to hold the bishops accountable for their decisions.

    Some would say this is an incredibly bold move by McDonald and Lawlor but the constitutional scholars say their proposal is a clear attack on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Connecticut Catholics are outraged by the proposal and are likely to fill the halls of the State Capitol and the Legislative Office Building on Wednesday, March 11th for the Judiciary Committee’s public hearing on the bill.

    I suspect this public hearing will be more like a zoo with the tone of an inquisition. Chances are the topics for discussion on Wednesday will go far beyond the bill proposed. I fear that we’ll be hearing all kinds of attacks on the bishops, pastors and priests of the Catholic Church.

    I pray fervently that we can dispense with this brutal attack on the Roman Catholic Church very quickly. Catholics don’t deserve this attack and the proponents of this bill will hopefully hear this message loud and clear.

    You can read about S.B. 1098 here: http://cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=1098&which_year=2009

    You can reach members of the Judiciary Committee here: http://cga.ct.gov/jud/
    Posted by Senator Michael McLachlan at 8:15 PM

  31. NEConservative Says:

    more on the anti-Catholic Church bill in CT:


    Voice of the Faithful v. Church?

    Posted by Tom Hoopes

    Monday, March 09, 2009 1:17 PM

    CNS/Lisa Kessler photoConnecticut Catholics, be prepared in Hartford Wednesday:

    1. Catholic “experts” will back the anti-Church bill.
    2. The defense of the bill will sound reassuring and reasonable.
    3. A big crowd will be there early on — but the Church needs Catholics to come later on, too.
    4. We can win this, if we fight.

    Let me explain:

    1. One objective of the new Connecticut anti-Church structure bill, I’m told, is for the Voice of the Faithful to get its message out about democratizing the Church.

    Today’s Connecticut Post lists “Some details of the proposed ‘Act Modifying Corporate Laws Relating to Certain Religious Corporations’:

    “A corporation may be organized in connection with any Roman Catholic church or congregation in the state by filing in the office of the Secretary of the State.

    “The corporation would have a board of directors consisting of not less than seven nor more than 13 laymembers. The archbishop or bishop of the diocese would serve as an ex-offico board member, but could not vote on issues.

    “The board members would be elected from among the laymembers of the congregation.”

    Senate Bill 1098 was quickly labeled as payback to the bishops for the defense of marriage. But it may be worse than that: It may be part of a Voice of the Faithful strategy to “democratize” the Church. This is Voice of the Faithful’s plan that would gut the Church’s structure.

    At annual meetings in Connecticut (at Fairfield University, for one place), Voice of the Faithful has been much more open about what it wants than it had been hitherto. Leaders in the movement dissent from bottom-line Catholic issues from women’s ordination to the sinfulness of homosexual acts to abortion. They also want to change Church structure (as a first step to changing Church doctrine, maybe?).

    I’ve been told to expect professors from Fairfield University and Fordham to testify at the March 11 Hartford hearing—FOR the bill. They will make a historical “Catholic” case for a new parish structure that bypasses bishops. (Think Pelosi’s tangled logic on “when life begins” applied to the question “what is a parish?”)

    Parish finance scandals will be used as a club to goad the Church to throw the baby — its very structure — out with the bathwater — the abuses of that structure.

    This story helps set the stage. Notice the Voice of the Faithful members quoted in it who aren’t identified as such.

    2. Co-chairmen Mike Lawlor (East Hartford) and Andrew McDonald (Stamford) are very capable trial lawyers.

    They seem to have written this bill so that it is not mandatory. It does not require any Catholic parish to organize itself according to the statute it cites. (The statue it amends, by the way, is part of a number of statutes helping churches organize themselves. The Connecticut Catholic Church welcomed the statute in the 1940s and 1950s; but it leaves the door open for this.)

    The two chairs will cite “faithful Catholic parishioners” (in fact, the Voice of the Faithful people) and say: “This bill comes from your own Catholic faithful. Your own people are begging us to do something. We’re only offering an option. What’s wrong with that?”

    They will sound like they’re right.

    If anyone testifies and accuses these two chairman of promoting this bill as payback for same-sex “marriage,” they will go on the attack. How dare you insinuate about their motives! They will demand to know where you got your information.

    Be careful! Remember: Make arguments polite and professional. Base them on the rights of the Church, not on personal judgments.

    3. This hearing will last late into the night.

    I’m told that if people show up and sign up for this hearing at noon or 1 pm, it’s possible they won’t get to testify until 6 pm, 9 pm, or even 11 o’clock at night (if they stick around). You won’t know until you see how many people are on the list above you. (Sign-up starts at 10 am).

    If there are hundreds ahead of you: Go into town. Get something to eat. Check out what Hartford has to offer. Then come back to testify.

    It’s important for people to recognize that if they sign up and there are hundreds of names before them, they don’t need to wait around getting irritated and burnt out and eager to leave — but they do need to come back.

    The pro-Church side doesn’t want a huge crowd of people to disappears two hours later, leaving few. (They especially don’t want people to hear the reasonable sounding opening statement [Its theme will be: “There has been a lot of misunderstanding about this bill …”] and then seem to leave en masse, convinced.)

    Come early. Come often. And if you can’t be there at noon: Come after work. Let’s stagger our visits to keep the pressure up.

    4. The Church can—and likely will—win.

    This can all sound discouraging. There’s no reason to be discouraged. Quite the contrary.

    The prediction I heard: The bishops will come out of this stronger than they started. There will be a huge show of support for them. The fight against them may be nasty, but the Church will prevail on the merits.

    Be heartened. If we were going to have a fight about something, this is a good one: We’re on strong ground constitutionally and faithfully.

    But remember: The good won’t happen if we don’t show up.

    Knights of Columbus Round-up:


    Here’s how to reach ALL judiciary committee members:


    Here’s our post about how one state senator says payback over the homosexual marriage fight is behind the bill:


    Here’s the Catholic Key’s post:


    Permalink | Filed under ct anti-church bill

  32. Tucker82254 Says:


    OBAMA: By the time we got here, there already had been an enormous infusion of taxpayer money into the financial system, and the thing I constantly try to emphasize to people is that if coming in the market was doing fine, nobody would be happier than me to stay out of it.

    REPORTER: Right.

    OBAMA: You know, I have more than enough to do without having to worry about the financial system.

    RUSH: Now, that’s an inspiring thing to say. I have more than enough to do without having to worry about the financial system. This does not inspire confidence among people who listen to what this man says.


  33. NEConservative Says:

    Hmm, I hadn’t heard this… Newt to convert to Catholicism:


    Gingrich to Convert

    Posted by Tom McFeely

    Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:23 AM

    Newt Gingrich listens to the Pope last April in Washington. (Tim Drake)The sharp eyes of Christianity Today (and of Register Associate Editor Tom Wehner) spotted a religious news nugget in this recent New York Times profile of Newt Gingrich.

    The news: The architect of the 1990s “Republican Revolution” plans to convert to Catholicism.

    Here’s the relevant excerpt from the Times article:

    “At a moment when the role of religious fundamentalism in the party is a central question for reformers, Gingrich, rather than making any kind of case for a new enlightenment, has in fact gone to great lengths to placate Christian conservatives. The family-values crowd has never completely embraced Newt, probably because he has been married three times, most recently to a former Hill staff member, Callista Bisek. In 2006, though, Gingrich wrote a book called “Rediscovering God in America” — part of a new canon of work he has done reaffirming the role of religion in public life. The following year, he went on radio with the evangelical minister James Dobson to apologize for having been unfaithful to his second wife. (A Baptist since graduate school, Gingrich said he will soon convert to Catholicism, his wife’s faith.)”

    Update: This post has been updated with a photo, taken by Register Senior Writer Tim Drake, of Gingrich attending Pope Benedict XVI’s address last April at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington.

    Says Tim, “I recall wondering to myself at the time, ‘Is Newt Catholic, or is he converting, or is he simply interested in hearing the Pope?’”

  34. LadyTexan Says:

    This is pretty funny. A guy named Ed Barnett, Wichita Falls, TX wrote the following letter to the IRS:

    “Dear IRS,

    I am sorry to inform you that I will not be able to pay taxes owed April 15, but all is not lost.

    I have paid these taxes: accounts receivable tax, building permit tax, CDL tax, cigarette tax, corporate income tax, dog licence tax, federal income tax, unemployment tax, gasoline tax, hunting licence tax, fishing licence tax, waterfowl stamp tax, inheritance tax, inventory tax, liquor tax, luxury tax, medicare tax, city, school and county property tax (up 33 percent last 4 years), real estate tax, social security tax, road usage tax, toll road tax, state and city sales tax, recreational vehicle tax, state franchise tax, state unemployment tax, telephone federal excise tax, telephone federal state and local surcharge tax, telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, telephone state and local tax, utility tax, vehicle licence registration tax, capitol gains tax, lease severance tax, oil and gas assessment tax, Colorado property tax, Texas, Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma and New Mexico sales tax, and many more that I can’t recall but I have run out of space and money.

    When you do not receive my check April 15, just know that it is an honest mistake. Please treat me the same way you treated Congressmen Charles Rangle, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and ex-Congressman Tom Dashelle and, of course, your boss Timothy Geithner. No penalties and no interest.

    P.S. I will make at least a partial payment as soon as I get my stimulus check.

    Ed Barnett

  35. rosettasister Says:

    Geez, How can I be expected to fix this whole financial system thingy?!

    ros⋅y flushed, blooming, healthy.
    Antonyms: pale. unpromising. cheerless.

    The Great Recession

    March 10, 2009 09:50 AM ET


    And this sort of thing, gang, is why I have been predicting a second stimulus package.

    From the econ team at IHS Global:

    We expect the fourth and first quarters to show back-to-back declines in real GDP of more than 6% at an annual rate.

    And we now peg the peak-to-trough drop in GDP at 4.8%,

    without precedent in the postwar era

    (but still some distance from the 10% decline that some consider the mark of a depression).

    Given the extent of downward momentum, we expect real GDP to fall 3.7% in 2009

    and the unemployment rate to peak at 10.3% in the first half of 2010.

    James Pethokoukis:

    Anything close to this will make hash of the administration’s economic and budget forecasts.

    I still have a hard time believing that taxes will be going up in 2011 or that a cap-and-trade plan will get implemented in 2012.

    That is all based on a rosy scenario growing more unlikely by the day.

  36. LadyTexan Says:

    Go vote… so far 61% give Obama an F!

    MSNBC Poll:

    If you were grading Barack Obama on his performance as president, what would he get?


  37. rosettasister Says:

    Tuesday, March 10, 2009
    The Floundering, Fumbled First Fifty Days
    Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 7:29 AM



    Yesterday was a day in which a lot of the president’s friends got out of bed and began to speak very clearly about what the president must do to restore confidence in the markets and thus allow an economic recovery to gain traction –a set of steps that begins with “do no (more) harm. That is, President Obama has to scale back his wildly ambitious agenda and its legion of tax hikes and sweeping, radical reforms for that period of time that it takes the economy to hit sunnier weather. Some Democrats must be figuring that the Dow’s drop of 3,000 points since the president’s election is going to imperil their re-elections 19 months from now


    unless some or even most of that ground is recovered, and they aren’t going to stand by why the already-mocked-on-Saturday-Night-Live Tim Geithner continues as Hamlet not Hamilton.

    Ronald Reagan inherited an economic mess from Jimmy Carter and set out, with Paul Volker, to fix it. It took a while even with a determined and not bumbling start, but the public nevertheless dismissed Reagan’s good intentions and voted their anger, and Republicans lost 27 Congressional seats in the 1982 elections. (The GOP was in the minority then, without a lot of seats to lose to begin with.)

    Already some Senate Democrats have balked at the President Obama’s confused and at the same time hyperkinetic approach to the recession, and are balking at the massive and radical changes proposed in the tax system, such as taxing mortgage interest and charitable deductions. Some House Democrats refused to vote for the stimulus and more are showing signs of a refusal to go over the falls with the wilder ambitions of Speaker Pelosi and the president. Certainly the continued weakness on Wall Street isn’t being laid at the feet of George Bush by neutral observers who saw the wasted opportunity of the stimulus and the deeply worrisome announcements about the future of tax policy combined with the very silly growth projections.

    Yesterday the release of the tape of the president’s “I am not a socialist” phone call to the New York Times reporter raised a lot of eyebrows. In the call the president sounded unnecessarily quarrelsome. Petulance doesn’t become presidents, especially young ones with enormous capacity to be charming. Good humor is his best weapon, and the would-be Plumbers who are advising him on attacking Rush and the previous Administration are giving him lousy advice.

    In a stroke, with the announcement of a growth agenda made necessary by the weak economy –an agenda that would at a minimum postpone all tax hikes of any kind until four consecutive quarters of more than 2.5% GDP growth are behind us– would mark a bold pivot that reflects economic realities. A refusal to adapt to the economic forces at work –some of which he has triggered– will tell us that no matter what he calls his ideology, it is driving him, and not the best policies for the times at hand.

  38. rosettasister Says:


    March 09, 2009

  39. rosettasister Says:

    Obama the Communist


    March 09, 2009

    Victoria Jackson Steals The Show (Hannity)

    Don’t let the schtick fool you, this woman is smart.

  40. rosettasister Says:

    Pause BlogTalkRadio before viewing video.

    Monday, March 9, 2009

    100+ Military Personnel Ask Obama for His Bona Fides


    Orly Taitz

  41. rosettasister Says:

    Exclusive: The Obama Birth Certificate Controversy – Not a Political Issue, but a Legal One



    My father-in-law has enjoined the Philip Berg suit, questioning President Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to be President, based on principle and patriotism. John Hemenway is a World War II veteran, a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy (class of 1951) and a Rhodes Scholar. He served in the Foreign Service in the former Soviet Union and in Germany as Chief of the Berlin section.

    Mr. Obama’s lawyers are now threatening my 84-year-old father-in-law, through Judge Robertson, with penalties of legal fees for pursuing the truth about Mr. Obama’s birth. This threat of financial sanctions is meant to silence all of us who remain unsatisfied with equivocations by the Obama camp about his legal qualifications to become President, and to punish us for pursuing our Constitutionally-guaranteed right to redress.

  42. rosettasister Says:

    Is Snopes.com infallible? — If website calls Obama eligible, then he must be, right?


    Posted: March 09, 2009
    8:55 pm Eastern

    In fact, as WND has reported, a U.S. senator recently dismissed an issue as significant as determining the eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as president based on the word of Snopes.

    “Rumors pertaining to [Obama’s] citizenship status have been circulating on the Internet,” wrote Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., to a constituent, “and this information has been debunked by Snopes.com, which investigates the truth behind Internet rumors.”

    Some, however, question whether Snopes merits its reputation as an unbiased, accurate source for debunking controversial issues as “myth,” including WND’s Joseph Farah.

    “Some of you are shocked to hear Snopes is not the last word on truth – that it is not the bible of rumors and urban legends,” Farah wrote in a column criticizing not just the website’s pronouncements on whether or not a story is a myth, but also how its writer (usually Barbara Mikkelson) determines what does and doesn’t qualify as a reliable source.

  43. rosettasister Says:

    National Conference on Barack Obama’s Missing Birth Certificate and College Records: April 3-4, Washington, DC


    In less than a month, we are going to convene the first National Conference on Barack Obama’s Missing Birth Certificate and College Records.

    We won’t start by saying “we told you so,” but the opening days of the Obama administration have been even more chaotic and destructive than we imagined. In all of the commotion and confusion, however, the issue of “who” Barack Obama really is continues to trouble many Americans. The mainstream media have done everything in their power to stamp out our movement. They have failed. More and more people have more and more doubts about Obama. And yes, Obama is scary.

  44. rosettasister Says:

    Well Is He, or Isn’t He?


    It is a popular topic of discussion in political circles these days, and as the weeks pass more and more people are asking, “Is Barack Obama really a natural born citizen of the United States? Is he eligible to serve as President, or isn’t he?” If he is, then so be it. We’ll just have to grit our teeth until this long dark nightmare comes to an end… one way or another.

    But what if he is not eligible? What then? Well, in that case we have a problem… a very large problem, the solution to which could tear asunder the fabric of American society.

  45. Rob in NC Says:

    The only people who vote for leaders are the people who demand to be governed.

    The people who demand to be governed demand it because they cannot govern themselves.

    People who cannot govern themselves lack the mental capacity to be independent.

    People who lack the capacity to be independent are slaves.

    You all are slaves. Now, keep voting for leaders to govern you, for I assure you, there is no short supply of taskmasters waiting to hire enforcers to help with your governance, paid to crack the whip across your backs in the form of expenses to govern you, which is extracted from you in the form and many and varied taxes.

    And oh yes, there is always some external threat ever present to instill fear into you and make you believe that the atrocities your leaders commit is for your own protection, a necessary evil, when in fact and reality, the only threat is that you one day realize what you have done demanding to be governed and appointing such leaders over you who will gladly burn you all in the name of saving you all.

    You shall, mark my words, get your wish.

    ” You are all so eager to be slaves ” ~ Emperor Tiberius, to the Roman Senate

  46. rosettasister Says:

    Don’t know if the following has any basis in truth, but I thought some here may have an interest just the same:


    To: autumnraine

    “But they got married in Feb 1961, so for her to go get married in Kenya, she would have to have remained in Kenya from Feb 1961 through August, when Obama was born.”

    I believe that is exactly what she did.

    Although that is speculation on my part. There is no evidence anywhere that I know of to the contrary.

    There is a statement somewhere by one of her friends that her father threw her out when he learned she was pregnant and intended to marry Sr. Another that she was estranged from her parents.

    Obama Jr. admits somewhere that she was in Kenya 72 hours before he was born.

    And there is an interview with wife #1 about how she was initially uncomfortable with the idea that Sr. had married a white babe, after she had the opportunity to spend significant time with Stanley Ann she bonded with her like a sister.

    Where did she do that? Only record they ever met was in Chicago at some later date.

    The absence of a record of the marriage in Hawaii.

    And the complete absence of any record anywhere of her presence in the US or in Hawaii in the period between February and August 8, 1961.

    7,284 posted on Friday, March 06, 2009 2:23:09 PM by David



  47. rosettasister Says:


    To: cpdiii; Candor7; LucyT; Fred Nerks; pissant

    “The time to make us look like fools has long since past. If he had nothing to hide why did he not make us look like blithering idiots?”

    Probably because he’s too busy picking blithering idiots for positions in his administration, and his legal team. What kind of an idiot attorney refers the Court to view ZERO’s bogus COLB on a website?

    The more that ZERO fights against the release of his vault birth certificate, the more I think that what’s on it is a lot worse than merely revealing he was not born in the USA. His lawyers said that the release of his BC would also be embarassing and harmful to the DNC. Like they were with Clinton & Lewinsky?

    If ZERO was born in Kenya, I think that the DNC would either claim they were duped along with everyone else, or ignorance of it, saying that they thought, like everyone else, it was a “tin-foil hat conspiracy” (it IS a conspiracy, to be sure, with no foil required).

    If ZERO’s daddy was not Obama Sr., but someone who is either a well-known radical, or to whom a lot of dots within the DNC can be connected, then that really would be embarrassing.

    There’s more to this than meets the eye.

    24 posted on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:56:58 AM by Polarik

  48. JAC Says:

    per the Obama file
    China Challenges Obama

    “Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama.” — Vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden, Oct. 19, 2008

    “Analysts say this could be a test of the new administration, and the Chinese will be focusing less on words than on what American ships actually do at sea.” — Chris Lawrence, CNN Pentagon correspondent, March 9, 2009

    Joe Biden made it with months to spare. An international power has challenged Obama. It came yesterday at the hand of China. As CNN’s Lawrence described it on today’s Situation Room:

    “Sunday in the South China Sea, five Chinese boats aggressively blocked the American ship Impeccable [an unarmed submarine-intelligence gatherer]. One closed to within 25 feet and ordered the Navy ship to leave. When the Impeccable asked for a safe path out of the area, two boats cut it off and forced an emergency stop. And the Navy says Chinese sailors dropped pieces of wood in the Impeccable’s path.”

    Added Lawrence: “The Pentagon calls it ‘one of the most aggressive actions we’ve seen in some time.'”

    Asked about the incident at today’s press conference, WH press secretary Robert Gibbs responded: “we’re going to continue to operate in those international waters, and we expect the Chinese to observe international law around it.”

    CNN aired a clip from a Heritage Foundation expert:

    “If we back off on the right of navigation, if we give in to bullying, the Chinese will interpret that as a real signal of weakness.”

    China has thrown down a wooden gauntlet. The world will be watching how Obama handles it . . .

  49. Rob in NC Says:

    The first international test of the Obamanation

    China to the US

    “Our control over our slaves is better than your control over your slaves.”

    The one thing the internanational banking cartel, eager to fund war, overlooks is the fact that they will not survive a thermo-nuclear war either.

    Call it poetic justice.

  50. rosettasister Says:

    Rob in NC Says:
    March 10, 2009 at 4:53 pm

    Rob in NC Says:
    March 10, 2009 at 5:37 pm


    Welcome, Rob!

    You should be able to post at will now.


  51. rosettasister Says:

    Shilling: U.S. Close to Depression


    Economist Gary Shilling, who correctly predicted the current downturn, isn’t afraid to utter the dreaded “D” word.

    “There’s no formal definition for depression,” he tells Bloomberg TV. “But we’re getting awfully close.”

    The entire financial system and economy are at risk, Shilling says.

    “The longest post-war recessions so far lasted 16 months: 1981-82 and 1973-75,” he points out.

    “If this one lasts through the year, it’s 24 months. If it goes through next year, and it might, that’s three years, and you may as well call it what it is — a depression.”

    Depression or no, “we’re certainly in the most severe recession and financial crisis since the 1930s,” Shilling says.

    Three important problems need to be fixed before the economy can recover, he argues.

    “One, there is a huge excess of housing inventory,” he says.

    “Two, we need to stabilize the financial sector — not just residential mortgages but consumer borrowing, credit cards, commercial real estate, and non-real estate junk securities.”

    Finally, Shilling says, “we need enough fiscal stimulus to make an effect. What we have so far, only $200 billion of the $787 billion is actually going to put people to work or put money in circulation with unemployment benefits.”

    Others agree about the dire state of the economy.

    After Friday’s employment data, IHS Global Insight economist Nigel Gault told the Associated Press, “There is no light at the end of the tunnel. Job losses were everywhere, and there’s no hope for a turnaround.”


    March 06, 2009

    In-Depth Look – Job Losses – Bloomberg

  52. rosettasister Says:

    And on that gloomy note, bbl

  53. JAC Says:

    Rob in NC
    Welcome 🙂

  54. ddlew2 Says:


    What will Obongba do about the Chinese?

    Well what did Clinton do about all of the terrorist bombings against our troop’s baracks?

    Hmmmm… Didn’t “O” just dismiss charges against the mastermind of the Cole attack?

    He aint gonna do sht!

  55. JAC Says:

    Not good


  56. JAC Says:

    wow,…. read some posts from the above link….. scary…. very scary…
    more anger is being shown,… talk is getting radical…. I think the End of April might just be an acurate time frame…..

  57. JAC Says:

    thank God!!!!
    ,…. they rightfully deleted some posts over at Info Wars..

    The crazies are starting to come out in force… they were talking about a group of them planning on starting to bomb the banks…

  58. Katie Says:

    We are truly living in ‘bizarro world’. Dr. Orly met Justice Scalia yesterday – you’ve got to read this one!


  59. JAC Says:

    I read it earlier,…. 🙂

  60. ddlew2 Says:


    Barack Al-Mahdi Obama??

  61. ddlew2 Says:


    Oops! I posted wrong link.

  62. Katie Says:

    The future of the Conservatives in America – “Meet Devon Generally”.

    (IMO, this is exactly who and what America needs right now, and he doesn’t have a gazillion dollars to run a campaign. Perhaps we can spread the word to help him succeed!)

    “At only 33 years of age, Generally will be seeking Arlen Specter’s U.S. Senate seat in 2010. Specter, Generally said, has greatly departed from the idea of a representative republic as advanced by those who had met 230-plus years before in the building behind him. Intrigued, I reminded him that, considering the entrenched support which accompanies lengthy tenure on Capitol Hill, his would be no easy task.

    “I don’t do ‘easy,’” Generally said. “I’ve never done ‘easy’ in my whole life. Rarely do I find that ‘easy’ is worthwhile, and if we need anything right now, we need ‘worthwhile.’ If that means that once again I’ve got to do ‘hard,’ if that means that once again I’ve got to sacrifice for the good of our nation, for the very nation I’ll turn over to my baby girls, then so be it. I’m ready.”


  63. JAC Says:

    PENNSYLVANIA. The Hill reported that US Senator Arlen Specter (R) is a potential party-switcher before the 2010 elections. Independent polling shows Specter would have a very hard time winning a contested GOP primary against a conservative challenger. Former Congressman Pat Toomey (R), who lost 51-49 to Specter in the 2004 primary, will announce his candidacy for the seat this month. Polls show Specter has significantly more support from Pennsylvania Democrats than he does from Republicans. Our own Ron Gunzburger spoke this weekend with a long-time Specter political consultant, who said a possible party switch to the Democrats is on the table — along with other options. Pennsylvania law — unlike Connecticut — does not allow Specter to run as an Independent in the general election if he loses the GOP primary
    Let the turn coat go to the Dems,… he fits right in……. nothing lost

  64. Katie Says:

    JAC – even better. FIRE HIM!!!

  65. Katie Says:

    And another one bites the dust – ha ha ha ha ha!!!

    Chas Freeman “backs out” (in other words, he’s a communist or a crook or a liar or a tax cheat… Take your pick)


  66. JAC Says:

    Larry’s Blog
    It was bad enough that Barack Obama told a Federal Judge that his ruling was not acceptable when the Judge refused Obama’s request to suspend Ali Al Marri’s Qitmo trial. Remember Obama directed the US Department of Justice orders to drop all charges against Al Marri to get around the Federal Judges order.

    Today it was learned that rather than bring Al Marri before a Federal Court in South Carolina where Al Marri has been in custody at a Naval Facility, the Obama administration had the Federal Indictment against Al Marri issued out of Chicago, Illinois! By bringing the indictment out of Illinois, the Obama administration brought Chicago the funds that the Administration will say are needed for Al Marie’s secruity and incarceration, Obama administration keeps its control on the case and rewards those who have clearly ignored and violated both Illinois State and Federal Laws in protecting Barack Obama from prosecution for his own crimes.

    Now also lets not forget that Al Marri will now be allowed to request bail and to communicate with individuals other than his attorney.

    Barack Obama has put his Chicago friends and America’s worst enemy before the American People once again

  67. JAC Says:

    You ever get the feeling that even though they can’t get to the Obama Machine directly…… there are people fighting to at least expose those in his cabinet or those considered by hm?

  68. JAC Says:

    The Real Meaning of Jefferson’s “Wall of Separation
    Between Church and State.”

    According to recent research conducted by the Library of Congress and FBI (recovering text blacked out in first draft), Thomas Jefferson’s reply to the Danbury Baptists (1801) was intended to explain why he (in a temporal political position) refused to proclaim national days of fasting and thanksgiving (which he considered under the permanent spiritual domain of God’s kingdom). It was not because he wanted to prevent Americans from observing religious celebrations, as Washington and Adams had done before him, but because he wanted to avoid showing political authority to proclaim them.

    Such religious proclamations were anathema to many Americans (both Republicans and Federalists, who hated King George’s religious tyranny in England). They weren’t atheists or offended by these religious observances, but because of their love for freedom and their Bible-based convictions, they absolutely didn’t want any Government control of their religions. So, Jefferson was attempting to avoid the appearance of (and prevent the occurrence of) any political or religious tyranny here in America.

    Also, Jefferson’s response to the Danbury Baptists’ was to alleviate their fear that the U.S. government was going to establish the Congregationalist Church as the official denomination of the new nation. Jefferson’s reference stated that the government should have no say in the affairs of the church, and — contrary to popular myth — was never intended to keep God out of government.

    Some Federalists were ready to demonize Jefferson either way. If he proclaimed a national day of thanksgiving, they would accuse him of exercising religious authority like King George. If he refused to proclaim, they would accuse him of being an atheist. Either way, they were being dishonest about Jefferson (the same way some politicians and media today are dishonest in their attacks on our President).

    Also, while being religious, Jefferson had no intent to establish a particular Christian sect as the official National religion. He was simply a good example of respecting our 1st Amendment rights, expressing his own convictions while in public office, without politically imposing them on others. In other words, our original political leaders wanted freedom to express their Bible-based beliefs without associating them with a particular Protestant religion.

    Furthermore, according to many religious quotes from our Founders, who contributed to the writing of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, any “wall of separation” was never intended to separate God’s righteous influence from our tax-payer funded Government leaders or public school teachers; but to separate the administration of Protestant religions from Government control (ie; prevent formation of political alliances between state or federal governments and any Christian sect; to prevent political domination over religion; and to prevent religious or non-religious domination over our Government).

    Jefferson’s “wall” was also intended to be a wall of protection, limiting Federal Government control over State Government and guaranteeing the protection of the God-given Rights of all USA citizens. Thus, we are free to express our various Christian beliefs anywhere and any time. This applies not only to private citizens (tax payers), but also to public (tax-payer funded) citizens, both on private and public property. Most taxpayers are not offended by this. I believe anyone who is offended, doesn’t understand the Spirit of America and is afraid to face reality.

    As long as Congress is not making laws to establish a religion or limit our freedom of expression (on public or private property), and as long as our expressions don’t show hatred towards or harm other people, then no one in America is justified to be offended to our religious expressions. If our Founders weren’t offended by the Bible, why should any modern day Americans be?

    In America there should never be Government-controlled religion, or religion-controlled Government, (like Charlemagne did in the [un]Holy Roman Empire, 800AD); but only Government leaders and American citizens voluntarily allowing God’s righteousness to have a good influence on them.

    According to the many religious quotes of our Founders (Peter Marshall’s book “The Light and the Glory”), that wall has a two-way door that allows God’s divine influence (righteousness, morality, wisdom, honesty, unselfishness, care for the well being of others) into Congress’s decision-making and tax-money spending process, and allows for outward religious expression of Government personnel private and public acknowledgements of God (First Amendment right of Bible religious and moral expression, Ten Commandment monument displays in Court houses, Christmas Manger Scenes, public non-denominational prayers, “One nation under God” in our pledge, teaching Creation in public schools praise, testimonies, gospel songs). These expressions should never be considered as Government establishment or endorsement of religion, because they are not Congress making laws. Nor should they be involved in legal disputes. Honest, well-informed judges should just dismiss these cases.

    But that door is also selective – it prevents any anti-Bible restrictions from entering in, and prevents official-endorsements of particular Christian sects from coming out. On the wall, right beside the door, I’d like to see a big sign that says “ACLU KEEP OUT!” Keep out of our tax-payer-funded public schools, Government buildings, and public property. When Government personnel, school-teachers and students express their personal religious beliefs, they should never be accused that they or their agency is trying to establish or endorse a particular religion (also applies to employees of corporations). We already have a law that prevents this – the 1st Amendment! As long as we have 1st Amendment rights, we don’t need lawyers, judges and courts to protect our civil rights. Because of this deception, American tax payers are being required to pay ACLU to erode our American freedoms and our culture. So, who needs ACLU?

    According to the Bible, many of the so-called “civil liberties” the ACLU supports are actually un-American and uncivilized (opposed to the principles of life given by our loving intelligent Creator). A friend of mine, refers to them as “Atheists, Communists and Liberals United.” The “ReclaimAmerica.org” website refers to them as “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing.”

    Their idea of “civil liberties” goes way beyond the original unselfish, honest, responsible, mature liberties that God and our Founders gave us. They also support additional freedoms that selfish, dishonest and irresponsible people demand. These demands are often accompanied by their unjustifiable (sometimes hateful and deceptive) attempts to deceive and dominate our legal system, and even to restrict our God-given Rights.
    ACLU may appear to have some good concerns, like supporting freedom of speech and opposing expenditure of tax money on religious displays that don’t represent all tax payer’s religions. But their good is just a front for other uncivilized liberties they support, like legalizing expressions of profanity and pornography in media, abortion (brutal, painful murder of children before birth), homosexual and lesbian alternatives to marriage… etc.

    Then, in violation of the 1st Amendment, they try to make it illegal for us to preach against these things, so that God’s love can save them. In their errant attempt to “separate church and state,” they seem more interested in eliminating the church, building their own wall that separates God’s righteous influence from our Government leaders and from our school children, so that the State will have total control over every aspect of our lives (goal of globalism). I believe any separation in America, should be a legal wall separating ACLU from both Church and State.

    Statistics published by honest psychologists abound to show the dangers of abortion and homosexuality. Abortion, whether legal or illegal, is among the leading causes of physical and emotional abuse to mothers. According to Elliot Institute, women who have abortions (legal or illegal) are so emotionally distressed that they are more likely to die or commit suicide soon after. And homosexuality is a major contributing factor in the spread of horrible deadly diseases, unfaithful relationships, and abusive treatment of children.

    In contrast, scientific evidence and a “cloud of witnesses” testify that women to choose to follow through with pregnancy and become mothers, and men and women to choose to engage in normal marriage, are the healthiest and happiest people.

    Looking at the big picture of life, our Creator loves us, and desires to deliver all of us from selfish worldly desires, so we can live healthy, peacefully and lovingly here on earth, and with Him in eternity. Why would anyone be offended by the fact that God loves them? Looking at the original intent of our Bill of Rights, as long as Congress is not passing laws (1) to establish a particular protestant sect (or other religion) as an official National or State religion, or (2) to restrict our Bible-based religious expressions, there is no justification for people to be offended by our 1st Amendment freedoms.
    Some Americans, like strong trees, have courage to stand tall and produce the good fruit of righteousness. Others, too weak to stand, are easily bent out of shape (offended). The high moral standards of the Ten Commandments and our Constitutional Republic are (and should continue to be) a lighthouse and good example to the rest of the world. What can we do to prevent the ACLU (and their sympathetic lawyers and judges) from eroding our American freedoms. They and other domineering minorities they support (Human Rights Campaign (HRC) homos and abortionists) are cumbering America like invasive species in trees, the original inhabitants of the land.

    The ACLU uses a loophole in “42 United States Code, Sect. 1988” to abuse the law. Following the same process used by invasive species encroach and dominate an ecosystem (ie: Kudzu in southern forests):
    (1) They establish a deep invisible root system.
    (2) With no support of their own they climb up using the tree for support (funding).
    (3) They cumber the tree’s branches (Executive, Legislative, Judicial, plus Military and Education).
    (4) With broad leaves (wide publicity) and sour fruit (judicial tyranny, forceful, hateful, intolerance, support of socialistic and immoral agenda) they try to dominate and block the light (God’s righteous influence).
    (5) They hinder the tree from producing its own leaves and good fruit (First Amendment right of Bible-based religious and moral expressions).
    (6) Killing the fruit also prevents the seeds from producing future generation of normal adults, moms and dads, leaders and workers, having wholesome values to pass to their children.
    (7) The end result of unrestricted infestation of invasive species is acres of dead and fallen trees and tangled vines where productive trees once flourished.

    If the ACLU and HRC succeed in destroying our American tree (Constitutional Republic) and good fruit (freedom of religious expression), then eventually, “…when freedom is lost, it is lost even to those who rebuke it” (Sterling Rome).

  69. JAC Says:

    It’s like ACLU is blindly walking past one of the greatest standards of American identity, the 1st Amendment. They don’t seem to have a clue (A-CLU) about the true meaning of our 1st Amendment rights. They are totally ignoring everyone else’s rights, and trying to force Congress to make laws that give a small minority of people additional rights to do things that oppose God’s will, and then hatefully make laws against our rights to lovingly preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, so they all can believe and be saved.

    Since our Constitutional Republic was established as “Government of the people, by the people and for the people,” the ACLU needs to get our permission (ALL voting citizens) to use our tax money to support what they call “civil liberties.” Since they are American citizens (our American brothers and sisters), they are entitled to enjoy the same freedom of expression as we are, and to debate respectfully with us, as long as they don’t try to hurt anyone or change laws that take away our rights. Occasionally I like to pull wild grape vines out of the trees around our yard, and if they had feelings and could speak, I believe those trees would thank me with sigh of relief. To protect the original tree, these vines need to be cut down (un-fund, and close the loop-hole in 42USC).

    I believe that if ACLU members (and atheists, agnostics, pagans, globalists) would just take time to study the Bible and U.S. history with an honest heart, and ask real Christians to explain how they know that God exists, and try to understand our testimonies of healing and deliverance (living proof of invisible spiritual realities recorded in Acts 2), and look at life from our Creator’s point of view; then they would see a more wholesome view of our liberties, and would not be offended by our expressions of faith in God, and would have more respect for our responsible freedoms.

    I believe the only truly “politically-correct” thing to do in America, is to continue using only the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights and the Ten Commandments as our legal standards, and compare all laws and future legislation to these standards, and shun lower European and U.N. standards. Our Founders departed from these when they crossed the Atlantic seeking freedom, and bravely fought against the bondage that attempted to follow them, and died to give us this wonderful “One Nation Under God.”

    Let us work together as one nation, not divided by religious, political and moral controversies, but united in preserving the righteous heritage our Founders gave us, for another generation. If we don’t remain the “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave” we will become the land of the weak and home of the slave.

    Charles Sproull, Springville IN, 3/10/2009
    Sorry, it was a private post…… no link… but too good not to share

  70. rosettasister Says:

    New Thread:


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: