Elementary, My Dear Watson: A Rebuttal of Ken Ham's "Days of Decline in the Church"

By Michael David Rawlings

December 9, 2013

 

The link to Ken Ham's article: "Days of Decline in the Church"

The disbelief of many in the Genesis account of origins is not due to any supposed confusion over the varying textual theories regarding the respective ages of the cosmos and its constituents, and the idea that the contentions of old-earth creationism, which emphatically reject the trappings of Darwinism, are intellectually chaotic or scripturally irresponsible is an illusion in the minds of those who fail to appreciate the hermeneutical and theological ramifications of the ancient Hebrew's prescientific view of the natural world. Those who will not believe in a six-twenty-four-hour-day creation scenario will not believe in a biblically based, dispensational rendering of the six days of creation entailing millions of years either.

 

Ultimately, those who spurn the authority of God's word do so because they cannot hear or will not heed the voice of the Good Sheppard.

 

In the meantime, the real problem in secular academia and popular culture is cognitive: an uncritical and often unwitting acceptance of the underlying metaphysical presuppositions of the modern apostasies of abiogenesis and evolution, namely, ontological naturalism and materialism. Like their subsequent theoretical models, these presuppositions are not only unbiblical, but scientifically unfalsifiable.

 

In other words, the Darwinist incautiously assumes that which is neither obvious nor scientifically demonstrable: that all of cosmological and biological history is an unbroken chain of natural cause-and-effect, hence, the big lies of abiogenesis and evolution.

Obama and the EU push Genocide

By James Lewis

11/30/2013

American Thinker

 

"Why can't Iran be allowed to have its own nukes?" asked a good friend of mine. "It only seems fair."

 

My friend is an intelligent person who has seen politics up close. And yet, such is the power of mass indoctrination, she doesn't know that Iran isn't a normal nation.

 

Four decades after Jimmy Carter's Iranian Hostage Crisis, which crashed his presidency and brought Ronald Reagan into office, our media have failed completely and utterly to tell the plain truth about the genocidal regime in Tehran.

 

When we complain about the blindness of our friends and family, we really need to point at the source: the leftist monopoly over our Organs of Propaganda. There is no genuine debate in American media. Nothing honest or worth learning. As in Europe, our Big Corporate Media peddle 24/7 leftist agitprop. If you want to see Crony Socialism at work, simply look at NBC and its Fat Cat owners, GE/Comcast. You can be sure they benefit financially from their alliance with the Left.

 

Read the rest of the article. . . .

The ObamaCare lie and the global warming lie

By Thomas Lifson

11/29/2013

American Thinker

 

Now that Americans have largely caught on that their government will lie to them to support the expansion of state power, America's progressives are in for a rough time ahead, according to Peter Ferrara, writing at Forbes.

The second shoe is preparing to drop to shatter the world view of so-called Progressives.  Coming, global revelations will demonstrate the fraud behind the theory of man-caused, catastrophic, global warming, just like the real world has shattered the falsehoods behind Obamacare. 

That is because the underlying reason for both frauds was the same: to expand government power.  Enablers went along with the fraud in both cases for the same underlying reason - political correctness.  In both cases, going along with the cause for the assumed public good without raising questions was considered the politically correct thing to do for all "good" people.  Soon the enablers in both cases will have to pay the price for participating in and perpetuating the fraud.

Article

Intellectual Froglegs

 

 

To the 41% who still approve of the Obamanation of America: "You're killin' me, Smalls"

By Michael David Rawlings

November 8, 2013

 

While Obama and his enablers in the mainstream media continue to lie about his lies, the destructive realities of Obamacare are sinking in for many for the very first time.

 

Those who are informed and can think their way out of those wet paper bags in which far too many Americans live nowadays already knew that Obamacare would necessarily be a debacle due to certain universal imperatives woven into the very fabric of reality itself, including certain principles that govern human nature and the ebb and flow of real-world economics. The disastrous HealthCare.gov website is just the first paragraph in this tail of deception, incompetency and misery.

 

Of course millions will lose their coverage and their doctors, of course millions will pay higher premiums and deductibles for plans that include coverage for things they don't want or need, and of course fewer and fewer at an ever greater expense will subsidize the coverage of more and more. So much for the Affordable in the Affordable Care Act (ACA), so much for its supposed economy-boosting provisions and so much for the new system's sustainability.

 

And Americans will pay more for less, not only because the inevitable supply-and-demand dynamics of this 2000-plus-page monstrosity entails rationing and deferment, but because tens of thousands of healthcare professionals are going to opt out of the system or leave the already short-handed healthcare profession altogether.  It doesn't take a genius to understand that a dramatic increase in the scarcity of healthcare providers means a decrease in the frequency and competency of care provided by those who are willing to remain in the profession for less and less compensation.

Obama: The Most Dangerous of Morons

By William L. Gensert

November 7, 2013

American Thinker

 

There have been bad presidents -- see Jimmy Carter.  Yet has there ever been a president as staggeringly incompetent as Barack Obama?  Really, can there be any other explanation for his performance as president than the man is, well...a moron?

Let's face it, we all know them.  They are the people who either started out with money, or have spent a lifetime failing up.  Despite a distinct lack of accomplishment, personal or professionally, they believe they are the smartest person in every room.  They cannot utter a sentence that does not include "I," "me," and "my," and they never stop speaking.  To quote Alice Roosevelt, they are "the corpse at every funeral, the bride at every wedding and the baby at every christening."

They seem to Forrest Gump their way through life, with one undeserved success after another.

Does this remind you of anyone?

Read the rest of the article. . . .

A Different View of Paternalism

 

By Jim Yardley

November 6, 2013

American Thinker

 

The word "paternalism" has been bandied about concerning the various pathetic defenses of Barack Obama's now infamous claim that "If you like your health care, you can keep it. Period."

 

Well, yes, you can actually keep the health care you had before Obamacare was crammed through Congress. The caveat that was always unstated by the president, by any and all Democrats in Congress or the administration and by the mainstream media was that you could keep it if, and only if, it complied with every aspect of the new (Orwellian) Affordable Care Act.

 

Certain people who might generally be viewed as conservative have noted with mild horror that this is governmental paternalism.

Betsy McCaughey, in her article published at Accuracy in Media's website, says:

Obama's pledge never matched up to the actual law. The law epitomizes "Washington knows best" paternalism. Everyone must have the one-size-fits-all health plan designed by "experts."

Paternalism is, in their view, clearly evidence that the government thinks that you are not capable, or intellectually competent, of making a rational evaluation of what is really necessary for your own well-being.

 

However, it should be noted that like cancer, there are stages to paternalism. A common dictionary definition of the term would be:

"...the system, principle, or practice of managing or governing individuals, businesses, nations, etc., in the manner of a father dealing benevolently and often intrusively with his children..."

Read the rest of the article. . . .

The Obama Doctrine: Lie to Win - Millions Spent Lying About Cuccinelli

By Lloyd Marcus

November 6, 2013

American Thinker

 

I caught a bit of Rush Limbaugh talking about a study that revealed why liberals own low info voters even though liberals are a small percentage of the population. The answer is quite simple. Liberals lie about their agenda and about conservatives.

For example: when liberals use the word "tolerance," it really means they are about to force another of their far left radical agenda items down our throats. When liberals say "fairness," it means they have targeted for redistribution more of what you struggled and labored to earn. When liberals attack you with the "e" word (extremist), it means you dared to oppose their attempts to bully you into submission of their latest infringement on your liberty and freedom.

Read the rest of the article. . . .

The Edification of the Low-Information Voter

By Scott Mayer

November 1, 2013

American Thinker

 

The predictably disastrous rollout of ObamaCare has given conservatives a rare opportunity -- a perfect storm, if you will -- to just sit back and observe while low-information voters discover firsthand that President Obama's lofty rhetoric in no way matches the actual effects of his signature law.  It's as if these shell-shocked low-information voters are being thrust into a once-in-a-lifetime crash-course on the failures of big government -- before the law even gets off the ground.  ObamaCare's implementation is different because previous expansions of the federal leviathan moved "forward" due to the temptations of unbridled utopian promises (think Social Security and Medicare) and because the inherent economic flaws didn't present themselves until well after Americans were fully dependent upon the system.  Not this time around.

 

Read the rest of the article. . . .

The Alinsky Republicans

By Fisher Adams
November 1, 2013

American Thinker

 

Fisher Ames was a great man. He also had a great name (I couldn't resist). But this original, almost completely forgotten Conservative philosopher said something hundreds of years ago that is as relevant in the world today as wigs and horses were back when he said it.

 

Ames said, "Society is the substratum of government."

 

By that he meant that culture, in many ways, steers the ship of state. As the values of the culture change, voters will elect people who embody and represent those changing values. It doesn't matter if those changes in morals were brought on by the media, the church, a partisan and biased educational system, or all of the above; the people eventually get what they want. If their wants shift in a certain direction, regardless of the cause, in a representative republic the government will eventually change with it.

 

The establishment Republicans -- who have shown a far more robust proclivity to attack Tea Party conservatives than attacking the socialist left -- have been living at odds with this sentiment. They seem to believe in the culture of money and Democrat-Light government that plays dog to the societal tail.

Read the rest of the article. . . .
 

Fisher Ames (April 9, 1758 – July 4, 1808)

 

_____________________________________________________________________

 

Ten Ways Republicans Are Giving President Obama A Taste Of His Own Alinsky

 

Saul Alinsky