Debra J. Saunders has an excellent article out today which goes down the laundry list of ways in which the conservative movement has been beating the Democrats at their own game. I was prepared to hate this article before I even started reading it because so many of these articles seem to simply be an excuse for the writers to bash conservatives who have principled opposition to John McCain. But Saunders makes an excellent defense for how much we have been able to accomplish just in the last few years.

Even with Bush heading into his final year in office he has been able to stick it to the democrats at every turn. And yet it seems that many conservatives are ready to ‘cut off there nose despite there face.’ I say openly that I don’t like John McCain. I think he is an arrogant, self-righteous man and if he ever got into my face I would explode like Mount St. Helens. I also believe that conservatives are going to be faced with a loss of power in a McCain presidency, because I do not see McCain backing down in the face of conservative opposition the way Bush did on Harriet Myers.

I’d say that we are stuck between the proverbial ‘rock and a hard place,’ but I think that would be stretching the truth somewhat. I believe that Clinton and Obama are so dangerous that we can not risk letting them get into office. The Supreme Court and Iran are just two issues that make it too important to allow democrats back into power. I believe that if we let the democrats regain control of the Presidency, especially while they still control Congress, we are going to see change that we can not even begin to imagine. Remember, these are the people, every single democrat presidential candidate, who said they have no problem with second graders being taught about Harry and Larry ramming each other in the caboose. To hear this and yet still believe the democrats when they say they oppose gay marriage is simply laughable on it’s face. My only hope is that the conservative movement comes to it’s senses and unites in the face of this threat. The alternative is simply too grave to even contemplate.

So, the Archbishop of Canterbury says that we should just accept the inevitable and let Sharia law be practiced in the west. This should be a wakeup call to Europeans about what happens when liberals are put into these types of leadership positions, but it won’t be, because this type of lunacy is rampant in Europe. The people of Europe have been born and bred into this type of thinking. I’m not saying most Europeans are going to be siding with this nut-case about Sharia law. I’m talking in more general terms. For instance, the anti-Americanism that is rampant in Europe, Canada and elsewhere is a good example. There are many in these countries, and I am talking about a very large number of people, who believe that America is a scourge on the world and that we are the source of most of the worlds problems. I will grant you, though, this may be changing somewhat with the rising belligerence of Iran. It appears that many Europeans are afraid of Iran, but this is another example of the absolute rampant amorality in Europe. The people of Europe are cowards to a large extent who will only rise up to defend themselves when they are on the brink. Unfortunately, we here in America aren’t a whole lot better. We act as if the death toll in Iraq of Americans is a the most disastrous thing that has happened to our country. Ten times that number die on American highways every year. And what did they die for? Nothing. The Americans in Iraq have died for a cause. But I’m not defending the absolute ineptness of the Bush administration in prosecuting the war. Let me just end with a quote from a great American:

It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
George S. Patton

Here’s more on Gary Zukav for anyone that is interested. The Watchman.org has an interesting article that clearly portrays Zukav’s bizarre belief system. Here’s a sample:

Zukav goes on to say, “When we say of an action, ‘This is right,’ or, ‘That is wrong,’ we create negative karma.”6 While the author pleads for compassion he has torn away the possibilities of correcting social evil. Contrary to Zukav’s view, the man may be lying in the gutter because he is an alcoholic, he may lie there because he is poor and ill and the foundations of society (i.e., the church, community and government) have failed in their duties. It may be the sin of the individual or the sin of many individuals, but there can be redemption because it is judged sin. The biblical understanding of sin and redemption is quite different than Zukav’s of human action. Jesus in the Gospel of Luke tells the parable of the two men who went to the temple to pray. Only the tax collector was justified because he humbled himself and prayed, “God, have mercy on me, a sinner!” (Luke 18:9-14). In the book of Hosea, God pleads with a whole nation: “Return, O Israel to the Lord your God. Your sins have been your downfall! Take words with you and return to the Lord. Say to Him: ‘Forgive all our sins and receive us graciously, that we may offer the fruit of our lips’” (Hos. 14:1, 2).

This isn’t so much bizarre as it is just typical liberal stupidity. And, I might add, evil. Taking away responsibility from the individual is, I believe, one of the greatest evils that liberals are perpetuating in our society today. This is the kind of indoctrination that is going on every day in our grade schools, high schools, and colleges. It’s one of the reasons why we need to break the backs of the teacher’s unions. This is why we need to forge ahead with a voucher system that will give us the freedom we need to raise up a patriotic, conservative, Judeo-Christian society. This is the last thing liberals want. They don’t want you to have the freedom to raise your child in whatever way you believe, within reason of course. I believe Hilary’s book, ‘It Takes a Village’, is a good example of how liberals want to raise your children for you. While, in theory, the warm and fuzzy idea of a village uniting together may sound like a great idea, the actual underlying theme of Clinton’s book is the creation of a socialist nanny state. The whole idea is to take away your rights as a parent. Clinton says that no one should think of a child as their own. They should think of them as society’s child. This just goes to show how radical Hilary Clinton’s thinking is. This isn’t what this country was founded on. And this certainly puts the lie to the falsity democrats are trying to spread of people like Hilary being faithful, believing Christians. These people believe in an all-powerful government. Not God. I don’t know about you, but I plan to fight tooth and nail against of any of Clinton’s radical ideas being adopted into law. This is the kind of war we conservative were born to fight.

Here is a link to an article by Phyllis Schlafly about the out of control nanny-state messing with your parental rights. I think you’ll be outraged by this:

It Takes a Village… To Undermine Parenthood

Here is a link to one-star reviews for Clinton’s book on Amazon.com.

So, I turn on Oprah today and she has a woman on named Louise Hay. Hay wrote a book twenty five years ago called ‘You Can Heal Your Life’ and this is the twenty-fifth anniversary of it’s release. Oprah starts asking each woman what they think of ‘The Secret.’ Ok, ‘here we go’, I’m thinking. So, I look this woman up and I find out that she belongs to the ‘Church of Religious Science.’ lol. I mean c’mon. This is just typical of Oprah who revels in any thing ‘New Age.’ She used to have on ‘New Age’ guru Gary Zukav and she would just be in awe of this man’s absolutely absurd babbling. I remember Zukav pulling some stupid little saying out of his ass and Oprah going, ‘That is so profound.’ I wish I could remember what he said, because it was beyond stupid. Zukav is the kind of the nut who believes that we were or are meant to do whatever we are doing or have done. In other words, Hitler was meant to kill 6 million Jews and other assorted millions in the gas chambers. He had no choice. It’s almost hard to believe that Zukav is a physicist. But, then again, with atheism and pseudo-Christianity being so rampant in that community, I shouldn’t be. It’s doesn’t surprise me that Oprah never has Zukav on any more. I bet her ratings tank when that loon starts spouting his ‘New Age’ rhetoric.

I’ll admit that I was interested when talk turned to a ‘movie’ based on Ms. Hay’s book. I thought this might be a movie of some inspirational sort, but that was before I looked the woman up. Of course this isn’t a ‘movie’ at all. More like some sort of video in the vein of the ‘The Secret’ with a bunch of New Age guru’s no doubt talking about how the ‘universe’ can heal you. I don’t really know anything about any of the people in it other than Dr. Wayne Dyer and can only guess at how much of a New Age fanatic he is. The sad part is how many people actually buy into this stuff. I remember my girlfriend really getting sucked into ‘The Secret’ when it came out. One thing I know for sure. I don’t think Oprah has a clue what Christianity is about.