Kyle and her husband moved to Brookfield in 1986. She became active in local politics and started blogging in 2004. Her focus is primarily on local issues but often includes state and national topics, too. Kyle looks at things from the taxpayers' perspective in a creative, yet down to earth way, addressing them from a practical point of view.
Did you know that Adolf Hitler and his henchmen were heavily influenced by Darwinian dogma? That, in fact, Darwinism was the driving force behind their attempt to wipe out the Jewish people as well as others they considered racially inferior?
Yesterday the President unveiled his 23 Executive Orders pertaining to gun control. There really wasn't much new in what he said. In fact, he relied heavily on that all too familiar plea: If gun control saves just one life, its worth it.
Is this the same man who wouldn't give so much as palliative care for a baby who survived a late term abortion? Is this the same father who said he didn't want his daughters "punished" with an unwanted baby?
Of course no legislation or executive order can prevent gun violence or violence of any kind. But the President loves to tug at the heartstrings when trying to push his agenda, especially when that agenda usurps our Constitutional rights. So he enshrouded himself with a group of young children to crank up the emotional response.
If only he would have the same concern for the million plus children aborted during his first term.
Obama, are you for or against Partial Birth Abortion? Yes
Walter Williams: Americans misunderstand point of the Second Amendment
It is estimated that between 17 to 30 million Evangelical and self identified Christians did NOT vote in 2008. I know many conservative Christians (I know several) voted 3rd party in 2008, because they believed voting for the lessor of 2 evils is still evil.
Candidate Barack Obama won that election by about 10 million votes over opponent John McCain.
If we want our Republic as One nation under God to survive, this cannot happen again.
But what does a Christian do if they feel they cannot support Barack Obama or Mitt Romney, because they "don't agree theologically" with either one?
Dr. Greg Huffman, a pastor at Brookside Baptist Church, addresses this extremely important question in his 2 part radio program entitled: Why Is Our Country So Divided? PART 1 and PART 2 I urge you to listen to each 13 minute broadcast in its entirety.
IIn Part 1, Pastor Huffman eases the Christian's dilemma by clarifying, "we're not electing a pastor, we're electing a president." The real question becomes, "So who can do the best job leading our country, with all the conflicting ethical and biblical issues at stake?" He goes on to say that fifty years ago, there wasn't a "whole lot of difference between the platforms of the two major parties". But today, there is a stark difference. The issues involved are morally and ethically worlds apart which reveal totally differing views of human life and the institute of marriage.
Then he outlines how the Obama administration has already chipped away at our religious rights by appointing an "EEOC Commissioner [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] who asserts that society should not tolerate my private beliefs, including religious beliefs, if they may negatively affect homosexual equality... Then in May of 2012, that same administration opposed legislation to protect the rights of conscience for military chaplains who didn't wish to perform same-sex marriages. ...They said, sorry, you must perform same-sex marriages. Then in June of 2012, Bibles for the American military, that had been printed ever since the American Revolutionary War, all of a sudden could no longer be printed with the military service emblems on those military Bibles."
"We are in a battle for the ethical values and biblical values of our country. ...The issues are of interest and concern to the Lord." Huffman then warns that God will give up on a nation if they are promoting sins such as fornication, adultery, and homosexuality.(Romans 1:24-25, 26-28 ) "God has said that He gives up on a nation when we consider that we can make all the rules and become totally anti-God."
"We, as a church, need to be concerned about allowing God be God, but our country needs to allow the church to preach and teach the same message. That's why these are ethical and biblical principles that we are facing in the election today."
In Part 2, Dr. Huffman recaps Part 1 [my summation] Why are we so divided as a country? Basically it is a division in philosophy and therefore, it is a division of politics. For Christians, their foundation, their worldview, is based on the principles of the Bible. For a non-believer, that foundation is anything but the Bible. So our election is basically a worldview test.
Then Dr. Huffman discusses other things that cause God to give up on a nation, such as the shedding of innocent blood (2 Kings 24: 1-4) in abortion. Psalm 106:36, 41 speaks of those who sacrificed their children to idols. "And God gave them into the hand of the heathen, and they that hated them, ruled over them." As a consequence for their sin of child sacrifice, God allowed other nations to come in and defeat His people, because they were the shedding innocent blood of their children.
"Our country today is so involved in a battle of pro-life and pro-choice." This is indeed a moral conflict between anti-God philosophies and worldviews and pro-God philosophies and worldviews."
"God designed government to keep order in society" (Romans 13), and we are to "be subject to higher powers for there is no power but of God, and powers that be [local authorities/government] are ordained of God."
Dr. Huffman concludes, "When you vote, you will be taking a test, a worldview test, and that will tell so much about your theology, God or anti-God, biblical truth or humanistic lies... May the Lord give you wisdom and give you courage to take a stand for that which is right against that which is wrong. Let's reestablish the moral foundations upon which this nation was founded."
Many other religious leaders and groups, from Billy Graham's full page newspaper ads, to the Catholic church, to Evangelical Christians such as Ralph Reed and James Dobson, are making the same plea: vote for biblical values this November.
It is vital that we support all candidates who support God's values, the biblical principles our nation was founded upon. If we don't, we will find ourselves under Democrat leadership, the party that tried (unsuccessfully) to scour any reference to God from its party platform, the party that openly supports homosexuality and same sex marriage, and the party that advocates murder of the unborn at any time through abortion. Remember that Senator Obama voted 4 times to withhold comfort care to aborted babies who survived the abortion!
So, you see, this election is too important to vote 3rd party or not vote at all. We, His people, must vote to support His values.
We should be used to it by now, the misleading, or to put it politely, the pants on fire campaign ads that paint the opposing candidate as being heartless and against something as wholesome as Mom and Apple Pie.
In this case, it is Gubernatorial Democrat candidate Tom Barrett wearing the hot pants. He points the accusatory finger at his opponent Republican Scott Walker. The Mom and apple pie issue here is stem cell research.
Barrett's ad is intended to tug at your heart strings in hopes that you will make the leap that Scott Walker is heartless and against helping those in need because of his pro-life beliefs. The ad wants you to believe Walker is turning a deaf ear to the pleas of the featured mother, talking about her diabetic son and how embryonic stem cell research would help cure her son.
This ad was so outrageous in its claims that it prompted Gary Nosacek to write an outstanding piece in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Oct. 7th titled, The stem cell confusion. He states he is a "father, brother and nephew of diabetics, and the husband of a doctor, I'm really upset by this ad."
I also found out that Walker's own wife Tonette is "a type 1 diabetic" and she says, "I CAN PROMISE YOU, my husband is full of hope! Hope for me, hope for our family, and hope for Wisconsin!"
Tonette goes on to say, "Regardless of what Tom Barrett has said, Scott will NOT ban stem cell research. Scott supports adult stem cell research- research which science has shown to have the most promise to cure my disease and which does not destroy innocent human life. "
So what is going on here? Democrats support government funding for Embryonic Stem Cell research instead of Adult Stem Cell research. Why? Is it that Embryonic Stem Cells work and adult ones don't? NO.
In fact, Embryonic Stem Cell breakthroughs continue to be fraught with serious side effects such as tumor growth and rejection. They have shown very little positive results. There is not one cure confirmed to date.
Contrast that with Adult Stem Cell research and treatments, which have already helped 1,000s of people. Nosacek's points out that even with moral issues aside, the Embryonic Stem Cells are a waste of money.
He writes, "There are over 167 adult cell treatments and cures being used by doctors every day. There are more in clinical trials and in animal testing phases. As for embryonic cells, there is not one cure to be found. There are only two in human trials, but so far there are no results. As a rule, embryonic cells haven't done much of anything in any lab in the world other than promised to be promising someday in the distant future. Walker isn't against stem cell research. He's against spending millions on research that hasn't worked at the expense of what is working!"
He goes on to tell us that Adult Stem Cell research on diabetes was being carried out at Harvard but it has been a painstaking process because they couldn't get funding. All the government grants were going to Embryonic Stem Cell research. Finally funding came from "Lee Iacocca, who has a diabetic grandchild. Harvard is now in human trials. They are being bankrolled by anyone who wishes to contribute."
So why isn't the proven and more promising type of ADULT Stem Cell research being funded by Government grants? Because IF the Liberal, Pro-abortion advocates can get us all on board with using embryonic stem cells, we will have lost the pro-life, life begins at conception fight.
Just this month we learned there was a Baby Born From 20-Year-Old Frozen Embryo. This leaves little doubt that embryos, even ones frozen for 2 decades, aren't human. Here we have one born to a New York woman! Would she give up her son for stem cell research? Of course not. So why are we asked to accept that these humans be sacrificed for the sake of Leftist researchers?
This is nothing new here. In the 2008 presidential campaign Obama ads accused McCain of being against helping people through stem cell research, which was not true. Like McCain and his running mate Sarah Palin, Scott Walker and other Conservatives just favor life respecting ADULT Stem Cell research.
President Bush had to endure this criticism too with his position to not allow Federal funding to go toward Embryonic Stem Cell research. The Republicans were all Pro-Life.
I asked this question in 2008:
How many times have we heard from the Democrats that the Republicans are the Party of NO? How many times do we hear that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans?
Well, if you watched any of yesterday's Obama summit, you now know differently. The Republicans utilized their 110 minutes of speaking time to their best advantage, compared to the President repeating the same old / same old for 119 minutes and the Democrats prattling on for 114 minutes.
My favorite Democrat prattle was the one where Rep. Louise Slaughter told the story of one constituent who was forced to wear her dead sister's false teeth as a reason to pass ObamaCare. Trouble is, ObamaCare has nothing to do with dental care!
Contrast Ms. Slaughter's moment in the limelight with Congressman Paul Ryan's 6 minute synopsis of the Republican's idea of health care reform vs. the Obama plan [YouTube]. Ryan skillfully reminded the President of his pledge to not sign a bill that adds one single dime to the deficit.
Ryan then gave some facts on how ObamaCare does not reduce the deficit, and how it double counts offsets. He stated that in the first 10 years ObamaCare really runs a $460 Billion deficit and in the next 10 years, a 1.4 Trillion deficit. Clearly the differences were pretty stark.
It is true that Republicans in the past often went along with irresponsible spending, but compared to the Democrats this past year, they now look like tightwads.
But on a far more serious front, consider the 2 parties positions on abortion. Here the difference is night and day with Democrats being pro death and Republicans being pro life. I would beg to differ with those saying there is no difference between the 2 parties, because it makes a HUGE difference to the unborn baby.
And that difference goes back to the differences in health care reform, with the Democrats allowing taxpayer money to fund abortion and the Republicans opposing.
More reading/viewing: Louise Slaughter: dead Sister's Dentures
Heritage Foundation: The Four-Minute Guide to the Seven-Hour Summit
More Boor Than Cure, The summit persuaded nobody. It probably wasn't meant to: Lamar Alexander, "It's not appropriate" to rewrite the rules of 17% of the U.S. economy through what is called 'reconciliation.' [51 vote procedure] Don't go 'jamming it through.' 'Let's start over'."
Unfortunately, ObamaCare health care reform has become a matter of being the best bill money can bribe. It seems the only way the Democrats can cram it down our throats is to offer big buck incentives to hold-out Senators to reach the magical 60 vote majority and then vote in the dead of night.
Senator and Doctor Tom Coburn said it best, "This process is not legislation. This process is corruption, and it's a shame that that's the only way we can come to consensus in this country is to buy votes."
If bribes weren't bad enough, Senate Leader Harry Reid scheduled the final vote on the eve of Christendom's most significant holiday: Christmas Eve. The timing of his vote is a slap in the face to Christians.
All I can say is that our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves at the dirty tricks some legislators have sunk to.
What can we do? Really nothing, except pray that just one of those 60 Democrats would change their vote? Something in the spirit of A Christmas Carol, where the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future visited Ebenezer Scrooge prompting his change of heart, that 1 or 2 Democrats would be convicted or have troubling dreams of what America will look like in the future under the tyranny of ObamaCare.
Or, we need something to keep a Senator or 2 from voting on the Senate floor Christmas Eve. Not anything serious, just a well timed emergency appendectomy or something?
Unless we get a reprieve, we probably will have a signed Senate bill on Christmas Eve. Talk about coal in our stockings!
The only shred of hope we have of defeating ObamaCare after that is to hammer our legislators while they are home in their districts over Christmas break. The House and Senate versions still must go through conference committee to come up with the final version. My hope would be some Congressmen would reconsider, seeing that over 60% of Americans DON'T WANT OBAMACARE.
God help us, everyone.
Curiosity won out last night, and so I went to Brookfield East's library for Sen. Jim Sullivan's Town Hall meeting. I didn't know what to expect; I have never been to one of his meetings. Would I be the lone conservative amongst liberals?
If you have been following Governor Doyle's proposed budget at all, you know that it is filled with tax increases, unwanted new government programs, new fees, and a whole host of other overreaching legislation.
Several people have sent me emails about this, The Red Envelope Project.
No, that isn't a typo. It is what Charles Darwin's theory of Evolution resulted in: a revolution of society. Relativism. Man is little more than animal. Life is cheap. There is no God. etc.
Just this week, we have 2 more stories in the news about stem cells used in human trials. In one case, a Parkinson's disease sufferer was helped, and in another case, a child with a brain disease, stem cells made the situation worse.
You cannot make this stuff up. Attorney David W. Ogden is President Obama's choice for 2nd in command in the U.S. office of the Attorney General. So what?
Last Thursday, I posted Ad celebrates Obama's mother's choice. That very afternoon, I received an email from Focus on the Family Action urging Christians to "pray for a change of heart for President Obama" regarding his pro-abortion and pro Freedom of Choice Act positions
January 18 - 25th is Sanctity of Human Life week. It also marks "the 36th anniversary of the 1972 U.S. Supreme Court Roe vs. Wade opinion that struck down state restrictions on abortion, essentially installing that "right" in the Constitution."
Obama is not going to defend life like President George Bush did. It was pretty hard to swallow Obama's line in his inaugural address that science would have it's rightful place regarding health care. I couldn't help think he referring to stem cells. Science is revealing Adult Stem Cells to be useful. Embryonic plagued with problems.
From Family Research Council:
Don't you love it? Grow your own transplant parts from your own stem cells. Claudia Castillo gets windpipe tailor-made from her own stem cells: (My emphasis)
http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/11/10/obama-may-move-quickly-on-stem-cells-childrens-health/ Obama May Move Quickly on Stem Cells, Children's Health Nov. 10, 2008
Well, today is the day. The day we go vote for president and our other government representatives*. How will you choose which one?
At the last debate, John McCain stated his strong opposition to the horrible procedure, Partial Birth Abortion. Barack Obama, knowing his pro-abortion stance at the Saddleback Forum hurt him, must have decided that in a national venue such as a televised debate, he could not publicly support Partial Birth Abortion. So Obama said he was "completely supportive of a ban on late-term abortions, partial-birth or otherwise, as long as there's an exception for the mother's health and life..."
Well, today is the day. The day we go vote for president and our other government representatives*. How will you choose which one?
People, you have a voice. Use it!
Partial Birth Abortion is a barbaric procedure in which doctors induce a late term pregnant woman to actually give birth, but before the baby is totally delivered, doctors will puncture the child's brain to kill it. If any other culture did that we would be outraged. (This procedure is to be confused with late term labor induced abortion, which occurs earlier in the pregnancy.)