BY GOD OR OPRAH
Re: Jeffrey Lord’s An Open Letter to Barack Obama:
Mr. Lord should not worry. God, or at least Oprah, will provide those legal funds.
— Kent J. Lyon
College Station, Texas
Mr. Lord is giving his denomination’s leaders too much of a pass on the IRS flap regarding Barack Obama’s speech before the group. While it would have been nice if Obama had declined to speak at the event, the ultimate responsibility lies with the leaders who allowed him to speak in the first place! It is their responsibility to safeguard the church from this type of situation, not the speaker’s to save them from themselves. The church leadership knew the rules, or least should have, and they failed to do what was necessary to keep away from violating the law (as silly as it may be).
But I must agree that Mr. Obama and his staff do bear some responsibility as well. This is his home denomination, and to do anything that threatens the security of the church he calls home for his own political ends should tell us all something abut Mr. Obama. What it tells me is that he is just another self serving politician, interested solely in his own political well being, all else be damned!
— Eric Edwards
Walnut Cove, North Carolina
I only have a few things to say to Mr. Lord, Rev. Thomas and Mr. Lynn (Rev. ha!). I think it is about time that the liberal side and especially something Barry Lynn is connected with get caught and investigated. Every 4 years the liberal Democrats break the rules and go into Black Church especially and campaign and get away with it. While good organizations like Focus on the Family get audited (come out clean). I hope they throw the book at Barry and Rev. Thomas and Senator Obama for their arrogance. They knew the rules and laws (come on). They just knew that they are liberal Democrats and above the law. Finally, please repeal the law. This is just plain wrong and unconstitutional.
Maybe it will take a large liberal Church like the UCC losing its tax exempt status to change the law. I hope so.
— Joseph D’Ambrosia
A timely topic that might “deal with” 3 birds at one time — if interest ignites — the LBJ Law against free speech, Obama and also Hillary who has given many a political speech in black churches. No doubt Obama thought he would get the same “pass” that Hillary always gets — and Republicans never get. So the real question should be: Why hasn’t the IRS investigated the Clintons for the same thing. Maybe if enough of the right politicians get fined, the LBJ Law will magically disappear. That is one “change” that is absolutely needed.
— Leonard Ransil
Doesn’t Mr. Lord (a good name for a servant of Christ) know that the new age messiah Barack Hussein Obama isn’t bound by the rules of law or the Constitution like the rest of us insignificant human beings. In his mind and the eyes of his disciples he’s above the law — even the Law’s of God. He’s infallible. What Mr. Lord needs is the “audacity to hope for the promise of change” and quit looking for substance, character and integrity in Barack Hussein Obama.
Now that “public theologian” (as Christianity Today christened Obama) has twisted Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount to mandate homosexual marriage I’m sure this vain “champion” of separation of church and state has puffed up his ego to the point that he believes he has the right to violate any law or Constitutional principle he arbitrarily chooses. One wonders how the “Obamanation of Desolation” will rewrite the Ten Commandments to make eliminating terrorists a “sin,” but sanctify the infanticide of partial birth abortion?
A careful review of Obama’s lightweight record (something the Democrat mainstream media refuses to do) reveals that though meager it is a series of “bonehead mistakes,” deals with corrupt domestic and foreign businessmen and taxpayer funded scams to fill his pockets and boost his ego. An individual so narcissistic and enamored with himself doesn’t have the character or integrity to rectify the grievous damage he has done to his church much less any political errors. Mr. Lord is hoping against hope for a promise of change by the man who says a lot, but still says nothing.
— Michael Tomlinson
MOCK THE VOTE
Re: Russ Ferguson’s Friending the Vote:
Every four years we hear this: “Young people are wildly interested in this election.” The Democrats always have thousands upon thousands so fired up they can hardly wait until November. The problem is that by November, these young people are just that: very young and have shot their wad. By November they are completely bored with the whole idea.
In the fall, it is too much trouble to get out of bed; too much trouble to get to the polls; the lines are way too long to wait; too much trouble to even be interested by November. So, to the nice young man who wrote this article, my answer is, “We’ll see.”
— Angie VanDaele
I was working in political campaigns before I could vote. I stood on corners holding campaign signs, knocked on doors, handed out literature and manned phone banks while other teens were partying. So what? Every Presidential election the Democrats and their media toadies tout an energized youth vote that’s going to sweep a dim Dem into the White House — just ask President John Francois Kerry or the “prophet” of gloom and doom President Al Gore.
The hype is even bigger this year with the Democrats running a has-been First Lady and a mesmerizing wannabe guru. Even if the youth do vote I’m still not overly impressed if they’re anything like the “living dead” for Obama. The really impressive youth in America are enlisted in the United States military — the men and women Obama and Hillary want to stab in the back on behalf of Islamic extremists. America’s young warriors are not kids, but brave adults defending the right of their out-of-shape and overweight peers to vote for the candidate for “change” — Barack Obama.
Before surrendering the White House to Obama and his “army” of “virtual” youth let’s wait till the votes are actually cast in November. Who knows if Hillary unseats the “Imam of surrender and appeasement” his energized youth might just decide to stay home and repeat history.
— Michael Tomlinson
I got into the habit of voting right when I was “the young vote” — I made sure to make it a habit. I may have missed one or two local elections early on, but I don’t think I haven’t voted in any local or national elections since. It took much longer to figure out the right people to vote for, but that’s another story.
It’s important to get the young vote, and get it early. Republicans or Democrats, they, as is said, “believe that children are the future — teach them well and let them lead the way.” If they don’t, someone else will, and someone else will get elected.
— Robert Nowall
Cape Coral, Florida
At the end of the day, all of those young voters to whom Ferguson refers–the ones who prefer sitting in front of a computer screen to moving about–have to get off their ever-expanding butts and go to the polls.
Every election we hear about the “rising influence of the youth vote.” Every election they disappoint. Until we see evidence of a change, talk — even in cyberspace — is cheap.
— Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida
TAKE A GANDER
Re: Larry Thornberry’s Sorry, Charlie:
To the Republicans & Crossovers of Florida: You gave us John Sidney McCain III, I think it is only fair we ram Charlie Crist down your throats. Sauce for the goose, etc., etc., etc!
— Judy Beumler
Re: Andrew Cline’s Obama Foie Gras:
Heh, heh! Andrew Cline writes priceless satire, and I love the faculty names (“Jessica Manfist”) and “ze French chef” Bob Jones!
However, his depiction of Obama-worship is probably a lot milder than the full-blown actual version.
— Herb Allen
Columbia, South Carolina
Re: George Neumayr’s No Obama Care for Terri Schiavo:
George Neumayr is right about Terri Schiavo. George Bush allowed a federal witness to be starved to death on national TV. She was murdered just as surely as if they had put a bullet in her head.
— C. Baker
Whenever I am told that a spouse or family member has the right (as opposed to the power as one of your readers correctly noted) to terminate their ill spouse’s or relatives’ live support system, as happened with Terri Schiavo, I remember the two “intellectuals” who got Germany on the right to kill back in the 1920s. As I am sure your readers know, it was a renowned lawyer and doctor who came to the conclusion that it was logical and correct and beneficial to kill those who could not live a full life, or a useful life, with or without their consent.
From this short document (The Justification of the Destruction of Life Devoid of Value by Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche), Hitler had the path to kill millions who he deemed unworthy of living. I know, I know, that will never happen in the United States — at least until it does. If you told Americans back in 1945 that in thirty years American women could kill their unborn child because it was their right, and that the Government would pay for it, you would have been called crazy. By the way, I saw little coverage in the mainstream media of MLK Jr.s’ niece rightly calling abortion racist and genocidal just two weeks ago. She also wanted her listeners to know that her uncle would not have supported abortion on demand, despite the fact that he accepted an award from the Planned Parenthood gang in 1966.
— Paul Melody
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.