Man, Newsweek! I don’t read it since, after all, I made it through grade school but it’s out there, and some other folks do. I’m sure some take what Newsweek prints as true just because they’re a magazine. That’d be a poor judgement call, but I’m thinking maybe some do that.

The 12/15/2008 issue of Newsweek (I won’t put the link in here, since I want to direct no traffic to their website) has an article on the Biblical position for gay marriage. There’s no such thing, but apparently some editor in the building at Newsweek, facing declining readership in print media, had to come up with something so weird and sensational that they’d sell a few magazines to folks who are otherwise WAY too intelligent to bother with Newsweek. Feel free to read the article if you want a laugh. I did, chuckled, and then came up with this post. I had to split it up a bit on the Newsweek site, since they have a 3000 character limit.

I was surprised that there were almost no concrete Biblical references in the article. Some are mentioned in passing, and several liberal clergy are quoted, but there’s very little actual Scripture in the article. I guess that shouldn’t surprise me, since Scripture defeats the position they’re trying to make. Anyhow, here’s my Newsweek comment in it’s entirety, respectfully submitted.
—————
Maybe all isn’t lost for California? Passing prop 8 gives me some hope. We passed a similar amendment here in Arizona recently, as did other states across the country. Lisa Miller, touted as the “religion editor” by THE editor of Newsweek on page 4 of the 12/15/2008 edition, came up with or was given a position (”There’s no Biblical basis for marriage being just between a man and a woman.”) and then went off to concoct a believable article. Hopefully she’ll do better next time.

The argument that the Bible’s invitation to love all people equates to “everyone should be able to marry everyone” is ludicrous. I love my daughter, but if I get to thinking that she and I should be married, I need immediate and substantial psychological help, locked away from polite society for everyone’s safety. Thank goodness I know right from wrong. I love my dog (no, not physically), and the same logic holds there too. It’s nice that some “rights” and “wrongs” are easily adjudicated! I love lots of people and things, but the institution of marriage (at least as described in the Bible, and now by state constitution in a few states) doesn’t avail them all to me in marriage. For a long time I was obsessed with pornography. I’d have made a lousy husband, and it would have been wrong for me to marry anyone. God still loved me, as did many people, but the institution of marriage wasn’t right for me and I wasn’t right for it. I’m not descriminating against myself there, just making an objective call based on Biblical principle. Since the Bible clearly (in my opinion) defines the institution of marriage as between one man and one woman, I’d make the same call. I support prop 8 in California and I supported the Arizona marriage amendment too.

The second chapter of the book of Genesis (with references to the books of Matthew, Ephesians, and 1 Corinthians) describes the creation of man, woman, and the institution of marriage. The temptation to take a verse or two out of context is a trap that many folks fall into for the sake of making their point- especially if it’s a difficult or tenuous one. Pick pretty much any generally accepted translation of the Bible and read the entire chapter (it’ll only take a couple of minutes), and you’ll quickly see that the contextual intention was clearly to describe marriage as between man and woman- husband and wife. Groups of people down through the generations may have made modifications to the quantities in the equation, but that doesn’t justify the pairing of two members of the same sex (or a man and an animal, for that matter, though some people have tried it) as being right for the marriage relationship. There are numerous verses in Proverbs that describe the roles of husband and wife. Proverbs 31 is devoted almost exclusively to describing the traits of a strong and dedicated (not weak, passive, or overly submissive) wife. These are descriptive ideals and what I consider to be “numerous examples of traditional marriage” that Ms. Miller somehow overlooked while reading her Bible in fulfilling her duties as “religion editor”. While we won’t ever be perfect, these guidelines were put here for us to follow when we run into those patches in life where we’re wondering what to do. Nowhere do they describe marital roles other than “husband” and “wife”, and not in terms of “wife to wife” or “husband to husband”. Furthermore, just because we can’t look to the Bible to write our vows for us doesn’t preclude it from being an excellent “marital manual”. The institution (as described in the Bible) and what’s in the hearts of the couple are what’s important, not the words the potential husband and wife say to each other so that others can listen to them and say, “Oh, how nice!”. More important still is how the couple honors their Biblical responsibilities to each other. Most husbands and wives in America I think do pretty well in this area. Those that don’t feel it in the way of increased levels of guilt, stress, poor health and other problems. It’s hard to have any good relationships when you’re shortchanging your primary relationship. Oftentimes they see the signs and take corrective action. It’s been scientifically proven that husbands and wives in marriages described as “happy” live longer than those who aren’t. Science (as well as the Bible) goes on to describe how children need to see both male and female gender roles played out in their homes, over the years they’re growing up, or suffer psychologically.

By the way, there are many “man and woman” couples considering marriage that probably shouldn’t because they’re at odds with Biblical guidelines. They’re too selfish, they want to run their lives based on their ‘feelings’, they want to make ‘money’ the center of their lives (look what happened to the Governor of Illinois when he did that!), and so on. The Bible lays out principles for marriage that make for happy lives. I’ve observed married couples who’ve followed the Bible (religious and unreligious) and those who didn’t, and the ones that did were happier longer, and other people around them were happier longer. Think of it as being “blessed”, I suppose. That’s what I want some day!

I think some of us Americans sometimes wonder, “Why should I do anything other than what I feel like doing?” Well, the reason is because feelings change quickly, and because of this living by feelings makes us unstable. Without responsibilities to fulfill, guidelines to follow, challenges to overcome, and relationships to feed we’re less than human. Why not let the children run the home and not the parents? The reason is explained in the Bible. Should people protect their own homes? The answer’s in the Bible. What’s the meaning and point of life? Yup- it’s in there. When I feel like I want to die and there’s no hope, what should I do? Modern psychologists admit privately that they don’t have an answer for this one, but it’s in the Bible. Why is our country so out of control, with a declining marriage rate and simultaneously advancing divorce rate, increased teen pregnancies, drug use, violence and physical abuse? That one’s our fault (no, not George Bush’s), but the answer’s in the Bible- the same place marriage is defined as between one man and one woman. If we look at these alarming trends honestly, we may have to admit that these past few decades of “liberalizing the culture” has made us worse off, not better, regardless of what Newsweek has to say, how “politically correct” we may be or how “inclusive” it may feel. Please don’t take Ms. Miller’s word for what’s in the Bible- it doesn’t sound to me as though she spends much time reading it. Feel free to peruse the Bible (or sites like bible.com if you prefer the ‘online’ variety) for real answers to real questions, not just mindless “politically correct” speculation and pointless conjecture designed to sell a magazine and make a buck.

One final note- I think it’s interesting that Lisa Miller tries her very best to equate homosexuality with such involuntary attributes as skin color, and in the very next article mother Lisa Miller (apparently a different Lisa Miller) is described as having renounced her homosexuality. C’mon, Newsweek. Which’ll it be? As much a born-in part of me as skin color, or something I can renounce? The fact that the two women share both first and last names, with the second pretty much refuting the arguments set forth by the first, is absolutely priceless irony. You can’t make this stuff up!

Anyhow, Merry Christmas (that’s right, I went there!)!! God bless us- each and every one.
Whipsawjim

My daughter came home from school the other day and told me what she’d learned in her 12th grade history class. Apparently they’re studying the election process and the current campaigns are good study examples for them. Apparently part of the learning process is “listening to what the candidates say and not what they’ll really do” though because she somehow got the idea that Barack Obama will cut someone’s taxes if elected.

The only way I can think of that she might’ve gotten this idea is if they’ve just covered the things the candidate has said and not his background or the things that he’s done, or digging deeper into what he’s said. Here are three ways that Barack Obama will raise everyone’s taxes:

One of the definitions of “windfall” is, “Sudden, unexpected profit caused by events not controlled by the beneficial person or company.” Oil companies put their capital at risk every day to find oil deposits, drill for them, transport the oil, and hire, train, and accommodate oil workers (i.e., “create jobs”). For these “events”, oil companies earn around $.40 in profit from each gallon of gas. Various government entities get about the same amount- $.40/gallon- but do nothing to earn it. Now based on our definition of “windfall”, if someone is getting a “windfall” is it going to the oil company or to the government? I’m all for reducing windfall profits on gasoline, but I suggest that the way to do it is to cut the gasoline taxes and not bother the oil companies who are actually doing something to earn their profits.

My daughter didn’t say that she learned that Barack Obama is a Marxist. When I tried to explain, she wasn’t really interested in hearing what I had to say. I asked why she listened to her teacher and not me. I’ve been around awhile and really should have seen the answer coming- “Because, Dad, he’s my TEACHER. I have to listen to him.” Then she went out to a movie with her boyfriend.

I really admire teachers, and they have a tough job especially these days. Just the same, it would probably be good for us to remember that our kids are occasionally hearing less than the whole story at school. We need to step up as parents, provide the missing details and offer ourselves up as living examples of well-educated voters that dig deeper than the speeches and rhetoric. Oh, and if “do as I say, not as I do” EVER worked for YOU in parenting YOUR children, please let me know. I gave up that idea long ago but am always trying hard to keep an open mind.

May God continue to bless America.
WhipSawJim

Liberals have been trying to find something to say about Sarah Palin. Naturally they’ll avoid confronting her on the actual issues, but making every effort to drag her through the mud seems like their best defense. After all, they have to be worried to death about this terrific VP candidate!

Liberals have said that this pick was no Maverick choice, and that a Maverick would have picked someone like Joe Lieberman (who used to be a democrat but turned independent when attacked because he didn’t support radical liberal agenda items he disagreed with). First of all, if Joe was such a great pick, why didn’t Barack Obama pick him? This would have been a great opportunity for Barack to put action behind his promise to “reach across the aisle” and work with folks outside the democrat party for chenge. Instead he chose an old-time beltway insider with a lobbyist in the family. That sounds like Obama pursuing “politics as usual” to me.

Sarah Palin fought against political corruption in her state, ran against an entrenched republican governor and beat him, and declined the “bridge to nowhere” earmark money. I love her statement, “If we need a bridge, we’ll build it ourselves.” That sounds like someone who stands strong! I like that.

I love Jimmy Carter. I’m embarrassed to have lived at a time when Americans elected him president, but that’s another story. When I get down on myself and think how I’ve messed up or said wrong things, I just think to myself, “At least I’m not Jimmy Carter”. Jimmy, who did well at the Naval Academy and became the first Naval Academy graduate to be elected president of the United States, embarrassed himself (again) by bemoaning Naval aviator John McCain for “milking” his time as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Wow. What was he thinking? What I really love is that democrats will own his stupid remark by not doing the stand-up thing and demanding that he apologize for his insensitivity (the democrat party IS still the party of ’sensitivity’, right?). Jimmy also indicated that he hopes that the democrats will win a few more seats this coming November so they won’t need Joe Lieberman’s vote anymore. He’s apparently not good enough for them, but republicans were wrong for not selecting him for VP? I think Joe is a great guy. He knew he’d be beaten up by liberals for not sitting down and taking his punishment, for his beliefs, and for actually representing his constituents. It’s nice that his constituents saw through the politics and elected him as an independent.

May God continue to bless America. To all who’ve served our country or have family serving, “Thank you!”
Have a great rest-of-your-weekend!
WhipSawJim

Wow, what a difference a week makes!

On 8/24, I was railing about the relatively confusing pick by Barack Obama of Joe Biden for his vice presidential running mate. Kind of like the experienced blind leading the inexperienced blind, but backwards, sort of, I think…

Anyhow, from a relatively confusing and backward VP pick to a very strong capable VP pick in a week- who’da thunk that such a bounce could’ve been made so fast! John McCain invited Sarah Palin to his 72nd birthday party today as America’s birthday present! What a winner! A “compare and contrast” between Palin and either Biden or Obama himself- take your pick- results in a ‘win’ for Palin in my book! A strong conservative who lives her values and has been mopping up Alaska politics for years, Sarah was a “knock it out of the park” choice. She helps put upgraded aftermarket alloy wheels on McCain’s stated interest to take on “business as usual” in Washington, while Obama’s pick in Biden reinforced the real “same old Washington politics” that lies just beneath his paper-thin “Chenge we can believe in” veneer.

As for me, I’m really proud to be an American again (no thanks at all to Michelle Obama, who uttered similar words), and I’m thinking that I just might be able to vote for McCain-Palin this coming November! The McCain Amnesty Bill aftertaste in my mouth is finally starting to dissipate! We’ll see how things play out next week at the Republican National Convention and into the campaigning, but it seems to me that conservatives finally have someone to vote for that isn’t Libertarian! In an era where both democrats and republicans have been putting top priority on “what’s in it for me” and political posturing, it’s refreshing to see real backbone and proven values count in a pick for a running mate!

Deepest sympathies to Hillary. After being shunned by her own party and not even vetted for Barack’s VP spot, it must really hurt to see “the other woman” steal her show again (apologies to Rush Limbaugh who delivered that line much better earlier today than I did just now). I love the fact that REAL feminists (not the sexually confused and emotionally embittered whiners, but the strong, action-oriented ladies real men admire so much) will have someone to rally around in Sarah Palin. For those of you who have been waiting to see a lady VP, here’s your REAL choice! Look into Sarah Palin. You’ll find a trooper who’s lived well, acted on her values, and taken a stand where she believed REAL change was needed. She didn’t just add ‘politics’ in Alaska, she added VALUE! Her two years as the states chief executive compares so favorably to Obama’s 143 days in the Senate that I chuckle every time I think about it. I’m really kind of embarassed for Barack. I hope they don’t hit his inexperience so hard with this that he cries…

In my opinion, Sarah Palin stole the show from the democrats this week. The DNC was sort of ho-hum and definitely ‘politics as usual’, but Palin’s announcement was amazing and seemed to completely steal the thunder! The presidential race now seems John McCain’s and Sarah Palin’s to lose.

Thank you, God, for bringing us Sarah Palin just when we needed her most! May You continue to greatly bless America. Have a great long weekend, everyone!
WhipSawJim

Wow. I heard over the weekend that Barack Obama chose Joe Biden as his VP running mate. I encountered mixed feelings spanning from simply, “YEAH!” (followed by a long happy dance) to “They must be kidding- this is too good for America, and they’d never do something that was actually good for America.” I guess Barack has reconsidered that whole “hope and change” thing. Joe’s been in the Senate longer than all but four of the other folks there. He was in the Senate for ten years before John McCain got there. Joe seems to epitomize “dinosaur politician”. This isn’t exactly what I’d consider “hope and change”.

So why pick Joe? I wonder if it has something to do with “inexperience”- either the kind that equates to, “if I had more experience I’d have made a better choice”, or “Mr. Biden’s onerous presence will make up for the fact that I have only about 145 days of actual experience in Government (except for the lawyering he did for Tony Resco, if you can count that).

The democrat gang is all in Denver now. Those citizens of Denver could use your prayers now, in a BIG way! Denver is a nice place, and I have been there, but this is a week when I’d have left town. The dems built a special facility there to detain ‘undesirable’ protest elements, gave homeless folks haircuts to spruce things up a bit, and a bunch of other well-publicized nonsense. The Code Pink folks are there, as is “Peace Mom” Cindy Sheehan. Recreate 68 is there, and so is Ron Kovic. If I were Ron, I’d be a little embarassed with myself. I think he’s protesting both parties, but if I were Ron I’d give some consideration to which side has folks on it that have served the country to the same or greater extent that Ron has- regardless of whether he’s proud of that service or not. In all fairness, Joe’s son Beau appears to have served honorably in the National Guard, but I can’t find any other military service indications for Joe or Barack.

The democrats consider George W. Bush to be one of the dumbest presidents America’s ever had (Mr. Carter’d get my vote for that, but that’s another post). As dumb as he was, the best candidate the democrats could bring against him in 2004 got whooped roundly, soundly, and convincingly. That guy, John Kerry, insinuated that if people don’t do well in school, they wind up in the military (John McCain was the guy who demanded John Kerry apologize for the statement, by the way). It seems to me that they’re making our military folks out to be exactly the kind of people they talk about helping (what with Socialist redistribution of wealth, tax and give, etc.). To me, John McCain seems like the person most in touch with that group, since he’s the only one who’s actually served! Forget for a second the fact that Barack Obama once acted to kill the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act, Barack Obama just hasn’t done much of anything but talk about how he’s gonna find some bad entity to tax (which, once you remove the smoke and mirrors trickles down to taxing you and me) so he can redistribute the income to folks he feels more worthy of it, which also increases those folks’ dependency on it.

I’m pretty sure America is smart enough to see through all the “America is an evil place and needs guys like us to fix it.” stuff that Barack Obama has been spewing. I suspect we’ll hear a lot more of it between now and the election, since that’s pretty much all the message the democrats have… Joe Biden has also been selling policies on this premise, but it’s been a bit more subtle in my opinion. I suspect he’ll get louder. Barack has been working awfully hard (with what appears to be the willing complicity of most of the news media) to cloud his real views with obfuscation, rhetoric, and a flashy smile.

Oh, and I wonder if Joe still thinks that Barack isn’t qualified to be president, and that the presidency isn’t the place for ‘on the job training’. Perhaps Joe has flip-flopped on this, given that he’s now running with and not against Barack? What a difference a couple of days make!

Michelle Malkin has a good post on the Biden thing.

May God continue to bless America.
WhipSawJim

After several high profile denials and getting caught by the National Enquirer sneaking around a California hotel, John Edwards confessed to having an affair. His wife Elizabeth hasn’t commented as far as I’ve heard, and thus appears to have a level of character so far above John’s that it’s surprising to me that they ever got together in the first place. It’s my opinion that character is built through perseverance. Here’s yet another opportunity to build some character, Mrs. Edwards. Not that you haven’t been through enough already. Please keep Elizabeth Edwards in your prayers. Its hard for me not to think that she deserves a whole lot better than John.

It was nice that John thought to say that even though he’d had an affair with Rielle Hunter, he didn’t love her. Hmmm- its as if that makes it alright, or somehow minimizes his immorality. No, I’m becoming convinced that all vestiges of repentance are trained out of lawyers and politicians early in their careers. Since Edwards was both, I’m guessing it happened earlier to him. I’m sure he’d have lied again if he felt it would have been in his own selfish interests to do so, or if he felt he wouldn’t get caught. “Innocent until proven guilty, you know.” The man must’ve gotten his moral compass from a cereal box or gumball machine. I’ve been in enough bars to know that a sizable percentage of men are complete pigs, but Mr. Edwards has plumbed new depths in this regard. C’mon, guys! I’m getting sick of apologizing for the lack of leadership, moral fiber, backbone, values and personal restraint I’ve seen in us lately.

That this man so obviously devoid of common decency and moral fiber could have so recently had folks supporting him as a candidate for the Presidency of the greatest country on the face of the planet mystifies me. I’ve heard several politically knowledgeable people mention today- and with certainty- that Mr. Edwards’ political career is over. Really? Can I count on that? Since we’re dealing with a lawyer here I’d prefer to have it in writing, but what took so long? I’m heartened that we’d be about done thinking this man is fit to lead, but geez didn’t the signs start showing up a few years back? I’ve never had anyone accuse me of having an affair. It’s partly because I’ve never had one, but I think it’s also because I try to behave in such a way that nobody who knows me would even start to believe claims like this. In Edwards’ case, one of his associates (Andrew Young) claims he’s the father of the baby, though Edwards’ (surprise?) denies it. “Yeah, right, John. We believe you THIS time.”

By the way, this isn’t about democrats. Being something of an aviation enthusiast, I’m still smarting over the Duke Cunningham bribery issue over in California. I still feel like one of my heroes betrayed me. A highly decorated Naval aviator and the only Ace of the Vietnam War, Cunningham sold his TOP GUNs for WAY too cheap in my opinion. It shouldn’t be about “party values”, it should be about values that take precedence over political parties. If we can’t rise above the lies, political nonsense and money-grubbing power trips, we’re not fit to lead. I hope Nancy Pelosi is listening (OK, ‘reading’, but ‘listening’ sounded better to me).

I’m totally in love with Michelle Malkin, and finally get the opportunity to gush a little, blush a little, and say that she has some excellent info on her blog about this stuff:
Culture of Corruption, GOP Edition
John Edwards ‘fesses up, sort of

May God continue to bless America- even those of us who are incredibly idiotic miscreants.
WhipSawJim

Heard on the J.D. Hayworth show on KFYI the other day:
” Some guy asked me to think outside the box. I said, ‘OK, why does it have to be a box?’”

It took me a minute, then I started laughing!

Happy Saturday everyone! God bless America!
WhipSawJim

I heard the other day that Barack Obama wants to give everyone (well, ‘cept me, ‘cause I make too much money) a $1,000 economic stimulus check. This would be paid for by a windfall profits tax on “big oil”. I think the assumption here is that “big oil” won’t pass the tax right along to the consumer, or perhaps Barack doesn’t want us to think of that. There are gas taxes currently. “Big Oil” can’t pay them without our help. There isn’t someone over there at “big oil” who goes to another job, makes trillions of dollars per year, and pays the corporate taxes for “big oil”. “Big oil” does what every other business entity from big corporations to small businesses do- they increase their prices to pay the tax! So, what we have here is another not-so-well thought out Obama plan to raise the price of gas so he can give some money back to SOME people. Does this sound like a redistribution of wealth to you? It should. Google defines “socialism” as An economic, social and political doctrine which expresses the struggle for the equal distribution of wealth by eliminating private property and the exploitative ruling class. I think Barack Obama is a fine guy. I like his smile, and I think he has a nice sense of humor. He’s kind of a bumbler sometimes, which makes me feel so much better about myself. It also occurs to me that most of the things he wants to do advance a socialist agenda of removing or redistributing private property.

I’d also like an answer to this: When the government (which doesn’t do anything for it) gets $.20 - $.40 per gallon in taxes, and “big oil” (who hire the workers, explore for resources, and actually produce and sell gasoline) also gets around $.40/gallon in profits, why is it legitimate for government to get their money, but a “windfall” worthy of being taken back by the government (who’d already received $.40/gallon they didn’t earn) when “big oil” gets the same amount?

I’d encourage everyone to look deeper. Some silly stuff really is just silly

May God continue to bless America even though some of the folks who would be our leaders aren’t very smart.
WhipSawJim

I heard the news about what went on in Congress today on the radio as I drove home (House Dems turn out the lights but GOP keeps talking). From the way I heard it Nancy Pelosi and Congressional liberals essentially shut down the U.S. Congress. There was apparently quite a song and dance, and all so Mme Speaker could ignore the will of the people, get on her jet (bought by the people) and fly home (fuel payed for by the people), and have a five week paid (by the people) vacation. Since Congress was technically adjourned, C-SPAN had to stop its cameras so the America people wouldn’t see what was happening (apparently it’s their policy not to record what happens on the floor of the House when it’s not in session). To me, what happened in Congress today seemed like a slap in the face- bought and paid for several times over by the slappee, me- AND covered up to boot! On the other hand, I’ve never been prouder to be a constituent of John Shadegg!

At probably the headiest moment in her rise to Speakerdom, Mrs. Pelosi promised the American people (her employers) two things:
1) to work in a bipartisan way to move America forward, and
2) to lower gas prices for the American people.
This, by the way, was in 2006, when gas prices were roughly $2.32/gallon. Not only are gas prices higher now, but Ms. Pelosi literally turned tail and beat a hasty retreat rather than stand strong, pitch in, and show leadership to help the bipartisan majority relieve America’s high gas price problem. Some might call such behavior “cowardice in the face as the enemy.”

I tried to give Ms. Pelosi a call to share my feelings with her (politely and in good taste, as I’d recommend to everyone), but both her phone message boxes were full. Not surprising, I suppose. I emailed her instead. Interestingly enough, I sent one to her SF office and received a reply indicating that, “Congressional courtesy prevents me from replying to emails if I cannot determine that you are a constituent of mine.” I’m not, but I think America’s had it’s fill of “Congressional courtesy” today anyhow. I also called John Shadegg’s office to congratulate him for his valiant efforts today on behalf of the American people.

You can find Nancy Pelosi’s phone number and email forms on her website.

Pardon me if this comes out a little funny looking, or if I miss some of the finer points. It’s my first attempt at blogging. I’m hoping to gain experience at your expense as I go.

May God continue to bless America, kindly pardoning us for our poor behavior in Congress today…
WhipSawJim

We’ve been absent a long time, but couldn’t resist posting this one quick item.

Check out ObamaForCHEnge.com. :-)

Finally, the U.N. steps up and takes some action on Kim Jong-Il.

Interesting visualization.

I’m suspicious. By now most are familiar with the efforts of the NY Times to aid and abet the enemy.

In yet another disclosure of secret anti-terror activity on the part of the United States and cooperating allies, the NY Times seems to be, once again, working to defeat the U.S. in the war on terror.

But the curious thing is their interest in the movement of money to the terrorists. I wonder why this might be.

Could it be that folks associated with the NY Times are involved in sending money to the terrorists?

Could this be an effort to warn American leftists to be careful in how they send money to support the enemy?

Could this be an effort to tell those very prominent anti-Americans among us to cool it sending money to the terrorists; the trail to your door may be getting hot?

There is something suspicious going on here; more than meets the eye.

I’ve put together four Amazon Listmania lists for those who want to easily and quickly purchase the children’s books that go along with the “Five in a Row” (FIAR) series, a popular homeschool supplement.

Five in a Row Volume 1 Book List

This list includes:
• The Story About Ping by Marjorie Flack
• Lentil (Picture Puffins) by Robert McCloskey
• Madeline by Ludwig Bemelmans
and more…

Five in a Row Volume 2 Book List

This list includes:
• Giraffe That Walked to Paris by Nancy Milton
• Three Names by Patricia MacLachlan
• Wee Gillis (New York Review Children’s Collection) by Munro Leaf
and more…

Five in a Row Volume 3 Book List

This list includes:
• The Bee Tree by Patricia Polacco
• Andy and the circus, by Ellis Credle
• The Wild Horses of Sweetbriar by Natalie Kinsey-Warnock
and more…

Five in a Row Volume 4 - Book List

This list includes:
• Roxaboxen by Alice McLerran
• The Raft by Jim LaMarche
• Mailing May by Michael O. Tunnell
and more…

It has now been over a month since I completed the book Presumed Guilty by James Scott Bell, and as I thought I had already written a review, I had moved on to other reading materials. It has come to my attention that I never posted a review and so here I am, the last of the ACM Reviewers for Presumed Guilty, so I’ll get right to it. :-)

In short, I really enjoyed this book. This book was not slow moving in any sense of the word. Mr. Bell jumped straight into the conflict of the story, amost before we even knew the characters well enough, and the book was hard to put down after the first few chapters.

The plot had several unexpected twists and turns and in the course of the story the gospel was clearly presented through the doubts and personal struggles of the characters. The only caveat I would offer with this book is that there is an element of darkness and evil that the more sensitive reader might be inclined to want to avoid. Despite the fact that the author deals with real and difficult problems, there are some who may prefer to stick with more benign subject matter than pornography, murder, addiction, adultery and evils that exist even within the church.

Consider the responses from Mom2Mom Connection:

After I finished it, I wanted to get away from it for a while because it contained so many distasteful images for me. Then I realized what the author’s main message was, and how he skillfully wove a tale that allowed me to see how faith in God can bring a family through ANYthing, even something as disgusting as what took place between the pages of Presumed Guilty.

Contrasted with that of Two Talent Living:

I received this book, started it, skimmed through some of it, and made the decision I would not read it. It is because I simply do not want the dark, graphic images in my mind. I don’t even want the ones that are there now because I checked the book out and read/skimmed parts of it.

In short, the book is about a popular pastor of a megachurch who is accused of murdering a young woman of questionable reputation. (Sorry, due to Google searches, I’m not spelling it all out here.) His wife is trying to find out the truth. I realize this sound rather innocuous, but as it all plays out, all kinds of things happen that I’m simply not going to write about on this blog.

I don’t know where the line is to be drawn for Christians regarding what we are to put into our minds. Perhaps there are some Christians who can read this kind of book and not be impacted spiritually and emotionally by it. I don’t know. I’m not their personal Holy Spirit and I guess it is enough of a gray area for a lot of folks that Christians have to make their own choices. For me, it is not enough that the characters are Christians trying to work out their faith in extremely difficult circumstances. That “redeeming” aspect of it doesn’t erase the images, storylines and dialogue that become a part of me when I read something like this.

If you’re looking for a thrilling mystery, a page turner that will keep you awake too long at night, and a book that integrates real faith into the lives of characters with real character flaws and struggles, then this book is for you! I would pick up another James Scott Bell book in a heart beat.

***

Note: This book was given to me from Active Christian Media as a gift from the publisher for the purpose of review.

Read this. Kid puts injured snake out of its misery, neighbor girls’ parents report animal cruelty, 13 year-old is charged with felony. Amazing.

Richard’s mom, Terry, said she doesn’t see why the case went that far.

“He wasn’t committing a crime,” she said. “He was putting an injured animal out of its misery - this is ridiculous. If you’re going to charge him, then fly strips should be illegal. And what about mousetraps?”

She said the police should apologize to her son.

She’s got a good point.

That’s the hilarious headline on Yahoo where an ABC retread runs the pro-terrorist news operation.

I wonder who else is mourning Zarqawi’s death? The Democrat Party maybe?

From the Yahoo headline it looks like the American media is mourning his death too.

I guess we took out one of the liberal’s generals.

And they wonder why we think they’re anti-American and pro-terrorist.

Hilarious.

It’s not often that I find something on NPR worth linking to, but this article is pretty good.

After listening to the results of this project for several weeks, I knew I could do three minutes, too. Certainly not on world peace or the search for meaning in an increasingly distracted world or anything as grave and serious as all that, but on a belief just as true.

I believe in barbecue. …

Despite the fact that this next step has been telegraphed to anyone who has been paying attention, it’s still shocking that it’s actually happening.

Dutch pedophiles are launching a political party to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and the legalization of child pornography and sex with animals.

The Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party said on its Web site it would be officially registered Wednesday, proclaiming: “We are going to shake The Hague awake!”

The party said it wanted to cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12 and eventually scrap the limit altogether.

“A ban just makes children curious,” Ad van den Berg, one of the party’s founders, told the Algemeen Dagblad (AD) newspaper.

Previously, we reviewed the book Help! Mom! There are Liberals Under My Bed! and raved about it.

The second book by Ms. DeBrecht, Help! Mom! Hollywood is in My Hamper! is definitely clever and has an excellent message, yet didn’t get me laughing as hard. Most likely the reason is that I’m really not that much into Hollywood, I don’t follow the lives of the various “stars” with much interest at all. That said, however, even I was able to recognize the figures like Barbra Streisand, Britney Spears, etc. I come down on the side of recommending this book, but not as strongly as Katharine DeBrecht’s first one.

The basic message is essentially that Hollywood is making you discontent and causes you to want and do silly things.

DaddyPundit sums it up well:

The story involves Janie and Sam, two sisters who want to start a babysitting business to save money for a new bike. But they are also big fans of certain celebrity shows (along the lines of Entertainment Tonight or just about anything you see on E! Entertainment Network). Soon Janie and Sam start paying attention to what these celebrities have to say about fashion, manners, and other things and that’s when everything goes awry.

Broken Masterpieces liked the artwork in this book a bit better than “Liberals” but agrees with me that it’s not as funny.

***

This book was provided to me by Word Ahead Publishing through Active Christian Media. No compensation was received for this review apart from the book.