Friday, January 10, 2014

Funny Friday ~ Math Quiz


Here is some simple math for you.

A simple trick that you can have fun with and share with your friends. 
This really works and will only take you about ten seconds!
And in the process you will identify your all-time favorite movie.
It is amazing it really works.
Each time I got the same answer, and sure enough it IS my very favorite movie EVER!
DO NOT cheat. DO YOUR math, THEN compare the results to the list of movies at the bottom.
You will be AMAZED at how scary, true and accurate this test really is.
1. Pick a number from 1-9.
2. Multiply that number by 3.
3. Add 3.
4. Multiply by 3 again.
5. Your total will be a two digit number. 
6. Add the first and second digits together to find the number of your favorite movie (of all time)

It will be in the list of 17 movies below:

Movie List:

1. Gone With the Wind
2. E.T.
3. Blazing Saddles    
4. Star Wars    
5. Forrest Gump    
6. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugl
7. Jaws    
8. Grease    
9. The Obama Farewell Speech    
10. Casablanca    
11. Jurassic Park    
12. Shrek    
13. Pirates of the Caribbean
14. Titanic    
15. Raiders of the Lost Ark    
16. Home Alone    
17. Mrs. Doubtfire
 Now, isn't that something
~ Ride Safe ~
Sparky

Sunday, January 5, 2014

Rightly Dividing The Word Of Truth: A Personal Testimony

 
I feel burdened by the Holy Spirit to share something tonight.

When I was growing up in Small Town USA, I felt left out that my family wasn’t affiliated with any one particular religion or philosophy. Religiously speaking I guess you could say I was a blank slate waiting for someone to grab a piece of chalk and start writing. (I was so rebellious, though, I always kept the erasers ready.) My adopted family considered themselves “Protestant“ but I‘ve never identified myself as one.

Like most people, I’ve searched for God in my own way, with lots of tumbles and stumbles. It was in 1983 that I first heard the unadulterated version of the “Gospel of Grace” and about “… rightly dividing the Word of truth …”. This message for today was given to us, the Gentiles, through the Apostle Paul. When I heard the Word rightly divided I knew that that was the answer to all my questions! My heart leapt with joy!

Ever have the unsaved say, “The Bible contradicts itself. It doesn’t make any sense.“ I have. To those who do not “rightly divide” [II Tim. 2:15] it does seem to contradict itself. This is the truth and I shall share it. The Bible is divided in sections or dispensations of time. Some of it, is not our (the Gentiles during this age of Grace) mail. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” [II Tim. 3:16] but not all scripture is meant for us during “this present evil age” [Gal. 1:4] (aka The Age of Grace). During this age, the ONLY way to be saved is by faith in the innocent shed blood of Jesus Christ, not the yoke of the law. [The 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 and all the other laws listed] The law was given not as a guide to salvation but was given instead by God to convict all men of their sin. We are condemned to death by the law. Jesus took this requirement away at His crucifixion and resurrection. They where nailed on the cross with Him. Gone forever. All these where taken away as requirements for believing in God and being saved. These works now are all empty and mean nothing to Him during this age. We’re in a, for lack of a better word, bubble, that was kept hidden from the ages [Col. 1:26] and revealed slowly through the Apostle Paul. The clock of time has stopped ticking. Once this dispensation passes away, at the Rapture of the Saints [I Thess. 4:17-18], all this free stuff goes away too. Then the clock starts ticking again and there will be outward signs of salvation required. This is a limited time offer in our Age of Grace.

Step outside the comfort zone. Research all I have put here. Release yourself and your family from the yoke of bondage and be set free. Then spread the Word to others. That's what we're suppose to do.

My earnest prayer is for all to feel an inner peace that only God can give.


Suggested Reading: The Gospel For Today’s Age Of Grace

This book help lead me to Christ:
Rightly Dividing The Word Of Truth by Clarence Larkin

~ Ride Safe ~
Sparky

Two Minutes With The Bible ~ Conversation Peace

Conversation Peace

by Pastor Ricky Kurth
“Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel” (Phil. 1:27).
Interestingly, whenever Paul uses the phrase “stand fast,” it is always to challenge people to stand fast in an area in which they were not standing fast! For instance, he tells the Corinthians to “stand fast in the faith” (I Cor. 16:13), for they had lost their faith in one of the fundamentals of the faith, the resurrection (I Cor. 15:12-50). He told the Galatians to “stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free” (Gal. 5:1) because they were forsaking grace for the law. He told the Thessalonians to “stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught” (II Thes. 2:15), especially the “tradition” of working for a living (3:7-12). The Thessalonians had become so excited about the Rapture that many of them quit their jobs in anticipation of the Lord’s coming!

But here in Philippians 1:27, Paul tells the Philippians to “stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel.” This is because two ladies in the church were quarreling (4:2), and some in the church were siding with Euodias and some with Syntyche. “Striving together” is the Greek word sunathleo. The prefix sun means together with, and athleo is the word from which we get athlete and athletics. Athletes are often teammates who must strive together to achieve a common victory, and this is what Paul was calling on the Philippians to do for the cause of Christ.

Notice Paul isn’t talking about faith in the gospel. The faith of the gospel is our faithfulness or fidelity to maintaining the gospel as God gave it, just as old “high-fi” or “high-fidelity” records claimed to be highly faithful to the sound recorded in the studio. We are to strive together to maintain fidelity to the gospel God gave to Paul.

Finally, Paul does not say we should strive with one another for the faith of the gospel. He rather says we should be striving “together” as those who see the fellowship of the mystery with those who don’t. With all the talk about “peace on earth”, how refreshing it would be if we could enjoy the “conversation peace” Paul longed to see in Philippi! (Psa. 133:1; Eph. 4:3).

Saturday, January 4, 2014

Did You Snow?

“Come now, and let us reason together,” saith the Lord. “Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." [Isaiah 1:18] KJV

I’ve been sitting here in my toasty warm southern abode, smelling the scrumptious aromas wafting from the kitchen. What's in the pot? We're cooking a revised version of Mrs. Garcia’s Black Bean Soup. It's simmering on the stove for our evening repast (served with crispy Italian Bread, of course). I‘ve been wondering how my bloggy friends are holding out further north with that scary snow storm pounding the Northeast like a fist. Our area has warmed slightly and it’s dried out. No hope of snow here, I should think.

Being a "deep south" girl, snow is an almost magical phenomena to me. I didn’t grow up with it nor have I ever really experienced real snowfall. I have been in what is commonly called “a flurry“. Big woof, right? [lol] Reader’s Digest Special Humor Issue this month has an article about snow called The White Stuff.

Here are a couple of snow facts from the article:
Q: Do you know why we see snow as white?

A: It is all to do with how the sides of the snowflakes reflect light. All the colors in the spectrum scatter out from the snow in roughly equal proportions, which we perceive as whiteness. Very deep snow can appear blue.

Q: Is it true that no two snowflakes are alike?

A: Yes. Every snowflake has a basic six-sided structure, but because of its spiraling descent it sculpts each in a unique way. Air temperature and moisture make the difference.
Then there’s snowflakes and snow crystals. And on and on. There’s more such interesting facts on snow available on the internet.

I'll be so thankful when we can ride again but I know up North that's not a possibly for many more weeks. The weather is simply not cooperating. Or, is that an understatement? [smile] And I just wanted to say I am praying for everyone to stay warm and safe this weekend.

~ Ride Safe ~
Sparky

American Thinker: Obama's Other Big Lie

The following article is brilliantly researched and written concerning Obama's Hawaiian birth certificiate. Quite enlightening, as well. I pasted the whole article here in case "someone" ever tries to have it deleted.

Not. That. That. Would. Ever. [cough] Happen.

By the way, did you know that Health Director Loretta Fuddy, the only person who witnessed the pre-amended birth certificate of Barry Soetoro (who now magically without benefit of those fussy things called legal documents, goes by the name Barack Hussein Obama) and issued the forgery given to the press, died in a plane crash recently? She was the only one to die out of all the many passengers on board. Makes one think, doesn't it ...

This is why I know that every piece of legislation or executive fiat that this man has signed is bogus. All such signatures should be made null and void. Everything about him is illegal, immoral, and deeply troubling. Just like any tin horn dictator, past, present or future, he's a cancer on the backside of the world.

Sparky

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

American Thinker
January 3, 2014 
Obama's Other Big Lie 
By Nick Chase


"We will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan. Period." (Barack Obama, June 15, 2009, with variants repeated many times since). 

Today, any American who isn't willfully blind knows this "promise" is a very big lie. A lie which was deliberately told by fundamentally-dishonest pushers of Obamacare, because if the truth were widely known at that time the Affordable Care Act would never have become law.

It's a lie that is so egregious, even the dinosaur media can't ignore it or cover it up. In fact, the dinosaurs are increasingly upset that they're being continually abused be "the most transparent administration in history" and they now seem to be more willing to shed light not just on this lie, but also on some of Obama's other lies.
Do you suppose we could get them to take another look at the big lie of April 27, 2011? The lie that is central to Barack Obama's identity? The lie the dinosaurs not only glossed over, but for which they excommunicated from the human race anybody who dared to point out it was a lie?

I refer, of course, to the long-form "birth certificate" forgery for Barack Obama released by the White House to the world as a digital image on April 27, 2011.

Before you say, "Oh no, here we go again -- the guys with the tinfoil hats are on the loose", let's dispense with the easy part. Here is the irrefutable proof that the Obama long-form "birth certificate" is a forgery.
Shown in Figure OFS (below), side by side, are two images, each measuring 8.5 inches wide by 11 inches high (in their life size), against a black background. On the right is the digital scan of Obama's genuine short-form birth certificate, as released by the Obama presidential campaign in 2008. On the left is the long-form "birth certificate" forgery released in April 2011. I call it the "green thing".

Genuine Hawaii birth certificates are printed on borderless green basketweave security paper, as you can see on the genuine short-form certificate image. They do not have the white border that you see in the "green thing" on the left. That white border is like a picture frame for a (borderless) photograph that you hang on the wall. It masks (covers) part of the security-paper pattern at its outer edges.

So it is immediately obvious to the naked eye that the "green thing" is not a simple scan of a genuine, borderless paper birth certificate. It is a computer-generated fake -- a forgery.

Figure OFS.  Obama PDF forgery (with white border) and genuine short-form birth certificate, side by side, each measuring 8.5 by 11 inches.

The White House released two versions of this fake: The "green thing", and a much clearer (higher-resolution) black-and-white paper copy with no security-paper background, which was passed out to reporters on the morning of April 27, 2011. This paper copy was digitized (photographed) by The Associated Press, and that image is shown in Figure MP1, which follows.

The second irrefutable proof of forgery was developed by Christopher Monckton (Viscount Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, an Englishman), who has done a thorough analysis of the forgery's pitch -- that is, the spacing of the supposedly-typed monospace text -- by drawing a uniform grid on the AP-digitized image of the forgery (red lines in Figure MP1).

Figure MP1.  Monckton's "typewriter pitch" grid superimposed on the high-resolution Associated Press photo.

Enlarged, look at the "typed" line of text on Lord Monckton's grid, as shown in Figure MP2. We see that "August 4" is actually shifted slightly left of true pitch, and ", 1961 7:24 P."  is shifted about a third of a character to the right of true pitch.

Figure MP2.  The column containing the comma is where there is a right-shift of about a third of a character in pitch for the rightmost third of the forgery.

If you look back at Figure MP1, you will see that the column containing the comma is where the forger "lost" horizontal pitch.  While the leftmost two-thirds of the forgery (mostly) has one typewriter pitch, the right one-third (mostly) has a different pitch, with the column containing the comma being (about) an extra third of a character too wide.  This pitch-shift is very abrupt and cannot be accounted for by lens distortion in the AP photographer's camera, nor by any conceivable behavior by a real typist at a real typewriter.  A true, and obvious, forger's mistake.

In Figure MP1 Lord Monckton also drew baselines for the "typewritten" text.  (The baselines are for double-spaced lines on a typewriter, when the typist pulls the carriage-return lever twice after typing a line.) You can see that some lines of "typewritten" text are on the baseline, some are close, and others are off, with no consistency from line to line.  While the forger tried to maintain consistent pitch horizontally, vertical pitch was lost.

Courtesy of Lord Monckton, shown in Figure MP3 is a very-beaten-up genuine Hawaiian birth certificate for the summer of Obama's birth, on which Monckton has superimposed a pitch-grid (blue lines) showing that a genuine typewritten Hawaiian birth certificate of that era maintains horizontal and vertical pitch on a form designed to accommodate double-spaced typewritten lines (as one would expect.) (The items "Waihee", "Negro", "Porter Service" and "6-13-61" are later modifications made with a different typewriter.)

Figure MP3.  A genuine Hawaiian birth certificate from 1961 which maintains perfect horizontal and vertical typewriter pitch.

To summarize:
If Obama's long-form "birth certificate" were genuine, then the White House would have released a simple, borderless digital image resulting from the scan of a genuine paper document, in a widely-used graphical format. (The 2008 certificate image was released as a JPEG.)

But because the "birth certificate" is a forgery, what we wound up with is a mess. Paper black-and-white copies of the forgery, with the basketweave security pattern digitally "turned off" before printing, were passed out to the White House press corps. Then a much-poorer-quality color image, inexplicably masked with a white border, was deliberately digitally damaged by the forger to confuse Internet sleuths before it was released to the public in PDF format (generally used for documents, not stand-alone pictures) as the "green thing".

If you would like more detailed evidence of forgery than is contained in this brief summary, I urge you to download and read my complete research report, Barry Soetoro's Birth Secret, available at:



This is a "public domain" document (uncopyrighted, except for "fair use" of certain graphics), so feel free to pass it around among your friends.

For the two years that I have been analyzing and writing about Obama's long-form "birth certificate", I have not done any of this research to score political points. (I think Obama is a terrible president, but that is irrelevant to my research efforts.) I have only been trying for my own satisfaction to solve the maddening, real-life mystery of Obama's origins and of what's being hidden that's on his real birth certificate.

In "Secrets Revealed" (American Thinker, June 15, 2012) I compared the short-form birth certificate, the forgery, and the "Verification of Birth" sent by the Hawaii Department of Health to Arizona secretary of state Ken Bennett -- line by line -- and concluded that all of the information on the short-form birth certificate and on the long-form forgery that was released to the public is true, but the genuine long-form image cannot be shown because the certificate in Hawaii's possession "looks different" or contains more information than what was released to the public.

At this point we progress from known fact -- the "birth certificate" is fake -- to theory: If all the information shown is true, why was the fake, instead of the genuine birth certificate, released?

For me, there is only one likely possibility: Adoption.  Specifically, Barry was legally adopted by Obama's mother's second husband, Lolo Soetoro, in a way that caused the Hawaii birth record to be visually altered.
Is there any evidence that Lolo Soetoro legally adopted Obama after he and Ann Dunham (Obama) were married in Hawaii on March 24, 1965?

Yes, there is, though it is sketchy.  (Adopted children don't usually go around telling people they were adopted, nor do parents typically advertise that their children are adopted, though it may be obvious where the child's race differs from the parents'.)

There is a Facebook posting made in 2011 by Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's half-sister, in response to a critic where she wrote in part, "You mentioned the adoption laws of Indonesia that you saw as related to my brother's legitimacy (you were suggesting that because my father, his stepfather, had adopted him, that my brother was no longer American) and I said that I had no idea about Indonesian adoption law and what you were saying didn't make any sense to me but that the law that mattered was the law of this country [that is, U.S. law] and the fact that he was born in the United States." (Italics are mine.) It would seem that Maya thinks that Barry was adopted, believing it to be an Indonesian adoption.

Figure SFA.  1968 Indonesian school registration for Barry Soetoro.  (Associated Press photo by Tatan Syuflana.)

Also relevant is young Barry's registration for the school term beginning in 1968 at Santo Fransiskus Asisi (St. Francis of Assisi Catholic) school in Indonesia, as shown in Figure SFA.
The translations for some of the line items are:
1.  Name of the student - Barry Soetoro
2.  Place and date of birth - Honolulu 4-8-61 [August 4, 1961, date in European format]
3.  Nation:       a, citizenship - Indonesia
                        b, foreign descent - (left blank)
                        c, race - (left blank)
4.  Religion - Islam
5.  Student's address - Ment[eng] Dalam R007/R1003
7a.  School term beginning date - 1-1-1968
7b.  Placed in class - 2
8a.  Parents' names:    Father - L.  Soetoro M.  A.
                                    Mother - (left blank)
Indonesian citizenship (which comes through the father under Indonesian law) would be conferred to Barry by legal adoption.

Chapter 2 of ghostwriter Bill Ayers' eloquent composite biography of Obama, Dreams From My Father, covers Obama's time spent in Indonesia. 

On Page 38 we read,
"So it was to Lolo that I turned for guidance and instructions.  He didn't talk much, but he was easy to be with.  With his family and friends he introduced me as his son, but he never pressed things beyond matter-of-fact advice or pretended that our relationship was more than it was.  I appreciated this distance; it implied a manly trust." (Italics are mine.)
And on Page 41 we find,
"My mother watched us from inside the house... She really was grateful for Lolo's solicitude toward me.  He wouldn't have treated his own son very differently.  She knew that she was lucky for Lolo's basic kindness." (Again, italics are mine.)
Dreams From My Father is revealing not just in what it says, but in what it omits.  Nowhere in Chapter 2 is there a reference to Lolo Soetoro as "father", "stepfather", "adopted father" or any reference at all to his formal/legal relationship to young Barry.  He appears as just "Lolo", with an apparent unwillingness on Barry's part to shed the Kenyan figment of a father in favor of a man who clearly was reaching out to be a real father to him.

Finally, we have Stanley Ann Soetoro's 1968 application to extend her 1965 passport (now destroyed) for an additional two years, as shown in Figure PPA.

On the second page of the application, Ann moved to exclude her son Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah) from her passport, but the item has been crossed out -- perhaps on the advice of the consulate in Jakarta, as this would have left seven-year-old Barry passportless -- so it didn't happen.

The appendage "(Soebarkah)" has never been satisfactorily explained by anyone, and I certainly don't know what "Soebarkah" means, but it does seem to indicate a name change or change in citizenship status for the boy.
Figure PPA.  Ann Soetoro's 1968 application to extend her 1965 passport.

If, as I think is likely, Barry was legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro, was the adoption in Indonesia or Hawaii?  Most observers (like half-sister Maya) have assumed that it would have been in Indonesia, but if we look at the timelines and circumstances of the Soetoro family's piecemeal return/emigration to Indonesia, we see that a timely Indonesian adoption would be very unlikely, while there was ample time for the parents to put in place a Hawaiian adoption before settling in Indonesia.

Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama and Lolo Soetoro were married in Molokai on March 24, 1965, while they were both still graduate students at the University of Hawaii.  Lolo was in the U.S. on a student visa scheduled to expire in June 1965.  But because Indonesia was in turmoil following a failed military coup in September 1965 which resulted in the purging and killing of communists in 1965-66, Lolo stayed in Hawaii for as long as he could, until the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service forced his return to Indonesia in July 1966.  On his return to Indonesia Lolo worked for the government, mapping western New Guinea.
Finally, in 1967 it was safe for Americans to go to Indonesia, so Ann Soetoro emigrated there in October 1967, with Barry in tow, to join her husband Lolo, where they lived in a district of south Jakarta.  Barry was enrolled as an Indonesian citizen for school beginning in 1968, as we have seen; Indonesian citizenship was a requirement for students attending Indonesian state-supported schools.

Under Indonesian law of the time, if Lolo adopted Barry before he turned age 5 (that is, before August 4, 1966), Barry would automatically become an Indonesian citizen, subject to the approval of the Pengadilan Negeri (district court) for the district of the father's residence.  A Hawaiian adoption of a U.S.-citizen child by a foreign-nationality father would pose no U.S. legal problems, and it would be recognized in Indonesia under international treaty.  (Under U.S. law, Barry would hold triple citizenship -- U.S., Indonesian, and Kenyan.) And since the parents knew they would eventually be living in Indonesia, it would make sense for Lolo to adopt Barry in Hawaii, and take advantage of the automatic Indonesian citizenship for the child, as part of the preparations for emigration and Barry's schooling there.

If Lolo had adopted Barry in Indonesia, he would then be adopting a six-year-old foreign-born child under Indonesian law, in less than four months' time, so Barry could go to school at the beginning of January 1968.  Unlikely.

In 1965 and 1966 the only kind of Hawaiian adoption available for young children was a sealed adoption, where the pre-adoption birth certificate of the adopted child is sealed under court order, and a new birth certificate is issued showing the adopting parent(s) as the birth parent(s). When a Hawaiian birth certificate is thus amended, a document file containing the sealed record of the original document and supporting documentation that authorized a change to the information contained in the original document is created. The amended certificate is "distinctly marked" alerting to the fact it was altered. (Today, most adoptions can be "unsealed" and the pre-adoptive birth information restored to the vital records, but this does not "undo" an adoption -- nor a change of surname, if there was one.)

Whatever that "distinctly marked" alteration to Obama's birth certificate is, it must be obvious enough that, if shown to the public, people would see that Barry had been adopted. 
Do we have any concrete evidence that Lolo adopted Barry in Hawaii?
Yes, we do.
First is the forgery itself -- it was released in lieu of a genuine long-form birth certificate so the public would not know that Lolo Soetoro had adopted Obama (as would be evidenced by the amending of his hospital-generated birth information).
Second, we have a myriad collection of official statements by various Hawaii officials.
In the English language there are (at least) two different meanings of the word "original" when referring to documents.  It can mean "master", rather than a copy or facsimile; or it can mean "first version," rather than revised or subsequent versions.
The section of Hawaiian state law (578-14) which covers birth certificates being issued as part of the adoption process refers to the pre-adoption birth certificate as "original" and the post-adoption birth certificate as "new."  So when bureaucrats who are following the law refer to an "original" birth certificate, they most certainly mean the master, but they could also be using the legal meaning, the certificate generated at time of birth, before it was amended by adoption of the child.
In this light let's take another look at some of those carefully-worded statements by Hawaii state officials:
Former Hawaii Department of Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino on October 31, 2008:
"I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai'i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai'i State Department of Health has Sen.  Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
Again, on July 27, 2009: Fukino indicated she had "seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai'i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai'i and is a natural-born American."  (One can disagree on legal grounds with the additional qualifier of natural-born, but her statement does identify Obama as native-born.)

On April 11, 2011, following a telephone interview with Dr. Fukino, NBC News reporter Michael Isikoff wrote, "the original so-called 'long form' birth certificate -- described by Hawaiian officials as a 'record of live birth' -- absolutely exists, located in a bound volume in a file cabinet on the first floor of the state Department of Health.  Fukino said she has personally inspected it -- twice.  The first time was in late October 2008 -- taking with her the state official in charge of vital records.  She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files.  She then put out a public statement asserting to the document's validity.  She later put out another public statement in July 2009 - after reviewing the original birth record a second time."
On April 22, 2011, President Obama wrote to then-Director of the Hawaii Department of Health Loretta J. Fuddy, "I am writing to request two certified copies of my original certificate of live birth."

On April 25, 2011, Fuddy wrote to the president, "Enclosed, please find two copies of your original Certificate of Live Birth.  I have witnessed the copying of the certificate and attest to the authenticity of these copies."

Finally, we have State Registrar Alvin T. Onaka's (rubber-stamped) Verification of Birth letter to Ken Bennett of May 22, 2012 in which Onaka writes, "Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request [that is, a printout of the "green thing"] matches the original record in our files."

(Italicized emphasis of the word "original" in all of these statements is mine.)

So you see, these folks have been telling the truth all along.  Moreover, they are adhering to state law by not indicating that an adoption had taken place, because they are not authorized to release that information.
Was there anybody else telling the truth?  Oh, yes -- President Obama on the morning of April 27, 2011, before the release of the "green thing: "As many of you have been briefed, we provided additional information today about the site of my birth.  Now, this issue has been going on for two, two and a half years now.  I think it started during the campaign.  And I have to say that over the last two and a half years I have watched with bemusement, I've been puzzled at the degree to which this thing just kept on going.  We've had every official in Hawaii, Democrat and Republican, every news outlet that has investigated this, confirm that, yes, in fact, I was born in Hawaii, August 4, 1961, in Kapiolani Hospital.  We've posted the certification [short-form birth certificate] that is given by the state of Hawaii on the Internet for everybody to see.  People have provided affidavits that they, in fact, have seen this birth certificate.  And yet this thing just keeps on going." (The rest of his comments were political talking points.)

"We provided additional information today about the site of my birth" -- yes, he did.  The information is truthful -- though incomplete -- but it was revealed via a forged document.

Just when Barry reverted from using the surname Soetoro back to the surname Obama is not clear.  It was sometime after his return to Hawaii in the summer or fall of 1971, alone as a ten-year-old boy with his own U.S. passport.  And we know that he graduated from Punahou School in 1979 as "Barry Obama."
Does Barack Obama still legally carry the surname Soetoro? Perhaps somebody should ask him that question.

We can now say beyond all doubt that Barack Obama (Soetoro) was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, and is a native-born U.S. citizen.  All "official" evidence prior to the release of the long-form "birth certificate" forgery told us this -- his short-form birth certificate, statements by Hawaii officials, the contemporaneous birth announcements in the Hawaii newspapers, his (birth) father's correspondence and dealings with the Immigration and Naturalization service, Obama/Soetoro's registration form for Fransiskus Asisi school.  Now we have the "birth certificate" forgery itself to seal the deal, because by knowing what was being hidden with the release of the forgery -- his legal adoption -- we know what was not being hidden -- his place and date of birth.

About the author: Nick Chase is a retired but still very active technical writer, technical editor, computer programmer and stock market newsletter writer.  During his career he has produced documentation on computers, typewriters, typesetters, headline-makers and other pieces of equipment most people never heard of, and he has programmed typesetting equipment.  You can read more of his work on the American Thinker website and at contrariansview.org.

The theory that Barry was adopted in Hawaii is not a new idea, nor is it original with me. In Suborned in the USA (National Review Online, July 30, 2009) NRO editor Andrew C. McCarthy wrote:
"Obama and the media worked in tireless harmony to refute any indication that he had ever been a Muslim. It's now apparent, however, not only that he was raised as a Muslim while living for four years in the world's most populous Islamic country, but that he very likely became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
"Shortly after divorcing Barack Obama Sr., Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married an Indonesian Muslim, Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo, whom she met - just as she had met Barack Sr. - when both were students at the University of Hawaii. At some point, Soetoro almost certainly adopted the youngster, who became known as "Barry Soetoro." Obama's lengthy, deeply introspective autobiographies do not address whether he was adopted by the stepfather whose surname he shared for many years, but in all likelihood that did happen in Hawaii, before the family moved to Jakarta.
"Under Indonesian law, adoption before the age of six [Correct age is five - Nick] by an Indonesian male qualified a child for citizenship. According to Dreams from My Father, Obama was four when he met Lolo Soetoro; his mother married Soetoro shortly thereafter; and Obama was already registered for school when he and his mother relocated to Jakarta, where Soetoro was an oil-company executive and liaison to the Suharto government.
"That was in 1966 [Correct year is 1967 - Nick], when Obama was five [Six - Nick]. Obama attended Indonesian elementary schools, which, in Suharto's police state, were generally reserved for citizens (and students were required to carry identity cards that matched student registration information). The records of the Catholic school Obama/Soetoro attended for three years identify him as a citizen of Indonesia. Thus Obama probably obtained Indonesian citizenship through his adoption by Soetoro in Hawaii. That inference is bolstered by the 1980 divorce submission of Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro, filed in Hawaii state court. It said "the parties" (Ann and Lolo) had a child (name not given) who was no longer a minor (Obama was 19 at the time). If Soetoro had not adopted Obama, there would have been no basis for the couple to refer to Obama as their child - he'd have been only Ann Dunham's child."
When McCarthy wrote this, Obama was not under intense political pressure to release his (genuine) long-form birth certificate, and at that time it probably did not occur to anybody that he would be unable to do so without also revealing that Lolo Soetoro had adopted him in Hawaii.

Friday, January 3, 2014

Stop Pushing Me: A Statement About My Faith


In reference to the ongoing conversation about homosexuality I wish to make an open comment.

In light of the way things seem to be going it seems to me that lines have been drawn and forces arrayed on both sides. There’s a lot of pushing and shoving going on from the government. They want an anointed sainthood for the homosexuals and those of us of faith want to be left alone. This is nothing new under the sun. I’m an amateur historian and know that events like this have happened all down the centuries and, like I always say, history does repeat itself. Right now things aren’t too bad but I think  the time to choose may well be upon us sooner rather than later. It's important to me to clearly state my position and openly declare which side I am on and who I am. It comforts me that so many have also stated in no uncertain terms what they believe and who their alliance is with. I can do no less.

I am an unabashed and unapologetic Bible believing, fundamentalist Christian. That means that I personally have accepted and embraced Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. I’m counting on Him for my eternal salvation. That also means that I know that the Holy Bible is the literal Word of God. In that light I also know homosexuality is a sin (just one of a multitude, but still a sin and worthy of death). Not a crime but a sin. I only care about this as it relates to everyone's immortal soul. It horrifies me to think some will be spending eternity in Hell because they haven’t accepted Christ. All of us as Christians have the duty to tell folks that unforgiven sin is a one way ticket away from the Grace of God and into eternal damnation. We are His Ambassadors in a foreign land. My statement today is that everyone can have a relationship with God, no matter what the sin. What that relationship is depends on each of us. I'm not in the eternal judgment business, that's God's purview, but with the help of His Holy Word, I can make my own judgments on what constitutes sin, what the result will be and what I need to do personally to be right with The Lord. I'm a sinner, no less than anyone else. “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God …” [Romans 3:23] As one who professes Jesus Christ, that puts me in the position of witnessing to others but also looking after my own house. How you manage yours is your business but I will speak out. I will not be silenced no matter the cost. That makes me loving, not full of hate and certainly, not intolerant. If you where sitting on train tracks with your back to an approaching train, shouldn’t I warn you to get off the tracks!? Of course I would. This is no different.

I also strongly believe in the rule of law and the fact that all people are created equal with inherent free will. That means they are free to choose the life they wish to lead and so long as that doesn't infringe on the inherent personal rights of others, it‘s none of my business. I'm supposed to love all and I strive to do just that in my own quiet way. I do not hate anyone based on their race, culture, life choices or sexuality. Every human being is my brother or sister. If you're life choice is destructive, it‘s only hurting you, not me. It doesn't effect our relationship, only yours with a loving God. It has nothing to do with me. If you've heard The Word then go and live your life as you deem fit. I have taken the same stance on homosexuals pretending that they can be married to each other. They want to play house without any of the consequences. Doesn’t work that way. We all pay for our life choices. However, it seems to me that it is in the best interest of a country to encourage the idea of Going Forth and Multiplying under the protection of the marriage contract. It protects women and it protects the children that are sure to follow. I’ve always felt that the Constitution is a divinely inspired document. The reason it's silent on the specifics of marriage is because back then, people walked closer to God and this wasn‘t an issue. I do suggest that let's get government out of marriage altogether and let churches go back to deciding who they'll marry. For everyone else it should remain a civil license. A contract is a contract. Perfect equality while respecting religious freedoms.

But. There's a limit to all this tolerance and it's reached under duress and state coercion.

This then is the position I and many others of my faith find ourselves in. I think by our very silence we encourage further persecution of Christianity. As a Christian it is my sacred duty to teach The Word and share the love of Jesus Christ to anyone who desires to hear and that's the key phrase. Desires. Teaching others about the His love has a lot of different connotations. I'm a layman so I'm generally limited to a soft word, a prayer or an answered question. But I'm beholden to my God not to be silent. That is my Faith in action.

What I strongly object to is the idea that I must celebrate any lifestyle at odds with my religious beliefs. Why isn't it enough that we can live together in peace and harmony without my having to deny my profound and deeply personal relationship with my Creator and literally abandon Him? Stop pushing me to accept your sin as being “OK“ or an “alternate lifestyle“. It ain‘t happenin‘. I won't do that no matter the cost. Leave me alone and I'll return the gesture. Defend my freedoms and I'll do the same for yours. But stop pushing me. If you back me into a corner where the choices are between belief and non belief, between God or political correctness, there's going to be a fight because I'll choose God every time and I won't go down timidly. It has nothing to do with tolerance or bigotry or phobia or any of the other made up buzzwords being tossed out by a culture increasingly hostile to God. It has to do with my own personal deeply held faith and the idea that I am either free to live my life as I deem fit or we as a people are a lot less free than we imagine. Thought Crime persecution isn't on my side, it's on the side of the rabidly atheist, humanist, politically and power driven Left.

I desire no authority over anyone's life and it infuriates me that others want power over mine. God is my ultimate authority and I desire no more than to be free to try and live as I believe he wants me to. In my world Christians are the Paladins, riding to the rescue and defending freedom and the forces of good and decency. Yes, we do fall and fail with maddening regularity but that doesn't take away from the core. The basic idea behind true Christian Faith. Love. Love for God and Love for each other. If you're like me, a sinner (and in my belief you are, we all are), then I love you. If you hate me I love you. If you persecute me I will still love you and I will continue to do so even if you force me to defend myself, my freedoms and my faith. And understand, defense of self and faith is no sin. Defense of faith does not mean forced conversion to Christianity but it does mean active and forceful resistance to forced conversion to a belief system incompatible with my faith by those who view Christianity as something to be eradicated.

We were once a nation founded on the basic idea of live and let live. Cuique Sum," to each his own". We are seemingly no longer that country. I still see signs of it, in the words of some who are not of my faith, but I fear they are now the exception and not the rule. So let me state it for myself. My words and not those of any other. My understanding and not those of learned scholars. My misunderstandings, failures and weaknesses. My human frailties. My Faith.

We are all created equal in the sight of God. We all have the exact same chances, choices and inherent rights. We are all free to choose the life we want within the strictures of civil law. No one should be free to exercise undue and unfair influence on that basic equality. We should be free to practice religion, or the absence of same, as we deem right and fit without fear of repercussions or silencing. No one is created better or worse than anyone else. How we end up depends on the choices we make on this Earth. I love everyone to the extent that I am capable and within the bounds of my life experiences and how they have shaped me. I am fragile, fallible and imminently human. I am prone to mistakes and errors of both discernment and judgment. I am a terrible sinner who needs God's Grace and Forgiveness each and every day of my life. I am neither judge nor jury and have no desire to be either. I have enough problems ordering my own life to meddle about in others. Please stop pushing me.

And that's sort of my point in all this. Faith, or the lack of, is a deeply personal thing. It's in our hearts and the deepest and darkest parts of our minds and souls. It is an intimate matter between each of us and our Creator and no one else. In the end it's all that really matters in this life and to be so arrogant as to believe that anyone has the right to dictate what that relationship is, or even whether it will be allowed to exist at all, is the ultimate tyranny. Coercion is evil. Period dot end. My answer is an unqualified No.

I keep getting told that my faith makes me a hater, a phobic and a criminal moron. So be it. If that's what you believe then you are free to do so. You are free to insult, hate, and preach against me and my faith. But understand that I, and a lot of others just like me, have more than a bit of the Old Testament in us and we absolutely will not lay down and die just because we're inconvenient to your view of the World as you wish it to be. I am most definitely an acolyte of the Church Triumphant. Anyone who has ever read my blog or writings knows that I am hardly a fire and brimstone Christian. I consider myself a fairly quiet person on issues of faith preferring to let others seek and find as they will. Sometimes I worry that I'm too silent but my Libertarian side requires that of me just as my Faithful side requires obedience. I am not tolerant, I am an American who holds the idea that true freedom is given by God Himself and is the natural state of Man. Your relationship with God is your own business. I won't pretend otherwise. But so is mine. Please refrain from telling me otherwise.

I've come to the point where I have stopped begging and started telling.


Stop pushing me into that corner.

~ Ride Safe ~
Sparky

Thursday, January 2, 2014

Weather Or Not Winter Is Here

First the temperatures dropped. Then since early New Year's Eve, it has rained, and rained, and rained. Usually, I like the rain, but, golly, I'm ready for it to be gone!


This was at mid-day. I am so tired of the gloomy skies!


This was "taken" a few moments ago. Can you see how we are socked in with clouds? I know, it's nothing compared to the brutal weather y'all are having up north. Believe me, I do feel for ya.

It's suppose to be snowing not far from us in South Carolina, so, we might get light flurries ourselves. That would be cool. Been watching Fox News and reading everyone's blogs and I see that snow is expected at record heights in Yankeeland with record cold temperatures. And it's expected to intensify through tomorrow.

I say let's start taking up a fund to go here ...

 www.caribbean.com/

... wouldn't that be a welcome change?! *smile*

Y'all stay safe up there in Snow Country. I'm praying for you all.

~ Ride Safe ~
Sparky