Try naming Sarah Palin's children.
0 Comments
Here's an impressive list of important people Sarah Palin is going to have meetings with this week: From Wikipedia: The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was a law passed by the United States Congress in 2002. It extended legal protection to an infant born alive after a failed attempt at induced abortion. Identified as Public Law 107-207, it was signed into law August 5, 2002 by President Bush, and was based on HR 2175 (passed March 12). The Senate counterpart, initiated by Sen. Rick Santorum, passed without amendment by unanimous consent July 18. My wife and I had the honor of singing in the choir on my church's worship album that is set to release this Tuesday. At first the statement from the title of this blog, "A worship album like no other," may seem prideful or even arrogant. That's until you understand the context. It is probably safe to say that my church has been through more scandal, scrutiny, and pain, on a national stage, than any other church in America the last two years. It all began with the pastoral scandal nearly two years ago. The scandal quickly became national known in large part because the election was only days away. My church was lied about, criticized, and ridiculed in the national media. By the grace of God, we survived. It was a long process to find a new senior pastor. Just as we had found our pastor, a new crisis, a gunman entered the church one morning with a semi-automatic rifle and hundreds of rounds of ammo. Tragically, two teenage girls were killed. Many more, possibly hundreds would have been killed if not for the actions of the heroic security staff. One security member specifically had been praying and fasting for purpose for her life. She knows God used her that day to save the lives of many people. Once again, my church was on the nationally stage. This time, we had an extraordinary opportunity to show the world Jesus' love. The news media have had to scratch their heads at us. "Why are people still going there? Aren't they afraid? Wasn't is all about one man and he's gone now?" are the questions we hear. They aren't audible answers as much as actions. Can someone please inform Barack Obama that John McCain cannot operate a computer keyboard because of injuries suffered as a prisoner of war in Vietnam? Based on current state-by-state polls, this may be the electoral college map on November 4th. The pink and light blue states represent poll averages within a 5% margin. These states would be possible locations for recounts in the days following the election. If the recounts do not change the results, the House of Representatives would be called on to vote for the president. Each state would get one vote. For example, Colorado's 7 representatives, Democrat and Republican, would combine for one vote. Whoever receives 26 votes or more would be president. I'm sure there are some states that have a 50/50 split between Democrats and Republicans. That could lead to an extended standoff with some possible backdoor deals. If there is still no resolution before the inauguration in January, Dick Cheney would become interim-President of the United States and Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, would become Interim Vice-President. They would hold these positions until the House decides on the Presidency. Got all that? I was surprised when I heard about this poll this morning. Only 60% of Americans believe that Supreme Court justices should base their decisions on the Constitution. 30% believe Supreme Court justices should base their decisions on the judge's sense of "fairness." The reason I say "only" 60% is because this should be a no-brainer for anyone with a high school education. This percentage should at least be in the 80's and preferably the 90's. Telling the Supreme Court that they should rely on their personal sense of fairness rather than the Constitution is somewhat similar to telling the Senate they should ignore the opinions of Americans and vote however they please. They may do this from time to time but thankfully we can fire them if they do. Inscription on the wall of the Supreme Court Building from Marbury v. Madison, in which Chief Justice John Marshall (statue, foreground) outlined the concept of judicial review. Most people will see this for what it is - in a rush to cleanup Invesco after the DNC, someone didn't use their brain and started trashing leftover American Flags. There's no way Obama would stand for this. The problem is it adds anecdotal evidence to a common criticism that Democrats are anti-American and pro-world government. Flaggate, along with Obama's world tour, Michelle Obama's "first time in my adult lifetime" comment, and the Greek styrofoam columns at Invesco, are gaffes that have to be eliminated by Obama in order for him to win on election day. That's how many people tuned in to Palin's speech last night as reported by the Drudge Report. That's more viewers than any single night of the Olympics and over 13 million more viewers than her counterpart Joe Biden had for his speech. Barack Obama had 38,379,000, a virtual tie with Palin. Well probably not the winning shot just yet, but Sarah Palin's speech was definitely a momentum changer. TINA FEY? SALLY FIELD? Several bloggers and party insiders have heard that McCain will scrap the normal convention acceptance speech format. Instead, it's rumored he will incorporate a townhall meeting format; taking questions from the crowd. That would be interesting! We'll have to see if it actually happens. McCain is not the best prepared speaker. He's certainly not as polished as Obama, or even Palin. He does however excel in a question/answer format like at Saddleback with Rick Warren. Changing the speech format would be a convention first. One last thing, check out this poll on usmagazine.com. Yes, this is the same US Weekly Mag that tried to smear Sarah Palin with their cover story yesterday. |
Archives
December 2008
Categories
All
|