Author: Papa Giorgio

Big Men-Big Speeches (Presidential)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Uncle Jimbo — via Big Peace — gives us something to chew on:

….Obama is a politician and that is where he feels comfortable. he even felt obligated to remind us that “ending” the Iraq War was a campaign promise of his.

So tonight, I am announcing that the American combat mission in Iraq has ended. Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, and the Iraqi people now have lead responsibility for the security of their country.

This was my pledge to the American people as a candidate for this office.

Well thank you candidate Obama, you will soon be back in your comfort zone running for re-election. Too bad you couldn’t find some time to actually command the troops in the interim.

He also managed to bring up the monetary cost of the war as one of its downsides.

We have sent our young men and women to make enormous sacrifices in Iraq, and spent vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home…..We have spent over a trillion dollars at war, often financed by borrowing from overseas.

A guy who pissed away more than a  trillion dollars paying off his political allies ought to watch what he says. If we are willing to go to war then we shouldn’t whine about the money it costs. Hear John F. Kennedy speak.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty….

To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

Let’s contrast Obama’s bloodless lecture to President Bush’s clarion call for victory when he announced the surge Obama couldn’t bring himself to mention.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life. In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy, by advancing liberty across a troubled region. It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom, and to help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East…

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security. Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue — and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties. The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success. I believe that it will.

…(read more)…

 

Obama-Care Loosing Support

Published by Papa Giorgio


Just as a side-note: Almost no one thought the earth was flat in Columbus’ day. Talk about misinformation… jeez! I wrote Leslie Marshall in the hopes she would forgo such use of non-history in the future:

Just an FYI, almost no one (including who was funding and sending Columbus to explore) believed the earth was flat. People from early Grecian days knew it was round. In other words, you were talking about misinformation and gave a misinformed analogy. Even Stephen Jay Gould said, “there never was a period of ‘flat earth darkness’ among scholars.” I suggest two books on the subject, one in-depth, the other a short chapter. The sorter read in entitled, Not So! Popular Myths About America from Columbus to Clinton. The more in-depth book, Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians.

I hope this helps,

Every Turn of the Spade Confirms

Published by Papa Giorgio

Here is an imported article from ICR entitled, “New Artifact Supports Antiquity of Bible.” It has to do with the applicability of real history versus history twisted with presuppositional stances:

An Israeli professor has found evidence that certain books of the Bible could easily be as old as their texts claim. Some scholars had believed that Hebrew writing did not yet exist when these books were purportedly written. But though it does not quote the Bible, a 3,000-year-old piece of pottery from Israel bears text inked in Hebrew, the language of the original Old Testament.

The pottery shard was excavated in 2008 about 18 miles west of Jerusalem, at Khirbet Qeiyafa. It was translated by Professor Gershon Galil of the University of Haifa, who determined:

It uses verbs that were characteristic of Hebrew, such as asah (“did”) and avad (“worked”), which were rarely used in other regional languages. Particular words that appear in the text, such as almanah (“widow”) are specific to Hebrew and are written differently in other local languages. The content itself was also unfamiliar to all the cultures in the region besides the Hebrew society.1

Modern critical scholars have often contended that many portions of the Bible were actually written long after the events they describe, and that the text was then attributed after the fact to the ancient authors. The conservative view that the Bible was authored by the individuals it names clashes with the liberal assertion that the people at the time were illiterate, or that the Hebrew language did not even exist then. But this newly translated artifact demonstrates that the Hebrew language was alive and well, in both spoken and written form, during the time that many portions of the Bible were written.

Fox News reported, “The inscription is the earliest example of Hebrew writing found, which stands in opposition to the dating of the composition of the Bible in current research.”2 How could “current research” have been hundreds of years off regarding its dates?

One reason that some academics have posited much later dates of authorship has been their bias against the supernatural. For example, significant prophecies were recorded by Daniel, chief advisor to several Babylonian kings, in about 536 B.C. God revealed to Daniel the number of years until the promised One, Jesus Christ, would enter Jerusalem, then be “cut off.”3 Christ fulfilled these prophecies to the exact year during His triumphal entry and crucifixion, respectively.

Since a centuries-earlier prophecy of this future event could only have occurred through a supernatural revelation, a much later date (though still over a century prior to Christ) was asserted for prophetic portions of Daniel’s book, along with the idea that Daniel was attributed false authorship after some of the prophesied events had actually occurred. For example, he foretold the rise of Alexander the Great, who unified the Greek empire in the third century BC.4

The newly deciphered Hebrew inscriptions date from the 10th century BC, long before Daniel.5 Therefore, the claim can no longer be made that much of the Bible could not possibly have been written by the listed authors because the Hebrew language did not exist until later. It is now more apparent than ever that these assertions of late-date authorship were not rooted in evidence, but in a certain ideology.

…(to follow footnotes and read related article)…

Here is a documentary that touches on many of these issues, that is naturalistic assumptions in history being proven wrong, time-and-time-again: