For liberals, truth can never be known and all focus must be given to the unknowable...

Kevin McCullough pulls back the curtain on liberalism again in his latest:

... John Edwards, though he represents the thinking of liberal mentality across the board, could not be more mistaken.

True nobody made him 'God' (and we all breathe easier for that.) But God did very much make him, and more importantly He made him a representative to his children, to teach, to instruct, to guide, and to help grow his children into fully functional and thoughtful adults who will then be able to do the same for their children in the days to come.

To not exercise the responsibility of teaching his children, or even more dangerously in Barack Obama's case of willfully teaching his children behavior and immoral justification, liberals are at best proving that they do not have the critical discernment needed to recognize the difference between right and wrong. At worst they are demonstrating negligent or intentional contempt for their children and society. And if they are that confused about something so basic as instructing their children, how will THEY be equipped when weighing the balance of good and evil in the world and nation they hope to lead?

In exposing their thinking on something so simple to us they confirmed that I would never trust them to baby-sit my own child, therefore how on earth can they be given oversight of the free world?

Indeed.

On the subject of families, Brent Bozell writes on hollywood latest attack on our culture on the frustrated family hour.

John Travolta: Do as I say, not as I do...

Check out the Travolta compound to the right.

What a moron:

His serious aviation habit means he is hardly the best person to lecture others on the environment. But John Travolta went ahead and did it anyway.

The 53-year-old actor, a passionate pilot, encouraged his fans to "do their bit" to tackle global warming. But although he readily admitted: "I fly jets", he failed to mention he actually owns five, along with his own private runway.

Clocking up at least 30,000 flying miles in the past 12 months means he has produced an estimated 800 tons of carbon emissions – nearly 100 times the average Briton's tally.

Travolta made his comments this week at the British premiere of his movie, Wild Hogs.

He spoke of the importance of helping the environment by using "alternative methods of fuel" – after driving down the red carpet on a Harley Davidson. ...

Hat tip to Allah at HotAir with Video: Goracle compares environmentalism to the civil rights movement; Update: Gore the favorite for Nobel? The Goracle.

Say Goodbye to Hollywood

I'm, yet again, with Kevin McCullough... liberals get it wrong on nearly everything:

...The heart stopping thing about 2007 is how boldly the immoral leftists will make these naked power grabs.

From the taking of our money that we work hard to earn and use to provide for our loved ones - to the direct communication, sympathy, and willingness to give the benefit of the doubt to those who wish to kill us - liberals are attempting to construct a society that few of us should wish to live in. Should they be left to their own devices they will rig the system to their own benefit and only the voices of "We the People" are able to stop them.

Liberals are almost always wrong, on nearly everything, and to not recognize it accelerates our own, painful, and dramatic destruction.

What's in your wallet?

Update: Who's the environmentalist?

Unity, forgiveness, mercy, and constant appeasement are to be more highly favored than righteousness, holiness, faithfulness, and obedience...

Kevin McCullough is absolutely right with Why the 'Christian Left' is not:

All three men shun the thought of biblically based Christians from standing firm against the creeping peril of evil in our culture. "Be more tolerant," they would advise. "Reach out with love and understanding, not judgment and division."

The 'Christian Left' is rife with such belief.

Unity, forgiveness, mercy, and constant appeasement are to be more highly favored than righteousness, holiness, faithfulness, and obedience.

In doing so the 'Christian Left' also claims to align itself with liberal ideas for the cause of helping the poor, the oppressed, and the downtrodden. When I asked Dr. Campolo for an example he actually cited, "a woman's right... to vote." What is this 1920?

If Wallis, Warren, and/or Campolo are reading this now, please hear this. There is a divide between liberals and conservatives over the relief of poverty, the easing of suffering, and setting the enslaved free. The divide is not the substance however, but rather the methods.

The American political left believe that only Americans should have the right to live in freedom, thus their hesitation and belligerence in advancing freedom in other corners of the globe. But is not freedom a gift from God, for his creation? The American political left is not concerned with the freedom and liberation of the unborn child - but they will speak at length about the evil of slavery that ended in the 1800's. It was not leftists that marched for full civil rights in the 1960's and it was not democrats who granted full civil rights in the 1870's.

Wallis and company will argue for the relief of poverty but give political support to liberals in America who seek to keep the poor impoverished, and dependent upon government for the well being of their family, and future. Conservatives are the ones who wish to see taxes reduced, so that government revenues increase, safety net programs insured - and fewer people needing them in the first place.

And who was it that brought relief in record supply to Tsunami and Katrina victims - not the leftist Academics, spoiled Hollywood starlets, or the National Organization for Women.

It was the bible-believing, faith practicing, church going religious right.

For biblical Christians to associate themselves in any way with the progressive leftists in America today is to associate oil with water.

So take your pick, choose to be a faithful, biblically centered Christian, or a godless, amoral leftist - but the two do not go together.

Not if you're sincere...

Exactly.

Questioning the belief structure that men and women are completely interchangeable with one another...

Another great, thought-provoking commentary called "Why Would Gays Want Children?" from Kevin McCullough:

... Let's face it in America today if we bring up such obvious inconsistencies we are immediately branded and labeled a bigot. I was repeatedly labeled such this week for asking six additional questions arising from the fake act of two women supposedly "becoming parents." Argue with me all you like - the truth is Mary Cheney's baby will share DNA with Mary and the male DNA donor. Genetically he/she will share nothing with Cheney's partner Heather Poe.

So here's the next item I'm not allowed to bring up... Two women who desire children can not achieve satisfaction, because their sexual union is incapable of producing it. And this is fully true - even if all parties involved have healthy, fully functional reproductive biology.

When I mentioned this earlier in the week homosexual bloggers like Andrew Sullivan took exception with the notion and accused me of being hypocritical of the issue when it comes to infertile couples. Yet it is the critics who are being inconsistent.

If a man and wife struggle with infertility, it is because of biological breakdown. What God designed to work a certain way short circuited. He has low sperm count. She doesn't produce eggs as she should. They have trouble getting the two together. The biological dysfunction is not voluntary, they attempt sexual intercourse, time and time again but because of the faulty genetics in the machinery they are unable to complete the conception. And should medicine ever develop a cure for whatever that specific breakdown might be - there will be no problem for the couple, through natural sexual engagement to have another child. ...

Men and women are not interchangeable, and I am not a bigot. McCullough is perfectly right to wonder what this all means for our future. Political Correctness will destroy America as we know it now if we don't find the courage to discuss and consider these types of issues.

What's Rosie's excuse?

A great column this week from Kevin McCullough on the utter confusion of Rosie O'Donnell.

The profound ignorance of the statements not only reveals Rosie's absolute incapacity to comprehend the serious matter of the war on terror but more importantly the eternal issue of her soul.

In comparing the harshest moments of the historical crusades Rosie's point would have still been amiss, but notice she specified the type of Christianity she considers dangerous, the kind of Christianity that we have in America.

Pardon me for brushing aside a lot of speculation and get straight to the issue, Rosie hates evangelicals. The kinds of Christians that scare her most are the radical ones. Roughly translated that means - the ones who actually live by what they believe. ...

---

Rosie hates evangelicals.

---

... Rosie refuses to recognize that Muslims whose doctrine calls for them to kill us are attempting to do just that, while at the same time evangelical Christians share a theology that speaks to the need for grace to those who are in danger, and mercy for those who repent. There are thousands of Christian pastors who even this day are prepared to launch their congregations into tremendous acts of compassion for those needing emergency help and care. Juan Williams, an NPR liberal, detailed as much to me this week as well as in his new book Enough, in the immediate aftermath of Katrina.

But the easy comparisons aside Rosie's statement says much more about her own belief system. ...

... Rosie’s statement also reveals a deep seated anger against a group of people that believe in moral absolutes. The idea of an objective source by which we can understand the difference in right and wrong is a concept that people like Rosie run from. It scares them, and the only way they can respond is in emotional anger to reality that they can not change.

---

right and wrong is a concept
that people like Rosie run from

---

In the world Rosie would like to live in, she wishes there would be no evil. In acknowledging that there is as much, she is also admitting to a greater moral structure that she must measure herself by each day, and in that she falls short - as do we all.

Rosie lives the way mankind always has when they reject God. They convince themselves that if no one gets hurt by what they do - then there is no such thing as right or wrong. So secrets are made, deeds are engaged in, and illicit sin holds a sway over their lives to the point where boldness begins to be craved.

Convinced over a long enough period of time that the deeds they know to be wrong will not harm them, they wish to force the rest of society to agree with them. The most important object in their way becomes the voices of those who would remind them that what they are doing is not good for them. And their most important goal becomes to equivocate or eliminate those voices.

---

they wish to force the rest
of society to agree with them

---

Rosie is angry with radical Christians, because radical Christians know a peace and resolve about their life that she has yet to find. She believes "radical Christianity" is dangerous because she views it as something that will limit her ability to do what she wishes.

What she doesn't understand is the incredible freedom she would find in embracing it.

Rosie needs to spend some time trying to understand. (MEMRI is very informative)

Doug Giles suggests hunting is the answer... he may be onto something.

Guaging the Radical Islamic Threat & Our Interior Culture War

Why We Fight

... For America, we are at present fighting two separate wars. One of them is taking place at and beyond our borders. It is composed of spying on terror funds, stopping (some would say 'failing to stop') terrorists from crossing our northern and southern borders. It involves attacking them preemptively where they live and are carrying out plans to attack us from caves and spider holes in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and in multiple places across the Middle East and Southeast Asia that we have never been told about. This war requires vigilance of each American at all times, in ever public place. It even requires us to take our shoes off, get wanded several times over, and sometimes even cause us to miss our flight. It has taken the lives of honorable men and women, who have felt the call of history, who for these years have protected our security, and yet served without complaint.

For people of common sense there is a second war that we are engaged in and like the first it was not a war that we started - but like unto the first it is one that we must fight, and more importantly one that we must win. It is a near daily assault on our sensibilities as people. It is an all out blitz-kreig on our families, faith, and value system. It is requiring that our 1st and 2nd graders identify their sexual organs and feelings to strangers who parade about as public educators. It mandates that we sacrifice our under-age daughters' wombs to the butchers of Planned Parenthood. It outlaws the ability of parents to teach their children the lessons of right from wrong as my parents did with me via a firm swat on my overly plump backside. And it is attempting to brainwash our youngest with the cursed idea - that men and women are not equal - but rather the same. It is an agenda that seeks to keep mankind from being treated equally regardless of the color of his skin - unless it can be manipulated to benefit a political party. ...

Kevin McCullough is selling his book, but I agree with a lot in his message.