$700 billion

From forbes.com

So, how did the Bush administration come up with the $700 billion figure?  As reported in Forbes.com:"It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number." Scary, huh?

It’s Dangerous for Men to “Follow Their Feelings”

It’s Dangerous for Men to “Follow Their Feelings”

by Mark Gungor on April 26th, 2011

Maleness is under attack in this country and has been for the past 40 plus years. This is true in the culture at large, as well as in The Church, and it is extremely detrimental to male culture and our society at large. For a few years now people have been addressing this issue in books like The Feminization of American Culture by Ann Douglas, and David Murrow’s Why Men Hate Going to Church. The results of this feminization have been disastrous. Men are not real men anymore. Many males themselves don’t even know what it means to be a man because they have no role models. Part of this is due to the fact, that far too many fathers have literally abandoned their children or they are not engaged playing an active role in being a part of their son’s lives. For decades since the industrial revolution, most boys have been surrounded and raised by women who are the caretakers and role models. The message men are getting in spades—consciously and unconsciously– is that they need to be more like women and less like men.

While, there is much to be said about the causes and cures for this phenomenon, for the sake of this argument, we are going to zero in on one particular area: living by feelings.  More importantly, how it’s a dangerous thing when men live by them. In his book, Man and Woman in Christ, Dr. Steven Clark states that one of the earmarks of a feminized man is that “he will place an unbalanced emphasis on how he feels (and how other people feel), in turn becoming highly visceral in his personal thinking and reactions”.  In other words, because such a high emphasis has been placed on feelings, men have incorrectly learned that they have permission to act on and live by their feelings rather than thinking through logically what is right and wrong.

At first glance it would seem like being more aware or “in tune” to feelings would make guys nicer, gentler, more sympathetic, compassionate and understanding. That can be true for men and it is definitely true for women. Generally, for a woman, feelings lead them to very idealistic and altruistic behaviors like caring for others out of genuine love and concern. But the wild card that gets played in the hand for a guy is that men—being men–often experience different feelings and emotions that women do not. Things like anger, retaliation and vengeance, and even inappropriate violent or sexual urges. Definitely feelings that you don’t want him acting upon.

Think about it. When a man gets angry, he will likely feel the urge to express that anger and want to hit something or someone. Now, if he has been taught that you don’t act according to his feelings, he will stifle that urge and find a different more appropriate response.  But, if he has learned either directly or indirectly in a feminized environment that is ok and appropriate to allow your feelings to dictate behavior—rather than choosing to do the right thing—he will swing away. He may also yell, curse, or throw things because that’s what he feels like doing—and to him this is normal and acceptable. While it doesn’t excuse the behavior, it certainly helps to explain the line inside a guy’s head that gets crossed when he hits his wife and calls her horrible names, because in his minds it’s ok. He’s just acting on what he feels and thinks he can’t help it.  For males, because they are men with much higher levels of testosterone along with more aggressive instincts and emotions, unleashing their feelings or lashing out can be downright destructive.

Let’s look at the extreme: It is a well-established fact that boys who are raised with no fathers have much higher incidence of criminal behavior. Just take a trip to any prison and ask the men there how many of them grew up with a father present—and acting like a father. Most will say that there was no dad, and if there was one present, he sure didn’t act like one. While the absence of proper role models is a no-brainer in this, what if there is another part of the equation we should consider?  What if this lack of a man in the house to provide modeling is only part of it? What if these boys are actually being “feminized” from the mothers, grandmothers, aunts, and sisters around them?  Could it be that the acting out in violent ways—ways that lead these young men to lives of crime— is a direct result of what Dr. Clark reported? Is it because they have internalized and lived by the notion that feelings and emotions dictate behavior?

Another characteristic that Clark reports, seeing in men who are “feminized”, is that they “will be much more subject to the approval of the group, and thus significantly affected by how others feel and react towards him”.  Could this be another ingredient that goes into the dysfunctional decisions young boys make when they join gangs?  Young men frequently state that acceptance, approval and belonging are high on the list of why they got involved with a gang in the first place. Is it possible that the lack of a father is only one of the culprits and that the resulting feminization is a large part of the problem too?

Of course, when we look at men who end up in gangs or in prison, we are talking about some real extremes in choices and behaviors. But there are very negative results that manifest in the average, typical husband and father.  I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard from couples who are having issues because the guy isn’t getting a job, isn’t helping around the house, taking care of the kids, investing time and attention with his wife, or willing to make love to the woman simply because he “doesn’t feel like it”.  Or worst-case scenario, he ends up in an affair because he had to “be honest and follow his feelings”. Because they have been feminized to think in this broken way, too many men are behaving very badly.

In her book, Reading Your Male: An Invitation to Understand and Influence Your Man’s Sexuality, Mary Farrar talks about Dr. Clark’s findings and how to counter this trend of “feminization”. She says that it’s not really as difficult as one would think. Farrar states:

“The good news is that feminization is easily remedied. It is not some kind of complex psychosis that needs years of counseling. It only requires (1) the permission/encouragement to be manly, and (2) a template, or masculine mentor—a man who visibly models healthy biblical masculinity.”

It’s time that Christians realize this as a problem in The Church and our culture and it’s time to stop demanding that men act and behave like women. We need to start allowing men to be manly men—and, as Farrar says, to give them permission to be men. Real men who man-up, do the right things and who refuse to live by their very deceptive and destructive feelings.

one world goverment

James Paul Warburg

On February 17, 1950, James Paul Warburg confidently declared to the United States Senate: “We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”

 [1] James Paul Warburg (1896-1969) was the son of Paul Moritz Warburg, and a nephew of both Felix Warburg and Jacob Schiff, both associated with Kuhn, Loeb & Company which financed the Russian Revolution through James’ brother Max, banker to the government of Germany. [2] A world government is a world without borders, national sovereignty, constitutions, privacy, autonomy, individual liberties, religious freedoms, private property, the right to bear arms, the rights of marriage and family and a dramatic population reduction (two thirds). A world government establishes a slave/master environment wherein the state controls everything.

Dr. Henry Kissinger

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion], whether real or *promulgated* [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this *scenario*, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government." Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

David Rockefeller

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991

Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State

"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

Woodrow Wilson

"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom (1913)

Richard Gardner

"The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down...but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault." CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFR's journal, Foreign Affairs.

David Rockefeller

Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.– David Rockefeller 1973, August 10th New York Times

Hegelian dialectic

Hegelian dialectic

"...the State 'has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State... for the right of the world spirit is above all special privileges.'" Author/historian William Shirer, quoting Georg Hegel in his The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1959, page 144)

In 1847 the London Communist League (Karl Marx and Frederick Engels) used Hegel's theory of the dialectic to back up their economic theory of communism. Now, in the 21st century, Hegelian-Marxist thinking affects our entire social and political structure. The Hegelian dialectic is the framework for guiding our thoughts and actions into conflicts that lead us to a predetermined solution. If we do not understand how the Hegelian dialectic shapes our perceptions of the world, then we do not know how we are helping to implement the vision. When we remain locked into dialectical thinking, we cannot see out of the box.

Trilateral Commission

Trilateral Commission  from there web site

Welcome to the web site of the Trilateral Commission. The Commission was originally created in 1973 to bring together experienced leaders within the private sector to discuss issues of global concern at a time when communication and cooperation between Europe, North America, and Asia were lacking. The Commission has grown since its early days to include members from more countries in these regions, and it continues to find that study and dialogue about the pressing problems facing our planet remain as important today as in 1973. Problems and threats have changed, but their importance has only increased due to the more interconnected and interdependent world in which we now live.

Although we are a small group, and meet only a few times each year, we see great value in a web site that offers scholars, researchers, and the general public access to our proceedings and the major reports submitted during our meetings. We also offer links to the writings of our membership and their individual views on issues of concern, and we provide some basic information about the Commission, its history, and activities. We have also begun to present short video interviews and other information connected to our meetings.

The Trilateral Commission has an official publication called, Trialogue. It also issues multiple Task Force Reports (also called Triangle Papers) per year.

Quoting from the objectives which appear in every issue of Trialogue, they wrote, "The Trilateral Commission was formed in 1973 by private citizens of Western Europe, Japan and North America to foster closer cooperation among these three regions on common problems. It seeks to improve public understanding of such problems, to support proposals for handling them jointly, and to nurture habits and practices of working together among these regions."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The January 16, 1977 issue of The Washington Post expressed, "Trilateralists are not three-sided people. They are members of a private, though not secret, international organization put together by the wealthy banker, David Rockefeller, to stimulate the establishment dialog between Western Europe, Japan and the United States. But here is the unsettling thing about the Trilateral Commission. The President-elect [Carter] is a member. So is the Vice-President-elect Walter F. Mondale. So are the new Secretaries of State, Defense and Treasury. So is Zbigniew Brzezinski, who is a former Trilateral Director and Carter's National Security Adviser, also a bunch of others who will make foreign policy for America in the next four years."

The same issue of The Washington Post reported that, "At last count, 13 Trilateralists had gone into top positions in the administration, not to mention six other Trilateralists who are established as policy advisers, some of whom may also get jobs. This is extraordinary when you consider that the Trilateral Commission only has about 65 American members

Why I hate religion but love Jesus

Why I hate religion but love Jesus     by bball1989

http://youtu.be/1IAhDGYlpqY

Verse 1

What if I told you Jesus came to abolish religion

What if I told you voting republican really wasn’t his mission

What if I told you republican doesn’t automatically mean Christian

And just because you call some people blind

Doesn’t automatically give you vision

Verse 2

I mean if religion is so great, why has it started so many wars

Why does it build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor

Tells single moms God doesn’t love them if they’ve ever had a divorce

But in the old testament God actually calls religious people whores

Verse 3

Religion might preach grace, but another thing they practice

Tend to ridicule God’s people, they did it to John The Baptist

They can’t fix their problems, and so they just mask it

Not realizing religions like spraying perfume on a casket

See the problem with religion, is it never gets to the core

It’s just behavior modification, like a long list of chores

Like lets dress up the outside make look nice and neat

But it’s funny that’s what they use to do to mummies

While the corpse rots underneath

Verse 4

Now I ain’t judgin, I’m just saying quit putting on a fake look

Cause there’s a problem

If people only know you’re a Christian by your Facebook

I mean in every other aspect of life, you know that logic’s unworthy

It’s like saying you play for the Lakers just because you bought a jersey

You see this was me too, but no one seemed to be on to me

Acting like a church kid, while addicted to pornography

See on Sunday I’d go to church, but Saturday getting faded

Acting if I was simply created just to have sex and get wasted

See I spent my whole life building this facade of neatness

But now that I know Jesus, I boast in my weakness

Verse 5

Because if grace is water, then the church should be an ocean

It’s not a museum for good people, it’s a hospital for the broken

Which means I don’t have to hide my failure, I don’t have to hide my sin

Because it doesn’t depend on me it depends on him

See because when I was God’s enemy and certainly not a fan

He looked down and said I want, that, man

Which is why Jesus hated religion, and for it he called them fools

Don’t you see so much better than just following some rules

Now let me clarify, I love the church, I love the Bible, and yes I believe in sin

But if Jesus came to your church would they actually let him in

See remember he was called a glutton, and a drunkard by religious men

But the Son of God never supports self righteousness not now, not then

Verse 6

Now back to the point, one thing is vital to mention

How Jesus and religion are on opposite spectrums

See one’s the work of God, but one’s a man made invention

See one is the cure, but the other’s the infection

See because religion says do, Jesus says done

Religion says slave, Jesus says son

Religion puts you in bondage, while Jesus sets you free

Religion makes you blind, but Jesus makes you see

And that’s why religion and Jesus are two different clans

Verse 7

Religion is man searching for God, Christianity is God searching for man

Which is why salvation is freely mine, and forgiveness is my own

Not based on my merits but Jesus’s obedience alone

Because he took the crown of thorns, and the blood dripped down his face

He took what we all deserved, I guess that’s why you call it grace

And while being murdered he yelled

“Father forgive them they know not what they do.”

Because when he was dangling on that cross, he was thinking of you

And he absorbed all of your sin, and buried it in the tomb

Which is why I’m kneeling at the cross, saying come on there’s room

So for religion, no I hate it, in fact I literally resent it

Because when Jesus said it is finished, I believe he meant it

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I love this its great

The first problem I think people have with this is that there is two ways to look at the word religion

1 - it is my faith in jesus / my faith and jesus are the same thing.

Which is mainly from people who have gone to church for a long time

2 - it is a system of does and don'ts, I have to stop this, I have to wake up early on sunday morning or it is all just a show, just something to make people feel good

I understand both kinds thoughts

I have been a christian for a long time. When I think of religion I still think of chose 2

I have always thought that I have a personal relationship with jesus not a religion / I have always thought that religion is mans attempt to reach God and christianty is Gods attempt to reach us

This video is making people think about and talk about their view of God and in my opinion thats a good thing

I think that people outside the church see the church as chose number 2 and this video is speaking directly to them