Obama Removes Jesus from Easter Message?

President Obama literally edited Christ out of his “holiday greeting” today when he excerpted a sermon given by a military chaplain on Iwo Jima on Easter Sunday 1945.

Below is the relevant paragraph from Obama’s holiday greeting today:

The rites of Passover, and the traditions of Easter, have been marked by people in every corner of the planet for thousands of years. They have been marked in times of peace, in times of upheaval, in times of war.

One such war-time service was held on the black sands of Iwo Jima more than sixty years ago. There, in the wake of some of the fiercest fighting of World War II, a chaplain rose to deliver an Easter sermon, consecrating the memory, he said “of American dead – Catholic, Protestant, Jew. Together,” he said, “they huddled in foxholes or crouched in the bloody sands…Together they practiced virtue, patriotism, love of country, love of you and of me.” The chaplain continued, “The heritage they have left us, the vision of a new world, [was] made possible by the common bond that united them…their only hope that this unity will endure.”

Their only hope that this unity will endure.

Now read below the same paragraph again, but this time note the additional bolded language that comes from the original audio of the 1945 sermon and its context, but which President Obama decided not to include:

There, in the wake of some of the fiercest fighting of World War II, a chaplain rose to deliver an Easter sermon, consecrating the memory, he said:

He has risen. With all due reverence, we apply these words to our beloved dead. 

There are too many air call wings encrusted with the stain of their owners’ life blood, too many marine trousers upon the graves, too many symbols of American dead – Catholic, Protestant, Jew. Together,” he said, “they huddled in foxholes or crouched in the bloody sands under the fury of enemy guns here on Iwo Jima. Together they practiced virtue, patriotism, love of country, love of you and of me. Together they stand before the greatest soldier of them all – Jesus Christ, to receive the token of our triumph.  For Christ has said: “Greater love than this no man hath then that he lay down his life for his friends.”

And so our beloved dead have gone from the world of hate to the world of eternal love. 

The chaplain continued, “The heritage they have left us, the vision of a new world, [was] made possible by the common bond that united them in the drudgery of recruit training or here in the chaos of bursting shouts.  Their only hope: that this unity will endure.”

And so our dead have risen to glory.

The American President is president of all the people, believers and non-believers alike.  So when presidential messages are delivered to mark the special observances of major religious groups, it is understandable that a president will strive to provide some measure of explanation of how a particular religious observance honors values that all Americans can share.

But there are limits. A president cannot possibly hope to be a grand synthesizer of all religious traditions in the United States. Despite his skills, it is above President Obama’s pay grade to construct some kind of civic religion that stands above traditional religions and which should guide Americans going forward.

Instead of providing separate messages to Jews and Christians on the observance of Passover and Easter, President Obama said in this holiday greeting that “while we worship in different ways, we also remember the shared spirit of humanity that inhabits us all – Jews and Christians, Muslims and Hindus, believers and nonbelievers alike.”

Obama then went on to say that “on this Easter weekend, let us hold fast to those aspirations we hold in common as brothers and sisters, as members of the same family – the family of man.”

The problem is that when you start to water down what people actually believe in an attempt to construct a religion of the “family of man”, you start to misrepresent fundamentally the nature of the hope that is at the center of lives of believers.

In the case of Christians, Christ is our hope.  Our hope is in the risen Christ, which we celebrate on Easter Sunday.

But if a president wants to water down religious beliefs in an attempt to find a synthesized religion of the ‘family of man’, you end up removing Christ from Easter, which is, strangely, exactly what President Obama did today in his Easter message. 

Is this the first American president to dechristianize Easter?

Vince Haley is vice president for policy at American Solutions. The observations made herein are personal

Obama’s Mr. Cool Act Wins Few Foreign Friends

Obama’s Mr. Cool Act Wins Few Foreign Friends

April 6th, 2010

Business Week

 Obama is too cool for school and for friends and allies

After 14 months in office, President Barack Obama is looking at a cold and friendless world.

That doesn’t seem to bother him one bit, because he’s the one who’s acting chilly.

His relations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Afghan President Hamid Karzai are almost sub-zero. Obama didn’t mind hurting Spanish feelings when he canceled a summit in Madrid.

Even French President Nicolas Sarkozy — dubbed “l’Americain” by his compatriots — was put on hold for a home-cooked dinner until a week ago. Other Europeans can’t decide whether he’s dissing them.

It’s gotten to the point where there is a debate in the U.K. Parliament on whether to call off the so-called special relationship. The British took offense at Obama’s decision to move Winston Churchill’s bust out of the Oval Office. The more dramatic slight was his pitiful gift of a boxed set of 25 old American movies to Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who can’t even view them on a U.K. DVD player.

Read More:

Painting the Protesters (the Cartoon)

States fear that five words in Obama health law will open door to lawsuits

States fear that five words in Obama health law will open door to lawsuits

April 6th, 2010

By Jon Ward – The Daily Caller

 Obamacare has a key provision that puts states at risk

The addition to existing law of five words, and a comma, may cause a world of hurt to state governments.

Tucked away on page 466 of President Obama’s 2,704-page health-care bill is a provision that changes the definition of “medical assistance,” the term describing what states are required to provide to Medicaid recipients.

States have in the past been required to provide payment for services to physicians. Now, under the new definition, states will be liable for ensuring provision of “the care and services themselves.”

In other words, states are legally on the hook not only to ensure that Medicaid recipients are paid for, but that they’re seen by a doctor.

Medicaid recipients have found it increasingly difficult to be seen by doctors, as states in extreme economic duress have cut payment rates.

Read More:

Obama’s Russian Disaster

Obama’s Russian Disaster

April 6th, 2010

By Kim Zigfeld, America Thinker

 Obama is being pushed around by Putin

The point of President Barack Obama’s much-ballyhooed “reset” of relations with Vladimir Putin’s Russia was simple: Get Russia to stop supporting American enemies and use its influence to reduce the threat of nuclear terror being rained down on the West by the world’s rogue regimes. 

Obama was ready, willing, and able to betray Russian human rights activists by selling American values down the river in order do get this deal done, and he promptly gave them the cold shoulder. He was even willing to totally ignore Russia’s horrific problem of race murder and its invasion of tiny Georgia for imperial conquest.

Last week, Obama learned the wisdom of Ronald Reagan’s famous advice on Russia: “Trust, but verify.”

Despite Obama’s best efforts, including a unilateral withdrawal of the Bush anti-ballistic missile plan for Eastern Europe, Putin traveled to Venezuela, shook hands with a beaming Hugo Chávez, and announced (video here) that Russia would provide Chávez with both a nuclear energy capacity and a rocket program, the same as it has done for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran.

Read More:

Tend to Your Seeds, Mr. President

Tend to Your Seeds, Mr. President

Peter Wilson

The Washington Post’s Robert Samuelson criticized ObamaCare in “Planting the Seeds of Disaster“:

Should the United States someday suffer a budget crisis, it will be hard not to conclude that Obama and his allies sowed the seeds, because they ignored conspicuous warnings.
The President seemed to respond directly to Samuelson last Friday, ridiculing him in front of supporters in Portland, Maine:
Can you imagine if some of these reporters were working on a farm? You planted some seeds, and they came out the next day, and they looked, and nothing’s happened! There’s no crop! We’re going to starve! Oh, no! It’s a disaster!
Earlier in Iowa Obama made similarly sarcastic remarks, but this time he jeered at the straw men who thought that Obamacare would lead to immediate Armageddon:
After I signed the bill, I looked around to see if there were any asteroids falling, some cracks opening up in the earth.  It turned out to be a nice day and birds were chirping, folks were strolling down the mall.
There are two essential questions here. 
One: is ObamaCare good or bad?  In terms of the seed metaphor, is it a seed of destruction or a seed that will bring forth nourishing crops?
Secondly, will the effects of ObamaCare be felt immediately, or gradually over the next decade?
None — zero percent — of Obamcare’s critics think that all of its disastrous effects will appear instanteously.  It’s a preposterous idea that need not be part of the debate.  Thus the seed metaphor: a seed takes time to germinate and grow.
Both of Obama’s jibes however address only the second question.  He mocks his critics for expecting both good seeds and seeds of destruction to grow overnight.

Obama’s List

Obama’s List

By J.R. Dunn

Over the past year and a half, we’ve seen much in the way of speculation of what Obama is really up to, what his true agenda might be behind all the soothing and meretricious rhetoric. It was quite clear that “Obama” was a construct, a carefully manufactured image, as all politicians are to one extent or another. But Obama was an extreme example — all image, most of it having little or no connection with any discernable substance. The gap between what he said and what he would then proceed to do was wide and glaring. This obvious and undeniable discontinuity is the major factor feeding all the conspiracy theories — the ones featuring George Soros as puppet master, or the claims of adherence to Islam and so forth. If only it were that simple! The past few weeks have clearly revealed that Obama is something at the same time entirely more commonplace while also being more obnoxious.

Obama is an example of that peculiar American contribution to the long line of political deviancy, the romantic leftist, a combination of undergrad Marxism, New Deal activism, Great Society idealism, and late 60s dementia. In fulfillment of this role, he is going down the list of left-wing daydreams, wish-fulfillment fantasies, and unfinished business, and doing his damndest to see them made reality. No more than that, and certainly no less.
Take a look at his latest series of crimes. Start with health-care “reform.” We all know about this — or, at least as much as we can be expected to know about a bill that is incoherent, contradictory, longer than Remembrance of Things Past and not fully grasped by even its most fanatic adherents. (Oh, there is one thing we do know that they don’t — that things that go up also come down, either by way of the Supreme Court, Congressional repeal, or the streets of Washington opening up to swallow everyone who voted for the atrocious thing.)
As for the newly announced nuclear disarmament treaty with Russia, we know even less about that, apart from it being a “breakthrough.” The single concrete point I’ve been able to gather is that the treaty terms will allow 800 launch systems, a provision that only indirectly involves nuclear weapons as such. If true, this has the feel of complete disarmament and not the nuclear variety at all. Does this mean 800 missiles? Or missiles, bombers, and submarines, and what have you? It doesn’t sound at all good. We’ll know more when Massa O comes down from the big house to explain it to us.
Third is the manned space program, now effectively kaput.  Constellation was morphing into the standard gold-plated NASA make-work program, which does not mean that it wasn’t worth pursuing anyway, as the only game in town. The idea of a major nation not possessing a manned program in the 21st century is an absurdity in and of itself. Particularly in light of the fact that such world powers as India, China, Richard Branson, and Jeff Bezos are all moving into manned spaceflight in a big way. Eventually somebody is going to stop ditzing around in low earth orbit and start exploiting the vast resources available on the moon and in the inner solar system. It would be nice if they spoke English.
All three of these have been on the leftie checklist for decades or longer. Health care since Harry Truman… or was it FDR? Or perhaps Aristides the Just?  Government health care was the goal the left was aiming at with the establishment of Medicare and Medicaid a half-century ago. And we’re still not there yet — the left won’t be satisfied until they have their completely centralized system on the model of the UK’s National Health Service. That’s why they don’t really care what’s in the current program — it’s designed to fail, and in short order, so that they can nationalize it in order to “save” it.
Nuclear disarmament was in large part of product of the KGB, the secret sponsors of every disarmament movement from the 1950s SANE to the to the 1980s Nuclear Freeze. But tainted origins don’t matter. Anything is better than nukes, which must be banished forthwith.
The space program has been a left-wing target since it first began. The standard argument — that it’s a “waste of money” — can be set aside. The left considers every dime outside its direct control to be “wasted”. Rather, it’s combination of elements, including lack of imagination and spirit, an inability to see what a new age of exploration would mean for America and the world at large, and a sense of bitterness at America’s achievement — the U.S. will always be the nation that first set foot on the moon, something that leftists find difficult to accept.
In the past two weeks, Obama has taken all three off the board. His other recent efforts: beating up on Wall Street, attempting to resuscitate the unions, groveling before third-world tyrants — are also characteristic of the American left and nobody else. (When did you last see a Castro or a Chavez bowing to a sheikh?) Obama is a typical example of a particular type of left-winger, produced by the United States alone among all nations. He is doing exactly what would be expected from this type of leftist, out of absolute conviction. Not in the service of any third party. Not to destroy or cripple the country. With his college-sophomore grasp of the world, he seriously believes he’s doing the right thing and will be vindicated before the end titles roll up. This in defiance of the clear failure of every last left-of-center domestic and international program of the past eighty years. This is ideological blindness at its deepest.
So what predictions can we derive from this? What else is on the list? The answer is — what do the lefties want?
  • Cap & trade
  • Marijuana legalization (tied in with ending the drug war as a whole)
  • Amnesty for illegals
  • Cutting Israel loose (We saw the first step toward this last week)
  • Creation of an international legal system
  • Media “reform”
  • A new NRA (National Recovery Act here, playmates — not the gun guys.)
  • A government-mandated green economy
  • An equal outcomes “multicultural” society
We will see attempted legislation on all these — and likely more — over the next few years, particularly in light of his recent “triumphs”.
But what about the exceptions?  Guns in the national parksClearance for new nuclear reactors in Georgia? The new offshore drilling program?  Each case involves triangulation of the most transparent and inadequate type. Bill Clinton was at least taking concrete action with NAFTA and welfare reform. Obama is doing no such thing. Loosening gun restrictions is a bone thrown to the despised “clingers.” The reactor projects must still clear the standard regulatory barriers, an unlikely event. The drilling program is almost completely bogus. More exploration fields off of Alaska were closed than opened, along with the entire Pacific Coast and much of the Atlantic.
Obama’s problem is that romantic leftism is consistently disastrous. A brief examination of FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society, the models for Obama’s efforts, will reveal that clearly. More to the point, the prototypes for his recent triumphs have also failed wherever they have been put into effect. Concerning health care, we’re told that we’ve joined the rest of the civilized world. So here’s what civilization looks like:
In 2008, the Australian health-care system came near to meltdown after the New South Wales hospital network collapsed. The money was all spent, vendors stopped supplying medical materials, patients just out of surgery lay screaming on their beds after the morphine and sedatives ran out, and hundreds of specialists and personnel jumped ship for jobs in private medical centers. How did it happen? Nobody knows. Last year, Dr. Anne Doig, the incoming head of Canadian Medicare, stated publicly that the system was nearing implosion. She promised to try to fix it. She did not sound enthusiastic. In the UK, mother of all national health services, not a week goes by without another series of stories in British papers detailing corruption, incompetence, and sheer cruelty within the NHS. Recent news includes reports that dozens of local hospitals will be closed down as a money-saving measure, leaving many communities with no medical facilities whatsoever. Tens of thousands have died in the hands of the NHS in recent years, and tens if not hundreds of thousands more will die before any meaningful reform occurs. These countries, compromising the core of the Anglosphere, are on their way to Third-World status as far as their health-care systems are concerned. We just joined them on that slide. As for me, I liked barbarism better.
There is an argument to be made for maintaining a small but useful number of nuclear weapons, but you won’t hear it from the left. Their contention is that nukes are no good and must be gotten rid of in toto. Forget the fact that they ended World War II decisively and quickly, that they helped win the Cold War (Could the West have kept the USSR contained without them? The simple answer is “no”.), and have played a large part in keeping the peace since. No matter — they’re Bad Things, and must be eradicated, along with DDT, alar, fast foods, and Toyota. So Obama has heroically tackled the job — just as Iran is obtaining its own nuclear arsenal. Great timing.
The first manned space program, which culminated in the Apollo lunar missions, was cancelled by Richard Nixon while he was playing his “I’m a liberal too” game during the run-up to Watergate. The ensuing economic shock caused by the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs (Where did the liberals think those paychecks were going to? Somebody living on the surface of Pluto?), helping to kick off the 1970s recession that hung on like a bad flu until Reagan took office. Obama simply repeated Nixon’s error, with a recession already in place. What will the results be? What would you guess?
Any one of these programs, in place or planned, would be problematic at best — creating serious and intractable problems during a period where resources and finances are stretched thin. But going into effect all at once — along with lesser examples I haven’t mentioned — is the political equivalent of opening the seven seals. Like all other leftists before him, Obama knows he’s right and that once these gimmicks are passed the problems will simply solve themselves. It’s the same attitude as afflicted FDR’s brain trusters, LBJ’s best and brightest, and all the little manipulators and systemizers in between. They change not all. They might as well be wearing baggy suits, two-tone shoes, and straw boaters.
It’s tempting to simply stand aside and watch him crash and burn. But not enough, because innocents — such as the people who have already canceled their health insurance and are awaiting their personal notification from Obama — will crash and burn with him. We must rather make the effort to limit the damage as much as we can with whatever resources we possess.
All the same, the prospect is no longer frightening or foreboding. It’s exhilarating. Thanks to O, the third millennium is getting interesting. We’re off on swift ride down hell’s highway, with a man at the wheel who thinks the truck steers itself. When we at last reach a turnoff, things are going to be very different.
Obama, quite contrary to his intentions, is set on ramming us into a brick wall before we complete the ride. Fortunately the truck is very large and very sturdy, while the wall is shoddy and poorly made, the bricks ancient, cracked, and deteriorating.
When it’s all over, there will be one thing left standing amidst the wreckage. It will be either that perverse little political philosophy called romantic leftism, or the United States. I’m betting it’ll be the old US of A.
One thing I know — it won’t be Obama’s reputation.

J.R. Dunn is consulting editor of American Thinker, and will edit the forthcoming Military Thinker.