Was Abinadi Unpatriotic?

The whole Rev. Wright controversy has got me thinking. What is a Patriot? Seems to me that a lot of the criticism of Rev. Wright was the "unpatriotic nature" of his comments; that he was condemning the country he lives in. As a family member asked, "if they don't like it, why are they here?"

The questions is what is a Patriot? Is the definition implied in the quote above is that unconditional love of country? If so, many of the old prophets were unpatriotic.

Take my favorite personality in the Book of Mormon, Abinadi.

Mosiah 11:20 states, "And it came to pass there was a man among them whose name was Abinadi...." So we know that Abinadi was a citizen of that Nephite kingdom.

What was the nature of Abinadi's message to the people? Mosiah 12:2 states, " Yea, wo be unto this generation! And the Lord said unto me: Stretch forth thy hand and prophesy, saying: Thus saith the Lord, it shall come to pass that this generation, because of their iniquities, shall be brought into ^abondage, and shall be smitten on the ^bcheek; yea, and shall be driven by men, and shall be slain; and the vultures of the air, and the dogs, yea, and the wild beasts, shall devour their ^cflesh."

This is a very serious message. Imagine what would happen to a prominent preacher would say that our cournty will be devoured by wild beast! But, this is what Abinadi was doing.

Sounds unpatriotic to me!? Then, if we go through the Bible and the Book of Mormon, many of the prophets would be considered unpatriotic.

Is that right, or is our concept of patriotism wrong?

The End of the Democrat Party

So Clinton wins PA and nothing changes. According to NBC she would need to win the states that are left by some 70% to garner enough delegate votes to overcome Obama. Then what? As the NY Times points out, Clinton has become a clone of the GOP. Her attacks on Obama are damaging not only Obama, but Clinton herself.

So, she can not win the pledged delegates, so it's up to the super-delegates.

Here is how I think this can play out.

1. Obama wins the nomination. The GOP will use the same tactics as Clinton, uses her words and her statements against Obama. There is nothing worse that using your own party's words against you. That is what Reagan did against Carter, using Kennedy's attacks against Carter. Who won?

2. Clinton wins the nomination. She does it by convincing the super-delegates that she is more electable, thereby overturning the popular election results. Thats is the same argument that is used to discredit the 2000 election for W. This is the worse scenario. People will be upset and not vote. Feel resentful to the party.

Either way, the Dems have lost the Presidency to McCain. Years from now Historians will point to what should have been a great campaign (a black and a women as front runners) and lament how it all turn to hell. They will place the blame on Clinton for destroying the coalition that was the Democrat Party. Her tactics have a ring of "If I don't win, he can't either". The longer she continues to attack him, the more McCain gains. She does not seem to see that, or frankly care.

Do you really believe that if it was the other way around, and it was Obama that had lost 11 primaries in a row, was behind in delegates and popular vote, that he would not been pressured to give up?

This whole notion that Obama "outspent me", but I won PA, therefore I am the stronger candidate is ludicrous. She was always the favorite. He was polling 20-30 points behind for a long time. It is amazing that with all her friends and name recognition that she only won by some 10 points. Should not have she won by some 30 points with all the advantage she had going into this process.

This is the end for the Democratic Party for a long time. If she wins, she will surely lose. If he wins, all the damage that she has cause will help the GOP. It too bad that she does not see it. History will not absolve her. History will be cruel to her.

From the NY Times - Who Endorsed Clinton - Having second thoughts

April 23, 2008
Editorial
The Low Road to Victory
The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.
Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.
If nothing else, self interest should push her in that direction. Mrs. Clinton did not get the big win in Pennsylvania that she needed to challenge the calculus of the Democratic race. It is true that Senator Barack Obama outspent her 2-to-1. But Mrs. Clinton and her advisers should mainly blame themselves, because, as the political operatives say, they went heavily negative and ended up squandering a good part of what was once a 20-point lead.
On the eve of this crucial primary, Mrs. Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11. A Clinton television ad — torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook — evoked the 1929 stock market crash, Pearl Harbor, the Cuban missile crisis, the cold war and the 9/11 attacks, complete with video of Osama bin Laden. “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen,” the narrator intoned.
If that was supposed to bolster Mrs. Clinton’s argument that she is the better prepared to be president in a dangerous world, she sent the opposite message on Tuesday morning by declaring in an interview on ABC News that if Iran attacked Israel while she were president: “We would be able to totally obliterate them.”
By staying on the attack and not engaging Mr. Obama on the substance of issues like terrorism, the economy and how to organize an orderly exit from Iraq, Mrs. Clinton does more than just turn off voters who don’t like negative campaigning. She undercuts the rationale for her candidacy that led this page and others to support her: that she is more qualified, right now, to be president than Mr. Obama.
Mr. Obama is not blameless when it comes to the negative and vapid nature of this campaign. He is increasingly rising to Mrs. Clinton’s bait, undercutting his own claims that he is offering a higher more inclusive form of politics. When she criticized his comments about “bitter” voters, Mr. Obama mocked her as an Annie Oakley wannabe. All that does is remind Americans who are on the fence about his relative youth and inexperience.
No matter what the high-priced political operatives (from both camps) may think, it is not a disadvantage that Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton share many of the same essential values and sensible policy prescriptions. It is their strength, and they are doing their best to make voters forget it. And if they think that only Democrats are paying attention to this spectacle, they’re wrong.
After seven years of George W. Bush’s failed with-us-or-against-us presidency, all American voters deserve to hear a nuanced debate — right now and through the general campaign — about how each candidate will combat terrorism, protect civil liberties, address the housing crisis and end the war in Iraq.
It is getting to be time for the superdelegates to do what the Democrats had in mind when they created superdelegates: settle a bloody race that cannot be won at the ballot box. Mrs. Clinton once had a big lead among the party elders, but has been steadily losing it, in large part because of her negative campaign. If she is ever to have a hope of persuading these most loyal of Democrats to come back to her side, let alone win over the larger body of voters, she has to call off the dogs.

Bashing Barack Obama, via email

Interesting picture, is that my Mormon Brother gleefully standing next to this sign that compares Obama to Osama bin Landen?

This email message was forwarded to me:

"HMMMM! ..LET ME SEE IF I HAVE THIS STRAIGHT:

HIS FATHER WAS A KENYAN, MOSLEM, BLACK- WE
HAVE SEEN PICTURES OF HIS AFRICAN 'FAMILY'
HIS MOTHER IS A KANSAN, ATHEIST, WHITE-
SO WHERE ARE ALL THE PICTURES OF HIS KANSAN,
WHITE MOTHER AND HIS WHITE GRANDPARENTS
WHO RAISED HIM??
HIS FATHER DESERTED HIS MOTHER AND HIM WHEN
HE WAS VERY YOUNG AND WENT BACK TO HIS FAMILY
IN KENYA

HIS MOTHER THEN MARRIED AN INDONESIAN MOSLEM AND TOOK HIM
TO JAKARTA WHERE HE WAS SCHOOLED IN A MOSLEM SCHOOL HIS
MOTHER RETURNED TO HAWAII AND HE WAS RAISED BY HIS WHITE
KANSAN GRANDPARENTS

HE LATER WENT TO THE BEST HIGH DOLLAR SCHOOLS, HOW?

HE LIVES IN A $1.4 MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE THAT HE ACQUIRED THROUGH
A DEAL WITH A WEALTHY FUND RAISER. ....AND HOW DID THAT TRANSPIRE?

HE 'WORKED' AS A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST IN CHICAGO- HAS NEVER HELD A
PRODUCTIVE JOB. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE PRESIDENCY IS NOT A
CIVIL RIGHTS POST NOR IS IT SUBJECT TO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION 'SET ASIDES'

HE ENTERED POLITICS AT THE STATE LEVEL AND THEN THE NATIONAL LEVEL
WHERE HE HAS MINIMAL EXPERIENCE

HE IS PROUD OF HIS 'AFRICAN HERITAGE' BUT IT SEEMS THAT HIS ONLY
AFRICAN CONNECTION WAS THAT HIS AFRICAN FATHER GOT A WHITE GIRL
PREGNANT AND DESERTED HER. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT SPERM CARRIED A
'CULTURAL' GENE. ....AND WHERE IS THE PRIDE IN HIS WHITE CULTURE?

HE GOES TO A 'AFROCENTRIC' CHURCH THAT HATES WHITES, HATES JEWS,
AND BLAMES AMERICA FOR ALL THE WORLDS PERCEIVED FAULTS AND THEN
REPEATEDLY COVERS UP FOR THE PASTOR AND THE CHURCH

HE CLAIMS THAT HE COULD NOT CONFRONT HIS PASTOR BUT HE WANTS US
TO BELIEVE THAT HE CAN CONFRONT NORTH KOREA AND IRAN, RIGHT!!!

YEAH, I THINK I SEE HOW HE COULD BE A UNITER AND BRING US TOGETHER, I
THINK THE HOPE IS THAT HE HOPES NO ONE WILL PUT THE PIECES TOGETHER"

I will post a response soon. Wow, unbelievable!

Waters of March

One of my favorite songs of all times. Written by Antonio Carlos Jobim, it has two version, one in English and another in Portuguese. It has been covered by many artist. These are my two favorite. If you type in "Waters of March" in Youtube you'll get a bunch of versions.
Enjoy.

Civics Quiz - Can You Answer these Questions?

1. What is "Rendition"?

2. Name a country that borders Israel? (there are four)

3. What country is the city of Kabul located?

4. Which of the following countries are democracies: Cuba, India, Japan, China

5. What years was the U.S. Civil War fought?

6. What is the most populous Islamic country?

7. The case Roe v. Wade is about what?

8. How many justices sit on the Supreme Court?

9. What year did the U.S. drop a nuclear weapon on Hiroshima, Japan?

10. Who is the Secretary of Defense?

These are question asked to college students, most could not answer the questions above. See this article: click here What has happen to civics in school? Are we so connected to our machines, that we ignore the world?

Here are the answers:

1. the process of taking terror suspects to foreign countries for interrogation purposes, countries where U.S. law will not apply.

2. Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon

3. Afghanistan, it's the capital city

4. Japan and India

5. 1861-1865

6. Indonesia

7. the seminal case on Abortion

8. Nine

9. 1945

10. Robert Gates

Argentina's Dirty War - 30 years on.

This is Maria Eugenia Sampallo. She was taken from her parents by the Military Government in Argentina in 1978, soon after her mother gave birth to her. Her parents where in the custody at the time of her birth. She is one of as many as 500 infants given to couples who were friendly to the government. Her parents were "disappeared", two of about 30,000 that "disappeared" during the "Dirty War", which lasted between 1976-1982 in Argentina.

The Dirty War was a the Argentine government's war against dissidents and government critics. Click Here for more information. A brutal government policy that destroyed countless lives and families.

Now, Maria Eugenia Sampallo, a victim of that war, has received a measure of justice. In Argentina a individual can bring criminal charges. She brought criminal charges against the couple that raised her. They considered themselves "adoptive parents", she has described them as "kidnappers". They were convicted by a criminal court recently. See article here. There is a film on this subject, "The Official Story".

Justice has prevailed. There are many still who seek it. No Justice No Peace.

Battlestar Galactica and Mormonism - New and Last Season Begins

This Friday marks the return of the best show on TV period. Battlestar Galactica.

For those uninitiated, Battlestar Galactica was created by a Mormon! In the original kitsch series of the 1970's , as well as the current series, there were and are many references that Mormons would be familiar with. There is a quorum of 12 that run the government, there are Gods and God, the home planet is call Kobol. People get married for "time and all eternity." There are more: see here and here. Very interesting.

This gets me to the current series. It won an Peabody Award and many others. It is what T.V. should be, challenging, provocative, and always makes you think. They have dealt with issues such as terrorism and torture, labor relationships, justice, etc. Not to mention religion and spirituality. Always tough, but very satisfying. While it is Science Fiction, it is the story the runs the show, not the gadgets.

If you can, watch it on SciFi or Rent it, you won't be disappointed.