Thursday, January 29, 2009

Cubs Pitching rotation is not as good as they say.... Needs Peavy.

Yes, yes, the Jake Peavy trade talks are starting to bother me even more than the Kobe Bryant to the Bulls trade rumors. They have not yet surpassed the fiasco from last year involving Orioles infielder Brian Roberts, but they are getting close.... That said, the deal needs to me made, and a true Cub fan, like Tom Ricketts claims to be, should know this and make it, or something equally as dramatic, happen.

I am inspired to write this after seeing that the Boys in Blue acquired Aaron Heilman today.... a good pitcher, but not the answer in the rotation. He may be a good replacement for Bob Howry, but that's about it. Would not Garrett Olsen have been just as good in that role? I am hoping this is a move meant to tide us over until the club's sale in final this spring, but you never know. Why do we need Peavy? Let's go over the Cubs rotation, the one that all the "experts" say is one of the best in baseball.

Our Number 1 starter is Carlos Zambrano. I love Big Z, but he is not consitent, plain and simple. He throws a no-hitter, God love him, but then pitches poorly the rest of the season, and looked like he needed to be on a 6-day rotation rather than a four or five, which you need in a pennant race. Big Z is a number 2 or very good number 3 on a World Series Champion.... not the Ace.... not by a longshot. Prove me wrong, Carlos.

Our Number 2 is Ryan Dempster. He was great last year, and Dusty.... I mean Lou.... made the right call giving him the start in Game 1, Ryan just did not come thru. Can we expect him to be an 18 game winner year in and year out? I doubt that. 2008 was a career year, plain and simple, which is fine, and it came in a contract year, which is not a surprise, and the Cubs signed him to a relatively reasonable contract, which is a surprise, but he is not a Number 2 on a World Series Champion. I think by the end of a healthy 2009 he will have 13-14 wins, which is a respectable total, Hell, Kerry Wood never did better, but his ERA will not be so tiny, you can count on that. He should be a Number 3 or 4.

Our Number 3 has Number 1 stuff, but is Mark Prior's Crimson Twin, and his name is Rich Harden. Thank God he's not in the WBC this spring. He is the best pitcher on the staff, but he can't go more than 5 or 6 innings, so that puts him as a 4 or 5 on a World Series Champion.... likely the latter since he may not even be on the active roster due to injury come October, so you can't count on him to be any higher than that, sadly.

Our Number 4 is Ted Lily, and I have no issue with him. He is a consistent guy, not brilliant or overpowering, but has a little Maddux in him. He is also our only lefty, and the one guy we can't afford to lose. Jim Hendry made the right call signing him over Barry Zito.... boy oh boy did he. Imagine him as a number 4 on a World Series Champion.

Sean Marshall has done nothing to show he does not deserve a shot, but we want to put together a World Series Champion, not another one and done. Anyway, it's pretty likely that with Harden and Zambrano on the roster Sean-o will get his fair share of starts. Which is why we come back to Jake Peavy. Jake Peavy the Ace. The Ace who is available and wants.... again, wants to play in Chicago for the Cubbies.... not for the Yankees, not for the Red Sox, not for the Cardinals, but for the Cubs! Why would you not make a deal, no matter the financial cost, Mr. Ricketts, for the undisputed, no doubt about it Ace on what could be a World Series Champion.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, July 21, 2008

Hendry and Cubs better not be done making moves after Rich Harden

Kudos to Jim Hendry for picking up an ace pitcher in Rich Harden for three average guys in Eric Patterson, Sean Gallagher and Matt Murton. Murton was just about done in Chicago and Gallagher eventually could be a good 3rd starter, so we really didn't give up much. However, it's the opinion of this blogger that the Chicago Cubs still need to make a few moves.... three of them in fact. The Brewers proved yesterday that they're not finished, after picking up C.C. Sabathia two weeks ago, they dealt for Giants 2B Ray Durham. Now, Durham is not an all-star anymore, but he's still a good player, and he murdered the Cubbies over the past couple weeks, a fact which likely played a part in why Milwaukee made the deal. Durham is a ballsy player, a great baserunner, and although he's not as fast as he was when he played with the White Sox, he still can streach a single to a double, and steal a base or two along the way. Nobody on the current Cubs roster is what one would consider a true basestealing threat. Yes, we have Soriano coming back, but he won't even risk a steal anymore, and unless it's a do or die game, I don't really want him to. "Ryno" Theriot is an awful base stealer, I believe he is under .500 in his attempts. Ronnie Cedeno is not the answer either.... if he was, Lou would be utilizing him in that role, which he currently is not.

While Eric Patterson will likely never be any better than his brother, Cory, and while he brought us a stud starter and a good reliever, he did bring one thing to the table, and that was scary speed. He made pitchers think, he made them worry. In my opinion, we need another guy like that. The question is.... who can fill this role? Well, in my opinion, it should be one of three guys. Two of whom played here before and another who was in a similar situation to that of this year's Cub team and had success.

First, there is former Cub Kenny Lofton. He's a free-agent and will be signed soon by somebody, so it may as well be us, especially since he won't cost his suitor any prospects. Other than K-Lof, the afore mentioned (gulp) Cory Patterson could be a great pickup for the Cubbies. He is what he is, and that's a 2.5 tool player, not the 5-tool guy he was projected to be at Iowa and the guy who showed such promise in the early stages of 2003 when he made the All-Star final vote. Lucky for us, though, the two tools he has left are speed and defense, and we all know that with the botchery that Soriano calls "D," we need another good defender. I'd give him a half a tool for power, as now it's pretty clear he wont hit 20-30 homers as we thought back then, but saying he would hit 10-15 in a full season is not too nutso. Cincy has no need for him, especially with mega-stud Jay Bruce in town and tearing the cover off of the ball. Nothing against Reed Johnson, but I think Patterson would be better than Reed as a late-inning fill-in for Fonzie, leaving Reed to platoon with Edmonds in center. That's the first piece to my puzzle, the first deal we should make.... but not the last.

The second and third move I am in favor of are really no-brainers. Jason Marquis has pitched much better than I think anyone expected, but we all know the blow-up is coming.... as sadly, it always does with Jason. Unless Lou does something unorthodox and does a "platoon" with him and Sean Marshall (another guy who is great the first time thru the order), we need to upgrade the 5th pitcher. Now, a platoon could work, pitching, say, Marquis for 4 innings and then giving Marshall the next 4, and doing this every 5 days might turn out to be enough to get us to October, at which point they would both be relagated to bullpen duties anyways, but it'd make more sense to just make another two moves.... but for whom? Well, we need one starter to replace Marquis in the rotation and one reliever to take Michael Weurtz's (who Lou is apparently scared to use) place. For the relief spot, there is only one guy I would like to see come to Wrigley, and that is "soft-tossing lefty" Brian Fuentes of the Rockies. he has experience as a closer and would give us three southpaws in the 'pen Scott Eyre (when he is activated off the DL) and Neal Cotts. This would help offset the mostly righthanded rotation. He really is the only move that makes sense, with 16 saves, he can back you up as closer and with an ERA of 3.23 he is as solid as you are gonna het. It's unfortunate that we need to be so picky, but since Rich Hill has only proven that he really does stink at all levels, our hands are, or at least should be tied. I don't see this move as a move we "could" make.... I see it as a "must".... especially with Cotts' being a touch erratic and Estes injury-plagued history. A good second option could be Huston Street, but since he plays in Oakland, and we just made a deal with them for Harden and Gaudin, it seems likely that if it were to happen it already would have. Another possible arm would be George Sherrill, as with the deadline rapidly approaching, Baltimore's Andy MacPhail is said to be quietly gauging Sherrill's value. However, Mick Fail screwed Hendry around for three months about the Brian Roberts trade, (and ended up screwing himself as he won't get as much for B-Rob now... if anything) so I don't think Jim can stoumach any more of his former boss right now.

As far as the 5th starter, I like, believe it or not, Randy Wolf. He is not having the best season, but maybe a change of scene would do him good. He is a great strikeout guy and his ERA is not that bad at 4.74 and he is a lefty, so it would open up more options with the "must have" tag I gave to Fuentes. Plus he only makes about 6 million, which today, sickeningly, is not all that much dough. The other guy is A.J. Burnett, usually seen as the 3rd best guy (behind Sabathia and Harden) available this year. It would be a big morale boost to the Northsiders to pick up 2 of the top 3 hurlers out there. Both Wolf and Burnett, however, have injury risk and both can be erratic. Both also have veto-power on any potential deals. A final candidate is an old friend, and an old nemesis.... Greg Maddux. How fitting it would be to score him as our #5 starter, and how clutch would he be coming out of the 'pen in a playoff series. He is traditionally great in the late innings and would bring experience and sanity to the club trying to cure 99 years of heartache.

In any regard, we better go buy lots of asprin and alka-seltzer this September. It's never easy for the Cubs.... never. GO CUBS GO!!!!

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Mumzie's Top 100 Hotties List

Jessica Alba actress starred in Fantastic 4
Beyonce Knowles singer and star of Dreamgirls
Eva Longoria actress from Desperate Housewives
Jennifer Love-Hewitt stars in The Ghost Whisperer
Gabrielle Union actress starrred in Bad Boys 2
Angelina Jolie star of Mr. & Mrs. Smith
Christina Aguilera multi platnium recorning artist
Halle Berry star of many feature films
Carmen Electra former Baywatch starlett
Jessica Biel actress is a good girl gone bad
Sofia Vergara one of of Latin Americas top models
Mariah Carey one of the best selling singers ever
Salma Hayek caught our eyes in Dusk till Dawn
Meagan Good caught attention in Fast and Furious
Eva Mendes starred in the film Hitch
Pamela Anderson another Baywatch product
Jessica Simpson singer and actress.... sort of
Scarlett Johanssen one of the hottest up and coming actresses
Aishwarya Rai the most beautiful woman in Bollywood
Fergie member of Black eyed Peas
Jennifer Aniston starred in the TV show Friends
Ashanti Douglas singer is in Resident Evil 3
Jennifer Lopez singer and actress
Christina Milian singer was in movie Torque
Brooke Burke formerly of E!'s Wild ON!
Rhianna hot r and b princess
Nikki Cox currently in TV's Las Vegas
Eva LaRue sexy star of CSI: Miami
Alyssa Milano beauty most recently in Charmed
Alessandra Ambrosio the face of Victorias Secret
Karina Smirnoff a member of Dancing with the Stars
Charlize Theron starred in the Italian Job
Penelope Cruz starred in the film Blow
Rosylin Sanchez starred in the film Rush Hour 2
Lindsay Lohan child star now grown up
Kelly Rowland sexy former member of Destinys Child
Stacy Keibler WWE diva Danced with the Stars
Alicia Keys one of the best voices and hot too
Carrie Underwood attractive former American Idol
Noureen DeWulf Bollywood star making a run in the USA
Monica Bellucci starred in the Matrix 2 and 3
Brenda Song Disney Channel star
Gwen Stefani former member of No Doubt
Torrie Wilson another very hot WWE Diva
Rachel Bilson sexy star of TV's The OC
Rosario Dawson has appeared in many films like Sin City
Toni Braxton R&B diva now playing Vegas
Amerie singer of Its the One Thing
Ashley Tisdale star of High School Musical
Reese Witherspoon cutie is star of Legally Blonde
Lacey Chabert newcomer starred in Mean Girls
Sabrina Bryan member of the Cheetah Girls
Zhang Ziyi the top actress in China
Vanessa Marcil former soap star now on Las Vegas
Shakira Latina singer had 2 US releases
Mallika Sherawat Bollywood star has starred with Jackie Chan
Elisabeth Hasselbeck a host on The View
Kate Moss one of our top US supermodels
Bai Ling chinese actress was in Star Wars ep 2
Rocsi Diaz host of BET's 106 and Park
Natalie Portman played Darth Vaders wife
Lisa Raye we first saw her in the Players Club
Victoria Beckham sexy former Spice Girl
Jamie Lynn-Sigler starred in The Sopranos
Keira Knightley starred in Pirates of the Carrebbean
Cindy Crawford the face of the makeup world
Anna Kournikova very sexy former tennis star
Catherine Zeta-Jones star of many feature films
Britney Spears pop princess and media darling
Jeri Ryan formerly played Seven of 9 on Star Trek
Dania Ramirez star of Heroes and The Sopranos
Kristin Kreuk star of Smallville
Emily Proctor cutie is star of CSI: Miami
Garcelle Beauvais caught our eye in The Jamie Foxx show
Elise Neal hottie starred in DL Hughleys TV show
Tara Reid caught our attention in The Big Lebowski
Shilpa Shetty Bollywood star was on Big Brother
Stacy Dash caught our eye in Clueless
Jolene Blalock star of Star Trek: Enterprise
Katherine Heigl former model now a movie star
Paris Hilton famous for being rich and famous
Naomi Watts caught the eye of King Kong
Evangeline Lilly star of the TV show Lost
Hillary Duff former Disney girl now as singer
Nia Long actress was in many films like Friday
Tyra Banks supermodel is the star of many TV shows
Lucy Liu cutie was one of Charlies Angels
Gong Li starred in Memoirs of a Geisha
Shannon Elisabeth first caught eyes in American Pie
Maria Sharapova tennis player is so so good with the racket
Daisy Fuentes has done just about everything on TV
Rebecca Romijn actress and model was in X-Men films
Cheryl Burke 2 time champ on Danicng with the Stars
Shania Twain still poppin out hits and catching eyes
Jennie Garth star of various TV shows like 90210
Willa Ford model and a host of TV shows
Kenya Moore actress and model graces many magazines
Julia Roberts one of the biggest names in Hollywood
Milka Duno professional race car driver
Kelly Hu former star of CSI New York

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Reasons why Muslims Terrorize Israel and the US.

This page should be titled why fundamentalist Muslims hate us. Most Muslims are not fundamentalists. They do not hate us, they simply view us as hypocrites. They know that the U.S. is the Christian nation. They do not understand why so many Americans fail to show the love of Christ or follow Christian morality, and they do not understand why we who claim the name of Christ seem to do nothing about this.

We must show love to Muslims and to Americans who do not know Christ by sharing our faith with them. The devil would like nothing more than to keep these people - whom Christ died for - in bondage to idolatry and sin.

Fundamentalist Muslims hate non-Muslims because the Koran tells them Allah hates non-Muslims and they should to. The Koran is perverse, but it is logical, and a man of pious reflection can see the hand of God at work when Muslims attack our apostate nation.

Here's the logic of Koran:

1. Unbelievers are those who do not accept Islam, especially Jews and Christians:
To those who have received the Scriptures [Jews & Christians] and to the Gentiles say: 'Will you surrender yourselves to Allah?' If they become Muslims they shall be rightly guided; if they pay no heed, then your only duty is to warn them. God is watching all His servants.
Sura 3:20

2. Because unbelievers do not accept Islam, Allah hates them and does not guide them:
Say: 'Obey Allah and the Apostle.' If they pay no heed, then, surely, God does not love the unbelievers." Sura 3:32

You have a good example in Abraham and those who followed him. They said to their people: 'We disown you and the idols which you worship besides Allah. We renounce you: enmity and hate shall reign between us until you believe in Allah only.".... Sura 60:4

Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number. Allah does not guide the wrongdoers. Sura 5:51

3. Because Allah does not guide them, unbelievers beome evil-doers, they commit additional sins besides rejecting Islam:

You see many among them vie with one another in sin and wickedness and practise what is unlawful. Evil is what they do.

Why do their rabbis and divines not forbid them to blaspheme or to practise what is unlawful? Evil indeed are their doings.
Sura 5:62-63

4. Muslims will see the sins of unbelievers plainly, both in non-Muslim society and in dealings with non-Muslims:

They listen to falsehoods and practise what is unlawful. If they come to you [Muhammad], give them your judgment or avoid them. If you avoid them, they can in no way harm you; but if you do act as their judge, judge them with fairness. Allah loves those that deal justly.
But how will they come to you for judgment when they already have the Torah which enshrines God's own judgment? Soon after they will turn their backs: they are no true believers.
Sura 5:42-43

5. Therefore, Muslims must fight unbelievers both to limit sin and give unbelievers a chance to go to heaven by becoming Muslims. (Only Muslims can go to heaven, but Muslims are not assured of going to heaven unless they die in Jihad. Muslims who do not fight Jihad will have their good deeds weighed against their bad deeds. Refusing to fight Jihad is a very bad deed.)

Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be slain or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter: except those that repent before you reduce them. For you must know that Allah is forgiving and merciful. 5:33-34

Let not the unbelievers think that We (Allah) prolong their days for their own good. We give them respite only so that they may commit more grievous sins. Shameful punishment awaits them. Sura 3:178

Those that fled their homes or were expelled from them, and those that suffered persecution for My sake and fought and were slain: I shall forgive them their sins and admit them to gardens watered by running streams, as a recompense from Allah; Allah dispenses the richest recompense. 3:195

6. Now here's the rub - the Koran does share many of the moral rules of the Bible. Although the Koran says moral rules like don't kill and don't steal only apply between Muslims - Muslims can kill non-Muslims, take the property of non-Muslims as tribute (called Jizya, this was the cause of the Barbary Pirate War in the early 19th century), take their wives, or make non-Muslims slaves - there are enough similarities that the modern, post-Christian West looks as evil to Muslims as Koran tells them it will look.

For example:

7. Koran and the Bible say God forms babies in their mothers' wombs, but the U.S. has legalized abortion.

It is he who shapes your bodies in your mothers' wombs as He pleases. There is no god but Him, the Mighty, the Wise One.
Sura 3:6

8. Koran and the Bible teach that God is the Creator, but the West embraces evolution.
Such is God, your Lord. There is no god but Him, the Creator of all things. Therefore serve Him. Of all things He is the Guardian.

Sura 6:102
9. Koran and the Bible both teach chastity, but we in the West practice free love, and display this to the world in our movies and TV programs.

Let those who cannot afford to marry live in continence until God shall enrich them from His own bounty. As for those of your slaves who wish to buy their liberty, free them if you find in them any promise and bestow on them a part of the riches which God has given you. You shall not force your slave-girls into prostitution in order that you may enrich yourselves, if they wish to preserve their chastity. If anyone compels them, God will be forgiving and merciful to them."
Sura 24:033

10. Koran and the Bible both forbid homosexuality, but we in the West are legitimizing this and many other perversions, and again it shows up in our media.
And Lot, who said to his people: 'Will you persist in these lewd acts which no other nation has committed before you? You lust after men instead of women. Truly, you are a degenerate people.'
Sura 7:80-81

11. Koran is full of contradictions. One of the strangest is Koran says it confirms the Bible, and tells Muslims to read Torah and the Gospels. Koran tells Muslims that Jews and Christians - the People of the Book - don't keep their own scriptures and don't teach them to others.
When God made a covenant with those to whom the Scriptures were given He said: 'Proclaim these to mankind and do not suppress them.' But they cast the Scriptures over their backs and sold them for a paltry price. Evil was their bargain. Sura 3:187

He (Allah) has revealed to you the Book with the Truth (Koran) confirming the scriptures which preceded it; for He has already revealed the Torah and the Gospel for the guidance of mankind, and the distinction between right and wrong. Those that deny God's revelations shall be sternly punished; God is mighty and capable of revenge. Sura 3:3-4

12. Koran and the Bible also condemn gambling, drunkenness, and the occult (horoscopes, witches, etc.) but in the U.S., our own state governments now run numbers, we are legalizing drugs, and there is an explosion of interest in the occult, including pagan religions like wicca.
Believers, wine and games of chance, idols and divining arrows, are abominations devised by Satan. Avoid them, so that you may prosper.
Sura 5:90

13. CS readers know that God's moral rules like don't steal and don't lie are essential to free markets and prosperity. While Islam says Muslims should not lie or steal from each other, corruption is rampant in Muslim countries, because they don't have the Holy Spirit to help them keep the Commandments.

The Koran perversely tells Muslims that the riches of Christians and Jews come from our sinfulness while the poverty of Muslims is a test from Allah to see who loves prosperity more than Islam,
"You shall be sorely tried in the matter of your possessions and your persons, and will hear much that is hurtful from those who were given the Scriptures before you, and from the pagans. But if you endure with fortitude and guard yourselves against evil, you will surely triumph. Sura 3:186

Do not be deceived by the fortunes of the unbelievers in the land. Their prosperity is grief. Hell shall be their home, an evil resting place. Sura 3:196-197

14. Last, Koran adds a rule that can't be found in the Bible. Where the Bible says that there are neither male nor female in Christ, and that God is no respecter of persons, Koran tells Muslims that men are superior to women. The West's Feminist movement thus looks evil and sinful to Muslims.

Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain the. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they disobey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme. Sura 4:34

Women are your fields: go, then, into your fields whence you please. Sura 2:223

The bottom line is that Muslims hate the West because the Koran tells Muslims that the West rejects Islam, and consequently is evil.

The Koran is confirmed to be true in the minds of Muslims by our own desire to throw out God's rules.

Also see the book "Why the Rest Hates the West" by Meic Pearse (2004) and Citizen Soldier.com

Remember - Every nation that has stood against Israel or the Jews, Every one, Rome, the Nazis, Egypt, they all have fallen. The USA is alright as long as we keep Israel as an ally.

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Link to alternate sites with alternate views

Get Busy Livin', or Get Busy Bloggin': Keep Your Baby, Please

or Evolutionblog.com

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5148792&postID=113690899599907236

Friday, January 13, 2006

Atheist support of Evolution and their attack on Chirstmas....My Perspectives....

By Jasen M (a.k.a. the Staple)

Recently, the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools has been shown to be unconstitutional. Not a surprise. Now, I don’t want to start World War 3, but I have started this page to share MY views. I am not a scientist, I am not a pastor, I am not a scholar or journalist. I am, by some folk’s standards, the lowest form of scum on Earth, a Car Salesman. I sell BMW's right outside of Chicago, so I am not claiming to be an expert on anything. This is my first post, and I hope to have many more, as I welcome all viewpoints. (I love to debate) Thanks for your time!!!!

LET ME FIRST START WITH the CLAIM OF "...Because Intelligent Design is religion, based on faith, NOT science, and the class the disclaimer was to be read in was Science class, not Religion class. Please, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against religion or faith, but they are not science. However, I'm also not sure what the big deal is. Certainly anyone who has faith in God can easily believe that evolution was created and set in motion by God?"

Ok, I'm a big fan of the TV show "LOST", and there is a funny link here, when Locke and Jack are arguing, and Locke says to Jack, "Do you know why we don’t see eye to eye, Jack? Because you are a man of science (Jack is a Doctor), and I'm a man of Faith." Now, it is correct that Intelligent Design IS based on FAITH. It is WRONG, however, if you think that it is NOT based on science. Science has NOT DISPROVEN CREATION IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, and to say that it has is plain WRONG and a LIE! Evolution as a Theory has proven one thing and one thing ONLY.... and that is that Evolutionary Theory ITSELF evolves rapidly. In fact, most of what was thought true or probable only 5-10 years ago has been either proven wrong or altered mightily.

Example - Jurassic Park, the blockbuster film from only 8 years ago portrayed Raptors as lizard like, based on the most recent science. Now, the wackos at Discovery channel portray them as vicious chickens. In fact, there are NO links between ANY species of ANY era showing "in betweens" or "links". NONE!!!! Also funny is that many "experts" who try to bring up 'in-betweeners' as proof of evolution (most common used are horses and Archaeopteryx) have differing views from others whom are also IN SUPPORT of evolution. (There are a couple of great books on this topic, one is written by Ken Ham, and is called "The Genesis Solution"; and the other is called "Refuting Evolution", by Jon Sarfati) If evolution is true, (which means the "Big Bang" is also true, though there is strong evidence to the contrary, and likely why you hear little of it anymore) then the Bible is FALSE! Both sides of a coin cannot land up.

Now, why do I believe that the historical record in early Genesis was meant to be taken in a literal way? My answer is based on the fact that Genesis states Adam and Eve were created by God on day six, and NOT evolved by day six. Adams rib was used to spawn Eve. There is no other way to quantify this other than literally. Some Christian-evolutionists (oxymoron) try, and say that Adam was the first man to have a soul, or a rational thought, and he was the first man God showed himself to, and enlightened to His existence. You can try to make up ideas all you want, but again, there is no grey area here, you MUST choose a side, and that is my point here, as I am disgusted by the 'p.c.ness' around me, the idea that you can sit on the fence and watch others in an agnostic way. You must choose because then He created Eve from Adam’s rib, as Genesis says, and putting together the idea of Adam being the first to be enlightened and then making Eve makes no sense. Could you have only males for billions of years then have females created all of a sudden? Or maybe the males evolved into intelligence quicker…. (The ACLU would love that one) Of course not! Pick a side!!!!

Genesis claims that the world was created in 6 LITERAL days, (the 7th being the day of rest, framework for our week) not 6 days in God's eyes or some other time warp. My evidence of this is that death was not existent on Earth until after the first sin, eating from the Tree of Life. Even the eating of meat was not allowed until Noah's flood. If anyone can explain to me how you can have natural selection over 4.5 billion years without meat eating or death? You CANNOT, so therefore, you must either believe the Bible is truth, or NOT truth; you cannot sit on the fence here. There is no possible agnostic, or 'in between' forms in this either.... Ying or Yang, right or wrong.

The choice is in this matter, whether to believe in evolution or not to believe the way the world wants you too, is yours, but you CAN’T choose both. That would be like saying I’m a die-hard fan of both the Yankees and the Red Sox, or both the Bears and the Packers. Belief in evolutionary fact on any level is a choice, and in and of itself it can be seen as a "RELIGIOUS" choice.... the choice to believe the Bible is NOT LITERAL, and that therefore there is no need to follow it, OR ANY PART OF IT. If God didn't create as he said he did, then Christ was not the true Savior, and we can flush the whole idea, as the Bible is only a nice piece of literature. No wonder atheists attack Genesis so frequently, how much easier it will be to defend their own self-godhood if they can destroy the foundation of the Bible.

Again, I am NOT here to prove Creation, only to state facts, and the facts say that the ACLU and other organizations push evolutionary fact down our throats so often we almost believe it by default, or by common sense, since that is the only thing ever presented to us in our schools, on television, or anywhere outside of your local Sunday School. It should be noted that Creationists believe that evolution observed today is actually degeneration from a once perfect world. Remember, Genesis says that God looked at his creation and it was good. Not that He looked at his creation and it was “aiight”. Neither group of scientists, no matter their bias, was around 4.5 billion years ago. The technology we use to "prove" or even disprove evolution is man made, therefore not perfect, and based on beliefs that are man made, therefore open to point of view. So why present evolution as a undeniable fact? There must be a motive for this.... right? At least the Bible gives us a Historical record…. and like Locke, I’m a man of faith, I just chose to have faith in God, not a carbon dating machine.

The Judge seeing over the case in Dover called the practice of Intelligent Design "INANITY". (STUPIDITY) Most of us don't use this word; in fact, it's use shows profound distaste. Was teaching an alternative to natural selection such a heinous crime? Sounds to me like the wrong man was seeing over the trial, and it looks like he was setting his own agenda. (Yes, I know Bush appointed him) I wonder if His Honor is aware that there are rocks formed in volcanic eruptions 30 years ago, and we KNOW the dates, but carbon dating placed them as 300,000 years old.... HMMMM.... Some folks will do anything to justify Atheistic beliefs. One Professor was quoted as saying; "It is a priority for us to find a scientific explanation for the origin of life, outside of biblical guidelines, as we cannot allow a Divine foot in the door." Too bad we can't teach differing points of view, and let kids choose for themselves. These selective liberals, like the ACLU, force Evolution down our children’s throats!

There is even a book written for use by science teachers to rebut and solidify evolutionist views, complete with ways to handle Creationist students. It is called "Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science" So, they force the ideas down our children’s throats that NON-LIVING gas and chemicals became LIVING CELLS, and that FISH have become PHYSICIANS over 4.5 BILLION YEARS thanks to the equivalent of a COSMIC FART! So, they say, there can't be a God, or a truth to the Bible, we have Evolution, and we proved it, and we can do whatever we like, answering to no one but ourselves and the law of the land. Yes, Christ did live, we don’t deny that, say the Evolutionists, but he was not God, so why give him any respect.... Not surprisingly, they also want to drive all reference of Christ out of another American tradition....

CHRISTMAS - This is more open to your opinions, and I am NOT offended by "HAPPY HOLIDAYS" or "SEASONS GREETINGS" but I choose to say "MERRY CHRISTMAS", and I do not feel that I am forcing Christ down Liberal throats by saying it! Happy Holidays and Seasons Greetings are more P.C. terms, this is true, but the ACLU and the liberal left only uses P.C. if being P.C. in a particular case meets their AGENDAS or BIASES, which I believe is CLEARLY to drive all Godliness and Biblical reference from our society! No wonder the American family has degenerated to its current form!!!! SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE, RIGHT? Since when is a store like Wal*Mart or Target considered "State?" Both recently stopped using signs or advertising saying "Merry Christmas", after pressure by groups supported by the ACLU. The claim, basically, was they did not want to force religion down our throats. WHAT???? Since when does a banner mean you are FORCING anything on anyone? If you are not Irish are you offended by being wished a "HAPPY ST. PATTYS DAY"? If you were, you'd be looked at as a weirdo, or even worse, a bigot.

Let's see, now, why is it that these pay no mind to Halloween, apparently it is o.k. to have kids dress up as the Devil, but in Illinois recently they would not allow a child to come to class dressed as Moses, complete with rock tablets and staff. Now who is forcing whom again? This school can get away with this, buried as a page 25 stories in the papers, yet it's front-page news when the ACLU bashes the Christians for attacking Halloween? Was it not that child’s civil liberty to dress as he wanted for Halloween? Where was the ACLU then? The answer is they were practicing their politics.... liberal politics. Think about this, churches are not traditionally liberal (though some are) because churches in general believe in the Bible, a book they believe is a sham, as stated in the above section on Evolution, so, what do these liberal atheists do? THEY ATTACK!!!! The question becomes Why?

I believe they have to attack, because all Christianity to them is anti-liberal, and definitely anti-atheist. Again, if the Bible is literal and valid, then the atheists cannot be correct in their standpoints, and of course they cannot allow any opposition to their narrow-minded philosophies. According to them, we can kill unborn children in abortion clinics, but murdering a pregnant woman is DOUBLE HOMICIDE! Are you catching my drift here? Liberal Atheists like the ACLU only attack what does not fit their agendas. Now, I am not attempting to paint with a broad brush, and call all Democrats and liberals heathens, as that is clearly not the case, and I am not saying evolutionists are evil people, but it does seems to be the case in of the "Anti Christian Liberal Union".

Ah, the ACLU, how you help us thru life, where would we be without you helping PETA save the animals, and with assisting the IGLA with liberating the gays!!!! They poke their heads out of their proverbial holes only when the media gives them the opportunity to oppose Republican or Christian agenda or to support Anti-war, death penalty or pro-abortion events. It's the Jessie Jackson syndrome, showing up whenever it fits agenda, though Jessie looks as right wing as Rush Limbaugh compared to some of these folks.

I stated above that not all churches are conservative. The ACLU has even found a new ally of late in the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church, whom are no longer much help to their Christian counterparts, and often actually ally themselves against the rest of the Christian world. Note: I am speaking about the Catholic Church, not Catholics in general, many of who are embarrassed and outraged at their leaders. Many leaders of that church are spearheading the inclusion of homosexuals into their fold, which would not be the norm for those whom believe in God.... though Catholics usually consider themselves to be the equivalent of the neutral Swiss in a military war, i.e. not taking either the liberal or conservative side in both the War on Christmas, and Evolution vs. Creation, though in these two cases they seem to take the more secular humanist approach and "play it safe" by being "politically correct." Unfortunately, the Bible, though it says to respect the laws of the land you live in, says to follow GODS law, and they seem to have forgotten this fact, or maybe they just DONT CARE!

Has Christmas been "Commercialized?" Sure it has, but if it brings one person to see THE TRUTH every year, then I say GREAT! There are so many things pushing us away from Christ in our nation, at least one thing still nudges toward Him. No matter what anyone says, Christmas is founded, at least in part, on a celebration of Christ's Birth, and that is the bottom line. Christmas does NOT, by the way, celebrate the SPECIFIC DAY that Christ was born (guessed to be in April), yet the SIGNIFIGANCE of the event itself.

The 'Holiday Season’ as we know it today combines the birth of Christ with the Winter Solstice, called YULE in Europe (start of winter/solar year/rebirth of the sun) which was celebrated worldwide for over 2000 years, as well as January 6, which is celebrated as the EPIPHANY by Christians the world over which is linked with the visit of The Magi, a.k.a. the 3 wise men, whom came bringing gifts. A few other traditions are also mixed in to this batter, like the Dutch St. Nicholas, (Santa) and even the chronological closeness to Hanukkah and more recently Kwanzaa, as well as the Pagan European tradition of decorating a tree. So, we bake on high for a century or two and you have what we call modern Christmas. But would it be such a big deal without Christ? Likely NOT. Wishing someone a Merry Christmas, to me, is to claim I RECOGNIZE that it is the PRESENCE of CHRIST in the Holiday that makes it so special, yet doing it in a diplomatic and unintrusive manner. Now is that really so horrible?

IT IS THIS UNNEEDED OPPOSITION TO THESE ISSUES, AND FORCING ANTI-FAMILY, ANTI-GOD PROPOGANDA DOWN OUR THROATS THAT MAKE ME ASHAMED TO HAVE VOTED DEMOCRATIC!

Forgive my Rant and Rage. Don’t worry, I am prepared to and look forward to an opportunity to defend my post, so any comments are welcome from any point of view, and on any topic you feel strongly on.

Sooooo.... Anyone want a BMW?