Precious moments with my husband and children are like bubbles. They appear suddenly, float by gently and disappear. I'd like to try to capture them here. Grandma always told me "It's the best time of your life when your babies are small." I'd like to prove her right and savor every minute.
Former KGB agent,Yuri Bezmenov shares strategies that the KGB used to infiltrate America and transform our culture into accepting the communist party's ideals. He feels it has been a "tremendous success."
Here are some of the steps:
Demoralization of the culture
Expose them to communist ideologies without question
De-stablize the nation using the 'useful idiots' (leftists)
Crisis
Normalization (promising people goodies, elimination of free market competition and putting Big Brother government into place)
He says most Americans think we are in a time of peace. He adamantly says no! The United States is in a state of war. Total undeclared war against the basic principles and foundation of the American democratic system. The initiator of this war is the world communist conspiracy.
After the bail-out, it seems America is ripe for a socialist president to begin the 'normalization' phase. You can read about Obama's childhood communist mentor here or here.
I was wondering about this so I looked it up. Here's what I found.
Socialism and communism are alike in that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership of the means of production and centralized planning. Socialism grows directly out of capitalism; it is the first form of the new society. Communism is a further development or "higher stage" of socialism.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his deeds (socialism). From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs (communism).
The socialist principle of distribution according to deeds— that is, for quality and quantity of work performed, is immediately possible and practical. On the other hand, the communist principle of distribution according to needs is not immediately possible and practical—it is an ultimate goal.
Obviously, before it can be achieved, production must reach undreamed of heights—to satisfy everyone’s needs there must be the greatest of plenty of everything. In addition, there must have developed a change in the attitude of people toward work—instead of working because they have to, people will work because they want to, both out of a sense of responsibility to society and because work satisfies a felt need in their own lives.
Socialism is the first step in the process of developing the productive forces to achieve abundance and changing the mental and spiritual outlook of the people. It is the necessary transition stage from capitalism to communism.
It must not be assumed, from the distinction between socialism and communism, that the political parties all over the world which call themselves Socialist advocate socialism, while those which call themselves Communist advocate communism. That is not the case. Since the immediate successor to capitalism can only be socialism, the Communist parties,-like the Socialist parties, have as their goal the establishment of socialism.
When asked what America's greatest moral failure has been, Mr. Obama responded that we don't abide by the basic precept in Matthew that whatever you do for the least of my brethern, you do for me.
That seems strange coming from a man who voted against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. It stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted. Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women's rights or abortionists' rights. To see a listing of then-state Senator Barack Obama's votes and state senate floor speeches on IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act go here.
When asked at what point a baby gets human rights, he said whether dealing from a theological or biological view point, that answering that question is "above his paygrade". Sorry, but that's not an answer!
He stated he is pro-choice and he has come to that conclusion not because he is pro-abortion, but because he believes that women struggle with this issue and don't make the decision to abort casually.
Does this make murder okay?
Struggling releases you from responsiblity?
Struggling with the decision somehow makes it okay?
Do the courts offer a pass for convicted murderers who struggle with their actions? Bottomline is that these babies are PEOPLE who are ALIVE. I am perplexed as to why there is even a debate...why is it okay to kill them?!
He mentioned being in favor of trying to limit the number of abortions. Why would you want to limit abortions if there is nothing wrong with abortion? And if you feel you must 'limit' them, because they are taking lives of 'the least of these' then how can you possibly condone it?
It's hard for me to understand how so many people casually talk about abortion as a choice. Voddie Baucham has written a MUST READ article entitled Framing the Abortion Debate.
Here's a taste:
"I think the approach conservatives are taking with the Palin issue is problematic. Christians are calling both Sarah and Bristol Palin heroes for choosing not to kill their children in the womb simply because the rest of the culture seems to have little problem with it. This is the wrong argument. This is like saying a police officer is a hero for not shooting an unarmed man. That’s his job! It is not heroic to stay pregnant; it should be expected. This is a sort of lowered expectation argument. Sure she got pregnant out-of-wedlock, but that is common; that makes them ‘real’ Americans (this is an actual argument I have heard no less than half-a-dozen times from “Christian” conservatives). But look at what happened next; they didn’t kill the baby... that makes them super human moral giants. What grit! "
