Some Upright Thoughts

[Teresa]

"President Obama's speech to the United Nations has been called naive and even 'post-American.' It was something else, as well: the most extravagant excursion into self-worship we have yet seen in an American leader. Beware of politicians who claim to be 'humbled by the responsibility the American people have placed upon me.' It's a neon sign flashing the opposite. And sure enough, in almost the next sentence, the president allowed that 'I am well aware of the expectations that accompany my presidency around the world.' Really? The whole world pulses with hope and expectation because Obama is president? People in Amsterdam, Sao Paulo and Taipei have a spring in their step because an Illinois Democrat won the White House?" --columnist Mona Charen

"America is 233 years old. Some think that there are ample accomplishments speaking to our character and cause that predate Obama's ascension to the presidency. Feh, Obama seems to be saying. Look instead to our new greatness, for we have elected a man like him! Having anointed himself America's vindicator and redeemer, Obama's real purpose seems to be to become the leader not of the free world but, simply, the world." --columnist Jonah Goldberg

"With President Obama presiding over 'the historic session,' the U.N. Security Council approved unanimously an American resolution committing all nations to work for -- please sit up straight for this -- a world free of nuclear weapons. Somewhere in the fine print was a clause praising small babies, little puppies and chocolate candy. The resolution was so harmless that even Russia, China and several 'developing' nations (the usual euphemism for the socialist satraps) voted for the resolution." --columnist Wesley Pruden

"The president's announcement that the United States would not deploy long-range missile defenses in Eastern Europe after all was astonishing because George W. Bush had negotiated so patiently with the Czechs and Poles, who took considerable risks in cooperating with Washington. ... The Poles, Czechs and everyone else must hope that Obama got something from Russia in return. For now, the president looks more chump than champ. The president's men made him look like a rube just off the turnip truck for how he gave the word to the Polish and Czech presidents, treating them to a midnight telephone call the night before he announced his decision. It looked like an afterthought, and probably felt that way, too." --columnist Suzanne Fields

"Liberalism holds that there is no human problem that government can't fix if only the right people are put in charge." --former Alaska governor Sarah Palin

[Warph]

U.S. To Break Up Soon?
by Chuck Baldwin
Wednesday, Sept. 30, 2009

According to Macedonian Radio and Television On-line (MRT),
http://www.mrt.com.mk/en//index.phpoption=com_content&task=view&id=6889&Itemid=29
a Russian professor predicts the United States will fall apart in July 2010. MRT reports, "'Mr. Obama is similar to the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.
Gorbachev was also making great promises for the Soviet Union, but the situation was only getting worse,' he said. By next summer, according to Professor Panarin, the US will disintegrate into six blocs--and everyone will get their piece. 'The probability that the United States of America fall apart in July 2010 is more than 50 percent,' said Igor Panarin, Professor at Moscow's Diplomatic Academy within the Russian Federation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs."

MRT went on to report, "Panarin came up with his grim forecast while analyzing the parallels between the Soviet Union in its final days and the current situation in the United States. 'American dream ballooned seven times in 11 years. During Gorbachev era, the Soviet dream ballooned five times.' Americans hope [President] Barack Obama 'can work miracles,' he wrote. 'But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles.' "
Rest of story:
http://www.rightsidenews.com/200909306658/editorial/us-to-break-up-soon.html


So, will the United States break up in 2010? Or 2011? Or 2012? Or anytime in the near future, for that matter? If history is any teacher, the chances would seem good that Panarin's predictions may be closer to reality than anyone would like to admit.

A historian and linguist from South Africa recently wrote me a fascinating letter, in which he chronicled the major world empires of history, dating the time of their rise and fall. Here is what his calculations look like:

Assyria (859-612 B.C.):                           a 247-year reign.

Persia (538-330 B.C.):                             a 208-year reign.

Greece (331-100 B.C.):                           a 231-year reign.

The Roman Republic (260-27 B.C.):          a 233-year reign.

The Roman Empire (27 B.C.-180 A.D.):     a 207-year reign.

The Arab Empire (634-880 A.D.):              a 246-year reign.

The Mameluke Empire (1250-1517 A.D.):   a 267-year reign.

The Ottoman Empire (1320-1570 A.D.):    a 250-year reign.

Spain (1500-1750 A.D.):                          a 250-year reign.

Romanov Russia (1682-1916 A.D.):            a 234-year reign.

Great Britain (1700-1950 A.D.):                a 250-year reign.

The USA (1790-2009 A.D.):                       219 years and counting.

My honorable historian-friend calculates America's reign using its post-Revolutionary War years. He notes that America's reign is currently at 219 years. He further notes that the average duration of every world superpower listed above is a little over 238 years.

One does not need to be a master mathematician or possess a Ph.D. to realize that America is fast approaching the mark in which every major world power in history has either collapsed or, at a minimum, lost its world leadership and power.

My friend also reminded me of his homeland's (South Africa's) demise. He told me that he noticed the handwriting on the wall in time to relocate his family to a more peaceful and stable European country. Many of his friends and countrymen were not so fortunate, however, and thousands were killed and their properties confiscated. He then warned me, "The period of Grace is closing, in what is your homeland."

In addition, serious students of Holy Writ are also struck with the similarities between societal conditions in America and those of Old Testament Israel (as well as with Gentile nations) at those times of divine judgment and retribution. As someone trenchantly said, "If God spares the United States, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."

Will the Russian analyst's prophecies come true in 2010? Probably not. Does that mean that America is impervious to some sort of national demise? Not at all. Is America already in serious trouble? You bet. Could there be some sort of break-up within the United States in the near future? In my opinion, that is a very realistic probability. If this happens, will freedom suffer?

Almost certainly. Will those with tyrannical tendencies use the opportunity of any national disaster to try and enslave us? They already do. I personally do not believe that there is any "If" to the question. The only questions are, "When?" and "To what degree?"

And, of course, there is another question: "When the break-up comes, how many Americans understand the principles of liberty enough, and are personally prepared enough, and are willing enough to resist whatever power it may be that seeks to place us under the thumb of oppression and fight for the same protections and vanguards of liberty that first established this land?" Obviously, the answer to that question is yet to be determined, isn't it? .....chuck baldwin

[Diane Amberg]

Here's another up beat thought for ya. I had occasion to read something from someone who calls himself "Good American" and he is absolutely positive that George Bush, Cheney and friends caused the destruction of the Word Trade Center. He even insists that they had loaded the buildings with explosives ahead of time so they would come down like they did.....and he can prove it, just ask him.  Bush was determined to have a war to please his father so it was all an inside job. He can produce all sorts of "credible evidence." This doofus said Bush didn't care about the loss of life, it was just collateral damage. It made about as much sense as some of the other stuff I read on the web. Unbelievable.

[redcliffsw]

Warph-
When the break-up comes, do you suppose that southern Kansas will go with
go with Oklahoma and Texas?