I forced myself not to turn my television off when McCain sat down to begin. I needed to hear him speak so that I would gain a different perspective on things. One answer that I thought was very genuine and honest was to the question: What is your greatest downfall? He answered "My first marriage". That is so relatable! But I felt that McCain didn't answer the most of the questions that were asked of him. He kind of stepped around them and instead referred to the audience as his "friends"(every five minutes) and told more about when he was in prision. For instance, when Pastor Warren asked him a question along the lines of 'What does Christianity mean to you  and how does it interpret into your everyday life'? McCain said "It means that I am 'saved'"(something like that) Then he turn to the audience and told about how he was imprisioned and how an emeny soldier drew a cross in the dirt for him one Christmas morning...... okay, another paragraph!

To John McCain From Mika FancyPants:  WE KNOW!!!!!!!!!!! We know already! You sent out a campaign commercial and you talk about it all the time while your beautiful wife is sits there like she's never heard it before! NOTE: If you like McCain, dont read this last part...

McCain, you need to loosen up. Maybe dry-hump your beautiful wife(if she's not getting it from somewhere else) since that's all I'm sure you can do... sex after 70 can be hard work! Get dentures already! No one wants to see those nasty yellow teeth of yours! I know it's hard but try to put on a real smile, see if you can raise those arms a little higher(Frankenstein), and only call your real friends 'friends'. Phew! that's enough venting!

Note to the Reader: I know that some may not be happy with what I've just written... so ahead and get it out... comment or email me at mikaandjade@hotmail.com or gmail or mikaandjadefp@yahoo.com

Peace For All,

Mika

Richard Abanes is at it again...please support Ingrid by checking the video out and judging for yourself; who's being a charitable Christian and who's not.

http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/uncategorized/1931/

later, darlings. :)

Facts from our last post on tithing:  5% of today's churchgoers actually tithe, the average church is 50-301 people & the average salary for a pastor of a church of this size is $72K.  At a median income of 48K (US Census 2007), All a pastor has to do is grow the congregation to 300, have 5% faithful tithers (15 salaries) and he's making 150% more than his faithful tithers!

Let's move to Megachurches (churches with the top 10 numbers in attendance weekly in the US).  Here are the top 10: 

1. Lakewood Church, Houston Texas – Joel Osteen (47,000)
2. Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, Ill. – Bill Hybels (23,500)
3. Second Baptist Church, Houston – Ed Young Sr. (23,198)
4. Saddleback Church, Lake Forest, Calif. – Rick Warren (22,000)
5. LifeChurch.tv, Edmond, Okla. – Craig Groeschel (19,907)
6. Southeast Christian Church, Louisville, Ky. – Dave Stone (18,013)
7. North Point Church, Alpharetta, Ga. – Andy Stanley (17,700)
8. Thomas Road Baptist Church, Lynchburg, Va. – Jonathan Falwell (17.445)
9. Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale, Fort Lauderdale, Fla. – Bob Coy (17,000)
10. The Potter's House, Dallas – T.D. Jakes (17,000)

Let's just take weekly and yearly income and do the numbers based on the data we used in the last study:

Usher: This does not include offerings, special offerings, building fund drives, missionary giving or special giving when it comes to programs or events. Numbers on these things are nearly impossible to obtain as there are no constant criteria with which to measure.  So Deak, could you manage a church on say, 787,884.62 per week?  Other questions:

1. If you had a congregation of this size, why would you not continue to ask for money any time it is needed?

2. If you didn't have to publish your finances, why would you? (Mr. Grassley has the same question)

3. Even independent surveys are confidential and sold to those who want them with all of the names scrubbed.  If men of God aren't doing anything wrong, then why won't they come out with the real numbers? (another Senator Grassley question)

4. Just how much money should a great orator pastor put in his pocket as fruits of his labor? (Kenny, Creflo, Richard, Joyce and Benny all seem to think there's no limit to that number.)

5. Here's a megachurch that did post its numbers and the blogger gives them kudos for posting it but that's about all: Neo-Baptist

Today I emailed a letter to Congressman Ryan and I thought I'd share it with you. Writing your representatives is a great idea. You can find your representatives by searching at the US House website, or the US Senate website.

Congressman Ryan:

While I am at odds with you on some issues, I see a genuineness in you that seems to be rare in the federal government and I have the utmost faith that you truly care about people. I lived in your district for a few years and I have seen you in action. That is why I write to appeal to you, to address the issue of the 9/11 investigation.

Several of your colleagues, including Congressmen Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, have publicly stated that they would support a new, independent investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001. Much information has come to light in the last seven years to suggest that things did not occur the way it was portrayed to the American people.

There is a large and growing grassroots movement for 9/11 truth, started by the victim's family members and first responders, which is being portrayed in the media as an "anarchist group" by Geraldo Rivera. Morning Joe's Willie Geist said of a 9/11 truth protester, "the man [was] led away in handcuffs and hopefully taken to one of those secret prisons in Eastern Europe, never to be heard from again... I hope we have a special prison for 9/11 conspiracy theorists."

Michael Reagan said of Mark Dice's organization, which sends 9/11 truth information to the troops in theater, "we ought to find the people who are doing this, take them out, and shoot them... You take them out, they are traitors to this country, and you shoot them... But anybody who would do that doesn't deserve to live... I'll pay for the bullet... How about you take Mark Dice out and put him in the middle of the firing range, tie him to a post, don't blindfold him, let it rip and have some fun with Mark Dice."

All of this for simply petitioning our government for a redress of grievances. The US Government has done a total of ten investigations into the attack on Pearl Harbor, but the mere idea of asking for a second investigation into this attack on our country makes us traitors who deserve to be shot. I thought this was America. I thought it was patriotic for the people, who supposedly are the government, to ask questions and exercise oversight over our elected representatives. Is this not still a republic?

The notion that the official story, asserted by the 9/11 Commission, is not the full truth is certainly not a patent absurdity, nor is the theory that perhaps members of our own government had prior knowledge or involvement in the attacks of 9/11. US Government involvement in false flag attacks is, of course, nothing new. We have a history of staging attacks to start wars. A declassified NSA report confirms that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a staged attack and that Vietnamese boats weren't even present on the 4th of August. In March of 1963, a plan was submitted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, which describes plans to stage false flag terror attacks as a pretext to illegally invade Cuba. These plans included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake "Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,"including "sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated)," faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a "Remember the Maine" incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. The United States was condemned by the World Court for international terrorism in Nicaragua. Even recently, Seymour Hersh exposed an idea by Vice President Cheney which he described in the following words: "Why don't we build, we, in our shipyard, build four or five Iranian boats, that look like Iranian PT boats, put Navy Seals on them, with a lot of arms, and the next time one of our boats goes through the Strait of Hormuz, start a shoot-up." This is all eerily reminiscent of Hitler's Reichstag fire.

So there is plenty of precedent for this alternate theory, but is there any evidence? It turns out that there is a plethora of evidence to disprove the official 9/11 Commission conclusion.

Dr. Steven E. Jones, retired professor of Physics at BYU, examined metal samples from the World Trade Center towers and found evidence of sulfur (which would indicate that thermate, a military grade steel cutting material, was present) and performed a study of the collapse of the towers and WTC Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, and was completely omitted from the 9/11 Commission report. Jones helped establish an organization dedicated to independent, expert research of the 9/11 attacks using the scientific method. The organization now has over 500 members with backgrounds ranging from engineering to physics to aviation and has a wealth of information available to the public.

Simple common sense would indicate many problems with the official story. The 9/11 Commission claims that the jet fuel burnt long and hot enough to melt enough core columns in both towers to cause the floors to "pancake" down. This is obviously not true, as we would have seen a stack of pancaked concrete floor slabs after the collapse. The Law of Conservation of Momentum tells us that the collapse would slow as it progressed, as each successive floor would absorb more and more momentum, but in all videos, all three WTC buildings collapse at near free-fall speed. This would indicate that support, i.e. resistance, had been removed from under the collapsing floors. In a pancaking collapse, there would not have been enough energy to pulverize the concrete into the enormous clouds of dust we all witnessed. A pancaking collapse could not explain the embedding of a large chunk of one of the towers into WTC7, over 300 feet away. There is evidence of first responders, time and again, reporting secondary and tertiary explosions, explosions in the ground floor lobby, explosions in the elevator, explosions in the basement. NIST's recent report on the collapse of WTC7 admits that these three buildings, all on one day, became the only tall, steel-frame buildings in history to collapse as a result of fire. In October 2005, New Civil Engineer called into question NIST's computer models for the collapse of the Twin Towers.

A tape was released of firefighters just seven minutes before the collapse on the 78th floor, saying there were only two pockets of fire, and Chief Orio Palmer said, "we should be able to knock it down with two [hose] lines". Firefighter Brian Becker, Engine 28, stated, "So I think that the building was really kind of starting to melt. We were - like, the melt down was beginning. The collapse hadn't begun, but it was not a fire any more up there. It was like - it was like that - like smoke explosion on a tremendous scale going on up there." Firefighter Ed Cachia, Engine 53: "It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit, because we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down."

An FBI document, 199-Eye W.F. 213 589, stifled the FBI's investigation of two of bin Laden's relatives and their ties to terrorist organizations. In fact, the FBI's own website, on Usama bin Laden's Most Wanted Terrorist page, does not even claim he is responsible for the 9/11 attacks. BBC reported in September 2001, "Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October."

Congressman, I could continue on with more and more evidence, and if you are interested in other leads and other facts, I will be happy to collate and provide them. However, I assume you have greater resources than I to gather such information. I will conclude this by simply requesting that you investigate this issue and imploring you to help fight so the victims of 9/11 can learn the truth and justice can be served.

I also hope the Congress will very soon embrace the idea of impeachment, not necessarily to pursue removal from office, but at least as a duty to history to get the lies and crimes of this administration in the Congressional record with an official inquiry. President Clinton was impeached for far less than what this President has done.

As a final thought, I have a question about your party's nominee for President in the 2008 election. Barack Obama's Foreign Policy Advisor is Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski was National Security Advisor to President Carter. During Brzezinski's term, we saw the transition of Iran to an anti-Western Islamic state and the arming of the mujaheddin in Afghanistan. He admitted that it was a lie when he claimed we started helping the mujaheddin after the Soviet invasion, and that it was designed to provoke such an invasion to cause a Vietnam-style war for them. Brzezinski is very hawkish, especially with Russia. How can we reconcile our want for the War in Iraq to end with voting for someone who has this guy as a Foreign Policy Advisor? Senator Obama has also called for sending troops into Pakistan. Obama also proposed a "civilian national security force", larger and more well-funded than the military. That sounds like an admission that the plan is a larger economic black hole than the War in Iraq. On top of this, he has voted to renew the Patriot Act, voted for FISA domestic surveillance, and voted to fund the war in Iraq. How can we trust and support such a candidate, a candidate from the party that campaigned two years ago on ending the War in Iraq, lowering gas prices at the pump, and holding the administration accountable, none of which has happened. I see you stand up continuously and admonish the administration, but as a whole the entire Congress has failed the American people in all these regards. We got a minimum wage increase, but with the dollar being debased by the Fed and the resulting economic downturn and price increases, we are generally in a much worse position than in 2006. Obviously we cannot support John McCain, a continuation of the abhorrent Neo-Conservative movement (who, ironically, lists Zbigniew Brzezinski's son as a campaign worker) that has been the Bush administration. I think the two party system has failed to produce a worthy candidate and it is time for those stand-up members of Congress, of which I count you as a member, to break with their party affiliations and become independent voices. What are your views on this stance and also on Chuck Baldwin as a presidential candidate?

Thank you for your time. I look forward to your reply.

My friend Dennis and I were talking over the weekend about being "poor".  The stereotypical "poor" to us in America is not being able to pay our cable bill, or having to shop at the thrift store or Aldi. The reality of "poor" in the world is not having enough to eat, not having clean water, or having a 7 year old raise his or her younger siblings because both of their parents died of AIDS.

So what about the bigger issues?  What about abortion, what about God? should these ideals play a part in your decision on who to vote for? I think so. I also think that Gabe hit it spot on with his post:

Mr. Obama, meet my God

This isn't an issue of whether Obama or McCain can overturn Roe vs. Wade and get rid of abortion for good, it's an issue I have with Obama's faith. A faith that hides when the going gets tough. The man places God in a box, maybe believing that the God I follow isn't big enough to deliver in the middle of unwanted pregnancies. My life is a result of a young couple (my parents) being in a position that Obama might think is too difficult for my God to work out. Close friends insisting that I be aborted. My parents being in a position where most would believe they didn't have enough to make it through, not knowing what the future holds at all. For them, let alone for an innocent child.

He can dodge the issue and play games saying that "it depends on whether you see it from a theological or scientific perspective". Or that answering the question of when a baby gets human rights is "outside of his pay grade". If it's too big of an issue for who could be the next leader of the free world, then who's big enough to take it on? I guess the answer is God, huh? The same God that works everything together for those that love Him. For those like my parents who are a living story that contradicts the beliefs of this careless "Harvard graduate" who could be our next president.

As a Christian, abortion is just as important of an issue as any other. You can't compare it to war, the numbers of casualties don't even come close. It might sound awkward, but the deaths of our soldiers are deaths of proud men and women fighting against people who were on the offensive against us. Trying to compare those with the deaths of innocent children, some who possibly could grow up and be a better leader than Obama one day, isn't a discussion worth having. Many other issues seem much more important to our society, and shockingly to lots of Christians from both parties. Driving hybrid cars to save our world, our debt, health care, etc. I think we're far too blessed to be making those issues more important than the mass murder that is happening every day (40 million abortions since 1973).

I recommend watching the two videos that I have at the bottom of this blog from the Saddleback Civil Forum with Pastor Rick Warren and both candidates from a few weeks ago. Feel free to fast forward to the 2:40 mark in both to get to the same question. For some reason, I'm tilting towards McCain at the moment. The issues matter, not the party.

Here's a link to a transcript of the Saddleback interviews

It might seem like I'm posting a lot of jokes, comments, etc. about Obama. Truth is, I'm terrified of where this country is headed if he is elected President. I've tried to stay relatively neutral on who I support on the blog, but the closer we get to election day, the more worried I get.  Understand, I'm not a complete McCain supporter either.

As Christians, we have a calling higher than anything the world can throw at us. Trees are nice, money is great, having a job is important, but keeping Jesus as a priority and preserving the morals this country was founded on should be of utmost importance when Christians walk into the voting booth.

Keep America strong, support small Burrito joints! by Kyle Bauer

In a time where Wal-Mart, Best Buy, McDonalds and Starbucks are at every turn, homogenization in the world of business is something we’ve come to expect. Local restaurants, mom and pop stores and organically grown capital seems to be something of the past, when it's what this country was built on. So when you run into a small Mexican restaurant, that uses family recipes to create homemade cuisine, you take note.

Located on 12 mile near Bunert just west of Macomb Community College south campus, Burrito Loco gives you an old fashioned unique, food cart style of Mexican that explodes with so much warmth and flavor, even with their generous portions you'll still find yourself wanting more once you finish one of their 8, 10 or even 12 inch burritos.

Personally my favorite is the vegetarian Burrito which you can get made a couple different ways. By the menu it's loaded with Potatoes, Pinto beans (fresh, not refried,) optional black beans, optional eggs, cheese, tomatoes, green pepper, onions and spices. I have also had a variation with just Pintos, tomatoes, green pepper, cilantro, onions, salsa and spices. Then of course there’s the pintos, onions and cheese which you can get for 99 cents on Mondays or Saturdays, which may vary. The Pinto beans star in the burrito as they explode with a smooth, savory flavor that you’ll want to keep in your mouth for a while.

The menu also has a vast selection of burritos, 5 different kinds, 3 breakfast burritos, nachos, taco salads, quesadillas, fish tacos and enchiladas, with several combos to pull it all together. Catering and delivery is also available.

The price on the burritos range from 4.25 for an 8 inch to 6.50 for a 12 inch that is known as the "Burly Burrito" which you can fill with whatever you wish. 6.50 sounds pricey but consider the size and that chain stores who also offer fresh burritos, Chipotle and Qdoba are around the same price, if not more expensive with a smaller menu. Also consider that they purchase all their food from grocery stores just like us and we know how the price of food is sky rocketing which makes it harder for a small business such as Burrito Loco to turn a profit. Its not a 1.20 burrito from Taco Bell or Del-Taco but you’re getting quality and a flavor that you’re not going to receive anywhere else.

I would also recommend the Fideo, which was something I hadn’t even heard of until I ordered it off the menu out of curiosity. If I could relate it to anything, I guess Mexican pasta would be most accurate. Its noodles, spices, tomatoes, peppers, onions and pintos. This tasty little dish makes an excellent side or a light lunch time snack.

Opened in the fall of 2006, Burrito Loco has been able to survive in a location that has traditionally been a dead zone for upstart restaurants. Several places have failed since the original tenant, a carry out only Buddy’s Pizza, shut their doors 10 years ago. I was almost hesitant to try this place figuring what would be the point? But the little Burrito joint that could has made it for 2 years and if you stop by to fill up, you’ll realize how.

Bottom line, great food, good prices from a small business that serves unique homemade Mexican. Go out of your way to try this place if you have to, I’m sure you'll end up coming back.

Be sure to head to www.burritoloco.org for full information on the menu, catering, delivery, recipes, and contact information.

Burrito Loco is located at 14156 12 Mile Road (586) 773-7707

After having Andrew Dunfee's 100 yard opening kickoff return for touchdown called back to the Belpre 46 thanks to an illegal block below the waist, Warren struggled to move the ball against a packed in Belpre defense. Opting to give Kaleb Wolfe the bulk of the carries via the dive play, Warren picked up a first down on its second offensive play, before stalling at the Belpre 38. Misfiring on a 4th down pass to Eric Hoon, Belpre then took over and gave the Warriors a steady diet of running back Ashton Packard.

Packard picked ran for gains of 5, 3, 4, 1 on the drive, as Belpre provided the games first score on the opening drive. Moving past mid-field thanks to Packard, Belpre quarterback Clay Ullman then connected with wideout Markie Tate for a 33 strike, which put the Eagles within range for the field goal. After a 5 yard run by Watkins, and two failed pass attempts, Watkins then booted his 27 yard field goal, giving Belpre a 3-0 lead.

After failing to move the ball on their second drive, Warren punter Grant Venham angled a deep end over end kick to returner Erik Waderker, a ball he would pick up off the bounce and ultimately fumble. Warren recovered the ball at their own 17, and forlowing Kaleb Wolfe's runs of 9 and 5 yards, Wolfe would give Warren the lead with a 4 yard plunge. Following the extra point by Tyler Cox, Warren led 7-3.

The score remained 7-3 till the end of the first half, as the defenses continued to apply the clamps on opposing offenses.

Half number two began much in the same way the first ended, as Warren and Belpre would exchange drives. On the Eagles second drive, Packard would again set the tone, gaining 12 yards on his opening carry. After a failed pass attempt, and a Clay Ullman scramble, the nimble quarterback fired a pass down the right sideline, where receiver Markie Tate would out jump defender Justin Petit at the goal line, hauling in a 37 yard touchdown pass. With the score Belpre regained the lead 10-7.

After yet another failed Warren drive, Belpre would return the favor with a three and out, thanks to two quarterback sacks. Catching the Belpre punt at roughly the 42, Venham would return the ball down the left sideline, picking up a couple blocks and bringing the ball to the Belpre 21 yard line.

When Warren was called for holding on their third down try, quarterback Clay Ellenwood would again find the playmaker Venham, this time connecting on a 22 yard pass and catch, bringing Warren to the Belpre 5 yard line as the third quarter clock expired.

Trailing 10-7 with the ball on the Belpre 5, Warren again failed to break the goal line, eventually settling for a game tying 24 yard field goal by Cox.

With the score tied at 10, Warren and Belpre would again exchange short drives, until the 8:18 mark in the 4th when Belpre again punted at the illusive Venham. Nearly being flagged for roughing the kicker, Warren escaped and managed a 38 yard return, as Venham brough the ball to the 22 yard line. Following an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on Belpre coach Curt Shriver, Warren provided the go ahead score in just three plays, as a handback trap to Andrew Coffman would give Warren a 17-10 victory.

As time ticked down, Belpre managed its best drive of the half, moving inside the Warren 15 yard line thanks to a 19 yard pass and catch to Markie Tate. Take would again out jump Petit, only this time, Petit and Tate would each claim the reception. As referees conferenced, it was decided that there was dual possession and the offensive player was given credit for the catch.  With 1:43 remaining Belpre threw into the endzone three times attempting to tie the game. Following a timeout Belpre stood at the Warren 12, with just 1:07 remaining and a four on the downs marker. Ullman again tried his target Tate, but fired a pass out of the reach of Tate in the far left corner.

Warren would then run three plays, the final a kneel by Ellenwood sealing the victory.

Warren 7    0      0    10--17

Belpre 3     0      7     0--10

Stats will be available momentarily.

Here are a couple things I learned:

Hydration and energy are important when mountain biking. The tougher the trail, the more you will need both.

Always ride with your mouth closed or you'll be eating a lot of bugs, spider webs and branches.

Proper equipment for any sport is important. For mountain biking it's good to have a nice, sturdy bike, a helmet and gloves, padding, proper clothing, and clipped riding shoes are also helpful. One of these days I'm going to have to get some of that stuff before I kill myself.

It's very difficult to watch for deer throughout the forests while you're navigating rocky singlepaths, especially on a steep decline or incline or rocky trail. I only had a chance to notice one deer on today's ride. I'm not sure if there were more because I had to pay too much attention to where I was riding.

Mountain biking is a vastly separate activity from photography and it's (almost) impossible to do both at the same time. Of course I still try, but it's not easy. I tend to either want to ride like a maniac or stop to take a picture. I have a hard time doing both. On today's trip I only brought along my little automatic Leica C3. It's an old-fashioned film camera. Of course with the loss of control using an automatic, I didn't expect to get any "good" pictures, but since it's a Leica, I might be surprised. You'll have to wait until I get the film developed to find out. As always, either add your name to my mailing list (on TYRANDALL.com) or keep checking my website to find out when I post them.

As I was riding up the Sussex Branch Trail getting slightly bored at the width and flatness, I began noticing (and taking) all the different paths leading off to the side. I thought those must be there because so many others before were equally board and had to go off and make their own path. It reminded me of when I was younger. It occurred to me that mountain biking is a lot like what I used to do when I was a kid, only I just called it "riding my bike" back then. I never cared as much for riding on the straight (boring) road. I always preferred going off road and seeing what I could get into, whether it be jumping over things, weaving between trees, or just making a new path. I liked to make my own path, go exploring, seek new adventures, maybe see things most people don't.

Today was my third time mountain biking in the last week and each time I went to explore different places because once I've seen or done something, it's not as exciting for me. I guess that's where that dreaded expression comes from, "been there, done that."

As for the trails themselves, they were nice. Today I stayed mostly on the Stephens State Park side because the trails are more compatible with my equipment and current physical abilities. I stayed mostly on the marked trails, but to be honest, I had more fun wandering off on the many unmarked trails even in that section of the park. One of my favorites was at one end of Parking Lot #1 that led into the yellow trail and then at the section of the white trail that is closed due to erosion where I picked up an alternate trail leading into the Allamuchy Pond trail and over to the Inn at Panther Valley, where I could have stopped for lunch, but didn't. Instead, I found a nice rock on the red trail on the northwest side of Deer Path Pond. Come back to see a photo of that later.

As for condition, all the trails were in good shape with no wet or muddy patches because it has been so dry lately. It seems every river I ride by is all dried up or extremely low. The Musconetcong River of course still has water, but a lot of the smaller off shoot rivers don't.

As always, let me know if you have any questions or want more details. Please check my website for the photos (someday).

I am sure that Rick Warren is a nice guy who genuinely cares about the state of the union.  That's great; so do I.  The problem is not that he cares about his country, but that he uses his office of minister and his church to address these issues.  The spirituality of the church has always stated that the church as the church is to concern herself with spiritual matters, namely the preaching of the gospel, the administration of the sacraments, and spiritual discipline.  That is all.  D. G. Hart in his book, Seeking a Better County, described the doctrine as practiced by 19th century Southern Presbyterians, "Southern Presbyterians saw the church’s task as preaching the gospel, trusting that the Holy Spirit would regenerate sinners by His Word and build them up in Christ. The church was not commissioned to make the world a better place in which to live. It had no business telling the government how to rule the body politic. It was not to feed the hungry, or provide houses for the homeless, or protest social injustice. These political and social temptations only distracted the church from its spiritual calling.” 

When the church abandons her spiritual calling, not only does she fail to accomplish her God-given responsibilities, she also fails to accomplish her newfound political and social endeavors.  The church is made worse and the society is made worse.  The fusion and confusion of religion and politics is never a good thing.   

This is not to say that Christians cannot take part in civil matters; they can and should as good citizens.  It is to say that an ordained minister should not place himself and his church into the political arena.  Christians should vote, run for public office, serve in their communities, and do all the other things that productive citizens do.  They should do these things however, as private citizens not as the corporate church.  The church should not be a forum for political debate, promotion of candidates, or voter registration.  I am sad to say that I have witnessed all of these things personally.  

J. Gresham Machen took part in many local and national civic issues including testifying before Congress concerning the formation of a federal department of education.  He did these things as a private citizen, not as an ordained minister.  In his book, What is Christianity, he offered sober words:

"You cannot expect from a true Christian church any official pronouncements upon the political and social questions of the day... But the function of church in its corporate capacity is of an entirely different kind.  Its weapons against evil are spiritual, not carnal; and by becoming a political lobby, through the advocacy of political measures whether good or bad, the church is turning aside from its proper mission, which is to bring to bear upon human hearts the solemn and imperious, yet also sweet and gracious, appeal of the gospel of Christ."

So I ask, what hath Jerusalem to do with Washington?

While Carol keeps mum about it even today, she has noted to his biographer that she wished he had wanted to turn 40 rather than 25. McCain's divorce papers were delivered to Cindy's (his current wife's) house; he cohabitted with Carol during the first 9 months of his affair with Cindy, according to the Jedreport blog account.

These indescretions were almost 30 years old. McCain raised it,l however as his biggest moral failure on the Warren morality debate, but only danced around it as the failure of the marriage, and gave no details. CNN revived the issue about his affair in the McCain Revealed story aired on August 20, 2008. In that report, they noted that he had a secret and he had begun to cheat by 1977, when he moved to DC. He developed the political aspirations while he was dating this wealthy heiress. He even lied to his new lady about his age.

McCain admits "responsibility" but unlike Obama, shows no evidence of having done a moment of soul searching nor does he appear to have learned from his mistake. His recent cheating on the zone of silence is a minor incident, compared to how he treated Carol, but if we give him the reigns of our country, we can expect similar fealty to what he showed to Carol and to pastor Warren.

The contents of "1984", as with all of Warren's output, was variable. Without many continuing characters in Warren comics anything and everything could appear....upcoming artists/writers dipping their first hesitant toe into the murky waters...old established artists/writers wanting an assignment with a little more freedom to let their hair down....or just wanting a job! Mix in a few bought-in stories and some South American artwork and you had magazines that seemed more European and less juvenile than many of the others available at the time. (Remember the independent comic "explosion" didn't really take hold until the mid 1980s).

Issue No 1 sets out its clear mission statement on the inside front cover. I'm sure there are a minority who might take offence at the subject matter of some of these stories (insulting other races/treating women as objects..not to mention the "sex" and "violence") but I think you have to bear in mind that the 1970s was a different planet! "The Saga of Honeydew Melons" written by Nicola Cuti and well drawn by Estaban Maroto is fairly representative of what you might find within an average issue of "1984".

There were 10 stories in this premiere issue counting this uncredited one-pager. As Jim Stenstrum is listed in the contents page as both an author AND an illustrator, perhaps this mini-saga can be attributed to him. I believe he painted the cover of Issue No 17 (by which time the magazine had been re-titled "1994").

With a cover and a "Mutant World" episode by Richard Corben, a quirky "elf" story written and drawn by Wally Wood, a gruesome and bizarre sideways story called "Once Upon Clarissa" by Bill Dubay and Alex Nino and an odd story called "Bugs" this magazine actually contains a large variety of styles.

One of my two favourite stories in the magazine is "Faster than Light" written by Jim Stenstrum with expressive art by Luis Bermejo. A farmer (?) has discovered a new form of propulsion!

The title appears on the second page of the story. I'm not sure why those kids are killing a cat though..................

The "science" behind Elias Newton Zong's "Zong Drive" seems almost plausible!! The sound effects are good too....

My other favourite story is "Momma can you hear me?" written by Nicola Cuti and beautifully drawn by Alex Nino.

This is what I was waiting for. The questions I would ask (and some more), were mostly asked. No hype, no brutality, no fighting, but a simple conversation, allowing these two great men to answer without being interrupted. The issues were broad, including abortion, human trafficking, personal life with God, orphans, personal moral failures, war, Supreme Court justices, evil, steam cell reaserch, and many more.

Here is a helpful side by side question-answer comparison.

You can, and should watch it, (CNN site here).

I like what he's saying about religion and politics, but I don't agree that spirituality should be completely removed from personal life. I am particularly keen about his thoughts on "evil".

Check out the "Religulous" movie site HERE.

Each of them got on the faith soap box and talked about their relationship with the One that has saved them as well as when they thought it is ok to send folks off to war.

There is a concern when the future leader of the ENTIRE United States gets up and talks about faith this deeply.  When a leader talks about the moral right to go into war based on faith, we have slipped away from democracy.  When marriage is defined by the new testament, then democracy is not being practiced.  Democracy is the vehicle that allows our faith to evolve.   The Civil Rights movement was the proving ground. To go back to faith-based leadership is a step in the wrong direction.

The assumption made is that the candidates for the Presidency of the United States are individuals of great character.  That is what the sugaring out process of the debates are all about. Seeing the candidates play to an Evengelical Christian audience caused greater concern then confidence.  History is filled with brutality and war justified by faith.

Ending the wars,  fixing our broken economy, developing better ways to create energy are the most important issues of this election.   The President could be Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist, Christian or even Unitarian as long as the issues that are facing this country are addressed with wisdom, compassion and character.

Saturday night Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church and author of The Purpose Driven Life successfully moderated the first public event between the two candidates for president.

Warren's premise for hosting the debate is that while he believes in separation between church and state, he does not believe in a separation between faith and politics. After all, he asserts, "faith is just a world view, and everybody has some kind of world view."

I felt that Warren performed very well in his role as moderator, and appreciated the forum to hear the candidates discuss matters that matter to me.

I encourage you to check out CNN's full discussion available online.

Update: It's Biden. Who said Democrats couldn't keep a secret?

Obama didn't want Hillary Clinton and the machine around him for the rest of his life. Can you blame him? Wouldn't you rather shoot the breeze with Joe Biden? Sure.

By Mick Gregory

With McCain's lopsided win in the debate held by Rev. Warren in California, the DNC leadership are in a panic. They will try and force Obama to pick Hillary as his running mate.

That's my prediction. We'll have to see if Hillary wants to chance it with this stalled campaign. Maybe there is so much worry, that Hillary will get the nomination in Denver. Obama has to nip it in the bud and name Hillary his VP before the revolt takes over the convention and makes Hillary the candidate and Obama has to settle for Veep.

Ralph Nader agrees with me.

“He just has to swallow hard and do what JFK did” in picking rival Lyndon Johnson in 1960, said the liberal activist and maverick presidential candidate.

According to Nader’s logic, Obama may dislike Hillary, but will conclude he has no choice but to get over it if he hopes to leave next week’s convention in Denver with a unified party and a decent shot against John McCain in the fall: “The polls show 25 percent of her supporters have not gotten on board.”

“He’s got to be very concerned by the [neck-and-neck] polls and by what happened at Saddleback,” added Nader, referring to the recent candidates forum hosted by evangelist Rick Warren. “He got beat in Saddleback—big time.”

Nader said his own sources—and, to be blunt, they sound a bit sketchy—lead him to believe that Clinton remains in serious consideration. A friend, he said, recently saw Clinton family intimate Vernon Jordan on Martha’s Vineyard and reported the “usually very effusive” Jordan to be suspiciously “tight-lipped.”

It was only in May that Sen. Barack Obama cockily proclaimed he would debate Sen. John McCain "anywhere, anytime." But in June, Obama said no to McCain's challenge to have 10 one-on-one town hall meetings

-- ibdeditorials.com.

After what happened at Lake Forest, Calif.'s evangelical Saddleback last Saturday evening, we may have found that debating is Obama's Achilles' heel. Whether or not you like the idea of such events being held in religious venues, the plain-and-simple method of questioning used by Saddleback pastor and best-selling author Rick Warren revealed fundamental differences between these two men.

"It's one of those situations where the devil is in the details," Obama said at one point. He could have been referring to his own oratorical shortcomings when a teleprompter is unavailable. We learned a lot more about the real Obama at Saddleback than we will next week as he delivers his acceptance speech in Denver before a massive stadium crowd.

The stark differences between the two came through the most on the question of whether there is evil in the world. Obama spoke of evil within America, "in parents who have viciously abused their children." According to the Democrat, we can't really erase evil in the world because "that is God's task." And we have to "have some humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil."

For McCain, with a global war on terror raging, there was no equivocating: We must "defeat" evil. If al-Qaida's placing of suicide vests on mentally-disabled women and then blowing them up by remote control in a Baghdad market isn't evil, he asked: "You have to tell me what is."

Asked to name figures he would rely on for advice, Obama gave the stock answer of family members. McCain pointed to Gen. David Petraeus, Iraq's scourge of the surge; Democratic Rep. John Lewis, who "had his skull fractured" by white racists while protesting for civil rights in the 60s; plus Internet entrepreneur Meg Whitman, the innovative former CEO of eBay.

When Warren inquired into changes of mind on big issues, Obama fretted about welfare reform; McCain unashamedly said "drilling" — for reasons of national security and economic need.

On taxes, Obama waxed political: "What I'm trying to do is create a sense of balance and fairness in our tax code." McCain showed an understanding of what drives a free economy: "I don't want to take any money from the rich. I want everybody to get rich. I don't believe in class warfare or redistribution of the wealth."

To any honest observer, the differences between John McCain and Barack Obama have been evident all along. What we saw last weekend was Obama's shallowness juxtaposed with McCain's depth, the product of his extraordinary life experience.

It may not have been a debate, but it was one of the most lopsided political contests in memory. -- iht.com

I have to agree, this was the most lopsided debate win I've seen in my life.

I can't wait to see a few debates. I know there will be only two or three now. And the Democrats will have to try and put the fix in with the "right" kind of journalists asking the questions.