FAREWELL, O NINE

Remembering the Headlines You Brought Us...

new President inaugurates "hope and change"

401K gets the dropsy

POTUS heads GM

scarey piggy flu

Sully lands on water

10 Gosselins become 9

"jobs created or saved" to aid unemployment

"war on terror OUT/"overseas contingency operation" IN

the king...asleep at 50

the Tiger was a cheetah

"political correctness" fells fourteen troops in Texas

revival of retro term "hot pants" by AlQaeda

And, this month when Americans were busy hanging lights/shopping/ cleaning and making fudge, we were pushed closer to the mother of all Christmas "gifts"...HEALTHCARE.

Could you please look back over that list and tell me if Sully was the only encouraging headline? Good news may not make the papers...

but come ON 2010, we're needing to catch a break!

"But as for me, I trust in Thee, O Lord, I say, 'Thou art my God. My times are in Thy hand'." Psalm 31:14,15a NAS

COPENHAGEN...A GATHERING OF POSERS (working title: What does Copenhagen have in common with "The Emperor's New Clothes"?)

Copenhagen welcomed the heads of state last week who arrived to talk about global warming. They had to fight snow blizzard conditions on arrival, so the ones who packed flip flops were outta luck.

The second picture shows President Obama landing back home after the conference...just ahead of the East coast's blizzard of 2009. So who is kidding who(m)?

Think about these eight points that seem to be obvious, but as ignored as the Emperor's lack of clothes...

1. Man is not almighty, but he sure is arrogant if he presumes to determine the future of the planet. If man could control nature, we would know when to expect rain. Copenhagen's overall premise is speculative.

2. Copenhagen is a gathering of third world leaders who want a chunk of change. We are fresh out of moolah...yet President Obama has committed the United States' share:

"The total reparations would be $30 billion per year in 2012, rising to $100 billion per year in 2020. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters yesterday that the United States would pay $10 billion of the $30 billion per year by 2012. Thus the U.S. share of the $100 billion by 2020 would be $33 billion per year." (American Thinker, "Obama offers $33 billion per year in climate reparations")

It sure seems like a whole lotta reparations are going on. And it is my understanding that emissions numbers in the U.S. decreased last year without any punitive actions.

3. Capitalism seems to be the object of ridicule and scorn at Copenhagen. Capitalism is what made America great and represents hope to every would-be immigrant around the world. Don't they all dream of coming to a place where they are allowed to "make it" according to their abilities?

4. It's important that we pay Brazil to plant trees because we have been bad polluters. Are trees more important than creating jobs for Americans? Trees/people, trees/people. Which?

5. It's important that we pay African nations because, again, we have been bad polluters. Then they take the money and do what with it? What normally happens when we give money to African nations? So how does that help pollution?

6. We pay; China doesn't. If they are one of the top two biggest polluters, will our money change their policy? Nah.

7. The developed nations agree to a pre-1990's emission cut, while developing nations increase their carbon emissions. So what does that mean? The energy costs here spike...so then our out-of-pocket is not only the big guilt payment, but ALSO the energy increases.

8. Copenhagen is over and the agreements that Mr. Obama hailed as "meaningful and unprecedented" are not binding, but only target goals. Since people do what you inspect rather than what you expect, transparency is key. How do you think China feels about transparency?

Any ONE of these eight bad boy derailers above represents a red flag for concern. So what is our President thinking? Whose side is he on? It may be that the campaign "change" we were promised...is a basic change of the playing field. Is this climate change stuff just a sham to get money going from the "haves" to the "have nots" (not only in America, but all over the world). Will that work? Has that ever worked?

We see power taken from private industry and given to government. The result? Bigger government/less freedom. Our president's resume includes time as a pro bono lawyer/teacher at Chicago Law School, but the bulk of his experience is on the government payroll. Mr. Obama has not run a small town or even a small business. So should we be surprised that he (and his cabinet) think government is the answer to every question?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Less-than-10-percent-of-Obama-cabinet-has-private-sector-experience-73911212.html

According to the CBO, this administration of less than one year has increased the deficit by 2.3 trillion more than was expected. Mr. Obama's track record is to spend and print more money. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123776518094909023.html

Mike has a doctor friend in his old deer camp who was frustrated with his wife's inability to get a handle on money. She got her own checkbook and account in an effort to simplify matters...but the doc was still getting calls from the bank. When he tried to talk to her, her perspective was that the problem AND the solution were simple. The problem was there seemed to be not enough money and her solution was "just put more money IN!"

Ala the community organizer.

Let's pray for a Damascus Road blaze of spiritual light that would enable our President to "see" beyond the veil. It has happened before to a man who was not seeking it.

"Right in the middle of the day a blaze of light...light outshining the sun... poured out of the sky on me and my companions." Acts 26:13 TM (when Saul became Paul)

LOOKS CAN BE DECEIVING

Well, a week has flown by. Mike and I took the motor home to Little Rock for five days to get our colons routinely scoped. We parked by the Arkansas River and the temp dipped into the 20's. Still, I think Tiger would have preferred our week to his...

In the last blog, I was cutting Mr. Woods some slack. I figured the man had gone off into the weeds and was sorry and the couple could work through it. But looks deceive. As the week progressed, it became obvious that the tiger was a predator. Eeeuuuw! He even paid women...and they were not nearly the "hottie" he had at home. So perhaps he is dealing with more than just a power addiction.

Grace is not impossible, but the trust wall got a whole lot taller to scale. If he wants his family back, Tiger Woods will have to proceed with all the focus and concentration that he previously has given to golf. For his family's sake, I hope he will.

If you read the last blog ("All I Want for Christmas"), the title seemed as if it might be what Tiger would be saying. If he could have one Christmas wish, he would wish for his life back. But in hindsight, to have THAT life back would be reprehensible. You know how we pray for our kids that they will not get away with anything...and if they ARE up to something they will be found out quickly? As painful as being "found out" has been for Tiger Woods, to have continued as a seamy poser would have been stockpiling condemnation.

"But if you don't do what you say, you will be sinning against GOD; you can be sure that your sin will track you down." Numbers 32.23 TM

ALL I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS IS...

Dunno if you have gotten the email picture of Tiger's "Christmas card" with his face all battered...our inbox is familiar with it.

The first time we got the picture, it brought a sheepish smile. I wouldn't have been smiling if the incident had happened to me, but it stoked my inner vigilante.

Clearly Elin Woods went with her first response...but what SHOULD she have done?

I read something today and then posted it on Facebook. It made a lot of sense:

http://www.godissues.org/tiger-woods-and-the-grace-of-christmas/

There but for the grace of God...

COHINKEYDINKS

You know, you wake up one day and you have been birthed.

You have no choice over your parentals. You have little choice about what you look like (Phyllis Diller and Joan Rivers being the exceptions). My point is that there are some remarkable likenesses between my daughter and I. Really, we don't try. They're just cohinkeydinks.

It's nothing to come out in similar clothes when we are going somewhere. That is inconvenient because one has to go back and change.

We simultaneously say the same things...or burst into the same song.

Last week I went to a "doc-in-a-box" to get a flu shot. I noticed the nurse looking at me through the receptionist's window. Each time I looked up, she was rubbernecking. I thought...I'm not sick so she's not worried about me keeling over or anything. Is she stalking me?

When she called my name to come back, she said "you don't have any relatives in this area, do you?" When I nodded affirmatively, she jumped in "named SAFERITE"? People often comment on how much we look alike. I've always thought Beth handled that very graciously. She isn't 62 with a turkey wattle, but she does look similar.

The last time Beth and I talked, I asked her "did I tell you the police stopped me last week?"

B: "me, too!"

S. "I got stopped on Rupple"

B: "ME, TOO! I was going 40 in a 30"

S: "ME, TOO!"

B: "the policeman gave me a warning, how about you?"

S: "yep"

At this time Beth drolly injects "he probably thought he stopped the same woman twice". I like her humor.

Cohinkeydinks aside...we're all here to be conformed to another image.

"...being conformed to the image of Christ" Romans 8:29 NAS