Category Archives: politics

USA Only: My opinion on what could Happen with Our Country.

Standard

It has been a long time since I have written a word on my blog but I feel this issue is important enough that I wanted to give my opinion. This will be my one and only online opinion about the upcoming election.

***

Good Morning everyone. Those of you that have known me a long time know that I’m not very political but as everyone else in this country, I do have my opinion. I was listening to the television yesterday, and there was a young college age) talking that got my attention. She was talking about how even knowing his issues she was going to vote for Trump just because there hadn’t been any change in Washington and she was going to encourage all she could to do the same.

It got me to thinking about what could happen to this country if he is elected and it scares me. On one side we have Hillary who has made poor choices in some areas but has worked who entire life for the public. Her husband was the President and not a bad one in my opinion. She already knows all of the foreign leaders, and they know both she and her husband. In my mind, we are getting Bill’s experience also if she is elected.

The email debacle with Hillary is not too different than President Bush’s teams problem with their lost emails. You can watch this short clip and find out what happened. http://www.pbs.org/…/w…/web-video/missing-white-house-emails
It happens on both sides of the isle.

It seems that the so-called Millenials and others in this country could be cutting off their nose to spite their face just for the sake of change right now. Donald Trump is a disaster waiting to happen for this country. He is unstable and the thought that because of his inability to keep his temper in check can through this country in necular war. There are some things he can do as president that congress or the senate can’t stop. Is the change in the white house for the next four years worth all the instability and potential hazards that can happen if Donald Trump is elected? I think not.

I am old enough to have followed Trump throughout his life and witnessed the choices that a spoiled rich man made. He didn’t let anything get in his way. If he wanted it to happen, whether good or bad it happened. I don’t want this man held up as an example of someone to follow to my great-grandchildren or anyone’s child as far as that goes.
I will be glad to discuss my opinion with anyone that can keep it civil and clean. Twice I have written what I thought, and I won’t be doing it again, but I thought maybe this might give someone reason to stop and think about what can potentially happen to our country. Thanks for reading.

President Kennedy Assassination (graphic picture)

Standard

I found this video from a former FBI man who investigated President John F. Kennedy’s assination very interesting. For me there has always been to many questions left unanswered. Maybe now the truth is beginning to be told.  Take a look and let me know what you think about it.  Shirley

 

Kennedy2

Heathcare Entitlement: Yes or No

Standard

obamacare3

Is Every American Entitled to Healthcare?

That is a question that has caused a great deal of striff in this country from the poorest to the richest person. There is right and wrong to both side so this argument and no matter who wins it they will be a price to pay. As a practicing RN for 32 years I saw the good and the bad in the healthcare system. My personal thoughts are that our system is broken and has been for many years. I also believe that everyone should have basic healthcare especially the old and young. No matter what my feelings I want to present both sides in this blog so you can make up your own mind.

47.9 million people in the United States (15.4% of the US population) did not have health insurance in 2012 according to the US Census Bureau. The United States and Mexico are the only countries of the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that do not have universal health care.

Proponents of the right to health care say that no one in the richest nation on earth should go without health care. They argue that a right to health care would stop medical bankruptcies, improve public health, reduce overall health care spending, help small businesses, and that health care should be an essential government service.

Opponents argue that a right to health care amounts to socialism and that it should be an individual’s responsibility, not the government’s role, to secure health care. They say that government provision of health care would decrease the quality and availability of health care, and would lead to larger government debt and deficits.

Did You Know?

27 million previously uninsured people will gain coverage under Obamacare according to a 2013 White House estimate.

obabmacare4The United States and Mexico are the only countries of the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that do not have universal health care.

The United States spent $8,508 per person on health care in 2011, over 2.5 times the average spent by member countries of the OECD ($3,322 per person).

The US five-year survival rate for all cancers is 64.6%, over 10% higher than the five-year cancer survival rate in Europe (51.6%),[26] and a 2009 study found that the United States had better cancer screening rates than 10 European countries including France, Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland.

In 2014, the Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States last in overall health care behind (in order) United Kingdom, Switzerland, Sweden, Australia, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, France, and Canada.
Argument For and Against Obama Care

Pro Arguments

Obamacare2The founding documents of the United States provide support for a right to health care. The Declaration of Independence states that all men have “unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” which necessarily entails having the health care needed to preserve life and pursue happiness. The purpose of the US Constitution, as stated in the Preamble, is to “promote the general welfare” of the people. According to former Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), as part of efforts to “promote the general welfare,” health care “is a legitimate function of government.”

Instituting a right to health care could lower the cost of health care in the United States. According to a 2013 study, under a single-payer system, in which all citizens are guaranteed a right to health care, total public and private health care spending could be lowered by $592 billion in 2014 and up to $1.8 trillion over the next decade due to lowered administrative and prescription drug costs. According to the American Medical Association, on average, private health insurance plans spend 11.7% of premiums on administrative costs vs. 6.3% spent by public health programs. According to a study in the American Journal of Public Health, Canada, a country that provides a universal right to health care, spends half as much per capita on health care as the United States. In 2010 the United Kingdom, another country with a right to health care, managed to provide health care to all citizens while spending just 41.5% of what the United States did per capita.

A right to health care could save lives. According to a 2009 study from Harvard researchers, “lack of health insurance is associated with as many as 44,789 deaths per year,” which translates into a 40% increased risk of death among the uninsured. Another study found that more than 13,000 deaths occur each year just in the 55-64 year old age group due to lack of health insurance coverage. In addition, a 2011 Commonwealth Fund study found that due to a lack of timely and effective health care, the United States ranked at the bottom of a list of 16 rich nations in terms of preventable mortality. In Italy, Spain, France, Australia, Israel, and Norway, all countries with a right to health care, people live two to three years longer than people in the United States.

The right to health care is an internationally recognized human right. On Dec. 10, 1948 the United States and 47 other nations signed the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The document stated that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of oneself and one’s family, including… medical care.” In 2005 the United States and the other member states of the World Health Organization signed World Health Assembly resolution 58.33, which stated that everyone should have access to health care services and should not suffer financial hardship when obtaining these services. According to a 2008 peer-reviewed study in the Lancet, “[r]ight-to-health features are not just good management, justice, or humanitarianism, they are obligations under human-rights law.” The United States and Mexico are the only countries of the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that do not have universal health care. As of 2013 over half of the world’s countries had a right to health care in their national constitutions.

A right to health care could make medical services affordable for everyone. According to a 2012 study from Consumer Reports, paying for health care is the top financial problem for US households. According to a peer-reviewed study in Health Affairs, between 2003 and 2013, the cost of family health insurance premiums has increased 80% in the United States. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 26% of Americans report that they or a family member had trouble paying for medical bills in 2012, and 58% reported that they delayed or did not seek medical care due to cost. According to one estimate of a proposed bill to implement a single-payer health care system in the United States (HR 676), 95% of US households would save money [51] and every individual in the United States would receive guaranteed access to publically financed medical care.

Providing all citizens the right to health care is good for economic productivity. When people have access to health care, they live healthier lives and miss work less, allowing them to contribute more to the economy. A Mar. 2012 study by researchers at the Universities of Colorado and Pennsylvania showed that workers with health insurance miss an average of 4.7 fewer work days than employees without health insurance. [55] According to an Institute of Medicine report, the US economy loses $65-$130 billion annually as a result of diminished worker productivity, due to poor health and premature deaths, among the uninsured. In a Jan. 14, 2014 speech, World Bank President Jim Yong Kim stated that all nations should provide a right to health care “to help foster economic growth.”

A right to health care could improve public health. According to a 2012 study in the Lancet that looked at data from over 100 countries, “evidence suggests that broader health coverage generally leads to better access to necessary care and improved population health, particularly for poor people.” In the United States, people are 33% less likely to have a regular doctor, 25% more likely to have unmet health needs, and over 50% more likely to not obtain needed medicines compared to their Canadian counterparts who have a universal right to healthcare. According to a 2008 peer-reviewed study in the Annals of Internal Medicine, there were 11.4 million uninsured working-age Americans with chronic conditions such as heart disease and diabetes, and their lack of insurance was associated with less access to care, early disability, and even death.

Because the United States is a very wealthy country, it should provide health care for all its citizens. Many European countries with a universal right to health care, such as Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and Italy, have a lower Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita than the United States, yet they provide a right to health care for all their citizens. As of 2012, 47.9 million people (15.4% of the US population) did not have health insurance and, according to a June 2013 study, even with the Obamacare reforms as many as 31 million people will still be uninsured in 2016. The United States spent $8,508 per person on health care in 2011, over 2.5 times the average spent by member countries of the OECD ($3,322 per person). With that level of spending, the United States should be able to provide a right to healthcare to everyone.

Providing a right to health care could benefit private businesses. If the United States implemented a universal right to health care, businesses would no longer have to pay for employee health insurance policies. As of 2011, 59.5% of Americans were receiving health insurance through their employer. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, some economists believe the high costs of employee health insurance place US companies at a “competitive disadvantage in the international marketplace.” According to the Business Coalition for Single-Payer Healthcare, a right to healthcare under a single-payer-system could reduce employer labor costs by 10-12%.

A right to health care could encourage entrepreneurship. Many people are afraid to start their own businesses for fear of losing the health insurance provided at their existing jobs. The Kauffman-RAND Institute for Entrepreneurship Public Policy estimated that a 33% increase in new US businesses may result from the increased access to health insurance through the Obamacare health insurance exchanges. A 2001 study found that providing universal health care in the United States could increase self-employment by 2 to 3.5 percent.

A right to health care could stop medical bankruptcies. About 62% of all US bankruptcies were related to medical expenses in 2007, and 78% of these bankruptcies were filed by people who already had medical insurance. In 2010, there were 30 million Americans who were contacted by a collection agency about a medical bill. If all US citizens were provided health care under a single-payer system medical bankruptcy would no longer exist, because the government, not private citizens, would pay all medical bills.

A right to health care is a necessary foundation of a just society. The United States already provides free public education, public law enforcement, public road maintenance, and other public services to its citizens to promote a just society that is fair to everyone. Health care should be added to this list. Late US Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) wrote that providing a right to health care “goes to the heart of my belief in a just society.” According to Norman Daniels, PhD, Professor of Ethics and Population Health at Harvard University, “healthcare preserves for people the ability to participate in the political, social, and economic life of society. It sustains them as fully participating citizens.”

Con Arguments

The founding documents of the United States do not provide support for a right to health care. Nowhere in the Declaration of Independence does it say there is a right to health care. The purpose of the US Constitution, as stated in the Preamble, is to “promote the general welfare,” not to provide it. The Bill of Rights lists a number of personal freedoms that the government cannot infringe upon, not material goods or services that the government must provide. According to former Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), “you have a right to your life and you have a right to your liberty and you have a right to keep what you earn in a free country… You do not have the right to services or things.”

A right to health care could increase the US debt and deficit. Spending on Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, all government programs that provide a right to health care for certain segments of the population, totaled less than 10% of the federal budget in 1985, but by 2012 these programs took up 21% of the federal budget. According to US House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI), government health care programs are “driving the explosive growth in our spending and our debt.” Studies have concluded that the expansion of insurance coverage under Obamacare will increase the federal deficit by $340-$700 billion in the first 10 years, [and could increase the deficit to $1.5 trillion in the second 10 years. Even with these expenditures, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates Obamacare will leave 30 million people without health insurance. If everyone in the US were covered under a universal right to health care, the increase in the federal deficit could be even larger than under Obamacare.

A right to health care could increase the wait time for medical services. Medicaid is an example of a federally funded single-payer health care system that provides a right to health care for low-income people. According to a 2012 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, 9.4% of Medicaid beneficiaries had trouble obtaining necessary care due to long wait times, versus 4.2% of people with private health insurance. Countries with a universal right to health care have longer wait times than in the United States. In 2013 the average wait time to see a specialist in Canada was 8.6 weeks, versus 18.5 days in the United States in 2014. In the United States, fewer than 10% of patients wait more than two months to see a specialist versus 41% in Canada, 34% in Norway, 31% in Sweden, and 28% in France – all countries that have some form of a universal right to health care.

Implementing a right to health care could lead the United States towards socialism. Socialism, by definition, entails government control of the distribution of goods and services. Under a single-payer system where everyone has a right to health care, and all health care bills are paid by the government, the government can control the distribution of health care services. According to Ronald Reagan, “one of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine,” and once socialized medicine is instituted, “behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom.” In Aug. 2013, when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) was asked if Obamacare is a step towards a single-payer universal health care system, he answered “absolutely, yes.” The free market should determine the availability and cost of health care services, not the federal government.

Providing a right to health care could raise taxes. In European countries with a universal right to health care, the cost of coverage is paid through higher taxes. In the United Kingdom and other European countries, payroll taxes average 37% – much higher than the 15.3% payroll taxes paid by the average US worker. According to Paul R. Gregory, PhD, a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, financing a universal right to health care in the United States would cause payroll taxes to double.

Providing a right to health care could create a doctor shortage. The Association of American Medical Colleges predicts a shortfall of 63,000 doctors by 2015 due to the influx of new patients under Obamacare. If a right to health care were guaranteed to all, this shortage could be much worse. In the United Kingdom, which has a right to health care, a 2002 study by the British National Health Service found that it was “critically short of doctors and nurses.” As of 2013 the United Kingdom had 2.71 practicing doctors for every 1,000 people – the second lowest level of the 27 European nations.

A right to health care could lead to government rationing of medical services. Countries with universal health care, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, all ration health care using methods such as controlled distribution, budgeting, price setting, and service restrictions. In the United Kingdom, the National Health Service (NHS) rations health care using a cost-benefit analysis. For example, in 2008 any drug that provided an extra six months of “good-quality” life for £10,000 ($15,150) or less was automatically approved, while one that costs more might not be. In order to expand health coverage to more Americans, Obamacare created an Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) to make cost-benefit analyses to keep Medicare spending from growing too fast. According to Sally Pipes, President of the Pacific Research Institute, the IPAB “is essentially charged with rationing care.” According to a 2009 Wall Street Journal editorial, “once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, medical rationing is inevitable.”

A right to health care could lower the quality and availability of disease screening and treatment. In countries with a universal right to health care certain disease treatment outcomes are worse than the United States. The US 5-year survival rate for all cancers is 64.6%, compared to 51.6% in Europe. The United States also has a higher 5-year survival rate than Canada. Studies have found that US cancer screening rates are higher than those in Canada and 10 European countries with universal health care including France, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. The United States is estimated to have the highest prostate and breast cancer survival rates in the world. The United States also has high survival rates after a stroke, with an age-adjusted 30-day fatality rate of 3 per 100, lower than the OECD average of 5.2 per 100. In addition, the 30-day survival rate after a heart attack is higher in the United States than the OECD average.

A right to health care could lower doctors’ earnings. The Medicare system in the United States is a single-payer system where government pays for health care bills, and between 1998 and 2009 it reduced physician payments in three different years. In 2009, Medicare payments to health care providers were almost 20% below those paid out by private insurance. In Britain and Canada, where there is a universal right to health care, physicians have incomes 30% lower than US doctors. According to a 2011 study, in comparison to US specialists, the average specialist in Canada earned 30% less, and the average specialist in the United Kingdom earned 50% less. Any lowering of doctor payments in the United States could reduce the number of young people entering the medical profession, leading to a doctor shortage.

A right to health care could cause people to overuse health care resources. When people are provided with universal health care and are not directly responsible for the costs of medical services, they may utilize more health resources than necessary, a phenomenon known as “moral hazard.” According to the Brookings Institution, just before Medicaid went into effect in 1964, people living below the poverty line saw physicians 20% less often than those who were not in poverty. But by 1975, people living in poverty who were placed on Medicaid saw physicians 18% more often than people who were not on Medicaid. A Jan. 2014 study published in Science found that of 10,000 uninsured Portland, Oregon residents who gained access to Medicaid, 40% made more visits to emergency rooms, even though they, like all US residents, already had guaranteed access to emergency treatment under federal law. Since Medicaid provides a right to health care for low-income individuals, expanding this right to the full US population could worsen the problem of overusing health care resources.

The majority of Americans do not believe there should be a right to health care. According to a 2013 Gallup poll, 56% of Americans do not believe that it is the “responsibility of the federal government to make sure all Americans have health care coverage.” In 2012, Gallup found that 54% of Americans opposed the idea of federally-financed universal health coverage.

People should pay for their own health care, not have it given to them by the government. Under a single-payer system, the right to health care is paid for through taxes, and people who work hard and pay those taxes are forced to subsidize health care for those who are not employed. In the United States, people already have a right to purchase health care, but they should never have a right to receive health care free of charge. Health care is a service that should be paid for, not a right.

Your Childs Education

Standard

History2I have to tell you, right up front that this post is strictly a commentary on my part. I belong to a Historical Fiction group on LinkedIn and yesterday during a history discussion the direction of the conversation turned and my mouth hit the floor (so to speak). It seems that during my absence from the educational system for myself and my children the system has taken a giant leap backwards.History3

I was not aware that history is no longer taught in the schools as it once was. I could not get my mind wrapped around that thought. How could our future not be taught about the past of our country and of the world? And if they are taught it is skewed.
History
I am going to be posting the statements made by the people of the group. That way you can read and make up your own mind about how HISTORY should be in our educational system.

Carole Schutter
Owner, Carole Whang Schutter
I was talking to my neighbor and her daughter, a 14 year old honor roll student. She told me something shocking. They never discuss or learn about 9/11, they are not allowed to bring up the subject of terrorists or discuss terrorism, and they learn almost no history. I’m shocked. History was one of my favorite subjects. As I watched “Waters World” on Fox, something I’ve only done a few times, he went around asking a bunch of 20-something-year olds easy questions like, “Do you know who George Washington is? Who did we fight in the Revolution and the Civil War? (most people said France) Who bombed Pearl Harbor? (Most people said China, one even said Russia) He asked most of them if they went to college (yes for some)-the older people fared better. When my ex-husband dated 20 something year olds (he was in his 50’s) after our divorce and admitted he he was getting tired of dating girls who had no idea who the Kennedy’s were. As lovers of history, this is shocking to me. Is this what is happening? I have 30-something year old kids & no grandchildren & I made my sons read history books-which, btw, they liked. They weren’t taught as much history as I was taught but according to my neighbor’s daughter they are taught practically nothing. Just interested in knowing what’s going on in our schools.

Christine Gibbs commented on a discussion in Historical Fiction.

I was talking to my neighbor and her daughter, a 14 year old honor roll student. She told me something shocking. They never discuss or learn about 9/11, they are not allowed to bring up the subject of terrorists or discuss terrorism, and they learn almost no history. I’m shocked. History was one of my favorite subjects. As I watched “Waters World” on Fox, something I’ve only done a few times, he went around asking a bunch of 20-something-year olds easy questions like, “Do you know who George Washington is? Who did we fight in the Revolution and the Civil War? (most people said France) Who bombed Pearl Harbor? (Most people said China, one even said Russia) He asked most of them if they went to college (yes for some)-the older people fared better. When my ex-husband dated 20 something year olds (he was in his 50’s) after our divorce and admitted he he was getting tired of dating girls who had no idea who the Kennedy’s were. As lovers of history, this is shocking to me. Is this what is happening? I have 30-something year old kids & no grandchildren & I made my sons read history books-which, btw, they liked. They weren’t taught as much history as I was taught but according to my neighbor’s daughter they are taught practically nothing. Just interested in knowing what’s going on in our schools.

Lu Ann Worley
Book Review and Marketing

I know a wonderful History teacher who took an early retirement because there is no real history in the new history books…He refused to teach this farce of a history curriculum. These books were presented during the Clinton administration. Tax dollars were withheld from any school not agreeing to the new History & English books (In the English books the students only have to look up the answers to two out of seven questions at the end of a chapter. Basically, the students do not have to search for answers and learn to think for themselves- many students did not even look up the two questions…many didn’t even read the chapters!)
We are definitely in a “Dumb down America” that most parents are not even aware of because of the way it is presented to them. history4

ART HENDRICKSON
WRITER OF FICTION AND COMEDY

On the morning of 9/11, I was teaching in a Bakersfield, Ca school. When news of the first tower invasion was relayed to me by another teacher, I immediately switched on the TV and found a channel covering the event. What a great learning experience for my kids. The TV was on for about five minutes when the principal entered the room and demanded that the set be turned off and kept off and for us to get back on curriculum. Seriously? I was dumbfounded. How could she (later I found that it was a district ultimatum) deny observing history in the making. She did and I made formal protest as did some students in other classes. The district backtracked in the coming days and even blamed the teachers. It was their choice to watch or not watch or so they said. I wrote a editorial letter of response to the district whitewash and was promptly admonished…with no union backing. I retired the following year when even more restrictions were placed on the teaching of history in the Bakersfield Middle schools.

M.N. Stroh
Freelance Writer with Her View from Home

Sadly, these facts are all too common. History was barely taught in my school. My last high school class covering American history was a joke. The teacher didn’t even teach from the books. Lessons were totally on his lectures of HIS perception of history. The downgrading of history and education in general is one of the prime reasons that I homeschool my children.

Now that you have read a few of the statements made, how do you feel about it? I think a big disservice is being done to the children of this country and that is very sad. How can are children really understand what and why things have happened the way it has if they are not taught in our educational system.

Birth Control

Standard

birthcontrol Sen. Mike Lee: Women Largely Use Birth Control Recreationally That headline caught my attention and when I read the article about what this Senator said I was a little in-sensed. To me that statement told me he was dumber than a “box of rocks” when it comes to women’s issues. I have to say this blog is my opinion being voiced but I guess you could tell that from the first two sentenses. I am old enough now I do not have to worry about birth control anymore, but it is something that affects every female in this country at one time or another. Whether they use it or not is their choice and that choice has remained intact. What hasn’t remained thanks to the Supreme Court ruling is the accessibility of that control.

Supreme Court Hobby Lobby has posted an article stating they did not want to force their beliefs on others but that is exactly what they have done. Abortion is one thing but assessable birth control is another. When people force their way onto everyone it usually causes a rebound action sooner or later. I know that companies that have to pay for birth control are worried about their bottom line. But what do you think is going to happen with the woman who can’t afford the cost of birth control. There will be unwanted pregnancies, illegal abortions conducted in the dirty dark rooms as they were done in the past. We have put a lot of money into the insurance companies that deny us the medications we need because of their cost and now the Supreme Court has given some companies the right to deny coverage if they have religious objections. If that is not forcing employees to follow your belief, I don’t know what else it will be.

birthcontrol2I am a middle aged female that has worked with the public most of my adult life. I have watched the poor suffer due to lack of medical care. Our medical system is broken and has been for many years. Not everyone gets the care they need. I feel the Birth Control issue was brought about by politics and I for one am sick of it. People should be our concern not Democrats or Republicans.

Thank you for reading this. I felt I needed to voice my opinion. This is a very bad situation that can lead to more bad situations. I hope God has mercy on this country because right now our future doesn’t look to bright.

Passover, Good Friday and the First Blood Moon

Standard

red moon
((Reuters file photo))

“I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn—both men and animals—and I will bring judgment on all. … I am the Lord. The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt” (Ex. 12:12-13).

“Then Moses said … ‘Go … slaughter the Passover lamb. Take a bunch of hyssop, dip it into the blood in the basin and put some of the blood on the top and on both sides of the doorframe. … When the Lord goes through the land to strike down the Egyptians, he will see the blood on the top and sides of the doorframe and will pass over that doorway, and he will not permit the destroyer to enter your houses and strike you down’” (vv. 21-23).

“Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor. 5:7).

“The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Joel 2:31).

What could Passover, Good Friday and the first lunar eclipse of 2014 have in common? Think about it with me.

Passover began at sundown Monday. It is a time set aside by God’s people to remember their deliverance from bondage in Egypt. Other than creation and the resurrection of Jesus Christ, there has never been a more dramatic demonstration of God’s power than the event we refer to as the Exodus.

Passover remembers the time when the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt. When Pharaoh defied God’s command to let His people go, his mind had to be changed. So God sent to Egypt a series of plagues one at a time, each giving Pharaoh opportunity to repent of his defiance: the water turned to blood; then frogs, gnats, and flies covered the land, followed by the death of the livestock, boils on men and animals, hail, locusts, and darkness. When Pharaoh hardened his heart against God and refused to let God’s people go, the final plague was sent. And it was the worst.

At midnight, God executed His final judgment on Egypt. The angel of death went throughout the land and struck down all the firstborn. From Pharaoh on his throne to the prisoner in the dungeon to the livestock in the barn, the firstborn died. The only ones saved from His judgment were those who placed the blood of a lamb on the doorposts of their homes and remained inside, Israelite and Egyptian alike. As a result, Pharaoh repented of his resistance and let God’s people go.

But Passover is not only a remembrance of the power of God to save His people from judgment and to set them free from bondage. It is also a beautiful prophetic picture of another event that will be celebrated this week.

Good Friday is a sacred, holy day that commemorates an event that took place 2,000 years ago when Jesus Christ was not just crucified but was sacrificed as God’s Lamb on the actual day of Passover. When you and I apply by faith the blood of Jesus shed on the cross to our own hearts and lives, then the judgment of God for our sin passes over us, and we are not only saved from the penalty of sin but saved from the power of sin. We are set free from spiritual bondage.

On this year’s Passover, in a unique way, God seems to be putting a sign of His blood on the doorposts of the heavens. Because on that very day, the moon was to turn to “blood” as it entered into a total lunar eclipse. Could God be warning Planet Earth that judgment is coming and giving us opportunity to repent before it does? Could God be reminding you and me that the only salvation from His judgment is to take refuge under the blood of the Lamb?

I can’t answer those questions, but I do know one thing. I want to make sure that I have been to the cross, repented of my sin and rebellion against God, and claimed the blood of Jesus as my covering. I want to make sure I am safe—saved from God’s judgment whenever it does come, whether it comes this year on earth or at death, when I step into eternity and face a holy God.

This Good Friday, would you thank God for the blood of Jesus by making sure you have applied it to the doorposts of your heart and life?

Anne Graham Lotz, founder of AnGeL ministries, has proclaimed God’s Word worldwide for more than 30 years. Her newest book, Wounded by God’s People, is available at AnneGrahamLotz.com.

Is It a Government Conspiracy?

Standard

Meriwether Lewis

I watched a television program last night that totally fascinated me. It was about Meriwether Lewis. Those of you who are not familiar with him, I will tell you a little about his background. He was born on August 18, 1774 in Charlottesville, Virginia. He became a soldier, served under William Clark who he later picked to be co-charge for the great exploration of the west, authorized by Thomas Jefferson.  Meriwether started out as the personal secretary to President Jefferson, but Jefferson gave him another job to explore the Louisana Purchase and  westward.

President Jefferson also gave them a mandate to see if there were signs of Welch occupancy in the west. Since Lewis had served under William Clark, they knew each other well. The two gathered their supplies and other men and left for the unknown in May 1804.

Meriwether Lewis kept journals of everything he saw during his mission. He retured in May 1806.  Documentation along with drawings showed President Jefferson what was seen on the journey.

Three years after returning home, Meriwether was going back to Washington DC with his Journals  He was staying at an Inn on the Natchez Trace. The Trace was a well used 440 mile trail from Mississippi to Tennessee.  At the Inn on October 12, 1809, a couple of gun shots were heard and Meriwether Lewis was found dead. He had one shot in the abdomen and one through the head, with blew part of the skull off exposing the brain. It was ruled as a suicide.

Since that time there has been a theory that the United States Government had him killed because he had found something during the expedition that would threaten the United States right to the lands west of the Mississippi. Such as the Welch having been there before which would give England the right to the land.

Pages had been torn from his journal and were never seen again. Lewis was a Mason and had his apron in his pocket. When they removed it, it was blood spattered. The apron is on display in Montana. Blood samples were taken and it has been shown that it came from two different men and not Meriwether Lewis.

I think it’s fascinating to know that even back when the country was new that a National Hero could have been killed because of knowledge he had that could harm the government. It’s something we will never know for sure but does make for a good story.

Do You Do It, When Asked?

Standard

cellphoneI was surprised when I heard the statistics of those who don’t. Being one of those people who usually follow the rules, I turned off my electronics before I boarded a plane. It seems the FFA is possibly going to lighten up a bit on their rules, but should they.

Electromagnetic waves put off by passengers electronics devices could interfere with an aircraft’s electronic controls. This would be things as the GPS navigation system. Let’s see now we’re on the plane and have just taken off and we are headed for New York. You look around and everyone is either talking on the phone or playing games on their ipad, ect. You get the idea. We are in the air a couple of hours and the captain announces overhead that we have to turn around because we have been flying towards Spokane Washington and something must have happened to the GPS system. Since this is my story just ignore the fact that the tower should have contacted them long before they discovered they were headed the wrong direction. So since everyone was late they missed their connecting flights.

Dozens of complaints are filed every year by commercial pilots because their instruments went haywire. After they asked the customers to check their electronics to be sure they were off, the problem cleared up. In 1993 the FFA put the ruling in place that the plane had to be above 10,000 feet before any electronic gadgets are turned on. Do you know why it’s 10,000 feet? The flight crew has enough time to react to the circumstances and possibly save our life.

A recent survey conducted showed 40% of passengers with electronics do not bother to turn them off. That’s only 10% less than half thumb their noses at the rules. I find that rather alarming.

Right now there are punishments in place for those who are caught.  Alec Baldwin was kicked off an American Airlines flight because he refused multiple times to stop playing a game on his Smartphone.  Last year there was about thirty police cars surrounding a plane at La Guardia Airport. Something really bad had happened. A man refused to turn off his cell phone during taxiing, so he was arrested. A Saudi Arabian passenger who flouted the cellphone ban in 2001 received seventy lases. “Ouch”

As I said in the beginning of this piece do we really want them to change the rules. Do you want to talk on the phone more and possibly risk your life. Something to think about.

It’s Over, Sort Of

Standard
Official photographic portrait of US President...

Official photographic portrait of US President Barack Obama (born 4 August 1961; assumed office 20 January 2009) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Here it is the day after one of the worst election campaigns that I have witnessed since I became old enough to actually pay attention to the television. Thankfully it is finally over and we have put our country in the hands of the President for a second term. There has been a lot of faith placed in him that he will continue to bring this country forward out of the quagmire we’ve been in for far to long.

He has a big job to do and I wouldn’t want to change places with him for anything in this world. It’s an extremely thankless position with nice perks and a place to live.  He is essentially the fall guy for both parties. As a Christian I have to place him and this country in the hands of God with prayer to back him up. That prayer is for him to do what needs to be done here at home and abroad.

I would encourage each Christian and other God-fearing faiths to pray. The biggest thing for me right now is Israel. I spent this past weekend at a conference that explained that Israel does not belong to the people but to God and he does not want his land divided.  Any country that goes against Israel and helps to divide the land will be judged by God. From my understanding both President Obama and Gov. Romney both want Israel divided in two for the cause of peace.

The other thing which was said about Israel is they will be in war with Iran in the first part of this next year. They were waiting to see the outcome of this election before deciding on a date. That’s another pressure put on the USA. The President said during the debates he had Israel’s back, which if this country wants to stay on the good side of God is a good thing. The problem is a lot of suffering is going to take place.

I know I don’t usually blog about politics or religion, but I felt I had to do this. Please pray for our country.

Shirley

Let’s talk Obama Care

Standard
Barack Obama at the University of Nevada, Las ...

Image via Wikipedia

This blog is a combination of a couple I posted back in March when the Supreme court was making their decision. I thought it was timely to repost it. I have edited a couple of things.

As a retired RN who has worked in many areas of health care I have seen and experienced our broken health care system.  I have seen and experienced waiting in an emergency room for hours because it is being used like a clinic because lower-income people can’t afford medical care for themselves or their children.

I feel we are being held hostage by the insurance companies who can dictate what our doctors can and can’t do.  Since they have to control their costs and make money, people are denied treatments that can save their life.  I feel every citizen in this country is entitled to medical care and I think the changes that will and have been started by Obama Care is a  good thing.  Why is it wrong for people to help buy insurance in a government-run program?  The citizens of this country have been paying for all of the care given to the poor to start with.  I feel in the long run this can save us money.  I can’t see a problem with them getting supplemented insurance at all. Obama Care will also help decrease the Medicare fraud that is perpetuated by the system in place now.  Wouldn’t that save us a vast amount of money?

I for one applaud the president for taking the initiative to change our health care system.  It is something that should’ve been done long ago.  Politics in this country tries to portray this plan as bad or good.  As I said, it is a new start.  I am not afraid of a new beginning with health care but I know many people are.

I am attaching a Bill Moyer’s video talking about medical lobbyist in Washington. It explains why so much propaganda is spread about anything affecting medicine or drugs.

http://youtu.be/GsIcS7egnyw

I have stated before on this blog that I think the healthcare program is a good thing for the people of this country.  With the insurance company‘s running the doctors and hospitals a lot of people are not getting the care they should be getting. We are already paying out the wazoo for the uninsured to receive care  with the high costs of medical care and deaths that could have been prevented.  If the mandatory insurance makes people get insurance who would otherwise just think they can use the ER as an Emergency Room with no thought to how they are tying up the system or the cost to all of us.  I think it is a good thing to make everyone responsible for something that might help reshape our medical and insurance system. It is something everyone uses at one time or another.

I do not think only the rich should be entitled to medical procedures which can save and improve lives.  As an RN I am not in favor of prolonging life just because it can be.  A life needs quality, not just quantity. I think this will give a good start to equal access.

I know how I want this election to go, but I also know it’s in God’s hands.  As an American and a Christian I will live with the final outcome. Either way it will be tough on all of us.

That’s my two-cents once again on healthcare.  Let me know what you think and why you feel the way you do. I look forward to hearing from you.  A healthy discussion is always good.