ourinter - Our Choice-Opportunity vs Troubled Times

	OurInternetBusiness.info
	'Permission Based' Archives & BackOffice

Our Choice-Opportunity vs Troubled Times

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Our Choice - Will It Be Troubled Times or Opportunity

Edited Exchange with 'Another Comment(or)' on my Nephew's Blog (inserted 03-05-08):

....................

xxxx: It is, I believe, good that 'The Real xxxx' has stood up to take accountability for his 'Luke Warm' Philosophies: I gladly place your response next to mine for the reader to judge them in their totality.

"Another comment:

“To the author of the baseless rot spewed about ‘...Libertarians, Feminists, and Homosexuals’ in ‘A Continuing thread...;’ as a confirmed independent, my immediate intense reaction to your lashing out at these groups and dogmatic description of your God, was as visceral as you put your position. But, I waited until it passed to offer this more reasoned response. “Unfortunately, it appears that you are ignorant of Libertarianism and perhaps Christianity as well. If you knew enough about what is a Libertarian, you would not be such a critic or would at least criticize from a position of knowledge. Anarchy is as far from the base as you are from the historic truth. Last time I looked, Libertarians do not run the country or even comprise any position of power over people. There are plenty of accurate websites available to teach you about what is a Libertarian. “If you knew enough about your own religion, you would remember that three of the great religions in the world all stem from the God of Abraham. Jews, Christians, and Muslims all hold the prophet Abraham in high esteem. There are accurate websites devoted to this topic as well you can reference. In effect, Jesus is the foundation for Christianity, Mohammed is the foundation for Islam, and Abraham is the foundation of all three. It is hard to accept your argument of a disconnected and isolated God since Jesus was a Jew. This great country of these United States of America survives based upon the Judeo-Christian tradition, not the Christian tradition you espouse. As the USA matures as a nation, we are expanding that tradition to be more inclusive into a wider base of religious tolerance and freedom in operation, not just in words. To dig in your heels and show your bias against particular groups does you and all Americans, whether Christian or not, a disservice, not to mention the uneasiness your position brings to Jews and Muslims alike given their strong connection to Abraham. “Being a Marine, I find your position impossible to defend with logic, but would always defend it with my life since that is the point of freedom and champions of it. My youngest son is doing so today with the Marines in harms way. He's not fighting just so you can stereotype particular Americans with whom you disagree or dislike. He does so for all of us just like all Marines before him and with him. If you wish to continue to be a judge and critic, learn all you can about what it is you wish to criticize and make certain you understand your own history as well. If you want us to listen to you whether we agree or not, develop a credible argument. Otherwise, pipe down or risk being typecast as an intolerant xenophobic zealot. Besides, screams from the manifestly intolerant make me deaf.”

-----Original Message-----

From: xxx [mailto:xxxx@xxxxx.com]

Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 6:37 AM

To: xxxx@xxxxx.com

Subject: Update no.xxxxx

To me, an interesting extension of my comments is to Google 'Ann Coulter', Attorney and Author, and go to, among her other material, her treatise, 'You Tube - Ann Coulter wants Jews "To Be Perfected". This interview reveals an example of the hostility, in fact hatred, that is I believe typical, that the non-Christian have for Christians. I believe it is a given that most references to Christianity do in fact mean Judeo-Christian. It is also, I believe, true that half-truths invariable are absolute total lies advanced with purpose of deceiving the Liar's audience. It is, again, blatantly absurd to insist that any non-Christian worships the God of Jesus Christ. It is, I believe, evident that the above speaker is in fact the 'intolerant xenophobic zealot' who seeks to ridicule into silence those with views opposing his own. Fortunately, in the United States, we all, Christian and non-Christian alike by law have the freedom, if we choose to exercise it, to free speech. I do believe that no Jew or Muslim or other non-Christian anywhere in the world has a legitimate basis for feeling any physical threat from me, but equally obvious is that many if not most of them 'violently' oppose my view and existence. It is my choice is "To Live For My GOD, the GOD of Jesus Christ"; but, on-the-other-hand, I have no wish for or fear of a premature death. Again, with regard to the above speaker, he prior to his response, had access to my full treatment of the subjects at hand: his willful blindness, deafness and intolerance are of his own doing.

From: xxx Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 3:56 PM

To: Herman Osborne

Subject: RE: Update no xxx

Importance: High

Herman,

Thank you for your explanation . . . understood and accepted.

I do not share your view of General Pace's retirement. First, I am a Marine, and I was and still am quite proud that General Pace was the first Marine to be Chairman. However, Peter demise was not brought about by "Libertarianisms, Feminism and Homosexuality." His fate came at his hand.

The American military has a long and noble history of being apolitical . . . at least in principle. Peter crossed the line. He made the choice. He bore the consequences. Like all American citizens, Peter is entitled to his opinions; unfortunately, in uniform, he is not entitled to express them.

The beauty of a free Republic . . . you have every right to profess your faith and religion; likewise, I have every right to leave my faith and religion between me and God.

As always, "that's just my opinion, but I could be wrong." Cheers, xxx

xxx; It appears to me that we (I, and perhaps also you, and for that matter, virtually everyone) have a tendency to isolate statements of others out of the total context from which they are drawn or spoken, To put down or diminish those opposing our point of view and to Emphasis our own point of view.

What you refer to as my Generalizations ignores my own life experiences I cited in the text below your conclusion, which I do believe legitimately support my own conclusions; and my taking offense to your presumption of being sorry for me is that you dismiss that validity of my own experiences.

Similarly, in our most recent exchange, you presume that my reference to conversions relates to Theological conversion (Saving Souls). On the contrary, like you I am not trained in Theology or Ministry, and, likewise, make no claims in that regard; I do not "Minister' or 'Save Souls' either. But I have no hesitancy to reveal my faith, and in fact take great comfort when others tell me they observe my faith in my walk.

Rather my reference is to conversions was not referring to Theological, but to career achievement or advancements based on our

parentage-upbringing, schooling, training, job and Life experiences. (In the spirit of: To Whom Much Is Given, Much Is Expected.)

I was tremendously angry at the time I dropped out of college and the Regular Naval Reserve Officers (NROTC) program at Oregon State College, and enlisted for naval flight training. I was tremendously proud of my two brothers already serving in the Marine Corps in Korean service at that time (my youngest brother also enlisted and served his tour with The Marine Corps); and in fact my time in the service has proven to be the most valued years of my life.

I take comfort in observing the character and achievements of our Marine Corps General Pace, who was forced into retirement from his position of Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs of Staff. I consider that to have been a most

disgraceful event brought on by our national immorality, and a warning of horrible times to come. I conclude that this travesty against human decency which, again, I believe has been brought on by the Morally Decadent and Diseased Multi-headed Monster of Libertarianisms, Feminism and Homosexuality. My former WebPages presenting 'My Personal Philosophy', My statement titled 'Opportunity vs Troubled Times', and my, incomplete, Personal Auto-Biography pages are attached.

Again, I should have been more complete in my expressions: One of my adopted 'Mentors' is the late Dr. J. Vernon McGee of 'Thru The Bible

Radio', whose ministry continues both on worldwide radio and on the internet at www.TTB.org <http://www.ttb.org/> . I subscribe to his philosophy that as a lifelong minister, he felt his calling was not to convert or 'Harvest' any soul, but was solely to preach the word of GOD; that GOD reserves the 'Harvest' of Souls to HIM-self. (McGee

passed away in the late 1980's, I believe he was 86. As a young man, after a brief start as a bank trainee, he then entered the ministry;

he retired from the pulpit at 65, when he started his radio ministry which he literally continued to his passing.) His entire ministry is

available on CD's for less than you spend on one dinner out with your life Partner.)

So, I Our Uncle Phil (and Aunt Eunice) is the only one of my father's siblings who I have any recollection of professing a Christian faith; though without exception they all reflected Strong and Decent Moral values as have most but not all of my cousins. My Dad's siblings all demonstrated a Great Love and Concern for my

father, and for me and my siblings which I was always aware of and deeply appreciated.

-----Original Message-----

From: xxxx [mailto:xxxxxxxx.com]

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 2:37 PM

To: Herman Osborne

Subject: RE: Update no.xxxxx

xxxxeMail: xxxxxxx.com

Blog: <http://xxxxxxxxxxx.blogspot.com/>

Website: <http://www.xxxxxx.com>

Long journeys begin with small steps

xxxxx; It appears to me that we (I, and perhaps also you, and for that matter, virtually everyone) have a tendency to isolate statements of others out of the total context from which they are drawn or spoken, to put down or diminish those opposing our point of view and to emphasis our own point of view. What you refer to as my generalizations ignores my own life experiences I cited in the text below your conclusion, which I do believe legitimately support my own conclusions; and my taking offense to your presumption of being sorry for me is that you dismiss that validity of my own experiences.

Similarly, in our most recent exchange, you presume that my reference to conversions relates to Theological conversion (Saving Souls). On the contrary, like you I am not trained in Theology or Ministry, and, likewise, make no claims in that regard; I do not “Minister’ or ‘Save Souls’ either. But I have no hesitancy to reveal my faith, and in fact take great comfort when others tell me they observe my faith in my walk.

Rather my reference is to conversions was not referring to Theological, but to career achievement or advancements based on our parentage-upbringing, schooling, training, job and Life experiences. (In the spirit of: To Whom Much Is Given, Much Is Expected.) I was tremendously angry at the time I dropped out of college and the Regular Naval Reserve Officers (NROTC) program at Oregon State College, and enlisted for naval flight training. I was tremendously proud of my two brothers already serving in the Marine Corps in Korean service at that time (my youngest brother also enlisted and served his tour with The Marine Corps); and in fact my time in the service has proven to be the most valued years of my life. I take comfort in observing the character and achievements of our Marine Corps General Pace, who was forced into retirement from his position of Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs of Staff. I consider that to have been a most disgraceful event brought on by our national immorality, and a warning of horrible times to come. I conclude that this travesty against human decency which, again, I believe has been brought on by the Morally Decadent and Diseased Multi-headed Monster of Libertarianisms, Feminism and Homosexuality. My former WebPages presenting ‘My Personal Philosophy’, My statement titled ‘Opportunity vs Troubled Times’, and my, incomplete, Personal Auto-Biography pages are attached.

Again, I should have been more complete in my expressions: One of my adopted ‘Mentors’ is the late Dr. J. Vernon McGee of ‘Thru The Bible Radio’, whose ministry continues both on worldwide radio and on the internet at www.TTB.org. I subscribe to his philosophy that as a lifelong minister, he felt his calling was not to convert or ‘Harvest’ any soul, but was solely to preach the word of GOD; that GOD reserves the ‘Harvest’ of Souls to HIM-self. (McGee passed away in the late 1980’s, I believe he was 86. As a young man, after a brief start as a bank trainee, he then entered the ministry; he retired from the pulpit at 65, when he started his radio ministry which he literally continued to his passing.) His entire ministry is available on CD’s for less than you spend on one dinner out with your life Partner.) So, I Our Uncle Phil (and Aunt Eunice) is the only one of my father’s siblings who I have any recollection of professing a Christian faith; though without exception they all reflected Strong and Decent Moral values as have most but not all of my cousins. My Dad’s siblings all demonstrated a Great Love and Concern for my father, and for me and my siblings which I was always aware of and deeply appreciated.

-----Original Message-----

From: cap [mailto:xxxxxxxxx.com]

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 2:37 PM

To: Herman Osborne

Subject: RE: Update no.xxxxx

Importance: High

Herman,

First, thank you for taking the time to put your thoughts ‘down on the page’ so to speak. Most folks just don’t take the time.

Second, I will ask my Mom ab the Osborne genealogy. I’ll try to have something back in a couple of days, if there is anything to be had.

Now, onto your other comments . . .

There are a few elements of my character that some know and perhaps most do not know. My faith is between me and God; I see no benefit to publicly professing my faith – some may be repulsed; some may find a faux-affinity. I enjoy the middle ground of moderation and I like to say I am all religions and all political parties; I see goodness in each.

It is unfortunate you found offense in my introductory statement – the fault is entirely mine. Sometimes I try to be succinct when a few more words would have been illuminating. Yes, I agree; freedom without constraints can be and often does degenerate to anarchy. I hope you can see in my words that I am not an anarchist. Where I should have added a few more words was ‘within the private domain.’ We have a long history of trying to use the law to dictate private behavior going back to the Comstock Act of 1873, the 18th Amendment, Roosevelt’s New Deal, and the worst of the worst, the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. And yes, there are Libertarian aspects to my argument. I have long espoused smaller, less intrusive government; if that is a sin, then I am a sinner. We have allowed government to subsumed far too many of the responsibilities vested in parents and individuals, and we have far too many citizens who are perfectly content having the government make their decisions for them. I resent the government’s intrusion upon my private life, and I would hope other citizens feel as I do.

I shall take umbrage with the equating of Libertarianism with anarchy, with our society being selfish and self-centered, and especially with the disparagement of feminists and homosexuals. For the record, I emphatically do NOT agree that femnists and homosexuals are morally decadent or have diseased values; in fact, I respectfully submit they possess some of the most noble of human qualities. Herein lies a focused argument for debate. A goodly portion of all those elements are private aspects of an individual that have absolutely nothing to do with their public conduct, performance or contribution. It is in this arena I said what I did at the opening of last week’s Update. I have no fear, no remorse, no hesitancy toward any citizen’s condemnation of my private character; that is their choice; I freely choose to let my public conduct be my testament. If people choose to judge me by some shallow, malevolent label born of their perception of what they do not know, then I doubt they will have any meaningful place in my life. I am not so easily summarized by such labels. As I have stated many times, everyone is entitled to their bigotry. Where such condemnation crosses my line of tolerance comes when someone or group of someone’s seek to produce a law dictating my private conduct and using the full weight of the State to enforce it. That is where my embrace of Libertarian principles begins. The point in my opening remark remains that the majority who may find contentment in projecting their moral values into the private lives of other citizen should find no comfort in such abuse, for one day the shoe may be on the other foot.

Re: God. You present the Christian dictum admirably. It is this parochialism of organized religion that has caused such incalculable destruction in human history. This factional parochialism rejects all other religions by creating a singular possessiveness toward God and concomitant jealousy toward all infidels, and provides the combustibles and ignition for great wars. I see God in a far larger context in that all religions worship the same God, as there is only one true God; the differences rest in the names by which we refer to God and the trivial trappings, incantations and rituals by which we mere mortal humans find meaning in our worship of God’s greatness. I am not a theologian and certainly no expert, but I am a sufficient lay student of religion to recognize the commonality among all religions. If anyone chooses to think less of me for my unwillingness for publicly profess my faith, then that is their choice entirely. I am what I am, and that’s all that I am. God knows my faith, and that is all that counts. I respect and do not think less of any person regardless of their faith. Likewise, their faith is between them and God; I care not.

Herman, I do not recall ever saying that I feel sorry for you; that is a broadly uncharacteristic statement for me to make. So, if I gave you that impression or heaven forbid I ever said such a condescending thing, I most humbly apologize.

As I said earlier, I am not a theologian or ordained cleric in any form. I am not in the business of saving souls. There are others far more qualified for such lofty work than me. I am a man of thought, of ideas, and of debate. I question anything and everything with one purpose – to learn. I choose to share my thoughts and opinions as a respectable number have stated some benefit to their lives. I would like to think my thoughts have given comfort to some, but I shall make no such foolish claim. So, if you have saved one soul, then you are an order of magnitude beyond me.

There are very few contributions I find of no value in responding. My response serves as my statement of worthiness. No worries there. Feel free to comment as you wish, as always. Cheers, xxxxx

From: xxxxxxxxx.com [mailto:xxxxxxx.com]

Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 4:56 PM

To: Herman Osborne

Subject: RE: RE: Update no.xxxxxx

Herman,

Yes, we can respectfully disagree on many things . . . that’s the beauty of freedom and an active democratic republic.

It sounds like y’ve had a hard life, and if so, for that I am sorry. I think I’ve lived a good life and I know the Good Lord has watched over me. I have been most fortunate.

Just one quick note . . . where you will find my disagreement is in your generalizations . . . religions, races, guns, whatnot, do not do bad things . . . individual people do. So, I shall respectfully object to the characterization of Jews, of women, or whatever in general. I’ve never liked labels and categorizations; I shall not start now.

Libertarianism believes in minimalist government, and by that I mean the closer to zero the better. They believe government should stay out of people’s private lives, period, and out of their public lives to the greatest extent possible. I cannot say I embrace libertarianism, but I am much closer to that political philosophy than I am the rampant, un-checked, near cancerous Federalism of the current Republican and Democratic parties. There are many social values that go along with this political notion, but most of those are quite sensitive, volatile and not particular comfortable to discuss/debate.

Thanks again for yr cmts. Take care and enjoy.

Cheers,

xxxxxx

============================================================

From: "Herman Osborne" <hermanosborne@msn.com>

Date: 2007/05/11 Fri AM 11:29:43 CDT

To: xxxxxxxxxx.com>

Subject: RE: RE: Update no.xxxxx

xxxxx: I am comfortable with your conclusions. I have never really understood what it means to be Libertarian? For myself, for example, my brothers feel I am a Socialist: I say no; I am totally for free enterprise, but I also believe unregulated free enterprise releases the ugliest in man's nature.

This country made a jarring shift to a ruthless unregulated free enterprise when Richard Nixon broke loose from his earlier constraints, for example as Vice President under Eisenhower(?).

From that point forward the entire world economy has been dominated by a Kissinger(?=spelling) mentality with predominately Jewish control over almost all world moneyed interests. International monopolies such as BP Petroleum and Mittal Steel have been permitted to monopolize virtually all of our strategic resources and now rampantly (as was totally predictable) and ruthlessly exploit each of us as consumers.

This type of abuse was present coming in to the 1920's and early 1930's but at time was broken up and prosecuted by vigorous Government imposed restrictions against monopolies. The Nixon/Kissinger era produced a total abandonment of protection from the ravages of these newly imposed monopolies. A fellow, believe his name was Green, founder of Litton Industries, started the era of Leveraged Buyout early in the 1960's; I worked for a company by the name Of Mellonics from 1966 to January 1970 ( they were doing the computer programming for the then Air Force Manned Orbital Laboratory – That program was cancelled about October 1969 and rolled in to a NASA project - wiped out 1,000 jobs at Mellonics overnight).

About 1966 Litton using a leveraged buyout acquired Mellonics; when I joined the company there were then 110 employees. With loss of the Manned Orbital Laboratory contract, which was a subcontract under Lockheed, it was clear Litton had no interest in allowing us to regroup with some new work; and rather quickly (after my departure in January) fired (including my boss who was one of) the four directors and the company founder and President, Frank Druding, and soon sold their interest in the remains to CDC, a Computer Manufacturing organization: we had been using IBM computers, including the 360 series and a companion computer by CDC etc. (Frank Druding, I understand did receive a sweet heart parachute deal)

Litton spiraled in to the major player in leveraged buyouts moving into steel company buyout such as LTV here in the Chicago area; and progressive after raiding their assets, each of its acquisitions were bankrupt out leaving employees out of jobs and losing virtually all of their pensions assets, and the lay stockholders with nothing. In each of these instances the senior corporate officers and Board members were first awarded mega million dollar parachutes etc; and then surprise, surprise the companies file bankruptcy. The ghosts of industrial grave yards still clutter the landscape here.

Regarding military service, I enlisted about December 27, 1952 and was released on December 10, 1959; I resigned my reserve commission believe it was January 1961, anyway as soon as I had completed my required 8-year combined active and reserve time. Other than a few Waves and Wacs and nurses I was not aware of any women in flight operations at that time. I share your observation, that I have worked for and with some very competent women who were always paid and treated at least as good as their male counterparts. There was never any discrimination against women that I was able to discern, and in fact they were always given a preferential advantage over their male counter parts.

As noted earlier, I was subject to discrimination and unfair treatment, just the reverse of what you claim to be the case. The same applies with respect to race. My male manager, for five years at Sylvania EDL did live with another man; he was an exceptionally competent and good manager and related exceptionally well with every one: his domestic position was never visible to us on or off the job. He was released about 6 months before I was in what was presented as layoffs due to lack of contract work; we worked under a military contract doing Electronic Defense R & D. Within two weeks of that layoff I was on another job with a significant increase in salary, so that was fortunate for me.

My last approximately 15 months of active duty I was a Command Pilot on the White House Helicopter Detachment; I was on detached duty from HMX-1 at MCAS Quantico, but flew out of NAS Annacostia, just across the Potomac River from Washington National, and just North of Bolling Air Force Base.

On that assignment I was on duty for 24-hour shifts and then off-duty for 48-hours; a neighbor lady who knew Mortimer Taube, head of Documentation, Inc., introduced me to him, and I was hired as a literature searcher on a contract he had with the U.S. Navy doing R&D for advance instrumentation for submarines and aircraft. A part of my job was to sit in on daily lunches at a nearby restaurant where most of the principals and the technical staff would brainstorm on just about every and any subject.

(All of the principals were Jewish). The conversations ranged from esoteric to mundane, but, for me were totally enlightening and exciting.

One of the principals was and elderly Jewish man who was or had been a design engineer for General Motors, and in the mid-1930's and took a year sabbatical to go to Germany where he designed the Volkswagen air cooled engine for Hitler; which he was very proud of. Later I watched Discovery Channel presentations showing and discussing the Jewish principal designers of Hitler's Atomic Bomb project during a time when the Holocaust was ongoing. I was taken aback by the pride the Jews had/perhaps have of applying their expertise to Hitler's devilish works.

The principals were constantly pushing me to resign and work full time for them. After my release from active duty and going full-time I received the classic and ruthless Jewish treatment on my pay; It ended up being barely half of what they had promised, with the stipulation that they would welcome my continuing to work there, but that they would not honor their prior commitment to me. I thoroughly enjoyed the work and associations there, but was simply too offended by the etc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Herman Osborne [mailto:hermanosborne@msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 11:06 PM
To: 'x
Subject: RE: Update no.x
Importance: High

-----Original Message-----

From: xxxx [mailto:xxxxxxxx.com]

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 2:37 PM

To: Herman Osborne

Subject: RE: Update no.xxxx

Importance: High

Herman,

First, thank you for taking the time to put your thoughts ‘down on the page’ so to speak. Most folks just don’t take the time.

Second, I will ask my Mom ab the Osborne genealogy. I’ll try to have something back in a couple of days, if there is anything to be had.

Now, onto your other comments . . .

And yes, there are Libertarian aspects to my argument. I have long espoused smaller, less intrusive government; if that is a sin, then I am a sinner. We have allowed government to subsumed far too many of the responsibilities vested in parents and individuals, and we have far too many citizens who are perfectly content having the government make their decisions for them. I resent the government’s intrusion upon my private life, and I would hope other citizens feel as I do.

Herein lays a focused argument for debate. A goodly portion of all those elements are private aspects of an individual that have absolutely nothing to do with their public conduct, performance or contribution. It is in this arena I said what I did at the opening of last week’s Update. I have no fear, no remorse, no hesitancy toward any citizen’s condemnation of my private character; that is their choice; I freely choose to let my public conduct be my testament. If people choose to judge me by some shallow, malevolent label born of their perception of what they do not know, then I doubt they will have any meaningful place in my life. I am not so easily summarized by such labels. As I have stated many times, everyone is entitled to their bigotry. Where such condemnation crosses my line of tolerance comes when someone or group of someone’s seek to produce a law dictating my private conduct and using the full weight of the State to enforce it. That is where my embrace of Libertarian principles begins. The point in my opening remark remains that the majority who may find contentment in projecting their moral values into the private lives of other citizen should find no comfort in such abuse, for one day the shoe may be on the other foot.

Re: God. You present the Christian dictum admirably. It is this parochialism of organized religion that has caused such incalculable destruction in human history. This factional parochialism rejects all other religions by creating a singular possessiveness toward God and concomitant jealousy toward all infidels, and provides the combustibles and ignition for great wars. I see God in a far larger context in that all religions worship the same God, as there is only one true God; the differences rest in the names by which we refer to God and the trivial trappings, incantations and rituals by which we mere mortal humans find meaning in our worship of God’s greatness. I am not a theologian and certainly no expert, but I am a sufficient lay student of religion to recognize the commonality among all religions. If anyone chooses to think less of me for my unwillingness for publicly profess my faith, then that is their choice entirely. I am what I am, and that’s all that I am. God knows my faith and that is all that counts. I respect and do not think less of any person regardless of their faith. Likewise, their faith is between them and God; I care not.

I question anything and everything with one purpose – to learn. I choose to share my thoughts and opinions as a respectable number have stated some benefit to their lives. I would like to think my thoughts have given comfort to some, but I shall make no such foolish claim. So, if you have saved one soul, then you are an order of magnitude beyond me.

There are very few contributions I find of no value in responding. My response serves as my statement of worthiness. No worries there. Feel free to comment as you wish, as always.

Cheers,

xxxxxxxx

xxxxxx I could not disagree more with your introductory statement: I believe this is a totally irresponsible anarchistic statement.

Fortunately the founders of this nation understood and feared a pure democracy, which they had just observed destroy France. That is why they established our nation as a government by elected representatives. My observation is that an 'unregulated free enterprise system', which you appear to advocate, is a totally ruthless and destructive form of government. Any good we have in our society is the result of 'the rule of law' which is 'of the people, by the people and for the people'. I believe our nation is being severely damaged by Libertarianism, which is just another name for Anarchy: It, I believe, has created the multiheaded monster of a selfish, self-center people including and dominated by Feminists and Homosexuals with their morally decadent and diseased values into every aspect of our society.

I would also like to make two points that you ended our earlier exchange with:

First, you present a statement to the effect that: "We all worship the same God"; This I believe is absolutely not true.

My God is the God of Jesus Christ and The Holy Spirit, who commands that we place no other god before HIM. This God also instructs us that our only way to Salvation is thru prayer repenting our sins and asking for forgiveness in the name of Jesus etc.

It appears certain to me that any one not professing a faith in this Trinity does not worship the same GOD that I do. Obviously there are many gods that we may worship, including no god at all, which privilege our USA Constitution grants to each of us. This GOD of mine does not command us to acknowledge or worship him; in fact he only accepts us as his own when we act of our own FREE WILL in coming to him, and in-fact tells us that at our final day of judgment he will not hear the pleas of any who have rejected him at the conclusion of our mortal life. On the Contrary, he tells us he will hear all who repentantly come to HIM in the name of Jesus.

Secondly, xxxxx, I did and do take offense to your earlier dismissive comment about feeling sorry for me. I never have been sorry for my life. I will be 76 this coming May 13th, and have been and will remain grateful for everyday of my life. I acknowledge that I have made many huge mistakes of judgment throughout my life, and have not dealt well with many situations and opportunities that were made available to me. But sorry I am not and again I resent any assumption of sorrow on my behalf when I share my life experiences: rather I would suggest profiting from my life experiences.

I wonder, xxxxxx, if you have any appreciation for the comparative conversion rate for good you have achieved in your life versus my life. You appear to luxuriate in a boring inconclusive intellectual re-hassling of many diverse events but with virtually no net gain of position including a profession of any 'faith' you may have.

xxxx, I know I am being harsh in these observations, and ask that you try to find it in your heart to forgive me for that; I would love to hear further from you when and if and as feel so disposed.

Best wishes,

Herman, Jr.

P.S. By the way, xxxx, before she passed away, my sister, Catherine put together some auto-biographical notes and genealogy, but it is devoid of a history of my father's father's family history. Are you aware of any treatise of the Osborne family history. As a youth I recall some speculation about an Osborne family bible (book), but no comment on what may have become of it. Any observations in that regard.

-----Original Message-----

From: xxx [mailto:xxxxxxxxx.com]

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 5:36 AM

To: xxxxxxx.com

Subject: Update no.xxxx

Update from the xxxxxxxxxxxx

No.xxxx

11.2.08 - 17.2.08

Blog version: http://xxxxxxxxxxxxx.blogspot.com/

Stars and Stripes Forever

(Click on Music Title Above to Start BackGround Music - Also, See the Notes on the SideBar Audio, Video & Music Page for comments on media player options & music selections)

04/19/07 approx 10:00 PM CDT

Reference: This today’s/evenings Fox News coverage of the Virginia Tech Massacre: Earlier this evening a Grade School and High School Classmate of the shooter was interviewed. This Classmate casually recounted how the shooter was taunted on numerous events for his speech difficulties when he, the shooter, was called on to answer questions in front of the class, etc. I find it appalling how this classmate and his fellow classmates take such comfort in describing their conduct in taunting this individual, with no apparent guilt or remorse for the end results of their cruel and irresponsible conduct. I am further dismayed at the Virginia Tech students who are collectively celebrating the lives of their now deceased fellow classmates without any apparent remorse and further with no acknowledgement of their, the taunters', responsibility for the creation for this monster, the shooter. It appears to me the Fox News Team is totally missing the obvious in who and what created this monster shooter. In my web site Philosophy web page I note the History of the Khmer Rouge in the Massacres in Cambodia described by Haing Nigor in the book 'Cambodian Odyssey' which was his real life story and which was the basis of the movie 'The Killing Fields'; wherein he notes the absolute 'rage' that developed in the peoples of the Khmer Rouge who identified the Middle and Upper Class citizens, in mass, as the source or their pain. I note with concern the rapidly growing masses in our society, typified be the growing numbers of people who no longer can qualify for or afford health care, and how unconcerned the Middle Class and the Wealthy are to the plight of their less fortunate brethren. We are indeed a cruel society.

To me, it seems obvious and inevitable that social ( as well as economic/political) abuses (by the perceived privileged) yields a building rage that eventually erupts in unreasonable violence: I would also note that this rage historically builds in a person and a people who lack the intellectual and moral courage to take responsibility for their own indolence (and resulting isolation and most likely poverty) - I am not sympathetic to the shooter, but I am equally disappointed in the lack of intellectual and moral courage and honesty in the shooters' taunters, which collectively included his teachers and school staffers who permitted such taunting and isolation to continue. This is certainly not a Christian Community. O'Reilly and his guest settle for this shooter being a Psychopath: that of course is true, but the point overlooked is who created and nourished this psychopath. I think it obviously starts with his parents, but is further nourished to its inevitable conclusion by taunting classmates and indifferent (and lazy) teachers and staffers.

Comments invited..

Herman Osborne

HermanOsborne@msn.com

Saint John, Indiana 46373

10/14/04 Preface: It has dawned on me after watching the Presidential Debate last night that now dramatizes my realization of a problem I face and I suspect many if not most Americans face: That problem is placing 'UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS' or Demands, especially on our Candidates and others in Public and Military Services, and on our fellow citizens in general. I often feel that my own wife places a burden or expectation for perfection on me, that I typically respond to that "I DO NOT WALK ON WATER". No one short of our God and Lord, in my case, Jesus Christ, could possibly meet all of those expectations; I have to take refuge by thinking: "I am not perfect, Just Saved" or something to that effect. But what I do expect, though I often do not have the privilege of demanding, is that others and in particular those who hold themselves out for Public Office at least try to be TRUTHFUL AND HONEST in all their dealings in both official and personal aspects. I do allow that in the interest of both national and personal security some things must be left unsaid and that it is not always in the best interest of our country to public discuss some issues. Also, I take issue with legal constructions that command responses that unfairly invade a persons private life jeopardizing their personal or political position; for example where pleading a fifth amendment right not to respond to a matter that is truly a private matter which neither the public nor the questioner has a legal right to know or ask.

An example of my point on unrealistic expectations is when parents criticize a school board member or teacher for their performance, but yet fail to address the teacher or board personally and further fail to participate in PTA and Board meeting themselves. Similarly would be criticizing a party nominee’s position when we have failed to participate in the 'Grass Root' campaigning or meetings that lead up to the nominee's being selected. In last nights debates I realize that no one candidate can possibly meet all of my expectations and I am left with choosing the better of two alternatives (perhaps the better of two evils if I were to be negative about it). In the present case, I believe I must deal with 'SHADES OF TRUTH', and overemphasis if not outright exaggerations and on the other hand OUTRIGHT LIES and avoidance of truthful responses. I am also disturbed by a parties unwillingness to admit error; as I do believe it is an error and a flaw in basic character not to view oneself as a 'WORK-IN-PROGRESS'; I think such a display is complete ARROGANCE, and stupidity, which I do not believe we can afford in any public service or office.

10/07/04 E-Mail sent with Philosophy -06-19-03 Former Website Page as an Attachment:

For some it is 'A Time Of Opportunity'; For some these are also 'Troubling times':

The issue, I believe, centers on, and is the proper Separation of 'State' and, let's call it 'Theology': I chose to believe that the founding fathers of these 'United States' of (North) America, ultimately, had a pretty clear grasp of what they were doing when they debate and finally wrote our founding documents, The Constitution of The United States Of America, The Bill Of Rights, and other documents that constituted the written evidence of the principles of government finally adopted for our new country. Many of our founders were Christians and many were not. I do believe that Christian fundamentals were all controlling in their collective thought processes, and are, if only by inference, thoroughly imbedded within those documents.

It is I believe equally clear, that the intent of our founding fathers was for this nation to be an 'Inclusive' society and government, that would not offend peoples of responsible moral persuasion, be they Christian, non-Christian, agonistic, atheistic or any other persuasion. By inference, perhaps, I believe we are all subject to 'Universal i.e Global' rules of ethical, moral and honest conduct. I hope and believe it was intended that we apply, particularly for Christians, and many other faiths, the rules of conduct that are embodied in the 'Ten Commandments' which provides a ready made packaging of these rules of conduct.

I think it is further equally clear, that there is to be no prohibition for all citizens to practice their faith or lack of faith whatever so long as it did not deny or limit the lawful rights of others to similarly practice their beliefs; And, perhaps by inference only, there was to be no restrictions on citizens to publicly advocate for their beliefs, so long as their advocacy doesn't 'improperly' limit or threaten the rights of others.

At issue here is the open hostility and even criminalization of conduct that some, and in fact many, governments and faiths impose on their citizens and constituents, prohibiting what they refer to as procilatization (recruiting) of citizens or people to or away from their beliefs. This was discussed a few days ago on a PBS radio program, which shared statements where several people of Jewish persuasion expressed frightening rage with one of their former members who was advocating on the street for 'Jews for Christ';

Of course, we have many instance of similar explicit threats coming from the Muslim communities, many advocating and voicing death threats to those who do not conform to their beliefs.

In a recent article in the Chicago Tribune the Tribune reporter quoted several sources commenting on the 'Radio Islam' program that attributed what I believe were totally distorted and absolutely false positions to the U.S. government and others, apparently trying to build a case of persecution of the Muslim community. I personally find this article and comments to be threatening and frightening, in fact terrifying.

I believe these and other critics of our society also have a duty to do positive due diligence and inquiry into what the beliefs and feeling of Christians are rather than simply airing there hate philosophies amongst themselves on public airwaves and media.

I am attaching below my synopsis of the Tribune article which I am referring to. I am also posting an attachment to this e-mail of my former website Philosophy page.

I believe it is clear that no Democratic or Freedom loving people can tolerate any government that imbeds any theological advocacy within their government. On the one hand all Democratic and Freedom loving people must, can and I hope will always insist on their rights, as individuals (including candidates for public office while campaigning for election), to hold to and advocate for any 'responsible' 'Moral' persuasion of their choice, both, and particularly within their own homes and private places of worship, and publicly but then only in a manner that is non-threatening to the audience present at that public advocacy. In particular, I do not believe any government official should ever proffer (theological propositions), while acting in any official capacity, any theological opinions, views or edicts.

I believe that public adornment with dress and apparel unique to a particular persuasion is very quickly both threatening and offensive; and particularly when a jury of peers so views it as such, then it should become a banned practice: I believe the wearing of Unique Head dress (turbans, caps, etc.), Tunics, Robes etc. and other unique apparel, jewelry, piercings etc. fits into this area of practice which should not be accommodated. (For instance, Christ Jesus in Revelations is quite specific in admonishing against the use of any such apparel as a means of separating or distinguishing a minister within and from members of their congregation.

I believe it is a sad commentary on the practices of virtually all leaders of almost all faiths, sects and cults who none-the-less adorn themselves in a manner so as to separate themselves from lay members of their congregation as well as the public at large. Dr. J. Vernon McGee emphasizes this teaching by Christ in his reading and studies of Revelations.

Further, it is an abuse of a trust, and I think a crime, for such leaders to adorn themselves with expensive jewelry, automobiles, homes etc. paid for with money drawn from collections (which were given to further the work of their faith).

A related issue is allowing any religious non-profit or tax exempt status, frankly to any non-government entity or activity. Such exemptions and status are, I believe, a blatant violation of the concept of separation of State and Church.

Which leads to another issue: It seems that a disease of leadership appointment is to turn that appointment into a vehicle for personal power, wealth, and aggrandizement and gratification in general. This seems a universal problem, whether the leadership is as a head of government (Nations, States, Municipalities, all other units of government etc.), a church, a congregation, a corporation, a Tribal Warlord or whatever. Within the theological realm, Imam's, Rabbi's, Pope's, Bishops, Priests, Ministers, Preachers; and even within domestic house holds between spouses and partners: you name it, it is a common disease: THE ABUSE OF POWER.

It appears to me that with very few exceptions these leaders almost invariably have created their entities (Religious Denominations, Sects, Congregations, Tribes etc. to serve as a financial and social power base for themselves, and then as in the instance of Homosexuals, So-Called Celibate Priests, Polygamists and Tribal leaders, for Example such as Osama Bin Laden, have regularly extended those power bases to serve their, often morbid, sexual interests.

It is my understanding and belief that virtual all faiths follow the principles, set forth also in the Christian Bible, that dictate that in all natural (God's) creation their is only one head; and now I come back to the head (the Headship) of the domestic household. The Christian Bible tells us that this is a love Headship; which means to me that authority exists with divine authority only when it is exercised with Christian Love. Further, I do not believe this Headship extends beyond the domestic confines; in other words as soon as the man or woman steps outside the relationship of the domestic household they then no longer have that authority, of and, granted to this headship.

I believe a Worst Case Example of the abuse of, and a purported extension of, this domestic authority is found in the practices of the Islamic Religion, and to varying degrees practiced in many if not most other societies in today's world, both in domestic, corporate, government and public environments.

I am simply amazed by how many presumably emancipated woman choose to stay in, return to or recruit themselves into the slavery of this practice, particularly in the Islamic Community, which I believe is a fraudulent interpretation when applied outside the domestic consenting household. Another vivid Domestic example is the practice within The Church of The Latter Day Saints (The Mormons) to excuse the practice of polygamy, which of course many if not most in the Islamic faith also practice.

With respect to Homosexuals, isn't it interesting that so many Governments, Heads of Governments, Politicians, Celibate professing Priests, Bishops and Ministers, etc. in general, are today permitted to thrive feeding on the very people they are charged with protecting to satisfy their Morbid Lusts. I do not believe any politician or anyone else for that matter, who panders to, promotes or participates in Same Sex Marriage or Homosexual conduct of any sort will pass muster at their judgment day with Jesus Christ; I believe that unless they are able to confess this sin, repent and ask forgiveness in the name of Jesus Christ, they all do and will face an eternity in condemnation. Even Non-Christians who will read the Christian Bible for its historical content have to be themselves mortified at how the God of Christ Jesus did and I am sure will deal with them.

True, Jesus Christ shows us the Love this God has for his entire creation and how he yearns for each of his creations to confess, repent of their sins and ask for forgiveness in the name of Jesus Christ; and join his Jesus Christ in salvation, So Yes this is a God of Love. Yet, this is also a Holy God, A Totally Just God and A Very Jealous God who has told us very clearly what his rules for salvation are, and what the future holds for each of us, both the Saved and the Un-Saved. I believe The born-again Christian must be the Envy of the entire Non-Christian World: Even the Old Testament records many events of how enemies of God non-the less knew and understood the truth and power of his words and understood when they were told of their impending death for defying Gods laws. Even most of his own people were and even today remain 'stiff necked' sinners who would not and still will not repent and they must all, in truth, know the unfortunate future that awaits them; I am sure they each tremble in their stubborn prideful hearts. True Christians understand that all those other people have very troubled times ahead of them, and our, including mine, hearts bleed and cry out for them to hear and act now while they can. We also understand that the only task we are permitted to undertake is to spread the word, and that after that it is between the Hearer of the Word and (Our) God what their decision will be. We have no further authority or choice and can only pray for them, that they will hear and come to him, now.

My own children wonder about what they can do, and what the future holds for this Country and The World and themselves and their children. Well, I happen to believe that the 'United States' exists only because and subject to the will of This GOD, and that it and we will be judged as were Sodom and Gomorrah, along with the rest of the fallen world. Nineveh was allowed a final 400 years to get their act together before he took them away to their judgment. Only this Lord God knows for each given individual, ultimately, what that judgment will be and how much more time we will have before it is executed. I would pray that all of 'mine' including myself go with the rapture; but I am also content to place myself in my Lord God's hands and to suffer his will for me. Amen.

These are problems that I believe are at the heart of the struggle today. Many of us today are focused on the Middle East conflict. I believe that in reality these issues and problems are the driving force behind most of those practicing Terrorism throughout the world today.

Again, I believe that the Christian Faith has to be the envy in fact by ever other faith, sect or belief on earth, past or present. The Christian Bible defines itself as a closed book: it declares itself to supersede all prior doctrines and is closed to any purported future claims (Such as that of the Mormons) pending the Second Coming of Christ Jesus. By definition, in the Christian Bible, there is only one intercessor between man and his one and only true God (and that is the God of Christ Jesus) and that intercessor is Jesus Christ. He tells us that he will only hear us when we come to Him (God ) in the name of Jesus Christ, and then his only requirement for salvation is that when we Confess our sins and Repent of them and ask for forgiveness in the Name of Jesus Christ that He our God (Not just Jesus Christ) will then and only then ( He our God) will forgive us of those sins (If you will, he washes us white clean (in the name of and through or with) the Blood Of HIS Son, Jesus Christ).

Until we collectively understand all these issues and articulate them clearly, I do not believe we will move much closer to peace with the Terrorists, and the Islamic, Jewish and for that matter the Non-Christian World; and in the alternative I believe we will then continue in the present death spiral under Terrorism and on into and thru the Apocalypse, until our Lord Jesus Christ reappears in our lives with his Second Coming.

I do believe this is a Time Of Opportunity or In The Alternative the beginning of Very Trouble Times.

I am Sincerely yours,

Herman Osborne.

PS: Particularly, with respect to Politicians and political campaigning, I think it would be useful if candidates, office holders, and commentators, and in fact if all of us could and would acknowledge that we are willing to look for ways to improve our own ideas and positions as we all learn from experience and training; and accordingly that we view ourselves as well as others whom we respect, which may often included our opponents, are in fact 'WORKS IN PROGRESS'. And as long as we have life in our body I hope we will remain so. I reserve for myself, and allow to others the same, right and the obligation to adjust my views without apology, as my experience and knowledge base grows. That even includes the right to admit I was wrong or less than perfect as I deem to be true and appropriate, and I do not and will not apologize when I do so, ever, for this, not even at my present age of 72 (at the time of this writing).

I recommended that you visit and study the following website: www.ThruTheBible.org

1997- 2001 Thru the Bible Radio Network
P.O. Box 7100, Pasadena, CA </