President Obama met with Israel’s prime minister Netanyahu, but you’d hardly know it. There was no invitation to the press. Absolutely no photo ops. You won’t see photos of the two men standing, smiling, shaking hands in tomorrow’s newspaper. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton probably had a more substantial meeting, but even that didn’t get much attention.

You won’t hear much about Netanyahu’s concession to endorse a two-state solution, or his restricting West Bank settlement growth for ten months. But you will hear that while Vice President Biden was visiting Israel recently a new housing project was announced in the media in Israel. Oh, but not to worry, Mr. Biden punished Mr. Netanyahu by arriving ninety minutes late for a scheduled dinner.

The obvious cold shoulder shown to Israel’s prime minister may have a deeper connotation. Remember, this is the same American president who met with King Abdullah of Jordan last year, and rolled out the red carpet. The press got many photo ops. King Abdullah was here to ask the president to push Israel to accept the two-statement solution, and to push the Arab Initiative of 2002 which demands that Israel go back to the borders of pre-1967.
Remember, too, that this is the president who wrote in his book Audacity, “I will stand with them [the Muslims] should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” In that same paragraph he states that Judeo-Christian heritage will recede as an all-religions country emerges.

What did we expect would happen when he became President? Did we expect him to continue America’s long tradition of cooperation with Israel. Did we really think that he would continue to recognize the danger Israel faces by the leaders of the extreme Arab nations? Do most Americans honestly not know that Ahmadinejab prays for a world without Israel and the United States in it? Perhaps Americans should just Google “World Without Zionism” and read some quotes.

The problem we “Judeo-Christians” -we vanishing people of a previous heritage in America- face is that we have very clear reasons why we think we should stand with Israel, and they have nothing to do with politics. No, we vanishing people happen to believe in the Bible, and the Bible shows that God has chosen to use Israel as a “clock” for the timing of the end, and as a “litmus test,” if you please, to determine who is favored by God and who is not favored.

In Numbers 24 Balaam was hired by Balak to pronounce a curse against Israel, and he went out to do so. But he could not, for he saw “that it pleased to Lord to bless Israel.” And in his discovery comes the phrase directed at Israel as a people, “Blessed are those who bless you, and cursed are those who curse you” (24:9). Now, we Christians know that is not a commandment for us, but we cannot ignore the content.

Israel played a huge role in giving us our favorite Jew, Jesus Christ. And most of us believe that Israel still has a place in prophecy. Nations are going to come against her in the end, and God is going to cause her to prevail. We can’t talk about that in politics. It sounds foolish and naive.
It’s just the mutterings of a vanishing people, the ever-fading Judeo-Christian.

Here we go again. Some congressmen are pushing President Obama to hurry up with immigration reform, and one of their key initiatives is the implementation of “biometric national identification cards.” Senators Charles Schumer (D-New York) and Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) just postponed a meeting with the President for the second time. It is likely that they are simply reacting to sharp criticism from advocates.

But mark this down: this congress will push the issue of immigration reform, and they will include a demand for biometric national ID cards. Biometric ID cards will necessarily contain virtually all of your personal information – banking, health, insurance, and more – and will require your bodily engagement to be effective, i.e., either your thumbprint or handprint, or eye scan. And of course there are those who believe the card is the first step to an implanted chip similar to those used now on pets, and approved by the FDA in 2004 for human implants.

The CEO of PositiveID (formerly VeriChip), Scott Silverman, said on Fox & Friends in 2006 that immigrant workers ought to be “chipped” to track them and monitor their taxes. It should be noted that PositiveID is a new company which resulted from the merger of VeriChip and Steel Vault, the people behind Am I the only one that wonders at the connection between a company which manufactures human microchip implants and credit reporting companies?

The disturbing thing about the senators who are about to push for immigration reform which will include a biometric I.D. is that they won’t discuss other methods of controlling illegal immigration. There are so many other options short of building walls. Every small town in America knows where its illegal workers hang out, and who hires them. But nothing is done because local law enforcement knows they don’t have the support of the ICE or other federal agencies.

And think about this. Currently illegal immigrants are able to work without providing one shred of documentation. No driver’s license. No Social Security card. They just work for cash with no reporting. Now how exactly is the requirement for everyone to have a biometric ID card going to change that?
The illegals will still work under the radar, no license, no SS card, and no National ID card. The only people genuinely targeted by such “immigration reforms” are the legal people who are already carrying every ID card required, and paying taxes on their income.

When Senator Schumer was told small businesses would have to pay $800 for a scanner just to scan employees, his response for the business owner was, “He can just go down to the DMV.” What an ignorant response for a man voting on the life and welfare of every human being in America. Like the DMV is going to welcome local businessmen lining up to scan their employees. Or like you need the extra people in line when you’re trying to buy tags for your car, or renew your driver’s license.
Nothing surprises me coming out of congress anymore. But some things do frighten me.

I was disappointed watching the Academy Awards 2010. Not at the hosts. I thought Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin were funny! I thought they teamed up to provide a welcome “show within the show.”

And no, I wasn’t disappointed at the winners. I thought Bridges was due, and I thought Sandra Bullock was actually humble in her acceptance. And I thought the movie she won for was a wonderful example of how Hollywood can once in a while come through with something mainstream Americans can warm up to.

No, my disappointment was more about something that didn’t happen rather than something that happened. For the last few years I’ve watched certain Hollywood celebs use their Oscars night to either bash former president Bush, or to make an impassioned plea to “bring our soldiers home!” Their compassion was convincing as they spoke of our young men and women dying “over there.” In particular, I watched Sean Penn on some Youtubes demanding that Bush be impeached because he had put our young people in an improper war, and demanding that democrats, when they were in control, bring our troops home.

And does anyone remember Barbra Streisand’s outrage? I know there were others, but the two I named were actually at the Oscars, and had a speaking role. What a great opportunity for Streisand to talk about how we have tripled the number of soldiers in Afghanistan that we had when Bush left office. And we still have troops dying in Iraq. Penn had a golden opportunity to simply say, “Bring our troops home.” Surely they haven’t forgotten their numerous speeches in 2006, 2007, and 2008.

But, alas, there was not a word about our dying soldiers in a bad war. I don’t get it. If they were dying unnecessarily two years ago, how is it that they are now dying well? If compassion cried out for them two years ago, what happened to that compassion?

So I was disappointed that, at the Oscars, some of the celebrities who have been so filled with compassion for our troops in the past seem to have lost their compassion. Some who wanted, no, demanded, an immediate end to the war, seem to now embrace the tripling of troops in Afghanistan. Ain’t politics something?

I mean, it makes you want to ask, “Where is Cindy Sheehan?” I know she didn’t have anything to do with the Oscars, but she was famous for camping outside Bush’s Texas ranch and protesting the soldiers being in Iraq. But to be fair to her, did you know she actually tried to do the same thing last August when Obama was vacationing in Martha’s Vineyard? Yep. She went there to camp and protest just like she did Bush. She went there to tell Obama to get the troops home. But you didn’t see her on TV protesting Obama’s war, did you? Nope. Hollywood must now approve of it. That’s all I can guess after watching this year’s Oscars.