CSO/Tweeple Fund Special Alert

October 9th, 2009

This is an official CSO/Tweeple Fund Project Alert!

We have a new mission, gang, and it calls for quick action.
A sister is going to have her electricity shut off on Monday, Oct 12th.

Details =>Please go to http://bit.ly/3zMeOq for details!

As always, any help spreading the word about our @TweepleFund Projects is needed and appreciated!

Note: You do not need to be on Twitter to participate in Tweeple Fund projects.

You only need a heart.

Tweeple Fund overview and e-mail opt-in can be found HERE

Thank you and God Bless!

IHS,
Bruce Macomber

Lift Jesus High

July 20th, 2009

We’re pleased to announce the launch of another sister site of the
Christian Soldier’s Word of Mouth Ministries

Please join us as we "Lift Jesus High", striving to remove ourselves as our focus, kneeling down and looking up to Jesus Christ!

Visit us online at Lift Jesus High for fellowship and discussion in Christ.

In His Service,

Bruce Macomber

Our God is an Awesome God!

April 5th, 2009

This video just tears me up…

Focus Action Update

February 25th, 2009

Obama’s Actions Contradict His Words

12-year-old speaks up for life!

February 23rd, 2009

Obama – Radical Communist

February 22nd, 2009

The Second American Revolution

February 16th, 2009

The Second American Revolution

Speechless…Silencing the Christians

February 13th, 2009

Speechless…Silencing the Christians

Change we can believe in!

February 7th, 2009

    Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Obama supporters, et al:We have stuck together since the late 1950’s, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right, so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile; slate it up to irreconcilable differences, and go on our own ways.

    Here is a model dissolution agreement:

    Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement.

    After that it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes. We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.

    Since you hate guns and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O’Donnell (you are however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move them).

    We’ll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies, and illegal aliens. We’ll keep the hot Alaskan Hockey Moms, greedy CEO’s, and Rednecks. We’ll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .

    You can make nice with Iran, Palestine, and France, and we’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protestors. When our allies or way of life are under assault, we’ll provide them job security.

    We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian Values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, and Shirley McClain. You can have the U.N. But we will no longer be paying the bill. We’ll keep the SUV’s, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru Station Wagon you can find.

    You can give everyone healthcare, if you can find any practicing Doctors (that is practicing, Howard Dean) who will follow to your turf (sic).
    We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right.

    We’ll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute ‘Imagine’,’ I’d Like to Teach The World To Sing’, ‘Kum By Ya’, or ‘We Are the World.’

    We’ll practice trickledown economics, and you can give trickle up poverty its best shot.

    Since it often so offends you we’ll keep our History, our Name, and our Flag.

    Would you agree to this? If so please pass it along to other likeminded patriots, and if you do not agree just hit delete and hang on.

    In the spirit of friendly parting, I’ll bet you ANWAR on who will need whose help in 15 years.

    Sincerely,

    John J. Wall
    Law Student and an American

    PS: Please take Barbra Streisand.

The Fairness Doctrine

January 31st, 2009

CSO Newsletter Vol. 3, No. 1
January 31, 2009
 

The Fairness Doctrine

by
Sarah Macomber

Imagine tuning into your favorite country radio station and after a couple of songs, you hear rap. Or imagine tuning into a rap station and hearing country. It is only fair that each genre-based music radio station play a diverse selection of music to give listeners a rounded selection of songs on one station. You may want to simply enjoy a country performance, but you cannot deny that it is only fair to have equal airtime for the rap-genre to play music as well. This might only be an imagined up scenario, but the “Fairness Doctrine” is very real.

Fortunately, the doctrine will not meddle with your music preferences on the radio. However if you enjoy conservative radio talk shows then you might be irked to find out just what the Fairness Doctrine proposes. Many extreme Leftists, the liberals of America, are working on passing this doctrine. It demands that free airtime be supplied for a liberal point of view on CONSERVATIVE radio talk shows. Of course, in return, conservatives will get airtime on liberal talk shows. This seems ‘fair’, except that there aren’t very many liberal talk shows. To be frank, they aren’t popular enough. In contrast, there are a variety of conservative radio talk shows.

This doctrine poorly disguises itself with the name ‘Fairness’. In reality the extreme liberals have no qualms about making their point. They want to silence conservative talk shows. The television has very little to offer in the way of religious channels. Some might agree that a few are enough. Newspapers generally print up a snazzy article for either opinion, although can be biased depending on who is running what. It is the radio that really gives conservatives a well earned place to speak freely. That is rapidly changing though.

Instead of imagining a country music station, imagine a conservative talk show. You tune in to listen to your favorite talk show host address an issue or give a sermon on air. And then a liberal host comes on air for an equal amount of time to refute everything that had just been said. I don’t know about you, but I pick my forms of entertainment based on what I enjoy and what interests me. If I were interested in hearing liberals tear apart a conservative case, I’d find an online discussion forum geared towards debates. It is truly wonderful to learn both sides of a story and educate yourself in issues by looking at each side with an open mind. However, demanding a station be forced by law to handout free airtime to have everything they discuss rebutted is a joke.

Many stations are funded by listener’s donations, fundraisers, and corporations. The government and state are known to fund about ten percent of what keeps a station alive. What conservative or liberal listener would want to pay to have the opposite opinion aired when they could be listening to what they tuned in for? Problem is: a conservative station that depends on listener’s donations might not be able to afford to keep the talk show alive when free airtime is given out. Not only that, but as I said before, liberal stations lack a large audience. Will conservative stations die because listeners stop tuning in due to the liberal discussions? It would seem this way. Which leads me to ask, what is the true motive behind the Fairness Doctrine?

Giving a well rounded opinion, in my eyes, is not the motive that drives some (but not all) liberals to put this doctrine in action. It can all boil down to silencing the conservatives. It is very easy to access both opinions on any matter. The television and the internet are quick means to getting information on everything. Anyone looking for a liberal opinion won’t have to go far. And if you are looking for conservative views off the radio as well, then the internet will give you everything you need. So why do we need a Fairness Doctrine? To kill one means of free speech. How far will this go? It might start with a talk show on the radio. But imagine the possibilities. Will churches have to let liberal orators rebut the sermon half-way through? It is drastic and unlikely, however it is not impossible. The point is, when will we stop and which rights will be attacked next? Conservative radio talk shows might just be the beginning.

Keep your wits about you and look for the Fairness Doctrine if it wakes up from its dormancy. President Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi are working towards resurrecting the aforementioned doctrine. There are ways to prevent the doctrine and I advise everyone interested prevent this infringement on our First Amendment; the Freedom of Speech.

-Sarah Macomber

High School Sophomore